Friday, October 28, 2011

NOACH 5772

I’m sure many of you know the story of the Tower of Babel, at the very end of this week’s parasha, Noach. It depicts a group of settlers establishing a city and building a tower extending into the heavens in order “to make a name for themselves.” Displeased with the building project, God confuses the languages of the builders so that they can no longer communicate and then disperses them to all the lands of the earth.

This is what we might call an etiological folk tale, a story designed to explain some feature of the world as we know it, like, how the tiger got its stripes. In this case, our story responds to the question, Why do people speak different languages? Even more to the point, why is human civilization so fractured and fractious? Why can’t we all just get along?

The Rabbis pay special attention to a feature of the story that I wish to highlight for us tonight. The way in which the text describes God’s behavior particularly interests them. Rather than summarily scattering and confusing the builders from a heavenly perch, the text reports that God, using something like the “royal we,” says, Hava Nerdah, “Hey, let’s go down there” before taking action. Two verses later the story says, “So God went down to see the city and the tower that the people were building.”

Why on earth would God need to leave the heavens, to come down, in order to see what was going on in Babel? Does not the Omnipresent One know all, see all? This question fuels the Rabbinic imagination.

It was not the case, concludes the midrash, that God needed to go down in order to see what what going on so much as God wished to model for human beings the proper way to evaluate any situation. RaSHI says that God said Hava Nerdah, “Let’s go down there,” in order to teach us that anyone who would judge a situation cannot determine if it is really bad [or good] until actually seeing it and comprehending it in person.” If you want to understand, first see with your own eyes.

We are living in a time and place that has made it possible, indeed, so easy, to formulate opinions and make judgments at a remove, without first-hand knowledge. The digital age has made every media image unreliable: what looks like cereal glistening with droplets of milk and ripe red strawberries in an advertisement is really some unholy and unpalatable combination of corn syrup and heavy cream or even glue. You really want to know how things are? Hava Nerdah, the Torah says. You have to see things with your own eyes.

The 24/7 news cycle bombards us with media images of people and places we will never see with our own eyes, surrounds the images with “expert” commentary, and then gives anyone with an Internet connection free reign to bloviate at will. The “comment” pages of any online news article or op-ed have become a repository for the worst sort of bilious nonsense, a soapbox for the ignorant and petulant.

Not long ago, an Orthodox Jewish guest to WRT’s online Torah Study blog used our forum for disparaging remarks about Reform Judaism and Reform Jews. In the spirit of Hava Nerdah, of seeing it for oneself, our Torah study community responded with open and sincere invitations to come to WRT and experience firsthand a thriving, engaged Reform Jewish community. And this cuts both ways; too many Reform Jews have a mental image of what goes on in Orthodox synagogues informed not by eyewitness testimony but by a combination of imagination, invention, hearsay, and childhood recollections. To promote interdenominational harmony, we need a serious dose of Hava Nerdah, of going down and seeing with our own eyes before passing judgment.

What about our perceptions of Israel? One interesting exercise is to hand a classroom of Jewish teenagers some blank paper and markers and ask them first to draw “a typical American home.” Then draw “a typical Japanese home.” Finally we ask them to draw “a typical Israeli home.” The pictures speak volumes about this week’s Torah lesson. The “American homes” feature green lawns, colorful furniture, happy children, televisions, and dogs. “Japanese homes” come out in black-and-white with serious children. And the pictures of “Israeli homes” often feature barbed-wire fences, explosions, military aircraft, and anguished faces, with backdrops of sandy deserts and camels. It would make us laugh if it weren’t so sad. In December I will be leading a WRT Family Trip to Israel and I again invite you to fulfill the precept of Hava Nerdah, of seeing for yourself the beauty, the exuberance, the high-tech, ecologically diverse, complex multicultural tapestry of modern-day Israel. We have a few spots still available and anyone who is interested can ask me about it.

When I think of the far-reaching wisdom of this week’s teaching, I wonder aloud: How many Americans have actually been inside a mosque? To experience the ritual of respectfully removing one’s shoes and peacefully stepping inside an ornately inscribed prayer space, observing the ritual movement and chanted liturgies of a Muslim community in the act of prayer? The word “mosque” conjures, for millions of non-Muslims, images that do not comport with what one might actually see.

How many Americans who have never visited New York carry an image of our beloved city informed more by the smoldering ruins of 9/11 than by the city blocks of the Upper East Side, the shops of SoHo, and picnics in Central Park?

This is nothing new, of course. If you’ve ever looked at very old maps you’ve probably gawked at the inaccuracies and omissions, some earnest cartographer’s attempt to illustrate the world without being able to see it with his own eyes. An astonishing passage in Cormac McCarthy’s landmark book Blood Meridian speaks of “those whited regions on old maps where monsters do live and where the is nothing other of the known world save conjectural winds” (p. 152).

Medieval artists almost invariably portrayed the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge in the Garden of Eden as a shiny, red apple even though the Bible never specifies the fruit. Sometimes art tells an even more provocative, even dangerous, version of events. Despite the portrayal of almost every Christian masterwork, Jesus was surely not Caucasian.

So it was with this week’s lesson in mind that I took the 6 train downtown this past Sunday, accompanied by my friend Michael Friedman, who was my first rabbinical intern at WRT and who now is a rabbi at Central Synagogue in Manhattan, to see with our own eyes what’s happening in Zuccotti Square near Wall Street. We went not in neckties but in jeans, and did not identify ourselves as rabbis. Using a small videocamera to record our experience, we approached some of the demonstrators who have occupied this public square since September 17th but whom we had only seen on the news day after day. Hava Nerdah, we said: Hey, let’s go down there and see for ourselves what this is all about.

Mike and I spent some time listening to some demonstrators speak about a number of causes including fracking (short for hydraulic fracturing, a process of using pressurized fluid to create a fracture in a rock layer to release petroleum or natural gas, which has come under fire for environmental and health concerns), student loan reduction, campaign finance reform, and unemployment. We also heard from opportunistic vendors and hangers-on, Hare Krishnas, Christian evangelicals, a synchronized drumming circle, and a sing-along to Madonna’s song “Material Girl.” Before departing we encountered an old-timey string band with an enthusiastic leader who taught us how to square dance. Upon departing, Mike and I turned to each other and in a unison voice that could only be described as ironic, said, “It’s Babel.” Babel, that place of confused speech.

I also spent some time this week applying the lesson of Hava Nerdah, of seeing things up close, by speaking one-on-one with members of New York’s financial community about their experience of the Movement. Fortunately we have a number in our congregational directory who were eager to share their perspective with me. One thoughtful respondent shared with me a sense of frustration in the Wall Street and business community about the way in which this Movement taints even well-intentioned people in the business world. “There is a sense,” he said, “that we share the frustration of a growing discrepancy between rich and poor in America. This, it seems to me, is fair game. But it is social-policy oriented, which has been misdirected at Wall Street instead of at Washington which sets the boundaries for what companies can and cannot do.” “I get it that we’re in a tough economy and that there is paralysis in Washington, D.C.,” he added. But the business community feels unjustly maligned that not only investment banking in its entirety, but capitalism in general, have come under fire.

Another respondent reminded me, “you could say that everything we see around us we built with our capital investment system.”

Still others shared their sense that the Movement’s original intentions have become distorted by hangers-on and hypocrites like the rappers Kanye West who joined the protesters wearing a suit estimated to cost $30,000 and Jay-Z who pulled up in his Bentley. And more than a few noted their exasperation with the protesters having become “media darlings” given the problems with their message.

More than once the Talmud resolves a dispute in a matter of Jewish law with the advice, “Puk Hazei Mai Amma Davar - go see what the people are doing” (Berachot 45a, Eiruvin 14b). When we really make the effort to see things up close, to ask the important questions on all sides of a public matter, the image we obtain gradually takes focus. Even more, a genuine conversation emerges. It becomes harder to talk past one another with black-and-white statements spoken from a position of ignorance or limited information.

You could say that seeing things up-close make our picture of the world three dimensional.

For me, the opportunity to apply the wisdom of Hava Nerdah, of going down and seeing things with my own eyes and hearing things with my own ears, is one I will cherish in my forthcoming role at WRT. As I see it my greatest immediate privilege and responsibility will be to see and hear you up close and personal, sharing the stories, beliefs, and values, that make WRT such a vibrant and beautiful expression of the multicolored tapestry of Reform Jewish life in America.

30 comments:

  1. Dear Rabbi Blake,

    The Torah's lesson on "Hava nerdah", as you point out, is a lesson for JUDGES to visit the scene of the crime or dispute in order to render a righteous judgement. This therefore constitutes part of the Jewish Code of Law - regarding the behavior of judges.

    You take this teaching to a new level, however, when you take issue with an orthodox Jew, presumably not a judge, who would not ingratiate himself with your offer that he visit you for the weekend.

    As an orthodox Jew, I can understand why he would turn down your kind offer, especially on Shabbat. There is, in your temple, many features you all take for granted, which an orthodox Jew knows and feels is degrading to his religion. He recognizes you may not appreciate the full impact of these transgressions, nor consider them as such, and most probably you refer to them, were they brought to your attention, as "fanatical", "primitive", or some such disparaging term, whereas to him these are real violations against the Supreme Being's dictates. He cannot bring himself to participate in such an environment, not so much for the discomfort, but for its incongruity with how he wishes to behave as G-d, he knows, watches him from above. Even in prison such Jews refuse to eat non-kosher, or meat not slaughtered under certain certified conditions, as an example.

    Other examples: There might be the use of a microphone on Shabbat; There will be the forbidden condition of mixed seating; There may well be the omission of answering Amen during kaddish or kedushah; The inability to pray with fervor, etc., etc.. The environment is replete with and conducive to sins of omission and commission.

    A second reason is also significant. Whereas the "atmosphere" you'll engender would be friendly, that, in and of itself, is a hindrance because, as it says in Ethics of Our Fathers, concerning Aaron: He would "Bring people to Torah" - as opposed to "bring Torah to the people". Here's the difference: To get one close or intimate with Torah, the right way is to bring the person to Torah, and not bring Torah to the person. That is to say, you do not compromise Torah for the sake of bringing the person closer, but rather, have the person feel the full impact of Torah requirements, to yield the proper relationship.

    I hope you were not referring to me when you speak of an orthodox Jew who spoke "disparaging remarks about Reform Judaism and Reform Jews". I went through your forum and found only myself, mostly, who spoke of the reform movement in a negative light. I came down particularly hard here:

    http://wrttorahstudy.blogspot.com/2010/12/vayechi-5771.html#comments

    But your comment then was, "Your last post in particular is powerful and striking. It necessitates an equally powerful and striking response. Unfortunately, it'll be a while before I get to that, because I want to do it thoughtfully." Well, I keep reading your articles, watch your videos and wait patiently for some form of retort. I sure hope you wouldn't use an anonymous reference as a way to throw me "under the bus" or dodge my heart-felt critiques.

    Wishing you a splendid month of Cheshvan and a happy 5772!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Really? Ever spent any time in the Middle East? Ever notice the olive-brown colored skin of indigenous people from that part of the world?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Unknown - ALL Jews originated in Israel! No matter where they ended up later. Most Jews are white. Many are "olive-brown". Most Israelis too are white, even many whose ancestors derive from African lands, though many are brown-toned. Even within families they sometimes differ.

    Jews have ALWAYS wondered after the Temples were destroyed. And thus "intermarriage" with nomadic Jews also is an important component. Yemenites are all mostly darker - although their Southern Jewish counterparts, in Aden, long a British colony, close by, are white.

    There's no question that, beyond genetics, environment plays a key role regarding skin color.

    It could well be Jews were, in fact, lilly-white, just as in South Africa you have whites among the blacks. And because Arabs around Israel today are darkish, this is no proof Jews too were, back then, off-white.

    It's obviously a complicated issue, how and to what degree environment contributes its important role. There's one place in Torah we see, clearly, environment bestows significant input. That's when Jacob peeled the bark of tree branches, rendering a design of contrast colors, and put these inside troughs where his sheep drank, which, we note, caused a marked change in his herds' demographics. He knew a lot about something we know little of.

    ---

    Rabbi Blake - You went to Zuccotti Square seeking to conveniently blend in. Had you gone there with your friend looking Jewish, e.g., wearing Kippahs, (with or without ties), I daresay you will have gotten different reactions from many "occupiers" there, for many are anti-Semitic, as you must have noticed from signs some are carrying. Had you gone there looking Jewish - THAT would really have been a "Hava Nerdah" experience, because THEN you could have properly JUDGED, which is the real "Hava Nerdah" purpose, is it not?

    ReplyDelete
  4. The problem with questioning the genetic integrity of Jesus or Jews is that some start wondering about their own provenance, as if their acceptance in the Community is somehow less if they don’t look Eastern European or Germanic in feature. Too many contemporary Jews forget that our People predates Germany, Poland or Lithuania. There probably are many good scientific articles on this subject which apply statistical methods to DNA, blood type and linguistic data, not that I would understand much of it.

    The reality is that “Caucasian” doesn’t carry much more precision than the meaningless “White”. The Caucasus is home to dozens of ethnic peoples and languages. Caucasian often refers to people of European, North African, Middle Eastern, Central Asian, etc. heritage. That doesn’t help much in terms of skin color homogeneity, unless one only sees black and white distinctions. Conventional usage often equates it erroneously to Northern European.

    If Jews are Caucasian, I suspect it has less to do with ethnic origins or skin color and more to do with Cossacks.

    Having said this, discussions of race rarely promote tranquility on blog sites. Last I checked, this was a website to promote the study of Torah at Westchester Reform Temple. I am a supporter of opening it up to the WWW. I think it is excellent to have contributors from around the world, regardless of religious perspective. But, it only works if we ultimately promote the furtherance of curiosity and study in our students of the weekly parashiyot. New students at Westchester Reform Temple who are drawn to Torah by intellectual or spiritual forces and who choose to dip their toes into these glorious waters tend to be intimidated by trollish banter back and forth and then seem to disengage. I consider extinguishing the spark of curiosity in a student next to criminal.

    Perhaps we need a new and tighter "Terms of Service" for our blog site or there may be a movement to limit it to our members. I think that would be terrible. So, let’s keep things politely constructive and on topic and get back to Bereshit, Noach, Bavel, soon Lech Lecha, or something resembling the parasha under discussion.

    Btw, on the subject of Bavel, God instilled confusion amongst the people by introducing a diversity of languages—“so that one will not understand the language of his companion”. The protestors Downtown all speak English. To me, the confusion there seems to have less to do with language diversity and more to do with the diversity in quality of thinking. One wonders why they protest on Wall Street in the first place, rather than on Constitution Avenue. But, now I am taking us off topic.

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

    In Noach, I need help understanding why God inflicted this confusion, resulting in the Dispersion. Was it just punishment for an act of unbridled hubris? Rashi imputes negative intent which I don’t see in the Torah text at all.

    I also am confused in that Chapter 10 makes it clear that the descendants of Noach were of distinct clans and tongues; yet, 11:1 implies everyone on earth was of the same language and words. What is the significant distinction between lashon/tongue and safah/language?

    DavidS

    ReplyDelete
  5. DavidS, regarding different tongues vs. one language, my initial thought would be that the stories are from different sources. (Not sure if they're from different JEDP sources, but even within one of thoscletus sources, might there be contradictions?). Or is the goal to reconcile the stories into one harmonious whole? I myself love source criticism; it explains so much about the Scriptures to see them as the product of multiple points of view.

    Rabbi Blake, thank you for introducing me to the idea of hava nerdah. My bit of hava nerdah this week was to watch a PBS show about Muhammed and Islam. OK, maybe it doesn't count because it wasn't in person, but it taught me about 3000% more about Islam than I know before, and made me realize how much I really don't know about Islam.

    I will sign this with my real name. Christine is my nom de web I usually use for blog comments, but after commenting last week I came to think you deserve more truth from me.
    --Sharon

    ReplyDelete
  6. Sorry, "thoscletus" in the first paragraph should be "those".
    --Sharon

    ReplyDelete
  7. David,

    Noah and his descendants all spoke Hebrew, as you note correctly from Gen. 11:1. Your confusion regarding the use of the word "tongues" 3 times in chapter 10 can be cleared if you keep in mind the descendancies, brough down in chapter 10, project farther than 300 years, about the time after the flood when the incident of Nomrod's tower took place. In verse 10:25 this future event is clearly referred to, as Rashi explains this verse to us, telling us of Ever's prophetic powers, that he knew that years ahead languages will proliferate.

    What's the difference between Lashom and Safah - great question! You intuitively realize Hebrew has no real synonyms, and that each synonym means something a bit else that its counterpart. A famous author, the Malbim, wrote a dictionary of synonyms from words in Tanach - using your premise. I just looked it up. He has much to say about the difference. Briefly, Safah, as in "lip", is exernal and Lashon, as in "tongue", is internal. Safah refers to that which is actually spoken, leaves the lips, is that which the child enunciates - so clearly exposed is the language rendered. Whereas Lashon involves more the internal aspect of language, that with which you think and calculate. He offers many verses in Tanach to demonstrate the nuances implied by each.

    I wish I could answer your question regarding the form of punishment the Generation of Dispersion received, meted out measure-for-measure, but for what purpose? My recollection of this explanation is too meager to pass it on, so I pass.

    Kol tuv!

    ReplyDelete
  8. Sharon, thanks for your suggestion. While I do consider the Torah divinely revealed, I definitely accept it as having been redacted by human hands--probably committees. I don't automatically accept Richard E. Friedman's analysis as gospel; but, his work is consistent with your hypothesis. Chapter 11 is attributed to J with its use of safah. Chapter 10 is attributed to J and P. The verses in which lashon/leshonotam is used are attributed to P. [Source: R.E. Friedman, "Who Wrote the Bible?", 1997 ed; p.247]

    DavidS (continued below...)

    ReplyDelete
  9. ...continuation...

    InTheVan, thanks for bringing Malbim to my attention—Rabbi Meïr-Leibush ben Jehiel-Michel Weiser (I’m ashamed to say I had to look that up). While both lashon and safah can connote language today, I think your Malbim-prompted distinction is on point. Lashon means tongue. Safah means lip. To me, lashon can connote the internal language, as you state; and, safah, the external, uttered (through the lips) speech. Chapter 10 describes the descendents of Noach’s 3 sons. It refers to their clans, their tongues/languages, their lands and their nations. Chapter 11:1 says that all the earth was of a single speech and one set of words. Rashi and you explain safah achat as lashon hakodesh, our Holy Tongue, Hebrew. Who am I to disagree? But, for me, in the context of our linguistic discussion, it feels like something else is being taught.

    For me, as Rabbi Blake has taught, it can be interesting to pose “ma kashe lerashi?” I.e., what Qs does the text pose? I think it is less Rashi’s “What was that one speech or language that the entire earth had adopted?”; instead, I am more interested with why God would choose to bust up mankind when it seemed to be working together harmoniously toward common ends. Perhaps this is better asked of 11:6. Was this as Rabbi Blake writes above that God was displeased with the (presumptuous) building project to reach the heavens or that God was displeased with our desire to make a name for ourselves. Set aside the “etiological folk tale”, to use Rabbi Blake’s words, that this text provides an explanation for why diverse peoples are scattered around the earth with different languages, etc. What is so wrong with peaceably working together? Any of us who has worked in a large organization knows the benefits and challenges of working together as a team. A well-managed team can accomplish far more than a single individual can. Team members don’t have to love one another. But, when well managed, they work effectively toward a shared goal or goals.

    Why is it that God doesn’t like it when man chooses to work together effectively, despite internal differences? It seems too simple to just explain this away with “Well, God felt the arrogant project to build a tower to reach and possibly claim the heavens was bad and therefore punished the people by inflicting babble on Bavel.” Is this just telling humankind to focus on its domain on earth, rather than head to the stars? Explore horizontally, not vertically? (Don’t tell NASA!) Or, is this an explanation of the seemingly endless discord on the face of this earth? Advanced Western societies take for granted that global peace is the aspirational goal. But, maybe God is telling us that our diversity and disagreements are the preferred, natural states. Not to get Darwinian or anything, but maybe “peace” should not be the aspirational goal. We know in Semitic languages, notably Hebrew (SH-L-M) and Arabic (S-L-M), that both Shalom and Salaam share a common root that means peace in contemporary usage. But, when we dig deeper linguistically, this common root really means submission, not our modern concept of peace. The word shalom makes one of its rare appearances in Torah in Deuteronomy in the discussion of what to do when laying siege to a city. Some translations talk about terms of peace. Others more accurately refer to terms of submission. Arabic uses the common root in the context of submission to God (Islam, Muslim, etc.). I don’t want to get off into a digressionary discussion of Islam here, but for me, Genesis Chapter 11 seems to convey a very different image of global cohabitation than that in which I have been indoctrinated within the American public education system.

    Sorry for these long winded, rambling thoughts. And, sorry for the anti-nechemta. I had better get cracking on Lech Lecha… :)

    Shabbat shalom to all in advance. See some of you at WRT tonight and tomorrow.

    DavidS

    ReplyDelete
  10. REMINDER TO FELLOW STUDENTS WHO DO NOT HAVE A PERSONAL COPY OF RASHI WHERE YOU STUDY:

    CHABAD'S EXCELLENT WEBSITE NOW HAS RASHI COMMENTARY ON TORAH IN ENGLISH AGAIN.

    It had been removed for copyright issues. It is back. I don't know if it is a pre-existing published edition or if Chabad funded a private project to manually translate all of Rashi's Torah commentary.

    GO TO RABBI BLAKE'S 1ST LINK ON THE TOP RIGHT OF THE WEB PAGE, "PARASHAT HA-SHAVUAH IN HEBREW AND ENGLISH", AND THEN CLICK ON "SHOW RASHI'S COMMENTARY".

    ReplyDelete
  11. DavidS, doesn't your peace-as-submission analysis come back to Rabbi Blake's explanation? The people were overreaching themselves by trying to be as great as G-d instead of submitting to G-d.

    (Not sure of your conventions here for writing G-d, so trying to be cautious.)

    --Sharon

    ReplyDelete
  12. Oh, now I notice, DavidS, that you write in full "God," so I will assume that's OK.
    --Sharon

    ReplyDelete
  13. Sharon,

    1. Yes. I think I am trying to extend this though to question whether it is God's aspiration that humankind pursue global peace. My read of Genesis diverges with this comfortable modern sentiment.

    2. Re: spelling God's name. There are many conventions. I think it is to protect God's name from false purposed use. But, God, G-d, god, Lord, Adonai, Elokim, etc. are simply references to our One God, whose name is traditionally spelled with 4 Hebrew letters, also known as the Tetragrammaton. It would not be good if I were to use the Hebrew letters for Yud-Hei-Vav-Hei falsely or disrespectfully. But, my own view is that we are studying Torah respectfully. I don't find referring specifically to God by name in this context to be disrespectful or false. Others on this blog may strongly disagree. But, G-d, to mask writing God, has little to do with God's 4-letter name. This may also have something to do with one of our 10 Commandments (Ex 20:7, translated by E.Fox): "You are not to take up the name of YHWH your God for emptiness, for YHWH will not clear him that takes up his name for emptiness." Fox comments that 'take up for emptiness' means use for false purpose. The oft used translation 'take in vain' "limits its scope unnecessarily." ...But, I am veering off topic.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I inadvertently omitted my name from the above reply.
    DavidS

    ReplyDelete
  15. DavidS,
    Thank you for explaining about the name of God.

    Regarding world peace: doesn't the aspiration that all nations will know God, that the Jews will be a light to the nations, and tikkun olam all point to repairing the splits in the world? Isn't "every man under his vine and figtree" aspiring to peace? It might be fruitful to think about what knds of unified activity might be culpable in the way the building of the tower of Babel apparently was interpreted to be. But to think we shouldn't be working towards global peace? That is a conclusion too far for me.

    --Sharon

    ReplyDelete
  16. David, you ask:
    "What is so wrong with peaceably working together?"
    The Generation of Dispersion, under Nimrod's leadership, wanted to reach the heavens to rebel against and fight G-d, and also, thinking G-d could only use water as His weapon for destruction, sought to reach beyond the clouds, by building a huge tower, to keep themselves safe against this possibility. ("Nimrod" derives from the Hebrew root word "to rebel")

    This generation sinned and deserved a harsh punishment, as did that of the Generation of the Flood. But the former generation had one important advantage the latter generation lacked - and that was "shalom", like you said, they worked peaceably together. So great is the power of peace among people in G-d's estimation, that, in fact, this is what saved this generation from being wiped out, even though they rebelled against G-d Himself.

    You see this, by the way, in Jewish history too. King Achav, who was a trangressor (as was his wife Izevel, who worshipped idols), whenever he had military conflict with his gentile neighbors, would win every war - without losing any soldiers! King David, who was a most righteous person, had occasions when he would lose soldiers during a war. How could that be? Because the Jews during Achav's time had love for their neighbors and never spoke evil of their peers, nor would they speak of another Jew if that Jew might suffer as a result of this talk ("lashon hara"). For example, the righteous convert Ovadiah, who later became a prophet, hid 100 prophets in two caves, to protect them from Izevel, who sought to murder them, as she murdered others. Ovadiah was a very wealthy man and during this time, during the 7 years of famine Elijah the Prophet caused to punish Achav and much of his Ba'al-worshipping generation, Ovadiah spent all his money buying food and water to feed these hidden prophets. Knowing full well what Ovadiah was up to, the Jews, nevertheless, never squealed on him. Because they all practiced Love of a Fellow Jew. This is what stood in Achav's merit when he went out to war. And this is what saved the Generation of Dispersion, who only brought upon themselves dispersion.

    You also say, "both Shalom and Salaam share a common root that means peace in contemporary usage".

    Where do you think Salaam comes from? Mohammed once worked for Jews, you know. Half of Arab vocabulary has Hebrew roots.

    ReplyDelete
  17. InTheVan, thank you for this teaching. Lest you, Sharon and others misread my position, my heart is firmly behind peaceful coexistence and cooperation. But, my head was drawing a different message from Torah (Gen 11).

    As for Hebrew and Arabic, I believe they share a common ancestor. I do not believe one is derived from the other--at least linguistically speaking.

    I don't know about Muhammad working for Jews. I do know that Yathrib, ancient Madinah, was home to powerful Jewish tribes at the time of Muhammad. Ultimately, they chose to ally themselves with the extant Yathrib power structure instead of Muhammad and his followers from Makkah. This "Jewish betrayal" can explain anti-Jewish sentiment in the Qur'an. Of course, history famously captures the conquest of Yathrib/Madinah by Muhammad...but, I fear I am digressing from Noach once again...

    Let us all pray for Rabbi Blake's speedy and complete recovery so that he can get back up on both feet once again.

    Shavua tov,

    DavidS

    ReplyDelete
  18. So would now be a good way to say, Lech Lecha. Go forth? Perhaps we will be able to share our steps into this new week soon. Torah Study yesterday was a more intimate group; the leadership shown by the more skilled teachers of Torah without Rabbi Blake's or any Rabbinic presence was indeed a gift and a blessing. Todah Rabah! When this blog spot opens up to this week's parsha comments, I look forward to absorbing more wisdom from you all. In peace, Shavua Tov, - Jaira

    ReplyDelete
  19. Jaira,

    Rabbi Blake is under the weather. Since he controls this website, he gets a bye for a couple weeks.

    Btw, technically, Lech Lecha was last week's parasha. Starting today, we study what could be your namesake parasha...by that I mean of course, vaJeira, or without the Germanic "J", Vayeira. (I recognize, your name probably derives from a different Hebrew root--I think ya'ir comes from he'ir to illuminate, as opposed to vayeira which I think means was made seen--but it was too coincidental to pass up.) :)

    http://www.chabad.org/parshah/default_cdo/aid/9170/jewish/Vayeira.htm

    DavidS

    ReplyDelete
  20. Are the parashas studied in advance, or after the fact? I see that Noach was posted here on Fri. 10/28. Did you hear Noach in synagogue on 10/29, then? And Lech Lecha on 11/4? So for those of us doing it solely on the web, we discuss it a week behind as it were, but if studying from a book we would study it for the week leading up to hearing it in synagogue at the end of the week?

    I am sorry Rabbi Blake is under the weather and hope he feels better soon.
    --Sharon

    ReplyDelete
  21. Sharon, this a Q best fielded by Rabbi Blake himself.

    Historically, Rabbi Blake's short video teachings/Qs would come out mid-week. Some of us have had at it digitally before we tackled the subject in person on Shabbat.

    Given the realities of being a congregational rabbi for a 1,200+ family synagogue, these weekly postings often have arrived on Friday afternoon. This has us interacting one week behind our live discussion. And, in the rare instance where Rabbi Blake skips a week on the weblog like this week, we are 2 weeks behind.

    Broken foot aside, this coming year Rabbi Blake assumes the senior rabbi position for our synagogue. We shall see how this works going forward. For now, technically, we have the platform to interact. Whereas we typically respond to the issues Rabbi Blake raises, the only thing stopping us from launching into a discussion of the next parasha is making the time during the week to read it and then posing Qs which arise during our study.

    Our challenge has been interactivity. Practically, if this investment is only for 2 or 3 members, then it may need to be tweaked for broader appeal. Our in-person discussions on Shabbat have doubled in size. Rabbi Blake has also elevated the levels of our discussion. But, many of us are unequally proficient with computer technology which I think has contributed to historical inactivity.

    As you know, we are on a triennial cycle, focusing on one-third of the weekly parasha. This year, we are tackling the 1st third of each parasha. I am not sure we are consistent with others on the triennial cycle. We may make ourselves consistent next year.

    David

    ReplyDelete
  22. FROM ZAFY 1 OF 2

    Re: DavidS’s “I am more interested with why God would choose to bust up mankind…goals.”

    In order to understand it will be interesting to go back to Bereshit and Creation.

    Bereshit=B'(2 )Reshit, meaning 2 beginnings. In the story we really read about two beginnings:

    In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. (Genesis 1:1)
    בְּרֵאשִׁית, בָּרָא אֱלֹהִים, אֵת הַשָּׁמַיִם, וְאֵת הָאָרֶץ

    There are no vowels in the Torah. Thus, את השמים ואת הארץ( heaven and earth) can also be read as, “At hashamaim ve at haaretz”, meaning:
    You are heaven and you are earth.

    What does You are heaven and You are earth, mean? You, we, each one of us as human beings is an amazing dichotomy comprised of two aspects—heaven and earth - a divine spiritual part that is our soul or consciousness and a physical body—that are united. It is up to us to learn to connect, balance and unite these two realms.

    Thus, our Body is the Earth ERETZ =ארץ serves as a vessel that contains Heaven the soul, called Shamaim=שמים . The body is the vehicle that helps us to accomplish and fulfill our purpose in this lifetime.

    The first command that God gave Adam was already in the first chapter, telling man:

    וַיְבָרֶךְ אֹתָם, אֱלֹהִים, וַיֹּאמֶר לָהֶם אֱלֹהִים פְּרוּ וּרְבוּ וּמִלְאוּ אֶת-הָאָרֶץ, וְכִבְשֻׁהָ; וּרְדוּ בִּדְגַת הַיָּם, וּבְעוֹף הַשָּׁמַיִם, וּבְכָל-חַיָּה, הָרֹמֶשֶׂת עַל-הָאָרֶץ.(בראשית א 28)
    And God blessed them; and God said unto them: 'Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that creepeth upon the earth. (Genesis 1:28)

    The word for multiply =רבו also is a verb which means: to argue with, to quarrel with.
    The word subdue כבשוה= also means: verb, to conquer; to level (a road); to captivate; (literary) to restrain oneself, to overcome one's inclinations, to hold back.

    God is blessing man and telling him to multiply. By doing that, you will have a lot to argue and quarrel with and you shall have to restrain yourself and overcome your inclination. And this you do by learning yourself and learning to communicate your inner truth knowing to hear other as well.

    In Psalms it is written:
    הַשָּׁמַיִם שָׁמַיִם לַיהוָה וְהָאָרֶץ נָתַן לִבְנֵי אָדָם.(תהילים קטו 16)
    The heavens are the heavens of the LORD; and the earth He gave to the children of men (Psalms 115:16)

    ”כעין מה שאמר הרבי מנחם מנדל מקוצק:
    “השמים שמים לה' והארץ נתן לבני אדם" - הקב"ה נתן את הארץ לבני האדם כדי שיעשו ממנה שמים.
    "השאיפה איננה להישאר מנותק, איננה להסתגר בבית ה' או לעובדו ברגעי שיא בלבד, אלא השאיפה היא לראות ולעבוד את ה' גם בתחתית ההר בכל יום מימות השבוע . החובה היא "להוריד" את האידיאלים לעולם המעשה, ליישם בחיי העולם הזה ולגלות ש"מלא כל הארץ כבודו".

    Rabbi Menachem Mendel from Kutzk said:
    “The heaven is to God and earth he gave to the children of man - God gave the children of man the earth so that they can make from it heaven.”

    The main idea is to "Download" the ideals and spiritual understanding to our daily activities, with the desire of seeing every ordinary, daily routine as a special divine action. Not only in special moments like Shabbat, High Holidays, or meditation, but in every moment in every man being able to be reminded of the presence of God.

    Man needs to cultivate his personality to learn to understand himself and to know how to express it even if he encounters challenges. Also to understand that there are different points of view to the same situation—a variety of ideas that enriches any society.

    ReplyDelete
  23. FROM ZAFY 2 OF 2

    So maybe it is not that God doesn't like man to work together. Maybe He wants each person to be honest and faithful to himself, to be the best he can in what he is doing. Dedicating himself discovering what are his gifts and then sharing care and love with the community. If everyone will think and do the same, there is no space for creativity and growth.

    Another point: sometimes it depends what we are united for. With the golden calf, the People were united, but not for a good thing. Later they again gathered together, but this time to build the Mishkan, and each person brought the best things he could from his heart. Gathering is good; but, the question is for what reason. Gathering together is good if the gathering is from this place of perfection and of respecting self and others, without jealousy of each other and trying to be like them- just acceptance. Then the joined work is very accepted. Think of an orchestra that plays a nice piece of music. Would it be inspiring to hear it played by one instrument or to listen to it when played with a variety of instruments? Can one note consistently be pleasant to our ears and elevate our spirits. Can it be that in listening to a group of talented musicians that each one dedicated his time to learning to domain (sic; control?) his instrument and to knowing when it is his turn to play and in other moments to lessen playing, carefully respecting the other musicians and their instruments? Imagine one group of musicians playing the same instrument, thinking that their instrument is important to help the audience elevate, and convincing all the others to play the same instrument. Maybe some of the musicians will think, oh, wow this is a really very nice instrument and by themselves will decide they also want to play like the others their musical instrument. So they will ALL play the same instrument but inside they might feel anger, frustration jealousy…maybe from the outside it seems everybody is happy and united; but, from the inside they are not at peace and truly feeling fulfilled.

    Actually acknowledging the special beauty and important contribution of each instrument in turn is what creates in the musician the inner feeling of peace and accomplishment that helps to elevate the audience to heavenly places and feelings of inner peace. Maybe this is why the covenant with Noah is with a colorful rainbow and why the Menorah has 7 candles made of one piece. It is to teach us to be able to see the differences and still be able to communicate and embrace all as one.

    Re: DavidS’s Q “What is the significant distinction between lashon/tongue and safah/language”

    You are right there is a difference between Lashon and Safa.

    God asked Noach to make a Tevah (not just ark). The word Tevah in Hebrew also means a Word. The size of the Tevah: Length 300 cubits= ש, Width 50 cubits= נ , Height 30 cubits= ל ; tongue=לשן . This means the size of the tevah is like the word lashon = =לשןTongue. To make a Tevah with the size of a tongue=To make a word with the size of an internal language with our real true intention and cavanah, attuned with our emotions and thoughts—not words that are just from the lips out that do not express real feelings or intentions.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Re: "Maybe this is why the covenant with Noah is with a colorful rainbow and why the Menorah has 7 candles made of one piece. It is to teach us to be able to see the differences and still be able to communicate and embrace all as one."

    Thank you, Zafy! I knew there was a nechemta here. I just couldn't find it. I am now once again at peace.

    DavidS

    ReplyDelete
  25. Yes, David similar to a football team, Rabbi Blake does get a bye week. Since we mostly continue to blog the same parshah as TS group...the comment was meant to continue, giving our Rabbi a chance to be "benched" or on the "DL". Thank you for the new peeked interest on the next portion...whichever one chooses it to be...still a covenant, a commandment, a way to build our relationship with God...and each other..all good stories in the book of life.
    -jaira

    ReplyDelete
  26. zafy writes:
    "There are no vowels in the Torah. Thus, את השמים ואת הארץ ( heaven and earth) can also be read as, “At hashamaim ve at haaretz”, meaning: You are heaven and you are earth."

    You can say the same thing about ויהי ערב ויהי בקר יום אחד, "And it was one day and one night, day one." (Gen. 1:5). You can say, since vowels are missing, what it really says is, "There was a crow and there was cattle, one day". Because crow and evening, and cattle and morning, contain the same letters, respectively.

    zafy also says:
    "Bereshit=B'(2 )Reshit, meaning 2 beginnings. In the story we really read about two beginnings"

    "Reshit", however, is singular in the text! Secondly, how does zafy know that his (or her) posited beginnings should be ראשיות and not תחילות, which also mean beginnings?

    And if "Reshit" means "beginnings - in the plural - perhaps the word "evening", instead of "crow", actually means "Arabs", in its "singular format": ערב

    There's obviously a problem here. Vowels are a part of oral Torah. The problem is that part of oral Torah is accepted, as when you accept
    ויהי ערב ויהי בקר יום אחד
    to mean, "And it was evening and it was day; Day one," but another part of oral Torah is unwittingly denied- by creating a new "oral Torah" - namely, "You are heaven and you are earth."

    That's not to say Torah cannot be explored in unique ways, but it must be done under the certain guidelines, otherwise you "short-circuit" perfect code and make preposterous sense. This is what happens when we leave it to our own machinations, instead of relying on our sages.

    You cannot scoop out where it suits you and leave the rest intact. There are 13 particular ways to expound Torah, as our sages specify. Even our sages carefully trod where no one trod before. You see this often in Talmud where one sage says something by quoting another sage, in the name of yet another sage.

    The very first premise to expounding, however, must be a complete respect for the original as being perfect, otherwise, like I said, you build castles in the air. With that premise in tow, we can cautiously look for our own secrets in Torah. But how wise would it be to look for secrets if we haven't yet mastered the secrets our own sages first revealed?

    For example, BeReshit cannot meant 2 beginnings, for the reason I mentioned - inaccurate grammar. Rashi, on this word, tells you that the first syllable in the word "BeRaishit" means - "FOR THE SAKE OF", a usage we find many times in Torah. The exegesis of the first verse in Torah thus becomes, "For the sake of 2 things referred to as "Reishit" [elsewhere in Tanach] the world was created." This Rashi, taken from the Talmud, reveals to us an exceptional secret of creation, thereby.

    ReplyDelete
  27. To in the vanguard:

    Are we to take your letters typed on this blog to be any more or less than any one else's?

    Perhaps we need to look at a definition:

    Sage:

    - one (as a profound philosopher) distinguished for wisdom
    - a mature or venerable man of sound judgment
    - wise through reflection and experience

    We are so very blessed to have such sages in our past and so very blessed to have such teachers in the present.

    If your letters on this blog did not type words for us to contemplate, investigate, consider then what lesson would this be for studying Torah? We have no voice with the Oral History from the sages of our past. We do have voices of the teachers, the students, us, as we continue to be enlightened by and to enlighten by the letters that lift our lives.

    This too would be a beginning for someone, thus making another sage/teacher of Torah; and another student of Torah; they would remember that tone, that inflection that voice to enable to retell the story. It would continue... in time. Is this any more or less important? Or are they just letters typed on the page?

    In peace whatever you choose that to be for you,
    -jaira

    ReplyDelete
  28. I think I know what you're saying, jaira; That we all are or can become sages in our own right. I commend your positive thinking, but here too I bow to Oral Tradition, which I accept totally. I found a good explanation on the internet for how I want to answer you; It's by a Rabbi Yaakov Meneken (he says more here: http://www.netplaces.com/torah/mishnah-and-talmud/the-decline-of-the-generations.htm)

    "In Jewish thought, the ultimate scholar, the greatest fount of Torah knowledge that ever lived, was Moshe Rabbeinu, Moshe Our Teacher. He knew more about Torah than any other human being ever has, or ever will. And with every passing generation since Sinai, knowledge is being lost rather than gained. Those who lived 3 generations ago were 3 generations closer to Moshe than we are today. The Talmud declares, “If the early generations were children of angels, then we are children of men, and if the earlier generations were children of men, then we are like donkeys” (Shabbos 112b). This concept is called Yeridat HaDorot, Decline of the Generations, the decline of Torah knowledge in the world."

    Anyhow, even if we WERE geniuses, we would still need to accept and first learn most of the Oral Tradition before we dare make our own tradition, out of respect for the Jewish sages, but more out of respect for Torah and Torah truth, and, mostly, out of respect for G-d, Who gave us the Torah and its Oral Tradition.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Agreed, we need to accept - this holds true for learning Oral Tradition thus taking it into our own tradition with respect. Agreed, we need to learn Torah for the truth in which it elevates us in our lives to be as He intended. On these suggested points we are on the same page...and that took reading the letters typed by all on this blog. May your day see the sun, the moon, the dark, the light and the differences between all as we exist to be in this place that was given to us to be together.

    In peace,
    jaira

    ReplyDelete
  30. Zafy - I wanted to postscript a message to my previous one regarding your creativeness. Because such inventiveness actually denies oral tradition rather than adding to it.

    During the Mount Sinai experience, and the aftermath years in the desert, God gifted the Jewish people with TWO Torahs - a written one and an oral one, later transcribed to constitute the Talmud.

    If one TOTALLY denies the Talmud, as did the Saduccees in early Jewish history, that's bad enough. But to PARTIALLY accept Talmud is worse! How can this be?

    Maimonides rules that a person who believes that the entire Torah is divine, except for just one item therein that he attributes to Moses, is a heretic!

    When Elijah the Prophet rebuked the Jews (during the "competition" he held with the false prophets at an ad hoc altar), he declared, "How much longer will you straddle the fence? If you want to worship Hashem, then do so; And if you want to worship the foreign god, then do that!" (Kings 1, 18:39)

    Note his precise words. Eliyahu was telling the people that even idol worship is better than straddling the fence! But why are fence straddlers worse than idolaters? Why does Elijah unleash such contempt for straddlers more so than for idol worshippers?

    We note a similar question elsewhere: Maimonides asks, how is it, if Hashem despises any other god before Him, that He allows for worship of false gods and false prophets to exist? He answers, because Hashem tolerates them for they, at least, strive to live by the truth. For now they follow the wrong path, but at least their mindset is anchored in truth-seeking spirituality; Eventually, when these people will be shown the truth, on a moment's notice they will turn around and align themselves with the correct faith.

    Which is untrue of those who straddle the fence! These people dip into oral Torah, when and as it suits them, and into the whimsical terrain, when and as it suits them. Such people seek convenience or self-aggrandizement more than they seek truth. For them spirituality plays second fiddle to self-satisfaction. These people delude themselves into thinking they are "Torah Jews" because, after all, much of what they do is congruous with Judaism, and as for what they do otherwise, their love of self easily rationalizes away these "imperfections". Logic cannot budge such people. Much like a sick person who doesn't recognize he's ill.

    Worse still is another effect straddlers have. They may influence others who lack insight or knowledge. For straddlers cannot be easily identified as easily as total deniers can be. A Jew knows enough to realize idol worship clashes with Judaism, but he may not detect the attitude of one who compromises his Judaism, as does his straddler friend. It is for this reason gentile missionaries, for example, often prey on targets among this group of weak Jews by portraying a Jewish facade.

    ReplyDelete