*Be the Change You Want to See In the World

Toldot 5774

 

וְאַחֲרֵי-כֵן יָצָא אָחִיו, וְיָדוֹ אֹחֶזֶת בַּעֲקֵב עֵשָׂו, וַיִּקְרָא שְׁמוֹ, יַעֲקֹב – And afterwards his brother exited with his hand grasping Esau's ankle, and they named him Yaakov... (Genesis 25:26)

In his 19^th century Torah commentary, Rabbi Efraim Eliezer Tzvi ben Hirsch Charlop (Warsaw) references this verse to teach that the People Israel have 2 distinguishing merits/characteristics: Firstly, and unrelated to the verse, is that Bnai Yisrael are the children of Gd – and, thus, the Chosen People. Secondly, that even when Israel's behavior is not good and not appropriate for descendants of Avraham, Isaac, and Jacob, when compared to the behavior of Esau's descendants and the other nations of the world the Children of Israel are righteous. Rav Efraim Eliezer explicates that with his hand grasping Esau's ankle informs that Israel's glory and uniqueness are often times most apparent when in comparison to others.

Chayei Sarah 5774

 וַיִּהְיוּ חַיֵּי שָׂרָה, מֵאָה שָׁנָה וְעֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה וְשֶׁבַע שָׁנִים שְׁנֵי חַיֵּי שָׂרָה – And Sarah's life was a hundred years and twenty years and seven years was the life of Sarah. (Genesis 23:1)

Rabbi Moshe Peretz (Italy ca. 1711) teaches that the unusual presentation of Sarah's years – 100 and 20 and 7 – is intentional, and that the ending clause “and seven years was the life of Sarah” comes to inform us that only the first 7 years of a person's lifetime – a person's childhood – is the golden age of life. That only these years are worthy of being called 'years of life,' for all the following years that a person walks the earth are filled with hardship, toil and worry. It is significant that among his community Rav Peretz was called “The Philospher” as perhaps it sheds light on why Medieval Jewish leaders shunned (and shun?) engagement with modern philosophy. Of course, a person is free to reject ideas that do not resonate – certainly Rav Peretz's definition of 'life' can be challenged – and yet, rather than discounting such ideas outright is there what to learn regarding how to define a life lived?

Vayera 5774

The contents of this week’s parasha, Vayera, include the moving appeal of Avraham negotiating with Gd in order to save Sodom and Gomorra from destruction. During the exchange, Avraham says, Here I venture to speak to my Ruler, though I am but ashes and dust -- וְאָנֹכִי עָפָר וָאֵפֶר (Genesis 18:27). A story is told of the great Rabbi Chaim HaCohen Rappaport (18^th century Podhajce, Poland) who was in virulent opposition to the nascent Chasidism of the Ba’al Shem Tov. While Reb Chaim was studying Torah alone in his beit midrash, a man entered the study hall. Reb Chaim said ‘shalom’ and the man answered with ‘shalom.’ Reb Chaim asked, ‘who and what is this person?’ The man responded with words from this week’s portion, I am but ashes and dust. When the same query was asked of Reb Chaim he responded, also I am but ashes and dust. The guest then said, ‘If so, why does dispute prevail between ash and dust?’ It was at that moment that Reb Chaim understood that the man standing before him was the Ba’al Shem Tov.

Lech Lecha 5774

Midrash is the attempt to address the lacuna of explanatory information in the Tanakh.  Gd’s selection of Avraham as the progenitor of the Jewish people is a classic example of the midrashic process.  At the end of last week’s parasha, we simply learn of Avraham’s ancestry.  This week’s parsha, Lech Lecha, begins with Gd’s choice of Avraham as the Israelites’ founding father.  Missing from the narrative is a description of even one character trait of Avraham that would inform the reader as to why Gd would choose him for the task.  A midrash on this story explains that Avraham’s father was a maker of idols and that Avraham showed his father of the foolishness of idol worship.  How?  His father leaves him in charge of the store and, while alone, Avraham smashes all of the idols except the largest one in whose hand he places a hammer.  When his father returns, he asks what happened and Avraham responds that the large idol smashed the others.  His father says this is impossible and Avraham says that if impossible, why would one worship such an impotent object?  Though obvious to modernists, Avraham's message was absurdly radical – and prophetic – for the time period in which he lived. Is absurdly radical and prophetic message possible in the 21^st century?  

Noach 5774

When Gd was intending to destroy the cities of Sodom and Gemorrah, Avraham raised his voice in protest. Similarly did Moshe Rabbeinu argue against Gd’s plan to wipe out B’nai Yisrael after the sin of the Golden Calf. In this week’s parsha, Gd says to Noach, For My part, I am about to bring the Flood – waters upon the earth – to destroy all flesh under the sky in which there is breath of life; everything on earth shall perish…For your part, take of everything that is eaten and store it away, to serve as food for you and for them. Noach did so; just as Gd said. (Exodus 6:17-22) Noach’s actions have been defended by the tradition as someone with such trust in Gd and such humility that arguing with the Almighty was unthinkable. However, the Zoharic work Midrash Hahne’elam teaches thusly: When Noach left the ark and saw the world was destroyed, he began to cry, and he said to Gd, “Master of the Universe, you are called ‘merciful’ – you were to have mercy on your creation!” Gd responded, “Foolish shepherd! Only now do you say this and not when I told you my intentions! When you heard that you would be saved in the ark, you did not think to represent others.”