An apology for my lack of attention and a bit on Parshas shoftim

I have been sadly remiss in keeping up to date with posting here.  My apologies, and I will enedeavor to do better!  My excuse?  I have taken up laining for a shul and the time I would have spent on posting and preparing something on the Parsha has been taken up with preparing the laining each weak.  So, I am coming to gips with the load and find myself having time available.

Last week, I lained for a small community where they struggle for a minyan and the person that normally runs services etc was away.  This meant that it wasn’t nly laining required, but also being the shaliach tzibur and giveng a couple of droshas.  What I spoke about on Shabbos morning is something that has always fascinated me- the Eglah Arufah.  For thos ewho don’t know what I am tlaking about- here is a short summary of the Eglah Arufah:  A body is found dead in the fields.  Who killed him is unknown and there is no way fo finding out who the killer is.  The members of the Sanhedrin come down from Jerusalem, and together with the elders and judges form the nearby towns measure the distance to the closest town.  The elders from that town then sacrifice an unblemished calf that has never done any work, in a valley in an area that has never been worked, and make the declaration “Our eyes did not see this deed, our hands did not do this deed.  Let this calf be an atonement for Yisrael”

What I find so fascinating with this is the fact that there is no one who actually suspects the elders/judges from that city.  Yet the Sanhedrin comes down to oversee the process.  IN the Talmud, Masechta Sotah the debate is over how many members of the Sanhedrin come down- the entire 70 members or only a few necessary experts.  Clearly what is happening here is a dramatic event!  One way to look at it is to think of the opening of each chapter in Masechta Avot  (Pirkei Avot):  “All of Israel is responsible one for each other.”  What is going on here is that the elders. judges, the Sanhedrin are essentially stating that they have done their duty- they have not neglected teaching the people their responsibilities in ensuring that the populace understands this important lesson.  The elders of the city are saying that if they had seen the person, he would have been welcomed and looked after- if they had had the opportunity, they would have sent peopel to escort him and thus help to avoid the danger of robbers on the road that would be looking out for single travellers leaving their cities to target.  The Sanhedrin is declaring their concern and showing how mportant this mitzvah is for all of us.

It can hardly be coincidental that we read this in Elul.  Here we are- looking at ourselves, at improving ourselves and elevating ourselves.  We al know how to be ntrospective and to lok for our failings.  We all know to go to friends, neighbors, colleagues etc and seek forgiveness for any wrong doing- but how much do we focus on the community on Tikkun Olam?  Th eglah arufah is a stark reminder that our responsibility to the community is important- the entire workings of the Sanhedrin in Jerusalem would come to a halt for however long it took then to travel, measure the distances, and carry out the sacrifice.  Thus the entirety of the Jewish Nation would be affected by the death of this one individual.  An important lesson on how we need to value each and every soul in the community- and to consider them, and how we can have a positive impact on our communities as we prepare for the Yamim Noraim.

Singularity and the soul

Singularity- an interesting concept that many science fiction writers have touched on in the past (and will probably continue to do so as people predict it coming ever closer). Probably the best science fiction story on the subject was written by Marc Stiegler called “The Gentle Seduction “ *. The concept is this: at some point in time the rate of scientific advancement is so fast as to become incomprehensible, with changes happening faster than they can be absorbed. One effect of this is the concept that eventually computers become so advanced as to be able to exceed the capabilities of our minds- or to extend them. The extension of this is eternal life through downloading the mind into a computer and continuing to live forever- either virtually or through various artificial bodies when physical interaction is desired. What got me thinking about this topic? A recent BBC documentary** (Ok originally screened in 2006 and recently rescreened…) that somebody mentioned discussing these ideas (I haven’t seen the actual documentary unfortunately)

Aside from the various aspects of how this would affect society, the economy and the job market- there seems to be another area that needs to be addressed- where does the soul fit in? Now, the one view of the soul is that it has three main components- ruach, neshamah and nefesh. The ruach is essentially the animating spirit common to all living things. It is basically the physical component of the soul and finite. The nefesh is the holy spark, the pure part that comes from God, the neshamah the combining influence- the part that is the “You”, the unique part of this life that grows, makes decisions and is needed to lift the physical to the spiritual.

So, what happens when our intellect is removed from the body? What happens to the soul? It would seem that the ruach at least would die. It is tied to the physical, and thus the removal of the physical means it, too, is removed. What about the higher parts? The neshamah is a link, a connection between the physical and the spiritual. If the physical ceases to be, does it? Is there a purpose in trying to perfect ourselves, overcome our limitations, when the limiting factor, the pull of the physical is removed? On the other hand- does the physical have to be the body as we know it? Is the lure of the physical, the challenge to move towards spirituality, as great once we are out of the physical body and embedded in the silicone heart of a machine? Is the neshamah dependant on a meat body, or on a connection into the physical creation of Hashem?

This question seems to be at the heart of this coming issue- is eternal life actually worthwhile? If we are rooted in the mundane and the physical- then the answer is yes. For those that believe this life is it, that death is oblivion and nullity, the answer is clear- continued existence must be preferred over being snuffed out. For those that do believe in an afterlife- the issue of what happens to the soul becomes paramount. If the world to come is where we actually want to be- then eternal life is actually a punishment. It denies us the movement into the realm that we are ultimately destined for. If the soul dies and the intellect continues to exist, is there any value to soulless living? Does spirituality die with the body, or does it continue as long as there is an intellect to interact with the world? (The question of spirituality and artificial intellects that may arise is a different can of worms to be opened in the future!)

Don’t look at me for the answers- questions such as these are going to require the contemplation and teshuvot from the Gedolei hador. But I open to the floor to you, any thoughts or comments on this?

* http://www.skyhunter.com/marcs/GentleSeduction.html (Originally published in Analog Science Fiction/Science Fact magazine in August 1989)

** http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/tvradio/programmes/horizon/broadband/tx/singularity/

Parshas Matos 5768

You ever feel really excited about something? So excited you get up early, jump out of bed, then rush to do whatever it was that excited you? Or you sit at work, and that one crucial task arrives- you know if you do it, and do it well, you will shine and be the next line in line for promotion- how quickly do you rush off to do it? To be the one to get the praise and accolades for a job well done?

What about the converse? The boss comes and tells you that you are fired, and then asks you to do one last task. How many people are keen then? How many people rush off excitedly, putting all that energy into that last task before they walk out the door to leave the company forever?

Chances are that everyone will identify with the first situation, and look at the second situation as bizarre. Run excitedly to complete the one task after which you will be fired? Most people will drag it out, extend it as far as possible to get the most possible traction from it. These two scenarios are played out in Parshat Balak and this weeks parsha.

In Parshat Balak we read how Bilaam wakes early in the morning, saddles his own donkey and leaves early. He is excited. He wants to curse the Jews. He wants to bring ill fortune and bad luck down on them- so much so that he foregoes the dignity and honour he normally insists on- preparing his own donkey and setting off without the household to accord him honour. He is like the first example- keen, eager, rushing off to do what he wishes.

On the other hand, in this week’s Parsha we see situation two. God tells Moshe to gather an army of twelve thousand men; one thousand from each tribe, to be led by Pinchas. Hashem tells him in clear terms that after the battle, his duty to Bnei Yisrael and Hashem will be completed and it will be time for him to die: he will never enter Yisrael- Bnei Yisrael will be led by his protégé Joshua in their conquest of the land. Not even his sons will take up his mantle of prophecy and leadership once he is gone.

Knowing this, one could forgive Moshe if he procrastinated a bit. If he dragged his feet, took things slowly, listened to the elders, took advice- and basically acted like most of us would in that situation. Instead, Moshe rushes to perform the commandment from Hashem. He does not delay, but right them gathers the army and sends it war.

In Moshe’s actions we can see how we should act. Moshe’s acts is as much an act of zealotry as Pinchas’, but while Pinchas’ happened in a moment of high emotion, an once in a life time situation- Moshe lived in this state constantly. Moshe lived to serve Hashem- for him, any commandment, no matter how small; or how painful to perform, had to be performed immediately, joyously and to the best of his ability. For Moshe, the serving of Hashem was the ultimate reward in itself.

So, too, it should be for us. Undoubtedly the complete acceptance and willingness that Moshe showed is not something easily done. Yet it should be something that we all strive for- to be able to fulfill the complete will of Hashem, joyously and rapidly, without worrying about how it affects us personally- but only that it is the will of Hashem.

Intermarriage

Intermarriage is probably most serious issue facing the continuation of Judaism in some areas of the world and for some of the Jewish movements. In the NJPS 2000 survey conducted in the USA, the Orthodox movements seemed to be avoiding this to a large extent- both showing large family sizes and an under 6% rate. However, for the liberal movements these rates were dramatically higher- from 32% in Conservative, to 49% in the unaffiliated community (only slightly lower at 46% in Reform). (Figures taken from here: http://www.simpletoremember.com/vitals/WillYourGrandchildrenBeJews.htm )

Recently I have seen a discussion of this on another blog (http://factualbasis.wordpress.com/2008/07/16/intermarriage-out-of-judaism/ ). Then today I came across a question on Yahoo! Answers- a mother trying to work out how to keep her children happy with not going to Church with their friends from school. (See the question here http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AgznOqLlXpjSHDIkirClAVUjzKIX;_ylv=3?qid=20080719202541AArdQQ9 )

I read this question and immediately thought of the figures around intermarriage and how this is a problem for many movements in Judaism (and probably more so in South African Orthodox than in Orthodox in the USA since the Conservative/Reform movement is very small here and thus you have the strange phenomenon of non-Observant Orthodox Jews in many Orthodox communities!) Immediately the obvious question arose: If the parent is so worried about the peer pressure and desire of her children to be like their friends form school, why isn’t the first step to socialize with more Jews and to create a circle of friends for them that are Jewish and thus remove the pressure to conform to a Christian society?

If the spiritual health of our children is important to us (and it should- as much as their physical health is), then why do so many avoid taking the tough decisions to ensure it? If we knew that we were living in the midst of a polluted area and that our children’s health was at risk, how many of us would be reluctant to move to make sure they would be healthy? Yet when it comes to spiritual health, the obvious solution of moving to a place where you would be surrounded by Jews, associate with Jews and be immersed in a Jewish environment is resisted and seen as a radical and fanatical.

In my mind this is just a symptom of the modern malaise of wanting to fit in- nobody wants to be too far from what is considered “normal”. We judge ourselves, our homes, our children, jobs etc by the standards of what society expects. We go on about how we must respect individuality, how uniqueness is desired and welcomed, yet we rush to conform and to not make waves or appear strange to neighbors. Unfortunately, for many this malaise seems to include making sure they conform to a specific societal ideal- being “radical” and associating with a minority group, moving house or school so children will associate with Jewish peers rather than being immersed in the majority culture is not acceptable.

Considering that, are we really surprised at such high assimilation rates? If our children grow up immersed in a society where Judaism isn’t the norm, where the desire to conform is a push to other religions (or to no religion), then why are we surprised when they absorb that and treat Judaism and marrying a Jew as nothing more than an option that is the same as any other option? It’s what they’ve been taught- all options are fine, all options are good, there is no definite right or wrong (and this comes through in the question- the parent is happy to have them choose religion in their teens).

So, as I answered in that question (yep- Allonyoav on Yahoo! Answers is me…) I see only one lasting and real solution- Jews need to acknowledge that if they want Jewish children, and Jewish children that marry other Jews, they need to structure their lives in such a way that Judaism and other Jews are a significant part of it.

Parshas Pinchas 5768

Parshas Pinchas starts off where last week’s parsha finished. Moses sends Pinchas and the rest of Bnei Yisrael to war against the Midianites. An interesting thought is brought on this the Talmud, Masechta Sotah. In discussing the role of the Kohen who led the nation to war, the issue of why Pinchas was chosen in this role is brought up.

There it is said that Pinchas was chosen because he was to lead the nation in war not just for what had happened at Baal Peor, but also, that as a descendant of Yosef (through his mother), it was as revenge for the sale of Yosef by the Midianites to the Egyptians. From the incident at Baal Peor is easily understood why Pinchas should be symbolic of that- it was through his actions that the anger of Hashem had been averted and the nation saved. His willingness to act correctly when such monumental and blatant sinning had left great men like Moses, Aharon, Elazar etc stunned into inaction showed how much he loved the Torah and Hashem. Indeed, it was for this action that he became a Kohen.

But why is Pinchas chosen to be symbolic of the revenge of Yosef? There were princes of Ephraim and Menasheh that could surely have fulfilled that role, and would have been more symbolic in that role since they were within the tribes that were Yosef’s descendants! Here we learn an important lesson- Pinchas burned with fire, with emotion. He felt things- for him Hashem and Judaism were living things, things that were intimate to him. He felt the indignation at the disobedience of Hashem as an intimate attack. So too with the sale of Yosef, for him it was not history, not an event two centuries in the past which had gone cold.

From Pinchas we see that Judasism is not dry, the Torah and Tanakh are not merely history books of what happened to our ancestors. It is not a matter of rote and learning, of merely studying what happened to others- Pinchas shows us that we need to feel that what happened to our ancestors should feel like it happened to us today. Every year we read in the Hagaddah the father’s reply to his sons. To the wise one- that if our ancestors would not have been redeemed, he would still be a slave in Egypt; to the wicked one that he would not have been worthy of being redeemed. Both these answers have a common theme- it is addressed to the sons and their current situation- they are told that they, too, would have been redeemed or left behind- the Exodus is relived because it is intimate to US, not just to our ancestors. Similarly on Shavuot we are told that we must act as if the Torah had been given to us, personally. That it is ours for eternity, always new, always freshly handed to each of us in a personal capacity; it was not just something that was given to our ancestors, but something that we must feel was given to us personally.

Pinchas teaches us this- he feels, he acts. For him an act against Hashem is something not to be borne; for him the wrong done to Yosef is felt as if it had just happened. Let us learn from Pinchas and feel the Torah is ours, new and to be guarded and loved as if it were given to us today.

As always, comments, suggestions and nit picking are welcomed!

NB: This was actually written by me for Parshas Pinchas. But it actually deals with a topic from Parshas Matos, with Rashi commenting on this subject in his commentary on Parshas Matos. So I am dithering on whether I keep it Parshas Pinchas or retitle it to Parshas Matos. Comments on that anyone?

Kashrut- a brief introduction

I am sure many of you who are Orthodox get faced with this question often: What exactly does Kosher mean? (Especially at work functions when your food is separate from everyone else’s and highly conspicuous as a result!) So I have prepared a brief introduction to Kashrut. Let me know what improvements should be made or if I have left anything of importance out! Just remember- this is meant to be a brief introduction, not a detailed study. Something more to explain more of the basic technicalities and how they operate.

The What of Kosher:
he Torah in Leviticus gives rules as to which animals are “clean” and “unclean”. In other words, which animals are kosher to eat.

For land animals the rule is that the animal has to have a cloven hoof AND chew the cud. With birds specific families are mentioned (they are all fowl and not raptors or carrion eaters), fish have to have scales and fins (thus no sea food is kosher).

With land animals- a few are specifically mentioned since otherwise their may have been confusion over whether they were kosher or not. Example: the hare which has a split foot (rather than hoof), by it being mentioned we know the kind of hoof that is kosher. The camel which chews the cud but does not have a cloven hoof- specifically excludes animals which only have that trait (another animal in this category is the horse). Then you get the pig- the ONLY animal that has a cloven hoof but does NOT chew the cud. Not only does this teach us that the animal must chew the cud AND have the cloven hoof- it also is seen as especially repugnant for another reason- it is seen as being deceitful, clean on the outside, with its impurities hidden within, thus the particular disgust aimed at the pig by the Torah.

The HOW of Kosher:
Kosher animals a re killed in a specific way. The knife used has to be exceptionally sharp, with no nicks or serrated edges. A cut is made across the three main vessels (jugular, carotid, larynx) and unconsciousness is instantaneous. The carcass is checked for specific flaws rhat render it unkosher (such as a deformed heart, lungs which are diseased etc). If the schochet (slaughterer) is a specialist, the anopheles vein is removed from the hind quarters, if he is unable to, the whole hindquarters are unkosher and sent to unkosher butcheries. The meat is salted and hung to draw out the maximum amount of feasible. For poultry and other fowl- the procedure varies as they are decapitated, and have no hindquarters to check.

Kosher fish require no special preparation.

Fruit is generally not a problem, but can be problematic when cut in a non-kosher kitchen (raw, uncut fruit is always kosher.) Raw fruit can be made unkosher by putting unkosher sauces etc on it, or by sprinkling lemon juice on it (lemons/chillis and some other strong fruits are considered “hot” and putting them on other fruit gives the same effect as cooking them.) Cooking them will always render them unkosher.

Leafy vegetables (lettuce etc) are problematic since they are often infested with small insects. They must be soaked and checked to make sure that they are clean. Vegetables where the leaves are not undone before eating (such as brussel sprouts) or cannot be undone (such as broccoli) are very problematic- we generally only eat those when we know their is no possibility of infestation (such as from frozen vegetables and from hydroponic sources). Other vegetables are generally ok (with the exception of strawberries- which have the leaf and a bit of the flesh cut off (since those areas are generally infested), and then cut in half to make sure their is no internal infestation). Yes, preparing a salad can be a pain!

On top of that- we have to cook meat and milk in separate pots (and if we are having something like vegetables which are neether meat or milk (Parev) we cook them in a third set so they do not become meat or milk), and we eat meat and milk off separate crockery, with separate cutlery. You can eat meat after milk (with a minimal waiting time), but milk after meal we have to wait much longer (depends on community- anything from 1 hout to 6 hours).

The WHY of Kashrut

The kashrut laws are NOT based on health issues. Kashrut is one of those laws which are referred to as a “chok” (chukot in the plural in Hebrew). The defining characterisitic of chukot is that they are not rational and not subject to being completely understood. Never the less, Rabbis across the millenia have tried to at least offer some explanations.

When it comes to kashrut- one explanation (which I like so its getting used here…) is that it helps to enhance our overall spirituality. Judaism sees our mission on earth as being one of learning, of spiritual growth. It is the time for our souls to grow and increase in their holiness since only in this world is there enough free will to make the challenge meaningful. So what has this to do with kashrut? Think of it this way: the bodies our souls are housed within are the same as any other animals bodies with the same physical needs. This means we need to find some way to change fulfilling those physical needs from the purely animalistic to the holy in order to uplift our bodies to the level of out soul. So sleeping is made holy through saying specific prayers before going to sleep and as we wake up, sex through marriage- and eating through kashrut.

Parshat Balak 5768

“ Before destruction comes pride, and before stumbling [comes] a haughty spirit.” Mishlei 16:18. (If that isn’t familiar- the more familiar paraphrasing of “Pride cometh before a fall” undoubtedly is.)

So why start discussing this week’s parsha with a quote from Mishlei? Lets look at the main subject of the parsha- the request from Balak, king of Moab to Bilaam to curse the Jews. We see Bilaam turn Balak down, Balak then send extra messengers of higher status followed by the incident with the talking donkey. Of course, Hashem does not allow Bilaam to curse Israel, but he instead ends up blessing them. We then finish off with the infamous incident at Baal Peor where the Israelites sinned with the daughters of Moab and Pinchas stags a prince of Shimon and the woman he is having relations with, and proceeds to walk through the camp with them impaled on his spear.

So- where does a quote about pride and a fall come in? For the answer- let us look at Bilaam, the prophet to whom Balak turns to curse the Jews stating “Whom you bless is blessed and whom you cures is cursed.” The midrash states that Bilaam was the equivalent of Moshe in prophecy and if he had not erred (more on this later) he would have been rewarded as such in the World to Come.

In the story with Bilaam, we see how pride twists somebody. Bilaam was so concerned with surface appearances and pride, that he did whatever he had to in order to preserve his dignity and his status. Surely a prophet of his stature would know that Hashem would not allow him to curse the Jews? In the Talmud, masechta Sotah, the story is told of when Pharoah wanted to weaken the Jews he turned to his advisors- Yitro, Bilaam and Job. Yitro fled, knowing that if he told Pharoah that the Jews were blessed and to attack them would be suicidal. Job remained silent (and this is why he was later punished- his silence was partly to blame for the suffering caused to the Jews by Pharoah and , thus, he suffered) and Bilaam gave the advice to kill the Jewish baby boys as they were born. From that we see that he had already tried once to attack the Jews (through Pharoah) and had failed. How could he think he would be any more successful?

When Blak’s messenger’s arrive, he states that he would consult with hashem and give them an answer in the morning. (This shows that while his prophecy may have been the same as Moshe’s, his relationship with Hashem was less- Moshe could speak to God at any time, Bilaam only in his dreams.) Hashem forbids Bilaam to curse the Jews and to go with the messengers. How does Bilaam convey this to messengers? He states “I cannot go with YOU.” In other words, he implies that the reason he is not allowed to go because their statue is too lowly and he cannot travel with them.

Not wanting to give up, Balak sends other messengers, higher ranking ones, to try and entice Bilaam. After all, Bilaam has implied the reason for his refusal is that he wasn’t paid the honour due to him! Once again Bilaam consults with Hashem and is told that he could go with the men and do ONLY as they asked and speak exactly as Hashem dictated. Why this specific statement? This was to cut out the possibility that Bilaam would make a generic curse against other nations, and then include Israel, thereby circumventing the prohibition against cursing the Jews (commentary of Baal Haturim). Of curse Bilaam goes- and Hashem is angry, seeing that Bilaam still seeks a way to circumvent his explicit instruction to curse the Jews and he thus sends an angel to waylay him.

It is in this incident with the angel that we truly see the pride of Bilaam. Three times his donkey seeks to save him, and he threatens to ill the donkey, until the angel reveals itself. But here lies an issue- surely a person at the level of Bilaam should have sensed the presence of the angel for himself- yet he is so concentrating on his mission, trying to find a way to curse the Jews- he is oblivious to its presence. On top of that, his donkey talks to him- yet he ignores this miracles, threatening to kill it! Not just that, in front of the High ranking Moabites, not wanting to offend his dignity, he tries to pretend he does not normally ride the donkey- yet the donkey replies that he is Bilaam’s daily transport, and has been for life.

Why this behaviour of Bilaam? Well, in it we see the pride of Bilaam- he wants to kill the donkey because it offends his pride. He does not want his pride and dignity hurt, so he goes with the Moabites even though he knows it is against God’s wishes. He seeks to bring down Israel, thing the nation (and though I have not seen any commentaries on this matter- maybe even jealous of Moshe’s closer relationship with God. In his pride, he is almost killed.

The correlation to the verse in Mishlei goes even further. After he is unable to curse the Jews; the Jews fall into idolatry and promiscuity at Baal Peor. The question is- why does the Torah have the one incident straight after the other. The reason for this is given in a Midrash. Failing to curse the Jews, Bilaam tells Balak how he can get the Jews to destroy themselves and to bring them down. The whole incident at Baal Peor is as a result of Bilaam’s pride- he does not want to seem weak and powerless to effect the Jews- so he tells their enemy how to attack them. Once again, surely a man of the stature of Bilaam should have known of the consequences to his soul for such an action (and this is discussed in the Talmud when Onkelos, then still a pagan sorcerer summoned the soul of Bilaam to ask its fate in the World to Come). Yet pride drives him- leading to his fall, letting him give advice that leads to the degradation of some Jews, a war between Bnei Yisrael and Midian and the damage to his own soul.

The lesson, of course is clear. Pride is a negative personality trait, one that we have to minimise. As with all things- it is not completely wrong. We should have some pride- and a Torah scholar in particular is told that there are certain things they should expect out of honour of the Torah they have learnt. Yet, at the same time we all have to be very careful that we do not contain too much pride- humility is far more apt in most situations and we should be more worried about the feelings of our fellow man than of anything we feel is our due!

Please feel free to comment on any aspect of this.  Agree, or disagree wiht my pointof view- or to point out any errors (or anything you particularly liked.)

No easy paths to spirituality

Nowadays we see a plethora of cults, new age movements, reinterpretation of old spirituality into new forms- all in the name of people seeking out spirituality. What is the driver behind all this? Why the search for meaning in everything but the traditional.

Strangely enough, everyone seems to think that this is new, that searching for easy answers to spirituality is something unique to our era. But history shows us something different. Why else do we see Bnei Ysirael falling into idolatary time and time again? Simply put: worshiping idols was easy, an entrance into spirituality without the hard work and discipline required in Judaism. Similarly, towards the end of the second Temple era there were a plethora of cults and sects looking for alternate answers to spirituality rather than looking at the hard work, study and discipline espoused by the Rabbis of the Sanhedrin (i.e. the Pharisees). Whether it was early sects looking for a Messiah to be reborn after three days (as it seems was part of the doctrine of one of the sects at least a hundred years before the time of Jesus according to a recently found tablet) or aesthetes such as the Essenes or textual literalists like the Sadducees and Samaritans- they surely reflect nothing more than the search for spirituality outside the mainstream- just as we see it today!

So what is the answer? Strangely enough I found this discussion in the Talmud (Sotah daf 40a): Rav Chisda bar Abba and Rav Abbahu both gave shiurim at the same time: Rav Abbahu taught on aggadata (allusionary stories, the meanings behind verses etc, Rav Chisda lectured on halacha. Rav Abbahu’s lecture was filled to overflowing; Rav Chisda had very few attendees. Afterwards, Rav Abbahu saw that Rav Chisda was upset at the poor attendance at his shiur. Rav Abahu comforted him with the following parable: There are two sellers, one of precious stones, the other of smallware (pins/needles/ threads etc). To the seller of smallware- the others items may be more precious, but most do not have the means to purchase them. How was this analogous to their situation? Rav Abbahu compared the teaching of agadata and spirituality to smallware- easily understood by everyone as it does not require deep logical analysis, knowledge of minutae and the intellectual capacity to follow difficult discourse- rather it is like asimple narrative . However, the Halachah of Rav Chisda, while of far more value and intrinsically worth more, is like the precious stones, few have the means to acquire it.

In this exchange we see the eternal quest for the easy path to spirituality. People go for the simple narrative, the quick fix to feeling they are spiritual, rather than involving themselves in the difficult work of study and understanding needed to follow the whole package.

Parshat Chukat - Part II

In our parsha we have the deaths of both Miriam and of Aharon. There is an interesting statement in regards to Aharon that is not found with the death of Miriam. When Aharon dies- it states that the entire assembly of Israel wept and mourned for thirty days. However, the first thing that is mentioned after the death of Miriam, is the people complaining about water. Undoubtedly they would have mourned for her- but it would seem that the grief they felt at the death of Miriam was muted in comparisaon to that at the death of Aharon!

Why was there such sadness at the death of Aharon? Why did his death have such a huge effect on the entire nation? There is comment in the Talmud that we should be like Aharon- to love peace and to chase after peace. How did Aharon exemplify this trait of peace, a trait of Hashem himself? In the parsha dealing with the sotah, we learn that G-d is so concerned about shalom bayis (peace in the home- i.e. relationship between the husband of wife) that it is the name of G-d that is erased as the final step of the process to determine her innocence or guilt.

In a similar vein, Aharon took great care to men relationships between people- particularly between husband and wife. He, personally, regardless of the importance of his position and the indignity of the role, would make sure to visit both sides of the conflict- speak soothing words and encourage them to come together and resolve their differences. Like G-d with the sotah, Aharon involved himself in creating shalom bayis, creating peace in the home and thus strengthening the overall nation.

It was this attribute of his- that he was so involved with ensuring happiness in the home and harmonious relationships he was beloved by the entire nation and thus the grieving over his death was very pronounced, far more so than with Miriam who, while loved by many (especially the women for whom she was a leader)

Comments on blogs…

Maye I’m strange- but when i read somebody elses blog I recognise it as their private space and an invitation to interact with them. If I choose to comment on something, I keep it polite, I try to discuss what is relevant, and I don’t attack the blogger. But thats me, it seems that I am in a minority!

Yep, few comments appear here- mainly because I just refuse to let anti-semitic hate speech be blasted across my blog, do not appreciate personal attacks (and will not allow them), and the ones replete with swear words and containing nothing of substance- well, do I even need to mention they will not appear?

Heres a few simple rules for anyone wanting to post a comment here- no hate speech, not swearing, no missionising (this blog is unabashedly Jewish- you want to lecture about Christianity and posts reams out of Christian texts- do it elsewhere) and no lashon hara.

For those who are not aware what lashon hara is- it translates as evil speech and includes gossip, hate speech, lying deliberately trying to embarass people. If you are uncertain if a comment qualifies as lashon hara- then rather don’t post it.

So yep, my blog is low on comments - I’d rather have that than the meaningless one liners whose sole purpose seems to be to show off the commentators swearing prowess, proselytising and anti-Semitic rants. Do I want people to read and comment? Obviously- else why would I bother posting in this blog? Do I want to get into arguments over religion or respond to personal attacks against me? Nope- and as this is my personal space, and it is my decision what appears here, such comments and attempts to engage in flame wars or personal attacks are just not going to appear!