Wednesday, April 11, 2012

Beshalach: Why Israel sinned in the desert - childishness and immaturity.

The commentators have been pointing out that בני ישראל are compared to children when they went into the desert after the Exodus. Many, Jews and nonJews, religious and nonreligious, have used this analogy to explain what happened. In fact, that is why the term used is always translated as "Children of Israel".

As Yirmiyahu says in Chapter 2 pasuk 2

ב  הָלֹךְ וְקָרָאתָ בְאָזְנֵי יְרוּשָׁלִַם לֵאמֹר, כֹּה אָמַר יְהוָה, זָכַרְתִּי לָךְ חֶסֶד נְעוּרַיִךְ, אַהֲבַת כְּלוּלֹתָיִךְ--לֶכְתֵּךְ אַחֲרַי בַּמִּדְבָּר, בְּאֶרֶץ לֹא זְרוּעָה

2 Go, and cry in the ears of Jerusalem, saying: Thus saith the LORD: I remember for thee the affection of thy youth, the love of thine espousals; how thou wentest after Me in the wilderness, in a land that was not sown.
 
For example, Dennis Prager, a modern radio talk show host used this analogy in 1996 to explain why the Exodus is unique. Only then did Hashem actively and obviously intervene on a national level with open miracles in this way. Even the open miracles of the desert and the miracles in the time of Yehoshua can be connected to this. All other miracles were either hidden or individual. Even the miracle of the altar of Elijah was relatively restricted and for a specific circumstance. Actually, the fact that the sacrifice was burnt by "the fire of Hashem" was considered a normal response by a "god" rather than a miracle. Similarly, the sins of the Bnei Yisroel in the desert from the beginning to through the  חטא העל (Golden Calf) can be attributed to the fact that as newly freed slaves they were indeed immature "children". Indeed, the חטא המרגלים (sin of the Spies) can be considered in the same way as an expression of childishness. The punishment for that can therefore be considered a necessity of our having to mature before we could progress to the next stage.

Even at the beginning of the Exodus, the actions of the not yet freed slaves show their immaturity. When Moshe first came, even though Hashem had warned him that Pharaoh would not listen, the response to his initial request stunned him. During the initial confrontation, the Hebrew Elders could not bring themselves to actually let themselves be seen by Pharaoh. Even then Moshe did not expect that things would get worse and the reaction of the Hebrew foremen shows this attitude. Dennis Prager pointed out that those purged by Stalin actually begged for the chance to explain to him the mistake that his underlings were making, when it was Stalin himself who had ordered them purged. Similarly, the foremen begged Pharaoh to rein in his servants.

Shmos Chapter 5:

טו  וַיָּבֹאוּ, שֹׁטְרֵי בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל, וַיִּצְעֲקוּ אֶל-פַּרְעֹה, לֵאמֹר:  לָמָּה תַעֲשֶׂה כֹה, לַעֲבָדֶיךָ.
טז  תֶּבֶן, אֵין נִתָּן לַעֲבָדֶיךָ, וּלְבֵנִים אֹמְרִים לָנוּ, עֲשׂוּ; וְהִנֵּה עֲבָדֶיךָ מֻכִּים, וְחָטָאת עַמֶּךָ.

15 Then the officers of the children of Israel came and cried unto Pharaoh, saying: 'Wherefore dealest thou thus with thy servants?
16 There is no straw given unto thy servants, and they say to us: Make brick; and, behold, thy servants are beaten, but the fault is in thine own people.'

The Medrash says that the lesson that the Hebrews learned from the plague of blood was to open up kiosks to sell water.

There are those who say that one reason that they were forbidden to go outside during the Plague of the First Born is to avoid the possibility that they might wind up gloating and showing themselves as not worthy of beeing freed.

Indeed, Ann Coulter actually pointed out the difference between the Exodus and other events when she contrasted the American and the French Revolutions. The American Revolution was a revolt by adults who carefully set up a system that was oriented to justice. The French Revolution (like the Bolshevik Russian Revolution) was one of mob action that swiftly devolved into terror to put the "new elite" firmly in the saddle. The Torah set up the model for bringing בני ישראל to maturity.

The first crisis after the left occurred at the sea. At the beginning of Beshalach, We see them leaving just like a mob of students who are pretending that they defeated Pharaoh and are ready for anything. But even here, we see that this is a facade and they are ready to break down. In fact, we see from the famous Rashi that וַחֲמֻשִׁים implies 20%, that even after all the plagues and the overt miracles that only a tiny minority were ready to go free. Of course, some commentators say that the 80% includes all those who died during the 210 years in Egypt and did not survive to go out, but the implication is still there.

The psukim in Beshalach chapter 15 say:

17 And it came to pass, when Pharaoh had let the people go, that God led them not by the way of the land of the Philistines, although that was near; for God said: 'Lest peradventure the people repent when they see war, and they return to Egypt.'
18 But God led the people about, by the way of the wilderness by the Red Sea; and the children of Israel went up armed out of the land of Egypt.

יז  וַיְהִי, בְּשַׁלַּח פַּרְעֹה אֶת-הָעָם, וְלֹא-נָחָם אֱלֹהִים דֶּרֶךְ אֶרֶץ פְּלִשְׁתִּים, כִּי קָרוֹב הוּא:  כִּי אָמַר אֱלֹהִים, פֶּן-יִנָּחֵם הָעָם בִּרְאֹתָם מִלְחָמָה--וְשָׁבוּ מִצְרָיְמָה.
יח  וַיַּסֵּב אֱלֹהִים אֶת-הָעָם דֶּרֶךְ הַמִּדְבָּר, יַם-סוּף; וַחֲמֻשִׁים עָלוּ בְנֵי-יִשְׂרָאֵל, מֵאֶרֶץ מִצְרָיִם.

Even here, we see from the Hebrew that it is not, as in the English, that "Pharaoh let them go" but that "Pharaoh sent them". That is he forced them to leave, and unlike most times in using that term, it does not say where he sent them to. He just wanted them out of the country. This brings to mind the famous scene in the Cecil B. DeMille move "The Ten Commandments" when Edgar G. Robinson is forced to join the Exodus even though he wants to stay in Egypt. Similarly, in spite of their marching so proudly with their weapons, Hashem is careful not to actually see what war is really like. They avoid any area where someone with a real army might be.


As soon as they actually face a problem at the Reed Sea, they again show their immaturity by immediately breaking into factions that do not understand what to do. They knew that Hashem had caused them to turn back at Pi Hachiros in order to lure Egypt to its destruction. However, when they actually saw the Egyptian chariots they panicked. Perhaps it is because only the G0d fearing Egyptians (who kept them out of the fields as instructed by Moshe before the cattle plague, דבר) had horse. The Hebrews did not believe that they would actually give their horses to the army for the pursuit. Just as children would they split into factions. Some wanted to surrender immediately, lik Shalom Achshav today. Some wanted to run panic stricken into the desert, like some of the other leftists. Some began crying to G0d. Some wanted to try to fight, like many secular Israelis today, even though they had no chance. They actually believed their own propaganda. Moshe had to quiet them and Hashem had to tell Moshe that it was already taken care of.

After they are saved at the sea, Moshe has to force them to leave. As I explain in Why were Bnei Yisroel reluctant to leave Yam Suf they were still not ready to accept responsibility for their actions and could not bring themselves to leave the site of "their triumph". The next occurs just three days later. As Rabbi Sorotzkin explains in דאזנים לתורה (Insights in the Torah) in Beshalach chapter 15 verse 22:


After journeying for three days, they still had their own water with them. Yet they were so confounded that new water had not been miraculously provided, that they began to doubt whether G0d was still with them on the journey.

There are meforshim who say that the water was sweet before they arrived but, as a test, was turned into a bitter spring when they complained. Others say that it was always supposed to be bitter because it was not supposed to be their source of water. The actual source of water was supposed to at the following stop. As it says in Beshalach chapter 15.

27 And they came to Elim, where were twelve springs of water, and three score and ten palm-trees; and they encamped there by the waters.
 כז  וַיָּבֹאוּ אֵילִמָה--וְשָׁם שְׁתֵּים עֶשְׂרֵה עֵינֹת מַיִם, וְשִׁבְעִים תְּמָרִים; וַיַּחֲנוּ-שָׁם, עַל-הַמָּיִם.

The preceding sentence is another situation in which an immature understanding can be dangerous.

26 and He said: 'If thou wilt diligently hearken to the voice of the LORD thy God, and wilt do that which is right in His eyes, and wilt give ear to His commandments, and keep all His statutes, I will put none of the diseases upon thee, which I have put upon the Egyptians; for I am the LORD that healeth thee.' 
 כו  וַיֹּאמֶר אִם-שָׁמוֹעַ תִּשְׁמַע לְקוֹל יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ, וְהַיָּשָׁר בְּעֵינָיו תַּעֲשֶׂה, וְהַאֲזַנְתָּ לְמִצְו‍ֹתָיו, וְשָׁמַרְתָּ כָּל-חֻקָּיו--כָּל-הַמַּחֲלָה אֲשֶׁר-שַׂמְתִּי בְמִצְרַיִם, לֹא-אָשִׂים עָלֶיךָ, כִּי אֲנִי יְהוָה, רֹפְאֶךָ.

 Rabbi Sorotzkin explains that this was required here because the Hebrews were afraid that there would be lingering problems from the water at Marah. Perhaps the water was bitter because of poison and the effects would linger even though the taste had become sweet. Additionally, he explains that Hashem promised that He would not bring any illnesses upon them through miraculous means as He did the Egyptians during the plagues. The end is because he is promising them that he would take care of them in the desert and protect them from common non-miraculous diseases during there trip. This does not mean that someone who (G0d forbid) gets a heart attack or a disease has somehow sinned. This is a mistake made by some religions that refuse to go to a doctor because "G0d will heal us". It is G0d that allows the doctor to be successful (or not) in healing a person.

This is my we must not make the mistake of assuming that we will never get sick or that someone who gets sick has somehow "sinned".

The story is told (in multiple versions) about a man who is in a flood and refuses to be evacuated. "G0d will save me", he says. The National Guard truck comes by and he refuses to go. "G0d will save me". the water rises and he is forced up to the second floor. A rescue boat comes by and he again refuses to go. "G0d will save me". The water continues to rise and he is forced to the roof. A helicopter flies over and a rescue line is dropped. He refuses again. "G0d will save me". Finally he drowns.

When he gets before G0d, he complains, "Why didn't You save me".

G0d responds, "I sent the National Guard truck, the rescue boat, and I even caused a helicopter to deviate from its scheduled flight plan to save you. You did not want to be saved."

After Elim, the Hebrews go into the wilderness and complain about the lack of food. They nostalgically remember the pots of meat that they sat near (not that they got to eat any) while serving their masters, while they ate "bread". Hashem tells them that they will receive the Manna and the Quail. They are commanded not to leave any of the Manna over to the next day as Hashem plans to give them enough for each day at the beginning of that day. Just as poor people and slaves would do today, may of them cannot stop themselves from hoarding. They are like children who will put some of their candy or cookies under their pillow because they cannot bring themselves to trust that they will have more the next day. They gather and try to hoard as much as they can so that it requires a miracle to ensure that every one gets the proper ration. I am sure that you can imagine the way this would be seen in the movie with some of them running around and gathering as much as they can, while others move slowly and with dignity to pick up what is available.

Even though the miracle of precisely one omer each should be enough to tell them not to hoard, there are still those who try. The fact that first it rotted and then developed maggots drives home the lesson.

Even though they have been told that there will be a double portion on the sixth day, they still panic when they find a double portion on Erev Shabbat. They must be told again that this is because they are not going to receive a ration on Shabbat. While some may have gone out to show their children, look you see the miracle that Hashem has not sent any Manna today, others specifically went out to collect. The fact that the Manna did not appear on Shabbat underscores the realization that it is a miracle and not some unusual "natural phenomenon". This is even though a natural occurrence could not have fed the entire people and given everyone precisely the correct ration. This again shows the childish nature of the Hebrews and the need to raise them out of their slave mentality. The Medrash says that this is Dasan and Aviram who have been giving Moshe nothing but trouble from the day that he stopped them from fighting with each other in Egypt (probably about 60 years before) and that they were the same ones who tried to hoard the Manna earlier. Rabbi Sorotzkin points out that they took their baskets to try to collect Manna without even bothering to look if there was any Manna there to be collected.

Dennis Prager imagines the scene when they come back with empty baskets and begin complaining, as if it is Moshe's fault.

Hashem commands Moshe to take an Omer jar and fill it with Manna in order to keep it in the mishkan (and later the Bais HaMikdash) as a testimony as to what happened in the desert. This is in and of itself a miracle because, unlike every other particle of Man, it does not melt or turn rotten. Instead it stays as fresh as the day if fell onto the dew. This teaches us that we must always remember what happened while we were children and how our parents took care of us even though we are now adult and are not fed by our parents.

They finally come to Rephidim and are "smitten with thirst". Rabbi Sorotzkin says that this teaches us that now that they had a constant supply of food in the Manna, they wanted a constant supply of water. They realized that they could not bring themselves to wait until they got to an oasis. They wanted it now. They forgot the lesson of Elim, where the water whose lack they complained about was waiting at the next stop. Moshe became afraid that they would stone him and Hashem tells him to "take the rod" and pass before the people. The rod is a symbol of the power that Hashem gave to Moshe as his messenger. Not only are the people afraid to attack Moshe (who is carrying the rod that brought the plagues) but they realize that he is about to do something.

Hashem tells Moshe to go to the next stop, at Chorev, in order to take care of the matter. This emphasizes the lesson that they were going to get the water there in any event. The Bnei Yisroel are not correct in complaining and their complaint is being shown to be without merit. Moshe goes to Chorev where Hashem is waiting to show him which rock to hit. Moshe Rabbeinu does so and the permanent supply of water is created.

The Medrash describes how the Bnei Yisroel panic and run helter skelter from Rephidim to Chorev. As a result, the protective cloud is now in Chorev and the people are strung out along the entire route from Rephidim to Chorev. That is why the next sentence in Beshalach 17 is

8 Then came Amalek, and fought with Israel in Rephidim.
 ח  וַיָּבֹא, עֲמָלֵק; וַיִּלָּחֶם עִם-יִשְׂרָאֵל, בִּרְפִידִם.

They took advantage of the childish nature of Bnei Yisroel  took attack those who were left behind in the scramble for the well at Chorev. This is why the pasuk explicitly states that hey attacked at Rephidim. Had they remained together and traveled as a unit, just as they had been traveling until now, Amalek could not have attacked.

Moshe must now teach them how to deal with this attack. Indeed, it is similar to the way children are bullied in school. Just as parents must teach their children how to deal with bullies, Moshe must teach them how to fight back. In fact it is only when they see Moshe with his hands raised that they can bring themselves to fight. This mirrors the behavior of many children who take self defense lessons. Often the hardest lesson to learn is to hit the opponent and not pull back.

This could be part of the reason that we are told "wipe out the memory of Amalek" and "never forget what they did to you". One of the hardest lessons to learn as a child is how to deal with the tension between "remembering" the lesson learned and not carrying a grudge on the person who taught you the lesson by being evil. Similarly, we must learn that Amalek must be wiped out utterly so that he can not longer bring evil into the world and torment people, but we must never forget that it is the deeds that are evil and not (necessarily) the people. In fact, an Amalekite is allowed to convert just as any other nonJew is allowed to convert. We might have thought that they were to be wiped out and treated as Moav and Ammon in not being able to join our nation. However, they are not even restricted as much as the Egyptians. An honest and sincere conversion is treated as having fulfilled the command "wipe out the memory of Amalek". In fact we are told that the descendants of Haman studied Torah in Bnei Brak.

We now jump ahead to the עגל הזהב (Golden Calf). Here too we see the essential childishness of the Bnei Yisroel. They were warned that Moshe would be gone for 40 days (Daddy is going on a business trip and will bring you a fantastic present when he comes back). They miscount the number of days and immediately panic. They start pressuring Aharon and Chur who have been left in charge for a "replacement". They cannot take responsibility for themselves or leave matters up to the one who is really in charge (Hashem). They should realize that they have to stay where they are as long as the cloud has not moved. The cloud has not moved and is still protecting them, they still get the Manna every day, the water from the Well of Miriam is still flowing. Even if Moshe does not come back "on time" there is nothing to worry about or for them to do. After they kill Chur, Aharon tries to delay them so that Moshe will have time to get back.He tries all the tricks to delay them. He thinks that they would be reluctant to give up their most precious treasures. He tells them to take the treasures from their wives and children, knowing that they will object . He figures that while they are fighting over this, Moshe will have time to get back. Instead, they strip themselves of their jewelry. He tries making the calf in the most inefficient way possible. Finally, he declared the next day a "festival for Hashem". Not only would this delay them to the next day, but it gave them the opportunity to realize that an idol was not an appropriate item to bring to a festival to Hashem. After all Hashem had forbidden this explicitly in the Aseres Hadibros. None of this works.

Moshe Rabbeinu gets back just in time to see what is going on. Again they are treated like misbehaving children. He destroys the"present" that they were going to get. He smashes the idol and forces them to drink the powder in water. Actually, consider that the only water source that they had was the miraculous Well of Miriam. That means that he is emphasizing that it is Hashem that provides anything. He then rubs in that had those who objected to this actually stood up and tried to stop it, they would have been able to. After all only 3,000 out of 600,000 (half a percent) actually are killed as a result. This means that had the Children actually backed Chur, the entire affair would have been stopped before it got too far. This realization is internalized by the tribe of Levi, which leads to their appointment to serve Hashem.

Finally, we get to the last sin that seals the fate of this generation, the חטא המרגלים (sin of the Spies. Here the spies were the chosen ones of Bnei Yisroel. They could be considered the "eldest brothers" of the "family" and the most mature. The rabbis discuss what their motive was in bringing back such a report and causing the death over the next 38 years of the entire generation of the Exodus. They realized that the nation would actually have to support itself as a normal nation. They would not be able to rely on the Manna and the Well. They would no longer be "in school" spending all their time studying Torah and worshiping at the Mishkan. They would actually have to go out and earn a living. They could not take that prospect. They had to stay in the "ideal conditions" of the desert. They are like the "perpetual student" who continues to live in his parents' basement while continually taking courses to "prepare" him for the real world while never able to actually move out and join the real world. In fact, the "OWS" (Occupy Wall Street) protesters and the super leftist baby boomers epitomize this attitude today.

It is this that seals the fate of the generation. It is only a generation that has been raised in freedom that can continue and enter the land. Those who were under 20 at the time of the Exodus are young enough to internalize the lessons being taught and unlearn the habits of slavery. Those over 60 are old enough and beaten down enough to regard themselves as "retired" and to go along with whatever the new generation will set up as a society. They are willing to allow themselves to be "taken care of". It is the active generation between 20 and 60 that has the habits of slavery too deeply ingrained to be uprooted but who are too young to allow the next generation to just take over that cannot be allowed into the land. The "baby boomers" who are causing so much of the trouble in our current society are indeed this age. The problems that they are causing are like the problems that the Hebrews caused in the desert.

Friday, March 30, 2012

Vayikra - The limits of Humility

The מדרש that discusses the small aleph (א) at the end of the first word always emphasizes Moshe's humility and says that he made the small aleph to make it more like the ויקר (it happened) of Bilam. Rabbi Sorotzkin in אזנים לתורה (Insight to Torah) points at two other places in which this phrase is used. The מדרש says that Moshe was called in this way every time that G0d wanted to speak to him, but that it was not necessary to put it in explicitly each time. There are significant commentaries as to why this was done, but that was not the purpose of his commentary. In the other two places in which the word is used in this way, the final א is written full sized. This leads to the question why. Why was the א only written small here at the beginning of ויקרא?

The other two places are when Moshe sees the סְּנֶה (Burning Bush - Shmos 3:14) and at הר סיני (Mount Sianai - Yisro 19:4). In both those places the letter is full size. Rabbi Sorotzkin points out that at the Burning Bush, Moshe is being chosen for his mission. He will be appointed to the position of leader and must confront Pharoah and take the Jewish people out of slavery. It is inappropriate to think that G0d would "happen" upon a person and immediately appoint him to such a position. Indeed the initial message to Pharaoh commanded in Shmos 3:18, does indeed use the language of "happenstance", נִקְרָה עָלֵינוּ, this is solely so that Pharaoh could understand the message. The message to the Israelites uses the word "appeared", נִרְאָה, to shown that it is indeed deliberate. Thus, the calling cannot be minimized. It must be given its full worth and to do otherwise would cheapen the mission.


Similarly, the calling of Moshe to the mountain cannot be minimized either. He is about to get the Torah for the israelites. This from the beginning has been the entire purpose of the exodus. Again it must be shown in its full value and importance. Consider what is about to happen and the thunder annd lightning that will accompany the Voice of G0d as He gives the commandments.


Finally, we come to Vayikra. moshe is called to the mishkan (tent of meeting) in order to receive the instructions on how to inaugurate his brother as the High Priest and his nephews as the attending priests. He immediately rushes in to get the instructions and follows them exactly as he does honor to his brother. Here, at last, he is allowed to express his humility. Doing so will not diminish the honor of the task that he is about to do. Indeed it increases it, as he is showing that it is Aharon and his sons who must be honored in being able to take part in the sacrificial ritual and eat (when appropriate) from the meat. Moshe regards himself as only a conduit to do honor to them. Here, finally, he is allowed to diminish himself and present himself as less than the leader of Bnei Yisroel.


This teaches us a lesson about our times as well. The talmud has a principle that there are circumstances in which a person is forbidden to forgo any of the honor that is due him. This occurs in a situation in which it would diminish the mission if he were to do so. The mission is more important than the person. Rabbi Frand
told the story as follows:
There is a famous story which illustrates this point. Rav Chatzkel Abramsky, zt"l, once needed to testify in a case in which the Beis Din of London was sued by a shochet [ritual slaughterer] who had been fired. As the head of the Beis Din, Rav Abramsky had no choice, but to testify in secular court. His attorney asked him to state his name and his position. The attorney then asked, "Is it true that you are the greatest living halachic authority on the European continent?" Rav Abramsky said, "Yes. That is true."
At that point the judge interjected and said, "Rabbi Abramsky, is that not rather haughty on your part? I thought that your laws and ethics teach you to be humble." Without any hesitation, Rav Abramsky responded, "I know we are taught to be humble. But I am under oath."
The point of this story is that Rav Chatzkel Abramsky was aware that he was the greatest living halachic authority on the European continent. Recognition of his true status was not haughtiness.

Because he was called to testify on a matter of Torah Law, he had to accept and acknowledge his position as the "greatest living halachic authority". The talmud states

"If a Nasi wants to overlook his honor, his honor may be overlooked. If a king wants to overlook his honor, his honor may not be overlooked."
As part of the discussion, it states that even though the king has declared that the honor can be overlooked, as a human being his honor can be overlooked, however, the honor of the kingdom and of the position that he holds will still be required the next second. Similarly, as long as it was required for the mission, Moshe Rabbeinu could not forgo his honor. It is only when the mission itself required that he act as an individual and subordinate himself that he could allow his humbleness to manifest.

Thursday, February 09, 2012

Why were Bnei Yisroel reluctant to leave Yam Suf?

Rashi gives the most quoted reason, which is that Bnei Yisroel were so intent on collecting the wealth that washed up with the dead Egyptians that they had to be forced to leave. Rabbi Sorotzkin in Oznayim LaTorah gives two other reasons that actually tie into modern politics. The Egyptian army had been destroyed. Egypt was no longer a world power. Indeed, we do not hear of the Egyptians again for almost 500 years, when King Solomon married the daughter of the resurgent Egyptian Pharaoh. This is an illustration of the point that most people lose sight of the long term goal because of the short term results that face them.

As a result, there was a group of Israelites who wanted to settle the area of the Yam Suf (Reed Sea) where they had emerged. Since they no longer feared the Egyptians and G0d had shown his power at that spot, they fell for the then current superstition that a god had his main power at certain locations in the world. The closer to the center of power that a people remained, the better the god would be able to show his power. The ten plagues were actually a prelude to the use of power and it was here at the sea that the center of power had been manifest.

Another group of Israelites wanted to go back to Egypt and tak over the government. Moses would become the Pharaoh and the Children of Israel would become the owners and their former owners, the Egyptians, would now be their slaves. This is indeed like most of the revolutions that have occurred in the world (except for the American Revolution).The former "oppressed class" instead of embracing freedom and learning how to behave, merely take the place of their former oppressors. This is similar to the results of the French and Russian revolutions. It is also what actually happened when the empires of Europe left their African colonies.The former slaves had no model of a society other than what they had seen from their masters. Since they had been slaves, they would never have seen the actual methods of governance or had a chance to learn what was actually required to build a society.

This is why the American Revolution was actually able to succeed. The people had built a society for themselves already and were defending "the rights of Englishmen" rather than uprooting what had been imposed on them. Similarly, the Bnei Yisroel needed to be taken to Sinai and given the laws of the Torah in order to be shown the society that was going to be built.This is also one of the reasons that they needed to have an entire generation grow up under the rule of the Torah before they could enter Eretz Yisroel and attempt to live on their own.

Friday, January 27, 2012

Parshas Bo - Let them discuss the matter

Rabbi Frand points out that every time Moshe Rabbeinu warned Par'o and his court about an upcoming plague, he would immediately leave. When someone must convince someone to act, it is best to allow that person to save face and appear to have made the decision on his own. Otherwise, he is likely to refuse to "give in" to pressure, even if it is the best thing for him to do. We see that also in the reaction to the plagues in which Par'o "strengthened his heart" (which in Hebrew is the symbol for the will). He could not allow himself to be "threatened" by a group of unruly slaves and diminish his "honor".

Rabbi Frand also points out the necessity for a man to have a wife. He needs someone to look on a situation from outside but who will be considered "part of him" so that he will listen to the advice.

Monday, January 02, 2012

Vayigash: 66 + 3 = 70

כו. כָּל הַנֶּפֶשׁ הַבָּאָה לְיַעֲקֹב מִצְרַיְמָה יֹצְאֵי יְרֵכוֹ מִלְּבַד נְשֵׁי בְנֵי יַעֲקֹב כָּל נֶפֶשׁ שִׁשִּׁים וָשֵׁשׁ:
 כז. וּבְנֵי יוֹסֵף אֲשֶׁר יֻלַּד לוֹ בְמִצְרַיִם נֶפֶשׁ שְׁנָיִם כָּל הַנֶּפֶשׁ לְבֵית יַעֲקֹב הַבָּאָה מִצְרַיְמָה שִׁבְעִים:
 26. All the soul(s) coming to Egypt with Jacob, those descended from him, excluding the wives of Jacob's sons, all the soul(s) were sixty six.
 27. And Joseph's sons, who were born to him in Egypt, two soul(s); all the soul(s) of the house of Jacob who came to Egypt were seventy.
The commentators discuss how the total that came from Canaan was sixty six, while adding the three who were in Mitzraim gives a total of seventy. Some commentators say that Yaakov himself was the seventieth person. Others say that Yocheved was born "in the gates of Egypt and wound up being the seventieth person. However, I have come up with another possibility. The שבטים (Yosef's brothers) are counted but the verse explicitly states that their wives were not counted. On the other hand, Yosef's wife אסנת בת פוטי פרע (Asenas), while not mentioned by name, is not explicitly excluded.

The Torah does not say something unless it is meant to teach us something. When counting people, the wives are normally not mentioned unless there is a specific need. However אתנת, while not mentioned by name is not explicitly excluded.Thus, since they had two children, there were four people in Egypt.

The question is now why she would be counted when the other wives were not. The significance of the way Menashe and Ephraim are spoken of comes through. The term used is אשר יולד לו (that were born to him) shows that she very carefully ensured that they were raised to follow in the way of Yoseph and to be worthy of being counted among the "Children of Israel". In fact they merited to be counted as the progenitors of tribes themselves.they were raised to a life of privilege and power. Their father was the viceroy of Egypt who controlled everyone and everything around them. The Medrash states that Menashe was the one who carried out his father's orders and ensured that everything worked all right. Ephraim learned with Yaakov and maintained the tradition.

Rabbi Beryl Wein points out that throughout our history, the intermarriage rate has been determined more by the way that the goyim have treated us than by our ability to resist assimilation. We have been able to survive the persecutions of the past and fight against the forces that attempt to destroy us. However, the most difficult tests have been the necessity to learn to live in a non-Jewish society that treats us kindly or allows us to live freely. This is the test that we are face with now in the United States. We have lost more Jews to assimilation than we have to persecution. This is the lesson of Ephraim and Menashe and what we need to learn from אתנת.

The Torah tells us that the redemption will be in the reverse order of the exile.

וזכרתי את בריתי יעקב ואף את בריתי יצחק ואף את בריתי אברהם אזכור והארץ אזכור” (ויקרא כו מב).
Avraham was regarded as a "Prince of G0d". Yitzchak was able to live in Geror and become wealthy and live in peace, though he was harassed before he could settle down. Yaakov became a penniless wanderer who had to work and fight and undergo physical hardships. The redemption will be in the reverse order. First we survived the physical attempts to destroy us; the Crusades, the Spanish Expulsion, the Holocaust, and all the other massacres and attempts to destroy us. We are now attempting to learn the lesson that אתנת and יוסף taught Ephraim and Menashe, how to survive as Jews in a country in which it is easy to assimilate and in which we are accepted. Only when we learn how to pass this test can we reach the level of Avraham and be recognized as נשיא אלוקים.


Thursday, November 10, 2011

Bikur Cholim sometimes means "Do not Visit"

The medrash in Vayera states that Hashem visited Avraham on the third day after Bris Milah when he was "sitting in the doorway of the tent in the heat of the day"

א. וַיֵּרָא אֵלָיו יְ־הֹוָ־ה בְּאֵלֹנֵי מַמְרֵא וְהוּא יֹשֵׁב פֶּתַח הָאֹהֶל כְּחֹם הַיּוֹם:
The obvious question is why the third day and not earlier. This is the basic source of the mitzva of Bikur Cholim. One of the explanations, quoted by Rashi, says that this was on the third day because that is the day that the pain is worst and the real healing starts. However, this still does not explain why Hashem waited until then and did not pay the visit earlier. One possibility is based on the fact that this was the day that Avraham actually was able to sit "in the doorway of the tent" and receive visitors. Even though the pain was not as bad earlier, he was still suffering the trauma of the surgery and was recovering from the shock. That is why a person is placed in a recovery room after surgery and requires a certain amount of time before visitors are allowed.

Only when he was able to go to "the door of the tent" was he able to receive visitors. Thus, it is improper for someone to actually visit a sick person when it would be more debilitating for them to receive visitors. Notice also that Hashem does not speak to Avraham or tell him anything. It is up to the sick person to decide how much he wants to talk and what he wants to talk about. It is only when Avraham actually gets up and addresses the "messengers" that interaction is initiated.

We should learn from this how to behave when visiting a sick person, just as we learn a similar lesson in how to behave when paying a shiva call.

Friday, October 28, 2011

Breishis - Creationism and Evolutionism

In fact, the arguments between the "Evolutionists" and the "Creationists" that have been occurring in the modern world (and especially in politics and the internet) imply that neither side understands what the issues involved might be. The "Evolutionists" assume that as long as the "science" seems to indicate that evolution is a valid process, then that disproves creation. One of the logical flaws that this leads to is the fact that no matter how far back one goes, the Evolutionist doctrine requires a prior source. The "Creationists" assume that there can be no physical evidence for the existence of the universe before whatever arbitrary time is assumed for the creation. Isaac Asimov once wrote an article discussing the "Big Bang". In it he came up with an explanation of the Big bang that involved the collision of two proto-universes. He then follows the analysis back to what "created" the proto-universes and what "created" whatever he called that previous "creation". He then waves his hand and says that "proves" that creation is not true.

One point that this ignores is that the definition of "creation" implies that the universe could have been created at any point in its development with all the evidence that the Evolutionists rely on. This is the main flaw in the Creationist argument as well. Just as the Torah states that the trees were created bearing ripe fruit, animals must have been created with appropriate age distribution in the herds, passenger pigeons require massive flocks to survive, mushrooms require dead trees on which to grow ... That is, the unstated assumption of the Evolutionist is that creation must occur with everything in a beginning state. An example of this is the assumption that Adam could not have seen the stars because the light would not have had the time to reach the Earth and be visible in the night sky. In fact, once one assumes creation, one cannot prove that the universe was not created with this post on your computer screen while you are in the middle of reading it. The universe could have been created 5 seconds, 5,732 years, or 15 billion years ago and we would be unable to tell the difference.

As can be seen this is the same logical flaw that disproves the pagan definition of "gods" (small g deliberate) as it leads to an infinitely recursive definition set. In the various myths of the various pagan religions, the "gods" are always defined as the "children" of a "father god" and a "mother" with handwaving taking the place of the original "father" and "mother". Consider the Asgardian myths, the Greek myths, of the Babylonian myths. They all have the "original" deities being the children of a pre-existing being of some sort which is just assumed to have been there. For example, consider The Norse Creation Myth which begins

Muspell

The first world to exist was Muspell, a place of light and heat whose flames are so hot that those who are not native to that land cannot endure it. Surt sits at Muspell's border, guarding the land with a flaming sword. At the end of the world he will vanquish all the gods and burn the whole world with fire.

Ginnungagap and Niflheim

Beyond Muspell lay the great and yawning void named Ginnungagap, and beyond Ginnungagap lay the dark, cold realm of Niflheim. Ice, frost, wind, rain and heavy cold emanated from Niflheim, meeting in Ginnungagap the soft air, heat, light, and soft air from Muspell.

Ymir

Where heat and cold met appeared thawing drops, and this running fluid grew into a giant frost ogre named Ymir.
 Later, there is a "creation" of a  a man named Buri who had a son named "Bor" who had a son name "Odin". There is no explanation of who Buri married. However, in the summary above, we see no explanation where Muspellheim, Surt, Ginnungagap, and Niflheim actually came from.

In any case, the monotheistic religions take the pagan idea and state that no matter how far back one must go, there must eventually be a "Prime Cause" because of the Turtles All The Way Down paradox. In this case, the idea of the monotheistic religions is that since the "gods" each require a creator, they are not worth worshiping and only the Primal Cause can be omniscient, omnipotent , or "outside the Universe". Thus only this Primal Cause is worth worshiping no matter how many levels of intermediaries there might be. The main monotheistic religions state that as a result of this, there is no point in assuming the levels of intermediaries since there is no evidence that they exist. As a result, the Primal Cause must have created the physical universe directly. It is only at that point that the physical evidence that the Evolutionists rely could have begun.

The main flaw in the Creationist argument is the assumption that there must be a flaw in the physical evidence. That is, they refuse to accept that the process of Evolution can be true at all or that the physical evidence can exist. It is as if they assume that if creation occured 5,772 years ago. The can be no fossil evidence in the layers of the Earth. It is as if they assume that G0d would be lying to them if the physical evidence of the evolution appeared. It would be like the question that Clarence Darrow asked Williams Jennings Bryan at the Scopes trial if Adam had a navel. It would be like claiming that trees could not have tree rings showing the apparent age or that Adam could not have seen the stars because the light would not have had the time to reach the Earth.

The result of this is that both the Evolutionists and the Creationists are arguing about different matters and from totally different assumptions. Thus, the argument in the modern world is actually meaningless.


Why was Noach "forced" into the teivah?

I have always wondered why Noach being forced in to the teivah by the flood water should be counted a flaw. Why couldn't it be that he waited until the very last moment for the people to do teshuvah? Couldn't it be that he was like Avrohom praying for S'dom up until the final decree? This seems to be the reason why we say "forced by the flood waters". When Hashem told Avrohom "there are not 10 tzadikim", Avrohom stopped. He saw that S'dom had passed the point of no return and the judgement was final. Noach saw that the rain had already come, the "light rain" (from the medrash of hashem giving the last chance to people) had passed, the heavy rain had come, the flood waters had started rising, the last opportunity had passed. Yet he still waited until the flood waters had "forced" him into the taivah. This showed that he was not waiting because he wanted to hope that people would do teshuvah at the last minute.

The medrash states that the word for everything perishing (vayigva) implies being "put to sleep" rather than being left to drown as the flood waters rose. By the time Noach had been forced into the teivah, he would have seen his and known that there was no point in waiting.

Noach, "tmimus" and his worlds

I saw an interesting dvar Torah on Noach about "tamim haya bedorosav". The word "bdorosav" is plural meaning that he was "tamim" in all three of the types of situation that he lived in; before, during, and after the flood. That is, he reacted to each circumstance by trying to follow hashem. Before the flood, he reacted to the circumstance of having to live among reshaim and attempting to remain holy. During the flood, as the medrashim state, he was constantly busy maintaining and supporting the animals in the taivah and attempting to keep the remnants of the world alive through the transition. During the aftermath, he became an " ish sadeh", attempting to regenerate the world and restore civilization.

One of the points seems to be that he was unable to maintain the level of "tzidkus" without the full infrastructure that allowed him to be isolated from the rest of the world. In order to succeed at each of the tasks that faced him, he had to throw himself into the role required by that task, and be "tamim" in that role.

To survive in the world before the flood, he had to isolate himself and become a tzadik. This explains the argument as to whether he would have been greater in the time of Avraham or not. Was it a matter of his needing to be isolated in order to survive and reach the level that he did, and he would have been greater in the time of Avraham? Was it a matter of this was the best that he could do and he could not have reached a higher level, so that he would not have been able to reach a higher level in the time of Avraham.

The medrash that he did not sleep for the entire year of the flood, but was constantly busy feeding the animals, cleaning the teivah, etc also hints at this. The appropriate role for that time was one of constant effort. He threw himself into that effort. However, he could not be a "tzadik" in the same sense as he had been before because there was no one to interact with and no opportunity to do anything else.

After the flood, he became an "ish sadeh". Here too in this role he was "tamim". Unfortunately, this was actually a flaw. He was completely a "man of the field". He became so completely a part of this role that when the pressure eased up a little (after the harvest) he became drunk. Here, "tmimus" was actually a flaw. He should have been able to transcend his current role and been a "tzadik" even in that case.

This can also be a different explanation of the phrase "tamim haya bedorosav". He was only able to maintain himself as tamim during the generations (he was 600 at the time of the flood) that he lived among a society that could be considered a surrounding fence. Once the "pressure was off" he could not maintain the same level of behavior. This is similar to the way that many historians (such as Rabbi Berel Wein and Rabbi Dovid Katz) explain what happened after the ghettos were abolished or what happened in the United States.  Rabbi Wein has used the phrase "a mile wide and an inch thick". This could be another difference between Avrohom's generation and that of Noach. Avrohom had to fight the society around him and constantly reject the pressure around him to conform. Noach had no pressure whatsoever. He was alone in the world and whatever he did, he would still be the "best". It is like the story of the man who arranged for his daughter to marry the "best boy in the Yeshivah". They married and moved to the town  where the father-in-law supported them. After a while, the father-in-law noticed a slackening of the young man's efforts. When he spoke to the boy, he responded that he was learning more and with more intensity than anone in the town. The father-in-law answered that this was not what he had in mind when he said "best". Similaraly, the lack of the pressure that noach had used to keep himself a tzadik contributed to his downfall.