Divine Attributes in human beings
Author: Esther Ehrman, Heshvan 5774/October 2013Shiur Vayera
Divine Attributes in human beings, a legacy of the Patriarchs.
Genesis, ch.18-22 (Vayera) through the eyes of Rav Eliyahu Dessler (1891-1954).
The eighteenth century scholar, Rabbi Moshe Chaim Luzzatto (the Ramchal) in his work Messilat Yesharim, explains that we have inherited from the Patriarchs certain great qualities, such as 'Chesed' and a love of the Land of Israel. Rav Dessler, in a talk given a few years after the end of World War 2, to the Talmud students of Yeshiva Poniewicz shows how this was exemplified in the life of the patriarch Avraham.
Chesed is not easily translated by any one term; it denotes lovingkindness, grace, a love of G-d and one's fellow man. It is one of the ten kabbalistic 'Sephirot', spheres of Divine activity. The Biblical section Vayera opens with the episode of Abraham seeing three men near his tent,going out to invite them in. His hospitality is such that, although the Lord has been communicating with him, Abraham asks Him to wait while he attends to total strangers, possibly idol worshipers angels as it turns out. Everything gives way before the obligation to practice Chesed. Rav Dessler compares Abraham's conduct to that of Job. Job, too, is hospitable; he gives his guests whatever they wish, wine and meat, if that is what they are used to; but he does not go out to bring in strangers and he gives only what they want – that is not full Chesed.
We next learn that the Lord plans to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah and Abraham has the temerity to argue that this might destroy some righteous people, Tzaddikim, together with the wicked who deserve it, 'Shall the Judge of the whole world not do justice?' (Gen. 18, v.25). Rav Dessler explains that this boldness was allowed by G-d because its motivation is pure Chesed. This is not only the Chesed of concern for others, it is also Chesed towards the Lord. Abraham is not questioning G-d's justice, but, if He destroys the righteous with the wicked, His image might be tarnished in peoples' minds. Similarly, Moses seemingly questions G-d's ways, arguing that the Egyptians might think that the Israelites were brought out of Egypt to die in the desert. Rav Dessler also makes the comparison with Noah, who, although a Tzaddik, did not speak up for the wicked generation that was to be destroyed in the Flood. Every Jew, says Rav Dessler, has inherited a spark of such Chesed from Abraham, but warns that the temerity shown here would incur severe punishment in anyone not totally fit to speak in this manner. Here, again, there is a comparison with Job who, likw Abraham, complains about the good and the bad being destroyed together. Job, however, is speaking of himself, not out of a concern for others.
The Bible text continues with the occasion when G-d tells Abraham to send away his son Ishmael. Abraham obeys. He rises early, prepares a little bread and water – clearly inadequate in the desert, says Rav Dessler and, although his son is sick (Rashi), sends him and his mother, Hagar, away. The quality Abraham displays here is another of the Sephirot attributes, 'Gevura', severity, strength, the strength to overcome his own emotions, his love for his son, his concern for him, because he is wholly convinced that that is what G-d wants.
Finally, with the Akeda, when he is convinced (as it turns out, wrongly)that G-d wants him to sacrifice his son Isaac, Abraham again demonstrates his unquestioning acceptance of the Divine command, as he understands it, with Gevura. Why, asks Rav Dessler, did he remain silent, how could he raise no question? Not only had G-d promised that his future would come from the descendants of Isaac, what about being asked to commit murder? being asked to commit child sacrifice, one of the Canaanite abominations (cf Deut.12, v.31)? Rav Dessler explains that a human being has an individual life that involves a given number of free choices. If he is killed, a portion of his choices, his personality, has been taken from him, stolen, as it were, one reason for the prohibition of murder. It was never G-d's intention that this should happen. Abraham's test here is not only to be willing to obey G-d's order as he, Abraham, understands it, but not to raise questions that might be interpreted as doubting the Divine teaching. Whereas Chesed prompted Abraham to the semblance of a challenge, - Chesed because it was not for himself, but for others - for the people of Sodom, here,at the Akeda, Gevura was required to a supreme degree, because any challenge here might have seemed to be motivated by his love for his son and not seen, as it should be, as an acknowledgement of the Divine. Once this is clear, says Rav Dessler, it was possible for the ram to appear. The ram, he explains, was necessary now, because it is an essential concrete realisation of a sacrifice. It is not enough to want to offer up everything, including the future, an act is required. The Midrash has Abraham asking whether he might not inflict a slight wound on his son and he is answered by an angel forbidding him to harm him in any way whatsoever. G-d is willing to accept sacrifices and takes the intentions for the deed only if the deed does not contravene His teaching- hence the institution of animal sacrifices.
'After he withstood his tests', writes Rav Dessler, 'Avraham prayed that the power to break one's personal will would remain with Israel throughout the generations'. We have inherited the will and the ability to ensure that the concept of the Divine is not tarnished as well as Abraham's understanding of Chesed and Gevura, as related in Vayera, from the Patriarch.
Did you know?
Author: Esther Ehrman, Adar 5774/March 2014Did you know? A few examples from Mishna Megilla about the reading of the Megilla on Purim
(from a shiur given at one of the Etta Kossowsy Study Groups)
Since Purim, like Chanuka, is a post-Biblical Festival, our Sages relate to it in a special way. Many of our Halachot are, as we know, firmly grounded in the text of the Torah; as for example the laws of Shabbat, which are determined by the activities required for the building of the Tabernacle in the Wilderness. Since our Sages saw observance as determined by the Torah, it made sense to link the new observance, the reading of the Megilla on Purim to the reading of the Torah, where possible.
Thus, the public 'reading' of the Torah is a reading, not a reciting by heart. The Mishna (Megilla, 2, 1,2) is very firm that the Megilla must be read and may not be recited by heart. Further, like the Torah, it must be written on parchment. The Mishna emphasises this by stating that the Megilla may not be written even on diphtera, parchment that has not been properly treated chemically( ibid 2,2); it must be written and with the proper ink.
You might have thought that this Persian Diaspora story about Jews in Persia could be written and read in any language. Not so. Although, with certain limitations, the Megilla may be read to a non-Hebrew speaker in his language, it must be written in Ashurit, the square Hebrew script; if a non-Hebrew speaker hears the Megilla in Hebrew, he or she has fulfilled the mitzva properly. This, too, is an important link to the Torah, at a time when the current spoken language was Aramaic, which the Jews had brought back with them from their first exile in Babylon.
And yet, since the Megilla is, in fact post-Biblical and since, consequently any halachic instructions are Rabbinical – as distinct from Biblical – there can also be a certain leeway. Thus we find that women read the Megilla. Halacha allows for the use of a shaliach, an agent, in the performance of certain mitzvot, when circumstances prevent someone from personally performing a mitzva; even such acts as betrothing or divorcing a woman. The Reader of a Synagogue Service, for instance, is known as the shaliach tzibbut, the agent of the community. The Mishna (2,4) records those who may not be agents for the reading of the Megilla: a deaf person, since he cannot hear what he reads, a mentally unfit person, since he has no understanding, a minor not yet able to understand the mitzva. Women do not figure on the list and thus are not seen as excluded. Rashi (re Tractate Arakhin, 3a) holds that women can read the Megilla and act as agents for others; other authorities do not agree with this.
As we learn from the few examples given here, when we learn about the reading of the Megilla on Purim, we also get a glimpse into the insights that may well have guided the Sages of the Mishna in Tractate Megilla.
The Political influence of Religious citizens
Author: Esther Ehrman, Kislev 5775/Nov 2014Some perspectives presented by Rav Soloveitchik
In a set of five talks given to members of the National Religious Party called MIzrachi, Rav Soloveitchik shows the importance of a Torah oriented political party in terms of the relationship of the religious Jewish community to the wider community both in Israel and in the Diaspora, as also to the non-Jewish world. The Rav takes into consideration the ideology of the party, its weaknesses and its potential.
In the talk entitled 'The Revolving Sword and the Two Cherubim' (English translation, The Rav Speaks, Toras HoRav Foundation,2002), The Rav gives a systematic analysis. He begins with the tools needed to point society in the right direction, using the image of the two Cherubim and their revolving sword in the Garden of Eden (Gen.3, v.24). The Rav sees the Cherubim as the guardians of the Book, here the Torah, just as the Cherubim figure on the Ark of the Covenant that contains the Torah; the sword that they wield then denotes physical power. A political ruler needs to understand the judicious use of both. Its physical power of the sword will engender fear, its spiritual teaching of the Book will inspire awe and love.
Next, the Rav looks at what is required by the recipients of that which is being taught, the citizens of a community as well as those who guide them. A king is not a king without subjecys, a teacher is not a teacher without students, a creator cannot create without matter. Every human is both creator ('in the image of G-d') and a humble subject, a recioient. The Rav terms the creative function, male and the ability to receive, female ('male and female created He them' Ge,5, v.1,2). The faith of those who seek to guide the community needs to be based on both; one cannot be Rabbi or a Rosh Yeshiva, says the Rav, without both when seeking to bring people 'back into the fold'. The Mizrachi Book, therefore, places this verse, 'in the image of G-d...male and female created He them' on its cover. The assumption that it is important to bring people back into the fold is an indication of the Rav's engagement with the wider community.
Armed with this faith,what is our attitude to others to be? The Rav takes as his model the speech that Abraham made to the Hittites when he wished to buy the cave at Machpela to bury Sarah. Abraham explained why he could not bury his wife in the local burial grounds that were being offered to him: 'I am a stranger and a resident with you '(Gen,23,v.4). The Rav explains that being a resident means taking part in the life and culture of a place, serving in its army, holding communal positions and the like; yet the Jew remains a stranger, follows different laws as well, has different values. That is what distinguishes Abraham and it distinguishes the Jew in any country, wherever he 'resides'. It also distinguishes Israel in the world; as resident, Israel contributes to world progress, yet it remains a stranger, with its own values and life style. All of this, says the Rav, constitutes the ideology of the MIzrachi party.
Given such an ideology/programme, how is it that the practising Jewish community in Israel did not give the Mizrachi party an overwhelming mandate? The Rav rejects the answers usually offered: apathy, anti-religious campaigning, the small number of religious Jews (it cannot be that small, since 40% of children attend religious institutions), internal strife. His answer, as always, is Torah based, The religious voter can be compared to the angels' descending and ascending' the ladder in Jacob's dream. This means that they look up and see the model of the righteous Jacob and when they look down they see the real world and expect to see something comparable; what they actually see in the would-be Mizrachi members of Knesset are - politicians, a party willing to make political deals, agree to compromises. Consequently, the voter does not trust them.
That is how the Rav explains the result of the elections in Israel for the sixth Knesset (This Knesset saw the Six Day war and the unification of Jerusalem. It was led by Levi Eshkol, then by Golda Meir and included David ben Gurion and Moshe Dayan. The dominant block was the left oriented Maarach. The Mizrachi party did not join the Maarach, but it was part of the government coalition. The Rav sees the Party as looking for power, the 'sword', rather than teaching from the 'book' of its ideology. It should, he stresses, 'aspire to be teachers, and not the rulers of the population' (The Rav Speaks, p.80).
In the last section of the talk, the Rav gets to the core of his subject, the content of the Judaism that needs to be taught. Here, too, he uses the Biblical story of Abraham and Sarah to convey his thought. On the birth of Isaac, Rashi brings two comments from Midrash. One says that Isaac must have been a foundling, since both Abraham and Sarah were too old to have children. The other suggests that Sarah became pregnant from Avimelech. The Rav shows how absurd both views were and then uses them to show how typical they were of the way many people view Judaism.
The 'Hellenizers', secular Jews, want nothing to do with the Judaism of Abraham and Sarah. They dismiss the story of the Torah as impossible. However, says the Rav, nowadays many secular Jews long to find their way back. What are they looking for and what do we offer them?
Abraham, the Rav explains, stands for strict, halachic Judaism and total submission to G-d. That is not what these people are prepared to accept. Sarah stands for 'the great love of the Jew for the Creator and the great happiness he finds in being close to Him'. This appeals to the Jew who would have the beauty of Judaism without its halachic discipline - the Judaism of Sarah as mother, where Abraham is not the father. The Rav, however, is very firm on this, Judaism has both Avraham and Sarah as its progenitors. The people of Haran were converted by both Abraham and Sarah. The inference is that teachers of Judaism to the secular world cannot pick and choose what to teach. A political party cannot compromise. The Rav sees the need to address the wider community, but it has to be with the teaching of the whole Torah.