Click here to see this in the Jewish Star
Parshat Yitro
A previous column discussed the father-in-law-son-in-law relationship using Lavan and Yaakov as the model protagonists. This week we will explore the same relationship through the eyes of Yitro and Moshe.
Yitro arrives at the Israelites camp bringing his daughter and “her two sons.” This verse leads to a number of questions: why are they with Yitro? Didn’t Tziporah accompany Moshe to Egypt in chapter 4? Why are they referred to as her sons? Aren’t they also “Moshe’s sons?”
After all the efforts to get Moshe to greet his family, we find that the only person Moshe seems able to relate to is his father-in-law, Yitro. Beginning in 18:7 when Moshe leaves the camp to meet them, the Torah says, “Moshe want out to greet his father-in-law” — only to Yitro, not to his wife or sons.
These points are debatable, of course, as the Torah often leaves out details. There is room to suggest — much of this is in the Midrash — that Moshe divorced his wife, saw no need for her to be in Egypt, viewed his sons as his connection to a Midianite life he no longer lived, and, as G-d’s devoted shepherd, did not feel a connection to his immediate family.
But Yitro was different. He was a political ally as the “Kohen of Midian.” And his history with Moshe had been one of more than total support.
After Moshe saved Yitro’s daughters from shepherds, it was Yitro who said, “Where is he? Why did you leave him? Invite him here to eat with us.” It was Yitro who gave Moshe a wife, a job, and total trust. He even gave Moshe his blessing when Moshe said, “I need to branch out and return to Egypt.” (2:20-21, 3:1, 4:18)
Moshe had a sense of appreciation for this man that went beyond the claim of, “This is my father in law.” Yitro comes in to observe Moshe’s practice of sitting all day to judge the people and, frankly, he is not impressed. As the parsha states: “18. You cannot do it all alone. 19. You must… bring [their] concerns to G-d. 20. Show them the path they must take… 21. But you must [also] seek out from among all the people capable, G-d-fearing men — men of truth, who hate injustice. You must then appoint them over [the people] as leaders of thousands, hundreds, fifties, and tens.” In essence, the key word is “delegate.”
Verse 24 is ambiguous when it says, “Moshe listened to his father-in-law. He did all he had said.” That Moshe listened is clear. But who did all who had said? Rabbi Elazar Hamodai in the Mechilta suggests that after listening to Yitro, Moshe did all that G-d had said.
When we examine what Moshe did, we see he did not do exactly as Yitro said. “25. He chose capable men from all Israel,” also known as “anshei chayil” but he left out Yitro’s other criteria — “G-d fearing men of truth who hate injustice.” Either he could not find such men, or he felt the other criteria were too high a standard for judges. Yitro had suggested that “big cases” (hadavar hagadol) be brought to Moshe, while Moshe instructed that “difficult cases” (hadavar hakasheh) be brought to him.
In other words, Moshe takes the advice for what it is, knows it is good and comes out of love, and appreciates it. But he must do it his own way — in a way that works for him.
Finally, when the air is getting too stuffy, “27 Moshe sent his father-in-law on his way, and he went away to his homeland.”
Apparently, even for Moshe there is such a thing as an overextended visit.
May all fathers-in-law and sons-in-law have a courteous and respectful relationship. May all fathers-in-laws respect their sons-in-law’s choices in life and be as emotionally supportive as possible, with blessings when possible.
And may all sons-in-law see that the advice given by those who care for you (when warranted and in a setting that is appreciated) comes out of love, and that someone with a little more experience may have a perspective you do not share.
Then do it your way, and either fail or fly.
Thursday, February 4, 2010
Friday, January 29, 2010
A Tu B'Shvat Thought
This article can alse be seen on the Jewish Star's website
The World's Two "Tu"s
by Rabbi Avi Billet
January 29, 2010/ 14 Shvat 5770
The first mishnah in Rosh Hashanah says there are four “Rosh Hashanahs” in the year for different calendar events. They occur on the first of Tishrei, the first of Elul, the first of Nissan, and there is a debate about the Rosh Hashanah for trees. Beit Shamai says it is on the first of Sh’vat, while Beit Hillel says it is on the fifteenth of Sh’vat.
The specific calendar event determines the age of fruits in order to put them into different categories of types of tithing or to determine at what point fruits can be used (is it the second, third, or fourth year of the fruit on the tree? …which would determine its status.)
When the Talmud discusses the Rosh Hashanah of trees, it emphasizes that the reason this “new year” takes place in the month of Sh’vat is because the rainy season peaks during this month (perhaps as evidenced by the flooding which took place in Israel last week), and the trees have stored up sufficient hydration to last until the next rainy season.
Though in general we rule like Beit Hillel, and therefore celebrate the new year of trees on the 15th of Sh’vat (aka Tu B’Shvat), it would seem, following the logic of the rest of the mishnah, that Beit Shammai makes more sense! All the other Rosh Hashanahs take place on the first of a month. Why should this one be any different? If the month of Sh’vat is indeed the time period of the height of the rainy season, the specific date of that height is certainly up for debate. Is it the first of the month, or the fifteenth?
We are left to try to understand the thinking and reasoning of Beit Hillel.
Perhaps we can look to the other “Tu B…” on the calendar, the 15th of Av – Tu B’Av – for an explanation.
There are many reasons for the celebration of the Tu B’Av holiday. One of them is the completion of the gathering of the “atzei ha’ma’arakha” — the wood used for offerings on the altar in the holy Temple. These gatherings ended at this time because the 15th of Av is considered the hottest summer day, after which the temperature begins to drop and moisture in wood no longer evaporates as it did before. Dead wood found after that date is not fit to be used for offerings.
Rabbi Moshe Feinstein uses this event as proof that the completion of any project to which one devotes much time and effort is cause for celebration (Iggerot Moshe, O”C 1:157).
Perhaps Beit Hillel used a similar logic in determining the celebration of the Rosh Hashana of trees. As the calendar date contains a natural event that completes a cycle of necessary tree growth, it is a time to mark the calendar and celebrate the trees’ new year.
Comparing the “fifteenth of the month” dates is not a novel idea, as we make similar comparisons from the start of Pesach to the start of Sukkot — both of which begin on the 15th of their respective months, and both of which are similarly six months apart from each other.
The Bnei Yissaschar points out that both the 15th of Sh’vat and Av take place 40 days before the Talmud’s proposed dates for the creation of the world, and the creation of mankind (Rabbi Yehoshua says Nissan, and Rabbi Eliezer says Tishrei). The Talmud (Sotah 2a) says 40 days before the conception of each human, a heavenly voice declares who the intended spouse of the person will be.
There is much talk in rabbinic literature over how humans are compared to trees. Following the parallel between natural phenomena of the world and the human condition, the 15th of Sh’vat and Av are significant as days in which the future is outlined, with the coming days and months set up to be ones of fruitful rest, relaxation and enjoyment of G-d’s gifts to the world.
Thursday, January 21, 2010
Taking Clothes Out of Egypt
This appears here in the Jewish Star
Clothes for the road
Parshat Bo
Issue of January 22, 2010/ 7 Shvat 5770
Before the instruction of “Hachodesh hazeh lachem” established the calendar for the Israelite nation, G-d told Moshe, “Now speak to the people discreetly and let each man request from his friend gold and silver articles. Let every woman make [the same] request of her friends.” (11:2)
This instruction follows the assurance G-d made to Moshe at the burning bush (3:21-22), and the promiseG-d made to Avraham in Bereishit 15:14.
From the text in our Torah portion, it does not seem that the Israelites acted upon these instructions until later, after the plague of the Death of the Firstborns had taken its toll.
In 12:29-32, the plague takes place, the quite-defeated Paroh locates Moshe to tell him to take all his people and animals and to go worship their G-d as they had been requesting.
In 12:33, the Egyptian people seem to chase the Israelites with an unspoken “good riddance,” with the hope that the source of their misery — the Israelite/Hebrew slaves and theirG-d — might not return.
The following verses detail the last things they did before leaving: 34 “The people took their dough before it could rise. Their leftover dough was wrapped in their robes [and placed] on their shoulders.” 35 “The Israelites [also] did as Moses had said. They requested silver and gold articles and clothing from the Egyptians.” 36 “G-d made the Egyptians respect the people, and they granted their request. [The Israelites] thus drained Egypt of its wealth.”
If we look back at the quote from 11:2 (first paragraph above), we see they were not commanded to request clothing. G-d only mentioned gold and silver articles, so how could 12:35 suggest they did as Moshe had told them?
Toldot Yitzchak warns us not to bring proofs from 3:22 when G-d indicated they will be leaving with clothing as well, because that was more of a strategy G-d was aware of than a commandment, the people would ask for clothing to give them more of a chance to delay the Exodus until the morning, rather than be forced to leave at night.
When 12:35 says, “the Israelites did as Moshe had said,” Toldot Yitzchak explains, this refers not to their borrowing of items but to the more important command of not leaving their homes until the morning (12:22). Just because Paroh had come out to see Moshe does not mean the danger had passed and that people could come outside.
If their “fulfillment of Moshe’s instruction” consisted of staying indoors, where did they get the idea to request clothing? As far as we can tell, the people were never instructed to request anything other than silver and gold. [Interestingly, Targum Yonatan leaves out the request for clothing in his interpretation of the verse.]
Toldot Yitzchak says there were two groups — “ha’am” — the masses who were unaware of proper protocol and left their homes in the night time when the Egyptians forced them out (12:33), and the “Bnei Yisrael” proper, who knew the rules, and would not budge from their homes until morning came. But as they were being prodded, they began requesting that clothing be brought to them, insisting they could not leave without proper attire.
Thus, those who asked for clothes were not following specific instructions to load up their suitcases, but were using delay tactics to stall until the morning when all of the people would leave together.
How long does it take to decide which jewelry you want to borrow? Not very long. Most people think, “If it is expensive, I’ll take it.”
Clothing is a different matter. Many people will only take clothing that looks nice on them, no matter how nice the clothing may be. Clothing is more a matter of personal taste than is jewelry.
Now we are left to understand the nature of the requests for the items in question.
Commentaries differ, and provide an entire range of interpretations as to whether the Israelites were requesting or “borrowing,” seeking compensation or a severance package, taking booty from their defeated enemies, accepting a peace offering for the G-d who defeated Egypt, or even giving cause to be chased after for the final pounding in the Red Sea.
No matter the specific interpretation, it is hard to imagine the word “she’eilah,” meaning, “borrow,” in this context. In many places in the Bible, a “she’eilah” is a flat out request with no intent to return anything. And in the context of freeing slaves (Bereishit 31, Devarim 15 and Devarim 23), rather than leaving empty-handed, a slave is supposed to be let free with compensation for years of labor or toil, minimally with the means to make good on his own in the short-term.
For slaves with meager possessions, wealth is certainly warranted. To provide a sense of dignity, proper clothing is essential. While I don’t know what happens in real life, I’ve seen films in which “rehabilitated” prisoners are release from prison with a business suit to give them a sense of dignity, so they can begin to make a go of their new lives looking like a mentch.If the clothes really do “make the man” (or woman), then having and wearing nice clothing is an important step in achieving emancipation.
And when those same garments are flattering, yet modest (says Jewish tradition), they certainly help bring out the essence of the person wearing them.
Clothes for the road
Parshat Bo
Issue of January 22, 2010/ 7 Shvat 5770
Before the instruction of “Hachodesh hazeh lachem” established the calendar for the Israelite nation, G-d told Moshe, “Now speak to the people discreetly and let each man request from his friend gold and silver articles. Let every woman make [the same] request of her friends.” (11:2)
This instruction follows the assurance G-d made to Moshe at the burning bush (3:21-22), and the promiseG-d made to Avraham in Bereishit 15:14.
From the text in our Torah portion, it does not seem that the Israelites acted upon these instructions until later, after the plague of the Death of the Firstborns had taken its toll.
In 12:29-32, the plague takes place, the quite-defeated Paroh locates Moshe to tell him to take all his people and animals and to go worship their G-d as they had been requesting.
In 12:33, the Egyptian people seem to chase the Israelites with an unspoken “good riddance,” with the hope that the source of their misery — the Israelite/Hebrew slaves and theirG-d — might not return.
The following verses detail the last things they did before leaving: 34 “The people took their dough before it could rise. Their leftover dough was wrapped in their robes [and placed] on their shoulders.” 35 “The Israelites [also] did as Moses had said. They requested silver and gold articles and clothing from the Egyptians.” 36 “G-d made the Egyptians respect the people, and they granted their request. [The Israelites] thus drained Egypt of its wealth.”
If we look back at the quote from 11:2 (first paragraph above), we see they were not commanded to request clothing. G-d only mentioned gold and silver articles, so how could 12:35 suggest they did as Moshe had told them?
Toldot Yitzchak warns us not to bring proofs from 3:22 when G-d indicated they will be leaving with clothing as well, because that was more of a strategy G-d was aware of than a commandment, the people would ask for clothing to give them more of a chance to delay the Exodus until the morning, rather than be forced to leave at night.
When 12:35 says, “the Israelites did as Moshe had said,” Toldot Yitzchak explains, this refers not to their borrowing of items but to the more important command of not leaving their homes until the morning (12:22). Just because Paroh had come out to see Moshe does not mean the danger had passed and that people could come outside.
If their “fulfillment of Moshe’s instruction” consisted of staying indoors, where did they get the idea to request clothing? As far as we can tell, the people were never instructed to request anything other than silver and gold. [Interestingly, Targum Yonatan leaves out the request for clothing in his interpretation of the verse.]
Toldot Yitzchak says there were two groups — “ha’am” — the masses who were unaware of proper protocol and left their homes in the night time when the Egyptians forced them out (12:33), and the “Bnei Yisrael” proper, who knew the rules, and would not budge from their homes until morning came. But as they were being prodded, they began requesting that clothing be brought to them, insisting they could not leave without proper attire.
Thus, those who asked for clothes were not following specific instructions to load up their suitcases, but were using delay tactics to stall until the morning when all of the people would leave together.
How long does it take to decide which jewelry you want to borrow? Not very long. Most people think, “If it is expensive, I’ll take it.”
Clothing is a different matter. Many people will only take clothing that looks nice on them, no matter how nice the clothing may be. Clothing is more a matter of personal taste than is jewelry.
Now we are left to understand the nature of the requests for the items in question.
Commentaries differ, and provide an entire range of interpretations as to whether the Israelites were requesting or “borrowing,” seeking compensation or a severance package, taking booty from their defeated enemies, accepting a peace offering for the G-d who defeated Egypt, or even giving cause to be chased after for the final pounding in the Red Sea.
No matter the specific interpretation, it is hard to imagine the word “she’eilah,” meaning, “borrow,” in this context. In many places in the Bible, a “she’eilah” is a flat out request with no intent to return anything. And in the context of freeing slaves (Bereishit 31, Devarim 15 and Devarim 23), rather than leaving empty-handed, a slave is supposed to be let free with compensation for years of labor or toil, minimally with the means to make good on his own in the short-term.
For slaves with meager possessions, wealth is certainly warranted. To provide a sense of dignity, proper clothing is essential. While I don’t know what happens in real life, I’ve seen films in which “rehabilitated” prisoners are release from prison with a business suit to give them a sense of dignity, so they can begin to make a go of their new lives looking like a mentch.If the clothes really do “make the man” (or woman), then having and wearing nice clothing is an important step in achieving emancipation.
And when those same garments are flattering, yet modest (says Jewish tradition), they certainly help bring out the essence of the person wearing them.
Will Die During Childbirth?
One of the more difficult passages to understand is the one in the mishnah in Shabbat 31b -There are three trangressions for which women die during childbirth: Not being careful about niddah (the laws concerning conduct during the menstrual period, taking challah [from dough], and the lighting of candles [Friday night].
Does it literally mean a woman will die during childbirth if she does not fulfill these? Can't be! There are many women who do not fulfill these (who even transgress), yet who live long lives, long past their childbearing years. And there are those who fulfill these in upstanding fashion, yet who die at a young age! How is this possible?
Clearly the mishnah is not meant to be taken literally. What then?
The answer lies in this lesson from the Medrash Tanchuma:
The commandment of Challah comes from the fact that she brought tumah (spiritual impurity) to the first person (chalato shel olam). Not only that, but he is compared to dough. In the Garden of Eden, there was all this mist moistening the world and then God fashioned Man out of dust of the earth. Just as a woman kneads her dough, God kneaded man. So woman has to make sure to remove the "challah" to make tribute to this "fixing."
Candles are because "The candle of God is the soul of the human being." Since she snuffed out the soul of the human being, she must make up for it by lighting candles and rekindling souls.
The Mishnah, therefore, is not saying a woman will die for transgressing any of the three. It is explaining that the idea of labor pains, which could cause death, stems from the original sins of Chava.
While it might not be fair to suggest all women carry the burden of Chava's sin, it does follow that the specific trangressions in question are all part of a categorical response to Chava, and that the notion of "dying in childbirth" refer to the idea that childbirth is a difficult experience unique to the female experience, which stems (at least according to the Torah) from the original punishment handed to Chava upon her exit from the Garden of Eden.
Perhaps these three stand as a reminder to women of the tremendous power they have, and the tremendous influence they yield and can hold over their husbands. Married women certainly do have the wherewithal to determine, in many ways, whether husbands will sin or not.
Perhaps it is incumbent upon women to yield their power for good, to fulfill their unique commandments, and to make sure, in the process, that their earth-originating husbands not give in to temptation, and are as protected from sinning as their wives can help them be.
Does it literally mean a woman will die during childbirth if she does not fulfill these? Can't be! There are many women who do not fulfill these (who even transgress), yet who live long lives, long past their childbearing years. And there are those who fulfill these in upstanding fashion, yet who die at a young age! How is this possible?
Clearly the mishnah is not meant to be taken literally. What then?
The answer lies in this lesson from the Medrash Tanchuma:
מדרש תנחומא (ורשא) פרשת נח סימן א
(א) ילמדנו רבינו על כמה עבירות נשים מתות בשעת לדתן, כך שנו רבותינו על שלשה וכו' ושלשתן מן התורה, נדה דכתיב (ויקרא טו) ואשה כי יזוב, חלה (במדבר טו) ראשית עריסותיכם, הדלקת הנר דכתיב (ישעיה נח) וקראת לשבת עונג זו הדלקת הנר בשבת, וא"ת לישב בחשך אין זה עונג שאין יורדי גיהנם נדונין אלא בחשך שנאמר (איוב י) ארץ עיפת' כמו אופל, ומה ראו נשים להצטוות על שלש מצות האלו, אמר הקב"ה אדה"ר תחלת בריותי היה ונצטווה על עץ הדעת וכתיב בחוה (בראשית ג) ותרא האשה וגו' ותתן גם לאישה עמה ויאכל וגרמה לו מיתה ושפכה את דמו, וכתיב בתורה (שם /בראשית/ ט) שופך דם האדם באדם דמו ישפך תשפוך דמה ותשמור נדתה כדי שיתכפר לה על דם האדם ששפכה, מצות חלה מנין היא טמאה חלתו של עולם דא"ר יוסי בן דוסמקא (נ"א קצרתא) כשם שהאשה מקשקשת עיסתה במים ואח"כ היא מגבהת חלתה כך עשה הקב"ה לאדם הראשון דכתיב (שם /בראשית/ ב) ואד יעלה מן הארץ והשקה ואח"כ וייצר ה' אלהים את האדם עפר וגו', הדלקת הנר מנין היא כבתה נרו של אדם דכתיב (משלי כ) נר אלהים נשמת אדם לפיכך תשמור הדלקת הנר.
(א) ילמדנו רבינו על כמה עבירות נשים מתות בשעת לדתן, כך שנו רבותינו על שלשה וכו' ושלשתן מן התורה, נדה דכתיב (ויקרא טו) ואשה כי יזוב, חלה (במדבר טו) ראשית עריסותיכם, הדלקת הנר דכתיב (ישעיה נח) וקראת לשבת עונג זו הדלקת הנר בשבת, וא"ת לישב בחשך אין זה עונג שאין יורדי גיהנם נדונין אלא בחשך שנאמר (איוב י) ארץ עיפת' כמו אופל, ומה ראו נשים להצטוות על שלש מצות האלו, אמר הקב"ה אדה"ר תחלת בריותי היה ונצטווה על עץ הדעת וכתיב בחוה (בראשית ג) ותרא האשה וגו' ותתן גם לאישה עמה ויאכל וגרמה לו מיתה ושפכה את דמו, וכתיב בתורה (שם /בראשית/ ט) שופך דם האדם באדם דמו ישפך תשפוך דמה ותשמור נדתה כדי שיתכפר לה על דם האדם ששפכה, מצות חלה מנין היא טמאה חלתו של עולם דא"ר יוסי בן דוסמקא (נ"א קצרתא) כשם שהאשה מקשקשת עיסתה במים ואח"כ היא מגבהת חלתה כך עשה הקב"ה לאדם הראשון דכתיב (שם /בראשית/ ב) ואד יעלה מן הארץ והשקה ואח"כ וייצר ה' אלהים את האדם עפר וגו', הדלקת הנר מנין היא כבתה נרו של אדם דכתיב (משלי כ) נר אלהים נשמת אדם לפיכך תשמור הדלקת הנר.
The midrash quotes the sources of the three commandments - Leviticus 15, Numbers 15, and Isaiah 58. Then it explains that these three commandments were specifically given to women on account of the actions of the first woman ever, Chava (Eve). In Genesis 3 she violated the one commandments she and her husband had been given: not to eat the fruit of the forbidden tree. Since she did and caused her husband too as well, she brought mortality to the world (this midrash follows the teaching that Adam was supposed to live forever, and eating the forbidden fruit brought about that he would die one day). As the verse in Genesis 9 says that one who spills "Adam"s (eith a person, or literally "Adam") will have their own blood spilled, the midrash argues this is the source for the concept of menstruation (in which blood flows) and the need to monitor activities and behavior during this period.
The commandment of Challah comes from the fact that she brought tumah (spiritual impurity) to the first person (chalato shel olam). Not only that, but he is compared to dough. In the Garden of Eden, there was all this mist moistening the world and then God fashioned Man out of dust of the earth. Just as a woman kneads her dough, God kneaded man. So woman has to make sure to remove the "challah" to make tribute to this "fixing."
Candles are because "The candle of God is the soul of the human being." Since she snuffed out the soul of the human being, she must make up for it by lighting candles and rekindling souls.
The Mishnah, therefore, is not saying a woman will die for transgressing any of the three. It is explaining that the idea of labor pains, which could cause death, stems from the original sins of Chava.
While it might not be fair to suggest all women carry the burden of Chava's sin, it does follow that the specific trangressions in question are all part of a categorical response to Chava, and that the notion of "dying in childbirth" refer to the idea that childbirth is a difficult experience unique to the female experience, which stems (at least according to the Torah) from the original punishment handed to Chava upon her exit from the Garden of Eden.
Perhaps these three stand as a reminder to women of the tremendous power they have, and the tremendous influence they yield and can hold over their husbands. Married women certainly do have the wherewithal to determine, in many ways, whether husbands will sin or not.
Perhaps it is incumbent upon women to yield their power for good, to fulfill their unique commandments, and to make sure, in the process, that their earth-originating husbands not give in to temptation, and are as protected from sinning as their wives can help them be.
A Summary of a Week
This week has been most interesting, and a little different for this rabbiwithoutacause.
I spent time on the phone on Monday, aiming efforts at bringing some of our programming to Miami Beach.
I had two brisses on Tuesday. The interesting part about being a mohel in South Florida is that whenever people ask me what I do other than be a mohel, and I tell them about Yeshiva University, and our efforts in South Florida, the response typically ranges from "I had no idea YU was down here" to "That's awesome. We can use a little YU inspiration down here."
Tuesday night I substituted for the Florence Melton Adult Mini School on Miami Beach. The topic of the class was an "Introduction to Jewish Texts" which is really hard to summarize in one hour, but nonetheless, we did our best. An interesting conversation followed the class, and that will be addressed in a very near future post.
Wednesday night consisted of the regular study class in Boynton Beach. I am happy to say we had over twenty people in attendance, including many new faces. The topic - the second in our series on the positive sides of Shabbos - addressed the obligations/practices surrounding Friday night candles and the candle of havdalah. This material is always fascinating to teach, as it is so widely practiced, yet we do not generally put much time into studying the details of the customs surrounding these practices/mitzvot. The most fascinating insight from the class will appear in a different post.
Thursday I attended a meeting of the Broward Board of Rabbis to present Yeshiva University in South Florida to the rabbis in the room. Everyone seemed very receptive to the idea of our being here, and I look forward to the chance to meet with the rabbis, on a more personal level, so we can hopefully bring more programming to the general Jewish population of Broward County.
All in all a productive week so far. Important meetings and exposure. Time will tell if it will lead to more opportunities to share that which we came to South Florida to do.
I spent time on the phone on Monday, aiming efforts at bringing some of our programming to Miami Beach.
I had two brisses on Tuesday. The interesting part about being a mohel in South Florida is that whenever people ask me what I do other than be a mohel, and I tell them about Yeshiva University, and our efforts in South Florida, the response typically ranges from "I had no idea YU was down here" to "That's awesome. We can use a little YU inspiration down here."
Tuesday night I substituted for the Florence Melton Adult Mini School on Miami Beach. The topic of the class was an "Introduction to Jewish Texts" which is really hard to summarize in one hour, but nonetheless, we did our best. An interesting conversation followed the class, and that will be addressed in a very near future post.
Wednesday night consisted of the regular study class in Boynton Beach. I am happy to say we had over twenty people in attendance, including many new faces. The topic - the second in our series on the positive sides of Shabbos - addressed the obligations/practices surrounding Friday night candles and the candle of havdalah. This material is always fascinating to teach, as it is so widely practiced, yet we do not generally put much time into studying the details of the customs surrounding these practices/mitzvot. The most fascinating insight from the class will appear in a different post.
Thursday I attended a meeting of the Broward Board of Rabbis to present Yeshiva University in South Florida to the rabbis in the room. Everyone seemed very receptive to the idea of our being here, and I look forward to the chance to meet with the rabbis, on a more personal level, so we can hopefully bring more programming to the general Jewish population of Broward County.
All in all a productive week so far. Important meetings and exposure. Time will tell if it will lead to more opportunities to share that which we came to South Florida to do.
Thursday, January 14, 2010
Va'era - A Little Inspiration From and For the Elderly
This article appears in the Jewish Star. Read it there or here:
Torah: a lease on life
Parshat Va’era
by Rabbi Avi Billet
January 15, 2010/ 29 Tevet 5770
How old was Moshe when he fled from Egypt in Chapter 2? Depending which Midrash you follow, he was either a teenager, 20, or 40. No matter which approach we follow, he spent at least 40 years in Midian before G-d sent him to be the deliverer, to take the Israelites out of Egypt. That’s a long time to spend away, working, building a family, and preparing, through natural existence, to become the savior and deliverer of the people of Israel.
In 7:7, we are told the ages of brothers Moshe and Aharon at the time they stood before Paroh. Moshe is 80 and Aharon is 83. What is the significance? If we need to know Moshe is 80 at this time, we could certainly figure out from the end of the Torah when we are told that after forty years in the wilderness, Moshe died at age 120. A simple calculation of 120 minus 40 will bring us to 80 at the time of the Exodus.
Let us assume for a moment that specific ages are not that important, that the fact Moshe and Aharon are specifically 80 and 83, respectively, is insignificant.
Is the Torah trying to teach us something deeper, a significant lesson to be derived from two older men, taking charge of a nation at G-d’s behest, in the latter third of their lives?
Ibn Ezra points out that no other career-prophet began his prophetic career at such an advanced age. Moshe and Aharon also were unique in the kind of prophecy they revealed to the people, as all the other prophets served in a role of rebuking those who had turned from the proper path. Finally, their relationship with G-d was unique in that their prophecy was attained through a cloud, while others fell into a sort of slumber when they received G-d’s revelations.
Rabbi Ovadiah Seforno focuses on their age specifically, pointing out that despite their advanced status, they nonetheless acted as sprite youths, rushing to fulfill God’s will. At the age of 80, they took the term “gevurot” — strengths — (Avot 5:21), to new definitions.
Netziv emphasizes that the Torah mentions their age in relation to when they appeared before Paroh, as opposed to in the context of when G-d appeared to them. It seems quite likely that Aharon had received the word of G-d prior to Moshe’s experience, but that Moshe, at age 80, was receiving it for the first time.
One might argue that 80 in those days was like middle age now. Most people achieve the pinnacles of their careers once they hit their mid-forties and fifties. There are exceptions, those who “make it” earlier, but I would bet statistics would support this notion. One example I know to be true: along with the very few who were elected in their mid-to-upper 40’s, most US Presidents were inaugurated while in their 50’s.
For Moshe and Aharon, was it the ancient middle age? Or were they, in fact, primed and seasoned to take on such a significant role in their waning years? Please do not misunderstand. They were special people, with unique character traits. At the end of his life, at age 120, Moshe is described as “his eyes not having dimmed, nor his natural powers having left him.” (Devarim 34:7)
Nonetheless, I wonder.
Did Paroh view him as an “old man?” Did the Egyptians perceive him as a kooky guy, holding up a placard and prophesying the end of the world? Was he taken seriously by the man on the street?
I like to think Moshe was an older man who felt young, who viewed himself as young. Perhaps his having an infant child (if his second son was truly born around the time of his journey, as Ibn Ezra records in 4:20) would contribute to this feeling.
But even without an infant child, through the new job Moshe had, he had a new lease on life.
Had everything gone as planned, perhaps Moshe was not meant to lead for forty years. The Children of Israel were meant to enter the Promised Land shortly after they left Egypt. Perhaps Moshe, even at his advanced age, was meant to lead the people only so far.His new role kept him going. He could not leave his job unfinished, or at least until it was at the cusp of being completed.
For those who have reached this “golden age,” I suppose the lesson to learn from Moshe is to allow personal involvement in Torah study to become a new lease on life. As long as G-d blesses you with health, and especially if you are no longer working, make the remaining years of your life into ones dedicated to Torah study.
Enroll in a study program, become a rabbi, do what it takes to make the last third of your life the ones in which you become closer to G-d than ever before in your life.
It may even be a recipe for long life, hopefully in this world, and certainly in the next.
Torah: a lease on life
Parshat Va’era
by Rabbi Avi Billet
January 15, 2010/ 29 Tevet 5770
How old was Moshe when he fled from Egypt in Chapter 2? Depending which Midrash you follow, he was either a teenager, 20, or 40. No matter which approach we follow, he spent at least 40 years in Midian before G-d sent him to be the deliverer, to take the Israelites out of Egypt. That’s a long time to spend away, working, building a family, and preparing, through natural existence, to become the savior and deliverer of the people of Israel.
In 7:7, we are told the ages of brothers Moshe and Aharon at the time they stood before Paroh. Moshe is 80 and Aharon is 83. What is the significance? If we need to know Moshe is 80 at this time, we could certainly figure out from the end of the Torah when we are told that after forty years in the wilderness, Moshe died at age 120. A simple calculation of 120 minus 40 will bring us to 80 at the time of the Exodus.
Let us assume for a moment that specific ages are not that important, that the fact Moshe and Aharon are specifically 80 and 83, respectively, is insignificant.
Is the Torah trying to teach us something deeper, a significant lesson to be derived from two older men, taking charge of a nation at G-d’s behest, in the latter third of their lives?
Ibn Ezra points out that no other career-prophet began his prophetic career at such an advanced age. Moshe and Aharon also were unique in the kind of prophecy they revealed to the people, as all the other prophets served in a role of rebuking those who had turned from the proper path. Finally, their relationship with G-d was unique in that their prophecy was attained through a cloud, while others fell into a sort of slumber when they received G-d’s revelations.
Rabbi Ovadiah Seforno focuses on their age specifically, pointing out that despite their advanced status, they nonetheless acted as sprite youths, rushing to fulfill God’s will. At the age of 80, they took the term “gevurot” — strengths — (Avot 5:21), to new definitions.
Netziv emphasizes that the Torah mentions their age in relation to when they appeared before Paroh, as opposed to in the context of when G-d appeared to them. It seems quite likely that Aharon had received the word of G-d prior to Moshe’s experience, but that Moshe, at age 80, was receiving it for the first time.
One might argue that 80 in those days was like middle age now. Most people achieve the pinnacles of their careers once they hit their mid-forties and fifties. There are exceptions, those who “make it” earlier, but I would bet statistics would support this notion. One example I know to be true: along with the very few who were elected in their mid-to-upper 40’s, most US Presidents were inaugurated while in their 50’s.
For Moshe and Aharon, was it the ancient middle age? Or were they, in fact, primed and seasoned to take on such a significant role in their waning years? Please do not misunderstand. They were special people, with unique character traits. At the end of his life, at age 120, Moshe is described as “his eyes not having dimmed, nor his natural powers having left him.” (Devarim 34:7)
Nonetheless, I wonder.
Did Paroh view him as an “old man?” Did the Egyptians perceive him as a kooky guy, holding up a placard and prophesying the end of the world? Was he taken seriously by the man on the street?
I like to think Moshe was an older man who felt young, who viewed himself as young. Perhaps his having an infant child (if his second son was truly born around the time of his journey, as Ibn Ezra records in 4:20) would contribute to this feeling.
But even without an infant child, through the new job Moshe had, he had a new lease on life.
Had everything gone as planned, perhaps Moshe was not meant to lead for forty years. The Children of Israel were meant to enter the Promised Land shortly after they left Egypt. Perhaps Moshe, even at his advanced age, was meant to lead the people only so far.His new role kept him going. He could not leave his job unfinished, or at least until it was at the cusp of being completed.
For those who have reached this “golden age,” I suppose the lesson to learn from Moshe is to allow personal involvement in Torah study to become a new lease on life. As long as G-d blesses you with health, and especially if you are no longer working, make the remaining years of your life into ones dedicated to Torah study.
Enroll in a study program, become a rabbi, do what it takes to make the last third of your life the ones in which you become closer to G-d than ever before in your life.
It may even be a recipe for long life, hopefully in this world, and certainly in the next.
The Shtick of Each Stick
I wrote this for the Jewish Star a few years ago, before they put their website together. As this came up in class today, I share it. The weekly DT will be posted later.
The Shtick of Each Stick - A Model for Role Models
From the time the youngest children learn of Moshe turning his stick into a snake, we develop an image of this fantastic magical piece of wood that can do all kinds of things. Of course a reader of the Torah knows the power is not the stick’s nor even Moshe’s, but this does not take away from the fascination we have with his “matteh.”
The Midrash, for example, describes the stick’s size and the sapphire stone imbedded in it, and even its history, claiming it was owned by Adam. The Mishnah (Avot 5:6) teaches us it was created during dusk of the sixth day of creation, along with a host of other supernatural creations. Were it an ordinary piece of wood, it would not have such press coverage.
Despite all this hoopla, it is not the only stick that demonstrates supernatural effectiveness – the other is owned by Aharon, Moshe’s brother. While both “perform” miracles, the miracles are of a different nature, perhaps along the lines of the personalities and inspiring nature of their respective owners.
The first difference is in what the stick becomes when it is thrown to the ground. Moshe’s turns into a snake before himself and the Jewish people (4:3-4 and 4:30) while Aharon’s turns into a “tannin” or amphibious creature usually identified as a crocodile in front of Pharaoh and his servants (7:9-12).
The next difference is for the plague of Blood. God tells Moshe to announce he will place
his own stick over the Nile (see 7:15 and 17) while Aharon will travel around and turn individual plots of water into blood (7:19). In 7:20 Moshe and Aharon indeed go and do their respective jobs. (This is why Egyptians dug around the Nile to find water – see 7:24)
For the plague of Frogs, Aharon is once again called upon to use his own stick to go to the same waters he affected in 7:19. In 8:12-13, Aharon uses his own stick to bring about the Lice.
In 9:22-23 Moshe’s stick is used to hit the sky to cause the Hailstorm. In 10:12-13 Moshe waves his stick over “all of Egypt” to bring about the Locusts.
In 14:16,21, Moshe uses his stick (an extension of his hand) to effect the “splitting of the sea.”
In Shmot Chapter 17 Moshe’s stick is used twice. The first time (17:5-6), Moshe is commanded to hit the rock-well to bring forth water for the Jewish people. The second time (17:9), the stick is held in his hand as a symbol during the fight with Amalek. (Mishnah Rosh Hashana 3:8 reminds us that the Jews looked up at Moshe and his stick and were thus reminded to pray to God to help seal the victory over Amalek.)
The last two times the sticks appear are in Bamidbar 17 and 20.
In Bamidbar 17:17-24, in the aftermath of the Korach incident, Aharon’s stick blossoms to indicate Levi is the chosen tribe for the priesthood, and his stick is set aside to be a sign for potential rebels not to challenge God’s decisions.
In Bamidbar 20, the incident of Mei Merivah transpires after which Moshe and Aharon are doomed to die in the desert. Without going into details of the sin of Moshe and Aharon, it is worth pointing out that some commentaries view the stick referred to in 20:9 as being Aharon’s stick from Bamidbar 17 – to be a sign to rebels to stop complaining, and the stick used in Bamidbar 20:11 is Moshe’s stick based on the precedent from Shmot 17 of how to draw water from the rock.
What is the common theme to be garnered from these sticks?
Moshe’s stick is the stick mentioned in the Mishnah in Avot. It is supernatural, it is other-worldly, it is meant to represent on a grand scale the strength and miraculous nature of God. Everything he does is in front of a large number of people – snake in 4:30, Nile in 7:17, hitting the sky in 9:23 and waving over all of Egypt 10:13 (both visible to all), the splitting of the sea, waving his stick during battle and drawing water from a rock for a thirsty nation.
Aharon, on the other hand, does all of his miracles on a much smaller scale. The crocodile-change is only in front of Pharaoh’s court. Going around to smaller bodies of water (Blood and Frogs) and hitting the ground in one spot for Lice, will not be seen by as many people. While Aharon’s stick is meant to be a sign to rebels, the miracle that takes place with his stick blossoming is only seen by a few people, the princes of the other tribes, and by them only after the fact when they come to collect their sticks.
The role of each stick and its owner is a model for different kinds of leaders. Moshe is almost superhuman, he is even known as “Ish Ha’Elokim,” and the miracles he presides over reflect the role he plays in his relationship to God and humans. In practical terms, he is the King, the President, the Chassidishe Rebbe, the Head Rosh Yeshiva, revered Dean of an institution, or the revered Senior Senior Rabbi.
Aharon is smaller scale. He is the man of the people, the Ohaiv Shalom and Rodeph Shalom (lover and seeker of peace) who is thrust into a leadership position. In practical terms, he is the local politician, the rebbe or teacher (male or female) in yeshiva or school, the rabbi of a small shul, a parent. He is often there to give a hug to a person who needs it, and he performs little miracles every day.
Each leader type plays a role in the community and can have a profound affect on people’s lives. Many people look to “the Moshe” for inspiration, but the “Aharons” among us are no less heroes and are the ones with the real, in the trenches mission to keep people grounded and help find answers to important questions. Because the Aharons live with the people, their job is so much harder and so much more important.
The Shtick of Each Stick - A Model for Role Models
From the time the youngest children learn of Moshe turning his stick into a snake, we develop an image of this fantastic magical piece of wood that can do all kinds of things. Of course a reader of the Torah knows the power is not the stick’s nor even Moshe’s, but this does not take away from the fascination we have with his “matteh.”
The Midrash, for example, describes the stick’s size and the sapphire stone imbedded in it, and even its history, claiming it was owned by Adam. The Mishnah (Avot 5:6) teaches us it was created during dusk of the sixth day of creation, along with a host of other supernatural creations. Were it an ordinary piece of wood, it would not have such press coverage.
Despite all this hoopla, it is not the only stick that demonstrates supernatural effectiveness – the other is owned by Aharon, Moshe’s brother. While both “perform” miracles, the miracles are of a different nature, perhaps along the lines of the personalities and inspiring nature of their respective owners.
The first difference is in what the stick becomes when it is thrown to the ground. Moshe’s turns into a snake before himself and the Jewish people (4:3-4 and 4:30) while Aharon’s turns into a “tannin” or amphibious creature usually identified as a crocodile in front of Pharaoh and his servants (7:9-12).
The next difference is for the plague of Blood. God tells Moshe to announce he will place
his own stick over the Nile (see 7:15 and 17) while Aharon will travel around and turn individual plots of water into blood (7:19). In 7:20 Moshe and Aharon indeed go and do their respective jobs. (This is why Egyptians dug around the Nile to find water – see 7:24)
For the plague of Frogs, Aharon is once again called upon to use his own stick to go to the same waters he affected in 7:19. In 8:12-13, Aharon uses his own stick to bring about the Lice.
In 9:22-23 Moshe’s stick is used to hit the sky to cause the Hailstorm. In 10:12-13 Moshe waves his stick over “all of Egypt” to bring about the Locusts.
In 14:16,21, Moshe uses his stick (an extension of his hand) to effect the “splitting of the sea.”
In Shmot Chapter 17 Moshe’s stick is used twice. The first time (17:5-6), Moshe is commanded to hit the rock-well to bring forth water for the Jewish people. The second time (17:9), the stick is held in his hand as a symbol during the fight with Amalek. (Mishnah Rosh Hashana 3:8 reminds us that the Jews looked up at Moshe and his stick and were thus reminded to pray to God to help seal the victory over Amalek.)
The last two times the sticks appear are in Bamidbar 17 and 20.
In Bamidbar 17:17-24, in the aftermath of the Korach incident, Aharon’s stick blossoms to indicate Levi is the chosen tribe for the priesthood, and his stick is set aside to be a sign for potential rebels not to challenge God’s decisions.
In Bamidbar 20, the incident of Mei Merivah transpires after which Moshe and Aharon are doomed to die in the desert. Without going into details of the sin of Moshe and Aharon, it is worth pointing out that some commentaries view the stick referred to in 20:9 as being Aharon’s stick from Bamidbar 17 – to be a sign to rebels to stop complaining, and the stick used in Bamidbar 20:11 is Moshe’s stick based on the precedent from Shmot 17 of how to draw water from the rock.
What is the common theme to be garnered from these sticks?
Moshe’s stick is the stick mentioned in the Mishnah in Avot. It is supernatural, it is other-worldly, it is meant to represent on a grand scale the strength and miraculous nature of God. Everything he does is in front of a large number of people – snake in 4:30, Nile in 7:17, hitting the sky in 9:23 and waving over all of Egypt 10:13 (both visible to all), the splitting of the sea, waving his stick during battle and drawing water from a rock for a thirsty nation.
Aharon, on the other hand, does all of his miracles on a much smaller scale. The crocodile-change is only in front of Pharaoh’s court. Going around to smaller bodies of water (Blood and Frogs) and hitting the ground in one spot for Lice, will not be seen by as many people. While Aharon’s stick is meant to be a sign to rebels, the miracle that takes place with his stick blossoming is only seen by a few people, the princes of the other tribes, and by them only after the fact when they come to collect their sticks.
The role of each stick and its owner is a model for different kinds of leaders. Moshe is almost superhuman, he is even known as “Ish Ha’Elokim,” and the miracles he presides over reflect the role he plays in his relationship to God and humans. In practical terms, he is the King, the President, the Chassidishe Rebbe, the Head Rosh Yeshiva, revered Dean of an institution, or the revered Senior Senior Rabbi.
Aharon is smaller scale. He is the man of the people, the Ohaiv Shalom and Rodeph Shalom (lover and seeker of peace) who is thrust into a leadership position. In practical terms, he is the local politician, the rebbe or teacher (male or female) in yeshiva or school, the rabbi of a small shul, a parent. He is often there to give a hug to a person who needs it, and he performs little miracles every day.
Each leader type plays a role in the community and can have a profound affect on people’s lives. Many people look to “the Moshe” for inspiration, but the “Aharons” among us are no less heroes and are the ones with the real, in the trenches mission to keep people grounded and help find answers to important questions. Because the Aharons live with the people, their job is so much harder and so much more important.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
