A Great, Wise, and Understanding People? Right...

Parshat Va'Etchanan

by Rabbi Avi Billet

We are now past Tisha B'Av, and our first Shabbos foray into the synagogue puts us in a position to hear this message from Moshe: "Behold, I have taught you statutes and ordinances, as the Lord, my God, commanded me, to do so in the midst of the land to which you are coming to possess.  And you shall keep [them] and do [them], for this is your wisdom and your understanding in the eyes of the nations, who will hear all these statutes and will say, 'This great nation is only a wise and understanding people.'" (Devarim 4:5-6)

            

I try not to live with blinders on. Which is why reading this triggers an exasperating throw of my hands skyward, along with a look heavenward, and a cry (sometimes aloud, but more often silent because no one is listening) of "Us? When will THIS happen?"

            

Did this happen a long time ago – perhaps during the time of David or Solomon? Did this happen during the time of the first or second Temples? Did this happen during the Talmudic Period? Does it refer to the historical anomaly of the kingdom of the Khazars?

            

It's great that the Kuzari was written by Rabbi Yehuda HaLevi. Would it ever have been written by someone from the "nations" described in the Torah?

            

The only "wisdom of this nation" I hear bandied around is the accusation of the Jews being the Illuminati, or that the Protocols are true. Of course both of these are nonsense. But when the headlines "amongst the nations" (when true) are about Jews who commit abominable deeds – especially Jews who are supposed to know better on account of their Jewish education and upbringing – the Torah (and I shudder to say this) seems to be out to lunch on reality.

            

Of course, the Torah is right. If the Jewish people would only "keep them and do them" – the commandments, that is – we would indeed be a wise and understanding people. A model to all. After all, thievery, physical abuse, cover-ups, dishonesty, slander, etc are all intolerable offenses which have no place in a world governed by Torah ideals.

            

But even so, our Public Relations would still need a lot of work. There are many cynical and skeptical people, Jewish and not Jewish, who believe the Torah mandates the stoning of adulterers (Vayikra 20) and the killing of minors (Devarim 21:20-21, 22:21-24), and the most heinous of punishments not for the perpetrators, but for the victims of sexual abuse (Devarim 22:29).

            

Anyone who makes these claims does not understand the magnitude of Torah knowledge as they look at the verse in its most simplistic translation, and have no concept of the Oral Torah, and thousands of years of rabbinic discussions addressing what these cases mean, and whether the punishments described in the Torah were ever carried out en masse or were more fixated on demonstrating the gravity of the sin, while life itself was valued.

            

The Talmud (Makkot 7) claims that courts did not exercise capital punishment. At worst, it was a very rare occurrence. And the conditions leading to such were almost impossible to attain: valid witnesses, proper warning, zero contradictions in testimony.

            

We live in a time when Sharia law, which takes some of the Biblical laws literally (or at least as prescribed in the Quran), and practices the worst kinds of corporal punishment, is on the rise in the world, in practice and acceptance, even in some Western countries.

Halakha, on the other hand, which has so many varying opinions and is a system which can help people live meaningful and fulfilling lives following various schools of interpretation, isn't growing beyond very small circles of Jews.

            

And it has become a major turnoff to many Jews who do not observe. This is wisdom? This is understanding? What are we doing wrong?

            

We are not as Jewishly educated as we ought to be. Even our rabbis and educators, and certainly a large majority of our flock do not have a mastery of Tanakh, Talmud and Halakhic literature.

            

We spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on the education of every child in his/her lifetime, yet we (and our children) can't read Hebrew, can't translate Hebrew, and have no patience to tackle a new text. We review the same laws every year, and we still don't know basic synagogue practice and basic holiday practice. Or what it means to live a life of "hatznea leches" – living a modest existence in which we do not call unnecessary attention to ourselves.

            

We preach about lashon hara, but we don't know the difference between a to'eles (discussion with a purpose) and what is pure besmirching and slander. Even as we wring our hands with dismay at the chillul Hashem, we enjoy reading all the dirt in the press about Jewish people who "look frum" who conduct themselves in ways that are anything but…

            

We talk about people doing teshuvah, but we are unaccepting of people we believe can't do teshuvah.

            

The Jewish criminals don't represent us. But we are not doing a good enough job of representing ourselves through living and modeling a Torah life that will cause others to say, "This is a great nation, wise and understanding."

            

Let the recent mourning period of Av serve as a reminder that we have a long way to go. May we find the strength to live up to our mandate from the Torah, to truly be a model nation.

Proper Education: Tumah and the Shema

Parshat Emor

by Rabbi Avi Billet

"And God said to Moshe, 'Say to the Kohanim, the sons of Aharon, and say to them, they should not become 'tameh' to people of the nation.'" (Vayikra 23:1)

            

The opening instruction in our parsha is for the kohanim to learn that they must follow a strict behavior, in which under ordinary circumstances they can only become "tameh" to a dead body if the deceased is one of the seven close relatives.

But the language utilized to relay this rule is strange. Instead of informing us that "God spoke (Vay'daber) to Moshe to say" the Torah says, "God said (Vayomer) to Moshe, "Say…" (Emor) And then it repeats the root word meaning "say" with the instruction of "V'amarta" – you will say to them.

            

Ramban says there is nothing special to be learned from this language. Emor is the same as Daber – it's a call to gather, listen and pay attention.

            

Yet one wonders, since there is a difference between the word "Daber" – Speak! and "Emor" – Say. "Speak" means you will address them saying the following idea, perhaps in your own words. "Say" means, "Here is a script you must follow."

            

The out-of-the-ordinary repetition of the root "Emor" is brought to our attention by Rashi, who, quoting a gemara (end of Yevamot 114a), says "'Emor... V'Amarta' comes to tell the big people (adults) to teach the little people (children) about the laws of tumah."

            

The midrashic book compiled in the Geonic period, Pitron Torah, explains that the first "say" teaches kohanim not to become tameh. The second "say" teaches kohanim the exception: if a kohen happens to come across a "met mitzvah" – a corpse on the road – he is to bury the body.

            

When Maimonides discusses the teaching of the Gemara (Hilchot Eivel 3:12), he says that a kohen-minor is to be taught not to become tameh. And while if he chooses to become tameh himself the court is not commanded to have him desist from being in a tameh arena, his father must educate him in the ways of "kedushah" – the holiness and sanctity that he must maintain as a kohen.

            

The Ta"z makes a similar point in Y"D 373, when he pinpoints the word "chinukh" as being the primary mode of operation determining the adult's responsibility to each child. The Pischei Teshuvah defines "chinukh" in his own comment on the Shulchan Arukh there as teaching so that "he can be punctilious in his fulfillment of the mitzvah when he reaches majority." ("she'yizaher l'kayem hamitzvah k'she'yagdil")

            

The kohen certainly has a job to educate his son in the ways of kohen responsibilities - in addition to the laws of tumah. For example, kohen children should be taught by their fathers how to duchen, and all kohanim must be sure that when they duchen they do so correctly (see Shulchan Arukh OC 128:8-end).

            

But "chinukh" is not confined to kohanim and their children. It is within the purview of all parents to properly educate their children, so that when their children reach majority they will know how to fulfill their mitzvah responsibilities properly.

            

Let us take a look at one of the first mitzvot we train our children to fulfill. While there are no official statistics, in my own work with children, I have found approximately 85% are being trained incorrectly. The flaw may lie in teachers, schools, parents or children. Or, perhaps, a combination of all four.

            

Some people may follow the Shulchan Arukh Orach Chaim 62:1, who says that even though it is a mitzvah to be exact in the reading of the Shema, if one is not perfectly exact, one fulfills one's obligation. But the Mishnah Brurah there says this is referring to all the subtleties that are raised in the entire Siman 61 about how to read the Shema punctiliously, precisely, and perfectly. However, if words or letters are outright misread, the Shema is being read improperly and the mitzvah is not fulfilled.

The problem is so pervasive that I even heard it on the "Shema @ Bed" app I have my daughter use to help her with the evening Shema.

            

In the first paragraph alone, most people make at least one mistake, and most children make at least two others. After the opening two sentences, the first word is "v'ahavTA," with the accent on the last syllable. Reading it this way means, "You shall love Hashem your God." When the accent is placed on the second to last syllable ("v'aHAVta") the words means "and you loved Hashem your God" in the past tense. This is one of many accent errors people make in reading Shema.

            

The other two very common mistakes are on words that are learned through listening and repeating, sounding out what (kids think) they hear, and not reading the words they are saying. The second to last word of the phrase "B'shiv'tkha B'veitekha uv'lekh't'kha baderekh u'v'shokh'b'kha uv'kumekha" is so commonly read as "B'shov't'kha" one can likely attribute it to confusion with the first word of the phrase as quoted as they now sound so similar. But there is a big difference between saying that you must review the words of the Shema "when you are laying down" (b'shokh'b'kha = the correct way) than "when you are returning" (B'shov't'kha = the incorrect way).

            

The last very common mistake is made when the first word of the last sentence of the first paragraph (and again when it appears in the second paragraph) is read as if it's the same as the first word of the previous sentence. We are told to tie the tefillin (u'k'shartam) and to write the mezuzah (u'kh'tavtam). Despite what many kids say when they read the Shema, we are not commanded to tie the mezuzah to the doorpost – u'k'shartam al mezuzot beitekha…

            

Perhaps all the emphasis on the root "Emor" (to say) at the opening of the parsha stands as a reminder that proper chinukh takes place when we take the time to say what needs to be said and to be heard. And, perhaps, in the case where the mitzvah is fulfilled through saying something, and following a script exactly, making sure it is said correctly.

            

Test your children. Be shocked or pleasantly surprised. Complain to the school or do not. Fix the problem if you can. (Shulchan Arukh 61:24 recommends leining the Shema every time!) Do proper Chinukh, making sure they read the words from the siddur so that when they reach the age of mitzvot, they can fulfill the mitzvah of reading the Shema properly.

Moshe's Failure

An Important Lesson in Education

  Parshat Va'Etchanan

  by Rabbi Avi Billet

 One of the more fascinating narratives in the Torah is the one surrounding the fate of Moshe, the great leader, and his passionate effort to gain entry into the Promised Land. In last week's parsha he seemed to imply that the episode of the spies doomed him to the same fate as the entire generation (Devarim 1:37).

 In this week's parsha, Moshe has a more cryptic explanation when, in the context of a paragraph in which he explains why God took the people out of Egypt to make them His special nation, "He got angry at me [because of] your words, and He swore I would not cross the Jordan, and I would not come into the land that Hashem your God is giving to you as an inheritance." (4:21) No further explanation is given here beyond blaming "your words."

 Why, then, was Moshe barred from entering the land? Is Moshe referring to the spies incident? The rock incident? Something else? Which "words" uttered by the people may have brought upon him the devastating fate that he tries over and over to have reversed?

The Or HaChaim points out that Moshe's reference to "not crossing the Jordan" as well as "not coming to the land" covers his non-entry in life, or in death (to be buried there), respectively. The traditional approach has all of Yaakov's sons' remains being brought to the land for burial. Moshe is excluded even from this. Why could he not even be buried in the land? Because of their words.

 What were their words?

 The Shakh on the Torah suggests that the anger that God wrought on Moshe was at the Golden Calf incident. When God told Moshe to "Go down" (Shmot 32:7) He meant "Go down from your greatness." Perhaps the underlying message is, "What kind of leader leaves his people in such a state that when he is missing for a 40 day period, they not only don't have more patience, but they go to such an extreme that they create a golden image and seemingly serve it?" This is a failure of leadership.

 The Shakh goes on to say that Moshe's response to the people in the rock incident (Bamidbar 20) hardly fits with his words here – "their words" there, complaining for water, could certainly not be viewed as causing his non-entry to the Land.

 Taking Moshe's message home, Ramban provides the most poignant message in his illuminating comment on this verse. He explains Moshe's words as meaning "God commanded me to teach you the commandments, that you will do in the Land when you cross over [the river] to get there. So, take the lesson, because I will be dying in Moab and I will not be able to teach you in the Land. [When you are] there, don't forget what I have taught you. Nor what you saw in Sinai… God was angry with me on account of worry that you will forget the covenant with God." This is why when Moshe repeats the "Ten Statements," he mentions "as God commanded you" (5:12,16) as if to say, "What I am telling you here was not my own words – it was never my words. All of my teachings come from God."

 What then were "their words?" On a simple level, it is likely words of rebellion that were legitimately out of place – which, as the Shakh points out, is likely not the incident with the rock. Does it matter if it was the Golden Calf, the spies, or something else? I think the point is that it's very hard to square Moshe's failure on a single incident. The punishment, as it were, does not fit any single crime.

 On a much deeper level, I think Ramban is suggesting that Moshe is saying, "I was punished because of your words, because I failed you as a teacher. I didn't understand your complaints. I didn't appreciate where you were coming from. I couldn't relate to you on your level. I may have advocated when you complained, but I didn't anticipate your needs in the right way. This lack on my part brought about the moral failures that fill the Torah, and is the reason I will not enter the land in life, and why not even my body will enjoy the benefit of burial in the land."

This is an incredible admission.

 Moshe is teaching every parent and teacher that God gets angry at us – the parents and teachers – on account of the words of those we are meant to teach, guide and inspire. We need to listen, to try hard to understand, and to respond in a way that is direct, pointed, and that helps the student or child overcome the obstacle, move past the challenging question or episode, with more clarity, with proper guidance. We need to provide answers that the children and students can appreciate and understand.

 And, most importantly, we need to be intellectually honest, without evading issues. Students and children can spot hypocrisy in an instant, and they also know when they're not being listened to or when their genuine concerns are misunderstood by those they look to for guidance. There is a big difference between the response elicited by our teaching or rebuke when a child says "I hate you" versus "I don't like what you're saying, but I respect you nonetheless because you respect me."

 Moshe concludes saying, "While I may not have understood you, I hope you will see that my teachings are good. Heed them, don't disregard them, don't forget what I have taught you."

 May we merit to learn from Moshe. Let us succeed in hearing "their words" so God may always be pleased with us in our roles as parents and teachers - horim and morim. And even when they don't like our methods, let us pray that the students and children will be able to see that our teachings are good, even though we, human beings that we are, are not perfect.

Jewish Honor Killings?

This also appears in the Jewish Star

Parshat Ki Tetze
By Rabbi Avi Billet

The “controversial” cover photo on the Aug. 9 issue of Time featured the face of a young Afghani woman whose nose has been cut off. Though we can’t see it, apparently her husband, the man who cut off her nose, also removed her ears in the Taliban-commissioned attack on the 18-year-old.

The magazine editor defended using the photo, for which the young woman posed, saying the world needs to know what returning power to the Taliban in Afghanistan will mean. This and “honor killings” will be run-of-the-mill in a society governed by Sharia law.

Perhaps Muslim fanatics who have no respect for life are irrelevant to us – they are free to do to their own people what they want.

We don’t really believe that, of course, but let’s leave the “what can we do?” question to the politicians to fight over for now.

The issue is relevant, however, when we look at Devarim 22:21. If a “na’arah” wife is accused of infidelity during her betrothal period, her husband and her family may each present their case. The Torah tells us what the husband’s punishment is for fabricating the tale, and then the Torah explains what happens if the accusation is proven true: “They will take the young lady to the doorway of her father’s home, and the people of the city will stone her until she dies. She has brought sexual immorality to her father’s house, doing a shameful thing in Israel. You must therefore rid yourself of the evil in your midst.”

Though a modern society might somewhat justify her behavior – she was experimenting, she was young and innocent, she didn’t know what she was doing – let us agree that her faithlessness is deplorable behavior; after all, a betrothal is a commitment.

But the death penalty? And in such a fashion? Could the Torah be serious?

By our standards the text alone is insufficient. The Oral Tradition (Torah She’baal Peh) and Rabbinic explanation help us understand the text more clearly.

“An eye for an eye,” for example, is rabbinically interpreted as a monetary punishment.

While that is not the case here – if guilty, the girl will die – the circumstances to bring about capital punishment are so difficult to achieve that the punishment as written is virtually impossible to carry out.

Valid witnesses (who cannot be related to either of the perpetuators or biased in any way) need to warn would-be perpetrators that the act they are about to commit is a Torah prohibition, for which the punishment is “x.” The act needs to be witnessed and then presented to the court without contradiction. The court must have the power to carry out capital punishment, which is not the case in our society where rabbinic courts are primarily limited to monetary arbitration, conversions and divorce cases. [And see here about the burden of proof]

In our case, the girl has to be the age of a “na’arah” – between twelve and twelve-and-a-half – a very small window of time. Much as the Rebellious Son (Ben Sorer u’Moreh) (21:18-21) was never killed (Sanhedrin 71a) – it stands to reason our case was also meant to be taught as a lesson in morality, without ever coming to practice.

Besides, the last mishnah in Makkot chapter 1 indicates, in essence, that Jewish courts did not carry out capital punishment.

In our day, therefore, no one can ever interpret these verses literally. Other than saving someone’s life from a direct danger, no individual may take the law into his own hands.

The guilty girl committed a horrible act. “Her offense is to all of Israel for not upholding the moral standards for which we are most proud.” (Sifrei) Whether it is her fault depends on how much we accept that a “na’arah” has understanding of the repercussions of her deeds. Some will say she has disgraced her family; others will argue in her defense. Surely her family taught her to conduct herself otherwise. Or did they?

The punishment takes place on her family’s doorstep – not to protect their honor, but to shame them. And it is carried out by the entire nation, not by her husband or family. The Talmud in Ketubot (45a) says the crowd exclaims “Look at the offspring you have raised!” In other words, you parents failed in the education of your daughter. Does the family want their daughter dead? Of course not. The lesson is not that Judaism believes in honor killings. We abhor the thought and distance the idea.

But we do believe in a strong education, in living by a set of values that are immutable. And, most importantly, in passing our values to the next generation.

Had the girls’ parents educated her properly, this never would have come about.

There is no room for hypocrisy. If we are to sustain Judaism as we know it, we can no longer afford to hear stories of infidelity of any kind. Children learn to do the things they see, and are very well aware of when we contradict ourselves – preaching one way as we practice another. We must live the lives we know the Torah depicts as ideal because through these guidelines our lives will not only be filled with meaning but will stand as a blessing to ourselves and everyone around us.

Tamim = A Complete Education

This also appears in the Jewish Star

Parshat Shoftim
by Rabbi Avi Billet

I’ve always marveled at the notion that Jewish men or women do not need to get any education beyond a Torah education. The thought that we might close off our brains or deprive ourselves of G-d’s gifts to this world is anathema to my existence, especially when we live in a time when knowledge is so readily accessible.

However, one need not leave the walls of the Beis Medrash to discover that people like Maimonides, Nachmanides, the Gaon of Vilna and others were heavily steeped in sciences and non-Torah subject matters — in addition to their being top-notch Torah scholars.

In Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach’s responsa on electric matters, he often spends dozens of pages describing the mechanics and technical matters of scientific realities before entering the realm of halakhic discourse.

The Talmud (Shabbat 75a) and the Sifrei (170) say that while one may not learn the ways of the other nations of Canaan in order to practice their ways, “One is permitted to learn about the things they do, to understand and to teach” a proper path. Of course, “their practices” refer to activities which are specifically polytheistic, pagan, or ritualistic — outside the pale of Judaism. But if the knowledge one will gain will make a person more well-rounded, the Talmud seems to be giving the learner its blessing.

The Talmud Shabbat takes this idea a step further and says that a person who does not learn about the seasons and constellations is not fulfilling a mitzvah of Devarim 4:6.
Amazingly, one of the criteria for a person to be appointed to the Sanhedrin is that he have an understanding of witchcraft and magic (Sanhedrin 17a, bottom), (Menachot 65a, top).

The common denominator of these bullet points is the allowance, the acceptance, and the necessity of having a general education beyond one’s Torah education.

This discussion stems from a fundamental interpretation of Devarim 18:9-13. “When you come to the land G-d gives you, do not learn to do the abominable acts of those nations. [Here the Torah lists kinds of necromancy, sorcery and magic.] Anyone who does these is perverting an abomination against G-d. It is these activities that are causing the nations to be chased out of the land. Be ‘tamim’ with Hashem your G-d.”

On “Do not learn to do the… acts” Rashi quotes the Talmud cited above to suggest we are in need of an education to know what is out there, so we can act accordingly and know how G-d wants us to behave, as well as the behaviors G-d abhors.

Therefore I would like to suggest that “Tamim Tihyeh Im Hashem Elokekha” means “Be complete with Hashem your G-d” in the sense of having as well-rounded an education one can have. Being complete means we have a life-long task of educating ourselves about not only Torah, but anything which can be defined as a G-d-given science.

Whether it is astrology, philosophy, political science, rules of governance, understanding the stars and the zodiac (Ramban has a lengthy commentary on this section of the parsha in which he intimates that these magic “sciences” are real and were put on earth for a purpose – just not a Jewish purpose), mathematics, biology, chemistry, physics, medicine, health – all of these are available to us to study and to understand, so we can have a complete knowledge of G-d and His world.

How will we know what to do with it all? The next verses in the parsha say we are to be guided by a prophet, just like Moshe.

In our days there are no prophets for us to follow. We have, on the other hand, a legacy of right and wrong, of the proper path versus the improper path, of what is pleasing to G-d versus what is not pleasing to G-d.

What is unacceptable, however, is to write off knowledge of the world as “goyish,” and to claim that pursuit of ideas which do not smack of Torah is to be avoided because it is something a Jew “doesn’t do.”

Not everyone needs to be a professor or scholar, but to avoid intellectual pursuits using Torah as an excuse is, at least according to one passage from the Talmud, the equivalent of not fulfilling of a mitzvah.

Remember the slogan of the United Negro College Fund since 1972: “A mind is a terrible thing to waste.”