Home & Homeland: where is it?

Sarah passed away and Abraham takes matters into his own hands, looking for a wife, first for Isaac and later in this Torah portion, also for himself (and some major commentators will tell us he got back together with Hagar).

Funny thing, we know how some of the Torah couple met (consider Adam & Eve; Jacob and Rachel) but not how Abraham and Sarah met. Since she was his niece (his brother’s daughter), and them being ten years apart, they probably (almost) always knew each other. Sarah was his wife, sister, soul-mate, but now, what about Isaac, who grew up alone in the “new land”?

In chapter 24 Abraham therefore sends his servant to go find a wife for his son. It’s an interesting exchange, that detail with the strange custom to place a hand on the thigh as a sign of a vow, or maybe even the whole ordeal – the fact that Isaac, now in his late thirties, almost 40, can’t go by himself to find his own wife but instead needs papa to send his own most trusted servant with his countless precious gifts?

But something else caught my eyes (and heart). Abraham gives the servant very clear instructions: “And if the woman be not willing to follow you, then you are cleared from this oath of mine; just do not bring my son back there” (8).

Yet at the same time, just a few verses earlier, Abraham described that “there” as his country and his homeland: “do not take a wife for my son of the daughters of the Canaanites, among whom I dwell, but go to my country and to my kindred and take a wife for my son, for Isaac” (3-4).

And also: “God… who took me from my father’s house and from the land of my nativity, and who spoke unto me, and who swore unto me, saying: to you l I give this land…” (7).

For hundreds of generations we wrote poetic midrashim, love songs and prose to the Land of Israel. How beautiful it is, how wide and spacious, how lush with trees, milk and honey! Since forever, we called going away from Israel, “going down”, and coming to Israel, “going up”, even if one moves to live at the shores of the Dead Sea from the Himalayas – and vice-versa! Our love has never been doubted! At the same time, I can’t help but share a few words by Amos Oz, who wrote in his book “A Story of Love and Darkness):

“… Europe for my parents was a forbidden promised land, a longing district … The words “cabin”, “meadow”, “geese-herd girl “, enticed and moved me throughout my childhood days. They had the touch of a sensual real world, complacent, far from the dusty tin roofs, spikes junkyard and parched hillsides of Jerusalem suffocating under a world of bleached summer….”

So where is home? I remember hearing two men conversing in the aisle during a flight from NYC to Israel. “My daughter is now back here”, one told the other. Here, he said, while we were flying over Greenland… Here?

One of the questions I often dread is, ‘where are you from’?… but maybe it’s safe to say that the split personally that simultaneously calls two places home – we inherited directly from Abraham.

 Shabbat Shalom.

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Yes Dear: An Intervention in Abraham and Sarah’s Tent

Jane: Honey, what is that wooden sled still doing here? Jakie almost broke his head tripping over it when we walked into the garage! You know how much I hate it. I told you to throw it away!!

Joe: Honey, this is my favorite sled! You know how much it means to me. With this very sled my high school sweetheart and I won the foreign teens championship in Norway thirty years ago during my year abroad! You cant possibly ask me to…

G-d: Joe! Forget that old sled. Just do whatever Jane says…

Among its many amazing stories, from Abraham hosting the messengers and arguing with G-d for Sodom and Gamora, to the miraculous birth of Isaac and the mesmerizing story of the Binding, we get a one verse glimpse into what must be the most famous domestic dispute. Sarah tells Abraham to kick Hagar and Yishma’el out, and while we do not hear Abraham’s response, we can guess it, for had he quickly agreed (as he did back in chapter 15 when Sarah first offered him Hagar), there would have been no need for G-d Himself to intervene.

Last week, in Parashat Lech-Lecha (Genesis 15:1-16), Sarah (then still Sarai) suggested that Abraham (Abram) take Hagar to have a child. After all, G-d promised him an offspring, but maybe not through her? They have been in the land now, after returning from Egypt, for ten years. Surely if G-d wanted them to have children together, it would have happened by now. Maybe it’s just Sarah who is stalling G-d’s plan? As they have aged, she might have become more and more worried.

Hagar becomes pregnant, but rather than remembering she was given to Abraham so Sarah can be “built” and have continuity through her (15:2), she treats her mistress lightly. She continues to be known as Sarah’s “shifcha” (maidservant) but feels herself to be Abraham’s wife. Sarah approaches Abraham and asks for his help in the matter: “May Hashem judge between me and you”. His response is, “do to her as you wish”. Sarah “tortures” her (vate’aneha”) and Hagar runs away. The angel that finds her also calls her “Hagar the maidservant of Sarai” (15:8) and instructs her to go back. Rabbi Hirsch notes the order of the angel’s words: “go back and work it out”, he says (loosely this is how Hirsch explains “hit’ani”) and Hagar doesn’t move. Only when he says, “behold you’re pregnant with a son…” (15:11) she agrees to go back.

In this week’s Torah portion, Isaac is born and Sarah observes with great distress the interactions between her son, Isaac and that son, Yishma’el.  She doesn’t just tell Abraham to send Hagar and Yishma’el away but uses the verb “garesh”, same root used for gerushin, divorce. The text tells us that Abraham felt very badly for his son, but G-d says, “don’t feel bad for the boy and for your maidservant”, which might be the first time that someone actually notes the special bond that developed between Abraham and Hagar. For a brief moment, it seems that G-d “understands” Abraham’s feelings. It is important to note that up until this point, none of our key Biblical heroes had a second wife so perhaps no one knew how complicated the theory can get in real life. Still, in spite of the brief compassion, G-d tells him: “Listen to Sarah’s voice”. Rashi notes that this comes to show that Abraham was secondary to Sarah in prophesy. Rabbi Hirsch notes that the voice is likened to the soul and that G-d instructed Abraham to be tuned with Sarah’s spiritual knowledge. In a way, Abraham was the transistor but Sarah was the antenna.  In fact, G-d never talks to Abraham without Sarah being an active part of his life!

But there is also irony in this section, expressed by the choice of roots: first, it is Yishma’el who is the one “metzachek” (same root as Yitzchak, from to laugh) and Sarah is the one about whom it is said, “shma bekola” (same root as Yishma’el, from to hear, listen).

I admit: There was a time when I was almost jealous of Sarah. Wouldn’t you like it if G-d showed up at your home too when you’re about to lose an argument, telling everybody to listen to you and do as you say?!

But then it dawned on me how terrible it must have felt for Sarah not to be heard by the person who was her nearest and dearest, especially when it came to the most critical issue in their life; to be so unheard, that G-d Himself had to intervene. Having such a powerful ally might shed light not only her great spirituality but also on the grave state on their relationship at that moment.

But in spite of the pain and him not fully understanding, Abraham complies. He gets up early, packs a lunch and saddles his donkey. By doing so, perhaps he gives Sarah what is still the greatest gift any person can give another human being: the gift of listening.

 

 

Posted in life and some, shabbat shalom, פרשת השבוע לחילוני האדוק | Leave a comment

Counting Adam, Noah, Abraham…

The publication of the recent Pew survey has brought us back to the number game: how many are we? How may on us in the U.S.? In CA? How many of us are Israeli? Russian? Under 18? Under 40? Over 40?

Digging into the 214 pages of the survey (and I admit, I didn’t read it all), reveals discrepancies between it and previous studies re Bay Area population: A 2004 demographic study commissioned by the SF based Jewish Community Federation cited about a quarter of a million Jews in the (west) Bay and a similar East bay federation study in 2011 added another 120,000 to a total of 360,000 in the immediate area. Yet, the current study claims the Bay Area to have about 122,336 Jews.

Who’s right? Well, at least some of that depends on who is counting who and how. We can really only count those who “show up” (attend anything Jewish: shul membership, subscription to PJ Library, Jewish newspaper, attendance at film festival, donation to federation), which of course leaves room for error. Some of us might be counted twice (in spite of some efforts, we do not have one central list like a local Jewish Community phone book). In addition, there is also a famous claim that those of us “affiliated” are only 20% of the total Jewish population. Hence, another 80% invisibles are often added to come up with a final “count”. That might be funny if it wasn’t so sad. Counting those who are involved is already difficult enough. But counting those are not? By definition, we don’t know how many people we don’t know about, and the estimates and guesstimates flourish. As we say in Hebrew “kol hamarbe – harei ze meshubach”, loosely translated to “the more- the merrier”.

When the Children of Israel left Egypt, the text says “vechamushim yatz’u”… (Exodus 13:18). Chamushim is usually translated as “armed”, but we have no proof that the this band of slaves had any weapons. Therefore, Rashi and others connect “chamushim” to the Hebrew – chamesh, the number 5, telling us that only a fifth of the People left Egypt. Since this would be too embarrassing, the text hid this piece of information in a hint. And would you know, we’re dealing with the same “hidden” ratio today.

One of those curious numbers is the number of Israelis in the U.S. Pew survey claims to 2% of the Jewish population was born in Israel: 2% of about 6 million is roughly 120,000. This is a far cry from the Israeli consulate and others who claim there are at least half a million (yes, 500,000) and maybe even up to one million Israelis in the U.S (more like 10% and up)! In the Bay Area alone there are supposedly more 40,000 Israelis, mostly in the Silicon Valley, and scattered throughout Nor-Cal. Along with 250,000 in LA and at least that many in greater NYC, not to mention the Boston area universities, Miami region and more.

Again, most of the Israelis are supposedly “unaffiliated”, a myth I once bought into too and now believe in less and less, because davka (especially) Israelis are, in general, a very connected people, hence leaning towards affiliation of some sort, and while they don’t necessarily want to join an organization, especially not a fundraising one, most – and I know I’m generalizing – sooner or later, rarely live without some communal connections. Again, this might not be the conventional Federation list and synagogue memberships but they do show up. On Yom Hazikaron and Yom Ha’atzmaut, at a Meir Shalev lecture, at a friends’ party when their kid join Gari’n Tzabar (lone soldiers pre-program) and at a dinner a friend helped organize, when they had no idea it was Hadashah’s annual gala.

Looking back again at our history, the children of Israel were counted going to and from Egypt. They were also counted in the desert early in the journey and before entering the land. The system was practical and spiritual: each person was to bring a half shekel coin; half a shekel to symbolize the fact that each individual is incomplete without another, without a community. Only those who were present were counted, because one cannot build a community with those who aren’t around in case one day they show up. Of course, we prepare some extra chulent for friends who might decide to stop by, but usually not to the tune of 80%. This kind of margin is impractical and rarely realistic. We cannot live in suspense that someone might one day show up.

In the opening of Genesis, and throughout the Torah, G-d Himself generally only works with one person at a time: first Adam, then Noah, and this week – Abraham. The Talmud later teaches us that anyone who saves one person saves a whole world. Then, in Genesis 12:5 we’re told about the “nefesh” (souls) that Abraham and Sarah made. The commentators say that “he was converting the men and she – the women”. What happened to all those “nefesh”? We don’t know. Maybe because we are not about the numbers. We are not about building community as an amorphous endeavor with a nebulous crowd. We are about the real person right next to us.

Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments

In a beginning: starting again

Seven is a favorite number — the seven weeks between Passover and Shavuot, the seven branches on the menorah, the seven days of Creation. But how about the first verse of the Torah, which has exactly seven words, and the first word, which has exactly seven letters? A coincidence? Perhaps.

But wait. Are there really seven days of Creation, or just six? Was the seventh day merely for doing nothing, or was Shabbat a creation in itself, bringing to the world a new concept, the idea of making space for a soul day?

And what about the fact that the first two chapters of the Book of Genesis don’t seem to make sense together? Chapter 1 tells the story of Creation in a very orderly manner: On the first day, there was light; on the second day, a separation of the water below and water above, mayim (water) and sham-mayim (literally “there water” but it’s the Hebrew word for the skies); then on subsequent days dirt and plants; a pretty starry sky; fish to swarm the seas and birds to fly in the sky; mammals; and humans. The world by the end of Genesis 1 is as perfect as can be, and God, described as “Elokim,” presides over the masterpiece. We would expect Chapter 2 to take it from here.

But instead, we’re thrown back to yet another beginning: “These are the generations of the heavens and the earth when they were created … When no bush of the field was yet in the land and no small plant of the field had yet sprung up — for the Lord God had not caused it to rain on the land, and there was no man to work the ground … then the Lord God formed the man of dust from the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living creature” (Genesis 2:4-7). Indeed, a different beginning, and God here has a different name.

How can that be? Not only is there now nothing after Creation, but once man is created he is formed out of dust! Hasn’t he already been made in God’s image? And then there is the mystery of the woman. First, she’s created along with the man — “male and female He created them” (Genesis 1:27) — but then all of a sudden God takes flesh and builds her up from the “man’s rib” (Genesis 2:21-22).

Seeing the seeming contradictions, it’s tempting to label these and other more complex Torah sections simply as stories written by different authors that are not for our sophisticated mindset, maybe more suitable for small children. But it would be much more beneficial for us to give the Torah, its readers and commentators of thousands of years (all of whom surely noticed these issues before us) the benefit of the doubt and dig a little deeper to find greater meaning.

It would have been easy to write a book that made sense, or at least one that was more consistent. Lots of people, ancient and modern (not to mention other religions), have done so successfully. If Hamlet and Harry Potter can tell a good story, why can’t we?

Perhaps because we’re asked not to treat the Torah as a “story,” not to think simply with this text, not to settle for easy answers and a quick way out, and not to hand it to our kids without honestly opening our hearts and struggling with the challenges first.

The first word of the Torah might shed some light. “Beresheet,” often translated as “in the beginning,” literally means “in a beginning.” It therefore implies more than one start. When we unscramble it, we get the words “alef betishrei,” which is the Hebrew date for Rosh Hashanah, the Jewish New Year. Alef betishrei is the day we celebrate the beginning of the year, the birthday of the world and Creation itself.

The opening letter of the word “beresheet,” the bet, is closed to three sides and open toward the left side, the side of the text. It asks us to look ahead with a fresh gaze as we renew our learning.

Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments

Sukkot

Instead of my blue toyota, we now have a sukkah in our front yard, between the wooden fence and the bushes, where normally the car would be. Just like last year, people keep stopping by, asking what this is. Some are with their kids on the way to and from school, some are jogging, taking a breath as they reach the relative flat top of the hill, some are out for a walk with their dogs and other friends. Some are Jewish in variety of ways – by birth, by partnership, by family, by culture, by vague memory. Cautiously they slow down, peek around. They are curious why is this sort of tree-house on the ground; what are the palm fronds on top; why does it have funny writing on the walls, decorations from the no-ceiling and pictures of a far-away place they heard of or read in their church Bible.

We talk. “It’s a Jewish holiday”, I tell those who run and wave from the other side of the street, continuing on their journey. But some want more: “Are you fasting”? They ask compassionately, trying to show me they do know something. “Will you be fasting in here”? They look inside again, trying to confirm their guess, since we haven’t dragged our dining table out there yet. “Oh no”, I shudder. “Fasting was last week. We’re back to food and drink. Sukkot is a reminder of the Children of Israel traveling in the desert and”, I add, “of how life is fragile”, I share the Sukkot elevator speech. And then I pause: a reminder of how life is fragile? Really? Like we need reminders? Syria and Iran do that daily, and if we want to skip the news one day, we’re at an age that we can’t help notice people dying around us, or just simply pick up and move away too far. People get sick without prior notice, they lose jobs (yes, it happens), they change life styles. Reminder that life is fragile? And we celebrate that? I went back to watering the plants and waving with a quiet smile.

Now a few minutes before the holiday, when (most of) the food is ready, the table has moved in and all that’s missing are the guests, I can go back to that and add some.

I realized, that the important piece missing from my street “drashot is just one word. Or two; an obvious word but worth reinserting: sukkot is a reminder that our physical- materialistic life is fragile, and that we can and should open up to whatever is spiritual in ourselves and the universe around us – davka (especially) in a season where our tendency might be to get ready to close up and curl inside our coops.

And there is lots more, commentaries and stories and wonderful deep, meaningful, mystical things to learn. But if it’s spiritual, we won’t be able to access it just through words. The best is to find a sukkah, sit in it and take a deep breath; look up and see the stars. We have at least a week. The door is open. Stop by.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Yom Kippur: an “Afternoon Delight”

Watching Afternoon Delight makes for a pretty crazy evening. The life of LA Silver Lake mom, Rachel is turned upside down when she decides to save a young prostitute and bring her home so she can give her a new life. Indeed, not clear who is giving life to who: Is it really Rachel who is helping McKenna, giving her a good home and a decent job as her new live-in nanny, taking care of her son and the other kids who attend the local JCC? or perhaps it is McKenna, the “sex worker”, who shows up just in time to shake Rachel’s perfect life falling apart  (or perfectly falling apart life) with the “chic modernist home, successful husband, adorable child, and a hipster wardrobe” at the Jewish community of suburbia?

In spite of Rachel’s best intentions to save the “young girl”, who had “such a hard life” and who “really, really needs me”, it is not Mckenna who needs saving but the girl inside of Rachel that silently and politely and appropriately (and with her useless therapist) would like to shriek for help, that needs to break through and feel life once again in its fullest. While she can’t attend to herself directly, she can do so through someone else, someone she wouldn’t dare imagine herself as being, yet she needs now to become in order to cut lose and rearrange her life.

The rearrangement, by the way, and not to spoil it for you (trust me, I’m not), is mostly internal. Everything stays: the beautiful house, the patient, darling husband (How I met Your Mother’s Ted), the lovely child, and the cute doggy too. But life within that has become stagnant, regains its flow.

We live our life in a metaphoric “figure eight”, looping around and around: we give and we receive. Sometimes we give directly; and at other times, not only we receive, but our gift is our ability to receive so that another can feel a sense of giving…. The best we can do is flow. From modern researchers to Chasidic master to yogis, feeling that flow, that breath of life through us, is as close to happiness as we can come.

When my kids were young, I told them that Yom Kippur is like taking a bath: During the year we play around. We get dirty. Now it’s time to wash it off and start another year of playing!

All that is true for us too. We need time a chance to pause and clean out the clogged pipes blocking the flow in our own system.

Oh, and guess what, I think I also told my kids not to eat in the tub too…

 

With that, hope you have a meaningful day. chatima tova & shana tova.

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Three (still somewhat disconnected) Thoughts, Last Shabbat 5773

Not many people fill the seats at Grand Lake Theater for the Friday matinee of Fruitvale Station, but by the time the film was over, there is not a dry eye in the audience. I thought it was only me, because I can cry even when we watch Cool Runnings for the 15th time. But as I saw the other puffy red faces at the restrooms, I had to wonder, what is it?

Maybe it’s because you can’t tell yourself it’s just a movie. And what’s worse, you can tell yourself, it just happened this once and “never again”. Maybe it’s because there are hundreds if not thousands of people in this city who wake up every day knowing that what stands between them and Oscar Grant is sheer coincidence. There are young men who walk out daily to the streets, the Bart, the bus, the stores, fully conscience that it could have been them; it can still be any one of them. There are countless mothers, fathers, siblings, grandparents, who know – every day – that this can happen to their son, their brother, their grandson, their neighbor. A recent article in the SF Chronicle shared that a Black male in Oakland has just as many chances to graduate high school ready for college, as he does to be killed.  So when he is late at night, he might be chatting with a friend, finishing work, waiting at the stoplight, hugging his girlfriend. But just the same – he might be shot. Before rushing 9000 miles away to decide for others how to live and fix the other side of the world, come to Oakland. You don’t need to go very far to do a lot of good. in the words of this week’s parasha: “ki karov elecha hadavar me’od” – For it is very near to you, in your mouth and in your heart to do” (Deuteronomy 30).

***

On the “Never Again” streak, Hannah Arendt leaves me with a different but maybe complementary message. She lies on her couch, cigarette at hand, trying to make sense of Eichmann’s trial (1961) which aims to showcase the greatest horrific evil of the monstrous Nazi machine, but the grey man standing on the podium behind the glass cage, is just a “runny-nosed bureaucrat”, a system’s “yes-man”. It’s even hard to call him an anti-Semite. He doesn’t have any umf and doesn’t seem to be pro or con anything. He couldn’t care less what or who is at the end of the train tracks. He is in uniform, he has a job, and that job must be done. She notices “the banality of evil”: small, dull, dreary, minute details that all add up to great wrong doings but leave no one directly responsible as they are composed of little people, little actions, each just doing what they are told, just moving train schedules, just making sure the locomotives are well stocked, just making sure factories have the right orders. It’s a long ride to Poland, and gasoline is expensive. He was a hard working officer, a good soldier, following orders, doing his best for his superiors (Whom he viewed as a Superior, but that’s for another time -).

We, the audience, wanted a simple story: with good (us), and with bad (them). We did not want to bother with this grey, messy stuff in the middle. We wanted an obvious tale, where we did everything right, and other bad people out there did bad things to us. We wanted the good to be close and those evil forces to be far, on someone else, on something we can point and pin and then punish. We did not want a chance that evil might be a fluid matter that can enter anyone, anywhere, anytime; that it might be in us too, and that therefore we will have to struggle with it ourselves in a real, painful, intimate manner.

Hannah Arendt – and the Torah portion – further deny us this option, as is so poignantly pointed out by a long ago dear student of mine, Ahuva Zaches, in her sermon: We are to stand “kulchem”, “all of us”, meaning, not just each one of us together, but each one bringing his – or her – whole self, the good and the pretty, along with the bad and the ugly. The bad news is – we have to live with the fact that we have both; the good news – there is room to us to have this and that. We don’t have to be perfect. We can be who we are.

***

This week’s Shabbat, the last Shabbat before Rosh Hashana, we read the double portions of Nitzavim-Vayelech. These are some of the shortest, yet most profound sections in the Five Books. One (Nitzavim) means standing, and the other – (Vayelech) going.

Of course, nitzavim is not simply standing. In Modern Hebrew, it means standing straight and tall, 90 degrees to the ground, sort of  like in “attention”. It expresses perfect, stationary balance. Vayelech, on the other hand, asks for forward movement. The picture we get with this is of Moses who spends his last day of his 120 years alive, going to the people. He could have stayed in his tent, waiting to receive the audience. He could have mediated with God. But he opts to get up and go out, to see everybody, to share his words, wisdom, care, to say his personal goodbyes like one loving friend to another. And yet, it is not a social scene. Moses, our rabbi, the greatest human being in our history, the man of God and the leader of the people, on his last day – walks alone. Alone ascending the mountain, alone approaching his death, disappearing into the horizon, and alone he will be buried in an unknown location, unapproachable to anyone.

Nitzavim tells about a covenant which is contracted with all those standing ready to enter the Promised Land, and even with those not yet there, not yet born, like us. It’s about peoplehood with a great big capital P, and for a moment, we go, ha? How can anyone sign a contract with someone who isn’t present? And yet, so it goes. And at the very same time we’re offered a “brit” (a covenant), the Torah already knows that like kids who are told no, we will mess up, and therefore goes on to tell us about tshuva, about the path back, about finding an answer when things seem down or lost. It is then that it tells us that this answer “is not greater than you, nor far away. It’s not in the heavens, lest you say: who will go to us to the heavens and bring it to us and let us hear it so we may do it. And not beyond the seas, lest you say: who will cross the sea and bring it. For it is very near to you, in your mouth and in your heart to do” (Deuteronomy 30).

Here it is, all of it: The inner voice and the outer clatter; The Heaven, far from our reach above and the Earth, accepting us below; The individual, all alone, and the community, numerous, loud, demanding, sharing, leaning; Those far from us, and those so near; The evil without and the one within, we dare not speak of; The force of revenge and the begging of mercy. And us in between it all, every day anew, asking to tread safely on the balance beam.

Shabbat Shalom & Shana Tova. May it be a good one, and may the journey ahead bring peace.

Posted in life and some, shabbat shalom, פרשת השבוע לחילוני האדוק | Leave a comment

שבת שלום: פרשת כי תבוא – ברכות, קללות, והחובה להיות שמח

קבלנו שבת לא קלה, בין חודש אלול לתחילת השנה החדשה (ערב ראש השנה כבר מגיע, ב-4 בספטמבר!) ועשרת הימים הנוראים, עשרת ימי תשובה. סופה (הארוך) של הפרשה כולל את הסט השני של ה”ברכות והקללות” או כפי שעוד קוראים לה “התוכחה”. את הסט הראשון קבלנו בסוף ספר ויקרא, ושתי הואריציות כוללות סדרה של מה יהיה אם נעשה טוב, ומה יהיה אם לא. הברכות – קצרות, רק 14 פסוקים, ואילו הקללות נמשכות על פני 54 פסוקים. חלק מה”מה יהיה אם לא…” – מצמרר, במיוחד לאור (לחושך) ההסטוריה שעברנו אחכ. האם כותב ספר דברים ידע את מה שהעתיד יביא? רק נגיד שהרבה דיו נשפך על הנושא.

הנה למשל, דוגמא שווה ציטוט וכמעט שלא מצריכה פרשנות:

“… יולך ה’ אותך… אל גוי אשר לא ידעת… ועבדת שם אלוהים אחרים עץ ואבן, והיית שם למשל ולשנינה בכל העמים אשר ינהגך ה’ שמה… ישא ה’ עליך גוי מרחוק מקצה הארץ כאשר ידאה הנשר, גוי אשר לא תשמע לשונו, גוי עז פנים אשר לא ישא פנים לזקן ולנער לא יחון… ונשארתם במתי מעט תחת אשר הייתם ככוכבי השמים לרוב… והפיצך ה’ בכל העמים מקצה הארץ ועד קצה הארץ  … ובגויים ההם לא תרגיע ולא תהיה מנוח לכף רגלך ונתן ה’ לך שם לב רגז וכליון עיניים ודאבון נפש, והיו חייך תלואים לך מנגד  ופחדת לילה ויומם ולא תאמין בחייך. בבקר תאמר מי יתן ערב ובערב תאמר מי יתן בבקר…”

יש אומרים שבמילים “עץ ואבן” הכוונה לצלב, סמל הנצרות, ולקעבה, סמל האיסלאם. כך או כך, גם העץ וגם האבן מתיחסים לדברים חומרניים אליהם נמשך בעתיד ואותם נעבוד במקומות רחוקים מהבית. ושם, ברחוק הזה, על אף שכל כך נתאמץ, נהיה ללעג בעיני בעלי המקום, ועל כך יש לנו הסטוריה רצופה של קנאה, בוז, השפלות ועינויים ליהודים, שהגיעו במוקדם או במאוחר  אל כל מקום בו חיינו. הנשר המוזכר כאן – יש אומרים שאלו הם הרומאים שדברו בשפה לא שמית, “שפה זרה”, ושניגוד לערכים היהודים, היו שולחים את הזקנים למות בהרים ולא היה להם כבוד ל”גיל הזהב”, בניגוד ליהודים שראו בזקנים את חכמי הדור המקורבים למעמד הר סיני ולכן כדאי לשמור על קשר קרוב איתם. כל זה מחלחל כמובן גם לימינו אנו, ואנו רואים את זה בתרבות סביבנו, תרבות בה מעריצים אנשים לפי כמה “טוב” הם נראים (כלומר, צעירים, אי-שם בין גיל 20 ו-40, אפשר בפלסטיק קפוא רק לא להזדקן מצד אחד, אבל מצד שני, אין תרבות של “ילדים זו שמחה”. בכל מקום, בנק, משרד רשמי וכו, יש תמיד קופסת צעצועים בשביל הילדים אבל אלו אינם מתוך כבוד ואהבה, אלא מתוך רצון שיהיה שקט. אני מכלילה אבל מעטים הם האמריקאים שלוקחים את הילדים שלהם לקניון במוצ”ש לבילוי משפחתי, וחבל.

ההמשך – מתאר את הקורות לנו: מספרי היהודים בעולם יורדים ויורדים, ואנו נשארים “במתי מעט”. מפוזרים מקצה הארץ עד קצה. במאה ה-11 כתב בספרד רבי יהודה הלוי באחד משיריו הנודעים, “ליבי במזרח ואנוכי בסוף מערב”, אבל אפילו הוא לא ידע עד לאיזה סוף מערב עוד נגיע. ועל אף המסעות והנדודים והחיפושים, לא נמצא שם מנוחה, ונשאר בהרגשה של ספק וחוסר שקט.

וואו.

למזלנו, יש גם חלקים יותר מעודדים בפרשה הזו.

הפרשה נפתחת בקטע יפיפה, שנשמע בערך כך: כשתבוא אל הארץ, קח את הפירות הראשונים שלך ותביא אותם לכהן שיכהן אז ותספר לו את סיפור חייך, סיפור העם שלך. הסיפור יתחיל ב”ארמי אובד אבי וירד מצרימה”… וממשיך בסיפור יציאת מצרים, חס וחלילה שלא נשכח, אותה פסקה שאנחנו קוראים עד היום כל שנה בהגדה של פסח. ולמרות  שיש אינספור פירושים לפסוק הבתי מובן “ארמי אובד אבי” – האם הכוונה לאברהם שבא מארץ ארם? או אולי ליעקב שאבד בשביל לבן הארמי שניסה “לאבד” אותו? לא משנה. זה הסיפור שלנו. מאז ועד היום. עוד נקודה מכאן: “ובאת אל הכהן אשר יהיה בימים ההם” – כל דור יצטרך להתעסק עם המנהיגים שלו, עם בני אדם עכשוויים, אמיתיים.

ואז מגיעה מצווה הכי מדהימה בתורה, המצווה הכי קשה והכי מוזרה: “ושמחת בכל הטוב אשר נתן לך ה’ אלוהיך…”. אחד הספרים שהכי אהבתי, מסע אחרי נמרי השלג, וחוכמת החיים של השארפה הנפאלי. הנפאלי הזקן אומר לסופר: כמובן שאני מאושר, בעיקר משום אין לי ברירה. והסופר המערבי, לא מבין. איך אפשר להיות מאושר דוקא כשאין ברירה, אף על פי כן ולמרות הכל… כל פעם זה מעלה לי שאלות מחדש. אפשר לצוות לא לרצוח, לשמור שבת, לתת מעשר, לא לגנוב. אפשר לצוות על מעשים, אבל איך אפשר לצוות על רגשות? איך אפשר לצוות עלינו להיות שמחים? התגובה האוטומטית שלנו היא שזה משהו שלא תלוי בנו. “מעצבנים אותנו”. אין לנו מספיק כסף”. “השוק קורס”. “החיים קשים”. “הילדים תובענים ובני הזוג…” ובכל זאת, התורה לא מוותרת לנו. וכתוב: “ושמחת”. יש פירושים שניסו להתמקד וטענו שזה שייך במיוחד לתקופת הבאת ביכורים, אבל השאר, התעקשו שאם זה שייך לתקופת הביכורים, שזו יכולה להיות תקופה לחוצה עם דאגות, מה יגדל, מה יהיה, מה נביא למי, אז בוודאי (“קל וחומר”) ששייך לכל המצבים האחרים גם בשאר ימות השנה, ובשאר ימות העולם.

תמיד קוראים את פרשת “כי תבוא” בשבוע לפני “סליחות”. במוצ”ש לפני ראש השנה, לפני חצות מתאספים בבתי הכנסת להגיד תפילות שנקראות “סליחות” (בכותל מתאספים גם לפנות בקר). אולי באופן סמלי לכן אומרים – תכלה שנה וקללותיה – אנחנו אמורים להשאיר את הפרשה עם הקללות מאחורינו, לסגור פרק, לנקות את הלוח ולפתוח דף חדש. הלואי שנלמד איך.

ושתהיה – שבת שלום.

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

על קצה המזלג: פרשת “כי תצא” – Shabbat Shalom: The Torah portion fo Ki Tetze (hebrew & english)

פרשת “כי תצא”

ידיד יקר נתן בי מבט אחד ואיבחן בדייקנות, “את מאוהבת”. הוא התכוון לשבועות האחרונים שלי ב”מכון פרדס” וללימוד האינטנסיבי שם, וכמו שכולם יודעים, כשמאוהבים, אי אפשר להפסיק לדבר על מה הוא אמר, ומה הוא עשה, ואיפה הוא היה ומה הוא לבש…  אם כך, בלב “מאוהב” זה, הרי כמה פרטים קצרים על פרשת השבוע הזה.

פרשת “כי תצא” עמוסה מאד בחוקים ומצוות. האמת, שיש בה מספר שיא: 74 מצוות! אבחר רק כמה שיספיק המקום כדי לא לטבוע בחומר, אבל שיהיה ברור שיש עשרות, ולכולן, גם אם בקריאה ראשונה הן נשמעות מוזרות, סיפורים ופירושים מעניינים.

נתחיל בדברים כ”ב 1-4: “לא תראה את שור אחיך או שיו (השה שלו) נידחים והתעלמת מהם, השב תשיבם לאחיך. ואם לא קרוב אחיך אליך ולא ידעתו, ואספתו אל תוך ביתך והיה עמך עד דרוש אחיך אותו והשבותו לו, וכן תעשה לחמורו וכן תעשה לשמלתו וכן תעשהלכל אבדת אחיך אשר תאבד ממנו ומצאתה…” (ותיכף נשלים את סוף הפסוק).

עד כמה צריך ללכת בשביל לקיים “השבת אבידה”? המדרש מספר על מישהו ששכח שתי תרנגולות ליד ביתו של רבי חנינא. רבי חנינא היה ידוע כעני מרוד – מדרשים אחרים מתארים את אשתו אופה זרדים בתנור המטבח רק כדי שהשכנים לא ידעו שאין להם כסף ללחם – לכן אפשר היה לחשוב שיהיו לו את כל ההצדקות בעולם לקחת את התרנגולות לעצמו. אבל הוא ידע מה כתוב כאן, ולפי המדרש, רבי חנינא לקח את התרנגולות הביתה וחיכה שהבעלים יחזרו. בנתיים, התרנגולות הטילו ביצים, יצאו אפרוחים, ועוד תרנגולות ותרנגולים… רבי חנינא לא ידע מה לעשות. כמו החכמים האמיתיים, הוא התיעץ עם אשתו (כל רב שמתיעץ עם אשתו ישר מקבל אצלי פלוס 10 נקודות, וגם, נכון, להיפך…) והיא אמרה לו, אין מה לעשות, זה לא שלנו ולנו אסור השימוש בתרנגולות, ביצים, אפרוחים, אבל גם אי אפשר להשתלט על הבלגן. מה נעשה? ניקח את כל התרנגולות לשוק ונקנה במקומם עיזים. עשו כן. אבל כעבור זמן מה, גם העיזים ילדו גדיים וכו וכו… אחרי שנתיים, חזר בעל התרנגולות ושאל את רבי חנינא אם אולי במקרה הוא זוכר ויודע מה עלה בגורלן של שתי תרנגולות שנשכחו כאן על אם הדרך. רבי חנינא לקח אותו לרפת. הוא הראה לו שתי פרות דשנות ואמר: בבקשה, קח לך את התרנגולות שלך סופסוף…

סוף הפסוק מוזר. כתוב “לא תוכל להתעלם”. מה פירוש? בשביל מה התוספת? המפרשים תוהים אם זו מצוה? אולי פשוט נאמר אסור לנו להתעלם כשאנחנו מוצאים משהו ששייך למישהו אחר? אם כך, צריך להחזיר את האבידה. זה פשוט. אך יש אלו שאומרים שזו כלל לא מצווה אלא עובדה, פועל רגיל בזמן עתיד שאומר שכך יהיה: “לא תוכל להתעלם”. זו לא הוראה מה לעשות, אלא – תוצאה: אם יהיה לנו כל כך אכפת מאדם אחר שכל כך נדאג לקיים את המצווה הזו של השבת אבידה, למרות הפיתוי וכו, אנחנו בעצמנו נהפוך יותר רגישים לזולת ו”לא נוכל להתעלם” מכאבם של אנשים אחרים.

מצוה נוספת שזוכה לבקורות נרחבות: “לא יהיה כלי גבר על אשה, ולא ילבש גבר שמלת אשה…” שוב, כל ענין יהודי יש לו דעות לכאן ולכאן. מה זה “כלי גבר”? חרב או מכנסיים? ואולי רק מכנסיים שמייצרים במיוחד לגברים? ומה עושים בסקוטלנד שם הגברים לובשים “חצאיות” או במקומות בהם הגברים לובשים גלביות? החשוב הוא שהתורה מבדילה בין גברים ונשים ורואה כל אחד כעולם אחר. לא שאחד שווה יותר ואחד שווה פחות – זה שטויות שיצקו לתוך הטקסט מחוסר הבנה. כך יכלו לבטל ולא להתמודד עם החוכמה שבו. אלא כמו במגן דוד: שני משולשים שווים שמונחים אחד על השני בצורה כזו שיש חלק משותף באמצע אבל מה שעושה את הכוכב לנוצץ זה הקטעים השונים בפינות. את הקטעים האלה צריך לשמור ולא לערבב, כמו חלקים בפאזל – אם כל חלקי הפאזל היו נראים אותו הדבר, לא היתה לנו תמונה. אם אין להם זויות – הם לא יוכלו להתחבר. השוני הוא מה שעושה את התמונה השלמה.  באופן אבסורדי, זה שהחלקים לא מהוקצעים, אלא עם פיתולים ופינות וכו – זה מה שעושה את החיבור לאפשרי, אם גם אתגרי. אפשר כמובן להתווכח על אופנת נשים וגברים ואיך להשליך את הפסוק למאה ה-21, אבל הנקודה היא שגברים ונשים הם לא זהים ושההבדל הוא לא רק “פנימי” אלא שפנימיות משליכה על החיצוני ולכן מתבטאת גם בה.

עוד מצווה קטנה שסבלה מפירושים מוזרים: “לא תלבש שעטנז, צמר ופשתים יחדיו”. אני זוכרת שאמרו לי, שזו אכן מצווה חכמה כי צמר מתכווץ בכביסה אחרת מפשתים!!! יתכן. אבל התורה לא התעניינה כל כך  בלאנדרומטים. דרך אחרת להסתכל על הטקסט מראה שצמר בא מחיות, ואילו פשתים – עשויים מצמח. ההפרדה הזו בין עולם החי והצומח, בין גבר ואשה, בין כהן ללוי, בין ארץ ישראל ושאר העולם, אינה באה להגיד “מי יותר טוב”, אלא לעזור לכל אחד למלא את תפקידו ומקומו בעולם בצורה הכי טובה. על דרך המשל, יש מנות שהן חמין ושם הכל מעורבב ומתבשל ביחד. כך, יש חוקים שהם לכולם: לא תרצח. לא תגנוב. שמור את יום השבת. אבל יש מנות במגישים בנפרד: תפוחי-אדמה, דג, עוף, לפתן, כי רק ככה יוצא להם הטעם הכי טוב, וכך יש גם לנו דברים שעלינו לעשות שהם שונים מהדברים שמחויב להם מישהו אחר לידנו.

את שאר 71 המצוות האחרות אפשר לקרוא בפרשה, כי בנימה זו, עלי לעזוב את המחשב ולקחת את עצמי לקניות ולמטבח. שתהיה שבת שלום.

 A dear friend took one look at me recently and diagnosed the situation correctly: “you’re in love”, he said, talking about my recent weeks at Pardes Institute in Jerusalem, studying intensively. As you must know too, people who are in love can’t help but talk about their beloved, what he looks like, what she wore, where he’s been, what she said… so perhaps it is in this spirit, that I share a few quick thoughts about this week’s parasha.

Parashat Ki Tetze, towards the end of the Book of Deuteronomy (thelast of the five) has a record number of commandments: 74! Lucky, we’re going to look at only 3 for now.

Deuteronomy 22, 1-4 says: “You shall not see your brother’s ox or his sheep driven away, and hide yourself from them; you shall surely bring them back unto your brother; And if your brother is not near you, and you know him not, then you shall bring it home to your house, and it shall be with you until your brother require it, and you shall restore it to him; And so shall you do with his ass; and so shall you do with his garment; and so shall you do with every lost thing of your brother’s, which he has lost, and you have found…” (and in a minute, we’ll complete the verse).

How far should one go when being trying to fulfill the mitzvah of “hashavat aveda”, returning a lost object? It’s told about someone who forget two chickens near Rabbi Chanina’s home. rabbi Chanina was known as a very poor and destitute person – other midrashim tell about his wife burning dry branches in their over so the neighbors wouldn’t know they don’t even have bread – so we might think he had all the justifications in the world to keep those chickens for himself. But, he must have known what it says here, and he took the chicken home. Meanwhile, the chicken laid eggs; chicks hatched; they grew and more chicken clucked around, and Rabbi Chanina wasn’t sure what to do. So, like other great sages, he consulted his wife (immediately getting an extra 10 point in Michal’s rabbis’ scale and vice versa…). She knew what it says here too. Still in order to gain some control of the mess, she suggested they take them to the market, and trade all those chickens for goats, until the true owner comes back. Some time has passed, and once again, those goats had kids etc etc. Rabbi Chanina and his wife went to the market again. By the time the original owner came back, Rabbi Chanina took him to the sty and showed him two cows, and said, “Please, take your chickens already…”

The end of the verse is peculiar: “You will not be able to turn away”. Why the addition? Commentators wonder if this is a mitzvah and we’re simply told not to turn away when we see a lost object. Then again, it might be a straight statement of a simple sentence in the future: this is what will happen. You will not be able to turn away. The result of paying such close attention to others’ pain is that we will be so sensitive that we will not be able to turn away.

Another commandment that receives much criticism is (22:5): “A woman must not wear men’s vessel, nor a man wear women’s vessel…” I’m purposely keeping “kli”, vessel, rather than be tempted to translate it into clothing, although usually that is how it’s understood. The question is asked, is “kli” just pants? What about in Scotland where men wear a kilt? What about places when men wear a jalabia? We can get lost in the details but the point of the Torah is that a man and a woman – that’s two different world. Neither is better or worse, but rather like in the Star of David: two triangles that overlap each other so that there is a common area, but what makes the star sparkling, is davka the differences. It’s like a puzzle picture. If all the pieces looked identical, we won’t have a picture. If the pieces didn’t have angles and corners, we wouldn’t be able to hook them together. Because the pieces are incomplete, it’s possible, though challenging, to put them together. We can argue how all this looks when we’re discussing 21st century fashion. Regardless, the point is that men and women are not the same, and that the difference is not “just internal”, but that internal things have to have an outward representation too.

Another mitzvah that received misunderstood commentaries is “sha’atnez”: “Do not mix wool and linen in the same garment…” I remember being told that we need to separate wool and linen since they shrink differently in the laundry. Perhaps. Though I doubt the Torah cared much about Laundromats and their strange outcomes (which resulted in my daughter’s old sweater now suitable for a doll…). Alternatively, wool comes from animals, and linen- from plant. Separating between animals and plants, men and women, the Land of Israel and the rest of the world, isn’t a matter of classifying who’s better but to help each one of us fulfill our role in the world in the best possible way. As  parable, some things are “chulent” – mix it all. We’re all commanded not to murder, not to steal, to keep Shabbat. But some dishes we serve separate: Potatoes. Fish. Vegies. Dessert. Because by giving them their unique place, we allow them to have their unique flavor. Likewise, we get to do things that are different from someone else next to us, for each of us has a different calling.

The rest of the 71 commandments, we can read over Shabbat, and with that, I’d better get back to the kitchen… Shabbat Shalom to us all.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Pardes: a new family summer adventure

There are a lot of things kids can do that drive their parents crazy. We all know it, as parents – and as the kids we all are (even if we opt to forget what we’ve done ourselves!). But then, there are also grand and wonderful things children do that warm a parent‘s heart so much, that your throat swells to a big balloon, and even if you had the words, they wouldn’t come out.

In our family, sometime as spring rolls around, I start with: “Guys, what do you want to do this summer”?

And as my children grow up (six of them, ages almost 16 to 26), they take longer to hmm and homm considering their options. There is work. And a chance to make some money. There is school. And friends. And tons of amazing programs. And lots more parties and other fun to have. And there is mom, with her ‘what do you want to do’ song and dance.

So while I can’t help nagging (trying to do it quietly and in moderation, though not always successful), I also remind myself that it’s time for me to get used to the fact that we probably won’t continue to spend all our summer days together, frolicking in a water park somewhere, driving around squished into a van searching for a bathroom in a rest area, freezing our tooshies off in a campsite huddled around a small fire, attending BBQ’s with long lost re-found friends, or flying overseas together. I realize, I need to grow up too, make my own plans, and let them make theirs.

So I did. I told them that I’m going to use all my vacation days on a dream: Like Tevya, I too want to sit in the Beit Midrash and study. I can’t think of anything better to do with my time then wake up to a shiur in Talmud, followed by another one in Midrash, Chasidut, and other Jewish text sprinkled with davening in between. I know, I know. People asked me, ‘and you do this for fun?!’ but yes, I do.

What I didn’t know was that 2 of my kids were going to sign up to do just that.

I searched and found Pardes summer course and quickly signed up. With great pride and excitement, I sent them the link to see. ‘Can I come too?’ they asked. ‘Well, if you insist’… I responded jokingly, amazed myself at what transpired.

For three weeks this past July, we shared a small Bak’a apartment from which we walked daily to Pardes; Each of us picked the classes that most spoke to him – or her, then we exchanged ideas and insights, discussing commentaries over falafel at lunch. For three weeks we lived Jerusalem. We visited family and friends. We checked out some of the tourists sites. We signed up for all the trips. We walked. We talked. We “pardessed”.

Lessons learned? Maybe it’s that the best thing we can do with someone we love is to share something we love with them. That is good to do no matter what age anyone is. If you can come to Pardes with your parents, or children, of any age, the sweetness of the Torah you’ll learn will multiply endlessly.

pardes

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment