One of the central moral lessons of the Torah is the importance of being aware that everything we have, all the blessings in our lives, come from God.  “The earth is the Lord’s, and all it contains,” says the Psalms.  It is not such a difficult concept to grasp.  We look around us, and we know that the world was here before us, and that we did not create it.

The purpose of so many of our mitzvot is to get us to acknowledge this fact.  Our prayers are filled with descriptions of God as the Creator of the world.  Saying blessings before eating food forces us to acknowledge God as the ultimate Creator before we enjoy the earth’s bounty.  In this morning’s Torah portion, we read v’achalta v’savata uverachta – “when you eat and are satisfied, then you will bless the Lord for the good land that God has given you.”  This is considered to be the origin of the mitzvah of reciting Birkat HaMazon, the Grace After Meals.  While the idea that we should be grateful may seem pretty obvious, we humans still struggle to maintain a regular awareness of our own dependance on God’s Creation.

This morning’s Torah portion, Parashat Ekev, warns us of an even more difficult form of gratitude to instill.  Moses is speaking to the Israelites before they enter Israel.  With God’s help, they will capture the Promised Land.  He tells them that things are then going to go really well for them.  Granted, they are going to work really hard for it, but all that hard work is going to pay off big time.

They will move in and build beautiful, secure homes.  They will plant crops, which will produce more than enough food.  Their flocks will multiply.  They will accumulate gold and silver.  It is going to be a good life.

Moses predicts what the Israelites will then say to themselves:  “My own power and the might of my own hand have won this wealth for me.”  (Deuteronomy 8:17)

It is true.  Those crops did not plant themselves.  The sheep and goats did not milk each other.  We did it.  We worked hard, and now we deserve everything we have earned.

That is the moment when the risk of forgetting is greatest.  When the Israelites say, “I deserve this.,” they will forget all that God has done for them to make it possible.  They will forget how God freed them Egypt, protected and led them through a parched wilderness that was full of snakes and scorpions, and gave them water to drink and manna to eat.

“Remember,” Moses says, “that it is the Lord who gives you the power to get wealth.”  (Deuteronomy 8:18)

From there, it is a slippery slope to idolatry.  The people will abandon God and turn to other idols.

How does a person acheive the American Dream?  Part of the mythos of our nation is that a person can succeed through hard work, no matter his or her religion, ethnicity, or background.  Rather than relying upon the state, the autonomous individual must take charge of his or her own fate.  For a person with the right drive and talent, there is nothing that cannot be achieved.

Let us set aside the question of whether this myth is true of twenty-first century America, because the idea of it is certainly still with us.  The belief that anything is possible, and that a person’s success is determined exclusively by the work of his hands, is one of the distinguishing features of American culture.

In an Op-Ed entitled “What Does it Mean to be White” that recently appeared in the Seattle Times, Professor Robin DiAngelo, who herself is white, suggests that most of us are largely unaware of the extent to which race determines our fate.  She points out that most of us develop our ideas about a subject by taking in information from the particular cultural waters in which we swim.  It is extremely difficult to gain the perspectives of those who swim in different waters.

A 2012 poll by Gallup investigated attitudes about the role of African Americans in the United States criminal justice system.  The question was asked:  “Do you think the American justice system is biased against black people?”  Note that the question is not to determine whether or not it is true, but rather what people believe about it.  68% of African Americans said yes, the criminal justice system is biased against them.  25% of whites claimed to believe that the criminal justice system is biased against blacks.  That is a huge discrepancy that suggests that the cultural waters that black and white Americans swim in are quite different.

This week, we have seen this on display as huge outpourings of anger following the tragic shooting of African American teenager, Michael Brown, in Ferguson, Missouri.

Professor DiAngelo points out that dictionary definitions of the term “racism” tend to focus on explicit attitudes of racial prejudice and the intentional actions that result from them.  Most of us probably think of ourselves as good, reasonable, fair people who give everyone an equal chance.  I am not a racist because I do not engage in actions that are disciminatory towards other people because of their race.

Social scientists define racism differently.  It is a “multidimensional, highly adaptive system… that ensures an unequal distribution of resources among racial groups.”

In other words, regardless of my own personal attitudes and actions, I still might be unconsciously benefitting from a racist society.

I stand here as white, Jewish, and male.  I consider myself to be good and fair.  I do not intentionally discriminate against anyone.  I speak up on behalf of tolerance and equality in conversations.  I consider these to be important values when making voting decisions.  Yet, as a white, Jewish, male living in America, I have benefitted from “an unequal distribution of resources based among racial groups” in astounding ways.

I was raised in a Jewish culture that treasures children, education, and strong family connections.  I have always lived in a safe and supportive, two parent household.  I was raised in a home that valued education, and that paid for that education by sending me to expensive Jewish day schools from third through eighth grade and sent me to an out of state university.  I lived in neighborhoods and participated in social circles that were dominated by well-educated, middle class professionals who were mostly white.  There was always healthy food on the table, and I was encouraged to be involved in organized sports.  I always had access to high quality health care.

I have never encountered a barrier in my life that was placed there because of my race, religion, or gender.

When I put all of this together, I have to admit that have I benefitted tremendously from a life of privilege.  The odds of my being successful in life were enormously high compared to someone who was not born with all of these opportunities.  And I did not do a single thing to earn those advantages.

So who deserves the credit for my prosperity?  I certainly worked hard for it.  I spent a lot of years in college and rabbinical school.  Is it not “the might of my own hands” that has brought me to this point in my life?

Call it blessing, or call it luck – I was born in the wealthiest country, at the most prosperous time in human history, to a family with white skin, into a religion and culture that enjoyed a degree of acceptance that is unprecedented in its history.  What are the odds?

Not high.

With regard to racism, Professor DiAngelo does not suggest that I have done anything wrong in benefitting from these opportunities.  We did not create a system with embedded racism, but we have inherited it.  She concludes, “We must take responsibility to see and challenge it both within and around us.”

She brings our attention to the same issue that Moses brings to the Israelites about to cross the Jordan River.

Moses understands human nature very well.  He understands that it is difficult to maintain a perspective on the big picture.  We tend to be wrapped up in our experiences.  When things are going well, we tend to think that we deserve it.  It is so easy to overlook the many advantages and opportunities, without which we would not have had the ability to work so hard and have that work pay off.  But that is exactly what we are asked to do.  “Remember that it is the Lord who gives you the power to get wealth.”  We must be aware.  We must be grateful.  And we must work to create a society that offers more people an opportunity to succeed in life.

In January 1914, Henry Ford*1* raised his workers’ salaries to $5 a day.  His competitors were paying $2.25.  He also shortened the work day from 9 to 8 hours.
The popular reason is that Ford wanted his workers to be able to afford to purchase the cars that they were manufacturing.  He wanted to increase demand for his product.
This is a somewhat simplistic explanation.
The real reason was to reduce worker attrition.  It was incredibly expensive to have workers who might or might now show up, and if they did show up, were more often than not drunk.  In 1913, Ford employed 52,000 men to keep a workforce of 14,000.
In increasing the wages, Ford did not just write bigger checks.  Half of the wages were paid as bonuses and were dependent on a number of factors.  Ford had a “Socialization Organization” that sent people to workers’ homes to make sure they were doing things the “American Way.”  No gambling or drinking.  Immigrants had to learn English.  Women could not get the bonus unless they were single and supporting a family.  Men could not get the bonus if their wives worked.
By reducing the workday from nine to eight hours, it allowed Ford to schedule three back-to-back workshifts per day.
But he did not just raise wages to improve efficiency.  Ford had much bigger ideas  He writes in his autobiography:
“The kind of workman who gives the business the best that is in him is the best kind of workman a business can have. …[I]f a man feels that his day’s work is not only supplying his basic need, but is also giving him a margin of comfort and enabling him to give his boys and girls their opportunity and his wife some pleasure in life, then his job looks good to him and he is free to give it of his best. This is a good thing for him and a good thing for the business.”
It worked. The reason it worked for those employees is not because the wages went up and the workday shortened in and of themselves.  It’s that it made working at Ford better than the alternatives.  Morale and loyalty were high because workers knew that they were getting a better deal at Ford than they could get anywhere else.
In 1913, Ford’s workers made 170,000 cars.  The next year, after these changes, they made 202,000 cars.  It went up and up from there.  Ford’s approach was adopted across the American economy, and played a big role in building the American middle class
In recent years, this has fallen apart.  Companies no longer take the approach that they need to invest in their employees the way that Ford did starting in 1914.
Over the last several decades, corporate profits relative to GDP has risen significantly.*2*  At the same time, employee compensation relative to GDP has fallen.  This is reflected in workers’ stagnant wages while corporations earn huge profits.
It seems to me, anecdotally, that workers today do not feel the kind of loyalty to their employers that Ford’s workers did in the 19-teens.
The Torah would seem to support Henry Ford’s ideas.  It is ironic because, in addition to being a business genius, Henry Ford was an anti-semite, publishing a series of articles in his newspapers that were later reprinted in a four volume set of booklets called The International Jew, which fanned the flames of all of the classic stereotypes.  It was admired by Nazis and reprinted in Egypt in Arabic as recently as 2001.
Henry Ford was apparently misinformed about Jewish values.
This morning’s Torah portion states: “When you enter another man’s vineyard, you may eat as many grapes as you want, until you are full, but you must not put any in your vessel.  When you enter another man’s field of standing grain, you may pluck ears with your hand; but you must not put a sickle to your neighbor’s grain.”*3*
This has been understood by our tradition to refer specifically to laborers.*4*  Workers in the field are allowed to eat their fill while they are working.
Why does the Torah require this?  Some commentators say that it is a benefit to which they are entitled – part of a worker’s pay.
The Mishnah asks how much a worker is permitted to eat?  Of course, there is a disagreement.  Rabbi Eleazar ben Hisma says that a worker cannot eat more than the value of his wages.  The Sages permit it, but warn that he should not be so gluttonous as to close the door against himself.*5*
In other words, if a worker is too greedy, his boss is not going to rehire him, or he’ll eat up all the profits, and he won’t have a job for very long.  So he should be smart about it.  To summarize, being able to eat while they work is a benefit to which agricultural workers are contractually entitled.
The Talmud adds that the worker is not allowed to transfer this right to family members.  It is only for the worker himself.
The commentary Torah Temimah explains that if the worker does not have to spend his own money on food while he is working, it will improve his morale physically and spiritually, thereby making him a better worker.  In other words, it makes good business sense.  Like Henry Ford more than 3,000 years later, the Torah recognizes that workers will be more productive when they feel that their basic needs are being met.
A similar rationale, it seems, has led many of the high tech corporations in our area offer all sorts of supplementary benefits on their campuses ranging from free gourmet food, to exercise facilities, laundromats, daycare centers, volleyball courts, and more – anything to make workers stay at work longer and boost productivity.
A medieval work, Meirat Enayim does not think that the right to eat produce while working is a benefit.  If it was, the worker should be allowed to transfer that benefit to his wife, children, or anyone else for that matter.  Rather, says the Meirat Enyaim, it is an act of grace and kindness.
Even though, according to strict justice, a worker should not be allowed to eat the products of his labor, the Torah is telling us to go beyond what strict justice requires.  A worker should not have to spend all day long handling food that he is not allowed to eat.  That would be cruel.  We have to act with compassion and not allow a person over whom we have power to suffer, even if the details of the contract would allow it.  Just because something is legal does not mean that it is right.
The Torah reminds us that there are some things that are more important than the bottom line.  This is such an important lesson in 2013.  We are more removed than ever geographically and socio-economically from the production of the things that we consume, whether strawberries picked by migrant workers in Watsonville, iPhones assembled by 20 year olds brought in from the farms in China, or t-shirts sewed in overcrowded sweatshops in Bangladesh.
Our prosperity depends not just on the opportunity for everyone in our global society to earn decent wages, but also on the compassion that is afforded to those with the least power among us, and the ability for everyone to live a life of dignity.
*1*http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2012/03/04/the-story-of-henry-fords-5-a-day-wages-its-not-what-you-think/
*2*http://www.slate.com/blogs/business_insider/2013/07/30/henry_ford_s_150th_birthday_his_fight_for_higher_wages.html
*3*Deuteronomy 23:25-26
*4*I got some ideas for this D’var Torah from AJWS’s D’var Tzedek, written by Rabbi Joshua Rabin.  It can be found at http://ajws.org/what_we_do/education/publications/dvar_tzedek/5773/ki_tetze.html?autologin=true&utm_source=education&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=20130812-E-DT
*5*Bava Metzia 7:5

I imagine you heard about the particularly insensitive, offensive, and misguided comments by Missouri Representative Todd Akin earlier this week.  Just to review, in case you missed it, he said in an interview with regard to his position on abortion in the case of rape that pregnancy in such situations is “really rare” and that “if it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down.”  He claimed that this was based on something a doctor had said.
These comments prompted a frenzy over the past week, in which the Republican Party denounced Akin and asked him to step out of the race, and individuals and groups throughout the media and across the political spectrum jumped in.  Akin later apologized for his use of the term “legitimate rape,” claiming that he had misspoken, and was really talking about forcible rape.  He also admitted that rape does sometimes result in pregnancy.  But he reiterated his opposition to abortion.
In fact, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists this week stated that, “each year in the U.S., 10,000 to 15,000 abortions occur among women whose pregnancies are a result of reported rape or incest.”  The number that are carried to term is unknown.
Setting aside the Representative’s inflammatory comments, and his apparent ignorance of basic reproductive science, his comments raise questions that Jews often wonder about.
What does Judaism have to say abortion?  Do the circumstances matter?  What about in the case of rape?
This issue also presents an even broader question:  On an issue like abortion, which has come to be such a divisive public policy issue, how should our community posture itself?
Regarding the question of abortion according to Jewish law, the Torah, in the Book of Exodus, presents a legal situation that helps us understand the issue.  If two men are fighting, and one of them accidentally strikes a pregnant woman standing nearby, such that she suffers a miscarriage, the punishment for that man is a fine.  It is not considered to be murder, because the fetus does not yet have the status of being a person.
Based on this, the Rabbis of the Mishnah, two thousand years ago, discuss a situation in which a woman is going through a difficult labor, such that her own life is at risk.  When that happens, an abortion is to be performed because the life of the mother takes precedence.  Once a majority of the fetus’s body has emerged from the womb, however, it is considered to be a person whose life is of equal status.
In Judaism, therefore, personhood begins at birth.  The fetus is not a human being, although it does have some status as a “partial nefesh,” a partial life, on the way to becoming a full human being.  Abortion is permitted at any point during pregnancy in order to save the life of the mother.  Over the centuries, there were differences in opinion with regard to how liberal to be in permitting abortions, but nobody disagrees about that basic principal.
In modern times, medical advances and our understanding of human psychology have required us to address concerns that traditional sources could not consider.
The Conservative Movement’s Committee on Jewish Law and Standards has addressed these questions in several different Teshuvot, or Jewish legal rulings.  A 1983 decision held that “an abortion is justifiable if a continuation of pregnancy might cause the mother severe physical or psychological harm, or when the fetus is judged by competent medical opinion as severely defective.”*1*
Our concern with psychological harm to the mother grants a lot of latitude to a Jewish woman wrestling with this decision.  Certainly in a case of rape, or some other traumatic situation, a woman should be free to make the decision that she feels is right for her.  But because the fetus still has some sort of status as a potential future person, other reasons for a termination might be problematic under Jewish law.
So Judaism’s stance on abortion is somewhat nuanced.  It’s limited permissiveness is not based on a woman’s right to control her own body, but upon the principal of saving the mother’s life.
On a public issue like this one, in which the impact is on the choices available to individual Americans, and in which Judaism has a particular religious position that would guide Jewish women’s decision-making, what should the Jewish community’s posture be?
Is the abortion debate in America something that Judaism ought to have a say in?
It is an interesting question, because Jewish law falls somewhere in the middle between those who think that all abortions should be outlawed and those who hold that there should be no restrictions whatsoever, and that women should be free to choose.
But there are other issues at stake.  Because many, if not most, of those who would outlaw abortions, hold their positions out of religious conviction.  And so what we have is members of particular religious communities seeking to impose their religious beliefs on every individual in the country.  If this were to happen, it would mean that observant Jewish women facing a tragic situation would not be able to turn to our tradition for guidance.  That right would be taken away, and the decision forced on them by a different religion.
The Jewish experience for thousands of years of living as a minority group under the domination of another culture, often a religiously affiliated culture, should make us particularly sensitive to religious coercion.  In the United States, with its Constitutionally-guaranteed tradition of religious freedom, we are free to practice Judaism in a way that is completely unprecedented in the history of our people, which is is why we should be concerned about attempts to restrict access to abortion.
And because the nuanced Jewish position says that we look at each case individually, and the circumstances that each woman is facing, the Jewish community has an interest in the government not placing limits on abortion access.  It should be left as a decision between a woman, her doctor, and anyone else whom she chooses to consult with, whether a partner, a friend, or a religious counselor.
This morning’s Torah portion, Shoftim, is all about the requirement to establish a society that is governed with a concern for justice.  Tzedek Tzedek Tirdof, we read at the beginning of the parashah.  “Justice, justice you shall pursue.”
In ancient Israel, great emphasis was placed on creating a system protected the rights of individuals, that was fair to all, that provided opportunities for people to advance in life, and that did not favor the rich over the poor.
Ever since, Jews have been involved in this pursuit of a just society.  This was true when Jews had autonomy, and it was also true when Jews were living as citizens in the countries in which they resided.
That is why we have a special awareness of how a religious majority can impose its tyranny over other groups.  For that reason, it should be of particular concern to the Jewish community that the government should not be involved in restricting access to abortion services based on a particular religious outlook.  In some senses, it comes down to a matter of religious freedom, as well as to justice.

*1*CJLS Responsa 1980-1990, p. 817.