Tag Archives: Torah

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

October 2, 2025

Posted under

Divrei Torah (Weekly Sermons), High Holidays

Comments

Leave a comment

Too Much Truth, Not Enough Peace – Yom Kippur 5786

Yom Kippur is not about being right. It is about being honest — with God, with each other, and with ourselves. And one of the Talmud’s most famous, well-known, and haunting stories shows what happens when we confuse truth with righteousness.

HaTanur shel Aknai — “The Oven of Aknai,”[i] — is a story that, somehow, in more than 18 years as a Rabbi, I have never once taught, even though it is often cited as a foundational text for Conservative Judaism. 

This is not just a story about rabbis long ago. It is about how we wound one another in the name of righteousness — and Yom Kippur is the one day when we cannot hide from that truth.

The two major figures in this story are Rabbi Eliezer ben Hyrcanus and Rabbi Yehoshua. Rabbi Eliezer was the greatest of Yohanan ben Zakkai’s students. Rabbi Yehoshua was considered the second most prominent. Together, the two of them smuggled their teacher out of Jerusalem in a coffin during the Roman siege, shortly before the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 CE.

Rabbi Eliezer is married to Imma Shalom, the sister of Rabban Gamliel II, who is the Nasi, the leader of the Sanhedrin. Their son is Hyrcanus.

Rabbi Akiva, who looks to both of them as his teachers, will also enter our story.

Our tale opens with the Rabbis debating the kashrut of a particular kind of oven called an Akhnai, which means “snake.”  It is called that because it is formed by a bunch of pieces of pottery arranged in a coiling shape around an open cavity. Something impure has been found inside this oven, perhaps a dead snake. Now they have to determine the oven’s status.

The legal question is whether such an oven can become ritually impure.  If it is an oven, then it can, and it is impure. If it is a broken vessel, then it cannot, and it is pure. To be clear, there is no practical implication, as the need to maintain ritual purity was destroyed along with the Temple.

Rabbi Eliezer rules that it is a “broken vessel,” and thus, pure.  The Ḥakhamim, the Sages, take the opposite viewpoint, determining it to be an intact oven, and thus impure.

During the deliberations, Rabbi Eliezer answers every possible answer in the world (kol teshuvot she’ba’olam), but the Sages reject every single one.

Departing from logic, Eliezer turns to the supernatural. “If the law is in accordance with my opinion, let this carob tree prove it.” Suddenly, the carob tree bursts from the ground and flies hundreds of feet through the air.

“We don’t accept proof from a carob tree,” object the Sages.

“Well then,” Rabbi Eliezer exclaims, “let this stream prove it!” Suddenly, the stream reverses course and begins to run uphill. 

“We don’t accept proof from a stream,” object the Sages.

Moving further to the absurd, Rabbi Eliezer announces, “If I am right, let the walls of the study house prove it.” The walls begin to shake, about to crush the entire Sanhedrin.

Rabbi Yehoshua steps in and issues a brusque order, “If Torah scholars are contending with each other over the law, what is it to you.”

The walls stop moving, frozen in place at an angle, unwilling to fall out of deference to Rabbi Yehoshua, but unable to straighten out of deference to Rabbi Eliezer.

Finally, Rabbi Eliezer goes for broke. “If the law is according to me, Heaven will prove it.” A Divine Voice suddenly booms through the study hall: “Why do you argue with Rabbi Eliezer? The law is in accordance with him in every matter.”

Case closed, it would seem.

But Rabbi Yehoshua stands up and declares, quoting Torah itself, lo bashamayim hi — “It is not in heaven.”[ii]

Check out this musical video telling of the story of the Oven of Akhnai.

That would seem to end the debate, but the Sages are not finished. They collect every single thing that Rabbi Eliezer had declared pure and set them ablaze in a bonfire. Later that day, after he leaves, they vote to excommunicate him.

“Someone has to tell him,” they murmur among themselves. Rabbi Akiva steps forward. “I’ll go, lest someone tactless goes and says something to cause Eliezer to destroy the world.”

So Rabbi Akiva dresses himself in black, in an expression of mourning, goes to his teacher, and sits a distance of four cubits away (about 6 feet), the distance required from someone who has been excommunicated.

Looking up, Rabbi Eliezer asks, “Akiva, what is different about today from other days?”

“My teacher,” he responds, “it appears that your colleagues are distancing themselves from you.”

Understanding the euphemism, Rabbi Eliezer rends his garments, removes his shoes, and sits on the ground, mourning. As tears pour from his eyes, the Talmud relates, one third of the world’s olives, one third of its wheat, and one third of its barley are struck.  Some say that even the dough in the kneading bowls spoiled. Others relate that on that day, everywhere that Rabbi Eliezer casts his gaze burns to the ground.

At that very moment, it so happens, Rabban Gamliel is on a boat. A large wave suddenly swells up to drown him. He understands right away, “It seems that this is on account of what we did to Rabbi Eliezer ben Hyrcanus.”

He stands up and declares, “Ruler of the Universe, it is revealed and known before You that it was not for my own honor, nor for that of my father’s house that I acted. It was for Your honor, so that disputes would not proliferate in Israel.” At that, the sea calms.

Our tale returns to Rabbi Eliezer’s home, where his wife, Imma Shalom, which literally means “Mother of Peace,” places herself on watch. She does not allow her husband to lower his head to the ground in a prayer called Taḥanun, “Supplication,” out of fear that if he were to bemoan his fate, it would bring Divine punishment upon her brother. 

One day, something happens. Perhaps she miscalculated the day of the new moon, when Taḥanun is not said. Perhaps a beggar came to her door asking for bread. Whatever the cause, Imma Shalom leaves her husband alone in his prayers.

When she enters his room, she sees Eliezer with his head lowered on the ground. “Get up,” she tells him, “for you have killed my brother.” Just then, a shofar sounds from Rabban Gamliel’s home, announcing his death.

To continue the story, we must jump to another tractate of Talmud, which picks up some years later. Rabbi Eliezer has fallen ill, and so Rabbi Akiva and some of his colleagues go to visit him. It is a Friday afternoon. As they enter, they see Eliezer’s son, Hyrcanus, trying to remove the Tefillin from his father. Tefillin are not supposed to be worn on Shabbat.

Eliezer becomes angry and insults his son, who leaves the room, exasperated. As he sees Akiva and the others, Hyrcanus laments, “It appears that my father has lost his mind.”

Eliezer overhears him and shouts from the next room, “It is Hyrcanus and his mother who are crazy! How can they neglect the preparations for the Torah’s laws of Shabbat, like preparing hot food and lighting candles, which are punishable by stoning, and concern themselves with matters that are only prohibited by Rabbinic law?”

(In other words, there are more religiously important things that Hyrcanus should be worried about.)

“Yup, that sounds like Eliezer,” say Akiva and the Sages. Judging him not to be insane, they enter the room and take their seats four cubits away.

“Why are you here?” the elderly Rabbi demands.

“We have come to study Torah,” they demurred, afraid to tell him it is because he is sick.

“Why have you not come until now?”

“We did not have any spare time.”

“I would be shocked if these ones die a natural death.” Eliezer mutters, his way of predicting that they will be tortured to death by the Romans.

Then Rabbi Akiva asks, “How will I die?”

“Yours will be worse than theirs.”

Then Eliezer raises his arms and places them on his heart, crying, “Woe to you, my two arms, as they are like two Torah scrolls that are being rolled up, [never to be opened again]. I have learned much Torah, but I have not taken away from my teachers even as much as a dog lapping from the sea. I have taught much Torah, but my students have taken away from me only what a paintbrush can remove from a tube of paint.

“I can teach three hundred halakhot about a snow white leprous mark, but nobody has ever asked me about them. I can teach three hundred halakhot with regard to the planting of cucumbers, but no person has every asked me anything about them, except for Akiva ben Yosef.” Eliezer then describes the incident.

And so, chastened, the Sages ask him about the ritual purity of a number of different items that he and the Sages had once disagreed about, “What is the halakhah regarding the ritual purity of a ball of leather stuffed with rags…” and so on. They are trying to find out if he has changed his mind and is willing to defer to the majority.

“Those things can all become impure, but you can purify them by dipping them in a mikvah just as they are, without needing to unwrap them.” The Sages had held that they needed to be unwrapped. Meaning, Eliezer has not conceded. 

“Well then,” they follow up. “What about a shoe that has not yet been taken off its shoe form?  Is it a complete vessel, and therefore subject to impurity, or is it not yet complete?”

Tahor. “It is pure…” and with that final word, his soul leaves his body.

Rabbi Yehoshua stands up and declares hutar ha’neder, hutar ha’neder. “The ban is released. The ban is released.” 

After Shabbat, Rabbi Akiva comes upon the funeral procession. Striking his flesh until his blood flows to the earth, he declares, “My father, my father, the chariot of Israel and its horsemen” (II Kings 2:12). I have many coins, but I do not have a money changer to whom to give them.” In other words, “I have so many questions, but after your death, I have no one who can answer them.”

And here our tragic story ends.

Who is to blame? Let’s start with the Sages. They refuse to hear any of Eliezer’s logical proofs. Is it just that they are not convinced or that they have better arguments? Or, could it be personal? Does the mere fact that Eliezer holds a position automatically disqualify it?

The Sages rightly uphold the principle of majority rule, but then they go overboard. They humiliate their colleague in public, and then socially ostracize him for the rest of his life, this man who was the greatest scholar of the generation. They want to punish him. Rabban Gamliel justifies it in the name of order. Then they wait until it is too late to lift the ban.

What about Rabbi Eliezer? He is stubborn to the extreme. He refuses to acknowledge the authority of the democratic process, which holds that the law is determined by majority vote.

He holds on to grudges dearly. He lashes out at his colleagues, and the world in general, to express his rage and frustration. What hurts him more, that nobody will acknowledge he is right, or that his colleagues cannot stand him?

Eliezer is so committed to the truth of Torah, as only he knows it to be, that he cannot see the humanity of anyone around him. He even takes it out on his poor son, Hyrcanus, who is just trying to help. Eliezer is literally right, with Heaven on his side, all the time.  But what does that get him? 

When the Sages, including his lifelong colleague Yehoshua and beloved student Akiva, show up at the end of Eliezer’s life, they give him a chance to back down, to accept the majority ruling of the Sages on what are really a series of fairly inconsequential cases. His need to be right in all things persists to the very end.

His final word is not forgiveness, not blessing, not love — but purity. Tahor. What a devastating way for a great life to end. It begs the question: What word do I want to leave behind when my time comes

This story, set in the opening decades of the Rabbinic project, is a warning. The Rabbis, as scholars who are attempting to rebuild a Judaism that can function without a Temple and a priesthood, are a very small group. They do not have any power or authority at this point. Even the process by which they reach decisions is still up for grabs.

What do we learn from this story? Does it demand that one forego one’s personal convictions to follow the majority? Is it a warning about the potential tyranny of majority rule? Is it about inflated egos? Is it about revenge? Is this a story about broken friendships and family schisms?

Is this a story about politics, or law, or social cohesion, or visiting the sick? Is it about truth, or purity?

Many in this room are worried about the current state of the world, of the politics and social divisions that seem increasingly out of control and even violent. No doubt, we look at those on the other side and see their flaws. We see their smug certainty, their hypocrisy, their vengefulness, their stubborn refusal to compromise. 

But today is Yom Kippur. Today is not a day when we blame others. It is a day when we look inward at our own souls. It is a day not only for identifying the specific things we have done wrong, our “sins,” as it were, but also for digging deeper and probing our motivations. 

At the opening of Yom Kippur, before Kol Nidrei even, we recite a formula three times: bishivah shel ma’alah, uvishivah shel matah. “By the heavenly court, and by the earthly court. With the consent of the Almighty and the consent of the congregation, we hereby give permission to pray with the sinners.”

The Talmudic origin of this prayer[iii] insists that, on a fast day, even those who are deserving of excommunication — the Rabbi Eliezers of the world — must be present with us in worship. Because without them, our prayers cannot rise. That is a radical Yom Kippur message: we do not get to decide who is too flawed to be in this room. If they are excluded, so are we.

So I look around, “Oh that guy, he’s a big sinner. Her over there. Oh boy.” Of course, they are looking around at me too, thinking the same thing. On Yom Kippur especially, it is not our job, our task, or even our right, to list the sins that others have committed. Only God sits on the throne of judgment.

My job is to look at myself. And to do it in community, surrounded by all of the other sinners who I trust are doing the same. 

Are there people I’ve harmed, relationships I’ve damaged, feelings I’ve hurt, not out of malice, but out of righteousness? Have I cut myself off from others out of a sense of moral “purity?” Have I stood in the way of reconciliation?

On this Day of Atonement, may we not cling to being right at the expense of being kind. May our pursuit of truth never cost us compassion. And may the final word of our lives not be tahor — but shalom.

[i] BT Bava Metzia 59b and Sanhedrin 68a

[ii] At this point, the Talmud digresses into an Amoraic discussion about the significance of Rabbi Yehoshua’s citation of “It’s not in heaven.” It is not part of the story itself, and it changes its emphasis and significance, so I left it out of my telling. This is the discussion from the Steinsaltz edition of the Talmud (explanatory text in non-bold):

The Gemara asks: What is the relevance of the phrase “It is not in heaven” in this context? Rabbi Yirmeya says: Since the Torah was already given at Mount Sinai, we do not regard a Divine Voice, as You already wrote at Mount Sinai, in the Torah: “After a majority to incline” (Exodus 23:2). Since the majority of Rabbis disagreed with Rabbi Eliezer’s opinion, the halakha is not ruled in accordance with his opinion. The Gemara relates: Years after, Rabbi Natan encountered Elijah the prophet and said to him: What did the Holy One, Blessed be He, do at that time, when Rabbi Yehoshua issued his declaration? Elijah said to him: The Holy One, Blessed be He, smiled and said: My children have triumphed over Me; My children have triumphed over Me.

[iii] BT Keritut 6b

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

August 31, 2025

Posted under

Uncategorized

Comments

Leave a comment

Guardians at the Gates – Shoftim 5875

The opening verse of this morning’s Torah portion is:

שֹׁפְטִ֣ים וְשֹֽׁטְרִ֗ים תִּֽתֶּן־לְךָ֙ בְּכׇל־שְׁעָרֶ֔יךָ אֲשֶׁ֨ר ה֧׳ אֱלֹקֶ֛יךָ נֹתֵ֥ן לְךָ֖ לִשְׁבָטֶ֑יךָ וְשָׁפְט֥וּ אֶת־הָעָ֖ם מִשְׁפַּט־צֶֽדֶק׃ 

You shall appoint judges and officers in all of your gates, in all the settlements that the LORD your God is giving you, and they shall judge the people with due justice. (Deuteronomy 16:18)

Rashi, the author of our go-to study guide for the Torah, understands this verse in a straightforward sense. Moses is instructing the Israelites to appoint judges, and court officers who will enforce their judgments, in every city, in all of the tribal regions in the Promised Land that the Israelites are about to inherit. The text continues with specific instructions for those judges and officers to judge justly, to not accept bribes or play favorites.

For any society to operate with trust and social cohesion, having just officials who administer the law impartially is a necessity. While the opening of our parashah may seem obvious, its fulfillment is far from a given. 

But there is a grammatical detail that Rashi, and many of the commentators, ignore. Moses delivers his instructions in the second person, singular. “You” – just you – “shall appoint magistrates and officials…”

Who is Moses talking to? Which individual has the authority and ability to make all of these appointments? Is it a grammatical mistake? Is it a collective “you?”

Our Etz Ḥayim Ḥumash refers to a teaching by Isaiah ben Jacob Ha’Levi Horowitz, who understands Moses’ instruction as metaphorically applying to each one of us, individually.

Horowitz lived in the late sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. Originally from Prague, he made aliyah to Eretz Yisrael in 1621, moving to Jerusalem, where he was appointed the leader of the Ashkenazi community living there. After he was taken hostage and ransomed, Horowitz moved North to Tsfat and T’veriah, in 1625.

Horowitz wrote his magnum opus, Shnei Luchot HaBrit, as a kind of ethical will. His son later published it in his father’s name. Horowitz is known as the Sh’lah, after the acronym of his famous work. Shnei Luchot HaBrit had a tremendous influence on Ashkenazi Judaism, particularly Hassidism, and popularized many kabbalistic ideals.

Drawing on the opening verse in this morning’s Torah portion, the Shlah cites an ancient kabbalistic teaching that identifies seven gateways to the human soul: two eyes, two ears, one mouth, and two nostrils. To these seven gateways, the Shlah adds two additional orifices that are a bit lower down. He says that the opening verse of our parashah alludes to a moral imperative on the individual.[i]

We must guard these seven (or nine) gateways with extreme care, he says. To what we see with our eyes, what we hear with out ears, what we speak or ingest with our mouths, and the anger which flares from our nostrils. He adds a bit more about our lower gateways, but I am going to skip over those details this morning.

In short, he concludes, these are the gateways of the body, over which one must appoint for oneself judges and officers who will constantly judge oneself. This is the reason the Torah added the words titein l’kha, “place for yourself,” in the singular. Moses is speaking to each one of us.

What the Shlah does not say explicitly is that Parashat Shoftim always occurs on the first Shabbat of the month of Elul. This is the month when we begin our spiritual preparation for the High Holidays, when we engage in Cheshbon NaHefesh, taking account of our souls, as a necessary step in the process of teshuvah, repentance.

The Shlah focuses mostly on what comes out of our soul’s gateways. By controlling how we interact with the physical world around us, he points out, we can keep ourselves from sin and achieve a state of peace, holiness, and purity.

Lately, I have found myself troubled much more by a kind of input into my soul that the Shlah could never have imagined, an input that I fear is having a terrible impact on me. Specifically, the digital content that pervades nearly every waking moment of my life.

I am not going to go through all of the evidence of how harmful our screens are to us. We know that they are harmful to our children’s learning and development. And while parents struggle to place some limits on our kids’ screen use, many of us know that we are just as addicted.

By this point, we know it is bad for our mental health and our social interactions, our relationships with family members and friends. Our attention spans and our patience. We know that book reading is down and loneliness is up. 

We know how social media drives us into echo chambers and exacerbates polarization. We know, intellectually, that the content that appears on our news feed, our Instagram reel, Tik Tok, Facebook, and whatever other social media platforms we use are driven by algorithms designed to feed us content that is tailor-made to keep our eyes glued as long as possible.

This system has us paying for the device and the internet connection. This entry fee grants us the right to have our attention sold as a product to the advertiser.

I see the ad. I recognize it for the click-bait that it is. I know that it likely contains something malicious. And I click on it anyways.

How many of us have had the experience of having a verbal conversation with someone and then, within a short time, we start receiving ads for the very thing we were talking about?

The rapid rise of ChatGPT and the other generative language AI platforms has introduced even more potentially isolating and dehumanizing dimensions to our lives. The amount of computer-generated content that enters through our gateways keeps rising, while our ability to distinguish what is human from what is AI-generated decreases.

To be clear, I am not anti-technology. The advances that we have seen are incredible, and offer the possibility to improve human life and flourishing, to combat disease and poverty, to help us solve the greatest social and global challenges.

The technology itself is not inherently good or evil. That depends on us. We get to decide how to use it – and how not to. The nature of fast-changing technology makes it very difficult to impose top-down guardrails and restrictions. 

My hope is that enough of us can get sufficiently fed up with the harmful uses of these devices that we begin to impose guardrails on our own use, and then the way that they are used begins to change for the better.

Although he never would have imagined his words being used in such a way, the Shlah’s interpretation of our parashah is entirely fitting to the present moment. It is up to each of us to appoint judges and officers over the gateways of our souls.

Over the next month, as we prepare for the High Holidays, this is what I will be working on. My Cheshbon HaNefesh will be taking stock of how I am utilizing technology, how the content that it feeds me is impacting my soul, and how I can better empower my own judges and officers. I invite you to join me. 

[i] Torah Shebikhtav, Shoftim, Derekh Chayim

שופטים ושוטרים תתן לך בכל שעריך (דברים טז, יח). בכאן יש רמז מוסר להא דתנן בספר יצירה, שבעה שערים הם בנפש, שתי עינים, שתי אזנים, והפה, ושני נקבי האף, עד כאן לשונו. והוא חושב השערים שהם בראש של אדם. אמנם יש שער לברית המעור, וגם כן פה התחתון, וצריך האדם להיות שומר השערים דהיינו הראיה והשמיעה והדיבור והכעס היוצא מאף. ג”כ צריך לשמור שער ברית הקודש שלא יצא זרע כי אם לקדושה. גם פה התחתון שלא ימלא כריסו כבהמת קיא צואה. ועל אלו השערים ישים האדם לעצמו שופטים ושוטרים, כלומר שישפוט את עצמו תמיד. זהו תיבת לך שאמר תתן לך, וישגיח תמיד שלא יהיה שם שום עבירה, כי כמעט אלו המקומות מקום שלום, ויהיו תמיד בקדושה ובטהרה: 

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

August 21, 2025

Posted under

Deuteronomy (דברים), Divrei Torah (Weekly Sermons)

Comments

Leave a comment

Saying Thank You Is Not Enough – Ekev 5785

Moses is speaking to the Israelites from the Eastern side of the Jordan River. He is preparing them to enter the Promised Land without him. Throughout the book of Deuteronomy, he worries about the new challenges that the people will face as they transition from wandering in the desert to settling in the Promised Land. So he tries to set them up for success.

Moses reiterates how, during the past forty years, God has provided for all of their needs. They ate manna from heaven. Their clothes never wore out, and their feet did not swell. God’s providence was immediate and direct. As a result, the people were constantly aware of their dependence on God for daily survival.

All of this will change when they cross the Jordan.  First, the good news. The land is “a good land, a land with streams and springs and fountains issuing from plain and hill; a land of wheat and barley, of vines, figs, and pomegranates, a land of olive trees and honey, a land where you may eat food without stint, where you will lack nothing; a land whose rocks are iron and from whose hills you can mine copper.”

In other words, the Israelites will no longer need to rely on God’s miraculous daily beneficence. Their prosperity will now come from the land itself. And so Moses instructs them: “When you have eaten your fill, give thanks to the Lord your God for the good land which He has given you.” V’achalta v’sava’ta u’verachta. This is the basis of the obligation to recite Birkat Hamazon – the grace after meals. It is a reminder, recited multiple times a day, that one of the most mundane activities of which we take part, eating, is a manifestation of Divine grace. 

But Moses knows that this will be insufficient. In the very next verse, he offers a warning against what will inevitably follow success and prosperity. Hishamer L’kha – “Take care.”  Literally, “Guard yourselves, lest you forget the Lord your God and fail to keep His commandments, His rules and His laws, which I command you today.”

Moses predicts that when the Israelites become wealthy and successful, they will forget all about God who brought them out of Egypt and sustained them through the wilderness.  Their hearts will become haughty, and they will say to themselves, “My own power and the might of my own hand have won this wealth for me.” This attitude will ultimately lead to their downfall. They will suffer the same fate as the Canaanite nations who dwelt there beforehand.

In these brief verses, Moses expresses two opposite views of human character. In the first, he sets a perfectly reasonable expectation on the Israelites to give thanks to God when we eat. To acknowledge and praise the ultimate source of blessing in our lives. It seems to me that this is a fairly easy commandment to follow. Observant Jews do not seem to have too much difficulty reciting brachot over food. We’ll be doing exactly that for kiddush in a few minutes. 

But then, immediately afterwards, Moses all but admits that it is not going to work. Either we are going to forget to express our gratitude altogether. Or, our expressions of gratitude will not matter, and we will succumb to hubris, crediting all of our success to our own efforts and hard work.

The commentator Nachmanides explains Moses’ warning. The Israelites will forget about what it was like when they were enslaved in Egypt, when they did not have power and wealth. Back then, it was much more obvious that basic survival depended on God. But when they become successful, they will forget about those former times when they had no power. They won’t realize that the strength that enabled them to prosper came from God as well.

Moses’ predictions are born out in the biblical history of ancient Israel. It seems to me that they are pretty accurate depictions of basic human tendencies as well. We tend to relate to our material success as something we earned. Either because I worked really hard for it, or because I am just a really great person who deserves what I have, or because I am too lazy to really think about how I got to where I am. Moses warns that saying “Thank you” to God is not enough.

When kids are really young, we try to teach them to say thank you. I hand a treat to a toddler, and their parent says “What do you say?”  Don’t get me wrong, it is a valuable lesson, and an important habit to inculcate.

And, if I do something nice for someone, and they do not acknowledge it, it can feel pretty bad.  Like I have been taken for granted. 

Something I have learned in my house is that saying “thank you” by itself doesn’t really matter. Thanks are expressed through actions.

My spouse makes a beautiful meal. After enjoying it, I look deep into her eyes, utter a most heartfelt “thank you for that wonderful dinner. I especially loved how you slow roasted the brussels sprouts.” And then I walk over to the couch and start watching TV while the dirty dishes are all over the kitchen.

This is all purely hypothetical, of course. 

Moses’ instructions to the Israelites are also quite simple.  Gratitude is expressed through actions. This is a theme that Moses returns to over and over again. The way for the Israelites to express their gratitude for the blessings they enjoy is by following God’s commandments. But not only that.

Later on in the parashah, in another one of Moses’s warnings, he tells us to “cut away the thickening about your hearts and stiffen your necks no more. For the Lord your God is God supreme and Lord supreme, the great, the mighty, and the awesome God, who shows no favor and takes no bribe, but upholds the cause of the fatherless and the widow, and befriends the stranger, providing food and clothing.—You too must befriend the stranger, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt.”

Here, the counter to stubbornness and haughtiness is caring for the stranger. This is what the all-powerful God of the universe wants from us.

Moses draws the contrast between an attitude of self-importance, stubborness, and entitlement on the one hand – and gratitude, observance of the commandments, and caring for the weak and powerless on the other.

Almost three and a half thousand years later, not much has changed. 

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

February 5, 2025

Posted under

Divrei Torah (Weekly Sermons), Exodus (שמות)

Comments

Leave a comment

מִי וָמִי הָהוֹלְכִים – Who and who are going – Bo 5785

We are thankful for the freedom from captivity on Thursday of Gadi Mozes, Arbel Yehoud, and Agam Berger, along with Pongsak Thenna, Sathian Suwannakham, Watchara Sriaoun, Bannawat Seathao and Surasak Lamnau.

And for the release today of Keith Siegel, Ofer Calderon, and Yarden Bibas. May they find healing of body and spirit in the days and weeks ahead. And may those who remain hostage be returned to their families speedily and without delay.

We are reminded, during these tense and perilous times, of the Jewish values of making sure everyone is included. This is a value that finds expression in this morning’s Torah portion, Parashat Bo. The first seven plagues have struck Egypt.

At this point, Pharaoh is under pressure from the Egyptian court to let the Israelites go. So he summons Moses and Aaron back to the palace and orders: “Go serve the Lord your God!” He seems to have given in. But then he asks: Mi va’mi ha’holkhim – “Who and who are the ones who will go?” (10:8)

 That’s a silly question. Has Moses not told him exactly who must be allowed to leave? Time after time, he has said something to the effect of “Thus said the Lord: Let My people go that they may worship Me.”

Nevertheless, Moses answers Pharaoh’s seemingly redundant question. 

With our young ones, with our elders we will go, 
with our sons and with our daughters, 
with our sheep and with our oxen we will go— 
for it is the Lord’s pilgrimage-festival for us.

Here, Moses adds a new element to his request. Never before has he specified who, exactly, is included by the term “My people.” Now he says it outright: our children, and elders, our sons and daughters, even our sheep and oxen. That is who is included in “My people.”

To this, Pharaoh claws back the permission he has just granted. No way will I let your children go with you. Just the men can go to worship the Lord.

What is the point of these word games? Why does Pharaoh insist on this verbal jousting. And why does Moses need to articulate what “My people” means.

According to Rabbi Shmuel Goldin, there is a deeper conversation taking place. Remember, Moses has not yet requested that the Israelites be freed from slavery and allowed to leave Egypt outright, even though we know that is God’s ultimate plan.

So now Pharaoh has agreed, in principle, to allow the three day holiday to take place outside of the land. How does Pharaoh, and the rest of Egyptian society, for that matter, think this is going to happen?

In Egyptian religion, and indeed, in every ancient religion, worshipping the deity was the domain of an elite priestly class. You may recall, at the end of the Book of Genesis, with Joseph as the vizier to an earlier Pharaoh, the Egyptian monarchy consolidates all land in the empire under the crown, except for the land holdings of the Egyptian priesthood. They are a powerful force to be reckoned with.

Access to the gods, religious worship, was the domain of a limited elite. The common people could not, and were not expected to, participate in the central observance. It is the king, the priests, the sorcerors who manage the relationship between people and the gods.

So when Pharaoh asks Moses “who, exactly, is going to go?” this is what he has in mind. The idea that the entire nation, including children even the animals, need to participate in the festival to God, is completely foreign to him. So when Moses answers the question in such an expansive way, Pharaoh takes personal offense.

But this too is part of God’s plan to introduce something new to the world. In just two chapters, when the Israelites assemble at the base of Mount Sinai, God will declare them to be a “kingdom of priests, a holy nation.”

The Exodus from Egypt begins a process of democratization of religion. Every Israelite will be able to participate in the worship of God. We see elements of this in this morning’s Torah portion, Parashat Bo. The Torah interrupts the Exodus story before the enactment of the tenth plague to tell us about the laws of Passover.

We learn that this is a holiday that is observed by the entire family. Nobody is left out. It does not require a priest or a Temple. It is observed in the home. Moses instructs the Israelites, us, to observe it as an institution for all time.

Three separate times, he emphasizes the obligation upon parents to teach their children about the symbolism of the rituals and what they represent. Maybe this sounds familiar.

And when your children ask you, ‘What do you mean by this rite?’ you shall say, ‘It is the passover sacrifice to the Lord, who passed over the houses of the Israelites in Egypt when smiting the Egyptians, but saved our houses.’

This is one of the sources of the parable of the Four Children in the Pesach Seder.

What is the grand moral of the story of the Exodus? We are used to it being a story of freedom, conveying the lesson that humans ought not enslave one another, that the condition to which we must strive is for all people to be free. Or perhaps it is the lesson to Pharaoh, Egypt, and the nations of the world – that no human is a God.

Here we learn another message: that every human being can stand in the presence of the divine. God is accessible to every human being. God’s revelation to the Jewish people includes every one of us, regardless of class, gender, or station. All must be included for our celebrations to be complete.

This is what we strive for in our synagogue. It is embedded in Jewish history and practice. And it is part of the culture that has driven our commitment to bringing home our brothers and sisters taken hostage in Gaza. 

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

November 21, 2024

Posted under

Divrei Torah (Weekly Sermons), Genesis (בראשית)

Comments

Leave a comment

Dust and Ashes – Valera 5785

The Chassidic Rebbe, Simchah Bunem, used to teach his students:” Everyone must have two pockets, so that he can reach into the one or the other, according to his needs. In his right pocket are to be the words bishvili nivra ha’olam.  “For me was the world created.” And in his left, va’anochi afar va’efer. “For I am but dust and ashes.” Knowing when to remove each piece of paper, is the challenge.  

Sometimes, we need to be assertive, to place ourselves and our own needs at the center of our concern. Other situations demand that we step down, and recognize how small and insignificant we are in the span of space and time.

As it turns out, va’anochi afar va’efer — “For I am but dust and ashes” — appears in this morning’s Torah portion.

וְאָנֹכִ֖י עָפָ֥ר וָאֵֽפֶר

But before we find out where, let’s see if we can figure out what it means. Afar va’efer. Afar with an ayin. Efer with an alef. Two different, unrelated words, but together, as an alliteration, expressing something profound.

Afar – “Dust” with an ayin — brings us back to creation. In the Garden of Eden, the first human is created out of the dust of the earth. Afar min ha’adamah. God gathers the raw materials together in the shape of a person, but it only becomes a human being when God blows the breath of life into its nostrils.

To compare oneself to dust, therefore invokes our origins, the raw materials from our physical selves are made.

Efer – “Ashes” with an alef,  are what are left over after something has been completely burnt. Through combustion, a thing that was once alive has been rendered into its inorganic parts. All of the organic components have become oxidized and are no longer present.  In other words, ashes are what are left over after all traces of life are gone. 

To compare oneself to ashes invokes the end of our physical selves. What is left over after anything that once marked us as individuals is gone.

Together “dust and ashes” describe the parts of our timeline which are devoid of life. Before the soul entered our bodies, and after the materials out of which our bodies are comprised have lost their cohesion.

This expression Afar va’efer, appears just three times in the entire Tanakh. Once in this morning’s Torah portion, Parashat Vayera, and twice in the book of Job. 

Vayera opens with three angels, disguised as men, coming to visit Abraham with a message that in one year, he and Sarah will have a son together. Message delivered, two of the angels leave, while one sticks around for a further conversation.

God has seen the wickedness of the people of Sodom and Gomorrah, and determined to destroy the cities entirely. But first, God turns inward to ask Godself:

Shall I hide from Abraham what I am about to do, 

since Abraham is to become a great and populous nation and all the nations of the earth are to bless themselves by him? 

For I have singled him out, that he may instruct his children and his posterity to keep the way of the Lord by doing what is just and right, in order that the Lord may bring about for Abraham what has been promised him.

True to God’s assessment of him, Abraham challenges God’s eagerness to punish the innocent along with the wicked, asking God to spare the cities if fifty innocent people can be found living there. In a bold rebuke, Abraham declares “Shall the judge of all the earth not do that which is just?!”

God agrees, and it turns out that this was just the opening of the negotiations. Abraham will lower the number to 45, 40, 30, 20, and finally 10 innocent people to spare the wicked cities. But first, he employs our phrase

Here I venture to speak to my lord, I who am but dust and ashes

What does this expression mean in this context?

At first glance, it might seem to be an expression of humility.  But what Abraham has just done and will continue to do seems quite bold. He has essentially told God that if You do not behave justly, you don’t deserve to be God. 

This is not behavior that most of people would describe as humble.

What about Job? He uses the expression twice. 

The first instance is in the midst of a long speech in which he is describing his suffering in most vivid terms. He laments how even the dregs of society, the worst of the worst, look down on him.

By night my bones feel gnawed;
My sinews never rest. 

With great effort I change clothing;
The neck of my tunic fits my waist.

And then comes our verse

He cast me down to the clay,
I have become like dust and ashes.

Here dust and ashes does not describe humility as a moral character trait, but seems to be almost literal. Just as people walk on dust and ashes without a second thought, without even noticing, Job too feels like he is being trampled underfoot.

His entire existence has been reduced to insignificance. “Dust and ashes” is a lament of self-pity. 

He uses the term once more, in the final chapter. In face, they are the last words he utters in the entire book that bears his name. After forty long chapters struggling to understand the meaning of his suffering, and rejecting all of the theological accusations and explanations of his so-called friends, God appears to Job out of the whirlwind.  And basically says, “I’m God.  Who the heck are you?”

And so, Job backs down.

Therefore, I recant and relent,
Being but dust and ashes.

This is Job’s final utterance. He realizes that his earlier complaints have been misguided. Job has been seeking some sort of reason for his suffering, a rational explanation for why he has been brought so low. 

But he never gets it. When he comes face to face with the awesome, terrifying Divine Presence, Job finally discovers that, as a mere mortal, comprised of “dust and ashes,” he is simply incapable of understanding God’s nature. Human concepts of justice and morality do not apply to God. It is pointless to try to discover any purpose to Creation that would make sense to us.

For both Abraham and Job, “dust and ashes” seems to be an expression of humility. It is a recognition that our existence on earth is temporary, that our imperfect bodies are made of material that comes together for only a brief moment in time.

We should also note that for both of them, the phrase “dust and ashes” occurs in the context of challenging God’s justice. They both react instinctively to what they percieve as God’s unjust behavior.

We all have that instinct. “It’s not fair.” Sometimes we experience it when we feel that we ourselves have been denied something we are owed.  Sometimes we experience when we see or hear of injustice perpetrated against someone else.

“Dust and ashes” is how Job describes himself when he finally stops accusing God of injustice. He realizes that human standards of morality do not apply to God.

For Abraham, it is the opposite. “Dust and ashes” is how he describes himself when he first begins to accuse God of injustice.

Perhaps another difference is that Job has been going through an existential crisis, arguing for justice on behalf of himself. Abraham, on the other hand, has been fighting to protect other people. 

Maybe that is the point of having this as one of the two phrases that we are supposed to have in our pockets. Recognizing our smallness, the limited time that we have on earth, means that we have to make use of that time for good.  To, as Abraham demonstrates, “keep the way of the Lord by doing what is just and right,” even when that might mean putting ourselves at risk.

But also, recognizing that the universe does not owe us anything. It is ok, as Job finally discovers, to accept ourselves as we are. To accept that God does not owe us any explanations. And then to make the most of it, as if the world was created for us. Maybe that is true humility.

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

October 6, 2024

Posted under

Divrei Torah (Weekly Sermons), High Holidays

Comments

2 Comments

A Four-Fold Song – Rosh Hashanah 5785

God never promised it would be easy.

This morning’s Torah portion tells the story of the banishment of Hagar and Ishmael. Sarah recognizes something untoward in the way that Ishmael is playing with her son. She demands that Abraham send him out into the wilderness with his mother.

When their supplies run out, Hagar places her son underneath a bush so she does not have to watch him die. God hears the cry of the boy and sends an angel to Hagar with a prophecy.

Fear not, for God has heeded the cry of the boy where he is. Come, lift up the boy and hold him by the hand, for I will make a great nation of him.

Then the angel reveals a well of water, and they are saved.

A midrash (Tanchuma Vayetzei 5:2) describes a scene that transpires in heaven, just before this moment. When God commands the angel to reveal the well, the angel objects: “Master of the Universe, why do you bring forth a well for this wicked person who will ultimately waylay travelers and wayfarers?”

The Holy One, blessed be He, retorts: “What is he right now? Is he not righteous? I judge a person only according to the moment at which he stands before me.”

The midrash derives this response from the Torah’s language: God has heeded the cry of the boy ba’asher hu sham – “in the place where he is.”

Midrashim often put into words their authors’ struggles with the Sacred Text. In this case, we witness the tension between the suffering of a child, for which any human with a heart must feel compassion and pity; and tribal protectiveness. This struggle is personified through Sarah versus Hagar, Isaac versus Ishmael.

The angel’s objection captures our defensive instinct to close ranks and protect our own. God ‘s rebuke expresses the universalism which seeks to break down barriers between peoples and treat individuals as they are, human beings made in the Divine image.

God does not suffer from human parochialism.

It is a particularly poignant midrash for us this year, conveying this tension between tribalism and universalism. I ask myself, in this moment: “Do I resonate more with the angel, or with God?”

As we celebrate Rosh Hashanah, welcoming 5785, it is a time for us to reflect on the ways in which we value peoplehood and humanity. Or is it peoplehood versus humanity?

One of the most beautiful expressions of this was described by Rav Abraham Isaac Kook over one hundred years ago, at a time which bore certain similiarities to our own.

Rav Kook is considered to be be the founder of religious Zionism. He was born and grew up in Russia in the second half of the nineteenth century. In 1905, he moved to Yaffo, in Palestine, then controlled by the Ottoman Emprire.

At the outbreak of the first World War, Rav Kook happened to be in Germany, where he was interned as an alien. He managed to escape and lived for the remainder of the war in London, stuck in exile, unable to return to Palestine.

It was a tumultuous time, full of danger, uncertainty, and change. The world was at war. Empires fell while nationalist movements reared their heads. Russia was aflame in revolution. A global pandemic was incubating. It was during this time period that Rav Kook wrote Shir Meruba, A Four-Fold Song.

He imagines four ways that a person might see themself; might orient their life and find meaning. He describes each of these four ways as a kind of song: the song of the self, the song of the nation, the song of humanity, and the song of the universe.

There is one who sings the song of oneself, and in themself findseverything, full spiritual satisfaction in its entirety.

There is another who sings the song of one’s people. He leaves the circle of his own individual self, because he finds it without sufficient breadth, without an idealistic basis. He aspires toward the heights, and he cleaves with a gentle love to the whole community of Israel. Together with her he sings her songs. He feels grieved in her afflictions and delights in her hopes. He contemplates noble and pure thoughts about her past and her future, and probes with love and wisdom her innerspiritual essence.

There is another who reaches toward more distant realms, and going beyond the boundary of Israel to sing the song of humanity. Her spirit extends to the wider vistas of the majesty of humanity in general, and its noble essence…

Then there is one who rises toward even wider horizons, until he links himself with all existence, with all God’s creatures, with all worlds, and he sings his song with all of them…

As Rav Kook describes so evocatively, each of us sings one of these four songs. He describes them as reflecting wider and wider perspectives, ever-expanding concentric circles.

What is my primary area of concern? Who do I care about most? Where do I invest my emotional energy? Form which wellsprings do I draw meaning and purpose in life?

Do I wake up each day to advance myself? Am I devoted to the Jewish people? Do I work for humanity? Or is my concern even more global?

Which song do I sing most strongly?

Rav Kook suggests that most people primarily sing one of these four songs. It is tempting to restrict our perspective to the narrowest of the concentric circles. Perhaps that is the song that most of us sing, most of the time.

This is the drive for self-preservation, for placing self over others.  It evokes the most famous teaching of Hillel the Elder in Pirkei Avot: 

אִם אֵין אֲנִי לִי, מִי לִי. “If I am not for myself, who will be for me?”

The next part of Hillel’s teaching warns of the risk of only focusing on the self

וּכְשֶׁאֲנִי לְעַצְמִי, מָה אֲנִי. “But if I am (only) for myself, what am I?”

Hillel suggests that a self-focused life is incomplete. Meaning and worth must include a concern for and commitment to others. But his teaching does not go so far as to distinguish how far that concern should extend: just to the Jewish people, to humanity, or to all of creation.

As we look back at the past year, I fear that we may have placed too great a focus on the universal, and not enough on the particular. Maybe we did not emphasize enough to our children how important it is to form our structures of meaning specifically around the history, values, and traditions of the Jewish people. We did not sufficiently emphasize that it is not only ok but necessary to feel particular connection to our Jewish brothers and sisters around the world.

We are now being taught that lesson. The borders that surround us are pressing in.

We are four days away from the one-year anniversary of the October 7 massacre, which changed the way Jewish people everywhere view ourselves as individuals, as part of the Jewish people, and within the wider society of humankind. 

Within hours of that horrific event, antisemitism had already begun its surge.

This past year has seen the international double standard against the world’s only Jewish state laid bare. We are still praying for the return of 97 hostages.

Many university campuses became unwelcome places for Jewish college students. We felt the need to further harden the barriers around our houses of worship and Jewish institutions, increasing our stress and fear.

So many experienced abandonment by friends, who could not bear to even have a relationship with someone who supports the legitimacy of the State of Israel.

And some of us painfully faced the conflict between the song of the nation and the song of humanity within our own families.

How have these forces, pushing in against us, affected our song?

After October 7, so many of us sought out one another, to be together, shed tears, express our grief, find solidarity —to experience some measure of comfort.

Many of us were surprised to find ourselves feeling connected to the Jewish people more profoundly than ever before.

This amplification of our song has not only been reactive. We are experiencing renewed eagerness to embrace Jewish tradition and practice. Participation in Jewish life is rising all over the world. 

Membership at Congregation Sinai is at its all-time high, along with the number of children learning in our religious school. What began as a defensive reaction has evolved into an awakening curiosity and eagerness to explore and find meaning in Judaism’s rich history and culture.

As we gather as a people to observe the new year, what are we to make of this seeming dissonance between Jewish peoplehood and universalism?

Rosh Hashanah is not a particularly particularistic holiday. It does not have an historic or symbolic connection to the Exodus from Egypt. It does not mark any moment in the history of the Jewish people. 

We describe it as Yom Hadin, the Day of Judgment. Not judgment for the Jewish people – but rather, judgment for all humanity. Unetaneh Tokef describes how “all who live on earth shall pass before You like a flock of sheep.”

A few lines later, we sing “On Rosh Hashanah it is written and on the fast of Yom Kippur it is sealed.” The fate of every living person in the year ahead is determined.

Rosh Hashanah is said to take place on the sixth day, the day on which God completed all the works of creation by forming humanity in the Divine image.

It is the most universal of Jewish holidays. Perhaps Rosh Hashanah is a holiday for singing the song of humanity, or the song of the universe, rather than the song of our people.

Does it have to be either/or? Must concern for the Jewish people come at the expense of concern for humanity, or vice versa? Let us return to Rav Kook’s Four Fold Song, which continues from where we left it. He imagines the rare individual who harmonizes the four competing melodies

…into one ensemble, each joining their voices… lending vitality and life to one another. They are sounds of joy and gladness, sounds of jubilation and celebration, sounds of ecstasy and holiness.

The song of the self, the song of the people, the song of humanity, the song of the universe continuously merged…

Rav Kook describes this four-part harmony as a “song of holiness.” It is the song of Yisrael, which, with the first two letters switched, spells Shir El – the song of God.

Rav Kook challenges us to merge our various identities. We start by asking: Which song do I primarily sing? Has my song changed in the past year?

With Israel at war, and the Jewish people threatened, is there space left in my heart to maintain my commitment to myself and my people, as well as to humanity and creation?

Rav Kook would argue that I do not have a choice. Humanity’s mission is to strive towards wholeness and perfection. Israel, like other peoples, has a unique contribution to make.

From the beginning, when God first revealed Godself to Abraham, our challenge as a people has always been to be a blessing to the world, as a distinct people, and through our commitment to Torah. 

For humanity to rise higher, we must be able to sing both songs. Rav Kook wrote:. “The upright person must believe in their own life.” He also wrote “the Love of Israel requires the love of the whole of humanity.”

Even when segments of humanity do not behave so lovingingly towards us.

We celebrate our new year with complicated emotions. We pray that our brothers and sisters still held hostage will return to their families embrace. We pray for God to protect our people who are at war, and to deliver the brave souls fighting to defend them.

We pray that we be strengthened in our communities and drawn closer as a people. We pray for love, connection, and healing within our families.

We pray for all people, everywhere, to learn to recognize the Divine sparks in one another. We pray for unity in humanity’s collective striving for wholeness, for each person and nation to contribute their own blessings to our shared task.

May all of these prayers blend together to produce a glorious masterpiece, the song of God, the Song of Songs.

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

July 30, 2024

Posted under

Divrei Torah (Weekly Sermons), Numbers (במדבר)

Comments

Leave a comment

Camp Ramah: A Bubble of Peace – Pinchas 5784

Dana and I had the wonderful opportunity to be away last Shabbat, as I completed a week as the Rabbi in Residence at Camp Ramah Galim. Galim means “waves,” which is a fitting name, given that the camp lies on a beachfront campus outside of Watsonville.

I am honored to serve on the Board of Directors for the past year and a half. My week started with a Sunday Board meeting, and then I got to stay. I would like to share with you a bit of what I experienced while I was there. 

Ramah Galim is the only Jewish, Zionist, Shomer Shabbat, kosher camp in Northern California. The camp continues to grow — this current summer is the biggest yet; and we just signed a ten year lease with the Monterey Bay Academy, which hosts us.

Campers at Ramah Galim sign up for one of four specialty tracks, which they attend most mornings. Afternoons bring everyone together for activities with their edot (age groups), kevutzot (groups), and the entire camp.

One specialty track is Yam – “ocean”.  Campers focus on learning about marine ecology, in addition to boogie boarding, surfing and other water activities. Campers in Etgar — “challenge” — go mountain biking, hiking, rockclimbing, farming, and other outdoor activities. Those in Al HaBamah — “on the stage” — write, rehearse and perform an original musical over the course of a two week session. I don’t know how they do it.

In addition, for the second summer, Ramah Galim has hosted the Ramah Sports Academy, which offers intensive training for basketball and soccer athletes.

I could go on about all of the wonderful aspects of Ramah Galim, but I want to focus on a few key experiences.

I am proud to share that Congregation Sinai sends more kids to Ramah than any other synagogue. There are twenty Sinai chanichim, campers, attending session three alone. If we add up campers who were at the first two sessions, we are proably in the 30-35 range. I haven’t run the numbers, but I suspect that this is at least 1/3 of all of the kids in the shul. Plus, we have four Sinai young adults serving as madrichim, or counselors. 

We have a scholarship fund at Sinai. This year, we provided more scholarship money for more kids than we ever have before. And I would love to see this expand.

As Rabbi in Residence, I get recruited to a number of different activities. 

Harga’ah means relaxation. Before bedtime, I might meet with an edah or a kevutzah to tell a story or teach a song.

I attend Tefilah with different edot, sometimes as a participant, and sometimes to lead or teach.

On Shabbat afternoon, I led a program for all of Nitzanim and Kochavim – third through sixth graders.

And on Shabbat morning, I led a learning session with staff.

Beyond this, I have the opportunity to simply participate in camp, interacting with campers and counselors, learning about them and occasionally answering “rabbinic” questions. I was also glad to be able to support our Sinai kids, who get a thrill to see “their rabbi” at camp.

This summer, there were also about 30 Israeli chanichim. Many of them are from the northern border and have not been living in their homes for the last nine months. The Education Minister just announced that schools from the evacuation zone will not be reopening in the fall. So these campers will again be attending makeshift schools that have been cobbled together near the hotels to which they have been evacuated.

For the second summer, there is a contingent of Ukrainian campers at Ramah Galim, who are here through a partnership with Maccabi.

All of these kids and staff come together to have a Jewish camp experience. And it is so wonderful. What strikes me about Ramah is how supportive and positive it is for everyone. It is meant to be joyful, experiential Judaism. Chanichim and madrichim are challenged to try new things, take on leadership roles, and have fun. 

As I mentioned earlier, among its core values, Camp Ramah is a Zionist camp. This comes through in so many ways. There is a large mishlachat, or contingent of Israeli staff.

Israeli flags fly everywhere. Announcements are made in Hebrew, and modern Hebrew words and expressions are woven into the camp experience. One of the most popular activites at Ramah is Israeli dancing, which takes place before most dinners, and on the beach after Havdallah.

Yom Yisrael is a day devoted to learning about and celebrating Israeli history, culture, and life. This year, it took on more somber tones. 

More important and impactful than all of the formal programming is the opportunity for Jews from Israel, America, Ukraine, and other communities to live together, get to know each other, become friends, and establish personal relationships. This is the best way to convey the Jewish value of achdut – unity.

At the end of last week’s parashah, the Moabites send in women to lure the Israelite men into commiting idolatry during an event which became known as “The sin of Ba’al Peor.”

To stop the ensuing catastrohe, Pinchas, grandson of Aaron, takes a spear and stabs an Israelite leader and a Moabitess.

As this morning’s parashah opens, God explicitly approves of Pinchas’ initiative, which “turned back [Divine] wrath from the Israelites.” In response, God grants him God’s “covenant of peace,” a covenant of priesthood for him and his descendants after him for all time.

The language in the Torah is unambiguously praiseworthy of Pinchas’ zealous violence. All of the medieval commentators approve of Pinchas’ actions.

It is a moment of crisis. Many Israelites, including leaders, are committing apostasy with the Moabite women. Thousands are dying in a plague. God has just instructed Moses to have all of the ringleaders impaled to turn aside Divine wrath. Pinchas is the one who takes action, stopping the idolatry, ending the plague, and saving the Israelites. He is a hero.

Why does he need a covenant of peace? The Talmud records a legend that the elders wanted to excommunicate Pinchas for taking matters into his own hands rather than going through a judicial process. God’s message to Moses, thus, is a counter to that effort, stating that Pinchas’ zealousness exactly matched God’s zealousness.

The medieval commentators suggest that the covenant of shalom is a promise of Divine protection from the possibility of retribution by the families of the people whom Pinchas impaled, or even from his fellow Israelites.

Modern commentators offer more psychological explanations. Naphtali Tz’vi Yehudah Berlin, known as the Netziv, lived in nineteenth century Russia. He writes in HaEmek Davar, his commentary on the Torah, that

In reward for turning away the wrath of the Holy Blessed One, God blessed him with the attribute of peace, that he should not be quick-tempered or angry.  Since, it was only natural that such a deed as Phinehas’ should leave in his heart an intense emotional unrest afterward, the Divine blessing was designed to cope with this situation and promised peace and tranquility of soul

In other words, Pinchas did what needed to be done. It was unquestionably the right move. But, it took a toll. God’s granting him a covenant of peace is about settling his soul so that Pinchas does not carry the trauma, the PTSD, if you will, with him, nor pass it on to his children.

Camp Ramah, this summer in particular, is playing such a role, particularly for the young adult staff who are there.

In part of the Chadar Ochel, the dining hall, there are posters up of people who have been killed since Oct. 7, as well as of hostages. All of them are personal friends and family members of staff members. Poetry and artwork by campers decorates the walls.

Outside of the Nachshonim bunkhouse, where the oldest campers live, there is a large “Free Hersh Goldberg” banner.

While October 7 and its aftermath certainly hovers over camp this summer, it has not taken over. Quite the opposite, in fact. Nobody knew what to expect before the summer. As it turns out, for the staff in particular, camp has been a respite.

I spoke with Israelis who who have spent much of the past year serving in the military.  Some are 20, 21, 22 years old, and have just completed their mandatory service. Others have had to put their careers on hold to serve in milluim, reserve units. Some saw combat directly. Others had to wait at home while loved ones were called up, not knowing when or whether they would be coming home. Many lost friends and family members on October 7 and during the war that followed. 

One young soldier who spoke with the Board of Directors was sent with his unit on the afternoon of October 7 to battle Hamas terrorists who had taken over a base. He lost several of his fellow soldiers that day, including his commanding officer, who led the charge. He was in tears as he shared his story with us.

Dana and I met with a group of Sollelim kids, going into seventh and eighth grades.  We visited them at their campsite in Monterey during intersession to play music and sing songs.  I let some of them play my guitar. I asked one talented kid where he was from. “Germany,” was his answer.

But that is not where he is from. He is from Ukraine and has only lived in Germany for the past two years. There are a couple of dozen Ukrainian Jewish kids who are at Camp Ramah, getting a break from a disrupted childhood that I cannot even imagine. 

Some of the American college students came to Ramah having experienced a different kind of trauma on their campuses. They described Camp Ramah as a kind of bubble where they did not have to worry about being visibly identified as Jewish, or think twice about what route to take while walking to the dining hall.

Camp is always a kind of bubble from the outside world. Usually, it is a bubble of joyful Jewish experience. This summer, in particular, it is serving as a bubble of love and support in the midst of extremely chaotic and threatening times.

I feel very blessed to have been able to spend a week inside this bubble of peace. I only wish that the world could always be like camp.

Shabbat Shalom.

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

April 7, 2024

Posted under

Divrei Torah (Weekly Sermons), Leviticus (ויקרא)

Comments

Leave a comment

The Silver Platter and the Ḥaredi Draft – Shemini 5784

On November 29, 1947, the United Nations voted on the partition plan. Soon after, Chaim Weitzman, who would become the first President of Israel, stated: “The state will not be given to the Jewish people on a silver platter.”

A few days later, the Israeli poet Natan Alterman published his famous poem in response, Magash HaKesef — “The Silver Platter.”

The earth grows still.
The lurid sky slowly pales over smoking borders.
Heartsick but still living,
A people stand by
To greet the uniqueness
Of the miracle.
Readied, they wait beneath the moon,
Wrapped in awesome joy before the light.
Then soon,
A girl and boy step forward,
And slowly walk before the waiting nation;
In work clothes and heavy-shod
They climb In stillness
Wearing still the dress of battle, the grime
Of aching day and fired night
Unwashed, weary until death, not knowing rest,
But wearing youth like dewdrops in their hair.
— Silently the two approach
And stand.
Are they of the quick or of the dead?
Through wondering tears, the people stare.
“Who are you, the silent two?”
And they reply:
“We are the silver platter
Upon which the Jewish State was served to you.”
And speaking, fall in shadow at the nation’s feet.
Let the rest in Israel’s chronicles be told.

Magash HaKesef appeared on December 19, 1947 in the newspaper Davar. This was before the War of Independence broke out. Alterman, in the midst of the joy and excitement engendered by the UN vote, anticipated the heavy price that would have to be paid.

This poem continues to be read each year as part of observances for Yom Hazikaron and Yom Ha’atzmaut, Israel’s Memorial Day and Independence Day.

This poem tragically captures the contract that is made by Israelis. Parents send their children to serve in the IDF, knowing that the existence of the state itself depends on it, knowing as well that for some of them, the ultimate price will be paid.

The official Yizkor, memorial prayer of the IDF does not begin with the traditional opening. A traditional Yizkor begins Yizkor Elohim – “May God remember.”  But the prayer invoking the memory of those who fell defending the State of Israel begins Yizkor am Yisrael – “May the nation of Israel remember.” God’s name does not appear once.

It is ironic that of all the issues roiling Israeli politics right now, with so many different groups calling for the government to resign – for different reasons – one of the leading issues that could bring down the government has to do with service in the IDF. The Haredim, the most fervently observant Jews in Israel, have by and large avoided serving in the Israel Defense Forces.

When I observe the debate over the question of the Hardei draft, I do so as an outsider, as someone who does not have to face these existential questions. America does not demand a lot from us. 

This Haredi draft exemption goes back to the founding of the state in 1948. David Ben Gurion, seeking a compromise to ensure stability in the new government, made a bargain with the small Haredi community at the time to exempt the 400 brightest Torah scholars from military service, as long as they remained studying in yeshiva full time as their full-time activity.

This was after Haredi communities in Europe had been decimated in the Holocaust. The goal was to try to build something back out of the ashes. The program was called Torah Umanuto – “Torah is his profession,” an expression taken from the Talmud.

For the first several decades, the numbers remained fairly steady. But over the last forty years, as the Haredi communities have grown exponentially and become involved politically, the numbers of exemptions have ballooned.

In 1974, 2.4% of eligible people were receiving Torah Umanuto deferalls. By 2012, it was 15%. Today, there are 63,000 draft eligible students receiving exemptions.

Governments have been trying to deal with the issue for the past twenty five years, and it now appears to have reached a breaking point.

Most non-Haredim oppose the Haredi draft exemptions, claiming that they should share the burden of protecting the state. There have been many commissions and proposals over recent decades, none of which have produced results.

Should funds for community institutions be tied to military service. Should citizenship and the right to vote itself be connected to entering the draft? Should military service be required for government employees, including those serving under the auspices of the Chief Rabbinate? These questions or part of wider issues having to do with pluralism in Israeli society and the integration of Haredim into the nation.

Why are they so adamant about not serving? First is the claim that their Torah study guarantees God’s protection of the state. Learning in yeshivah is itself a form of national service. Another fear is that sending their young people to serve in the army will expose them to all sorts of secular, ‘non-kosher’ influences. It will take them away from the influence of their Rabbis. Apparently, on the shidduch market, (matchmaking), the rare bachelor who does choose to serve has a more difficult time finding a good match.

After October 7, with war in Gaza and in the North, the military says that it needs more soldiers. Such heavy reliance on reservists for six months and counting means pulling older citizens away from their families and their jobs. It is no longer tenable, many argue, to allow tens of thousands of young Haredim to continue to sit out from national service.

This past week, a court appointed deadline passed that legally ended the exemptions. The only legal way to extend the exemptions would be for the Knesset to pass a law, which is not politically feasible. The government must immediately stop funding as many as 1,500 yeshivot with students who are refusing to serve.

At the moment, the Haredi politial parties who are part of the government are indicating that they are not going to leave the coalition. In their calculations, new elections would not improve their situation.

Haredi communities have been staging protests against the draft, with counter-protests by Israelis who are tired of bearing the cost, in both blood and money, of their refusal. They are demanding that Haredim share the burden of protecting the state.

I am thinking of the poem, “The Silver Platter.” There is a cost to having a nation. For the Haredim who refuse to serve, the cost they are afraid to pay is not their lives. It is their way of life, which they fear would be lost if they were forced to participate in what they view as the secular project of the state.

I am also thinking of this week’s Torah portion, Shemini, which includes the tragic story of the deaths of the High Priest Aaron’s two eldest sons, Nadav and Avihu. At the moment of glory, when the Tabernacle has just been inaugurated and Aaron and his sons anointed as priests, something awful transpires.

Nadav and Avihu offer up incense before the Lord using a strange fire. Flame erupts from out of the Holy of Holies and consumes them in an instant. We are not going to talk about what it was that they did or did not do. Aaron’s response is what concerns us.  Vayidom Aharon – “And Aaron was silent.” (Num. 10:4)

Moses begins ordering Aaron, his remaining sons, and cousins around, making sure that they attend to Nadav and Avihu’s corpses properly, as well as complete the dedication of the Tabernacle. The mission must go on.

Thinking that they have made a mistake, Moses becomes angry and accosts Eleazar and Itamar, which pushes Aaron to his breaking point. He intervenes on their behalf. “See, this day they brought their sin offering and their burnt offering before the Lord, and such things have befallen me!” (10:19)

Aaron has paid the ultimate price – the deaths of his children. Why does he bear his grief with such stoicism? Perhaps he knows that he is part of something greater – a national project from which he cannot turn away – even in this moment when he should be mourning. His loss is part of the unspoken agreement.

600 soldiers, officers, and reservists, and 61 police officers have been killed since October 7. 256 of them have died in the course of the ground invasion into Gaza, sent to eliminate Hamas.

Most recently was Staff Sergeant Nadav Cohen, 20 years old, from Haifa, who was killed fighting in southern Gaza as part of the 7th Armored Brigade’s 77th Battalion.

Their lives are added to the silver platter. Yehi Zikhram Barukh. May their memories be a blessing.

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

November 28, 2023

Posted under

Divrei Torah (Weekly Sermons), Genesis (בראשית)

Comments

1 Comment

Thanks, It’s Not Enough – Vayetze 5784

This Shabbat of Thanksgiving weekend carries with it special significance. Fifty Israeli hostages are in the midst of being released as we speak. We must be grateful for their freedom, and pray for their and their families’ healing from the harm—physical, psychological, and emotional—that they have suffered after more than 40 days in captivity.

While feeling gratitude, we must also cry out that it is not enough. We want more. The remaining 190 hostages must be returned home. Israelis fleeing from the northern and southern borders, from the shadow of Hamas and Hezbollah rockets, must be able to go back and live in peace. Antisemitism around the world must end.

It is difficult to celebrate in the midst of loss and fear.

This morning’s Torah portion, Vayetzei, can be seen as a second beginning to the story of our Jewish family. You’ll remember that Abraham’s journey begins when God instructs him to leave his land, his birthplace, his father’s home, and embark on a journey to a new land. As Abraham and Sarah set off, he is already a wealthy man, the head of a great household.

As our parashah opens, Jacob begins his journey in the opposite direction. Like his grandfather, Jacob is leaving his land, his birthplace, and his father’s home. He is going back to Haran, however, away from the Promised Land. He leaves with nothing but the shirt on his back.

God appears to Jacob in his famous dream at the top of a ladder, upon which angels are rising and descending.

I am the LORD, the God of your father Abraham and the God of Isaac: the ground on which you are lying I will assign to you and to your offspring. 

Your descendants shall be as the dust of the earth; you shall spread out to the west and to the east, to the north and to the south. All the families of the earth shall bless themselves by you and your descendants. 

Remember, I am with you: I will protect you wherever you go and will bring you back to this land. I will not leave you until I have done what I have promised you.

Awaking, Jacob declares, “Surely the Lord is present in this place, and I did not know it.” Then Jacob makes a vow, incorporating much of what God has just promised him:

If God remains with me, if He protects me on this journey that I am making, and gives me bread to eat and clothing to wear, 

and if I return safe to my father’s house—the LORD shall be my God. 

And this stone, which I have set up as a pillar, shall be God’s abode; and of all that You give me, I will set aside a tithe for You.

It is a standard vow formula. Note what Jacob asks for from God: protection on his journey and the eventual safe return to his home. No time frame is given, but Jacob promises allegiance and tithing to God if these conditions are met.

How does it play out? Jacob makes his way to the house of his uncle, Laban. Let’s fast-forward through the next twenty two years. Jacob marries Leah and Rachel, has twelve children with them and their two handmaidens, Bilhah and Zilpah.

He works the entire time for his uncle Laban, whom he makes fabulously wealthy. Despite Laban trying to cheat Jacob, Jacob still manages to prosper himself as well. We learn that God has been taking care of Jacob this entire time, ensuring that Jacob will be successul despite the adverse conditions under which he  lives.

Finally, the time arrives for Jacob to return home. Consulting with his wives, Leah and Rachel urge him to make the journey as well. They know exactly what kind of men their father (and their brothers) are. So Jacob sneaks away with his household while Laban is off shearing sheep.

Laban takes off in hot pursuit. This is where I’d like to return to the details of the story. Observe how Laban treats Jacob, the assumptions he makes about him.

Before reaching Jacob, God appears to Laban in a dream with a warning: “Beware of attempting anything with Jacob, good or bad.”

Overtaking Jacob, Laban accuses his son-in-law of carrying off his daughters like “captives of the sword.” He insists that he would have sent Jacob off with a great party, but then flexes his muscles: “I have it in my power to do you harm; but the God of your father said to me last night, ‘Beware of attempting anything with Jacob, good or bad.’”

It turns out, that is exactly what Jacob was afraid of: “I was afraid because I thought you would take your daughters from me by force.”

Jacob complains to Laban that he has been duplicitous and manipulative the entire time that Jacob has spent with him, changing his wages constantly. If not for God’s protection, Jacob would be returning empty-handed, exactly as he had arrived 22 years earlier.

Consider next how Laban responds and what it says about how he really feels about Jacob:

The daughters are my daughters, the children are my children, and the flocks are my flocks; all that you see is mine. Yet what can I do now about my daughters or the children they have borne? 

Come, then, let us make a pact, you and I, that there may be a witness between you and me.

Laban does not want to recognize Jacob as an equal, as the head of a household, as a political entity in his own right. He does not respect Jacob’s marriage to Leah and Rachel, nor the possessions that he earned fair and square. If it were up to him, Laban would take it all for himself.

The only factor that brings Laban to the negotiating table, or the negotiating pillar, as it were, is God’s protection. Or, put a different way, Jacob’s power. Jacob is negotiating from a position of strength.

They assemble a pillar and a mound and strike a treaty, each side promising not to cross past the location, that is to say, the border, with ill intent. Now Jacob can return home. 

It seems to me that this story captures much of the experience of the Jewish people for the past two thousand years. Alone in the world, mistreated and taken advantage of by more powerful neighbors. Somehow managing to keep going despite it all, and only earning our seat at the table through strength. And let’s be clear, Jacob’s power is not one of military might. His is a spiritual strength and a cleverness, an understanding of human behavior and motivations.

As we tell the story of our people over the past two thousand years, we point to these qualities to explain how our ancestors managed to retain their identity despite so much oppression and persecution.

The past seventy five years has seen a change. For the first time since the Maccabees, Jews have been able to bring our physical might into the world. The state of Israel has survived, and thrived, because it has retained the spiritual and intellectual cleverness of Jacob, while adding military power.

As it turns out, that is what other nations respect. It is what has brought enemies to the negotiating table in the past.

The forces that would deny us are still loud. So called Anti-Zionism is nothing more than Laban telling Jacob “The daughters are my daughters, the children are my children, and the flocks are my flocks; all that you see is mine.” He denies Jacob’s right to be a political entity. There is no convincing Laban to see Jacob differently. But he can be forced to come to the negotiating table. Jacob is prepared to negotiate when he does. 

Returning to the beginning, has God’s promise to Jacob been fulfilled? God has protected Jacob during his exile. He has blessed him with wealth and family. He is now poised to reenter the Promised Land. We know that as the story continues, Jacob’s position will remain tenuous, and he will continue to struggle for recognition and respect for the rest of his life. He is grateful to God, and he wants—and demands—more.

This is where we still find ourselves. God’s promise is incomplete. Whether in the land or outside of it, we continue to struggle against those who deny our right to exist.

As for the return of our hostages, our Jewish family, such negotiations only succeed from a position of strength. It is not for me to judge whether the price was worth paying. I trust that those who make these decisions have more information than any of us.

Regardless, it is a time for thanks and relief, as well as for saying, “it is not enough,” redoubling our efforts to bring home those who remain in captivity. 

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

November 5, 2023

Posted under

Divrei Torah (Weekly Sermons), Genesis (בראשית)

Comments

Leave a comment

The Problem with the Story of Sodom and Gomorrah – Vayera 5784

I have a problem with the story of Sodom and Gomorrah.

It is a story that is set up to be about Justice and righteousness. Those are the words that are used repeatedly over the course of the narrative.

Let’s review the story in broad outlines, so we know what we are talking about. God sees the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah and that they are evil, and decides to completely annihilate them. But first, God consults with Abraham. God reveals the plan. Abraham then argues on behalf of the cities. There may be innocent people there. In the end, not even ten can be found, and the cities are destroyed.

When we look at a story in the Torah, we have got to accept the way that the story is told, and the facts that the Torah presents, as being very deliberate. It is trying to tell us something, and so we have got to be true to the text when we approach and try to analyze it.

What are the starting assumptions?

First. Abraham has been singled out to instruct his children to “keep the way of the Lord by doing what is just and what is right—la’asot tzedakah umishpat.” (18:19) That is why God consults with Abraham.

Second. The cities are evil – so evil that God determines that the only course is to destroy them entirely, to literally turn them upside down. “The outrage of Sodom and Gomorrah is so great, and their sin is so grave.” (18:20) Justice demands that they be punished.

What is Abraham’s argument?

He argues that the presence of a few righteous individuals is sufficient to reverse the decree against a city that, in the eyes of God, is entirely wicked. Abraham starts with 50 innocent people. “Will You then wipe out the place and not forgive it for the sake of the fifty righteous individuals who are in it?” (18:24)

Throughout, in his description of the people living in Sodom and Gomorrah, Abraham uses the langague of tzadik and rashah: Righteousness in opposition to wickedness. Abraham’s argument is that it is unjust to bring the same punishment upon the righteous as upon the wicked. Collective punishment is wrong.

God agrees to follow Abraham’s basic premise. Over the course of their discussion, Abraham drops the number down from fifty until he eventually settles at ten. Also, God uses three different terms to express God’s willingness to not destroy the cities: nasa’ti – I will lift [their iniquity]; lo e’eseh – I will not do it; lo ashḥit – I will not destroy.

The argument that Abraham is bringing to God is that mercy should overcoming justice.

Notice that God and Abraham are making inverse arguments. 

God says: I’ll wipe out everyone because of the preponderance of evil people – This is justice taking precedence over mercy.

Abraham says: You should save everyone because of the minority of good people – This is mercy taking precedence over justice.

I would argue that there are some major gaps in their arguments. 

One. There is no call for repentance.  Just like with Noah, it does not even occur to Abraham to walk down the mountain to Sodom and Gomorrah to speak with the people themselves.

This is a successful tactic, after all. Think of Jonah, the most successful prophet in the Bible. God sends him to the people of Nineveh, who are also described as completely evil, all the way down to the livestock. Jonah’s mission, which he tries to avoid at all possible costs, is to call upon them to change their ways, to repent, so that they earn their own salvation.

And it works! Perfectly, to Jonah’s dismay.

Does Abraham have such a low opinion of the residents of Sodom and Gomorrah as to think that they are irredeemable?

Should he not have given them an opportunity to save themselves?

Here is my second problem with this story. Abraham is only partially concerned with justice. Justice is the premise that people get what they deserve.

Consider that if Abraham succeeds, two whole cities filled almost entirely with wicked people are going to get away with it. What then of their future victims? Will Abraham bear any responsibility? That does not sound like justice to me. With too much mercy, wickedness thrives. If we forgive too readily, we allow evil to spread.

How does the story end? Abraham goes to bed that night feeling good about himself. He is confident that the has saved the people of Sodom and Gomorrah by bargaining God down: the presence of just ten righteous people will save the cities. Mercy wins over justice.

When he wakes up and walks to the overlook from which he can gaze down upon the plain, he is surprised to see a smoking ruin. There were not even ten righteous people.

Meanwhile, God has taken it upon Godself to save the few innocent people: Lot, his wife, and two daughters. 

The coda to the story is strange: “Thus it was that, when God destroyed the cities of the Plain and annihilated the cities where Lot dwelt, vayizkor Elohim et Avraham—God rememberd Abraham and removed Lot from the midst of the upheaval.” (19:29)

What does it mean in this text to say that God remembered Abraham? This result does not resemble anything that they have discussed. It is, however, the solution that is the perfect execution of justice. The wicked are punished and the innocent are saved.

Maybe that is what Abraham should have demanded from God in the first place. Save the innocent. Bring them out, and then do what You are going to do.

As a model for justice, mercy, the question of collective punishment or collective redemption, this story is overly simplistic. It lacks nuance.

In this particular framework, the Torah depicts people as either wholly righteous or wholly wicked, and this is just not how people are. People are not so black and white.

This is not a story about repentance and reconciliation. It sees people’s character, their morale stature, as static, something that cannot change. Either the presence of the wicked dooms the fate of everyone, or the presence of innocents releases everyone from punishment. There is no nuance here.

These problems strike me as bearing certain similarities to what Israel faces right now.

An evil, unjustifiable act was perpetrated against innocent people by Hamas. I do not think that repentance and eventual reconciliation is a reasonable goal for the estimated 40,000 members of that organization who are hiding underground, often under schools, mosques, and hospitals. But what of the fate of the 2.3 million Palestinians living in Gaza? Many of us have tried to specify that this is a war between Israel and Hamas. Noa Tishby, the Israeli actress who has emerged as a strong voice explaining Israel and fighting against antisemitism and anti-Zionism, describes herself as “pro-Palestinian” and “anti-Hamas.” I identify with that.

But this is messy. How many dead and injured men, women, and children, destroyed homes, and uprooted lives are justified in the mission to eliminate Hamas and rescue the 240 hostages who have been held now for four weeks?

How does one balance justice and mercy in a situation like this? Should one lean towards collective punishment or collective redemption? Can those who commit atrocities be allowed to go free because of the cost to civilians? Is there a way to thread that needle? I do not pretend that there are any easy or obvious moral answers here.

I would just like to point out that the outcome of Abraham and God’s argument over the fate of Sodom and Gomorrah does not resolve the dilemma either, even when it paints people in moral black and white.

My prayer is that those in Israel who are responsible for waging this war are truly aware of these moral dilemmas and are putting them at the forefront of the very difficult decisions that they are forced to make. I wish there was more nuance in the discussions taking place around the country and around the world to recognize how difficult this situation is.