Va-Etchanan: Say It Again Now!

The Torah doesn't mind being repetitive. At the same time, one of the main principles of Biblical interpretation - known as exegesis - is that there's nothing extraneous in the text. Well, that's a central tenet of rabbinic exegesis anyway. 

Those two concepts might appear contradictory, but they're not. Yes, the Bible is incredibly repetitive... but that repetition is ITSELF meant to teach us something! One example of this is the famous verse, "Do not cook a [goat] kid in it's mother's milk," which actually appears THREE times in the Torah - Ex. 23:19, Ex. 34:26, and Deut. 14:21. The very fact that it is stated thrice is interpreted by the rabbis to mean it's important! So how do we extrapolate from this to other incessant... um, I mean fascinating... repetitions? This week, our Torah reading includes BOTH the Ten Commandments AND perhaps the most famous Jewish prayer, Shema Yisrael. Yet, what caught my eye as I read the text was something else that is stated, restated, restated again, and then... well, you get the idea.

Did you know that idolatry is bad? Yeah, caught me by surprise too. Seems the Torah isn't much of a fan. I've read this Torah portion 

many times, so I sat down and prepared to write about the Big Ten or the Shema... but couldn't help but notice that before, during, and even AFTER these central tenets, the text harps on about the dangers of idolatry over and over again. I've included my research at the bottom of this post, but my initial count yielded TWELVE separate references to the abomination of idolatrous worship, in just four chapters of Deuteronomy. Several times, the text simply reminds everyone that there's only ONE GOD, while other instances explicitly condemn, reject, admonish, rebuke, scorn, chastise, and chide the people for previous offenses as well as potential (almost assumed...) future temptations. So yeah, pretty crystal clear on worshiping other gods... it's a BIG no-no.

Now, we're only talking here about ONE Torah portion; I think it's safe to say that the people are reminded of this prohibition a couple (dozen) other times as well. 

So back to the rabbinic principle I began with, what deeper meaning could/should we extract from all this? If saying something three times means it's significant... what about a concern that is echoed exponentially more often?? My feeling is, idolatry is more complicated and insidious than we think. You may not keep a small sanctuary of house gods in your home, but I think our Tradition is trying to suggest its still lurking out there somewhere... ready to pounce on you regardless! When you read the books of the Biblical prophets, one thing you might notice is that pagan worship is particularly egregious because of something potentially surprising.

Humans seem to be particularly susceptible to marveling at their own ability to create. We are just super-impressed by... well, US! And idolatry, interestingly enough, is often described throughout the Bible as being about worshiping that which you, yourself, created. Gods of stone, wood, clay... but also money, power, 

influence, and fame. Being faithful to God - at least ideally - is meant to create a sense of humility in us, realizing that there's more to this world than what I see in front of me. There's also something "else," something inexplicable, indefinable, and even unseen. When you see it this way, you might discern that the core of the Ten Commandments AND the Shema AND perhaps the Bible as a whole, is this sense of humility, gratitude, and acceptance that we are not in control. Idolatry is the opposite of all that. It's not about the act itself, but what it says about us and how we view the world.  Framed this way, we might understand why the text is so emphatically opposed to idol worship... and also why it needs to repeat it again and again. Idolatry plagues us still, and is the root of so many problems across the globe. So maybe we still have more to learn? I guess it bears repeating just one more time...

CC images in this blog post, courtesy of:

1. Dannielle Blumenthal on Flickr

2. pxfuel.com

3. modernghana.com

4. geralt on Pixabay

Mentions of idolatry in Va-Etchanan:

1. Deuteronomy 4:3-4

2. 4:15-19

3. 4:23

4. 4:25

5. 4:28

6. 4:35 (God alone)

7. 4:39 (God alone)

8. 5:7 (1st commandment - no other gods)

9. 5:8-10 (2nd commandment - graven images)

10. 6:13-14

11. 7:4-5

12. 7:9 (God alone)

Devarim: I Thought I Was The Favorite!

Sometimes, it feels like the divide among various religious groups is comparable to rivalries like the Bloods & Crips, Hatfields & McCoys, or Red Sox & Yankees. Everyone's gotta pick a side!! 

What I especially find distasteful and toxic about this concept in relation to religions, is that it perpetuates the notion that there is One Truth, or that God has One Chosen (and thus "Favorite") Group. Not only has this widely held principle caused wars, destruction, misery, and devastation, but it's also false. Look, the Torah does use the language of our having a special relationship with God... but it never purports that no one else can therefore EVER have an equally unique and loving bond with The Divine. It would be like saying that you and your mom are super-super close... which somehow (I guess) must mean that your mother couldn't care less about your siblings! Furthermore, even though the Torah uses terms that denote exclusivity, it is also a LONG book, with many contradictory messages. Sometimes we're told that preserving life is more important than anything EVER... while other times we're instructed to stone to death someone who gathers firewood on Shabbat! Viewing religions as bitter rivals is a choice, not a given... and I prefer the message in this week's Torah reading instead.

That last sentence may have been surprising to you. You see, Devarim/Deuteronomy is a long monologue - or even a soliloquy - by Moses. Standing at the border of the Promised Land, Moses makes a (proverbial) 

sweeping gesture with his hand, and preaches to the people that "all this will be yours." Doesn't he? Well, sort of. In fact, the text is fascinatingly specific about which parts of the land are indeed designated for the Israelites... and which parts are NOT. In chapter two, God instructs the people, through Moses, saying: "You will pass through the land of the descendants of Esau... be very careful not to provoke them, for I will not give you of their land, not even so much as a footprint's worth!" (2:4-5) So God's being pretty clear here. God has a relationship with the children of Esau AS WELL, so you have no right to dispossess them of their land. Ok, fine, but that's unique to Esau, right? Surely that's the exception to... Um, hang on. Four verses later, the text states: "Do not harass the Moabites or provoke them to war, for I will not give you and of their land as a possession." (v. 9)

There goes that theory... But we also know that Ruth, the great-grandmother of King David, would eventually come from the Moabites, so maybe... Wrong again? "Do not harass [the Ammonites] or start a fight with them, for I will not give any part of their land to you as a possession" (v. 19). Three different times, the text tells us that other peoples live in this region, and we are not to disturb them. What I find particularly striking, is how Moses speaks of God having relationships with those people, making promises to the various groups, and not wanting everyone in the entire region wiped out in deference to the Israelites. 

We mustn’t ever forget either side of this coin: We DO have a special relationship with God... but it is NOT - in any way - to the exclusion of God’s other relationships 

with basically everyone on earth. We should be proud Jews, wrestling audaciously with God and with our religious tradition, but we have no right to place ourselves above other people. Or see anyone else as “less than.” The Torah is even using the language of “footprint,” which might (should?) make us think of our own carbon footprint; the importance of not taking up more space or resources than we need. Sometimes it’s hard letting go of the notion of being “The Favorite.” But I think if we stop for a moment and examine the repercussions of such thinking, we’re actually much better off with a humbler approach. If it can work for good parenting everywhere, I’m confident God can love us all equally as well!

 

CC images in this blog post, courtesy of:

1. Pixabay

2. Pixabay

3. zeevveez on Flickr

4. Peakpx

Matot-Masei - What Have We Been Doing All This For??

This week, we’re finishing up the Fourth Book of the Torah, B’midbar (Numbers). After this, the Fifth (and final) Book, Devarim/Deuteronomy, is mainly just a recapitulation of all that has happened to the Israelites on their Exodus from Egypt. 

So whatever place they arrive at in our parashah, that’s pretty much as far as they’re going to go. Just the Jordan to cross, and they’re IN the Holy Land! And that’s been the goal all along, right? Not only to escape slavery, nor merely to receive the Torah at Mount Sinai, and not even “just” to congeal as a people and become a nation... but THE LAND - that’s the Grand Prize! Isn’t it? Well, I’m not so sure. The Torah, in fact, doesn’t seem 100% sure about this either, and, perhaps MOST surprisingly, even Moses kind of leaves some room for question. Sooo... now what?

Everything was going swimmingly. 40 years of wandering has passed, the people are stronger and more battle-tested; they are ready for The Conquest - capital T, capital C. Then, a band of no-good-niks 

go and mess it all up. The two tribes of Reuben and Gad, along with half (??) of the tribe of Menashe approach Moses with a request: “If we have found favor in your eyes, give us this land as an inheritance; do not move us across the Jordan [River].” (Numbers 32:5) What an outrage!! What chutzpah!! We wandered and wandered for 40 years, only so you can stay on the OTHER side of the Jordan and not claim the Holy Land for us and for God?!?! Moses is incensed, and yells at these agitators that even uttering such a petition has surely already enraged The Divine!! But their audacity continues. Instead of apologizing and backing away slowly, they try to negotiate. They offer to leave their families and belongings in this land they have requested, and enter the land WITH the rest of the Israelites, to help them conquer it (and then they'll return home, back across the Jordan). Well, you can only IMAGINE what Moses has to say about that, right???

Moses says “sure.” Yup, you heard that right. Moses agrees to their proposal. Ummmm... well that’s a little confounding, isn’t it? Back to my original assertion, wasn’t it a central and essential goal of this Exodus to conquer THE LAND?? 

And not just to conquer it, but to settle it and build our homes there? I think it’s fair to say that that’s what we’d been led to believe the whole time. Nevertheless, the Torah goes on to tell us that this is exactly what happens with the two-point-five tribes, and even in later books of the Tanach, we see that this community does indeed remain in Jordan for hundreds of years. As I’ve stated in previous blog posts, not only is this the first real Diaspora Jewish community, but one might even argue that the Diaspora was established BEFORE a community was formed in Israel; starting with the moment these families and possessions were kept back on the other side of the river. 

I believe the Torah is teaching us a fundamental lesson here. Maybe even several lessons. First of all, the safety and protection of the Land of Israel is ALL our responsibility; whether we live there or not. But interestingly, choosing to NOT live in the land is also a valid option! Even today, those of us living outside the State of Israel are sometimes made to feel guilty, as if residing elsewhere is an “inferior” choice, or perhaps even a “cop-out.” 

But the Torah itself doesn’t seem to feel that support and settlement are one and the same. So why should we? Second, perhaps a more global lesson (not tied to the question of Zionism) is that I love how the Torah shows us that each person and group may have their own destiny. What’s right for one person isn’t right for everyone. We don’t have to feel ashamed or apologetic when our journey leads us to unexpected places; life is FULL of unplanned shifts, changes, and resets. I highly doubt that Reuben, Gad, and Mena (cause it’s only half of “Menashe”...) were hatching this plan for 40 years. They had every intention of sharing the Promised Land with the other tribes... but life took them in a different direction. We may feel surprised, challenged, and even disappointed when things change in a BIG way. But we also have to learn to adapt and accept. If Moses (and God) could do it, I think we’re capable as well. 

CC images in this blog post, courtesy of:

1. Library of Congress on Wikimedia Commons

2. Piqsels

3. Andrew Dawes on Flickr

4. Jonathan Billinger on Wikimedia Commons

Conversation on Racism and Anti-Semitism (Video)

Related to my previous post, about comments made by Eagles' wide receiver, DeSean Jackson, here is a video of a conversation I had with two of my friends, Cory Long and Rocky Brown, about racism, anti-Semitism, and misunderstandings between different minority communities.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRU52lb-MCg

On DeSean Jackson - He Just Isn’t Our Problem...

Ok, so here’s where the racism conversation gets really tricky and thorny. A player with the Philadelphia Eagles, DeSean Jackson, wrote some awful, anti-Semitic remarks, reiterating the incredibly tired trope of Jews controlling finances and seeking world domination. And there are lots of articles about how he hasn’t been condemned enough, and how outrageous it is that other players have come to his defense. One such article is this one:

https://www.inquirer.com/eagles/desean-jackson-eagles-malcolm-jenkins-fine-20200711.html

And I certainly agree that the comments are anti-Semitic and racist. There’s no excuse for them. My issue is, what does condemnation achieve? Don’t people just shut up, apologize... but continue holding those same beliefs? I’ve heard similarly upsetting comments about Jews in sports’ executive offices, or behind record labels in the music industry. It’s hard to hear. But we need to TALK about them. Ignoring them or trying to shout one another down does NO ONE any good. 

One defender of Jackson’s, a fellow player named Malcolm Jenkins, wrote in his somewhat dismissive response: “Jewish people aren’t our problem, and we aren’t their problem.” And that actually makes me really sad. I think he was trying to say, “they don’t hate us, and we don’t hate them”... and maybe also “we’ve both got bigger enemies to deal with.” But it’s still sad, because I actually think it’s a Freudian slip. What he accidentally MEANT to say was, “we don’t care about one another.” And we SHOULD. We need to care, and we need to combine forces, because we do indeed have common enemies, and they benefit when we fight one another. And Jews and blacks have A LOT in common... not to mention the fact that there are quite a few Jews who ARE black! 

So, why is it so hard to talk? Let’s get all the toxic stereotypes out on the table, so we can educate one another another and grow together. What do you think??? Ultimately, I think we all spend too much time talking, and not enough time listening. Well, this is just as good a moment as any. Let’s talk. Share your thoughts/comments here. Thanks!

Pinchas: A Time for Action

We have a problem. It may be a Western culture thing, but I suspect it’s actually a global challenge. We see ALL forms of extremism and extreme reactions as bad, unproductive, and destructive. Which, to be fair, they often are. But then, as a result, we aim constantly and exclusively for calm discussion, sensible reasoning, 

level-headed decision-making, and practical solutions. If I’m being completely honest, I have essentially subscribed to that way of thinking most of my life as well. But what happens when either the rational, objective, logical paths have all been exhausted, producing zero results, OR when a situation warrants something outrageous, crazy, spur-of-the-moment, and purely emotional? Then we’ve got a problem. Because we don’t know what to do or how, and we have been trained - all our lives - to view those kinds of behaviors as mortifying, unacceptable, and bad. Our parashah challenges our way of thinking, when it begins by focusing on a man who acts impulsively, irrationally, savagely, and as a maverick... and God rewards him for it! Not only with praise, but God gives him something that we might find bewildering and TOTALLY inappropriate - a “Brit Shalom,” a Covenant of Peace. 

Pinchas, the man in question, is the grandson of Aaron. At the end of last week’s Torah portion, Moses and Aaron stood in front of the whole community, declared that NO ONE could have sexual relations with an idolater, and then, right before their eyes, an Israelite man walked into a nearby tent with a Midianite (and thus idolatrous) woman. Everyone was stunned... 

that is, except Pinchas, who grabbed a spear, followed them into the tent, and impaled them both - together! Following Pinchas’ rash and brutal action, the text declares, “... then the plague [same word as pandemic...] against the Israelites stopped” (Numbers 25:8). And if anyone was unsure whether Pinchas’ actions were both favored by God and directly led to the end of the plague, our Torah portion this week reiterates that his deeds yielded Pinchas a “Brit Shalom,” a Covenant of Peace, and explains: “... [it is] because he took impassioned action for his God, thus atoning for the Israelites” (v. 13). So what are we supposed to make of this? Again, we have a problem. One doesn’t DO this. Pinchas’ behavior is wrong, and leads to death, chaos, and totalitarianism. How can we learn anything from this story, other than religious fundamentalism seems to be favored by God... but remains abhorrent to most of us?

We need to grapple with this text. That’s why I not only emphasized it here (my first blog post after a couple weeks’ hiatus...), but I deliberately included much of the uncensored, gory details of Pinchas’ actions. We can’t sugar-coat this, and we mustn’t look away from it. To be CRYSTAL clear; I am NOT encouraging my

readers to kill or harm anyone! I am not condoning this behavior AT ALL. What I AM asking us to sit with is our own discomfort, and I want us to see how measured responses sometimes harm us as well. For example, back in January-February, most of us refused to imagine the impact of this pandemic. “We’re going to wear masks??? Every day, in all public spaces?!?! Isn’t that a bit MUCH?????” A second example, how we have ignored - for centuries - the embarrassment of racism in this country. We try to rationalize and justify, and focus on conversations, discussions, and working through our problems. Indeed, if you were sitting with a group of people and someone started yelling or cursing, the unpleasantness of that experience would turn many away. “You just don’t act that way.” But why are our only two options to calmly sit at a table and debate something OR grab a spear and find a heretic to impale??? We’ve got to work on finding a few middle-of-the-road options.

Sometimes, we need to get angry. Outraged even. We need to cry genuine tears of bitterness and frustration, so that we can truly STARE directly into the brokenness and injustice that pervades our society. Otherwise, what do we mean when we say “Never again,” or “Dayeinu - Enough,” or “Not on my watch”? Are they empty words? Will we only muster enough energy to draft a stern letter to a newspaper, or call and voice our objection to a local politician? 

Yes, those actions are vital as well... but sometimes the situation at hand demands passion, emotion, and action. Pinchas is an extreme example. But it would be foolish and misguided of us to dismiss or censor this story, mainly because it makes us uncomfortable. Let’s take violence and murder off the table (phew!). Do you then have NO options left? How else could you stand up and actually live the values you purport to uphold? Think about the famous words from the Biblical book of Ecclesiastes (brought back to popular culture by the Byrds’ song, “Turn, Turn, Turn”). Yes, there are times for silence, healing, and keeping; all manor of gentle, socially-acceptable, tactful behaviors. But there must then also be times for speaking, crying, throwing, and yes, even destroying and fighting. It’s hard to accept, but we all really need to ask ourselves: Do we have the capacity for outrage? Do we believe that somewhere - anywhere - there is a line that cannot be crossed, when injustice has simply gone too far? And what might we do when that happens? And most scary of all, if that isn’t right now, in this toxic climate, then when? 

CC images in this blog post, courtesy of:

1. AnonMoos on Wikiquote

2. Brooklyn Museum on Wikimedia Commons

3. needpix.com

4. Dirk Ehlen on Flickr