Red And White Blue Suede Shoes, I'm Uncle Sam How Do You Do?; Give Me Five Stay Alive, Ain't No Such Luck I Learned To Duck (Robert Hunter & Jerry Garcia - "U.S. Blues")

           With the beginning of the July, I cannot help but think about the importance of July 1st Canada Day and July 4 U.S Independence Day, sacred days for both my adopted country and my country of origin, These first few days of July remind me of the importance of liberal democracy, on this continent and throughout the world. As Winston Churchill said, “democracy is the worst form of government except for all the others that have been tried”.Yet despite Churchill’s insightful words, democracy and democratic institutions are under pressure, especially in two of the three democratic countries that should be beacons of democratic light throughout the world: Israel and the U.S. In Tom Friedman’s June 28th New York Times Editorial, entitled “The victory-at-any-cost mentality of the Trump far right — which was vividly described in Washington on Tuesday during Cassidy Hutchinson’s testimony to the Jan. 6 committee — is part of a broader trend of deeply anti-democratic values that are at odds with what many Americans and Israelis still aspire to. If this trend prevails, it will tear apart both societies, which is why the soul of Israeli democracy and the soul of American democracy is on the ballot in their next elections”. However, Friedman takes solace in the one-year experiment of Israel’s outgoing governing coalition comprised of center left/right wing/and Arab parties that managed to govern, pass a budget for the first time in 3 years, and essentially govern based upon democratic ideals, facts, and hope instead of fascism, alternative facts and fear. Friedman also found solace in the recent testimony before the January 6th committee of a 25-year-old white house staffer who came forward and told the committee all that she saw, all that she made notes of, and all the conversations she had. Friedman reminds us that democracy depends upon the ability to govern from the center, not the extremes, and there comes a time when individuals must always remember that the first loyalty is to country, constitution, and the rule of law and not party or individual. 

          This morning we read from Parsha Korach. Following their punishment of wandering for forty years because of their initial belief in the ten spies’ false report, Korach, a member of Moshe Rabeinu’s family stirs up trouble. Moshe’s authority is questioned, those who rebel are punished, and those who were silent bystanders were also punished. The Parsha concludes with God speaking to Moshe and enumerating Aaron’s priestly responsibilities, all of the entitlements, and all the sacrifices that come with the position

          Clearly, the most poignant moment in the narrative is the confrontation between Korach, Datan and Aviram, and all their followers with Moshe and Aaron. After witnessing Miriam becoming a leper for speaking against Moshe (Parsha B’Halotcha), after witnessing God’s anger and Moshe’s defense of the people in Parsha B’Halotcha and Shlach Lecha, the rebellion is very troubling. Moshe is shocked by it. He is hurt by it. The fact that he didn’t want the job in the first place, the fact that he went to bat for his flock time after time, leaves Moshe questioning his purpose.  Vayishmah Moshe Vayipol Al Panav – Moshe heard [the complaints] and fell on his face (Num 16:4).  Why did Moshe fall on his face? The Medieval commentators offer a variety of explanations.  Chizkuni, the 13th-century French commentator explains “Moshe fell to the ground in humiliation [at Korach accusation]. Rashi, the 11th-century French commentator explains that “Moshe fell in despair, he felt powerless to appeal to God for the fourth time. He defended the people after the Golden Calf, when they complained for no good reason, and when they heeded the spies." However, there is another and, perhaps, more modern reason why Moshe fell upon his face. Moshe was not humbling himself before Korach and the rebels. Rather he was publicly demonstrating that he was humbling himself before God, Torah, and its institutions. Moshe publicly demonstrated that his own ego and welfare were subservient to God and Torah. Korach’s rebellion and the fact that Korach did not fall upon his face indicated that Korach put himself above Torah and the community. Moshe was trying to save and preserve Torah, God, and community at his own expense.  Korach was clearly trying to promote himself.

          From the episode of Korach, we see the first example of how messy leading a community can be in which laws are discussed and interpreted as opposed to enacted based solely upon power. From the episode of Korach, we see, for the first time, a leader placing the rule of law, a document, and its institutions above himself. In doing so, Moshe preserves the community as well as retains his role as leader.  This type of leadership can neither afford to be cynical, self-centered, nor arrogant. Rather, this type of leadership must have the courage and the patience to lead people in a direction that is required as opposed to what the people may desire. Indeed, great leadership requires the courage to rule from the middle and to preserve a community’s sacred institutions and documents even at the expense of power.

Peace,
Rav Yitz

I Have Always Heard That Virtue Ought To Be Its Own Reward (John Barlow & Brett Mydland - "Just a Little Light")

           A  former and still popular U.S. President once said that “elections have consequences”. That statement reflects on the leaders who campaigned, and who sought votes and who either won or lost. That statement also reflects upon the public, both upon those who vote and those who don’t, upon those who are enfranchised and those who are disenfranchised, and those who live in and among the community where the election took place and those who do not live in the community but have to deal with the community.  “Elections have consequences” for wherever elections are held, at the Federal and the Municipal level and elections have consequences at a Co-Op board, a school board, a board of directors, and even at a Shul. If an effective, competent good leader is elected, the community and the organization is rewarded. If an incompetent, ignorant, self-promoting, or disingenuous leader is elected, the community and the organization are ultimately punished. 
          This Shabbat, we read from Parsha Korach. Korach was Moshe and Aaron’s cousin. “ tribe of Levi. Korach questioned Moshe's authority eventually leading a rebellion. Korach did question Moshe’s authority in a private meeting between individuals. Rather, Korach gathered 250 supporters, and then publicly challenged Moshe. Moshe tried to keep peace within the community but to no avail. A divine test is administered, and Korach and his supporters fail. The earth swallows them up. However, God is angry and a plague falls upon the people. They are communally punished for Korach's actions, their passive support, and their failure to bond together against Korach. Yet the people are still not convinced that Moshe and Aharon should remain in charge, only that Korach was unworthy. So a second divine test is administered this time with 12 rods stuck in the ground and almond branches resulting in Aaron’s staff, thus symbolizing that God has chosen Aharon to be the Kohen Gadol.  The Parsha concludes with God speaking to Aharon and re-iterating his obligations in terms of the Mishkan, the Altar, and the Tent of the Meeting. 
           The Parsha offers a benchmark for evaluating conflict. The Talmudic sages explain that conflicts disagreements and different opinions are to be expected    There are conflicts and disagreements that are “Shem Shamayim” (in the Name of Heaven) and there are those that are not in the name of heaven.  Korach’s rebellion, according to the Talmudic Sages, was not in the name of heaven.  The Parsha begins like any disagreement or a rebellion should begin: and an aggrieved person tries to convince others that they, too, are aggrieved.  VaYikach Korach ben Yitzhar Ben Kahat ben Levi v’ Datan V’Aviram B’nai Eliav V’On ben Pelet Bnai Reuven – Korach son of Itzhar son of Kohath son of Levi took Datan and Aviram.  By the end of the “Rebellion”, Moshe has attempted to make peace by bowing his head to the ground in front of Korach and God is seething VaYidaber Hashem  El Moshe V’Aharon Leimor, HiBadlu MiToch Ha’Edah HaZot  Va’Achaleh Otam K’Ragah - And Hashem spoke to Moshe and Aaron saying; separate yourselves from this congregation so that I may consume them in a moment.  VaYiplu Al Peneihem VaYomru Eil Elohei HaRuchot L’Chol Basar HaIsh Echad YeCheta V’Al Kol Ha’Edahg Tiktzof - and they fell upon their faces and said, “O’ God, God of the spirits and all flesh, shall one man sin, and You be angry with the entire assembly? (Num.14:20-21) The answer of course is yes. This is why God urged everyone to separate themselves from Korach, and those who did not would be punished as well.
          Yes, the people were misled by a disingenuous Korach. Indeed, Korach’s accusation that Moshe and Aaron were “lording” themselves over the community, resonated with those who followed Korach. The consequences were revealing. Moshe interceded on behalf of the community in order to minimize the communal guilt and punishment. Korach and his followers were punished.  However, the shine on Moshe’s leadership had been tarnished and his leadership would continue to be challenged until B’nei Israel’s arrival in Eretz Canaan. No, Korach’s rebellion did not succeed. Even so, the community was punished. Imagine what would have happened if Korach had succeeded. Well, it seems that there are enough examples of leaders who came to power through grievance, there are enough examples of leaders who are mostly concerned with themselves and not the welfare of the community, and there are plenty examples of leaders who spread KoRaCh spiritual baldness or emptiness as part of their own agenda. It is up to everybody else to speak out against such leaders and to distance themselves from such leaders not only for their own welfare but the welfare of the community or the organization.

Peace,
Rav Yitz

I Got No Dime, But I Got Some Time To Hear His Story ( Robert Hunter & Jerry Garcia - " Wharf Rat")

Our eldest daughter had a big week in terms of her professional career. For the past 5/6 months, she served as the campaign manager for a woman running for re-election to the Virginia State legislature. Her candidate won in a landslide. This was the first political campaign for which she was in charge of the entire campaign. With that experience, comes the next campaign which inevitably becomes a bigger and more prestigious campaign. Winning a campaign, as she explained to me, is all about a narratives. First she needs to tell the candidates life narrative and the narrative should include events, and experiences that allow the candidate to connect to the narratives of the voters.  That leads to the second narrative, the candidate needs to listen to the narratives of the voters’ lives. Her candidate needed to hear about the struggles, and tsuris that they deal with in order to speak to it and perhaps even come up with a solution for that pain, tsuris and hardship. The third narrative, is the integration of these two different narratives into a coherent messages that allows the candidate and voter to connect.  When I ask her about transmitting the narrative and what is the most powerful way of transmitting these narratives, it’s not Facebook, Twitter, digital media, print ads. Certainly all those modes of transmitting a narrative are helpful but nothing is more helpful than knocking on the door and talking to people face to face.

This week's Parsha is Chayei Sarah. The Parsha begins with the recounting the years of Sarah's life, Avraham's mourning for his wife, purchasing the land for Sarah's burial and then burying her. Avraham then tells his servant that he does not want his son, Yitzchak, marrying a Canaanite woman. Instead, the servant must return to Avraham's hometown and look for a woman from Avraham's family/ tribe. Avraham explains that the girl that returns with the servant is the right girl. Armed with treasures, camels and plenty of wealth for a dowry the servant sets off and decides that the best place to find a girl is by the local well. There the servant decides that the "right" girl is the girl who would offer him water, as well as offer water to his camels. Sure enough, Rebecca arrives at the well and fulfills the servant's standard. The servant returns with Rebecca to her family, convinces the family to let her go, and Rebecca is asked if she wants to return with the servant. Rebecca unhesitatingly responds with a yes. Now Rebecca has fulfilled the servant's requirement as well as Avraham's requirement. Upon her arrival at her new home, she sees her betrothed, and, not knowing who he was, asked the servant. The servant told her and she covered herself. Rebecca and Yitzchak are married. The Parsha concludes with Yitzchak and Ishmael burying their father, and the genealogy of Ishmael's family.

Three different times and in three different contexts we read about a father’s desire to find a wife for his son and then we read about that desire being fulfilled.  First, Avraham tells his servant Eliezer to swear an oath to find a wife for Yitzchak. Then we read about Eliezer actually finding the future wife for his master’s son, Yitzchak. Finally we read about Eliezer’s transmitting the first two narratives to the future bride’s family since they are about to be impacted by both Avraham’s desire for his son to find a wife and their daughter’s decision to become that wife. Each narrative contains numerous details and descriptions. Yet the narrative that immediately preceded this week’s Parsha, the narrative that Jewish tradition points to as the foundational essence of a people’s relationship to God, the Akedah, and the Binding of Isaac is scant nineteen verses and numerous details aren’t even included. In this one long narrative divided into three subsections, we are told of specific conversations, prayers, jewelry as well as gifts for Rebecca’s family.  Why does the Torah tell the story of how a couple met in three different ways, the third being a recapitulation of previous events by the servant. The only other time we read of a detailed recapitulation of a narrative is when Moshe speaks to B’nai Yisroel when they are on the eastern bank of the Jordan River and preparing to enter into Eretz Canaan. The RaDaK (Rabbi David Kimchi- Provence, France 1160-1235) explains that Eliezer’s recapitulation serves to placate Rebecca and her family. Avraham’s servant speaks candidly and enthusiastically of his master and his master’s household. Eliezer’s re-capitulation hints at the Avraham’s character as well as the very unique covenant established between him and God. Only by transmitting this message, this story in a face to face manner, Rebecca’s family understands the significance and the necessity of Rebecca leaving her family of origin for her future with Yitzchak.

Creating a narrative is important for individuals and for nations. However, it is the way in which that narrative gets transmitted which allows members of a family, a people, voters, citizens and members of a specific community to connect to a shared common past and experience. The means by which a narrative is transmitted will affect the way in which people connect with each other and its leadership. Just ask our daughter, she transmits narratives in order for people to serve their constituency and their community.  The real question becomes how do we transmit the values embodied in the narratives of our lives and our families and our traditions to the next generation?

Peace,

Rav Yitz