Just Like A Deaf Man Dancin'; Like A Blind Man Shootin' Pool; Heaven Help The Fool (John Barlow & Bob Weir "Heaven Help The Fool")

          This past Saturday night, and for the 48 hours that followed on into Monday, I had the same sickening feeling in my stomach that I a little over fifteen years ago with the 9/11 terrorist attacks and its immediate aftermath. While in the movie, my cellphone vibrated, a New York Times breaking news stated that a bomb had exploded in the Chelsea section of New York City. I watched and listened to the news all day on Sunday, and on Monday. No, thankfully this was not 9/11 all over again. Because this is an election year, as the investigation unfolded, the story became political and in a sense a political referendum on the Hilary Clinton’s candidacy and Donald Trump’s candidacy. Perhaps the most ridiculous, dangerous and saddest comment came from Donald Trump during a rally in Fort Meyers, Florida, “If you choose Donald Trump, these problems are going to go away, far far greater than anyone would think, believe me.”  Really? Is he serious or just speaking in Trump hyperbole? “If you choose Donald Trump, these problems are going away….” I get it. All I have to do is pull the lever for Trump and poof, no more threat of terrorism, no more fear of terrorism, no more anxiety caused by terrorism. Just pulling that little lever in the voting booth will make all the trouble in the world go away. As ridiculous as Trump’s comments were, something incredibly sad simultaneously took place there at that rally. It is something that takes place everywhere Trump speaks. Those in attendance clap, cheer, nod their heads and actually believe him and his words. They lap it up as someone who had been in a desert without water for days and days. They cheer and scream and look as if they have been shown some type of light even if that light is the darkness of hatred, fear and ignorance.

This week's Parsha, is Ki Tavoh. For the past several Parshiot, Moshe has been listing and explaining all the precepts and laws. Last week's Parsha, and the first part of Ki Tavoh explains the rewards. We will inherit the land; we will keep the land. Our enemies will be rendered weak. We will be fruitful and multiply. However the second half of the Parshah explains all the curses that would befall us if we neglect to observe these laws. Every curse, of course, is the diametric opposite the previous blessings. So if we were promised bountiful harvests and many children, then our curse will be drought, famine, and bareness. Traditionally, the Aliyot that contain the curses are read in a softer voice. However as horrible as these curses are, we must understand that it is up to us. We can either follow these laws or not, and as a result we will bear the consequences of our actions. This is not necessarily a bad lesson for us as well as our children to learn. We are responsible for our actions, and we must bear responsibility for the consequences of those actions.

            One of the curses is most poignant in light of listening to Trump.  Arur Mashgeh Iveir Ba'Derech, Va'Amar Kol Ha'Am Amen - Accursed is one who causes a blind person to go astray on the road. And the entire nation said 'Amen" (Deut 27:18). If we read this literally then we are talking about a guide or a seeing-eye dog that would lead the blind astray. However this curse is symbolic. We know that Torah is a light and the word Derech (way) is usually in combination with the Way of the Lord (God's Laws). On a metaphorical level, the curse is upon those leaders of a community that causes the less knowledgeable to go astray. If that knowledge causes those who are blind (re: those who are in the dark or without light) to go astray, then that leader should be cursed. Implicit to that statement is that the one who causes the blind to go astray sees the light, has knowledge and teaches or guides the community away from God.          

            Our Talmudic Sages offer an Agadah about the teachers/Rabbis who were the leaders of their communities. "If there are two teachers, one who covers much ground but is not exact, and one who does not cover much ground but is exact, Rav Dimi b. Nehardea maintained that the one who is exact and does not cover much ground is to be appointed. The reason? A mistake once implanted (in the mind or in behavior) remains [a mistake]. (Talmud Baba Batrah 21a-b). The Talmudic sages essentially understood the first rule in education. It is terribly difficult to undo that which has already been incorrectly taught.  It appears that the Talmudic Sages also understood quite a bit about Presidential campaign politics as well.

Peace,

Rav Yitz

But I Say That The Women Today Are Smarter Than The Men In Every Way (Norman Span - " Man Smart, Women Smarter")

History was made this week. The proverbial glass ceiling was broken. For the first time in the history of the United States, a major political party formally nominated a woman for the President of the United States. While so many participants at the Democratic National Convention were praising themselves, while the press was taking a “pause” to recognize the historical significance, one talking head rightly pointed out just how behind the United States is. After all Angel Merkel has been the leader of Germany for many years already. Great Britain was led by Margaret Thatcher in the 1980’s. Indira Gandhi led India  in the first half of the 1980’s, Benazir Bhutto was the Prime Minister of Pakistan in the late 1980’s and then in a second term in the mid 1990’s. And before all of those women were elected to office, Gold Meir a diminutive Jewish woman from Milwaukee Wisconsin (via Kiev), became Prime Minister of Israel in the late 1960’s and early 1970’s. Yes Golda Meir broke the glass ceiling nearly 50 years ago. However Jewish law began breaking glass ceilings long before Golda Meir.

                This Shabbat we read from Parsha Pinchas. The first few psukim (verses) of the Parsha are a direct continuation of the previous Shabbat Parsha Balak. There is no elapse of time in the narrative. Balak concludes with a plague upon B’nai Yisroel for its worship of Moabite/Midianite god, Baal Peor. Aaron’s son Pinchas zealously acts by killing Zimri from the tribe of Shimon and Cozbi the Midianite woman. God tells Moshe to reward Pinchas for his behavior by giving him the Brit Shalom, the Covenant of Peace. This covenant is only for Pinchas and his descendants. Keeping in mind that B’nai Yisroel has now concluded it 40 years of wandering in the wilderness and are poised upon the eastern bank of the Jordan River; a new census is taken. Just like we needed to know how many left Egypt, we now need to know how many will enter into Eretz Canaan. After the census is taken Moshe must judge a legal case concerning the laws of inheritance when a man has only daughters. This brief narrative is about the “Daughters of Tzelophchad”. Following this narrative, God commands Moshe to teach the new generation the laws for time bound offerings including the Shabbat offering, the Rosh Chodesh offering, the offerings for the Shelosh Regalim (Three Pilgrimage Festivals etc).

The narrative concerning the Daughters of Tzelophchad is really the first instance in the Torah of a glass ceiling breaking. No, it may not be as dramatic as becoming the first Prime Minister or President, however the seeds for ground breaking change at the highest level, owe, in small part to small very subtle shifts in social norms. This narrative illustrates the point. B’nai Yisroel is about to enter Eretz Canaan. Each tribe is to receive an area. Each family within each tribe is to receive tribal land. Until that moment, in that part of the world, and at that time, inheritance was through the man. A son inherited his father. If there was no son, then inheritance would revert to the living brother (if one existed). Or land would be inherited by the son- in law, or held in trust, until the daughter of the deceased married. The idea that a daughter could inherit was unheard of, and unthinkable. How do we know this? The daughters present their case to Moshe and he doesn’t know how to decide. So he asks God: Avinu Meit BaMidbar V’Hu Lo Hayah B’Toch Ha’Eidah HaNoadim Al Adoshem B’Adat Korach Ki v’Cheto Meit U’Vanim Lo Hayu Lo – Our father died in the Wilderness, but he was not among the assembly that was gathering against Hashem in the assembly of Korach, but he died of his own sin; and he had no son. Lamah Yigra Shem Avinu MiToch Mishpachto Ki Ein Lo Bein T’nah Lanu Achuzah B’Toch Achei Avinu – Why should the name of our father be omitted from among his family because he had no son? Give us a possession among our father’s brothers. Quite cleverly, the daughters explain that their father did not participate in any rebellion against Moshe’s nor God’s authority. Rather he committed and individual sin that led to his death. However that should not preclude him nor his family from receiving land. Clearly this was entirely new and Moshe had never no idea how to solve this precedent setting legal issue. VaYakreiv Moshe et Mishpatan Lifnei Hashem – So Moshe brought their claim to Hashem. However a hint as to decision exist in the word MishpataN (their claim). The last letter of the word is written in a bold font compared to the rest of the Torah letters. This special letter designating the daughters tells us that the daughters were meritorious and worthy of making the claim. They did so in a respectful manner mindful of the law and willing to work within the system.  The rest of the narrative substantiates the final letter’s special font in MishpataN as God instructs Moshe that indeed, the daughters inherit and this precedent will become law just like the laws that Moshe presents to B’nai Yisroel at the Parsha’s conclusion.

Yes, we take it for granted that woman can own land. However it didn’t always use to be like that. First Lady Michelle Obama pointed out in her speech to the Democratic National Convention, that young millennial woman (including my three daughters) take for granted that a woman can aspire to anything including President of the United States. But for those who came first, for those who set the precedent, it wasn’t something to be taken for granted. It wasn’t considered normal.  As God says to Moshe- Kein B’not Tzelophchad Dovrot – The daughters of Tzlophchad speak properly. The daughters had merit, they wanted the same responsibilities and land oriented obligations as everyone else who had received land.  They did not want any special favors; just an equal opportunity. Yes, sometimes the glass ceilings breaks as a result of one big rock. Sometimes it breaks as a result of thousands of small stones thrown at the ceiling over the course of time, chipping away here and there, making a tiny crack here and there, until finally it shatters.

Peace

Rav Yitz

Standing On The Moon, Where Talk Is Cheap And Vision True (Robert Hunter & Jerry Garcia - "Standing On The Moon")

For the past few months, as our Canadian friends watch coverage of the Presidential Campaign, and, needless to say they can’t believe what they watch and what they hear. Forget trying to explain primaries, delegates, conventions or anything else. They are amazed by what comes out of the candidates’ mouth. They are amazed at the personal insults that are hurled back and forth. Our children, since they are the “resident Americans” in the school also are frequently asked by their friends about the Presidential campaign, about Trump, Cruz, Sanders and Clinton and all the insults and all the hyperbole and all the gossip, rumor and hearsay that is bandied about in the respective campaigns. Admittedly, it is rather embarrassing to listen to what these people say about each other, or in the case of Trump and Cruz, what they say about each other’s wives. Theoretically it is important to discuss differences in policy, judgment and temperament.   As the candidates campaign just across Lake Ontario in New York State, unfortunately the reality is very different. Rather than an intelligent discussion, we are exposed to gossip, rumors, half- truths hyperbole and Lashon Hara. When asked about another candidate, we are told that they are unqualified, dangerous, threatens the fabric of life. A more novel approach would be for the candidate who is asked about another candidate to simply say “I don’t know”. Such an answer would demonstrated self-control, humility and probably a lot of wisdom.

This Shabbat we read from Parsha Metzorah. The discussion and laws for Tamei/ Tahor (Purity & Impurity) as it affects human beings is continued from last week’s Parsha, Tazria. We continue to learn intricate details concerning how an individual becomes ritually purified, his/her reentrance into the camp, and the prominent role of the Kohen Gadol in ascribing a spiritual treatment for a physical expression of a spiritual problem. Besides discussing the laws of the Metzorah, the laws of one who suffers from this skin ailment, the Parsha also confronts the issues of the Metzorah spreading to a house and the method by which that impurity is removed from the house. The second half of the Parsha concentrates on the laws of Taharah Mishpachah, the laws of family purity.

          When Tzaraat is discovered on an individual, he or she would go to the Kohen Gadol, the High Priest, and undergo and examination. However if the Tzaarat spreads beyond the individual and pollutes the home: U’Vah Asher Lo HaBayit V’Higid LaKohen Leimor- “K’Negah NiReH Li BaBayit” – And he that owns the house shall come and tell the priest saying: It seems to me there is as it were a plague in the house. (Lev. 14:35) Even if the individual sees the Tzaarat, sees the impurity, knows that it is Tzaarat, the individual cannot and must not say that “It is plague in the house,” but rather K’Negah literally “It is like a plague”. Rashi explains that “even if the individual is learned and has no doubt as to the nature of the plague, he must not utter a definitive judgment, but merely declare “it seems”.  On the surface Rashi’s comment appears to be focused upon the issue of “Purity and Impurity”, and reminding us that the authority to decide and declare Purity and Impurity rests solely upon the High Priest.  The Talmud in Tractate Brachot 4a teaches: I have learned from my Masters that the wording is not associated with the definition of purity and impurity. Rather, it serves as a moral lesson, i.e., even in the event of certainty about an impurity, one should declare it as doubtful. Thus our Sages have stated, “Teach your tongue to say ‘I do not know’ “. The MaHaRaL of Prague (Rabbi Yehuda Loew of Prague 1525-1609) takes the lesson a step further. “Since it is but the priest who establishes the Nega (the plague and its legal implications); he would not be speaking the truth.” If that individual is not speaking the truth, then he is speaking Lashon HaRa.

Here in this simple statement “K’Negah” –It seems to be a plague” is simplest and most effective way to deal with Lashon HaRa- acknowledge that we “don’t know” for sure, and that we are not necessarily as authoritative as we think we are.  While I realize a candidate saying “I don’t know” might indicate a sense of weakness or lack of knowledge; “I don’t know, ask the other guy” might also be a sign of empowerment. Rather than sinking to the level of the press, and contributing to an otherwise nasty environment, “I don’t know, ask the other guy”, suggests self-discipline, thoughtfulness, and a dignity that the office of the President deserves.

Peace,

Rav Yitz