Monthly Archives: May 2021

Shavuot is the celebration of the revelation of the Torah. Since that moment when it was given to the Jewish people, matan torah, its words and letters including the spaces on the Torah scroll have been open to interpretation. When we think of commentaries that help us comprehend the multilayers and multidimensions of meaning in the Torah, we think of the rabbis of the Talmud and Midrash, not to mention Ibn Ezra, Rashi, Ramban, Sforno, Hirsch, Nechama Leibowitz, Shlomo Riskin, Aviva Zornberg and Jonathan Sacks, to name a few. While all are important, there are other forms of commentary that use the other side of the brain.The arts can also be a form of commentary.One way I teach is by taking a biblical scene and finding a number of paintings, sculptures, or drawings to see how different artists interpret the text through the artwork they produce. For example, there is one theory that Michelangelo painted the robe surrounding God in the Creation of Adam in the Sistine Chapel as a silhouette of the human brain. In this way, Michelangelo represents God as pure thought or reason. Lyrics in modern and contemporary songs can be another example of biblical commentary. Leonard Cohens You Want It Darker is a haunting and profound interpretation of the biblical word heneni (here I am).MOVIES, TOO, can be a form of commentary/interpretation. When it comes to the revelation of the Torah at Mount Sinai, we have Cecil B. DeMilles The Ten Commandments and Stephen Spielbergs The Prince of Egypt. The question both DeMille and Speilberg faced is who would do the voice of God, which in and of itself is a question of interpretation. DeMille shot some of the movie at the mountain of Santa Caterina in the Sinai Desert in 1955, a year before the Sinai War. At the monastery at the base of the mountain after a day of filming Gods revelation at the Burning Bush, Charlton Heston (who played Moses), DeMille and the abbot of the monastery had dinner together. Heston remembers:

Mr. DeMille, I said. When we were filming that today, I was trying to imagine Gods voice. (We were to record that back in the studio.) Surely I hear Him inside my own head, my own heart. I think it should be my voice, too. The abbot sipped his wine and nodded thoughtfully. DeMille smiled. Well have to think about that. You already have a pretty good part, you know. Its possible, though. It might work. Some months later, thats the way we did it. I never really heard God on the mountain. But I found Moses there.

Hestons insight about the voice of God and Moses is also found in the Talmud! The question is raised over the sentence, As Moses spoke God answered him in a voice (Exodus 19:19) describing the encounter between Moses and God on Mt. Sinai. In Brachot 45a we read:

As it is stated: Moses spoke, and God responded in a voice (Exodus 19:19). This verse requires further consideration, as there is no need for the verse to state in a voice since we know that God spoke in a voice so the phrase in a voice adds nothing. Rather, to what purpose did the verse state in a voice ? In Moses voice. That is to say, since voice meaning the voice of God is redundant it must be teaching something else. In this case God spoke in the voice of Moses so Moses could better understand.

cnxps.cmd.push(function () { cnxps({ playerId: '36af7c51-0caf-4741-9824-2c941fc6c17b' }).render('4c4d856e0e6f4e3d808bbc1715e132f6'); });

As with all great communicators, God speaks in the language of those with whom they are speaking to so they can be better understood. George Bernard Shaw said, The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place. That is to say, just because words have been exchanged is no guarantee that the speaker will be fully understood by the person they are speaking to. Both the speaker and the listener make assumptions about the meaning of the words exchanged; when those assumptions dont line up, misunderstandings easily develop. This is even more so when it comes to God communicating with humans. A midrash makes the point that at Mt. Sinai, God fine-tuned His messaging by speaking in countless voices so Gods commandments could be comprehended by all the Children of Israel:

Come and see how the voice would go out among all of Israel each and every one according to their capacity: the elders according to their capacity; the young men according to their capacity; the infants according to their capacity; the sucklings according to their capacity; the women according to their capacity; and even Moshe according to his capacity. (Shemot Rabbah 5:9)

RELATED, SPIELBERGS original idea was for the voice of God to be represented by a myriad of voices according to Val Kilmer, who, in the end, did the voices for both Moses and God. Kilmer recounts it was a wonderful idea, but it didnt work dramatically. It sounded unpleasant. So they came back to the very solid theological idea that God comes to you in a voice that you can hear or comprehend. So they asked me to go back and record the voice of God. Kilmer adds, Its not exactly the voice of Moses, but its a familiar sound to him. I loved that idea.

The revelation at Mount Sinai of the Torah remains a mystery as to what exactly happened and what exactly was heard. Still: at the end of the day, we are fortunate in that we can have before us a handwritten Torah scroll and/or a chumash, the printed version of the Five Books of Moses, as well as a table full of commentaries. Rabbi Louis Finkelstein taught, When I pray, I speak to God, when I study, God speaks to me.

That is a conversation worth engaging in and listening to.

The writer is rabbi emeritus of the Israel Congregation, Manchester Center, Vermont, and a faculty member of the Arava Institute for Environmental Studies and Bennington College.

Read more here:

Shavuot: The voice of God in the revelation on Sinai - The Jerusalem Post

In Israel, you can truly feel the unique combination represented by the Shavuot holiday. We commemorate the revelation at Sinai, while at the same time celebrating a harvest festival, oscillating between the heights of heaven and the soil of the Land of Israel. We cast our gaze heavenward in seeking to connect with Torah, while at the same time connecting with the earth beneath our feet, and its bounty.

The festival of the giving of the Torah (Matan Torateinu) demands that we prepare ourselves, that we spend the night immersed in learning, that we internalize that the Torah will only continue to exist if it is embraced again and again and on the condition that we prove ourselves worthy of it. And to be worthy of receiving the Torah we need to strive to improve ourselves, on both the personal and communal levels. Yes, we can quote biblical verses and claim that the Torah justifies our actions, but all too often the result is mere hypocrisy (naval birshut HaTorah). If we truly want to embrace the Torah bestowed to our ancestors, we need to work, and work hard. If we aspire to connect with heaven, Shavuot teaches us that the pathway to heaven passes through this world.

In Vayikra Rabbah (Midrash on Leviticus) we learn: Therefore, when you enter the Land of Israel, occupy yourselves first and foremost with planting meaning that entering the land does not call for a mass prayer rally, but rather for agricultural activity.

More than two millennia later, Zionism speaks to us of the connections between a person and the land, between individuals and their destinies, and between fellow human beings. Therefore, by listening to the land we can also learn how to be more attentive to others. Connecting to the land means not just planting a tree and then moving on to something really important, but rather appreciating that a deed that begins in the soil can lead up to heaven.

There are those who believe that revelation was entirely a celestial event, detached from the vanities of this world. They would say (Babylonian Talmud, Berakhot 35b): When Israel performs Gods will, their work is performed by others. I am not referring to those who spend all day long studying in yeshivot, but rather to those who focus solely on their own beliefs, their own Torah and only as they understand it thus completely blinding themselves to the world around them.

cnxps.cmd.push(function () { cnxps({ playerId: '36af7c51-0caf-4741-9824-2c941fc6c17b' }).render('4c4d856e0e6f4e3d808bbc1715e132f6'); });

We must also take note of Jerusalem Day, which we have just celebrated. God said, I shall not enter the Heavenly Jerusalem until I enter the earthly Jerusalem... Jerusalem rebuilt, a city unified. (Babylonian Talmud, Taanit 5a) Perhaps, if we think about the connections between the heavenly Jerusalem and the earthly Jerusalem, we will succeed in becoming a better society. Better than a society that speaks of Jerusalem as a city unified, from East to West and from North to South. The danger of embracing a Torah that is detached from reality is not only in ignoring those around you, but also in acting neglectfully, and even cruelly toward them.

Rabbi Yoav Ende is executive director of the Hannaton Center for Leadership.

Read more:

Shavuot - Celebrating the giving of the Torah and the harvest festival - The Jerusalem Post

I am reading a striking book called Send in the Idiots: Stories from the Other Side of Autism. It is written by a remarkable man, Kamram Nazeer, who was born to Pakistani parents, raised in New York City and now lives in London. Diagnosed with autism, Nazeer went to one of the very earliest programs that attempted to provide an appropriate education for special needs children. Many years later, as an adult, he decided to visit some of his former classmates to see what had become of them and how they had adapted to life.

The first former classmate adapted to the challenge of conversing by speaking through the use of puppets. The man created a variety of puppets, and when he has specific things to say he utilizes a different puppet. His rules are that the puppet is speaking, not him, and you have to address the puppet, not him.

For autistic individuals, conversation is not something one can just assume but is a skill requiring deep and persistent work. Because of this, Nazeer spends several pages thinking about what it means to be in conversation. And his insights are relevant because the work that we Jews do is participating in and maintaining an ancient and vibrant conversation with the Holy One, with the generations, with Torah.

Nazeer observes, first of all, that conversation is a form of performance. Conversations cannot flourish when one party sets out to win or destroy the other participant. To enter into conversation means to invite the other person to join with you and can only continue when both parties are participating, when they both are engaged.

Nazeer noticed that conversations are not about conclusions. Most conversations that he overheard between neurotypical people never had a real conclusion; they just moved from subject to subject, dancing around. As I read that description, I thought, How similar to the Talmud!

The Talmud contains approximately 5,000 conversations/makhlokot. Only about 50 are concluded because the action is not in the answer; the action is in the exchange, in the questioning, in the probing, in the exploration. In understanding why someone might see a matter differently than the way we see it, we explore the origins of our perspective while continuing to perceive it the way we do. The great Jewish philosopher Shlomo ibn Gabirol, in his beautiful work Mivhar Ha-Penimim, writes, Wisdom about which there is no discussion is like a hidden treasure from which nothing is extracted. Wisdom is made visible by sharing it with others, by bringing it to the light of day and then by batting it around. It is through conversing with others that we bring wisdom into the world, and it becomes something we can own and with which we can live.

It is through conversing with others that we bring wisdom into the world.

Nazeer reflects that conversations are not linear. He writes, Though conversation may well bring out matters of this sort, it shouldnt be directed at a conclusion, and it shouldnt, too formally, be about something. It should circle, it should break up, it should recommence at an entirely different point. This is certainly an accurate description of Jewish sacred literature. Our sacred writings routinely circle around, suddenly break up and begin yet again when we least expect it.

Because we never know when a topic will reappear, we never know when a subject will begin, so we need to pay attention at each stage of the conversation. At any moment someone could reveal something you need; someone may introduce a subject of vital importance in the middle of an apparently unrelated topic.

The Talmud notes, Even the secular conversations of the Sages require study. Precisely because there is deep insight clothed even in trivial conversation, and because we dont have access to an objective place to stand, we can only know through our own knowing; we can only converse from where we are. A judge has nothing to see with save their own eyes.

Perhaps most important of all, conversation should be fun. You have to relish the opportunity to bring something into the world or to bring something out of your fellow human being. In that exchange, there is deep joy: the invitation to connect to each other, the invitation to connect to our heritage, the invitation to connect to God. As the Pirkei Avot tells us, When two persons meet and exchange words of Torah, the Shekhinah hovers over them.

But the process can only be fun if you treat your conversing partner with full respect and with unfeigned affection. There must be civility in our conversations with each other; otherwise, they will shut down. There is a tradition that in the Messianic future, we will paskin, we will adjudicate, not according to the Bavli, the Babylonian Talmud, but according to the Yerushalmi. Why is that? In Massekhet Sanhedrin we are taught, The word gracious is applied to the Sages of the Land of Israel because they are always gracious to one another in their discussions of Halakhah, their discussions of Jewish Law. Its not that the sages of Israel are smarter than those of Bavel; it is not necessarily that they have arrived at a greater truth. But their graciousness to each other makes them fitting role models for us in the Messianic times yet to come.

And that insight leads me then to my last point. Conversations are almost never about the truth. Truth pertains to very finite and concrete matters: How much money do you or do you not have in your checking account? Did you or did you not eat your healthy food prior to dessert? But most of the areas in which we work building community, healing hearts, saving souls, loving our brothers and sisters are neither true nor false. They are enriching, they are meaningful, they are empowering, and they are healing.

The Sefer ha-Hinnukh,speaking about the Hakhel, the Biblically-ordained periodic gathering of the entire Jewish people, says, It will soon come to pass that among the men, women, and children, some will raise the question, why are we gathered here, all together in this huge assembly? And the reply will be To listen to the words of the Torah which are the essence of our existence, our glory and our pride. The ensuing discussion will lead to an appreciation of our Torah, its greatness and supreme value, which in turn will arouse great longing for it. With this attitude they will study and attain a more intimate knowledge of God. Thus, they will merit the good life, and God will rejoice in their works.

Conversation is not used to verify information. Conversation is used to build community. It establishes the capacity to understand a viewpoint not our own and see the humanity of those who walk in the world differently than we do.

I love the fact that in a room full of mourners, what is required is not accurate information but shared discussion. The Talmud tells us that a group of ancient Jews responded to the destruction with extreme mourning and rigid restrictions of any pleasurable food or drink. Rabbi Joshua taught them a crucial lesson: Children come and listen to me. Not to mourn at all is impossible because the blow has fallen. To mourn overmuch is also impossible, because we do not impose upon the community a hardship which the majority cannot endure. Therefore, the Sages have ruled: You may stucco your house, but you should leave a corner bare.

Rabbi Joshua does not prove his point with logic; he enters into a relationship. He invites the others to step with him into another way of understanding the world and how to live in it.

The contemporary philosopher Jrgen Habermas affirms what I believe is an ancient and Jewish insight when he notes, In his capacity as a participant in argumentation, everyone is on his own and yet embedded in a communication context. To Habermas, an idea community of communication entails The individuals inalienable right to say yes or no and his overcoming of his egocentric viewpoint.

The right to say yes or no and the ability to transcend ones own limited viewpoint is the basis upon which we build relationships, establish community and live in Covenant. This is what it means to expand our vision, to see the views of another, to see through the eyes of the Holy One.

After all, God created the world through conversation, calling the world into being. God reached out yet again to our ancestors Abraham and Sarah, inviting them to a conversation. Again, at the height of Mount Sinai, God called the entire Jewish people to a conversation that yet abides, a conversation that involves the give and the take of Mattan Torah and Kabbalat Torah. And our predecessors the Sages of Israel and its prophets, its mystics and its monarchs have harvested an ever new Torah through ongoing conversation, a respectful yet vigorous exchange of ideas.

We too, are given the holy privilege of joining that conversation, of adding our voices to those words and inviting our people some now waiting on the margins, some now excluded, some now binding their wounds to reclaim their birthright, to rejoin the ancient, sacred conversation that is Torah.

My blessing to all of us is that we should always be worthy participants in this conversation, so that we hold in conversation the Sages and the prophets who have come before us and we hold in our hearts and our minds those with whom we speak and teach and those yet to come. I bless us that our conversations should be vessels for Gods love and light to enter the world, that in our speech and in our deeds, we should invite others to walk on that path of righteousness that has guided us across the millennia.

Rabbi Dr Bradley Shavit Artson (www.bradartson.com) holds the Abner and Roslyn Goldstine Deans Chair of the Ziegler School of Rabbinic Studies and is Vice President of American Jewish University in Los Angeles. He is also dean of the Zacharias Frankel College in Potsdam, Germany, ordaining Conservative rabbis for Europe. He is a contributing writer to the Journal.

Originally posted here:

On Giving and Receiving Torah: An Invitation to Conversation - Jewish Journal

Dinner Celebrating Massive New Talmud Torah Building Leaves Gerer Chassidim Inspired

In recent years, Talmud Torah Imrei Emes dChasidei Gur has invested incredible effort in acquiring an enormous new building to house the yeshivaan endeavor that has finally come to fruition. This building is now undergoing the final stages of the renovation, and the talmidim are set to move in shortly.

To celebrate this momentous occasion, a dinner was held on Sunday eveningbringing together hundreds of Gerer chassidim who drank in the celebratory, and spiritually-charged atmosphere.

Representing the Gerer Rebbe shlita at this historic event were his special emissaries; his son Rav Shloime Tzvi Alter, shlita, and his son in law, Rav Shimon Rothstein, shlita, who made the rounds to bring chizuk and warmth from Yerushalayim throughout their visit this past week, and in particular elevating the dinner through their presence, and by representing the Rebbe, shlita.

In his letter addressing this event, which was read aloud by his son Rav Shloime Tzvi, the Gerer Rebbe wrote with effusiveness and praise of those who have participated to bring this dream to realityas well as heartfelt words of guidance in chinuch of the children .

In addition to emotional, inspiring addresses throughout the evening by various rabbonim and mechanchim within the chassidus, the evening featured numerous presentations that were particularly poignant.

As we have noted, the chassidus in America has lost a precious gem to the Miron tragedy, a product of the Gerer mosdos in Boro Park, Pinchos Menachem Knoblovitz, zl, who was beloved by all those who knew him. The siyum upon the recently completed maseches Taanis by the hachanah lyeshiva (8th grade aged boys) was dedicated to his memoryafter which his father recited kaddish.

This event is just the latest in the glorious history of the Gerer chassidus rebuilding from the ashes of the Holocaust. WWII nearly wiped out the entire movement, which boasted tens of thousands of chassidim at the outbreak of the war. But with incredible mesirus nefesh, the Imrei Emes and his sons rebuilt the world of Ger that we see today.

Thus, a number of poignant audio-visual presentations took the participants on a journey through the years; from the years following the Churban, with just a handful of people, to various groundbreaking events of buildings in Eretz Yisroel and in Americaone beautiful chain of a thriving world of Torah, avodah, and chassidusthe latest link of which was celebrated in a fitting manner, in the presence of hundreds of Gerer chassidim who were filled with pride and holy joy.

Read the original here:

Harav Shloime Tzvi Alter, Son Of Gerer Rebbe ShlitA, And Harav Shimon Rothstein, Son In Law Of Gerer Rebbe, During A Visit To America On Behalf Of The...

At the upcoming festival of Shavuot, we read the story of Ruth. According to rabbinic tradition, Ruth was a convert to Judaism.

When her husband died, Ruth told her mother-in-law, Naomi: Your people will be my people and your God will be my God. Naomi welcomed her into the Jewish fold and taught her the ways of our people.

When Ruth turned up asa foreign widow in Boazs fields, Boaz married her. He made a home for her and showed her kindness. Together they raised a family, and the whole community rejoiced.

Get The Jewish News Daily Edition by email and never miss our top storiesFree Sign Up

But what if these people hadnt welcomed Ruth? What if Naomi had said: We dont take converts? What if Boaz had said: Youre not a real Jew? What if the community had said: That baby doesnt look Jewish?

Scripture tells us the answer. Naomi was the great-grandmother of Jesse, the father of David. There would have been no Davidic kingdom; no King Solomon; no Temple.The Jewish people, as we know it, would not exist.

The last verses of Ruth are a polemic in favour of accepting converts. We owe the existence of our communities to converts and outsiders.

Yet, too often, we hear people question others Jewish status, try to nullify conversions, or dismiss people for not being Jewish the right way.

The story of Ruth lets us know that, by excluding people who want to be Jewish, you weaken the whole community. Welcoming converts and baalei teshuvah makes us all stronger.

Shavuot is a reminder that nobody has pure lineage, even the great King David. Torah teaches that we left Egypt as a mixed multitude and Talmud Kiddushin says that everyone comes from mixed backgrounds.

Its time to celebrate Jews in allour diversity.

The rest is here:

Progressively Speaking: Shavuot tells us to celebrate Jews in all our diversity - Jewish News

The war on Covid has included battles against denials, anti-masking and science relativism.

Now its waged in the theater of vaccine hesitancy.

In the quest for herd immunity 70 to 85% vaccinated, which only slows but doesnt eliminate the spread the battle is fierce as many refuse to be injected with viral armor branded as Pfizer, Moderna or J&J.

Good for them.

Vaccinations arent for everyone.

Individuals must deliberatively calculate on which side of the inoculation wall they want to plant their flags.

As of Tuesday, 44.5% of Wisconsin residents are vaccinated with at least one dose. That compares with 46% nationally (source: https://usafacts.org/visualizations/covid-vaccine-tracker-states/), and closer to home, 38.1% in Fond du Lac County and 39% in Green Lake County (source: https://www.dhs.wisconsin.gov/covid-19/vaccine-data.htm#residents).

For whatever reason, folks in this county and those to the west have less inclination to get vaccinated or less accessibility to vaccines than others statewide and nationally.

That may improve. But in the meantime, a critical component to the goal of achieving herd immunity is that the unvaccinated determine for themselves whether their personal concerns outweigh their opportunity to protect themselves and others.

On their decisions many will stake their desires to return to normalcy and their very lives as vaccine potency abates and evolving variants become more deadly and contagious.

Here then, is guidance for those inclined to take care of themselves while putting others at risk:

Please, dont get vaccinated if you are not a

Christian, Jew or members of another compassionate faith A central tenet to Christianity and Judaism is to love your neighbor as yourself (Mark 12:31 and Jerusalem Talmud Nedarim 9:1, respectively). If you care for your own welfare more than for the wellbeing of friends, family and strangers, dont worry about the vaccine. Just look out for No. 1.

Republican Republicans value maximum independence from big government, the nanny state and political correctness. They know that by being vaccinated they can pay less attention to edicts from the CDC, White House, state and county public health departments, and other Big Brother agencies, while enjoying the freedom that comes from being a beneficiary of the Trump administrations Operation Warp Speed.

Democrat Democrats penchant for social justice, particularly for the most vulnerable due to age, race or disability, make them want to achieve the Biden administrations goal, shared last week, of all Americans no matter their circumstances enjoying a regular life by July 4.

Parent Face it, not much in America seems to be going right these days. The country seems impotent as popular music is debased by smutty singers and lyrics, gun control is an oxymoron, the political chasm between and within parties is widening, mental illness was rising before Covid, adult name-calling is fashionable, racism is more overt and the government is on a spending bender while its youngest citizens are saddled with unsustainable debt. At least parents know that they can improve their childrens futures by modeling good behavior with a shot or two in their arm.

Friend Friends dont put their friends at risk and so they are horrified at the prospect of unwittingly passing on the virus due to their ignorance or indifference.

Warrior Soldiers in the battle against Covid wear uniforms of antigens to battle the virus while the timid and weak flee from needles to some sort of metaphorical Canada, where they declare themselves conscientious anti-injectors. And while they declare their independence from science, they ride on the coattails of those who choose to stay and fight.

* * *

So there you have it.

Christians and Jews, Republicans and Democrats, parents, friends and warriors: Covid vaccinations make perfect sense for you due to your values as they pertain to self, society and the common good.

All others will need to soul-search to determine why that person in the mirror knows more about immunology, epidemiology and virology than the experts who plead for us all to do the right thing.

Come on, Fond du Lac and Green Lake counties.

Lets exceed the national vaccination averages in our quest to vanquish the Covid enemy.

Tim Lyke

Read more here:

Editorial: Covid vaccine is not for everyone; don't get immunized if you're not on this list - Ripon Commonwealth Press

What would have been if for a moment, all was right: if inequalities disappeared, the past became not an encumbrance but an inspiration, the sins of ancestors were overcome by acts of kindness by their heirs, and people and their deity worked in harmony?Long before science fiction contemplated revisiting and revising events of former years, the Bible did so, in the Book of Ruth. A carefully structured and well written tale, this book dared to rewrite the past while relating it. As so often in history, change took place not by replacement but by addition.The book is written as a retrospective. A family facing famine emigrates to Moab, but returns only after the death of all the males involved. Naomi and her Moabite daughter-in-law struggle against objective financial difficulties and societal problems, to ultimately emerge with help from their relative, Boaz, to security and continuity. Ruth and Boaz become the great grandparents of King David.While the core story may date back close to the time of events described, the Hebrew of the book includes elements which could only have been used in Second Temple times, so that what we read is minimally an articulation written down then.

Revising History The Book of Ruth absorbs into itself many former Bible tales. The description of Abraham having left his family and ancestral home to go to a distant land, is now reapplied to a woman, to Ruth. Women once drew water from a well for Jacob, but now young men do so for Ruth. Once, Midianites refused to feed the Jews leaving Egypt, and now Ruth the Midianite takes upon herself the task of getting food for her mother-in-law, Naomi. Most affected is the character of King David, whom the Bible traces on one side to the somewhat tawdry story of Tamar, dressed as a prostitute, bearing a son from Judah, and on the other side, (since David evidently had Midianite roots), to the story of Lot being seduced by his daughters in the dark while drunk, then bearing the child Midian. The Book of Ruth now gives David a different pedigree, wherein a young woman again meets an older man in the dark, while dressed up, and while he is slightly inebriated, she does not have a relationship with him, as the text moves toward marriage.

The Book of Ruth also offers a new conclusion to the Book of Judges, which ends with a horrific story of rape, murder, and near destruction of an entire tribe, all beginning in Bethlehem. The new ending is a story of love, kindness and creation of a positive future, also beginning in Bethlehem. This pattern of constant change is evident from the beginning of the Book of Ruth. Once, Abraham and Lot, the relatives, separated while looking out at the Dead Sea, and now Ruth Lots descendant refuses to separate from Naomi Abrahams descendant at the same spot.

Balancing Gender Roles It is no secret that the Bible is overwhelmingly androcentric. Not only is Ruth compared favorably with Abraham, but also to other forebears. The forefathers consistently went east, out of Israel, to seek a mate, while Ruth moves west, to Israel. Furthermore, the women are constantly central. Ruth and Naomi carry this book forward almost to the end. It is these women who plan, initiate and develop the plot.

cnxps.cmd.push(function () { cnxps({ playerId: '36af7c51-0caf-4741-9824-2c941fc6c17b' }).render('4c4d856e0e6f4e3d808bbc1715e132f6'); });

Envisioning Perfection A related phenomenon is seen in the characterization of Ruth. It is well-known that the Bible presents all human beings with their faults. As Rabbi Adin Steinsaltz once pointed out, there is but one biblical character with no faults cited: Ruth. It is as if the book cries out that perfection is possible.

Accepting the Outsider The Bible tells a mixed tale concerning integration and intermarriage. Both are clearly discouraged by a number of biblical texts for reasons ranging from religious, to ethnic, to historical. Nevertheless, at the same time, the Bible records numerous examples of integration and intermarriage, from the inclusion of the mixed multitude in the Exodus, to the marriages of forefathers and Kings, to many incidental mentions of children of mixed marriages (one of whom did all the copper work in the Temple). Indeed, there is a way for strangers to join fully in the Passover celebration, the laws are stated to be equal for Jews and strangers, and at the end of time, fellow travelers (Hebrew: nilvim) are to be fully integrated in Gods land as people and are to be rewarded by Him. Here, the Book of Ruth, in focusing on the full integration and marriage of the Moabite woman Ruth, takes its stance at the integrationist end of a biblical range of testimonies.

God in Human Hands The subject of divine intervention in this world is multilayered, but in a broad manner of speaking it moves from the most direct acts in Genesis, to the guiding hand in historical books, to indirect communication through prophets, to the most indirect and hidden leadership (if at all) in Esther. Here, Ruth illustrates the stance that would ultimately most influence Jewish theology for millennia: Gods work is carried out through the kindness and initiative of good human beings.

Reward The idea that kindness and a good life should be rewarded would seem to be an obvious emphasis of the Bible. Yet, in many places, including Psalms, Job and Ecclesiastes, authors bemoan the lack of evidence of Gods support and reward. For over 2000 years, since the Talmud, scholars have noted that in the Book of Ruth kindness is rewarded, almost a response to the other books named.

A Flexible Law While any law system must have a way to develop, the Book of Ruth provides perhaps the clearest example. The laws of land redemption (when land is sold for debt) and levirate marriage (to guarantee progeny for one who died childless) are revised (both to include additional relatives to solve problems) and combined, thus providing a more humane solution to a specific situation.

All of these changes are present in the Book of Ruth, which rearticulates an evidently well-known story concerning the ancestry of King David. The artistic genius of the book is evident at every turn: in parallel structures of the middle two chapters; in chiastic literary structures of the first and last chapters; in names of character chosen for their representational meanings; and in the careful use of words that echo from beginning to end. Ten barren years of tragedy become the 10 generations leading to King David; a woman mourning the death of her children at the end holds the child she will help raise; and Bethlehem (house of bread/food in Hebrew) moves from famine to the locus of celebration.

Starting by naming the two children who will die Machlon (sickly) and Kachlon (dying), the book announces from the beginning that it is an imaginative reconstruction of events here to tell the reader a story, one meant to instruct and edify. That does not make it less important, but more so.

Many cultures include tales in which their highest values are seen as having once existed (or, still in some isolation, apart from society): an ideal to be contemplated for all generations. For English chivalry, this was Camelot; in Tibet, this was Shambala (better known by its modern dramatic presentation, Shangri-La); in Greece, this was Arcadia. For the biblical Israelite society, the Book of Ruth is that story.

The writer, a rabbi, is a former president of the Schechter Institute of Jewish Studies. His latest commentary is The Book of Ruth: Paradise Gained and Lost (Gefen Publishing and the Schechter Institute).

Original post:

Book of Ruth: The tale of King David's ancestry is taste of perfection - The Jerusalem Post

"The old will be renovated and the novel will be hallowed, wrote Rabbi Abraham Isaac Kook, the bold theologian whose public career was dedicated to bridging between Zionisms pioneers and his messianic faith.

Appointed by the British Mandate as Ashkenazi chief rabbi of Palestine (alongside Sephardi Rabbi Yaakov Meir), the 56-year-old Kook spent his last 14 years building the agency which, he hoped, would be a centerpiece of the Zionist enterprise, an inspiration of public morality and national peace.

A hundred years later, the agency that was launched amid great expectations has come to be widely derided as an engine of national schism, public wrath and religious shame.

While delivering its more prosaic services a religious court system; marriages and divorces, and kosher supervision Kook hoped the Rabbinate would also serve as a moral inspiration for the future Jewish state.

Moreover, having served as a rabbi in London, and thus been exposed to the big world that sprawled beyond the Land of Israel, Kook hoped the Rabbinate would become a moral authority not only for observant Jews, but also for their secular brethren, and not only in the Promised Land, but worldwide.

The limits of this vision became apparent already before his death in 1935, as ultra-Orthodoxy had mostly rejected his version of Judaism, and ignored the agency he built. Then again, he did win the respect of secular Zionists, having genuinely admired and continuously dialogued with the pioneers, despite their apostasy.

The stature Kook established was preserved by his successor, Rabbi Isaac Herzog, who like him was a towering scholar, a fervent Zionist, and a citizen of the world. The Rabbinates prestige survived Herzogs death in 1959, but a series of internal scandals and external challenges since the 1970s spawned half-a-century of spiritual decline, political marginalization and public disgust.

cnxps.cmd.push(function () { cnxps({ playerId: '36af7c51-0caf-4741-9824-2c941fc6c17b' }).render('4c4d856e0e6f4e3d808bbc1715e132f6'); });

The pairs backgrounds were entirely different. The Polish-born Gorens career as the builder of the IDFs chaplaincy was shaped in the fire and brimstone of three wars battlefields. His great rivals back then were the secular generals on whom he imposed the armys observance of Shabbat and the dietary laws, while doing the thankless work of locating and burying casualties, and devising the eligibility of missing soldiers wives.

The Iraqi-born Yosefs nemeses were the Ashkenazi sages who marginalized Sephardi rabbis and their centuries-old legacy regarding Jewish law. Yosefs crusade since his twenties for Sephardi identity and pride, and his willingness to confront much older Ashkenazi rabbis, would later result in his establishment of the Shas Party with which he reshaped Israeli politics.

Despite their very different origins and goals, in terms of their personalities, Goren and Yosef had much in common, as both were independent-minded warriors. The result was war, at the Rabbinates heart.

The chief rabbis collision was triggered by a case involving two Israelis whose mother did not divorce before bearing them from another man, and thus were bastards from Jewish laws standpoint, and as such could not marry other Jews (Deuteronomy 23:3).

Faced with an angry secular public, and convinced he had a halachic solution for the problem, Goren allowed the siblings marriages (based on dubious information that the mothers first husband wasnt Jewish, and her marriage was thus invalid). While at it, Goren overruled Yosef. Moreover, he tried to use the case to establish a special court of rabbis from around the world that would be headed by Boston-based Joseph D. Soloveitchik (1903-1893) and be tasked with tackling unique cases like the two siblings.

Rabbi Yosef saw all this as an attempt to marginalize him personally and Sephardi rabbinical authority in general. The result was a decade of mutual charges, leaks, intrigues and mudslinging that made the pair an emblem of unbridled animosity, and the Rabbinate a casualty of their war.

It was a trauma from which the Rabbinate never recovered. The politicians now sought mild personalities on whom they could count to harmonize. That aim was achieved, but by installing chief rabbis who lacked charisma, or rabbinical stature, or both.

Meanwhile, external events also debilitated the Rabbinate, and even more severely than one personal war, no matter how intense.

ISRAELS POLITICAL tilt from Left to Right since 1977, and Rabbi Yosefs establishment of Shas in 1984, resulted in the Rabbinates gradual takeover by ultra-Orthodoxys politicians.

The result was the Rabbinates deterioration into a bureaucracy with little spiritual standing and moral pretension. The most glaring symptom of this devaluation was the 2003 appointment as Ashkenazi chief rabbi of Yona Metzger, who was later convicted and jailed for assorted financial crimes, including money laundering, tax evasion and accepting million in bribes.

The bribes involved the international drama that the Rabbinate would turn into an Israeli tragedy: Soviet Jewrys liberation.

The unexpected influx of a million immigrants within hardly a decade included an estimated 300,000 partial Jews and non-Jews. The result was a clash between Israeli and rabbinical law. The former granted citizenship to a full Jews non-Jewish spouses and their offspring. The latter, however, defines as Jews only those born to Jewish mothers.

This gap left some 200,000 people who grew up in Israel, and graduated its schools and army, unable to marry here, since Israeli law places matrimony in the hands of the Rabbinate, for which they are not Jewish.

The Rabbinate tells such Israelis to undergo its conversion process. However, its model of conversion means becoming Orthodox, a demand that most prospective converts reject. So does Modern Orthodoxy, whose rabbis say the immigrants partial Jewishness is a product of anti-Jewish persecution, and should therefore entail a more lenient conversion process.

This is besides the Modern-Orthodox argument that conversion to begin with should ignore observance, and besides suspicions that the Rabbinate harasses the immigrants because they dilute ultra-Orthodoxys demographic weight and political clout.

Beyond these partialities lurks the chief rabbis relative levity. The gravitas of Rabbi Kook, who ruled that farmers should cultivate the Land of Israel despite the biblical sabbatical year; the courage of Rabbi Yosef when he ruled that Ethiopian Jewry is Jewish; and the bellicosity of Rabbi Goren when he green-lighted two bastards weddings are all gone.

Instead, the Rabbinate is widely hated as an aloof establishment that makes thousands feel hassled when they seek a divorce, or when their kosher-serving restaurant is stamped non-kosher because it opens on Shabbat. Mainstream Israelis also feel the Rabbinate hampers the national interest, which is to embrace semi-Jews, certainly not to intimidate them, let alone sell conversions for money, as Rabbi Metzger did.

Now, inspired by Roman-era sage Yohanan Ben Zakkai, who in the wake of Jerusalems destruction canceled converts duty to make a sacrifice at the Temple, Modern-Orthodox rabbis hope to use the current political crisis to retrieve the Rabbinate from ultra-Orthodoxys tutelage. If successful at this, they promise to deliver a more outgoing, worldly, pragmatic and compassionate Rabbinate.

Such a Rabbinate would doubtfully become the kind of national leader Rabbi Kook had in mind, but it would start its long climb to the peaks of which he dreamt, from the nadir to which it has sunk.

Read more:

How the Chief Rabbinate has become an engine of schism, wrath and shame - The Jerusalem Post