Click here to download in pdf format
“G-d said to Avram, ‘Go for yourself from your land, from your relatives, and from your father’s house to the land that I will show you’ ... Avram took his wife Sarai and Lot, his brother’s son, and all their wealth that they had amassed, and the souls they made in Haran; and they left to go to the land of Canaan, and they came to the land of Canaan.” (Genesis 12; 1-5). This was one of Avraham’s ten tests (Ethics of the Fathers 5). Because he hearkened to G-d, and left his home, relatives and family he showed his faith and trust in G-d. Yet this passage is remarkably similar to that immediately preceding. “Terach took his son Avram, and Lot the son of Haran, his grandson, and his daughter-in-law Sarai, the wife of Avram his son, and they departed with them from Ur Kasdim to go to the land of Canaan; they arrived at Haran and they settled there.” The Torah is not merely telling us the travelogue of Terach and his family, but seems to be implying a parallel between Avram and his father. Both set out for Canaan with their families. However, Avram arrived at his destination, whereas Terach gave up en route, and settled in Haran. Surely G-d is as concerned with intent as with deed, therefore we should expect Terach to be praised for beginning the process which Avram was to complete.
Yet even from G-d’s instruction to Avram we see that this is not the case. “Go ... from your father’s house...”. G-d explains to Avram that he is not to continue in his father’s path, but to make a new beginning, abandoning his past. Similarly, as we read in the Haggada of Pesach, when Joshua gives his farewell address to the nation, he contrasts Avraham’s actions with those of Terach. “Your forefathers - Terach, the father of Avraham and the father of Nachor - always dwelt beyond the [Euphrates] river and they served other gods.” (Joshua 24; 2). Avraham, the founding father of the nation and the first to embrace monotheism, is contrasted with his father Terach who remained an idolater. Thus, rather than considering Terach meritorious for setting out for the Land of Israel, he became the epitome of an idol worshipper for his failure to reach that goal. In fact, it seems that Terach’s main failing was his inability to cross the river.
Avraham is described (Genesis 14; 13) as ‘Ivri’ (‘Hebrew’ lit. ‘from the other side’) because he came from the other side of the river. It seems that crossing the Euphrates river and entering into Israel is the crucial distinction between Avraham and Terach, between monotheistic service of G-d and the idolatrous worship of alien gods. The Midrash highlights the difference in even starker terms: “I shall give to you and your descendants after you the land where you dwell, all the land of Canaan ... and I will be for them as G-d” (17; 8). Rabbi Yudan said; if they enter the Land of Israel they accept G-d’s divinity, and if not they do not accept it.” How can such a simple journey make such a difference? Furthermore, Avraham was commanded by G-d to enter Israel, perhaps if Terach had received such an invitation he could have become the founder of our faith in place of Avraham.
The Midrash (Bereishis Rabbi 41) gives another explanation of the word Ivri. “Rabbi Yehuda says that all the world was on one side, and Avraham was on the other.” Avraham was the original iconoclast, he smashed the idols of the entire generation, and was not afraid to show the world that he was different, even if it meant putting his life at risk. He was prepared to live by his beliefs. Therefore G-d instructed him to cross the river, and enter into the Land of Canaan, the geographical distinction symbolising Avraham’s spiritual separation from the rest of the world.
On the other hand, when Terach reached Haran, he gave up the quest for spiritual growth. The Torah tells us that after arriving in Haran, Terach died at the age of 205 years old (11; 32). However, when we calculate his age upon arrival, we find that he didn’t die until long after Avraham had gone to Israel, and become famous as Avraham the Ivri. The Torah tells us now that he died to write him out of the story. He failed to reach Israel, and cross the river, even though he recognised the importance of Israel and the symbolic meaning in going to the other side. Therefore he no longer has a part to play in the history and spiritual development of the Jewish nation. Furthermore, because he knew what he should have done, but decided to opt for the comfortable life in Haran, rather than dedicate himself to the goal of making G-d known in the world, he was not only considered a failure, but was classed as wicked. Rashi’s commentary to that verse states, “The verse calls him dead, for the wicked even during their lifetime are called ‘dead’, and the righteous even after their death are called ‘living’.”
To live one’s life in darkness, without an awareness or quest for anything higher is a pity. But to recognise the truth, and having done so to ignore it, is a disaster. To know one’s potential, yet to give up because it is too hard, is one of the greatest tragedies in the world.
Avraham followed G-d wherever He told him to go, and for this is hailed as the father of the nation. Terach quit when the going got tough, and opted for the easy life. We contrast these two approaches of Avraham and Terach in the Haggada to show what would have happened had we not left Egypt. Instead of receiving the Torah on Mount Sinai and coming into the Land of Israel, we would have become content with a life of slavery, preferring the security of bondage to the responsibilities and challenges of freedom.
The challenge of Lech Lecha, the first of Avraham’s trials, is equally challenging to all of us. We must recognise the truth, and having done so act upon it to fulfil our potential.
Click here to download in pdf format
Sunday, October 29, 2006
Monday, October 23, 2006
Noach
Man of the Earth
for printable pdf file click here
“Noach, the man of the earth...” (Genesis 9; 20). Ramban explains that the description “man of ...” denotes a complete dedication to that thing, and a separation from anything else. As soon as he left the Ark Noach immediately set about sowing and planting the desolate world that he found. He devoted himself entirely to the earth. Similarly, Moshe was described as “man of G-d” (Deuteronomy 33; 1), signifying his complete devotion and total dedication to G-d.
In the very beginning of our portion Noach is also described as a man, but a ‘righteous man’ (6; 9). According to the Ramban’s definition this means that he dedicated himself to righteousness, and separated himself from anything else. Noach transforms from the epitome of righteousness, to a farmer, concerned not with righteousness, but with the earth. In the same verse that Noach is described as being a ‘man of the earth’ the Torah also shows us his descent from his level of sanctity. “vayachel Noach”, “Noach debased himself” (9; 20).
One could mistakenly assume that it was Noach’s concern with the earth that caused him to lose his righteousness. We assume that someone designated by G-d as ‘righteous’ must spend their time removed from worldly pursuits, engaging with the spiritual. Yet from his birth Noach had been recognised as someone able to work the earth, and transform it like nobody before him. He had a special relationship with the earth. Since the time of Cain nobody had been able to till the ground, yet during Noach’s lifetime the curse of the ground disappeared. Noach is also credited with the invention of the plough allowing people once again to work the ground (Midrash Tanchuma Bereishis 11). In fact Noach was named for his relationship with the earth, “And he called his name Noach saying, ‘This one will bring us rest from our work and from the toil of our hands, from the ground which G-d has cursed’.” Lamech, Noach’s father, recognised his potential to work and develop the ground, and remove its curse.
His relationship with the ground was actually the source of Noach’s righteousness, and in that merit he was chosen to survive the flood. Rather than being removed from the physical world, Noach dedicated himself to working the soil. However, his sole intention in so doing was to bring himself closer to G-d. Therefore after the flood, Noach simply continued with that work which he knew best, tilling the soil, and sowing and planting. He even found support for his actions in G-d’s commands to him. Since (according to Midrashim) G-d had told Noach to take saplings and seeds with him into the Ark, he concluded that he should plant them when he left the Ark a year later.
Rashi explains that Noach’s sin was not in planting, but in what he chose to plant first. Of all the species which he had with him in the Ark, he began by planting grapevines, with the disastrous results mentioned in the continuation of the story. This shows the importance of beginnings. Noach lost his exalted status only because he made the wrong beginning when he emerged from the Ark. Yet Judaism sees nothing intrinsically wrong with wine and grapes - at every Jewish ceremony we mark the transition from holy to mundane or from mundane to holy, with a blessing over wine. Thus we begin Shabbat with Kiddush on wine, and end it with Havdalah on wine. We use wine at a wedding to signify the higher spiritual level of a couple than two individuals, and we use wine at a circumcision to show the higher sanctity of a child who has entered the covenant with G-d. But before Noach became drunk the Torah already saw that he was no longer ‘a righteous man’, but ‘a man of the earth’.
Noach refused to leave the Ark without a Divine command to do so (8; 15-17). “Every living being that is with you … take them out.” In the Torah the Hebrew word ‘take them out’ (hotzei) is read as ‘order them out’ (ha’ytzei), meaning that if the animals refused to leave the Ark voluntarily, Noach and his family should forcibly remove them. Perhaps this reluctance to leave the Ark was also felt by Noach. Therefore G-d subtly told him that there was not an option to remain in the Ark. Why would Noach not want to leave the Ark? Surely a whole year separated from his beloved earth would have been enough for him?
“G-d said to Noach; ‘The end of all flesh has come before Me … and behold I am about to destroy them with the earth (es ha’aretz)’” (6; 13). Rashi explains that not only the people and animals, but even the upper three tefachim of earth were destroyed during the flood. Three tefachim is the depth of a plough, and we can only surmise that the corruption of humanity had even penetrated the earth as they were working it. When Noach emerged from the Ark he realised that because of his invention of the plough, he had indirectly caused the earth to be even more desolate than it should have been. Had he not invented the plough, people would have been unable to work the ground, and it would have been spared destruction. His beloved earth was now ruined because of him.
Perhaps this is why Noach was reluctant to leave the Ark, and why he began the new world by planting vines and becoming drunk. His greatest achievements, the plough and removing the curse from the ground seemed to him to have caused only destruction. Despite receiving Divine sanction for his invention, in his depression he failed to realise their value. He reasoned that it would be better for the world if he were drunk, and unable to contribute any more destructive inventions to the world. This depression caused him to temporarily lose sight of G-d, and become only ‘a man of the earth’.
for printable pdf file click here
for printable pdf file click here
“Noach, the man of the earth...” (Genesis 9; 20). Ramban explains that the description “man of ...” denotes a complete dedication to that thing, and a separation from anything else. As soon as he left the Ark Noach immediately set about sowing and planting the desolate world that he found. He devoted himself entirely to the earth. Similarly, Moshe was described as “man of G-d” (Deuteronomy 33; 1), signifying his complete devotion and total dedication to G-d.
In the very beginning of our portion Noach is also described as a man, but a ‘righteous man’ (6; 9). According to the Ramban’s definition this means that he dedicated himself to righteousness, and separated himself from anything else. Noach transforms from the epitome of righteousness, to a farmer, concerned not with righteousness, but with the earth. In the same verse that Noach is described as being a ‘man of the earth’ the Torah also shows us his descent from his level of sanctity. “vayachel Noach”, “Noach debased himself” (9; 20).
One could mistakenly assume that it was Noach’s concern with the earth that caused him to lose his righteousness. We assume that someone designated by G-d as ‘righteous’ must spend their time removed from worldly pursuits, engaging with the spiritual. Yet from his birth Noach had been recognised as someone able to work the earth, and transform it like nobody before him. He had a special relationship with the earth. Since the time of Cain nobody had been able to till the ground, yet during Noach’s lifetime the curse of the ground disappeared. Noach is also credited with the invention of the plough allowing people once again to work the ground (Midrash Tanchuma Bereishis 11). In fact Noach was named for his relationship with the earth, “And he called his name Noach saying, ‘This one will bring us rest from our work and from the toil of our hands, from the ground which G-d has cursed’.” Lamech, Noach’s father, recognised his potential to work and develop the ground, and remove its curse.
His relationship with the ground was actually the source of Noach’s righteousness, and in that merit he was chosen to survive the flood. Rather than being removed from the physical world, Noach dedicated himself to working the soil. However, his sole intention in so doing was to bring himself closer to G-d. Therefore after the flood, Noach simply continued with that work which he knew best, tilling the soil, and sowing and planting. He even found support for his actions in G-d’s commands to him. Since (according to Midrashim) G-d had told Noach to take saplings and seeds with him into the Ark, he concluded that he should plant them when he left the Ark a year later.
Rashi explains that Noach’s sin was not in planting, but in what he chose to plant first. Of all the species which he had with him in the Ark, he began by planting grapevines, with the disastrous results mentioned in the continuation of the story. This shows the importance of beginnings. Noach lost his exalted status only because he made the wrong beginning when he emerged from the Ark. Yet Judaism sees nothing intrinsically wrong with wine and grapes - at every Jewish ceremony we mark the transition from holy to mundane or from mundane to holy, with a blessing over wine. Thus we begin Shabbat with Kiddush on wine, and end it with Havdalah on wine. We use wine at a wedding to signify the higher spiritual level of a couple than two individuals, and we use wine at a circumcision to show the higher sanctity of a child who has entered the covenant with G-d. But before Noach became drunk the Torah already saw that he was no longer ‘a righteous man’, but ‘a man of the earth’.
Noach refused to leave the Ark without a Divine command to do so (8; 15-17). “Every living being that is with you … take them out.” In the Torah the Hebrew word ‘take them out’ (hotzei) is read as ‘order them out’ (ha’ytzei), meaning that if the animals refused to leave the Ark voluntarily, Noach and his family should forcibly remove them. Perhaps this reluctance to leave the Ark was also felt by Noach. Therefore G-d subtly told him that there was not an option to remain in the Ark. Why would Noach not want to leave the Ark? Surely a whole year separated from his beloved earth would have been enough for him?
“G-d said to Noach; ‘The end of all flesh has come before Me … and behold I am about to destroy them with the earth (es ha’aretz)’” (6; 13). Rashi explains that not only the people and animals, but even the upper three tefachim of earth were destroyed during the flood. Three tefachim is the depth of a plough, and we can only surmise that the corruption of humanity had even penetrated the earth as they were working it. When Noach emerged from the Ark he realised that because of his invention of the plough, he had indirectly caused the earth to be even more desolate than it should have been. Had he not invented the plough, people would have been unable to work the ground, and it would have been spared destruction. His beloved earth was now ruined because of him.
Perhaps this is why Noach was reluctant to leave the Ark, and why he began the new world by planting vines and becoming drunk. His greatest achievements, the plough and removing the curse from the ground seemed to him to have caused only destruction. Despite receiving Divine sanction for his invention, in his depression he failed to realise their value. He reasoned that it would be better for the world if he were drunk, and unable to contribute any more destructive inventions to the world. This depression caused him to temporarily lose sight of G-d, and become only ‘a man of the earth’.
for printable pdf file click here
Sunday, October 22, 2006
bereishit
Human Beings or Individuals?
for printable pdf file click here
“By ten Divine utterances was the world created. But what does the Torah mean to tell us by this? Could not the world have been created by one single utterance? It teaches us that G-d will exact severe punishment from the wicked who destroy a world which was created by ten Divine utterances, and that He will richly reward the righteous who preserve this world which was created by ten Divine utterances.” (Ethics of the Fathers 5; 1). The S’fas Emes explains that with each utterance of creation G-d created more laws of nature, and thus made it more difficult to perceive Him directly within the creation. Had the world been created with only one utterance, G-d’s Presence would be directly perceived, which would leave no opportunity for free choice, and hence no reason for reward for the righteous or punishment for the wicked. This is why the Hebrew word for world, olam, is related to the word for hidden, he’elem. The creation of the world was an act of G-d hiding Himself, and each further act of creation made G-d less revealed in the world.
At the end of our Torah portion there is a list of the ten generations from Adam to Noach. Anyone studying the portion would usually skim read this part, as it is repetitive, and doesn’t contain anything interesting except construct a timeline of Jewish history. There is a similar section at the end of next week’s portion, Noach, which again simply lists the generations from Noach to Avraham. It seems that even the Mishna considers these sections unimportant parts of the Torah, as it states, “From Adam to Noach there were ten generations, to show the extent of G-d’s patience...” (Avot 5; 2).
However, if we examine the two lists of names, we find an important difference between them. In this week’s list we are told the age of each person when they had their first son, the remaining number of years of their life, and then the total number of years they lived, “and he died”. In contrast the list at the end of Noach appears to be more sensible, and only gives each person’s age when they had their first son, and their total number of years. Why does our portion bother to give us the total number of years, when this total can be calculated by simply adding together the number of years before and after the first son was born?
There is a question that I am often asked, ‘How could people live so long in those days?’ Certainly we are puzzled by the average antediluvian life expectancy which seems to be in the high 800s. There are several answers given (e.g. Ramban to Genesis 5; 1), however the strangest answer is given by the Rambam in Moreh Nevuchim (2; 47). He states “As for the precise statements made by the texts of the Torah regarding the length of life of certain individuals, I say that only that individual who is mentioned lived so long a life, whereas the other men lived lives that had the natural and usual duration....” Why should G-d miraculously cause a single individual in each generation to live ten times longer than his contemporaries?
At the end of our portion G-d despairs of humanity and states, “I will blot out man whom I created from the face of the ground - from man to animal, to creeping things, and to birds of the sky, for I have reconsidered making them” (6; 7). Rashi (ibid.) explains why the animals were wiped out “Everything was created for mankind, and since mankind was being wiped out, there was no need for the animals”. Before the flood animals were just an adjunct to humanity, and had no significance or merit on their own. Yet by the end of the flood we find, “G-d remembered Noach and all the beasts and all the animals that were with him in the ark...” (8; 1). G-d ‘recreated’ the world both for Noach and the animals. From this point on animals seem to have an intrinsic value which they lacked in the original creation.
Rav Matis Weinberg (Frameworks Genesis) explains that there was a fundamental change between the purpose of mankind before the flood and after. Originally each person was the totality of creation. The Midrash (Kohelet Rabba 7; 13) explains “When G-d created Adam he took him and showed him all the trees of the garden, and said to him, “Look at how nice they are. And everything that I created, I created for you. Take care not to sin, so that you do not destroy the world”. Usually this is understood as the earliest environmental protection statement. However, we can also view it in light of what happened at the time of the flood. Everything was only created for the use of mankind, therefore when people sin the whole world is destroyed.
It is not only the animals who are secondary to people before the flood, but even the human population of the world is only the backdrop for the actions of those ten people mentioned in the list of generations. This is perhaps the key to understanding the Rambam’s comment that everyone else lived lives of normal duration. Those ten generations were the entire focus of creation, and they had to justify their existence through their actions, otherwise the world could not continue to exist. Therefore the Torah lists the total number of years that they lived, but stresses that ‘they died’, - none of them were able to justify their existence through their actions.
After the flood however, human beings were no longer the sole purpose of creation, but one more creature amongst many. Certainly people are endowed with intellect, and free-choice which separates them from the animals, but ultimately they are still only one species among many. This is why G-d remembered not only Noach, but the animals that were with him. Similarly in the end of the book of Jonah we read “G-d said, ... ‘shall I not take pity on Nineveh the great city, in which there are more than 120,000 people who do not know their right hand from their left, and many animals as well?” (4; 11).
Richard Dawkin wrote a book called ‘The Selfish Gene’ in which he shows that the goal of life and evolution is solely to ensure the continuation of the genes of each species. Each species is striving for eternal life through the continuation of their genetic structure, and each individual is only another step in the chain of life. We find a less extreme version of this statement in the genealogies from Noach to Avraham, that the total life of each individual is not as important as the fact that they had children to continue the human race. Before the flood everything was dependent upon each individual, afterwards people become valuable through population numbers even if as individuals they fail to live up to their full potential. We see this difference most clearly in the different reactions that Noach and Avraham have when they are told of imminent mass destruction. Noach recognises the futility of praying to save people who have failed to justify their individual existence, but Avraham immediately begins bargaining for the people of Sodom according to the number of righteous people.
The postdiluvian view of humanity does not mean that individuals cannot justify their existence through their actions, or diminish the importance of each individual, but it means that even if someone fails to fulfil their potential their merit can come from the future generations. Conversely each of us can bring merit through our actions to all our progenitors.
for printable pdf file click here
for printable pdf file click here
“By ten Divine utterances was the world created. But what does the Torah mean to tell us by this? Could not the world have been created by one single utterance? It teaches us that G-d will exact severe punishment from the wicked who destroy a world which was created by ten Divine utterances, and that He will richly reward the righteous who preserve this world which was created by ten Divine utterances.” (Ethics of the Fathers 5; 1). The S’fas Emes explains that with each utterance of creation G-d created more laws of nature, and thus made it more difficult to perceive Him directly within the creation. Had the world been created with only one utterance, G-d’s Presence would be directly perceived, which would leave no opportunity for free choice, and hence no reason for reward for the righteous or punishment for the wicked. This is why the Hebrew word for world, olam, is related to the word for hidden, he’elem. The creation of the world was an act of G-d hiding Himself, and each further act of creation made G-d less revealed in the world.
At the end of our Torah portion there is a list of the ten generations from Adam to Noach. Anyone studying the portion would usually skim read this part, as it is repetitive, and doesn’t contain anything interesting except construct a timeline of Jewish history. There is a similar section at the end of next week’s portion, Noach, which again simply lists the generations from Noach to Avraham. It seems that even the Mishna considers these sections unimportant parts of the Torah, as it states, “From Adam to Noach there were ten generations, to show the extent of G-d’s patience...” (Avot 5; 2).
However, if we examine the two lists of names, we find an important difference between them. In this week’s list we are told the age of each person when they had their first son, the remaining number of years of their life, and then the total number of years they lived, “and he died”. In contrast the list at the end of Noach appears to be more sensible, and only gives each person’s age when they had their first son, and their total number of years. Why does our portion bother to give us the total number of years, when this total can be calculated by simply adding together the number of years before and after the first son was born?
There is a question that I am often asked, ‘How could people live so long in those days?’ Certainly we are puzzled by the average antediluvian life expectancy which seems to be in the high 800s. There are several answers given (e.g. Ramban to Genesis 5; 1), however the strangest answer is given by the Rambam in Moreh Nevuchim (2; 47). He states “As for the precise statements made by the texts of the Torah regarding the length of life of certain individuals, I say that only that individual who is mentioned lived so long a life, whereas the other men lived lives that had the natural and usual duration....” Why should G-d miraculously cause a single individual in each generation to live ten times longer than his contemporaries?
At the end of our portion G-d despairs of humanity and states, “I will blot out man whom I created from the face of the ground - from man to animal, to creeping things, and to birds of the sky, for I have reconsidered making them” (6; 7). Rashi (ibid.) explains why the animals were wiped out “Everything was created for mankind, and since mankind was being wiped out, there was no need for the animals”. Before the flood animals were just an adjunct to humanity, and had no significance or merit on their own. Yet by the end of the flood we find, “G-d remembered Noach and all the beasts and all the animals that were with him in the ark...” (8; 1). G-d ‘recreated’ the world both for Noach and the animals. From this point on animals seem to have an intrinsic value which they lacked in the original creation.
Rav Matis Weinberg (Frameworks Genesis) explains that there was a fundamental change between the purpose of mankind before the flood and after. Originally each person was the totality of creation. The Midrash (Kohelet Rabba 7; 13) explains “When G-d created Adam he took him and showed him all the trees of the garden, and said to him, “Look at how nice they are. And everything that I created, I created for you. Take care not to sin, so that you do not destroy the world”. Usually this is understood as the earliest environmental protection statement. However, we can also view it in light of what happened at the time of the flood. Everything was only created for the use of mankind, therefore when people sin the whole world is destroyed.
It is not only the animals who are secondary to people before the flood, but even the human population of the world is only the backdrop for the actions of those ten people mentioned in the list of generations. This is perhaps the key to understanding the Rambam’s comment that everyone else lived lives of normal duration. Those ten generations were the entire focus of creation, and they had to justify their existence through their actions, otherwise the world could not continue to exist. Therefore the Torah lists the total number of years that they lived, but stresses that ‘they died’, - none of them were able to justify their existence through their actions.
After the flood however, human beings were no longer the sole purpose of creation, but one more creature amongst many. Certainly people are endowed with intellect, and free-choice which separates them from the animals, but ultimately they are still only one species among many. This is why G-d remembered not only Noach, but the animals that were with him. Similarly in the end of the book of Jonah we read “G-d said, ... ‘shall I not take pity on Nineveh the great city, in which there are more than 120,000 people who do not know their right hand from their left, and many animals as well?” (4; 11).
Richard Dawkin wrote a book called ‘The Selfish Gene’ in which he shows that the goal of life and evolution is solely to ensure the continuation of the genes of each species. Each species is striving for eternal life through the continuation of their genetic structure, and each individual is only another step in the chain of life. We find a less extreme version of this statement in the genealogies from Noach to Avraham, that the total life of each individual is not as important as the fact that they had children to continue the human race. Before the flood everything was dependent upon each individual, afterwards people become valuable through population numbers even if as individuals they fail to live up to their full potential. We see this difference most clearly in the different reactions that Noach and Avraham have when they are told of imminent mass destruction. Noach recognises the futility of praying to save people who have failed to justify their individual existence, but Avraham immediately begins bargaining for the people of Sodom according to the number of righteous people.
The postdiluvian view of humanity does not mean that individuals cannot justify their existence through their actions, or diminish the importance of each individual, but it means that even if someone fails to fulfil their potential their merit can come from the future generations. Conversely each of us can bring merit through our actions to all our progenitors.
for printable pdf file click here
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
