"Who knows three?"

As we close out the Seder every Pesach, our families sing “three are the fathers and four are the mothers.” But is this true? No doubt there are three fathers, but what is the correct number of mothers? Were there four?  Perhaps there are only three? The most accurate answer actually might be six. Our member Rabbi Steven Ettinger explains:

When we bless our daughters, we beseech Hashem to imbue them with the qualities of Sarah, Rivka, Rachel and Leah—the four mothers. In Parshat Vayeshev, Bilhah and Zilpah are clearly identified as wives of Yaakov (“neshei aviv”), this might support six. Rachel is the one who eternally weeps for her children in exile, she was solely designated for Yaakov (Leah believed she was destined for Eisav: see Rashi to Bereishit 29:17) and she, the younger sister, not Leah who birthed such a large number of tribes, is mentioned third in the weekly blessing (we also note Rashi on Bereishit 31:33, who states that Yaakov’s regular abode was in Rachel’s tent and that generally Rachel is the only one designated in the Torah as “eshet Yaakov.”)

Turning back to Seder night, the focus seems to be on the fours—the four cups, the four sons, the four expressions of redemption, and so on. But it is actually the threes that have primacy: one does not fulfill one’s obligation without mentioning three things (Pesach, Matzah, Maror) and the Ten Plagues are condensed into a three-part acronym.

Our people are a nation of threes, as Rav Chisda expresses in Shabbat 88a: “Blessed is the Merciful One who gave the threefold Torah (Torah, Neviim, Ketuvim) to the threefold nation (Kohanim, Leviim, Yisraelim), through the third born (Moshe) on the third day of separation in the third month (Sivan).” Indeed, there is an even earlier three to be associated with our people: according to the Midrash, Avraham Avinu recognized Hakadosh Baruch Hu at the tender age of three years old.

What is the significance of three and how does this relate to the elevated status of Rachel?

While Three Dog Night may have designated one as “the loneliest number,” it is, in fact, the most important number. It is Hashem and it represents unity. With no other (ein od milvado), there is only clarity.  There can be no contradiction or confusion.

When a second is introduced, when there are two, there is opposition and conflict. Adam might not have sinned without his “negdo,” the one opposite him. Yitzchak prayed for children, but that prayer was “lenochach ishto,” opposite his wife. This is not to imply that a man and woman are in a perpetual state of conflict.  Quite the contrary, their ideal state is one of shalom bayit. Nevertheless, this cannot be achieved without a center point, without a third, a three, that integrates their disparate personalities and natures.

Our nation has three fathers, but we are most closely identified as the children of only the third: we are the sons of Yaakov, we are identified as Benei Yisrael. A parent cannot spoil and indulge a child with love: Avraham is the parent of love.  Likewise, a parent cannot always be strict and exacting, as represented by Yitzchak. The most fitting parent blends together these two characteristics into a path of truth and clarity – “titen emet leYaakov.” The third father was the center point that provided our foundation.

If we focus on Rachel, we see that she, more than any of the matriarchs, represented this same center point. She took action at two critical junctures that displayed contradictory behavior. When Lavan substituted Leah when Rachel was to marry Yaakov, she refused to allow her sister to face embarrassment and she honored her father. In other words, she showed love, compassion and respect.

Yet she was willing to disrespect Lavan, even to the point of risking her own safety and that of her family, by removing the idols from his home; they were a complete anathema to her. Rachel, like Yaakov, was a mixture of love and justice (In contrast, Leah showed no compassion to Rachel after she asked for the flowers from Reuven. Leah demanded payment in the form of extra time with Yaakov.).

As the children of Yaakov and Rachel, our spiritual DNA contains the capacity to experience the world in three dimensions, not two. There is a time for love and life and mercy and peace.  Likewise, there is a time to be strict, to fight, to kill, to make war and to be vengeful. The first is ideal, the second is sometimes and reluctantly necessary. However, the guiding principle is always truth and what is right – and that is what our three, our Torah, demands from us.

Unfortunately, much of the world exists in a two-dimensional reality. We are surrounded by those who believe that there is only a single path—the path of death and hate.  In their world there is their way or no way.  Three Dog Night had it wrong. One is not the loneliest number…but two is – the two of conflict, the two of deceit and manipulation and the two of mutual destruction. Any solution involving two is likely one doomed to fail.

Post Script: We all know the old joke about the two Jews stranded on the island having three shuls: one for each and the third that neither would go to. Thinking about this a little more, this explanation does not hold up. They each already had one they would not pray in, this being the shul the other Jew occupied. It is more logical to believe that the third shul was the place where they prayed together; it was the third point where, as the children of Yaakov and Rachel, they would have cried out together be rescued.

Lavan the Deceiver – Nature or Nurture?

Was Lavan always bad, or did something happen in his life to turn him to the side of evil?  Our member Rabbi Steven Ettinger speculates: 

Lavan, brother of Rivka and father to Rachel and Leah, is certainly one of the more controversial biblical figures. In one respect, he is our uncle and forefather. His sister Rivka directed Yaakov to seek a wife from his home, so she knew he would stay there for an undetermined duration while Eisav’s wrath cooled—and would know he would influence and mentor him. However, we also know that Lavan cheated Yaakov tens of times. Lavan’s most egregious swindle was to switch Leah for Rachel—an action that resulted in Yaakov’s indentured servitude for an additional seven years. Lavan was considered such a threat to the very existence of our people that the Torah describes him as a person that wanted to destroy our father (Devarim 26:5). He is consistently referred to as “Lavan ha’Arami” (“Lavan the deceiver”).

If this is truly who he was, if this was his character, how could Rivka have sent Yaakov to him? Perhaps, this was not his nature. Maybe some event changed him, an experience which taught him that the way to advance or the way to protect himself and to get what is his was through deceit and misdirection. Ironically, this turning point, this critical time in his development, may have been his interaction with the house of his sister’s new family.  In other words, Lavan learned it from the house of Avraham (via his servant)—and Rivka may have been totally unaware of this.

Let us pay careful attention to Eliezer’s interactions with Rivka and her family—with close attention to Lavan:

1. Eliezer sets out on the journey laden with the ten of the finest camels and the entire (and considerable) wealth of Avraham’s house (Bereishit 24:10).

2. He speaks to Hashem in order to set up a test to find the right woman for Yitzchak (24:12-14)

3. Rivka enters and passes the test (24:15-21)

4. Eliezer gives her expensive gold jewelry (24:22).

She reveals who her family is and brings him home. Lavan then comes out to meet Eliezer.

5. Lavan comes out of the house, sees the jewelry and then is enthusiastically and generously hospitable (24:30-32).

Eliezer explains who he is, why he is there, recounts the story (including the sign from Hashem) and asks that he bring Rivka back as a wife for his master’s son.

6. Betuel and Lavan agree (24:51). Eliezer offers nothing and they receive nothing.

7. Despite arriving with the camels and a significant display of wealth, Eliezer gives Rivka gold and silver vessels and garments, but only migdanot (presents) to Betuel and Lavan (24:53). Soo they are soon on their way back to the house of Avraham on the camels (in fact, Rivka even departed with her maid) (24:61).

Bottom line: Eliezer came, he showed off immense wealth, he perhaps implied that they would profit if they agreed to allow him to take Rivka, they agreed – and he took the girl (who actually received all of the fine gold jewelry which presumably she would take with her) and the wealth. Betuel and Lavan got played!

Lavan must have been furious! He was conned. What’s more, he was conned by the virtuous Avraham, he was conned by a wealthy man, and he was conned by family (Sarah was Betuel’s aunt). He was taught lessons that he carried through his life. Is there any wonder he became “Lavan the deceiver”?

Now fast forward many years. Yaakov arrives in Aram and he wants a wife! For Lavan the irony must be delicious. What could be better?  His sister—his rich sister and now part of the family who deceived him so many years earlier—has delivered her precious son to his doorstep. Oh, are they going to pay! They are going to pay top dollar!

The story that plays out is almost a mirror image of ours. Yaakov is by a well. He meets Rachel there.  He discovers that she is from the very family he seeks. She brings him home to meet the family. Lavan gives him the same enthusiastic and generous welcome.  Except, there is one big difference. Yaakov has no camels, no obvious wealth.

Lavan hugs/frisks him—but he feels no hidden cash or jewels.  He kisses him—but there’s nothing concealed in his mouth. Lavan will not be thwarted, his strategy must shift. He knows Yaakov is there to marry and wants to marry Rachel. Lavan is going to make him pay, with everything he is and everything he has. The deceiver emerges, the revenge trap is sprung.  “Shall you work for me for free? Tell me what you want!” (29:16). Yaakov is drawn in and is hung out to dry by his own initiative – working seven years for Rachel (29:18), which turns to fourteen years after the deception. Fundamentally, Yaakov pays for the fact that Eliezer/Avraham themselves might be said to have acted deceitfully.

Perhaps Lavan was orignally a good person, perhaps not. Perhaps Eliezer was following the correct social norms, perhaps not. It is difficult to ignore the parallels between the two stories. In parashat Chayei Sarah the family seems to have expectations of significant wealth—gold, silver, camels—as payment. But they receive nothing. This might justifiably engender bad feelings and give rise to a grudge.  In Parashat Vayetze, Lavan clearly expects payment and makes sure to extract it.

Lavan could have been compassionate, he did not have to treat Yaakov so harshly. He did not have to take advantage of his passion and his situation. This may be why Lavan is cast in such a negative light.  However, it might not entirely be his fault. Perhaps it was not his nature. Rather, it was a learned behavior.

The Antecedent to the Precedent

Most of us have read the story of Avram's departure from Ur Kasdim and his early career as an apprentice Patriarch--but we may be sleep-reading through a familiar story instead of asking ourselves some penetrating questions. Why Avram? What's so special about him? Our member Rabbi Steven Ettinger takes a close look at the Torah text and shows us what we may have missed.

If you are reading critically, Lech Lecha poses a question rather than presenting a request or command. The question is, out of every other living person, why does Hashem choose Avram as the progenitor of His holy nation, effectively making him father of the three major world religions? The Torah does provide limited background about him: who his father was, that his brother died, that he got married and that his wife was childless. It also tells us that it was his father—and not Avram—who began the journey from their homeland. It conveys nothing of his character, his beliefs or his fitness for such a pivotal role in human history.

Some mistakenly identify him as the first monotheist.  However, there were others who preceded him: Adam and his three sons, Noach, Shem, Ever, Chanoch and Malkizedek (some say he was Shem). Yet Avram gets all the credit. Why?

There are midrashim that recount how Avram

1. inferred that Hashem existed by observing the natural world;

2. destroyed the idols in his father’s store and;

3. survived Nimrod’s attempt to burn him in a fiery furnace for not worshipping other deities.

However, the Torah, which sometimes details seemingly minor incidents, is silent as regards these events.  The Torah does not provide this background. The Avram narrative begins with Hashem directly addressing him – and Avram does not seem surprised by this. Why?

All of this is even more perplexing when we examine Hashem’s first communication/request: Hashem asks Avram to leave his land, birthplace and father’s home to go to an unspecified land in exchange for great reward. Avram had already left his land and birthplace. His father moved the family from Ur Kasdim to Charan. Additionally, they set out to travel to Canaan (Israel) – the place Hashem was going to show him, anyway (Gen. 11:31). This is like receiving a reward for breathing. Yet this is considered a turning point in history. Why?

 As explained, we know little of the pre-Lech Lecha Avram. However, there are three narratives that follow Hashem’s revelation to Avram that may answer the three “whys.”

The first is the Sarai story.  After Avram journeys to “the land” there is a famine that causes him to relocate temporarily to Egypt which had food. He tells his “beautiful” wife Sarai to present herself as his sister so that the locals will not kill him and treat her better. As the story unfolds, the Egyptians bring her to the Pharoh who intends to claim her. Hashem intervenes and threatens him. Pharoh returns Sarai to Avram, admonishes him for the deception, but presents him with an abundance of wealth. Avram now has the resources he needs as the head of the family, to be a provider.

The second is the Lot narrative. The story begins with a family dispute over grazing land, following which Lot separates from Avram and moves to Sodom. Lot is taken captive during the First World War (the war between the Five Kings and Four Kings). When Avram hears this, he gathers a small band of 318 men to challenge and defeat the larger, previously victorious army; he defeats them and recovers Lot. Avram thus proves his mettle as a protector of the family.

The third is the Hagar/Yishmael narrative. Sarai is barren so she encourages Avram to take her maidservant Hagar as a second wife. Hagar becomes pregnant but Sarai oppresses her and she flees to the desert. An angel bids her to return and she later gives birth to a son – whom Avram embraces and names Yishmael. Avram biologically creates a family. Immediately after this third event, Hashem forges a new covenant with Avram, changing his name from Avram to Avraham – signifying that now he is the father of a multitude of nations. Gen 17:5.

These three stories retrospectively show us why Hashem chose Avraham. While other men may have recognized that there is one God in the universe, only Avraham understood that He is not a singular distant, powerful and sometimes vengeful entity – the King of the World. Instead, he perceived and encountered God as the Father of Mankind.He also understood that, to the extent that Avraham was created in Hashem’s image, he himself, likewise, had to be a father – the archetypical father.

These three stories are stories of family: of supporting the family, of preserving the family, of risking all to protect the family, and  of creating a family –-- of being a father. Hashem chose Avraham because he was capable of being Avraham Avinu. When this narrative cycle was complete Hashem acknowledged this by designating him as the “Av Hamon Goyim,”. the father of the multitude of nations.

In summary, here are the answers to the three “whys” that we encountered above:

1.Avraham was not the first monotheist, but he was the first to recognize that the one God ultimately relates to mankind intimately as a father.

2.  The Torah did not recount the early, formative stories of Avraham’s past because they are not relevant to understanding his critical essence. Yes, he was a courageous champion of monotheistic faith. But more germane, he was the only individual with the character to be the father of our nation.

3. Hashem’s request is not what it seems. It is a code – it explains why Avraham was chosen. Avraham had already left his land and birthplace. The family actually intended to relocate to where Hashem ultimately sends him (Canaan/Israel). So, the only sojourn is from the house of his father. In other words, to become the father, he needed to leave the house of his father. The point of the command “lech lecha” was not to tell him where to go. It was to separate the child from his father Terach so he could become our father.

Bereishit and the forbidden fruit -- a misdirection?

Taking a fresh and imaginative look at one of our most familiar parshiyot, Rabbi Steven Ettinger wonders what might have happened if Adam and his helpmeet had engaged a good defense lawyer--and whether the real offense was not the eating of the forbidden fruit but something arguably more important -- with a message for us to learn.

The sequence of events when Hashem creates Adam, as recounted in Bereishit, Chapter 2, is perplexing:

1. He creates and animates man (forming clay and then infusing it with Divine spirit – interpreted as giving man and only man the power of speech);

2. He plants Gan Eden and places Adam there;

3. The plants (trees) sprout, including the Trees of Knowledge and Life;

4. Main rivers flow from Eden to irrigate Gan Eden and the civilized world;

5. Hashem “takes” Adam and “places” him in Gan Eden to work and protect it; 

6.  He commands Adam that he may eat from all trees except the Tree of Knowledge and warns that—if he eats from that tree, he will die;

7. Hashem recognizes that it is not good for Adam to be alone, so he provides him with a helpmate;

8  Finally, Adam names all of the animals.

There are many questions we could ask: why was Adam placed in Gan Eden twice? Why did the trees only sprout after Adam was placed in Eden? What exactly was Adam’s task in Eden? Why did Hashem give Adam just the one command?Why was it only at the end that Hashem created woman? Where did the animals come from? A lot of trees seem to be mentioned, but no animals.

The key to understanding this unusual sequence is the famous story that follows. The “woman” encounters the nachash who says to her “Didn’t Hashem tell you not to eat any fruit of this garden?” He said this so that he could engage her in conversation (see Rashi to Bereishit 3:1), As we know, he convinces her to eat the forbidden fruit, she then gives it to Adam—who also eats it. Hashem reacts by punishing Adam, the woman and the nachash. Adam is exiled from the Garden and the woman is cursed with birth pains and being subjugated to her husband.

The takeaway is that Adam and the woman could have used a good lawyer. When Hashem confronted them, they did not really mount an effective defense. They merely tried to shift blame—Adam to the woman, then the woman to the nachash. However, they actually had an effective and quite reasonable defense.

As noted above, the creation of Adam was unique in that man is the only entity in creation with the power of speech (creation has four categories: inanimate objects, vegetation, living creatures, speaking beings – only man is in this last category). 

Now woman is out alone in the Garden and she encounters the nachash. To her surprise, this being is speaking. Thus, to her limited experience and understanding there could be only two possible explanations: this being either is another type of “man,” or perhaps was he created by another God. Add to this is the fact that she was created after everything else. She did not therefore witness Hashem’s handiwork in planting the Garden, she was not “placed” there, she did not hear God’s command directly – indeed, she never encountered Hashem directly. For her, everything is hearsay. As far as she knows, the nachash has inside information, maybe even better information than her husband. His behavior, his speech, his very existence, are proof that there are beliefs and rules other than those which, she has been told, are valid – and these rules might perhaps be superior (she is being told that, by eating the fruit, she could even become Godlike). Additionally, she has not yet been commanded to listen to Adam. Bottom-line, especially since she only heard the command second-hand, she should not be culpable.

At this point the woman does eat—but she does not die! Since she did not do so, one can only imagine the conversation she had with Adam:

Woman: “Guess what? There is another speaking ‘man,’ there may even be other Gods or God-like beings, so eat the fruit of the Tree and enjoy – I did.”

Adam: “But God said if we eat it, we will die!”

Woman: “I ate it and I am still here, so as you can see, it is perfectly safe – and there are some amazing benefits. It is consciousness raising!”

So Adam ate too.  Again, this is perfectly understandable—and even excusable, given the facts and circumstances. This gave Adam the right to “blame or rely on” the woman (she presented a cogent argument and had eaten the fruit and did not die), and the woman could “blame” the fact that the nachash defied the natural order (which perhaps implicitly made it Hashem’s fault). So why were they punished? After all, iit does NOT seem like they did anything wrong. Or, at worst, maybe Hashem even entrapped them with the talking nachash!

Perhaps the reason Adam was punished has nothing to do with the command not to eat the fruit. That was simply a misdirection. Hashem punished Adam because he violated the primary command: “to work and protect the Garden.”

Returning to the sequence in Chapter 2, Hashem placed Adam in the Garden before the trees sprouted. Adam watched the trees  emerge but he expended no effort in nurturing them. And when the rivers burst forth to irrigate the Garden, Adam again had no need to do anything. Nevertheless, Hashem places him in the Garden again and tells him to work and protect it.

But we can ask “What work? What protection?”  It doesn’t seem that there is anything for him to do. But there is! “Working” and “protecting” are code, synonym for” taking responsibility”—just like the sign on President Harry Truman’s desk: “The buck stops here.” Adam named the animals because he (and not the lion) was the King of the Jungle. In other words, he was responsible. And, though he did not need to plant or irrigate the Garden, he was responsible for it—for good and for bad.

When Adam erred and ate the fruit (possibly NOT a sin, as explained above, as he may have had had a valid excuse), he failed in his obligation was to take responsibility. That was the job Hashem gave to him.  That was what he was commanded to do. Hashem likely did not care about the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge, that was a mere pretense.

We have emerged from the Yamim Noraim with a clean slate. We have done teshuvah.  We also know that we will err and sin, likely doing many of the same things we transgressed last year and the year before, etc. Hashem knows this. We know this. We need to learn the lesson from Adam’s behavior: if we want to avoid serious consequences, we need to accept responsibility. If you peel away the excuses, if you do not assign blame to others, if you do not redirect and misdirect—only then can you make positive changes.

Shabbat Shuva: Not Just Empty Words

We are reaching the end of Sefer Devarim. This week we read parashat Vayelech and next week Ha’azinu, the last of the weekly Shabbat readings of this book. Looking through Sefer Devarim as a whole, our member Rabbi Steven Ettinger takes a fresh view of the word that gives this Sefer its name.

There is real symmetry to Mishneh Torah, this collection of Moshe’s last words to our people between the beginning and end of this Sefer. The first verse begins with words and the root דבר:

אֵ֣לֶּה הַדְּבָרִ֗ים אֲשֶׁ֨ר דִּבֶּ֤ר מֹשֶׁה֙ אֶל־כׇּל־יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל בְּעֵ֖בֶר הַיַּרְדֵּ֑ן בַּמִּדְבָּ֡ר בָּֽעֲרָבָה֩ מ֨וֹל ס֜וּף בֵּֽין־פָּארָ֧ן וּבֵֽין־תֹּ֛פֶל וְלָבָ֥ן וַחֲצֵרֹ֖ת וְדִ֥י זָהָֽב׃

These are the words that Moses addressed to all Israel on the other side of the Jordan, through the wilderness, in the Aravah near Suph, between Paran and Tophel, Laban, Hatzerot, and Di Zahav.

The Torah marks the conclusion of Ha’aziunu with three unusual and redundant pesukim (Deut. 32:45-47):

וַיְכַ֣ל מֹשֶׁ֗ה לְדַבֵּ֛ר אֶת־כׇּל־הַדְּבָרִ֥ים הָאֵ֖לֶּה אֶל־כׇּל־יִשְׂרָאֵֽל׃

And when Moses finished reciting all these words to all Israel,

 

וַיֹּ֤אמֶר אֲלֵהֶם֙ שִׂ֣ימוּ לְבַבְכֶ֔ם לְכׇ֨ל־הַדְּבָרִ֔ים אֲשֶׁ֧ר אָנֹכִ֛י מֵעִ֥יד בָּכֶ֖ם הַיּ֑וֹם אֲשֶׁ֤ר תְּצַוֻּם֙ אֶת־בְּנֵיכֶ֔ם לִשְׁמֹ֣ר לַעֲשׂ֔וֹת אֶת־כׇּל־דִּבְרֵ֖י הַתּוֹרָ֥ה הַזֹּֽאת׃

He said to them: Take to heart all the words with which I have warned you this day. Enjoin them upon your children, that they may observe faithfully all the terms of this Teaching.

כִּ֠י לֹא־דָבָ֨ר רֵ֥ק הוּא֙ מִכֶּ֔ם כִּי־ה֖וּא חַיֵּיכֶ֑ם וּבַדָּבָ֣ר הַזֶּ֗ה תַּאֲרִ֤יכוּ יָמִים֙ עַל־הָ֣אֲדָמָ֔ה אֲשֶׁ֨ר אַתֶּ֜ם עֹבְרִ֧ים אֶת־הַיַּרְדֵּ֛ן שָׁ֖מָּה לְרִשְׁתָּֽהּ׃ 

 

For this is not a trifling thing for you: it is your very life; through it you shall long endure on the land that you are to possess upon crossing the Jordan.

 In these three verses Moshe uses the root דבר six times. It is unclear from context if each one refers to the same thing, different things, perhaps to the entire Torah, solely Sefer Devarim, maybe to certain specific admonitions he related that particular day – or to all, or none, of the above. Moreover, there seems to be no major commentary on these verses that provides clarity.

 This week is Shabbat Shuva. Perhaps it should more appropriately have been called Shabbat Teshuva – as it is the Shabbat of the Ten Days of Repentance.  However, it receives its name from the special Haftarah that we read – “Shuva Yisrael” from Hosea 14.

 Most people are familiar with the opening verse:

שׁ֚וּבָה יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל עַ֖ד ה אֱלֹק-ֶ֑יךָ כִּ֥י כָשַׁ֖לְתָּ בַּעֲוֺנֶֽךָ׃

Return, O Israel, to the ETERNAL your God, For you have fallen because of your sin.

However, it is the second verse that perhaps provides a key to understanding the enigmatic words in the verses we quoted and, in turn will reflect back and provide us with a deeper understanding of the teshuva process. The verse reads: 

קְח֤וּ עִמָּכֶם֙ דְּבָרִ֔ים וְשׁ֖וּבוּ אֶל־ה 

Take words with you, and return to God.

What are those words? There is that word “devarim” again.  Is this somehow all connected? Is there an interpretation or unifying theme that can help us understand this within the context of Moshe’s phraseology which may then help us reach a higher teshuva?

Moshe said that the words, the “devarim”, are not a “davar rek,” not empty. Rashi interprets this as follows:
 

There is not one empty (ריק i.e., superfluous) word in the Torah that, if you properly expound it, has not a grant of reward attached to it for doing so. You can know this, for so did our Rabbis say: It states (Genesis 36:22) “And Lotan’s sister was Timna”; (Genesis 36:32)

In other words, there are Jews who contain, have heard, have studied, have learned all, or close to all of the Torah. They are Jews who are “Kol haDevarim” Jews. They bring their bountiful “Devarim” and return to Hashem. It is easy for them; they approach confidently - have little to be concerned about.

 But unfortunately, there are many or our co-religionists who have not only not paid attention to the entire Torah – they have heard, perhaps, only a fraction of it. Maybe only a phrase or two, the equivalent of the words: “And Lotan’s sister was Timna”.  For one, it was reciting one “Shema Yisrael”.  For another, it was answering a single Amen to a mourner’s kaddish when they attended a funeral. For yet another, maybe it was sitting at one’s grandparents’ seder and eating matzah.

If any Jew combines that one word, that one experience, with a step or a thought toward teshuva, then, as we read in the very next pasuk: 

אֶרְפָּא֙ מְשׁ֣וּבָתָ֔ם אֹהֲבֵ֖ם  נְדָבָ֑ה                                                                                                             

I will heal their affliction. I will take them back with love.

Devarim is unique, a Jewish king must write this book and keep it with him at all times. All of the Jews – men women and even infant children – gathered as a nation every seven years to hear it read aloud.   Even today some have the minhag to read the complete sefer on the eve of Hoshana Rabbah. Perhaps it is not solely because of its contents. Instead, maybe it is because its very name reminds us that every single Jew is a davar and not a davar rek. If every Jew can hold on to his or her davar and  bring it to Hashem – it would change the world!

Torah and History

Rabbi Wein ztz'l was renowned for his perspicacious comments on the State of the Jewish Nation and how important it is for us to learn the lessons of the past when boldly facing our future. The following post has been composed as a perspective on history in Rabbi Wein's honor, by Rabbi Steven Ettinger.

I am writing this piece three weeks after the funeral of our esteemed and beloved Mara d’Atra, Rabbi Wein. The day following this Shabbat we will be gathering to mark his sheloshim. I am limiting myself to just those two adjectives—esteemed and beloved—as there is a nearly endless fount of words and phrases that could be used to describe his accomplishments, abilities and impact. Like many of you, I attended eulogies, read articles about his life, listened to podcasts and viewed videos—entirely fitting insofar as these are all media that he mastered in order to communicate his teachings to millions.

So many others are better positioned to appreciate his essence and have a more intimate awareness of it that I will not even attempt to write anything about him. Instead, I will share a thought about this parashah of which Rabbi Wein, as a man of history, would most likely have been aware—and which I am sure he would certainly have appreciated.

The most noteworthy part of this parashah is the tochachah, the fearsome curses that would befall our people if they did not follow their covenant with Hashem (these curses have, in fact, befallen us, down to the most minute and sordid detail).

It is perplexing that, after forty years in the midbar and on the precipice of entering the Land of Israel, Am Yisrael would be subjected to having to hear and accept such a litany of horror. After all, their own parents were condemned to die as the result of a single sin. One midrash describes how, each year on Tisha b’Av, the entire nation dug graves and slept in them. Those who rose the next day knew they were spared, at least for another year. Thus they truly understood the consequences of failing to heed the word of God.

But the curses in our parashah were not directed at that particular generation: they were projected out towards history, and to a specific era of history.

This is the interpretation of a particularly shocking interpretation revealed by the Vilna Gaon. He declares that Sefer Devarim corresponds to the sixth millennium of world history. There are ten parshiyot in Devarim and each corresponds to a particular century (Nitzavim-Vayelech count as one). For example, Devarim corresponds to the years 1240-1340 (5,000-5100), Va’etchanan to 1340-1440 (5100-5200), etc. The years 1840-1940 would equate to Ki Savo – years filled with pogroms, the upheaval of World War I and the rise of Hitler and the Holocaust.

Of course, the Holocaust continued for five more years. These are alluded to in the parshiyot of Nitzavim-Vayelech which is our present era 1940-2040:

וַיִּחַר־אַ֥ף ה בָּאָ֣רֶץ הַהִ֑וא לְהָבִ֤יא עָלֶ֙יהָ֙ אֶת־כׇּל־הַקְּלָלָ֔ה הַכְּתוּבָ֖ה בַּסֵּ֥פֶר הַזֶּֽה׃

וַיִּתְּשֵׁ֤ם ה מֵעַ֣ל אַדְמָתָ֔ם בְּאַ֥ף וּבְחֵמָ֖ה וּבְקֶ֣צֶף גָּד֑וֹל וַיַּשְׁלִכֵ֛ם אֶל־אֶ֥רֶץ אַחֶ֖רֶת כַּיּ֥וֹם הַזֶּֽה׃

Hashem’s anger flared against the land to bring against it the entire curse that is written in this book. And Hashem, removed them from their land with anger and wrath and great fury and he cast them to another land, as this very day.

It should be noted that the gematria of בְּאַ֥ף וּבְחֵמָ֖ה וּבְקֶ֣צֶף גָּד֑וֹל is the same as הפתרון הסופי, the final solution!

Our Torah is not a history book. Our Torah is history. While we have lost perhaps the greatest guide to viewing and appreciating Torah in this light, we can honor his legacy by continuing to appreciate how the knowledge of our Nation’s past enhances our learning and our perspective on Hashem’s plans for His world.

Learning to Read the Torah

An inquiring mind will pick up items of information from wherever they may be found. But what are the lessons one can learn from them--and what is the yardstick by which their veracity and usefulness may be measured? Our member Rabbi Steven Ettinger shares this answer with us:

While describing his early yeshiva years in Teach Them Diligently (p. 21), Rabbi Wein ztz’l fondly recalled what he learned in ninth grade from Rabbi Mendel Kaplan. Along with Talmud, this famed disciple of the Mir Yeshiva and Rabbi Elchanan Wasserman taught his young student “how to actually read the newspaper, spotting its unintended lessons in life.” Undoubtedly, these were lessons in how to distinguish truth from falsehood, how to remain steadfast to Torah values in a world that celebrated vanity and immorality, and how to understand proper use of political power in contrast with its abuse.

Today’s newspapers and news media are not the information sources that existed in the late 1940s. Now, they report opinions, not facts. Reporters are biased and not objective. There is no longer such thing as verifying sources – there are no standards of truth.

The Torah, of course, is a primary unimpeachable source. The Torah is truth. The Torah is unbiased. Finally, the Torah is eternal. Thus the Torah should be the contemporary global news source – 24-hour – six day - TNN (Torah News Network). The key, perhaps, is only learning to read/interpret it.

Many (certainly those in the media and who appear or attempt to shape public opinion) are heretics or sceptics. They do not believe any of statements made in the previous paragraph regarding our Torah.  They would claim that the Torah is a 3,000 years old manuscript, likely a work of fiction, written in ancient times and completely irrelevant for a modern enlightened society.  They would certainly scoff at concepts like those found in parshat Shofetim: worshiping trees, witchcraft and sorcery, talking to the dead, false prophets allowing killers to flee from avenging family members, breaking a calf’s neck, etc.

However, this parsha is perhaps the penultimate example of the Torah as today’s media source. Nearly every significant story that we can find in our daily news, regardless of topic or discipline, has its roots and more – perhaps its entire arc –in its verses.

The parsha opens with the requirement to establish a justice system and the overriding imperative to pursue righteousness (“tzedek tzedek tirdof”). This prescription is so intense that it is stated as a continuing condition for remaining in the Land of Israel. Looking closely, these pesukim are today’s stories of judicial reform, of the trial of political leaders and of activist courts both here and abroad.

We know how miserly the Torah is with words. Yet in our parsha there is significant redundancy. The word tzedek appears three times in these three verses. Hashem repeats the phrase, “that Hashem has given you” referencing the Land of Israel, twice in these verses. Ramban translates tzedek here as truth and peace. If we commit to unbiased truth and a desire for peace among our people, then these stories become footnotes.

The next topic is the ashera tree that was worshipped as an idol. This seems incomprehensible to our modern sensibilities. Yet how many hundreds of millions “worship” their “Apples.” How many hours a day are their attentions absorbed and subsumed by the content on these devices. More drastic – and alarming – how many of our youth are influenced to the point of experiencing record levels of depression (and epidemic numbers of teen suicides), lower academic achievement levels, behavioral issues, not to mention issues with gender and sexuality. How many headlines and articles are devoted to these topics and can be attributed to this ashera?

Let’s jump forward to another headline, leaders and elections. In Gaza there is a leadership vacuum. In New York they may soon hail the “new generation” leader, the future of American politics -- an antisemitic communist. In Israel, of course, who the Prime Minister is or should be may be the most polarizing issue of all.

This parsha has the only direct commandments regarding leadership – the commandments regarding the Jewish king. It is interesting to note that there is no commandment to anoint one – but there can be a king IF the people request one. More interesting is that we find only two positive commandments, only two tasks that a Jewish king is commanded to perform (in contrast with things he is forbidden to do). He must (i) write a “sefer Torah” and (ii) gather the nation once every seven years to read the Torah to them. Bottom line, the purpose of a Jewish leader is to set an ethical example – one of universal values, God’s values – and to serve the people, not himself or his vanity or ego or pocketbook.

There are so many others, witchcraft and bone reading, cities of refuge, false prophets, the rules of war, ecology, etc. However, let us conclude with another mitzvah that seems so superstitious – that it could easily subject our religion to ridicule – eglah arufah. How strange is this: someone randomly finds an unidentified corpse and no-one knows who killed him. The elders then come out and determine (through precise measurement) which city was nearest. The representatives of that city must take a calf and perform a ceremony involving breaking its neck in order to absolve themselves from sin- on account of the blood that was shed.

How many of today’s stories involve violence and bloodshed? In the newsroom, the bloodier the better. How many murders and assaults? How many gunmen opening fire in shopping centers and schools and stadiums? How many crime-related killings? How many innocent victims of terror and war world-wide.

If mankind could only value life so much that they could gather and regret and have a solemn ceremony for the death of a man they cannot even identify.  If humanity could ask forgiveness for the loss of a single life and ask Hashem to remove guilt for this death – because this is “doing what is right in the sight of Hashem,” then mankind might only be reading the Torah and there would be no news. That day will come – that is the day Moshiach comes.

One day -- and another

Why were we forty years in the desert before entering our Promised Land? We all know what the Torah tells us -- or do we? Our member Rabbi Steven Ettinger challenges our reflex answer to this well-known question

If you were to ask most anyone with basic knowledge of the narrative of the Five Books of Torah why the Children of Israel wandered in the desert for 40 years, they would most likely answer that it was because Hashem punished them for despairing over the negative report of the spies. Hashem condemned them to sojourn one year for each day that the spies scouted in the Holy Land.  This is written in black and white in the text. 

However, in Parshat Eikev Moshe provides a completely different and quite strange answer, one that is repeated, presumably for emphasis, twice in quick succession!  Hashem forced them to travel forty years in the desert:

לְמַ֨עַן עַנֹּֽתְךָ֜ לְנַסֹּֽתְךָ֗ לָדַ֜עַת אֶת־אֲשֶׁ֧ר בִּֽלְבָבְךָ֛ הֲתִשְׁמֹ֥ר מִצְוֺתָ֖ו אִם־לֹֽא׃

וַֽיְעַנְּךָ֮ וַיַּרְעִבֶ֒ךָ֒ וַיַּאֲכִֽלְךָ֤ אֶת־הַמָּן֙ אֲשֶׁ֣ר לֹא־יָדַ֔עְתָּ וְלֹ֥א יָדְע֖וּן אֲבֹתֶ֑יךָ לְמַ֣עַן הוֹדִֽיעֲךָ֗ כִּ֠י לֹ֣א עַל־הַלֶּ֤חֶם לְבַדּוֹ֙ יִחְיֶ֣ה הָֽאָדָ֔ם כִּ֛י עַל־כׇּל־מוֹצָ֥א פִֽי־יְהֹוָ֖ה יִחְיֶ֥ה הָאָדָֽם׃

In order to test you by hardships to learn what was in your hearts: whether you would keep the divine commandments or not. [God] subjected you to the hardship of hunger and then gave you manna to eat, which neither you nor your ancestors had ever known, in order to teach you that a human being does not live on bread alone, but that one may live on anything that ה decrees.(Deut 8:2-3).

הַמַּאֲכִ֨לְךָ֥ מָן֙ בַּמִּדְבָּ֔ר אֲשֶׁ֥ר לֹא־יָדְע֖וּן אֲבֹתֶ֑יךָ לְמַ֣עַן עַנֹּֽתְךָ֗ וּלְמַ֙עַן֙ נַסֹּתֶ֔ךָ לְהֵיטִֽבְךָ֖ בְּאַחֲרִיתֶֽךָ׃

Who fed you in the wilderness with manna, which your ancestors had never known, in order to test you by hardships only to benefit you in the end (Deut 8:16).

In other words, they wandered in the desert for forty years not because of a sin but so Hashem could test them by feeding them manna!  This almost sounds absurd.

For a question that seems so big, there is a dearth of commentary. Only Ramban provides a detailed explanation of this test of the Manna.

כִּי הָיָה נִסָּיוֹן גָּדוֹל לָהֶם שֶׁלֹּא יָדְעוּ עֵצָה לְנַפְשָׁם וַיִּכָּנְסוּ בַּמִּדְבָּר הַגָּדוֹל לֹא מְקוֹם לֶחֶם וְאֵין בְּיָדָם כְּלוּם מִן הַמָּן, אֲבָל יָרַד דְּבַר יוֹם בְּיוֹמוֹ וְחַם הַשֶּׁמֶשׁ וְנָמָס וַיִּרְעֲבוּ אֵלָיו מְאֹד. וְכָל זֶה עָשׂוּ לִשְׁמֹר מִצְוַת הַשֵּׁם לָלֶכֶת כַּאֲשֶׁר יְצַוֶּה. וְהַשֵּׁם הָיָה יָכוֹל לְהוֹלִיכָם בְּדֶרֶךְ הֶעָרִים אֲשֶׁר סְבִיבוֹתֵיהֶם, אֲבָל הֱבִיאָם בַּנִּסָּיוֹן הַזֶּה כִּי מִמֶּנּוּ יִוָּדַע שֶׁיִּשְׁמְרוּ מִצְוֹתָיו לְעוֹלָם:

 [The manna itself] was a great trial to them. They did not know what counsel to adopt for themselves when they entered the great wilderness, a place of no food, and they had none of the manna [in reserve because it could not be stored from day to day] but each day’s portion came down on its day, and as the sun waxed hot, it melted, although they hungered mightily after it. All this they did to keep the commandment of G-d, to follow as He commanded. Now G-d could have led them through the [populated] cities that were around them, but instead He brought them into this trial [of never having any food in reserve] for He knew that as a result [of this experience] they would keep His commandments forever.

Let us return to that “black and white” text that implies the forty years was punishment for the sin of the spies. The language used (Numbers 14:34) י֣וֹם לַשָּׁנָ֞ה י֣וֹם לַשָּׁנָ֗ה is a bit unusual. It is repetitive, doubled. Writing the phrase once would have been enough.  A number of commentaries (i.e., the Kli Yakar) explain that one is for that moment – that generation – and one to prophesize that there will be one day of suffering, Tisha B’Av eternally set aside for crying and pain because of their sin.

However, in light of how Moshe connects the forty-year wandering in the midbar to the manna, perhaps the repetition of י֣וֹם לַשָּׁנָ֞ה foreshadows that their task was not to earn forgiveness for their sin but to exhibit steadfastness in faith in the face of ongoing adversity.

If we interpret this correctly, Moshe is saying that the forty years was preordained.  It had less to do with their despairing over the spies and much more to do with Hashem wanting to be assured that the Jewish nation could withstand daily hardship and remain committed to His commandments. Extrapolating from this, the fact that we have been afflicted with (and continue to experience) so many calamities and intense hatred and have nevertheless endured is simply a continuation of this trial – through the centuries we have merited Divine protection (our manna) but must continuously prove steadfast in our worthiness to remain his Chosen People.

Ultimately, there is another “day” that is a constant test that we not simply hope, but are promised, will be לְהֵיטִֽבְךָ֖ בְּאַחֲרִיתֶֽךָ for our benefit in the end. Every day, like the test of the manna falling, as a fundamental element of our belief as Jews we must proclaim regarding the Mashiach: “We await him that he may come any single day.”  אֲחַכֶּה לּוֹ בְּכָל יוֹם שֶׁיָּבוֹא. May today be that day!