Quintessential Fundamentals 5-30-10

Important to revisit ones quintessential fundamentals a time or two a year... Here is a short list from a quick assessment today.

The Perennial Philosophy: https://prostores3.carrierzone.com/stores/i/insightscomm.com/images/PSHelperSet/InsightsComm_philosophy3.pdf

Thou Art That: http://followyourbliss.tribe.net/thread/ca5902fb-13b6-41a9-a2a3-014a44e4f058

Grow Where You Are Planted: The grass is not greener elsewhere, just different (and the same).

Be Who You Are: If you have a size 8 foot… wear size 8 shoes.

Gratitude: There is more to be thankful for than you can even call to mind.

Wonder: There is more to wonder at than you can even call to mind.

Wisdom As Behavior In Accord With The Rhythm Of The Created World: You are not what you think, feel or will. You are what you do.

Don’t Waste Time Discussing Theology: Rather, break bread over how the Ultimate is afoot in your current life.

What Feels Like Discovering is Really No More Than Remembering.

The Water of Torah

Rabbi Akiva was inspired to study Torah by seeing how a small stream of water had tiny bit by tiny bit worn through a rock. From this he learned that every “drop” of Torah study must change a person, even though the initial signs of change may not be recognized.

From: In the Garden of Torah

http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/82718/jewish/Bechukosai.htm

Real Growth Bechukosai

Adapted from Likkutei Sichos, Vol. III, p. 1012ff; Vol. VI, p. 112ff; Vol. XVII, p. 313ff; Vol. XXII, p. 163ff Satisfying Thirst One characteristic of the human condition is a desire for growth.1 This is a positive trait, an expression of the nature of man’s soul. For the soul of man is “an actual part of G-d.”2 As such, no substitute for genuine meaning will ring true. Moreover, even when a person achieves an understanding of authentic truth, he will constantly seek to expand his awareness. For G-d is unlimited, and the G-dly potential within us reflects this boundlessness, never remaining content with any given situation, but rather striving to “proceed from strength to strength.”3 Although this desire for growth is universal, its expression varies from individual to individual. For though we all want to continue advancing, many do not know how to start, and this lack of knowledge prevents personal growth from beginning. How does an individual find the never-ending path to personal growth? Answers to this question can be derived from our Torah reading, which begins with the phrase:4אם בחוקותי תלכו , generally translated as “If you follow My statutes.” תלכו translated as “follow,” also means “proceed,” and is used in several sources as an allusion to personal growth.5 בחוקותי , “My statutes,” refers to a particular category of mitzvos, referred to as chukim. What is implied is that personal growth depends on internalizing the lessons of the chukim. Hewn Into Our Hearts The word חוק means “engrave.” Contrasting the difference between writing and engraving allows us to appreciate the inner meaning of the chukim , and the influence they have upon us.6 Firstly, in contrast to writing, engraving involves strenuous labor. Writing is also considered one of the 39 categories of labor,7 but the amount of effort required to write cannot be compared to that necessary to engrave.8 In this context, Rashi interprets אם בחוקותי תלכו as meaning “If you labor in Torah study,” i.e., if you do more than merely study, and arduously apply yourself to the Torah. When a person dedicates himself in this fashion, the words of the Torah will become “engraved” on his heart. Even if his heart is as rigid as stone, the gentle, inexorable pressure applied by the “water” of the Torah will penetrate.9 This is the first key to personal growth. There is no such thing as spirituality without sacrifice. A field will not yield crops unless one plows and sows. In order to make the Divine potential each of us possesses grow and blossom, an investment of hard work must be made. Without a Dichotomy There is another difference between writing and engraving. When one writes, the surface upon which one writes and the ink which one uses remain two separate entities. When, by contrast, letters are engraved in stone, the writing and the stone form a single entity; they are inseparable.10 This points to the importance of internalizing the Torah, making its teachings part of one’s own being. There is an advantage to compelling oneself to observe the Torah even when doing so runs contrary to one’s nature.11 But the deepest commitment to G-d’s service involves remaking one’s nature to reflect His will.12 This is the second lesson of the chukim that a person and the Torah should not be separate entities,13 but rather a single whole.14 This approach leads to true growth, for one proceeds beyond the limited vistas of his own perception, and enters the unlimited horizons to which the Torah introduces him. Above the Limits of Intellect The above leads to a third interpretation of chukim: that the term refers to the dimensions of Torah which surpass our understanding. Toiling in the study of the Torah brings one to an awareness that its every facet, even those which appear to be within the grasp of mortal intellect, is in fact unbounded. For the Torah is G-d’s wisdom, and “just as it is impossible for a created being to comprehend his Creator, so too, it is impossible to comprehend His attributes.”15 “He is the Knower… and He is the Knowledge itself. All is one.”16 Moreover, such a commitment to study does more than engender an awareness of the infinite dimension of the Torah’s wisdom; as mentioned above, it enables this dimension to be internalized. In the process, a person’s way of thinking changes, and the infinite dimension of the Torah becomes one with his own being. Fusing Conflicting Tendencies Parshas Bechukosai is often read in conjunction with Parshas Behar. On the surface, the two readings represent opposite approaches, for Behar communicates the message of personal strength and fortitude, while Bechukosai focuses on the theme of self-transcendence. Nevertheless, as a person endeavors to apply the lessons of each reading in his life, he realizes that the messages are complementary. When the strength of Behar stands upon the self-transcendence of Bechukosai, one uncovers deeper and more powerful reserves of strength than one normally possesses.17 Conversely, the self-transcendence of Bechukosai is possible only when a person possesses the inner strength of purpose needed to make the required efforts. To Know G-d’s Goodness The majority of this Torah reading focuses on the rewards granted for observance of the Torah, and the punishments ordained for failure to observe. One might ask: When a person has internalized the self-transcendence of Bechukosai, of what interest is reward? As the Alter Rebbe would say:18 “I don’t want Your World to Come. I don’t want Your Gan Eden. All I want is You alone.” In truth, however, only a person who genuinely “wants You alone” can appreciate the full measure of reward G-d has associated with the Torah and its mitzvos. As long as a person is concerned with his individual wants and desires, he will interpret the reward received for observance in that light. When, by contrast, a person has transcended his individual will, instead of these petty material concerns, he will appreciate the essential good and kindness which G-d conveys.19 This will create a self-reinforcing pattern, for the purpose of the rewards granted by the Torah is to enable an individual to further his study and observance.20 As this pattern spreads among mankind, we will merit the full measure of blessings mentioned in the Torah reading, with the return of our people to our land, led by Mashiach. Then “Your threshing season will last until your grape harvest…. You shall eat your bread with satisfaction…. I will grant peace in the land, and none shall make you afraid.”21

FOOTNOTES 1. At times, this desire is consciously appreciated and therefore systematically developed. In other instances, a person will experience undefined feelings of restlessness and a longing for change. At the core of these feelings is the soul’s desire for spiritual growth. Note Likkutei Sichos, Vol. IX, p. 25. 2. Tanya, ch. 2. 3. Psalms 84:8. 4. Leviticus 26:3. 5. Psalms, loc. cit., Zachariah 3:7, et al. 6. See Likkutei Torah, Bamidbar 45a. 7. Shabbos 7:2. 8. Such an approach to study is of virtue in its own right, as explained in Tanya, ch. 15. 9. Cf. Avos d’Rabbi Nosson 6:2. This concept is quoted with regard to the story of Rabbi Akiva, who was inspired to study Torah by seeing how a small stream of water had tiny bit by tiny bit worn through a rock. From this he learned that every “drop” of Torah study must change a person, even though the initial signs of change may not be recognized. 10. See also the interpretation of the phrase (Avos 3:11): “Even though he possesses Torah and mitzvos.” The Hebrew words translated as “possesses” are יש בידו , literally, “he has in his hand.” This person may observe the Torah and its mitzvos, but his observance is “in his hand,” separate from his inner self [In the Paths of Our Fathers (Kehot, N.Y., 1994)]. 11. See Basi LeGani (Sefer HaMaamarim 5710), sec. 1. 12. See Avos 2:4, and the explanation of the mishnah offered by In the Paths of Our Fathers. 13. The two lessons are interrelated, for as explained above, dedicated toil in the study of Torah will enable its truth to penetrate one’s heart. 14. This level was personified by Moshe our teacher, as reflected in the verse (Deuteronomy 11:15): “I will give grass in your fields for your cattle,” in which he speaks in the name of G-d. This is possible because “the Divine presence spoke from his throat” (Zohar, Vol. III, p. 232a); he was totally at one with the Torah which he taught. 15. Tanya, Shaar HaYichud VehaEmunah, ch. 4. 16. Rambam, Mishneh Torah, Hilchos Yesodei HaTorah 2:10. 17. See the previous essay, entitled “Pride That Runs Deeper Than Self.” 18. As quoted in Derech Mitzvosecho, Shoresh Mitzvos HaTefillah, ch. 40. See also Rambam, Hilchos Teshuvah, ch. 10. 19. See Likkutei Sichos, Vol. XV, p. 312. 20. Rambam, Mishneh Torah, Hilchos Teshuvah 9:1. 21. Leviticus 26:5-6.

Inconveniences and Troubles

"Troubles, you see, is the generalization-word for what God exists in. The thing is not to get hung-up." Dean Moriarty in Jack Kerouac's On the Road.

This is one of my favorite literary quotes... My mind finds it scintillating every time I remember it... As much as I love the idea, experientially, I loathe troubles... I loathe inconveniences...

Here's a list of some of the basic kinds of inconveniences I loathe:

• Flat tire
• Battery and/or generator problems in the car
• Lack of electricity
• Lack of water in the house
• Any type of plumbing problem
• Any type of electrical problem
• Broken toasters, coffee makers, hair dryers, microwaves
• Problems with refrigerators, washers, dryers, dishwashers
• Home repair type issues of any variety

I suppose I hate all of these because of my general handyman ineptitude. After all these years I still find most repair type work intimidating.

On any given day I take for granted that my car will start, that my home will have water, that the refrigerator and washing machine will work... None of this takes into account the daily life of people in many other parts of the world that worry about having food to eat or not stepping into a building or bus that will blow up... I get this... my "troubles" are slight... they are in the inconvenience realm. Minor league all things considered.

Nonetheless... I loathe them.

Years ago I had the opportunity to attend a one day seminar with Scott Peck (author of The Road Less Traveled). He told the story of being on a Catholic retreat and visiting late at night with an old nun (whiskey bottle in tow)... He related his frustration and pain over marital problems he was having... She responded by saying, "That's wonderful my son".

This confused him, so he said, "Sister, I don't think you understood me...". He went on to restate his problems, pain, and anger. She replied, "Yes, I heard you the first time. This is wonderful".

This really pissed him off and and he asked her what the hell she was talking about. She said something like this in response, "It's only when we have troubles that we know we need G-d's help and let G-d in".

Here's to a personal attempt to work towards a paradigm shift... As Dean puts it, ""Troubles, you see, is the generalization-word for what God exists in. The thing is not to get hung-up".

Working on going with the flow (thanks to Marcus Aurelius) and being more receptive to inconveniences and trouble.

Weekly Torah Portion: Arcarei and Kedoshim

Acharei (אחרי — Hebrew for “after” or “after the death,” the fifth word or fifth and sixth words, and the first distinctive word or words, in the parshah) is the 29th weekly Torah portion. It constitutes Lev 16:1 to 18;30.

In common years (for example, 2010, 2012 etc.), parshah Acharei is combined with the next parshah, Kedoshim, to help achieve the needed number of weekly readings.

Kedoshim (קדושים — Hebrew for "holy ones,” the 14th word, and the first distinctive word, in the parshah) is the 30th parshah. It constitutes Lev 19:1 to 20:27

I do not pretend to understand the reasons for the many twists and turns of Jewish Law in Leviticus... but, perhaps this is the point... Maybe understanding is overrated at times...

I love that quote by Pascal, "The heart has it's reasons that the reason knows not of".

Solomon says it well, "Trust in the Lord with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding...".

Lev 20:26 And ye shall be holy unto Me; for I HaShem am holy, and have set you apart from the peoples, that ye should be Mine.

All the laws, rites, regulations, instructions... the modern - rational mind seeks... rationales... perhaps there are none to be found... perhaps it's as simple as "this is how we Jews do life"... so I leave you with words and thoughts more eloquent than mine from a favorite writer of mine...

Why Does Judaism Make No Sense?

http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/1148059/jewish/Why-Does-Judaism-Make-No-Sense.htm

By Tzvi Freeman

Question:

Yesterday, my sister threw out some scrambled eggs. I asked her why. She said because she accidentally mixed them with a spatula that was used for milk and the frying pan was used for meat and that meant the eggs were no good. I asked her why. She said because that's the halacha. I asked her why. She said, "Because."

There are so many things like this in the Jewish religion. Don't play musical instruments on Shabbat. Why? Because you might come to fix one. So what? You're not allowed. Why? Because. Don't mix wool and linen. Why? Because.

Tell me, rabbi, is this a sensible religion?

Response:

No, it is not. And your first mistake is to believe that Jews do these things for any particular reason. Jews do these things because they are Jews. Keeping kosher is not a reasonable act and neither is Shabbat or the prohibition against mixing wool and linen. The same with Torah readings, bar and bat mitzvahs, black leather boxes or dipping in the mikvah. These are neither rational nor religious acts—in the modern understanding of "religious." They do not speak to the modern mind because they are not of modernity. They are ancient tribal rituals, preserved by a people obsessed with their history and their tribalism.

A few words about tribalism as the sociologist sees it. Sociology became a science with the publication Emile Durkheim's monograph on suicide in 1897. Durkheim was a nice Jewish boy who had studied in yeshiva to become a rabbi, as his father, grandfather and great-grandfather before him, but then left to think for himself and challenge his teachers at the Sorbonne. In his paper, Durkheim blamed most of society's woes (especially suicide) on the abandonment of tribalism. He coined the term anomie, which means a state of society where nobody knows who they are, what they have to do with one another or what on earth they're doing here. Durkheim demonstrated, through the first methodological, scientific study of a social phenomenon, that in turn-of-the-century France, suicide was the realm of the tribeless—meaning the Protestant and the agnostic. Catholics and Jews rarely committed suicide. Because they felt no anomie.

What this runaway-yeshiva boy ironically demonstrated, and others after him confirmed is that a human being without a tribe is like a polar bear without ice—he can survive, but he'll be awfully confused. It's through his relationship with the tribe that a human being knows that the earth beneath his feet is solid ground, that tomorrow is a day like today, that he is who he is and it's okay to be that way. Take the tribe away and none of that remains necessarily true.

Ask any social worker: Take an aboriginal person off of skid row and plop him back in his tribe and he's a healthy specimen of life. Rip a wild kid out of that stolen vehicle and make him part of an extended, cohesive family and he calms down, becomes manageable.

Most social illnesses arose when society grew beyond the tribe. As Jared Diamond points out, tribes are egalitarian. It was chiefdoms and states that gave one man power over another. Communism, socialism, the checks and balances of the modern capitalist state—all of these are attempts to make up for the primal trauma that society experienced as it emerged from its cocoon of the tribe.

Which is the astonishing thing about the Jewish People: We never left the tribe behind. Actually, that is the best description I have of this enigma we call the Jewish People: A bronze age tribe residing smack at the vortex of modernity. That's also the best way for me to explain those rituals, sacred objects, sacred spaces and mystic occasions that are such an anathema to the modern mind: It's true—they are absurd within the framework of the rationalist mind, just as polar bears would be absurd hunting for walrus in the Sahara. Kosher garments, Shabbat technicalities and taboo scrambled eggs are downright bizarre outside the context of tribalness—as are the thrice daily incantations, the black leather boxes, the dip in the mikvah, the candles before sundown, perhaps the entire gamut of the Jewish experience. But tell me, just how much are you in love with the anomie of the modern mind? In Yeats' classic portrayal of the modern mess:

The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;

The center cannot hold because there is none. Because modern man is a figment of its own imagination. He defines himself, his world and his place within it each day anew according to the temperament of that day. He is his own point of reference, and therefore he has no center, only periphery.

Let's back up. What is the place of ritual within the tribe?

Richard Sosis, an anthropologist at the University of Connecticut, has put a lot of thought and research into this question and published prolifically on the topic. Sosis observed tribe members who maim their bodies in initiation rites, others who risk their lives in celebratory dances and even one particular middle eastern tribe in which male members would stand for hours shaking back and forth, dressed in fur hats and hot woolen clothes, reciting ancient incantations before a stone wall under the blazing sun of Jerusalem. Sosis was bothered by the seeming counter-productivity of these rituals. "Why," he asked, "does human society universally develop rituals that do not contribute, but rather, severely detract from reproduction and accumulation of food and resources?"

His answer: Rituals deal with something yet more essential, something that precedes the intellect. Rituals deal with identity, the context in which intellect functions. Identity in turn is the glue by which a tribe is held together. Specifically, Sosis demonstrates, we're speaking of rituals that are attributed meanings that cannot be falsified (read: can't prove it, can't disprove it), involve significant risk or sacrifice on the part of the individual ("too risky to fake") and are performed together or in concert with other members of the tribe. If there's no risk, you haven't proven anything to anyone, not even yourself. And if it all makes perfect sense, then you did it because it makes sense, not because of who you really are.

It's like bringing your wife flowers or buying her diamonds. Now does that make sense? Good money gone to waste on items that provide no utility. But that's just the point: If it would make sense to you, it would mean nothing to her. It's only when we do the irrational that we establish firm bonds of commitment and joint identity.

Within the Torah cosmology, non-falsifiable ritual has a yet greater place. The mitzvah-rituals not only bind the people together as a cohesive whole, but also bind the people to an underlying truth that is wholly transcendent and unknowable, sometimes known as G-d. That is really the essence of Jewishness, and the secret of Jewish survival as a tribe: The covenant. Yes, other tribes have their particular deities, totems and worships. But with the Jewish People, that covenant with the Unknowable Maker of Heaven and Earth is our defining truth. That is who we are and without it we are not.

So how do I establish, sustain and perpetuate a covenant with a transcendent, unknowable G-d? If I cannot affirm my commitment to another individual through something that I do because it makes perfect sense to me, all the more so I cannot establish an eternal bond with an infinite entity by means of cute little acts that fit neatly within my puny brain. The only true bond is through the super-rational. Like those black leather boxes on my arm and head.

Does that mean nothing is allowed to make sense? Not at all. This Infinite G-d desires a bond with the entirety of each one of us—with our hands, our feet, our hearts and, yes, even our brains. If nothing would make sense, then the brain and heart would be left out of the equation. So He provides opportunities to bond through mitzvahs that make sense as well, like don't steal, visit the sick, honor mom and dad. Even the ones that transcend reason—the ones we call chukim, such as the prohibition against wearing wool and linen mixed together or eating meat cooked with milk—these as well have been provided a kind of reasoning that works within a certain realm.

Yet nevertheless, when it comes down to the prime motivation for all of them, for everything Jewish a Jew does, it's because, "Hey, I'm a Jew and this is what Jews do." In other words, it comes down to our covenant with a G-d that we never quite figured out, and don't really expect to. But we do His stuff, because, hey, we're His tribe.

Like throwing out those eggs. It's a bonding experience. Do it with love.

The Stairstep Psalms

I am currently reading the weekly Torah portions with little stirring... When I read the musings of my peeps I seek a stirring of the mind, heart and will... but, mainly of the heart...

I've been reading again this week in Peter Drucker and he emphasizes over and over that to be effective we must know our strengths and how we operate... How do we learn? How do we communicate? What are we good at?

In the realm of spirituality, as much as I love the intellectual side of things I am fundamentally a creature of the heart ("The heart has it's reasons that that the reason knows not of." see Pascal on the heart). It is emotion that moves me...

My mind and will may be the banks and bed of the river... but my heart is the water.

I have been seeking a paradigm shift in my approach to reading Torah... Torah study not as learning but as meeting... communing with the ground of my being... connecting anew... no, remembering- becoming aware again of the connection between the divine sparks at the core of my soul and the ultimate divine spark... A unity that persists regardless of whatever I may think, say or do.

As a side note... I think that this is why there is such emphasis in psalms and proverbs on blamelessness, being just, doing right... Not for some moralistic/ rewards-punishments kind of reason but rather because of potential connectivity issues (as we say in IT language)... G-d in us is inseparably connected to G-d above... but, evil and wrongdoing obscure and cloud the connection functionally... again, functionally, not relationally... G-d is always my mother and father- no matter what I do... but, when my way is blameless... when I am pure in heart I can see G-d and experience Her/ Him in my day to day.

Back to Torah... I can't understand why so much of the primary spiritual mother's milk and father's meat of the peeps (Torah) would focus on ritual, rite and things like how to address lesions and bodily fluid discharges (Leviticus)... Just don't get the rationale for granting the amount of time and attention to these matters given the very limited real estate that is the 5 books of Moses... I trust that with time this will make more sense to me...

I continue to read as part of my daily study/service Torah along with a psalm a day and a chapter from proverbs... Of late, the proverbs stir me... the psalms rarely do. This has not typically been the case over the past 30+ years.

Today I read the final psalm in the stair step psalms (Psalms 120-134)...

Chapter 134

1. A song of ascents. Behold: Bless the Lord, all you servants of the Lord who stand in the House of the Lord in the nights. 2. Lift up your hands in holiness and bless the Lord. 3. May the Lord, Who makes heaven and earth, bless you from Zion.

Many of the psalms can tend to ramble a bit for me these days (more a Jonathan issue than a psalms issue)... the stair step psalms are like industrial strength psalms... concentrate. Succinct... to the point. I love them... they stir me.

I like to use them as a "template" for a personalized prayer...

Oh Lord, bless you... bless you for all your goodness and faithfulness to me... I am your servant. My heart, mind and will stand at the ready in your house day and night for your call. I lift up my hands asking you to search my heart and expose any fault in me... May my way be pure and right... pleasing to you... in harmony with the natural order of things... the way the universe flows. Maker of all, source and ground of my being... I ask for your blessing on my way, my family, my life work. Lover of my being, may my love for you make real and enveloping that union that has existed since you first knew me...

I will be mulling over the songs of ascents this week... also, re-reading the story of king Hezekiah...

More about The Songs of Degrees (Ascents)
http://www.levendwater.org/companion/append67.html

There is no difference of opinion as to the meaning of the word "degrees". It means "steps", but interpretations of the use of the word in this connection manifest a great difference and discordance. Some think these Psalms were so called because they were sung on the fifteen steps of the Temple. But there is no evidence that there were fifteen steps. In Ezekiel's Temple (Ezek. 40:22, 31) there are to be two flights; one of seven steps in the outer court, and another of eight steps in the inner court. But that Temple is the subject of prophecy, and is still future.

Others suggest "a Song of the higher choir", "on the stairs of some high place"; others, "in a higher key". Others interpret them of "the going up of the Ark" to Zion; others, of "the going up of the tribes" to the feasts; others, "a Song of high degree". Others refer them to "a synthetic arrangement of the parallel lines"; others, that they refer to "the going up from Babylon", which makes them all "post-exilic". Others regard them as referring to the yet future return of Israel from their long dispersion; while yet others spiritualize all the expressions, and interpret them of the experiences of the Church of God at all times, and in the present day.

One thing is clear, i.e. that all these interpretations cannot be correct. So we still look for one which shall be worthy of the dignity of the Word of God as "written for our learning"; and one which shall produce and combine intellectual enjoyment with experimental satisfaction. Dr. Thirtle (*1) has called attention to the use of the definite article. The Hebrew reads "A Song of THE Degrees" (Shir hamma'aloth). In this simple fact lies the key to the solution of the problem, which is as simple in its nature as it is grand in its results.

Once we note the use of the definite article, "THE Degrees", we naturally ask what Degrees? The answer comes from the Word of God itself, and not from the guesses and imaginations of men. The only "degrees" of which we read in the Bible are "the degrees" on the sundial of Ahaz, by which the shadow of the sun went backward in the days of his son Hezekiah, as a sign from Jehovah that he should recover from his sickness, while Jerusalem was surrounded by the armies of the king of Assyria, and Hezekiah was under sentence of death from the King of Terrors (see 2Kings 20:8-11, and the Structure of the chapters in Isa. 36-39). Scripture knows of no other steps or "degrees" that can be connected with the shadow of the sun.

On recovery from his sickness, Hezekiah said (Isa. 38:20) :

"Jehovah was ready to save me :
Therefore we will sing MY SONGS (*2) to the stringed instruments
All the days of our life
In the house of Jehovah." (*3)

More than 250 years ago (1602-75) this interpretation was suggested in a passing remark by Dr. John Lightfoot in his work on Old Testament Chronology : but so far as Dr. Thirtle is concerned, it was his own independent discovery. The number of these Psalms (fifteen) adds to its testimony to the certainty of this interpretation. It corresponds with the number of the years (fifteen), which were added to Hezekiah's life : while the number written by himself (ten) corresponds with the number of "the degrees" by which "the shadow of the sun went backward".

Hezekiah called them "MY songs". There was no need to put his own name to them, but he put the names to the other five. The one by Solomon is in the center, with two by David on either side. In each of the seven Psalms (on either side of the central Psalm) the name "Jehovah" occurs twenty-four times, and "Jah" twice (once in the third Psalm of each seven). In the central Psalm, "Jehovah" occurs three times.

There are five groups consisting of three Psalms each. The first of each group has Distress for its subject; the second has Trust in Jehovah; while the third has Blessing and peace in Zion. In the notes on these Psalms, the passages in the Kings, Chronicles, and Isaiah, to which they refer, are carefully supplied : the passages in the historical books also are referred to in these Psalms. Here we give, in order, the facts of Hezekiah's history which are referred to in these Psalms. These fifteen points of contact can be used in connection both with the Psalms and the historical books.

We have noted fifteen events in the life of Hezekiah which find their counterpart, and are celebrated, in these fifteen Psalms. Space forbids our giving here more that the bare references. Further details will be found in the notes in the historical books, the prophet Isaiah, and the Psalms in question.

The Mystic Dean Moriarty

The Mystic Dean Moriarty
from the Gospel According to Kerouac

Everything since the Greeks has been predicated wrong.

"Now this is the first time we've been alone and in a position to talk for years," said Dean. And he talked all night. As in a dream, we were zooming back through sleeping Washington and back in the Virginia wilds, crossing the Appomattox River at daybreak, pulling up at my brother's door at eight A.M. And all this time Dean was tremendously excited about everything he saw, everything he talked about, every detail of every moment that passed. He was out of his mind with real belief. "And of course now no one can tell us that there is no God. We've passed through all forms. You remember, Sal, when I first came to New York and I wanted Chad King to teach me about Nietzsche. You see how long ago? Everything is fine, God exists, we know time. Everything since the Greeks has been predicated wrong. You can't make it with geometry and geometrical systems of thinking. It's all this!" He wrapped his finger in his fist; the car hugged the line straight and true. "And not only that but we both understand that I couldn't have time to explain why I know and you know God exists." At one point I moaned about life's troubles-how poor my family was, how much I wanted to help Lucille, who was also poor and had a daughter. "Troubles, you see, is the generalization-word for what God exists in. The thing is not to get hung-up. My head rings!" he cried, clasping his head. He rushed out of the car like Groucho Marx to get cigarettes- that furious, ground-hugging walk with the coattails flying, except that he had no coattails. "Since Denver, Sal, a lot of things- Oh, the things-I've thought and thought. I used to be in reform school all the time, I was a young punk, asserting myself-stealing cars a psychological expression of my position, hincty to show. All my jail-problems are pretty straight now. As far as I know I shall never be in jail again. The rest is not my fault." We passed a little kid who was throwing stones at the cars in the road. "Think of it," said Dean. "One day he'll put a stone through a man's windshield and the man will crash and die-all on account of that little kid. You see what I mean? God exists without qualms. As we roll along this way 1 am positive beyond doubt that everything will be taken care of for us-that even you, as you drive, fearful of the wheel" (I hated to drive and drove carefully)-"the thing will go along of itself and you won't go off the road and I can sleep. Furthermore we know America, we're at home; I can go anywhere in America and get what I want because it's the same in every corner, I know the people, I know what they do. We give and take and go in the incredibly complicated sweetness zigzagging every side." There was nothing clear about the things he said, but what he meant to say was somehow made pure and clear. He used the word "pure" a great deal. I had never dreamed Dean would become a mystic. These were the first days of his mysticism, which would lead to the strange, ragged W. C. Fields saintliness of his later days.

~Jack Kerouac "On the Road"

Parshah Shemini

Shemini (Hebrew for "eighth", the third word in this parshah is the 26th weekly Torah portion. It constitutes Leviticus 9:1 - 11:47. It tells the story of the consecration of the tabernacle, the death of Nadab and Abihu, and the dietary laws of kashrut.

There are things that we can only describe as a bit puzzling to the modern mind in this week's parsha.

-Lots of blood and guts in the sacrifices that consecrate the tabernacle.
-Nadab and Abihu get fried when they offer strange fire to G-d
-Aaron holds his tongue about this after Moses talks with him...
Then Moses said unto Aaron: 'This is it that HaShem spoke, saying: Through them that are nigh unto Me I will be sanctified, and before all the people I will be glorified.' And Aaron held his peace.

-Various animals/foods are distinguished as clean and unclean

This seems to be the guiding principle of the parshah... perhaps Leviticus (and the commandments in general)...

11:44, 45 For I am HaShem your G-d; sanctify yourselves therefore, and be ye holy; for I am holy; neither shall ye defile yourselves with any manner of swarming thing that moveth upon the earth. For I am HaShem that brought you up out of the land of Egypt, to be your G-d; ye shall therefore be holy, for I am holy.

"The Hebrew word for "holiness," "kedushah" ( קדושה‎) has the connotation of "separateness." That which is holy in Judaism is set apart, and the separation is maintained by both legal and spiritual measures. Certain places and times are intrinsically sacred, and strictures are placed on one's actions in those situations"(Wikepedia).

At this time I'm not really sure what to make of a parshah like this...

G-d consuming offerings and Nadab and Abihu (even with good reason- some have posited drunkeness)... it all reminds me of... well, I hate to say it... The scene in the wizard of Oz when Dorothy (Toto) finds the wizard behind the curtain...

Is it possible that G-d's initial attempts to separate out a group of people as a holy nation for His purposes started out as an experiment of sorts? In other words, G-d stood behind the curtain throwing levers to create fire and smoke to awe the peeps into going along...

As time goes on you find no such antics (certainly not to this degree) in the kingdom (David, Solomon -->) and exilic/prophetic periods... Nothing of this kind reported in the days of the inter=testamental period, the days of Jesus on... The NT reports various healings but nothing quite like the giving of the law/Sinai and the tabernacle in the desert incidents.

So did G-d change his/her game plan for communicating with the peeps? And, why have we not had any smoke and fire for the past 20 centuries or so... Why none in my (your) lifetime?

It is most likely that we see an evolution in how the people of G-d writing Torah express their perceptions/conceptions of G-d... It's interesting to think of the Jewish Bible less as a story of G-d's dealings with the peeps and more as a story of the evolution of the peeps perceptions/conceptions of G-d and the laws of the people...

Hmmm... better start re-looking at some reformed and reconstructionist weltanschaungs...

PS This week is Passover... this year in my heart and mind... next year, perhaps a move in the Jewish Holidays from heart and mind to heart, mind and hands... time will tell.

Second Soul

March 2, 2010

Second Soul: Parashat Ki Tisa (Exodus)

by Rabbi Adam Kligfeld

There is a mystical tradition that states that a Jew gains a neshamah y’teyrah, an extra soul, on Shabbat. For those 25 hours, we are doubly spiritually charged, or at least potentially so.

Although Rashi, the great medieval French rabbi and commentator, is not the author of this idea, his comment on a well-known verse within Parashat Ki Tisa takes us in a similar direction. The familiar “V’Shamru” song/prayer is lifted directly from a section within Ki Tisa — one of many moments of revelation during which God mentions the idea of, and the commandment regarding, observing Shabbat. In describing the first week of creation, God says, “uvayom hashvi’i shavat vayinafash” — on the seventh day God ceased working (shavat, from which we get the word Shabbat) and was refreshed.

It is that last word that is most interesting. The Hebrew is vayinafash, a verb from the root nefesh, meaning “soul.” The Jewish Publication Society translates the word as “and was refreshed,” as if something happened to God, in a passive way. By stopping, God simply was refreshed. In his “The Five Books of Moses,” scholar Everett Fox translates the word as “paused for breath,” suggesting a second, active action. God both actively stopped working and actively paused to take in, as it were, a much-needed breath. The old and venerable Hertz Chumash translates it more simply as “He rested,” again suggesting an action taken by God in addition to ceasing work.

What did God do on the seventh day? Better yet, what is God trying to tell us about our experience of Shabbat by using this word vayinafash to reminisce about that initial Shabbat of creation? Here is where Rashi comes in. He first says that vayinafash means “God rested.” But then he explains the meaning of that rest. “God restored God’s own soul and breath by taking a calming break from the burden of the labor.” By using this anthropomorphism, Rashi invites us to imagine a God with a soul, a God with needs, a God who could be, as it were, burdened.

But within this comment, Rashi is not only describing God. Rashi also, and perhaps principally, speaks to the human goal for Shabbat and in doing so puts an active spin on the mystical tradition of the double soul.

Our tradition speaks of many “doubles” on Shabbat. The Israelites received a double portion of manna, represented by our two loaves of challah. That double portion simply came to them. It was a gift from above, with no conditions or strings attached. Rashi’s read on vayinafash suggests that our second soul does not come without its price, or at least its effort. In an ironic twist, we need to “work” to earn our pause from work. Only by actively stepping away from those things that define our non-Shabbat world, our Sunday through Friday weeks, do our souls get the boost we so sorely need.

I am a Conservative rabbi. The central vehicle through which I achieve and experience Shabbat is the concept of restraint and prohibition. Feeling bound by the structure and stricture of halachah, or Jewish law, I enter Shabbat via the rabbinic definitions of prohibited labor, which were set up both as a living commentary on the words of the Torah and also as a way of standardizing practice among Jews. Those rules are a fundamental guideline for my observance of Shabbat. At the same time, I acknowledge the multiple paths within Jewish life and the many people within the Jewish community who do not feel bound by the fundamentals of Jewish law.

I firmly believe that Rashi’s message speaks to every Jew, transcending the category of “prohibited labor” that is resonant for some, but not for others. There is an important personal, individual aspect to Shabbat as well. Each of us knows which things in our lives most anchor us to the feeling of work and most burden us. Each of us has activities, habits, behaviors that, though they play important roles in our lives, need not intrude on each day.

Each of us is aware of the things we ought to step back from in order to imbue our own religious experiences with Judaism’s message of 24/6 as opposed to 24/7. Each of us, then, has the blessing, and weekly opportunity, to craft a Shabbat of restraint, withholding, ceasing and active resting that has the best chance of restoring our neshamah, our nefesh, so that we can imitate God ... vayinafash.

Whatever denominational category does or does not inspire you; wherever you place yourself on the spectrum of Jewish observance; whatever your personal theology says about your belief in a commanding God, spend this Shabbat considering what you most need to not do for that second soul to descend upon you Friday night, ascending heavenward on the wisps of the Havdalah flames Saturday night, leaving you restored and ready for the week to come.

Shabbat shalom.

Rabbi Adam Kligfeld is senior rabbi of Temple Beth Am (tbala.org), a Conservative congregation in West Los Angeles.

---

Real Belief: Creed or Relationship?

Prov 3:5,6 Trust in the Lord with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding. In all your ways acknowledge Her and she will guide your paths.

In Judaism trusting God is less a matter of cognition and belief... more a matter of loyalty and obedience...

Loyalty to God, Torah, and Israel, therefore, is the hallmark of the Jew: loyal behavior, not systematic theology, is what is expected and demanded.


Emunah: Biblical Faith

In the Torah, faith in God means trust, not belief in particular propositions.

http://www.myjewishlearning.com/beliefs/Theology/Thinkers_and_Thought/Doctrine_and_Dogma/Biblical_Faith.shtml

By Dr. Menachem Kellner


The term emunah, which is rendered in English as "faith" or "belief," occurs for the first time in the Torah in connection with Abraham.

After obeying God's command to leave his family and home, Abraham is led to the land which God promises to give to his descendants. Famine forces him to sojourn in Egypt, where his wife Sarah's beauty almost precipitates a tragedy. Back in the land promised by God, Abraham and his nephew Lot find that they cannot live together in peace, and each goes his own way. Lot is captured by enemies and then freed by Abraham.

Abraham Questions God

"After these things," the Torah tells us, "the word of the Lord came unto Abram in a vision, saying: 'Fear not, Abram, I am thy shield, thy reward shall be exceeding great.'" Now, for the first time, Abraham questions God: "O Lord God, what wilt Thou give me, seeing I go hence childless…to me thou hast given no seed."

God has repeatedly promised Abraham that the land to which he has been brought will be given to his descendants. But Abraham remains childless: what is the use of a "great reward" if there are no children to whom it can be bequeathed? In response, God brings Abraham outside, and says: "Look now towards heaven and count the stars, if thou be able to count them…so shall thy seed be." What is Abraham's response to this new promise? "Vehe'emin,and he believed in the Lord; and He counted it to him for righteousness" (Genesis 15: 1‑6).

What is the nature of Abraham's belief which God counted as "righteousness"? It is quite clear that Abraham's righteous belief was not a matter of his accepting God's statements as true, or of having given explicit intellectual acquiescence to the truth of a series of propositions such as:

1. God exists.

2. God communicates with individuals and makes promises to them.

3. God has the power to keep promises made.

4. God may be relied upon to keep promises.

In God We Trust

No, the context makes it very clear: Abraham's act of righteousness is his demonstration of trust in God. There can be no doubt that, had he been asked, Abraham would happily have affirmed the truth of the four propositions listed just above. The Torah, however, gives us no reason for thinking that Abraham ever asked himself the sorts of questions to which our four propositions could be construed as answers.

The emunah spoken of here is more than belief that certain statements about God are true; it is belief in God, trust and reliance upon God, all of which call forth behavior consistent with that stance of trust and reliance.

The point I am making here about the meaning of emunah is neither new nor controversial; it is just not often noticed. Yet perusing a concordance and examining the verses in context is enough to convince any reader that the basic, root meaning of emunah is trust and reliance, not intellectual acquiescence in the truth of certain propositions.

A few further examples should suffice to make the point clear. God is described as a God of emunah in the great poem Ha'azinu: "The Rock, His work is perfect; for all His ways are justice, a God of faithfulness [emunah] and without iniquity; just and right is He" (Deuteronomy 32: 4.). God is not being described here as agreeing to the truth of certain statements. The verse itself teaches us which of God's characteristics make it possible to appeal to a "God of faithfulness": God is free of iniquity, just and right.

Even in cases where the Hebrew can be construed in terms of "belief that" as opposed to "belief in," reading the verse in context almost always reaffirms the point being made here about the connotation of emunah in the Torah. In Deuteronomy 9:23 Moses berates the Jews: "And when the Lord sent you from Kadesh‑Barnea, saying, 'Go up and possess the land which I have given you'; then ye rebelled against the commandment of the Lord your God, and ye believed Him [he'emantem] not, nor hearkened to His voice."

This verse might be construed as saying that the Jews simply did not believe what God was telling them; i.e. they did not believe that God was speaking the truth. This, however, is an entirely implausible interpretation. In the first place, the parallel between "believing" and "hearkening" is clear; the Jews are being castigated for failing to do what God told them to do, not for their failure to believe some statement or other.

Why did they fail to do what God instructed? The Jews failed to trust God, and therefore they failed to obey God's, command. God commanded the Jews to ascend to the Land of Israel and conquer it, promising that they would succeed. The lack of emunahin this verse relates to the Jews' failure to trust God to keep the promise made. Furthermore, what was the content of God's statement concerning which the Jews showed lack of emunah? It was the command to ascend to the Land of Israel.

If one disobeys a command and is therefore accused of lack of emunah, it makes much more sense to say that one is being accused of lack of trust in the commander than of quibbling over the accuracy of statements made by or about the commander.

Theology and the Torah

My claim here is that the Torah teaches belief in God, as opposed to beliefs about God. That is not to say that no specific beliefs are implied or even explicitly taught in the Torah. The Torah obviously assumes God's existence, although it nowhere states simply that God exists, or according to most interpreters, commands belief that God exists. The Torah also clearly teaches that God is one: "Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one" (Deuteronomy 6: 4)…

If, then, there are specific beliefs taught in the Torah, why can we not say that the emunah which the Torah both demands of a Jew and seeks to inculcate, is belief that certain statements are true, as opposed to trust in God, trust which finds its expression in certain forms of behavior?

The answer to this question has to do with the Torah's understanding of itself and its understanding of the nature of human beings. To state part of the answer in summary fashion: the Torah teaches, occasionally explicitly, more often implicitly, certain beliefs about God, the universe, and human beings; notwithstanding this, the Torah has no systematic theology.

Judaism emerged through a struggle with idolatry, demanding loyalty to the one God, creator of the universe. This loyalty was to find expression in certain ways, pre‑eminently through obedience to God's will as expressed in the Torah.

So long as one expressed that essential loyalty in speech and (especially) in action, little attempt was made to enquire closely into the doctrines one affirmed; indeed, no attempt was even made to establish exactly what doctrines one ought to affirm. Furthermore, Judaism developed as a religion intimately bound up with a distinct and often beleaguered community.

Loyalty to the community was a further way in which loyalty to God and God's revelation was expressed. Loyalty to God, Torah, and Israel, therefore, is the hallmark of the Jew: loyal behavior, not systematic theology, is what is expected and demanded.

Dr. Menachem Kellner is Sir Isaac and Lady Edith Wolfson Professor of Jewish Religious Thought at the University of Haifa.

Devekut and Dependence vs Independence

If you are recieving this blog notice and prefer not to just email me and let me know...

I originally thought of my blog as a gallery... a place in which I would create and display personal creations... I now think of it more as a co-op gallery... a place where I collect and display beautiful ideas created by many varying people (myself included... maybe something you send me too!?)

My last blog has gotten me thinking about devekut, "clinging to God". Does the ground of our being want dependent children who hold fast to him/her and are fixated in thought upon him/her... or, does the almighty wish for strong, competent independent children who fully acknowledge mother/father God but get on with it in the real world and Tikkun Olam!

As is almost always the case, the ideal is likely a middle way...

Devekut

http://www.myjewishlearning.com/beliefs/Theology/Kabbalah_and_Mysticism/Kabbalah_and_Hasidism/Hasidic_Mysticism/Hasidic_Ideas/Devekut.shtml

Devekut is an attachment to God, having God always in the mind, an ideal especially advocated in Hasidism but found, too, in earlier Jewish writings. The term devekut, from the root davak, to cleave, denotes chiefly this constant being with God but sometimes also denotes the ecstatic state produced by such communion. The relevant verse is found in the book of Deuteronomy, a book replete with the summons to love God, in the verse: "To love the Lord thy God, to walk in all His ways and to cleave unto Him" (Deuteronomy II: 22).

The Talmudic rabbis understand the cleaving to God mentioned in the verse as referring to the Torah and its students. Being attached to the Torah and its study constitutes the only possible cleaving to God at all applicable to finite human beings who can never actually 'cleave' to God Himself. But in a notable passage, Maimonides (Guide of the Perplexed, 3. 51) develops the idea that it is possible for the greatest saints to have God always in the mind. Such saints, says Maimonides, are immune from the common mishaps of human life. As their minds are on the highest, nothing on earth can affect them; they can even walk through fire and water without suffering an harm.

Hasidism relies on this passage but, following a comment by Nahmanides to the verse, extends the ideal as attainable by lesser mortals, although, in its fullest sense, it can only be attained by the Hasidic master, the Zaddik. Nahmanides writes in his commentary:

"The verse warns man not to worship God and a being beside Him; he is to worship God alone in his heart and in his actions. And it is plausible that the meaning of "cleaving" is to remember God and His love constantly, not to divert your thought from Him in all your earthly doings. Such a man may be talking to other people, but his heart is not with them since he is in the presence of God. And it is further plausible that those who have attained this rank, do, even in their earthly life, partake of the eternal life, because they have made themselves a dwelling place of the shekhinah."

The Hasidic ideal of "serving God in corporeality," that is, serving God by having the mind on Him even when engaging in business or other worldly pursuits, is based on Nahmanides' understanding of the ideal of devekut. It was also in obedience to this ideal that Hasidism understood the rabbinic doctrine of "Torah for its own sake" to mean that when studying the Torah the mind should be on God. This attempt to convert the study of the Torah from an intellectual into a devotional exercise angered the mitnagdim, the opponents of Hasidism, because, for them, to study with anything in mind other than the subject studies, is not to study at all.

Hasidic fondness for song and melody is based on this ideal. A particular melody of plaintive yearning, "soul music," is called a devekut niggun, an attachment melody, which Hasidim repeat over and over again in order to cultivate this state to the highest degree possible for ordinary worshippers.

Rabbi Dr. Louis Jacobs (1920-2006) was a Masorti rabbi, the first leader of Masorti Judaism (also known as Conservative Judaism) in the United Kingdom, and a leading writer and thinker on Judaism.

Thinking versus Clinging

Finally reading a good book on Maimonides (by Heschel)... It seems, as Aquinas was to Catholicism so was Maimonides to Judaism...

I found this brief article helpful... Maimonides notion of clinging is very similar to Kierkegaard's notion of dependence.

What is the Virtue of Man?

http://ohr.edu/yhiy/article.php/1330

Moses Maimonides (Rambam) in his "Guide for the Perplexed" states that the classical Greek philosopher Aristotle reached the highest level of understanding a human being can reach short of prophecy, and calls him the greatest of philosophers. Yet, Maimonides refutes many of Aristotle's basic tenets of philosophical speculation, especially his postulations regarding man's duty in the world.

Where did Aristotle fall short to the extent that he, the greatest of philosophers, did not attain the wisdom of prophecy, a wisdom which even the simplest of our ancestors achieved at Mount Sinai?

Aristotle reasons that the "virtue" of a creature is to be found in its fulfilling its natural function. Thus, a bird could be called virtuous in flying, a fish in swimming, and a lion in killing a zebra.

What is the virtue of man? Aristotle suggests that since that which is distinctly human is the capacity for rational thought, it follows that man's highest nature is to be found in the realm of the mind. The highest ability of the human mind is the ability to think. Therefore contemplation, the activity of the mind, is the source of man's highest joy. Aristotle concludes that the virtue of man, the fulfillment of his natural inclination, is to philosophize (not a surprising conclusion for a philosopher!).

A "thinking being" can create incredible inventions enabling man to communicate between continents, prolong life-expectancy, and most remarkably, explore the far-reaches of space. It also enables man to abuse the environment, extinguish entire species, and most regrettably, develop weapons capable of annihilating millions in an instant.

According to Maimonides, however, the virtue of man is to cling to his Creator. In other words, man is a "praying being."

Aristotle's "thinking being" strives to rule the world through subjugation and domination. Maimonides' "praying being" has a much greater potential to be the true "king" of this world by elevating the world. If man abides by the will of his Creator - the King of kings - he is capable of more than mere thought; he is capable of prayer. This prayer binds him to his Creator to make him a full partner in building a world of truth and beauty.

Moses the Egyptian

In reading the elaborate details of the Tabernacle ritual system in Exodus and Leviticus... in concluding that this system was put in place as an "allowance", not as an "ordinance"... my mind again turns to Moses.

As Egyptian royalty he was certainly exposed to, if not deeply involved in, Egyptian religion... The Egyptians had developed an extremely sophisticated religious system and practice... They were the world power of their time. If God was taking Israel out of Egypt in order to form his own nation... eventually a kingdom, certainly this nation had to have it's own religious system and practice comparable to that of Egypt...

I am not talking about spirituality or spiritual "practice" here but temple/priesthood system... For more on this see:

An Overview of the Ancient Egyptian Cult
http://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/cults.htm

The Priesthood and the Temples of Egypt
http://www.philae.nu/philae/priesthood.html#Priesthood

Moses the Egyptian
http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog/ASSMOS.html?show=reviews

Weekly Torah Portion: Tzav

Tzav (צו — Hebrew for "command,” the sixth word, and the first distinctive word, in the parshah) is the 25th weekly Torah portion (parshah) in the annual Jewish cycle of Torah reading and the second in the book of Leviticus. It constitutes Lev 6:1-8:36.

The parshah teaches how the priests performed the sacrifices and describes the ordination of Aaron and his sons.

I don't really get the whole sacrificial system thing... the whole idea of a temple cult seems questionable on many levels... I've attached a portion of a well written article below that offers sensible interpretations concerning how to conceptualize the sacrificial system... G-d did not create it, S/He tolerated it...

David's words make sense to me here: Psalm 51:¹⁶ You do not delight in sacrifice, or I would bring it; you do not take pleasure in burnt offerings. ¹⁷ The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit; a broken and contrite heart, O God, you will not despise.

Frequently Asked Questions

About Animal Sacrifices and the Messianic Period

http://www.jewishveg.com/schwartz/faq_sacrifices.html

1. If God wanted us to have vegetarian diets and not harm animals, why were the Biblical sacrificial services established?

During the time of Moses, it was the general practice among all nations to worship by means of sacrifice. There were many associated idolatrous practices. The great Jewish philosopher Maimonides stated that God did not command the Israelites to give up and discontinue all these manners of service because "to obey such a commandment would have been contrary to the nature of man, who generally cleaves to that to which he is used," For this reason, God allowed Jews to make sacrifices, but "He transferred to His service that which had served as a worship of created beings and of things imaginary and unreal." All elements of idolatry were removed. Maimonides concluded:

By this divine plan it was effected that the traces of idolatry were blotted out, and the truly great principle of our Faith, the Existence and Unity of God, was firmly established; this result was thus obtained without deterring or confusing the minds of the people by the abolition of the service to which they were accustomed and which alone was familiar to them.

The Jewish philosopher Abarbanel reinforced Maimonides' argument. He cited a Midrash that indicated that the Jews had become accustomed to sacrifices in Egypt. To wean them from these idolatrous practices, God tolerated the sacrifices but commanded that they be offered in one central sanctuary:

Thereupon the Holy One, blessed be He, said "Let them at all times offer their sacrifices before Me in the Tabernacle, and they will be weaned from idolatry, and thus be saved." (Rabbi J. H. Hertz, The Pentateuch and Haftorahs, p. 562)

Rabbi J. H. Hertz, the late chief rabbi of England, stated that if Moses had not instituted sacrifices, which were admitted by all to have been the universal expression of religious homage, his mission would have failed and Judaism would have disappeared. With the destruction of the Temple, the rabbis state that prayer and good deeds took the place of sacrifice.

Rashi indicated that God did not want the Israelites to bring sacrifices; it was their choice. He bases this on the haphtorah (portion from the Prophets) read on the Sabbath when the book of Leviticus which discusses sacrifices is read:

I have not burdened thee with a meal-offering, Nor wearied thee with frankincense. (Isaiah 43:23)

Biblical commentator David Kimhi (1160-1235) also stated that the sacrifices were voluntary. He ascertained this from the words of Jeremiah:

For I spoke not unto your fathers, nor commanded them on the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning burnt-offerings or sacrifices; but this thing I commanded them, saying, "Obey my voice, and I will be your God, and ye shall be my people; and walk ye in all the ways that I have commanded you, that it may be well unto you. (Jeremiah 7:22-23)

David Kimchi, notes that nowhere in the Ten Commandments is there any reference to sacrifice, and even when sacrifices are first mentioned (Lev. 1:2) the expression used is "when any man of you bringeth an offering," the first Hebrew we ki being literally "if", implying that it was a voluntary act.

Many Jewish scholars such as Rabbi Kook believe that animal sacrifices will not be reinstated in messianic times, even with the reestablishment of the Temple. They believe that at that time human conduct will have advanced to such high standards that there will no longer be need for animal sacrifices to atone for sins. Only non-animal sacrifices (grains, for example) to express gratitude to God would remain. There is a Midrash (rabbinic teaching based on Jewish values and tradition) that states: "In the Messianic era, all offerings will cease except the thanksgiving offering, which will continue forever. This seems consistent with the belief of Rabbi Kook and others, based on the prophecy of Isaiah (11:6-9), that people and animals will be vegetarian in that time, and "none shall hurt nor destroy in all My Holy mountain."

Sacrifices, especially animal sacrifices, were not the primary concern of God. As a matter of fact, they could be an abomination to Him if not carried out together with deeds of loving kindness and justice. Consider these words of the prophets, the spokesmen of God:

What I want is mercy, not sacrifice. (Hos. 6:6)

To what purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices unto Me?" sayeth the Lord. "I am full of the burnt offerings of rams, and the fat of fed beasts; and I delight not in the blood of bullocks, or of lambs or of he-goats...bring no more vain oblations.... Your new moon and your appointed feasts my soul hateth;...and when ye spread forth your hands, I will hide mine eyes from you; yea, when ye make many prayers, I will not hear; your hands are full of blood. (Isa. 1:11-16)

I hate, I despise your feasts, and I will take no delight in your solemn assemblies. Yea, though you offer me burnt-offerings and your meal offerings, I will not accept them neither will I regard the peace-offerings of your fat beasts. Take thou away from me the noise of thy song; and let Me not hear the melody of thy psalteries. But let justice well up as waters, and righteousness as a mighty stream. (Amos 5:21-4)

Deeds of compassion and kindness toward all creation are of greater significance to God than sacrifices: "To do charity and justice is more acceptable to the Lord than sacrifice" (Prov. 21: 3).

Perhaps a different type of sacrifice is required of us today. When Rabbi Shesheth kept a fast for Yom Kippur, he used to conclude with these words:

Sovereign of the Universe, Thou knowest full well that in the time of the Temple when a man sinned he used to bring a sacrifice, and though all that was offered of it was fat and blood, atonement was made for him. Now I have kept a fast and my fat and blood have diminished. May it be Thy will to account my fat and blood which have been diminished as if I have offered they before thee on the altar, and do Thou favor me. (Berachot 17a)

Vayakhel- "And he assembled"

Vayakhel (ויקהל — Hebrew for "and he assembled,” the first word in the parshah) is the 22nd weekly Torah portion (parshah) in the annual Jewish cycle of Torah readings and the 10th in Exodus. It constitutes Exodus 35:1-38:20.

Rabbi David Aaron suggests that a Jew is not to come to the Torah to study, but rather to engage...

"...getting involved with the Torah is a living encounter with the author, God... the Torah is not a book, it is a meeting place... We do not study Torah, we immerse ourselves in it..."

"...according to the Kabbalah, you are a soul, and that means that the real you is a part of God. Therefore, when you immerse your true self in the Torah, it is as if the author continues to study His own book through you, the reader, because you are actually a part of the author."

So, moving forward I am trying to practice this notion, Torah immersion (not study)... Torah as a meeting place, not a book.

A few themes stand out this week as these phrases are repeated throughout the parshah...

-Individuals contributing of their possessions as their heart moves them.
-Individuals with G-d given skills working as artisans in the creation of the tabernacle and it's vessels
-The color patter of blue, purple and crimson

So, how to take these items and transform them from concepts/notions to relational dialogue... how to metamorphasize "book reading" into an encounter with my soul which is a sliver... a fragment, of the ultimate ground of all being...

Dialogue... "prayer"... talking to G-d as I read and as I contemplate...

-Lord, may my heart be moved this week to give of myself and means to those things you desire to see actualized in this world.
-HaShem, may I be cognizant of the skills you have endowed me with and use my time wisely... not to obtain the empty praise of man, but rather to live purposefully... to focus my time, attention and energy on what I am called to in light of how you have gifted me. Pursuing and investing in the things that matter in the broad scheme of things in light of what I can influence given my gifts.
-Blue, purple and crimson... you know my thoughts and heart in this.

Oh Lord, as I immerse myself in Torah this week help me to meet, not think... to engage, not observe. To transform, not gather information... It is all returning and remembering... not learning and becoming...

HaShem, aid me in my attempts to become what I was and what I truly am... your issue.

PS I was reminded this week that the temple system was not set up for HaShem's benefit but for that of the peeps... G-d allowed it for a time as Israel needed it given the religious context of the day and times... True service and sacrifice is in the heart... thanks to Rambam for this reminder.