Organizations Working to Help Syrian Refugees

Organizations Working to Help Syrian Refugees

When we feel powerless or helpless, it is important to remember that we can do something to help those in need.  Here is a (non-exhaustive) list of organizations that you may wish to support:

http://www.shelterboxusa.org/

Shelterbox provides immediate aide to those affected by disaster, delivering the essential needs to families in need.

http://www.unicefusa.org                                

The United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) works in 190 countries and territories to save and improve children's lives by providing health care and immunizations, clean water and sanitation, nutrition, education, emergency relief. 

http://www.doctorswithoutborders.org

Doctors without Borders is currently providing medical care to Syrian refugees crossing into Iraq.

http://il4syrians.org/

An Israeli non-profit, volunteer based, NGO that delivers lifesaving aid to communities affected by natural disasters and human conflict.  Its members travel to local regimes where humanitarian organizations are normally prevented entry.

http://www.savethechildren.org

Save the Children’s teams are on the ground helping to keep children safe, providing the basics they need, like food and blankets and offering programs to help them cope with tragedy.

IT GETS BETTER

(Thoughts on Behar-Bechukotai 5773/2013)

Lev. 25:1 – 27:34

[I shared the following dvar torah with the congregation on Friday evening 5/3/13, the start of Ben W.’s bar mitzvah weekend.]

This Shabbat we are concluding the Book of Leviticus with the final double-portion of “Behar” and “Bechukotai.”  Like much of Torah, these chapters contain some passages of great inspirational value – and others that make us want to hang our heads in shame at the content of our tradition.  But as Jews we embrace all of it --- warts and all, so to speak – and view it as the start – not the end – of a conversation that extends across the centuries.

The Torah’s text dates from a time in world history when slavery was rampant.  And our foundational story as Jews is about our liberation from the bondage of Egyptian servitude.  But this week’s Torah reading seems to draw only a limited, incomplete lesson from that experience.  We learn in Leviticus 25 that Israelites may not treat their Israelite slaves harshly, and that such slaves must be freed to return to their ancestral tribal holdings with the coming of the fiftieth year – the so-called Jubilee year.  But as for non-Israelites, Leviticus 25:44-46 states –“…[I]t is from the nations round about you that you may acquire male and female slaves. You may also buy them from among the children of aliens resident among you, or from their families that are among you, whom they begot in your land.  These shall become your property:  You may keep them as a possession for your children after you, for them to inherit as property for all time.  Such you may treat as slaves.  But as for your Israelite kinsmen, no one shall rule ruthlessly over the other.”

Yukkhhh!!! If only we had just stopped reading after verse 8, which is so much more inspiring when it says ––  וּקְרָאתֶ֥ם דְּר֛וֹר בָּאָ֖רֶץ לְכָל־יֹֽשְׁבֶ֑יהָ / ukeratem deror ba’aretz lekhawl yosh’veha/ “Proclaim Liberty throughout the land to all the inhabitants thereof.”  Okay, some linguists say that the rare Hebrew word “deror” is better translated as “release” rather than “liberty.”  But, still, “Proclaim release throughout the land to all the inhabitants thereof” still sounds pretty good to me.  Don’t you agree?

How can we not be frustrated and ashamed by the chauvinism and immorality of the later verses of Leviticus 25 that say that this liberty, this release, doesn’t apply to non-Israelites?   And indeed, how can we not be frustrated and ashamed by the failure of the Torah to abolish slavery altogether?  Wouldn’t THAT have been the more appropriate lesson to draw from the story of Passover and the Exodus from Egypt? 

Did not the Torah elsewhere say without equivocation that humanity is created “btzelem elohim”/”in the image of God” (Gen. 1:27) – not just Israelites, but rather all people  -- all of whom it portrays as descending from that first Adahm  who is created both male and female?

One traditional way of dealing with all this comes from Maimonides, writing in the twelfth century.  Essentially, he argues that in a world where slavery was universally practiced, it would be too radical a shift to outlaw it all at once.  Rather, God in the Torah starts with regulations that limit slavery among Israelites, with the implicit hope that ultimately this will lead to a world where it can be eradicated entirely.       

A more contemporary approach, which resonates more for me personally, is that the Torah, like all scriptures of all religions, is written - so to speak – of the people, by the people and for the people.  And people, then as now, don’t know everything.  We progress over time in our ethics, in our understanding, in our science, in our technology, albeit not without periodic setbacks.  The Torah is our collective spiritual autobiography as a people.  Religion comes from the people up not from the mountaintop down.

I believe in God, but I don’t believe in a God who writes books  --- whether they be the books of the Torah or the books of the Prophets or the New Testament or the Koran or the sacred books of any other religion.

Torah in particular doesn’t exist in a vacuum.  It is informed by the cultural environments of the time it was written, by the cultural environments of the centuries through which it has been interpreted, and by the cultural environment of this time and place when we ourselves engage with it.

Really, I guess I could start out every single dvar torah of every single Shabbat with these thoughts I’ve just been sharing with you.  And perhaps those of you who have gotten to know me a bit over the last three years already knew all this…

But it feels worth saying it again:  Before we get bogged down with arguing in public forums with those who use scripture to justify discrimination against unpopular groups. 

Or before we get bogged down with arguing against those who use scripture to justify cruel indifference to the needs of the poor and disenfranchised. 

Or  --  before we get bogged down with defending ourselves against those who denigrate all scripture as reactionary, outdated, sociopathic drivel.

Pick your issue:  Tax policy, gay rights, death penalty, war, immigration, environmental protection.   Yes, we have scriptural verses on our side – but so do they have on their side.  You can’t look to Torah for a single answer on any political or social question.  Rather, Torah is a collection of voices—just as a congregation is a collection of voices.  Just as a city, a state, a nation, a world – is a collection of voices.

Ben --- I hope you will find your own voice in the collection of voices that is Torah. 

And that is also my wish for every one of us.  As we say in the central blessing of the Shabbat Amidah --- “veteyn chelkeynu betoratekha” – “grant us a “chelek” /  a “share”/ a “portion” of your Torah.

So, in Parshat Behar-Bechukotai, for example --- the part about it being okay to have foreign slaves – that sure isn’t the “chelek”/ the “portion” the “share” that I claim.

But the part about proclaiming liberty throughout the land to all the inhabitants thereof --- that suits me better.

I hope for each of us, that when we literally hold the Torah – as Ben and some of his family members will do tomorrow morning – or when we figuratively embrace the Torah – as when we study it, and speak of it --- when we sit in our house, and when we walk on the road, and when we lie down, and when we rise up ---  that we may be blessed with the ability to connect to it as etz chayim/ a tree of life … whose ways are ways of pleasantness and all of whose paths are peace. 

And trust me, it gets better --- once we’re done with Leviticus.

Shabbat shalom.

(c) Rabbi David Steinberg 2013/5773 

Breaking the Cycle

Dvar Torah for Parashat Bo  (Exodus 10:1 – 13:16)

(given at Temple Israel, Duluth on Friday evening 1/18/13)

This week’s Torah portion, Bo, features the last three of the ten plagues.  Just as in last week’s parasha, we read about God hardening Pharaoh’s heart, and we wonder about what that means for us who ascribe to a faith tradition which emphasizes that we have free will. 

However, though God had told Moses in Exodus 7:3    וַאֲנִי אַקְשֶׁה, אֶת-לֵב פַּרְעֹה   (“I will harden Pharaoh’s heart”), God doesn’t actually start doing so until the 6^th plague, whereas for the first 5 plagues the Torah portrays Pharaoh as hardening his own heart.  The 12^th century Spanish Jewish commentator Nachmanides explains:  “When God warns one on three occasions and one does not turn from one’s ways, God closes the door of repentance on that person in order to punish that person for his or her sin.  Such was the case with Pharaoh.”

Viewed metaphorically, we might understand this to mean that we do indeed have free will to act virtuously or sinfully.  However, if we act too immorally, for too long, it becomes a locked-in pattern of behavior that becomes harder and harder to break.  As it says in Pirke Avot, the rabbinic era compendium of ethical teachings:   “Mitzvah goreret mitzvah va'verah goreret averah...”/ “One mitzvah leads to another mitzvah, but one sin leads to another sin…” (Pirke Avot 4:2).  

Those teachings come to mind this week as we follow the news of Oprah Winfrey’s televised interview with Lance Armstrong, the first part of which was broadcast last night.   

Armstrong had denied for years the various allegations leveled at him concerning use of banned performance enhancing drugs during his cycling career.  He still was proclaiming his innocence last summer, when the United States Anti-Doping agency stripped him of his seven Tour de France wins, and banned him from professional cycling.  However, this week, in the wake of ever increasing evidence of his misdeeds, he changed his story.

“Mitzvah goreret mitzvah va'verah goreret averah...”/ “One mitzvah leads to another mitzvah, but one sin leads to another sin…” (Pirke Avot 4:2).   

Winfrey asks: “For 13 years you didn't just deny it, you brazenly and defiantly denied everything you just admitted just now. So why now admit it? “

Armstrong responds: "That is the best question. It's the most logical question. I don't know that I have a great answer. I will start my answer by saying that this is too late. It's too late for probably most people, and that's my fault. I viewed this situation as one big lie that I repeated a lot of times, and as you said, it wasn't as if I just said no and I moved off it."

Later Winfrey asks how he viewed his own actions:

OW: Did you feel in any way that you were cheating? You did not feel you were cheating taking banned drugs?

LA: "At the time, no. I kept hearing I'm a drug cheat, I'm a cheat, I'm a cheater. I went in and just looked up the definition of cheat and the definition of cheat is to gain an advantage on a rival or foe that they don't have. I didn't view it that way. I viewed it as leveling the playing field."

*****************

I’m well aware, and I do try to take to heart the admonition, which we find elsewhere in Pirke Avot, אל תדון את חברך עד שתגיע למקומו / “Don’t judge your fellow until you have arrived in his place” (Pirke Avot 2:5), or, as it is sometimes idiomatically rendered, “Don’t judge another until you have stood in their shoes.”

My sister Robin is a serious cyclist and triathlete.  Last summer I posted on her facebook wall a link to a N.Y.Times article about the latest in the Lance Armstrong saga, and I asked her what she and her cycling buddies thought about it.  She said (and some her friends chimed in in agreement) that she would rather focus on Armstrong’s heroic fight against testicular cancer that preceded his Tour de France races, and on the millions he had raised for cancer research through the “Livestrong” charity.

No doubt the story will continue to develop over the coming days and weeks.

And various pundits and members of the public, and the people directly impacted by Armstrong’s actions, will come to their own conclusions about these latest developments.

Is Armstrong’s repentance genuine? 

As the medieval commentator Sforno said concerning God’s hardening of Pharaoh’s heart:  “Had Pharaoh sincerely wanted to repent, nothing would have prevented it.”  And maybe that’s the case now for Lance Armstrong. 

None of us are in those big leagues of the sports world, but just like a champion athlete who over and over again faces the choice of whether or not to cheat, or an ancient Pharaoh who over and over again faces the choice of whether or not to oppress others, we face our own moral choices each day.

Psalm 95, the first of the Kabbalat Shabbat psalms in our Friday night liturgy challenges us:הַיּוֹם, אִם-בְּקֹלוֹ תִשְׁמָעוּ. / hayom, im bekolo tishma’u/ “O, if you would only hear God’s voice this day.” (Ps. 95:7) 

What is that voice telling us?  Whenever we are faced with a moral decision, big or small, that voice of conscience is indeed there within us “im bekolo tishma’u” --- if only we would hear it. 

Inspired and challenged by the age old words of our liturgy, our times of prayer each day (and especially during the unrushed hours of Shabbat), afford us the opportunity to go deep within ourselves to find that voice.

May we indeed be graced with the fortitude to follow it in all of our moral choices, not only on this Shabbat but throughout all the days of our lives.

Shabbat shalom.

(c) Rabbi David Steinberg 5773/2013

HOLDINGS/אחוזות

Dvar Torah for Shabbat Vayigash (12/21/12; 9 Tevet 5773)

(Gen. 44:18 – 47:27)

Well, we made it.  No Mayan Apocalypse today.  And even better – we made it to the solstice so that the daylight hours will start getting longer again. 

And we made it to another Shabbat – that “palace in time” (as Heschel describes it) which affords us “a taste of heaven” (as the sages tell us). 

And we made it to another day.

And we made it to this moment.

For these miracles we give thanks.

Of course, we never know what tomorrow may bring, which is why Jewish tradition also includes such meaningful teachings as this one from Masechet Shabbat in the Talmud:

"Rabbi Eliezer would say: Repent one day before your death. His students asked Rabbi Eliezer,  ‘But does a person  know on which day he or she will die?’  He said to them: ‘Well, since that’s the case, one should repent today, for perhaps one will die tomorrow. Therefore, let all one’s days be passed in a state of teshuvah.”   (Shabbat 153b)

At all times we should strive to be kind to one another; at all times we should strive truly to see one another as btzelem elohim/ created in the image of God. 

Especially in light of the mass shootings in Connecticut last week, we are painfully aware of the fleeting nature of life, and of the necessity of treasuring each moment we share together on this planet. 

At times like this we are reminded that the most important things in life are our relationships with one another, not the things we own. 

And what about those things we own?  At Genesis 46:27, the last verse of this week’s Torah portion, Vayigash, we learn:  "Vayeshev yisra'el be'eretz mitzrayim be'eretz goshen vayei'achazu vah vayifru vayirbu me'od" which the new Jewish Publication Society Tanakh translates at Genesis 46:27 as:  “Thus Israel settled in the country of Egypt, in the region of Goshen; they acquired holdings in it, and were fertile and increased greatly.” (emphasis added)

Within that verse, I’d like to focus on the phrase “Vaye’achazu vah” , translated as “they acquired holdings in it.”  When I was reviewing the parashah this week, something seemed odd about that phrase to me, and I double checked my biblical Hebrew grammar and, indeed, there is something fishy about the translation.

I don’t doubt the scholarship of the team that translated the Tanakh for the Jewish Publication Society.  I’m sure they’re right that, as a matter of idiomatic usage, the expression “vaye’achazu vah” can reasonably be translated as “they acquired holdings in it.”

Indeed, Ibn Ezra’s commentary back in the 12^th century says that the phrase "vayei'achazu vah" means “shekanu sham achuzah”/ “that they purchased there a holding.”   However, the Torah doesn’t actually say “shekanu sham achuzah” – what it actually says is "vayei'achazu vah"  using a passive conjugation of the verbal root alef-chet-zayin, which means “to hold” or “to grasp”.   So, translated literally, the phrase “וַיֵּאָֽחֲז֣וּ בָ֔הּ” / vayei'achazu vah means “they were held by it.”   That’s quite a difference – between “they acquired holdings in it” versus “they were held by it”….

And this reminded me of another verse in Genesis that uses a passive form of the verb alef-chet-zayin:  In Genesis 22:13, in the famous story of Akedat Yitzchak/ The Binding of Isaac – Abraham looks up and sees a ram “ne’echaz basvach” – Caught in a thicket.  “Ne’echaz” is also a passive form of that same verb (aleph-chet-zayin) used in Genesis 47 to describe Israelites  settling in Goshen. 

We know what happens after that:  A new pharaoh “who knew not Joseph” arises and enslaves the Israelites for 400 years.  (We get to that part of the torah two weeks from now in Parshat Shemot).  In this week’s Torah reading, the bitterness of Israelite slavery is yet to come.  But the scene is set here: They thought they were purchasing holdings but  ---in fact --- just like the ram destined for the slaughter, they were “ne’echazim” – held/caught/ensnared/trapped by their own possessions.

I’m 51 now, and a saying I came across not too long ago sticks in my mind:  Up to age 45 we try to acquire stuff – After age 45 we try to get rid of stuff.

That seems so wise to me:  You don’t have to go to extremes with any of this – but – truly --- as we get older we can get ensnared/ ne’echazim/ by our possessions.  The older we get, the deeper we understand that our true riches are in the connections we make with others, and in the experiences and the wisdom that we acquire in our journeys through life.

Coming back to the events of last Friday in Newtown, Connecticut, we can’t help but be struck by the tragic consequences of so many Americans’ obsession with the possession of guns.  The Torah says: “וַיֵּאָֽחֲז֣וּ בָ֔הּ”/ "vayei'achazu vah"and we ask:  Does this mean “they acquired holdings in it” ?   Or does this mean “They were ensnared by it” ?.  And similarly we ask:  Isn’t it really the gun owners themselves who are ensnared  -- who are “held up” by the lethal weapons they purport to hold? 

And, indeed, studies have shown that the presence of a gun in one’s home, even if intended for protection, statistically increases the odds of the owner being killed[1] -- as was the case with the shooter’s own mother in Connecticut who was killed by her son using a gun she herself owned.

One of the big challenges we face in the struggle to pass effective gun control legislation is that guns have become a sort of macho identity badge.  But Jewish tradition offers a different view, as we see in the following teaching from the Mishna. 

As background to the following teaching, remember that traditional Jewish law, halacha, forbids the carrying of items in the public domain on Shabbat.  However, if an item forms part of your clothing or jewelry, then you would be considered to be “wearing” it (which is okay) and you wouldn’t be considered as “carrying” it (which would be a halachic violation).  And so we learn in the Mishnah in Masechet Shabbat, ch. 6, Mishnah 4: 

ו,ד לא ייצא האיש לא בסיף, ולא בקשת, ולא בתריס, ולא באלה, ולא ברומח. ואם יצא, חייב חטאת. רבי אליעזר אומר, תכשיטין הן לו; וחכמים אומרים, אינן לו אלא גנאי, שנאמר "וכיתתו חרבותם לאיתים, וחניתותיהם למזמרות" (ישעיהו ב,ד)[.[..

A man must not go out [of the house on Shabbat] bearing a sword, nor a bow, nor a shield, nor a lance nor a spear. And if he did go out [with one of these] he is liable for a sin offering [because he has violated the final Shabbat labor, carrying]. Rabbi Eliezer says, “these are his ornaments” [like clothing or jewelry, and therefore he should be allowed to wear them]. But the Sages say [he is liable, because these are not ornaments. Rather,] these [weapons] are shameful; as it says, (Isaiah 2:4), “they shall beat their swords into plough shares and their spears into pruning-hooks”

And that verse from Isaiah quoted in the Mishnah concludes –

"lo yisa goy el goy cherev, velo yilmedu od milchamah"

"Nation shall not lift up sword against nation, and they will not learn war any more” […]  

That is our prayer as well.

Shabbat shalom.

© Rabbi David Steinberg (Tevet 5773/ Dec. 2012)

---

[1] http://www.bradycampaign.org/facts/gunviolence/gunsinthehome

Thoughts on Vayishlach (Genesis 32:4 – 36:40)

(Dvar Torah given on Friday evening 11/30/12)

In this week’s Torah portion, Vayishlakh, Jacob and Esau reconcile – but it’s ambiguous how sincere that reconciliation is.  In the end Esau separates from Jacob and moves to another land (as it says in Genesis 36:7) כִּי-הָיָה רְכוּשָׁם רָב, מִשֶּׁבֶת יַחְדָּו (ki hayah rechusham rav mishevet yachdav) --- “for their possessions were too many for them to dwell together…”  just as Lot had separated from his uncle Abraham two generations earlier (as it says in Genesis 13:6) כִּי-הָיָה רְכוּשָׁם רָב, וְלֹא יָכְלוּ לָשֶׁבֶת יַחְדָּו.  (ki hayah rechusham rav vlo yachlu lashevet yachdav) --  ^“for their possessions were so great that they could not remain together.”

Those separations were peaceful.   With respect to Esau (also known as Edom) his descendants are identified in the Torah with the Edomite people living in the region of Mount Se’ir.

In the Book of Deuteronomy, we are reminded not to provoke the descendants of Esau, as Moses says in Deuteronomy chapter 2:   

¹ Then the Eternal said to me: ³ You have been skirting this hill country long enough; now turn north. ⁴ And charge the people as follows: You will be passing through the territory of your kinsmen, the descendants of Esau, who live in Seir. Though they will be afraid of you, be very careful ⁵ not to provoke them. For I will not give you of their land so much as a foot can tread on; I have given the hill country of Seir as a possession to Esau.

And later in Deuteronomy, we further are told:  “You shall not abhor an Edomite, for he is your kinsman.”  (Deut. 23:8)

This week, we have been witnessing another iteration of this age-old theme of two peoples trying to effectuate a peaceful separation:  Yesterday, on the 65^th anniversary of the United Nations General Assembly’s vote to divide the British Mandate of Palestine into two states --- one Jewish and one Arab --- the U.N. General Assembly voted to admit “Palestine” as an non-member observer state.”  Previously, Palestinian interests in the UN had been represented by the Palestinian Liberation Organization, having the lesser status of “non-member observer entity."   The new "non-member observer state" designation for Palestine now puts it in the same category vis-à-vis the United Nations as that of the Vatican.  

Israel (along with the United States, Canada, the Czech Republic and few small Pacific Ocean island states) opposed the measure.  However, it’s difficult to find rational explanations for this opposition.  Mahmoud Abbas is the best friend Israel has ever had among the Palestinian leadership.  He explicitly calls for a two-state solution with the State of Palestine to consist only of those territories captured by Israel in the West Bank and Gaza during the 1967 Six-Day War.  This is in itself a notable concession in that Israel’s territory just before the 1967 Six Day War was already significantly larger than the territory designated for the Jewish State in the 1947 United Nations partition vote 65 years ago yesterday. 

And rest assured that both Israel and the Palestinian Authority understand that ultimate borders would also involve adjusting those “just before the six day war” 1967 borders through mutually agreed land swaps.   

I strongly believe that the UN vote is a step in the right direction, and the Israeli government is just shooting itself in the foot by trying to undermine the Abbas government.  The more they undermine Abbas, the more they prop up the Gaza-based Hamas rejectionists who seek the destruction of Israel.

By contrast with Hamas, Abbas stated in his address to the General Assembly this week: 

"We did not come here seeking to delegitimize a State established years ago, and that is Israel; rather we came to affirm the legitimacy of the State that must now achieve its independence, and that is Palestine. We did not come here to add further complications to the peace process, which Israel's policies have thrown into the intensive care unit; rather we came to launch a final serious attempt to achieve peace."  http://www.voanews.com/content/mahmoud-abbas-speech-to-united-nations-general-assembly/1556084.html  

Abbas further said: 

"We will accept no less than the independence of the State of Palestine, with East Jerusalem as its capital, on all the Palestinian territory occupied in 1967, to live in peace and security alongside the State of Israel, and a solution for the refugee issue on the basis of resolution 194 (III), as per the operative part of the Arab Peace Initiative." 

And in the concluding paragraphs of his speech he said: 

"Sixty-five years ago on this day, the United Nations General Assembly adopted resolution 181 (II), which partitioned the land of historic Palestine into two States and became the birth certificate for Israel.

"Sixty-five years later and on the same day, which your esteemed body has designated as the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People, the General Assembly stands before a moral duty, which it must not hesitate to undertake, and stands before a historic duty, which cannot endure further delay, and before a practical duty to salvage the chances for peace, which is urgent and cannot be postponed.

[…]

"The General Assembly is called upon today to issue a birth certificate of the reality of the State of Palestine."           

Israel complains that the PA has bypassed the Camp David accords' mechanism of direct negotiations by going to the United Nations.  But those Camp David Accords also said there would be a Palestinian state within 5 years, and that's now almost 20 years ago.

Israel says the PA should come back to the negotiating table without preconditions.  But it's hardly an unreasonable precondition for the PA to insist upon Israel freezing settlement expansion on the West Bank while negotiations proceed.

The future of the region should not be held hostage to the extremists on either side of the conflict.   

Abbas is no extremist and needs to be supported.

And what has the Israeli government done today, the day after the historic UN vote?  It has chosen today to approve additional settlement building in the area known as “E1” – an area of parkland that provides the last contiguous link between Ramallah and Bethlehem in any future Palestinian state on the West Bank.  I love Israel.  I want it to live and prosper in peace.  But, honestly, who is now provoking whom?  

Back in Parashat Vayishlakh, the separation of Jacob and Esau is followed by a set of genealogical tables of Esau’s descendants.  We find there the notice that Timna, a concubine of Esau’s son Eliphaz, was the mother of Amalek (Gen. 36:12).   Later in the chapter we also learn that Timna was Lotan’s sister, and that Lotan was a son of Seir, the original leader of the land before the arrival of Esau’s retinue when Esau separated from Jacob.  (Gen. 36: 20-22).

And later in the chapter, “Timna” is named as one of “shemot alufey Esav”/  “the names of the ‘alufs’ of Esau.” (Gen. 36:40).   What is an “aluf?”    Biblical scholars generally define “aluf” as “clan”, i.e., a subset of a tribe.  But there is also an old tradition that “aluf” is a title of nobility. 

And so we come to a striking passage from the Talmud that presents a midrash about this woman Timna:

אחות לוטן תמנע מאי היא תמנע בת מלכים הואי דכתיב אלוף לוטן אלוף תמנע וכל אלוף מלכותא בלא תאגא היא בעיא לאיגיורי באתה אצל אברהם יצחק ויעקב ולא קבלוה הלכה והיתה פילגש לאליפז בן עשו אמרה מוטב תהא שפחה לאומה זו ולא תהא גבירה לאומה אחרת נפק מינה עמלק דצערינהו לישראל מאי טעמא דלא איבעי להו לרחקה

“Lotan's sister was Timna”(Gen. 36:22)? — what [is the purpose of writing] this?  ---   Timna was a royal princess, as it is written, “aluf Lotan”  (Gen. 36:28), “aluf Timna;” (Gen. 36:40)  and by 'aluf' an uncrowned ruler is meant. Desiring to become a proselyte, she went to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, but they did not accept her. So she went and became a concubine to Eliphaz the son of Esau, saying, “I had rather be a servant to this people than a mistress of another nation.” From her Amalek was descended who afflicted Israel. Why so? — Because they should not have repulsed her."  (Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Sanhedrin, page 99b)

What can we learn from this that can inform our contemporary situation? 

Who knows if the writers of the Talmud were simply making up imaginative tales when they told this one about Timna having been pushed away by Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. 

Frankly, like much in the Talmud or in the Torah itself, it sounds apocryphal and not historically factual. But I think the Talmudic sages did have a sensible intuition:

That sensible intuition is that hatred doesn’t simply arise out of the blue, even the vicious kind associated with Amalek – who Jewish tradition sees as the ancestor of Haman.

There is enough hate and enough ill feelings and grudges going around to stymie any attempt at the peaceful settlement of differences, whether in the Middle East, or in other troubled regions of the world, or even, on a personal level, in many families.

But in Psalm 34 we are taught “bakesh shalom v’rodfeihu”/ “seek peace and pursue it.” (Ps. 34:15).  We should always strive to be “rodfei shalom”  --- “those who chase after opportunities for peace.”    The vote this week in the General Assembly provides such an opportunity.  Rather than spurn it, let us pray that Israel and its allies pursue it.

The Talmud says that Timna was spurned by Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and gave birth to the viciousness of Amalek  ---  and that ---- לא איבעי להו לרחקה (lo iba’ey lehu lirchokah)  -- “They should not have repulsed her.” 

Similarly, the peaceful approach of Mahmoud Abbas and the not-yet-fully-birthed State of Palestine ought not to be repulsed by the State of Israel  -- the State that got its birth certificate 65 years ago this week – the State that sees its lineage as going back to the patriarchs and matriarchs. 

Nor should those who seek peace be spurned by we who count ourselves among the children of Israel.

Shabbat shalom.

(c) Rabbi David Steinberg 5773/2012

Dvar Torah for Shabbat Chayei Sarah

(delivered on Friday evening, 11/9/12 [25 Cheshvan 5773])

Near the end of this week’s Torah portion, Chayei Sarah (Gen. 23:1 – 25:18), we read of Abraham’s final years, after the death and burial of Sarah, and after the marriage of Isaac and Rebecca.

We learn in Gen 25:1 that Abraham takes another wife, named Keturah.  The Torah text doesn't tell us anything else about Keturah --- but Jewish midrashic tradition steps in as it often does to try to fill in some of the blanks:

In the classic rabbinic midrash collection, Bereshit Rabba, we learn that this Keturah was none other than Hagar, the mother of Abraham’s first son Ishmael.  Hagar and Ishmael had been sent away years before, but, according to this midrashic version, Abraham called Hagar back to be with him in his final years after the death of her rival Sarah.

The medieval commentator Rashi states that the name Keturah comes from the fact that her deeds were as beautiful as  the "Ketoret" or “incense” that would be used in the ancient Temple. 

Some contemporary scholars suggest that the name Ketura means that she was connected by family ties to the incense and spice traders of eastern Arabia.  In the modern commentary "The Five Books of Miriam", Ellen Frankel connects the name "Keturah" with "Keter" meaning crown or wreath --- suggesting that Keturah was a princess.

Rashi also quotes another midrash that connects the name Keturah with the Aramaic verb "ketar", meaning “to tie” According to this midrash Keturah  had "tied" her womb, and not been sexually involved with any other man from the time that she had separated from Abraham years before.

We may or may not find these midrashic flights of fancy convincing.  Indeed, other medieval commentators dispute the identification of Keturah with Hagar.  However, I personally find it very moving to imagine that Keturah was Hagar.  This means that Abraham's life could end on a note of reconciliation after the various crises and trials that he had lived through in the decades before.

And perhaps this explains how, a few verses later at Gen. 25:9, it can happen that Isaac and Ishmael bury their father together.  Perhaps there is a long hoped for reconciliation there too.   And, if not a full-scale reconciliation, at least it shows that they were capable of joining together to address a common task.

As we read in the Torah tonight of this reconciliation within the family of Abraham, it’s tempting to follow the typical homiletic spin of also praying for reconciliation among the various political factions within our country.  That’s a worthwhile aspiration in the sense of hoping that we can all respect one another’s humanity, and that we can all ascribe sincere motivations to one another’s actions.

Indeed, during this heated battle in Minnesota to defeat the attempt to impose homophobic discrimination into the State Constitution, we were encouraged to pursue a strategy of conversation – of getting to know our ideological opponents on a personal level in the hope that this would lead to reconciliation around a shared belief in fairness for all. 

And from this week’s Torah portion, we could even claim that conversation is itself a form of prayer.  Our sages say that Mincha, the daily afternoon prayer, was first initiated by Isaac, basing their claim on Gen. 24:63 ---

 וַיֵּצֵא יִצְחָק לָשׂוּחַ בַּשָּׂדֶה, לִפְנוֹת עָרֶב

“Isaac went out to meditate in the field towards evening”   --

and the verb “lasu’ach” – here translated as “to meditate” also has the meaning of “to converse.”

However, speaking personally, with the conclusion of this election cycle I feel massively relieved but deeply bruised.  In Minnesota and elsewhere, this year we witnessed attempts to turn the clock back on civil rights for those already facing discrimination, and we faced off against attempts to suppress voter participation for those already hindered by economic adversity.   And we saw attempts to destroy the societal safety net in order to coddle the rich.  Thankfully, we defeated those attempts. 

And now, as we face the future, reconciliation on a personal level is important, but such reconciliation should not desensitize us from the need to continue struggling for justice and equity in society.   When it comes to those goals, there is a fine line between compromise and caving in.  I hope and pray that we don’t cave in, and that we continue the good fight.

Shabbat shalom.      

YOM KIPPUR MORNING SERMON 9-26-12

Tipping the Scales

What is Yom Kippur?  The Torah tells us, in Leviticus chapter 16, verses 29 and 30, which we read from the Torah scroll earlier this morning: 

כט וְהָיְתָה לָכֶם, לְחֻקַּת עוֹלָם: בַּחֹדֶשׁ הַשְּׁבִיעִי בֶּעָשׂוֹר לַחֹדֶשׁ תְּעַנּוּ אֶת-נַפְשֹׁתֵיכֶם, וְכָל-מְלָאכָה לֹא תַעֲשׂוּ--הָאֶזְרָח, וְהַגֵּר הַגָּר בְּתוֹכְכֶם. ל כִּי-בַיּוֹם הַזֶּה יְכַפֵּר עֲלֵיכֶם, לְטַהֵר אֶתְכֶם: מִכֹּל, חַטֹּאתֵיכֶם, לִפְנֵי יְהוָה, תִּטְהָרוּ.

(29) “This shall be for you a law for all time: in the seventh month on the tenth day of the month, you shall practice self-denial, and you shall do no manner of creative labor, neither the citizen nor the stranger in your midst.  (30) For on this day, he (i.e., the Kohen Gadol or High Priest) shall make atonement for you to cleanse you of all your sins; you shall be clean before the Eternal.”

The ancient purification rituals conducted by the Kohen Gadol, of which the Torah speaks, were in use during the periods when the first and second Temples stood in Jerusalem.  We still recount these rituals in the dramatic Avodah service on Yom Kippur afternoon.   

However, since the destruction of the second Temple in 70 C.E. by the forces of the Roman Empire  – and up to our own time --- those centralized, sacrificial, priest-centered rituals were replaced in Judaism by a more democratic approach, with each of us called upon to serve God through our own acts of repentance, prayer and social justice, or to express those concepts in Hebrew  ---- teshuvah, tefillah and tzedakah.    

The scope of the term “avodah”  [עבודה]  - which literally means “service” - evolved so that it could refer not just to the service of the kohen gadol in the Bet HaMikdash in Jerusalem, but also to “Avodat Halev”/  “The service of the heart”  ---  “Avodat Halev” being a traditional poetic reference to  the act of prayer.  In our own Avodat Halev – throughout the year but especially on Yom Kippur --- we turn inward and judge ourselves --- so that we may find new energy to turn outward and repair the world.  We engage in cheshbon-ha-nefesh, taking stock of one’s own soul.  We seek during this season of repentance to bridge the gap between our actions and our ideals.

We do this with seriousness of purpose:  This is Yom Din, a day of judgment, a day on which our ancestors imagined that our fate for the coming year is being sealed in a cosmic Book of Life (a book that may not be so cheery and friendly as The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy.)     

For with regard to the Book of Life, we are taught that the entries in it are written in our own handwriting, by our own freely-willed acts and omissions.

In this sacred season, teshuvah, tefillah and tzedakah go together:  Our inner work of teshuvah finds emotional expression in our tefillah ---  and finds concrete effect in our acts of tzedakah.  

In the penitential prayers of our synagogue services, we phrase our confessions in the plural, reminding us that whether we attend synagogue regularly or not, whether we call ourselves Orthodox, Conservative, Reconstructionist, Reform or none of the above, whether we live in the State of Israel or in the Diaspora,  whether we are Jews by birth or by choice ---- we are all one people ---  all sharing one fate --- all responsible for one another----- and all called to the pursuit of justice throughout the world and to the pursuit of peace among all people.

Here at Temple Israel, the local practice has been to read the traditional Yom Kippur morning Torah reading from Parashat Acharei Mot in the Book of Leviticus, which spells out the details of the purification rituals carried out by the High Priest.  Many Reform and Reconstructionist congregations, however, instead read from Parshat Nitzavim in the Book of Deuteronomy because of its inclusive ethos.  That Torah portion opens with these stirring words:

אַתֶּם נִצָּבִים הַיּוֹם כֻּלְּכֶם, לִפְנֵי יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵיכֶם: רָאשֵׁיכֶם שִׁבְטֵיכֶם, זִקְנֵיכֶם וְשֹׁטְרֵיכֶם, כֹּל, אִישׁ יִשְׂרָאֵל. טַפְּכֶם נְשֵׁיכֶם--וְגֵרְךָ, אֲשֶׁר בְּקֶרֶב מַחֲנֶיךָ: מֵחֹטֵב עֵצֶיךָ, עַד שֹׁאֵב מֵימֶיךָ. לְעָבְרְךָ, בִּבְרִית יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ--וּבְאָלָתוֹ: אֲשֶׁר יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ, כֹּרֵת עִמְּךָ הַיּוֹם

(9) You stand today -  all of you - before Adonai your God: your leaders, your tribes, your elders, your officials, every man, (10) woman and child of Israel, the stranger in the midst of your camp, from the one who chops your wood to the one who draws your water, (11) that you may enter into the sworn covenant of Adonai your God which Adonai your God is confirming with you this very day….   (Deut. 29: 9-11)

It’s striking that, even in the patriarchal context that generally pervades the Torah, this passage calls for the inclusion of every person in the camp – not just community leaders, but the masses as well; not just male heads of households, but women and children as well; not just Israelites but fellow travelers as well.

Each one’s participation is important in this renewal of the covenant between God and the Jewish People.

This theme of covenant renewal has a special resonance on Yom Kippur, for rabbinic tradition teaches that it was on the 10^th of Tishri – Yom Kippur – that Moses returned with the second set of tablets, proof positive that God had forgiven the people for the sin of the Golden Calf.  (See Rashi on Ex. 33:11).

In our general society, Election Day each November can be thought of as our secular version of covenant renewal.  Our public officials hold office neither through assertions of divine right, nor through military conquest, but rather through the covenant that we enter with them by means of the voting booth. 

And just as in Parshat Nitzavim, so here in our secular context of democratic elections, it’s critical that participation in the process of voting be as maximized as it can be.  Unfortunately, our country doesn’t have such a great record with respect to voter participation.   According to George Mason University’s “United States Election Project” the percentage of eligible voters who voted in federal elections between 1948 and 2008 consisted of only between half and two-thirds of the eligible voting population.[i]  According to the same study, Minnesota’s eligible voter participation rates have generally been better than the national rate:  In 2008, it was 77.8%, well above the national rate of 61.6% that year.   In 2004, it was 78.4%, compared to national rate of 60.1%.  And in that “hanging-chads” election of 2000, Minnesota’s eligible voter participation rate was 69.5%, compared to the national rate of 54.2%.

Overall, not great – It would be great if close to 100% of eligible voters were voting. But still, not too bad. 

There has been no significant incidence of voter fraud in Minnesota. 

As the non-partisan organization League of Women Voters Minnesota reports ---

"Allegations of voter fraud usually get big headlines. What does not get headlines is the fact that nearly all allegations of voter fraud turn out to be clerical errors, data matching mistakes, or misunderstandings. In reality, voter fraud is extremely rare. In the 2008 U.S. Senate election recount, lawyers for both candidates [i.e., the lawyers for both Norm Coleman and Al Franken] looked for fraud in the election. They found none.  

"Our election system has many checks and balances in the system that ensure the integrity of our elections. Checks and balances that take place before and after the election look at everyone who signed the roster to make sure that voter was legitimate. If there are questions, they are forwarded to county attorneys for further investigation and possible prosecution. Because most of the flagged records are data -entry errors or the result of a misunderstanding, charges are rare. The most frequent type of charge is felons who vote before their civil rights have been restored. These could not be prevented by photo ID; felony status is not noted on a driver's license.  

“Our current laws have proven sufficient to deter voter fraud. The penalty can be steep - up to a $10,000 fine and one year in jail.

“When we look at the few ballots that are wrongly cast in an election, there are virtually none that would have been prevented had those voters been required to show photo ID. A photo ID can only prevent voter impersonation. There are no cases of voter impersonation on the record in Minnesota elections. Election experts are nearly unanimous in their agreement that voter impersonation is not a factor in our elections, due in no small part to the fact that in-person voter fraud presents a high risk of being caught and offers small pay-off.”[ii]

Nevertheless, the Minnesota legislature has passed a Constitutional amendment proposal that will appear on our election ballot this November.  The question to which we are asked to respond is this:  "Shall the Minnesota Constitution be amended to require all voters to present valid photo identification to vote and to require the state to provide free identification to eligible voters, effective July 1, 2013? [iii]

As most of you probably know, Temple Israel is an active member of CHUM, the interfaith coalition which describes itself as “people of faith working together to provide basic necessities, foster stable lives, and organize for a just and compassionate community”.  

Elizabeth Olson, CHUM’s congregational outreach director, had this to say in a memorandum on the topic that she recently sent to me and other local clergy.  She writes:

“At CHUM we serve those who are homeless, or teetering on the brink of homelessness. Many live their daily lives on the margins of society, away from the center stage of public politics. Yet, the people served at CHUM are often the ones most affected by the decisions made in the public arena. As people of faith we are troubled by policies, like the proposed amendment, that seek to restrict the circle of participation in our democracy. For these reasons, and many others, CHUM is working to defeat the Voter Photo ID amendment. The individuals served by CHUM should not be pushed any further away from the decision making process by placing unnecessary barriers on their path to voting.

"CHUM would feel the impact of the voter ID amendment in the following ways:

“Costs

During 2011, 424 individuals sought assistance from CHUM to acquire an ID. Many not only needed the ID, but the supporting documents required to obtain a photo ID. The total cost used by CHUM to obtain IDs and supporting documents was $7,903. These IDs are necessary for individuals to find housing, employment and reach stability in their lives. If the voter ID amendment passes, many more individuals would look to CHUM for help in obtaining an ID (including supporting documents). These documents are not always easy to track down, the process can take a long time, and often the costs are not just for the IDs, but for other supporting documents.

“Vouching

"Election Day Registration as we know it will end. Voters would be able to register at the polls but will have to cast provisional ballots. These will be counted later only if a voters’ identity and eligibility can be verified.  Additionally vouching would end. Vouching done by registered CHUM staff and the same day registration are the primary ways those staying in emergency shelter are able to vote. Without same day registration and vouching, most individuals staying in emergency shelter would be unable to vote.”

--------------------------------

It seems to me that the arguments presented by CHUM, the League of Women Voters, and other organizations that have come out against the Voter ID amendment are compelling and well-considered.   Why on earth would we want to impose additional burdens on those who face so many existing burdens in their day to day lives when the stated goal of those additional burdens is to address a problem that doesn’t even exist?  Why on earth would we want to place the extra expense of administering these unnecessary provisions on county and state budgets that are financially strained to begin with?

Positive arguments can be made for the proposition that the integrity of the election process is a fundamental value, and that requiring ID at the polls would promote that value of integrity.  However, when dealing with such a fundamental right as the right to vote, we should be wary of proposals like the voter ID amendment that don’t appear to take into account the actual facts on the ground:  First, the fact that voter fraud has not been an actual problem.  Second, the fact that the proposed solution to the non-existent problem of voter fraud would have the effect of denying many on the fringes of society from being able to vote.

Maimonides (also known as Rambam) teaches in his restatement of the Laws of Teshuvah:

Throughout the entire year, one should always look at oneself as

equally balanced between merit and sin and the world as equally

balanced between merit and sin. If one performs one sin, one tips the

balance and that of the entire world to the side of guilt and brings

destruction upon oneself. [On the other hand,] if one performs one

mitzvah, one tips his balance and that of the entire world to the side

of merit and brings deliverance and salvation to oneself and others.

This is implied by (Proverbs 10:25) ‘A righteous person is the

foundation of the world,’ i.e., one who acted righteously, tipped the

balance of the entire world to merit and saved it. (Hilchot Teshuvah 3:4)

Elections can be close calls too.  Rambam says a single sin or a single mitzvah can tip the scales of the world.  Similarly, it’s important that we not suppress voter participation because a single vote can tip the scales of an election, and can indeed make all the difference.  Rather, let us be able to say that we still live in a society where we can be “Nitzavim” - all standing together -- as we renew our covenant of living in a democratic republic. 

Gmar chatimah tovah/ May you be sealed in the Book of Life for a good year of health and happiness – and may the same be true for our State, our nation and our world.

Amen.

(c) Rabbi David Steinberg 5773/2012

---

[i] http://elections.gmu.edu/voter_turnout.htm

[ii] http://www.lwvmn.org/page.aspx?pid=734#unnecessary

[iii] https://www.revisor.mn.gov/laws/?id=167&year=2012&type=0

KOL NIDRE SERMON 9-25-12

Honoring Vows

Throughout the High Holidays, and, indeed, throughout the month of Elul that precedes the High Holidays, we seek to review and make amends  -- to do teshuvah – for the wrongs we have committed in the previous year.  However, the dramatic recitation of “Kol Nidre” – with which we opened our service --- is what we might call an exercise in “teshuvah advance planning.”   In effect, we’re trying to make amends for the wrongs we haven’t yet committed.  Kol Nidre acknowledges that we are imperfect --- and that our best intentions are often thwarted by circumstances beyond our control, or simply by our own moral failings:

And so we say:

All vows, bonds, devotions, promises, obligations, penalties and oaths, wherewith we have vowed, sworn, devoted and bound ourselves, from this Day of Atonement to the next Day of Atonement – may it come to us for good – all these we repent us of them.  They shall be absolved, released, annulled, made void and of no effect; they shall not be binding nor shall they have any power.  Our vows shall not be vows; our bonds shall not be bonds; and our oaths shall not be oaths.

The legal language of Kol Nidre technically refers only to personal vows that we may make to ourselves or to God in the coming year --- and asks that they be considered null and void --- so that we may not become sinners if we fail to follow through on them. Indeed, with regard to such verbal undertakings, there is a strong current within Jewish tradition that teaches that it’s better not to make vows at all:

כִּי-תִדֹּר נֶדֶר לַיהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ, לֹא תְאַחֵר לְשַׁלְּמוֹ: כִּי-דָרֹשׁ יִדְרְשֶׁנּוּ יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ מֵעִמָּךְ, וְהָיָה בְךָ חֵטְא. וְכִי תֶחְדַּל לִנְדֹּר--לֹא-יִהְיֶה בְךָ חֵטְא

says Deuteronomy 23: 22-23  --  

“When you make a vow to the Eternal your God, do not put off fulfilling it, for the Eternal your God will require it of you, and you will have incurred guilt; whereas if you refrain from vowing, you incur no guilt.”

טוֹב אֲשֶׁר לֹא-תִדֹּר--מִשֶּׁתִּדּוֹר, וְלֹא תְשַׁלֵּם

teaches Ecclesiastes 5:4

“It is better not to vow at all than to vow and not fulfill.”

And in the Talmud, in Tractate Chullin, Rabbi Meir argues: 

טוב מזה ומזה שאינו נודר כל עיקר

“Better than either of these (i.e., better than the person who makes a vow and fulfills it or than a person who makes a vow and fails to fulfill it), is one who doesn’t vow at all.” (Chullin 2a)

Still, notwithstanding all the caveats in Kol Nidre and in our tradition about making vows at all, we do all make vows and promises of one sort or another all the time, not just to ourselves and to God, but to other people.  And one particular example of such making of vows comes very much to mind in this heated election season – the vows that two committed partners make to one another when they get married.   

A valid argument can be made that government should have no interest whatsoever in whether two people decide to get married.  And, call me a contrarian, but I don’t actually believe that there is any fundamental right for coupled individuals to enjoy tax benefits and streamlined property transfer and probate procedures compared to single individuals.  However, as long as government does wish to make the policy choice of favoring couples over single people in these ways, I do feel very strongly that it shouldn’t discriminate between opposite-sex couples and same-sex couples in doing so.  

As a society, we still have a long way to go in getting our laws to reflect the principle that discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is unjust and unfair.  In many parts of the world, gays and lesbians fear for their very lives due to legal regimes and social environments in which homosexuality is criminalized and demonized.  And in the United States, it’s only about ten years since the United States Supreme Court invalidated state and federal laws that purported to make homosexual behavior a crime.  And it’s only one year since the discriminatory “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” regime in the U.S. military was ended.

Marriage equality is the next step in ensuring a just society.  This has already been achieved in several states, including the State in which I was born, New York, and the state where I was living before coming to Duluth, the great State of Vermont.  Vermont back in 2000 became the first State to enact Civil Unions, which gave same-sex couples the exact same rights under state law as opposite-sex couples in civil marriages, except for using the word “union” instead of the word “marriage.”  Then in 2009, the Vermont State legislature abolished that separate but equal designation of “civil union” and legislated that the unions of both same-sex couples that were civilly recognized by the State as well as the unions of opposite-sex couples that were civilly recognized by the State would both be designated as “civil marriages.”   

From personal experience, I can assure you that the sky did not fall in Vermont as a result --- nor did catastrophe ensue in other states and countries where there is civil marriage equality – jurisdictions that include our neighbors the State of Iowa to our south and all of Canada to our north. 

I know that the wonderful organization “Minnesotans United for All Families” advises that in this fight we should steer clear of the language of equal rights and civil justice, and instead focus on the importance of love and the meaning of marriage.  This is a well-intentioned and, I’m pretty certain, ultimately the most effective strategy in our current electoral contest.

However, for me personally, the principles of justice and equal treatment before the law are the values that most strongly resonate with me.

For me personally, I find it almost unbearable as a gay man to have to argue for my right to be treated equally under the law.  And I’m angry at having to argue that the love and commitment that two same-sex partners can share is equal to the love and commitment that two opposite-sex partners can share.  And I’m angry at having to argue that the nurturing that can be provided to children in a household headed by two dads or two moms is equal to that which can be provided by a mom and a dad.   

It should be obvious to all that love is love.  Commitment is commitment.  Family comes in a variety of forms.  And no religion should have the right to impose its particular understandings of gender roles on others who do not share those religious views.  

I am proud that our Temple supports marriage equality.  I am proud that my professional association of Reconstructionist rabbis supports marriage equality.  And I am proud that the congregational arms of both the Reform and Reconstructionist movements support marriage equality.

However, the problem for me in talking about this subject in the context of a sermon is simply that I don’t think this issue of discrimination in our CIVIL marriage laws should have anything at all to do with religion.   

With respect to religious movements with which Temple Israel is NOT affiliated --- the question of whether or not a particular faith community or congregation wants to allow same-sex religious weddings is not our concern and should not be the concern of the government.  If, for example, the Catholic Church will not permit a church wedding between two gay parishioners – That’s not our concern.

But ------- whether we are religious liberals or religious conservatives or – for that matter – atheists or monotheists or polytheists --- American citizens should not be discriminated against by our government based on sexual orientation.

As I’m sure most of you already know, the proposal on our ballots this November would do just that.  It asks if the Minnesota State Constitution should be amended to state that the only marriages that will be civilly recognized by this State will be marriages between one man and one woman.

If this amendment passes, it will not change existing Minnesota law.  Minnesota has already legislated that only opposite-sex marriages can be civilly recognized by the State of Minnesota.  What the ballot amendment will do is two things:  (1) It will prevent the Minnesota courts from ever holding that the current law against same-sex civil marriages is unconstitutional on equal protection grounds;  And  (2) It will prevent future Minnesota legislatures from opening the institution of civil marriage to same-sex couples.

Whether the amendment passes or fails, it will have no effect on the various and diverse religious definitions of marriages that exist among the various and diverse religious communities of our state.  It will effect only the CIVIL definition of marriage in this state --- by enshrining into our constitution the narrow, heterosexist version of the civil definition of marriage that keeps it closed off from participation by gay and lesbian citizens.

When the New York State legislature last year was debating legalization to open the institution of civil marriage to same-sex couples there, New York State Assemblyman Charles Lavine summed up the fight for marriage equality in New York with this memorable sound bite:  "Only second-class states have second-class citizens."   By that yardstick, Minnesota already is a second class state (as are the majority of states in the USA) because it currently discriminates against gay and lesbian people in its civil marriage laws.  The ballot amendment this November would, if it passes, make Minnesota a third-class state by enshrining that discrimination in our Constitution.

The fight this November is to ensure that we don’t move from being a second class state to being a third class state.  The fight to move us from being a second class state with second class citizens to being a first class state where all are treated equally under the law will still have to wait for a future day, but at least let us not distance ourselves further away from that still unattained goal.

What I’m really determined not to do, on this bima tonight or in the weeks ahead, is to try to pick and choose Bible verses that we can use to defend the notion of equality versus those Bible verses that our political adversaries pick and choose to attack the notion of equality.

First of all, anytime you encounter anyone justifying an anti-equality argument through quotations from the New Testament, our first response as Jews should be to say:  Don’t use your religious scriptures to justify civil discrimination against those who do not belong to your religion and who do not accept the authority of your religious scripture for anyone who is not an adherent of your religion.   

But, what about when folks quote verses at you from our own Jewish Bible, the Tanakh, or as some Christians call it – the “Old Testament?”    

I’ll be the first to tell you that, in my view, the Tanakh and the rabbinic and medieval era commentaries don’t support the notion of equal treatment for all regardless of sexual orientation.  There are some majorly homophobic passages in Jewish tradition, just as there are some majorly sexist and xenophobic passages.

However, I agree with the approach that Professor Marc Brettler of Brandeis University suggests in his book How to Read the Bible, published by the Jewish Publication Society in 2000.  Professor Brettler makes a distinction between “sourcebooks” and “textbooks.”  A “sourcebook” contains many perspectives as compared to a “textbook” which adopts a particular point of view.  Brettler explains:

“The Bible […] comes from many places and times; it conveys the interests of many different groups.  Within it, we can find more than one opinion on almost any single item of importance – the nature of God, the corporeality of God, intergenerational punishment, the relationship between men and women, the attitude towards foreigners, retribution, etc.  In this sense, the Bible is surely more sourcebook than textbook.

(Brettler, How to Read the Bible, Jewish Publication Society, 2005, p. 280)

And I also take strength in the Reconstructionist approach to Judaism that defines Judaism as “the evolving religious civilization of the Jewish people.” In the Reconstructionist approach, “the past has a vote but not a veto” on how we participate in the evolution and development of Judaism in each new historical era.  There is much of spiritual and moral value in our classic texts.  As anyone who comes to our Shabbat morning Torah study group can tell you, I am very much a lover of Torah.  I do indeed believe that, as it says in the Book of Proverbs,

עֵץ-חַיִּים הִיא, לַמַּחֲזִיקִים בָּהּ; וְתֹמְכֶיהָ מְאֻשָּׁר/ “It is a tree of life to those who hold fast to it, and all its supporters are happy.”  (Prov. 3:18)

However, we don’t need to accept the homophobic elements in our classic Jewish texts any more than we need to accept their outdated views on slavery, animal sacrifices, genocide of non-Israelite nations, or female subservience to men. 

Judaism doesn’t shy away from argumentation, not by a longshot.  In the Talmud there is a great story about Rabbi Yochanan and his most brilliant disciple, Resh Lakish (also known as “Son of Lakisha”). The two had had a falling out which had upset Resh Lakish so much that Resh Lakish had became ill and died. (In the following passage, I should first explain that a “Baraita” is a rabbinic teaching that was not included in the Mishna (published around 200 C.E., but which was nonetheless known and studied by the rabbis of later generations who are quoted in the Talmud).   And so we read in Tractate Bava Metzia, page 84a:

Resh Lakish died, and Rabbi Yochanan was plunged into deep grief. The rabbis said, 'Who shall go to ease his mind? Let Rabbi. Eleazar ben Pedat go, whose disquisitions are very subtle.' So he [Rabbi Eleazar] went and sat before him [R. Yochanan]; and on every dictum uttered by Rabbi Yochanan, Rabbi Eleazar observed: 'There is a Baraitha which supports you.'

Let me stop here to explain what we mean by the word “Baraita”.  But first I have to explain to you the word “Mishna.”  The Mishna was a compendium of rabbinic teachings that was codified around 200 C.E.  A “baraita” (the word literally means “outside”) is a rabbinic teaching from that period which was not included in the Mishna,  but which was nonetheless known and studied by the rabbis of later generations who are quoted in the Talmud.  So, returning to the words of Tractate Bava Metzia in the Babylonian Talmud:

Resh Lakish died, and Rabbi Yochanan was plunged into deep grief. The rabbis said, 'Who shall go to ease his mind? Let Rabbi. Eleazar ben Pedat go, whose disquisitions are very subtle.' So he [Rabbi Eleazar] went and sat before him [R. Yochanan]; and on every dictum uttered by Rabbi Yochanan, Rabbi Eleazar observed: 'There is a Baraitha which supports you.' 'Are you as the son of Lakisha?'  [R. Yochanan] complained: 'when I stated a law, the son of Lakisha used to raise twenty-four objections, to which I gave twenty-four answers, which consequently led to a fuller comprehension of the law; whilst you say, "A Baraita has been taught which supports you:" Do I not know myself that my dicta are right?' Thus he went on ripping at his garments and weeping, 'Where are you, O son of Lakisha, where are you, O son of Lakisha;' and he cried thus until his mind was turned. Thereupon the Rabbis prayed for him, and he died.  (Bava Metzia 84a)

There are good reasons for having an argument and there are bad reasons for having an argument – or in Jewish terminology, there are arguments “leshem shamayim” (“for the sake of heaven”) and arguments “shelo lesheym shamayim” (“not for the sake of heaven”).

As we learn in Pirke Avot:

"Any dispute which is for the sake of Heaven will ultimately be of enduring value, and one which is not for the sake of Heaven will not be of enduring value. What is a dispute for the sake of Heaven? This is a debate between Hillel and Shammai. What is a dispute not for the sake of Heaven? This is the dispute of Korach and his assembly."  (Pirke Avot 5:20)

The schools of Hillel and Shammai debated over the interpretations of Torah but members of their families still intermarried with one another.  Their disputes were conducted for the sake of the search for truth, just like Rabbi Yochanan’s disputes with his beloved student Resh Lakish.  Korach and his assembly, on the other hand, argued with Moses and Aaron not out of concerns for truth and justice but rather out of lust for power. It seems to me that the fight over the marriage amendment is an argument shelo beshem shamayim --- an argument not for the sake of heaven. 

Rather, it is an attempt to add insult to injury by certain religious conservatives who want to violate the separation of church and state to enshrine their misguided, reactionary, bigoted and homophobic views into our constitution and by manipulative legislators who want to play on this bigotry to help them increase voter participation among their likely supporters.

I don’t like using such charged language as that in public, especially from a synagogue pulpit. I much prefer the approach praised by the Prophet Malachi who speaks of a messianic time when

אָז נִדְבְּרוּ יִרְאֵי יְהוָה, אִישׁ אֶל-רֵעֵהוּ; וַיַּקְשֵׁב יְהוָה, וַיִּשְׁמָע, וַיִּכָּתֵב סֵפֶר זִכָּרוֹן לְפָנָיו לְיִרְאֵי יְהוָה, וּלְחֹשְׁבֵי שְׁמוֹ

"Then, those who stood in awe of the Eternal conversed with one another; and the Eternal heard and noted it, and a Book of Remembrance was written concerning those who revere the Eternal and esteem God’s name."  (Mal. 3:16)

The key here for me in that quote from the Book of Malachi is conversation.  Indeed that’s what Minnesota United for All Families is looking for all of us to do – have conversations with our friends and neighbors to encourage them to join us in voting NO.

I’m personally feeling a bit in the eye of the hurricane right now over this issue, to the point where I’m not sure how good I am with the whole conversation part.

But, as for that Book of Remembrance of which Malachi speaks, like the Book of Life of which the poets of the Machzor wax poetic… let me conclude by wishing you all, Gmar Chatimah Tovah ("a good sealing") as well as Tzom Kal ("an easy fast).

And may we see progress towards a more just and caring society in the year ahead.

Amen.

(c) Rabbi David Steinberg 5773/2012

ROSH HASHANAH MORNING SERMON 9-17-12

OPENING OUR EYES

A little while ago when we sang Unetaneh Tokef, we proclaimed:

uteshuvah, utefillah, utsedakah ma'avirin et roa ha-gzeyra./   Repentance, prayer and charity temper judgment's severe decree.

I’d like to speak this morning about the role of that second category --- tefillah.   We generally translate the word as "prayer," and the Merriam-Webster dictionary gives its primary definition for that English word as    

 (1): an address (as a petition) to God or a god in word or thought prayer for the success of the voyage> (2): a set order of words used in praying b: an earnest request or wish http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/prayer?show=0&t=1346966880

This is certainly the general understanding of the term, but the Hebrew word “tefillah” has additional nuances that don’t come through in the English.

In his book Six Jewish Spiritual Paths: A Rationalist Look at Spirituality (Jewish Lights, 2000), Rabbi Rifat Sonsino explains that the word תפילה

comes from the verb להתפלל, a reflexive form of the root פ-ל-ל, which means “to judge.” Therefore, at the very basic level, to pray really means “to judge oneself.”  http://www.jewishlights.com/mm5/merchant.mvc?Screen=OP&Store_Code=JL&Category_Code=8-8-12

Last night I talked about one of the prominent motifs of Rosh Hashanah, the praise of God as “melekh al kol ha’aretz mekadesh Yisrael v’yom hazikaron” / “Ruler over all the world who sanctifies Israel and the Day of Remembrance.” Perhaps some of you were surprised at that.  We so often hear it said that Jews don’t talk about God much.  Maybe some of you squirmed in your seats thinking: “I’m here because I’m Jewish and Rosh Hashanah is when we Jews get together and shul is where we get together. So don’t talk to me about God. “ 

Fair enough.   “Jewish Atheist” is not an oxymoron.  We even have a Chasidic teaching on the subject which goes as follows:

There is no quality and there is no power in us that was created to no purpose.  And even base and corrupt qualities can be uplifted to serve God. […] But to what end can the denial of God have been created?  It, too, can be uplifted through deeds of charity.  For if someone comes to you and asks your help, you shall not turn that person away with pious words, saying, “Have faith, and take your troubles to God!”  You shall act as though there were no God, as though there were only one person in all the world who could help this person – only yourself.  (quoted in Siddur Hadesh Yameinu, Rabbi Ron Aigen, editor and translator, 1996, p. 332)

Whether we are firm atheists, or assured God-believers, or agnostically floating in-between those two poles – this idea of tefillah as an act of judging ourselves is a common ground on which we can all meet.  As Rabbi Morris Adler teaches:  “Our prayers are answered not when we are given what we ask, but when we are challenged to be what we can be.” (quoted in Siddur Hadesh Yameinu, Rabbi Ron Aigen, editor and translator, 1996, p. 100)

How, as Jews, DO we pray?  Communal recitation of fixed liturgical texts is a major component of Jewish prayer.  We certainly do our share of those fixed liturgical texts in our High Holiday and Shabbat services.  And when we chant those same words of liturgy as were offered up by our ancestors for two thousand years or more, we connect with the heritage of our people, a connection through which we do indeed find    --- to use the words of the Torah blessing --- “chayei olam nata betocheynu” / “eternal life implanted in our midst.

But it’s also a long-standing custom to incorporate one’s own personal prayers into the silent recitation of the Amidah.  A teaching in the classic text Pirke Avot emphasizes the importance of this personal, individual element with our standardized communal prayers: 

[יג] רבי שמעון אומר, הוי זהיר בקרית שמע ובתפילה; וכשאתה מתפלל, אל תעש תפילתך קבע--אלא תחנונים לפני המקום ברוך הוא, שנאמר "כי חנון ורחום, הוא" (יואל ב,יג).

“Rabbi Shimon says: Be careful in reading the Shema and the Amidah prayer, but when you pray, don’t regard your prayer as a fixed mechanical task; rather, as an appeal for mercy and grace before the Blessed Omnipresent One whom scripture says is gracious and full of mercy.” (Avot 2:13)

And of course, we’re not talking about just formal prayer services.  Spontaneous personal prayer --- whenever and wherever we are moved to offer it --- is basic to who we are, not just as Jews but as human beings: 

It reminds me of the popular saying “as long as there are final exams, there will be prayer in schools.” http://www.barrypopik.com/index.php/new_york_city/entry/as_long_as_there_are_final_exams_there_will_be_prayer_in_schools/

Our Torah and Haftarah readings this first morning of Rosh Hashanah contain several examples of spontaneous personal prayer that are well worth reflecting upon: 

First of all, there’s the example of Chanah (or Hannah, to use the common English form of that name):  The haftarah portrays Hannah pouring out her heart to God in prayer, distraught at her inability to conceive:    וְחַנָּה, הִיא מְדַבֶּרֶת עַל-לִבָּהּ--רַק שְׂפָתֶיהָ נָּעוֹת, וְקוֹלָהּ לֹא יִשָּׁמֵעַ; וַיַּחְשְׁבֶהָ עֵלִי, לְשִׁכֹּרָה.  "Behold Hannah was speaking to herself, and only her lips were moving while her voice could not be heard so that Eli (the Priest who was sitting nearby) thought she was drunk" (1 Sam. 1:13) 

Chana’s style of praying would become a quintessential model for Jewish prayer.   As Talmud teaches:    

 אמר רבי יוסי בר חנינא מן הפסוק הזה את למד ד' דברים

א) וחנה היא מדברת על לבה מכאן שהתפילה צריכה כוונה; (ב) רק שפתיה נעות מכאן שהוא צריך להרחיש בשפתותיו ; (ג) וקולה לא ישמע מכאן שלא יגביה אדם את קולו ויתפלל; (ד) ויחשבה עלי לשיכורה מכאן שהשיכור אסור להתפלל

“Said R. Yose bar Haninah: From this verse (1 Sam. 1:13) you learn four things:
(1) “Hannah was speaking in her heart” -- from this you learn that prayer requires kavanah [which we might translate as concentration or intentionality]. (2) “Only her lips moved” -- from this you learn that one must mouth the prayer with one's lips. (3) “And her voice was not heard” -- from this you learn that one may not raise one’s voice and pray. (4) “And Eli took her to be a drunken woman” -- from this you learn a drunken person is forbidden to pray" (Talmud Yerushalmi, Berachot, 4:1).  (See also Talmud Bavli, Berachot 31a)

According to the contemporary Talmud scholar Rabbi Adin Steinsaltz, there are other passages in the Talmud that argue about the parameters of Rabbi Yosi Bar Chanina’s teaching that someone who is drunk ought to sober up first before engaging in prayer. (Steinsaltz, Masechet Berachot [Hebrew edition], p.137)  As for the second and third points, the way it was taught to me was that when you davven (pray) individually within a public setting, such as during the individual sections of the Amidah, you should move your lips and pronounce the words distinctly enough so that you can hear yourself saying them, but not loud enough for those standing next to you to hear what you are saying.

All those Talmudic teachings about Hannah’s prayer are interesting – but even more striking is the emotional tone of Hannah’s prayer.  Rabbi Art Green teaches that Hannah's model of prayer shows us that it's valid and desirable to pour one's heart out in prayer, to be emotional ---- including being angry and upset.  Rabbi Green writes:  “The depth and sincerity of Hannah’s prayer became a model for the rabbis.  This apparently included the very strong and seemingly audacious way in which Hannah spoke to both Eli [the Kohen] and God.  The model of prayer offered here is hardly one of submission and entreaty.  Hannah stood up to both human and divine authority, demanding that she be treated justly and recognized as the wronged person she was.”  (Kol Haneshama: Machzor Layamim Nora’im, p. 553).

Similarly, I’m reminded of a teaching I received from, Rabbi Shapiro,  my Hasidic Orthodox Hebrew school teacher at Sea Breeze Jewish Center in Brooklyn, NY where I used to go 4 afternoons a week when I was in 4^th and 5^th grade.  I remember Rabbi Shapiro (I never did learn his first name) teaching us that it's okay to be angry at God; it's just not okay to ignore God.  That one really has stuck with me all these years:  IT'S OKAY TO BE ANGRY AT GOD, IT'S JUST NOT OKAY TO IGNORE GOD…. 

                                                            ********

The prayers of both Chana in this morning’s haftarah and Hagar in this morning’s Torah reading each include a strong element of catharsis.  Getting out what you're bottling up inside.  And for Hagar, there is much that has been bottled up.  In Genesis 21 verse 14 it says:  וַתֵּלֶךְ וַתֵּתַע/ “she wandered back and forth.”  She’s in a panic, in a state of crisis and turmoil.  She’s afraid.

It seems to her that her beloved son Ishmael is going to die before her eyes of dehydration -- and that she couldn't be far off from that fate herself.

So, she sets her son down under a bush, and moves a short distance away so that she won’t have to see him die.  Then she bursts out into tears:  The Hebrew word in Genesis ch. 21 verse 16 for bursting into tears is itself ugly and percussive --- almost like the sound of being so nauseous you wanna throw up yet so famished that you have nothing to regurgitate:   וַתֵּבְךְּ    (VATEVK!)

But then a miracle happens:  We read in Genesis 21: 17-19:

”GOD HEARD THE CRY OF THE BOY, AND AN ANGEL OF GOD CALLED TO HAGAR FROM HEAVEN AND SAID TO HER: ‘WHAT TROUBLES YOU, HAGAR?  FEAR NOT, FOR GOD HAS HEARD THE CRY OF THE BOY WHERE HE IS.  COME LIFT UP THE BOY AND HOLD HIM BY THE HAND, FOR I WILL MAKE A GREAT NATION OF HIM.’  THEN   וַיִּפְקַח אֱלֹהִים אֶת-עֵינֶיהָ/ GOD OPENED HER EYES/   --- AND SHE SAW A WELL OF WATER, AND LET THE BOY DRINK"

The medieval Italian Jewish commentator Sforno explains that the well of water had been there all along but, by opening her eyes, God had given Hagar the ability to notice the well.   We use the same verb in the Birkhot Hashachar, the morning blessings we recited near the beginning of our service today, praising God there as פוקח עורים  / poke’ach ivrim /  “the one who opens the eyes of the blind.” 

I think this is a stunning illustration of the true power of prayer.  The natural laws of the universe do not suddenly get overruled.  However, our prayers do get "answered" when we discover new ways of looking at the world around us.   When we discover that we are not so isolated and alone as we might have thought.  When we recognize that God is with us even when life seems to be at its bleakest.

Is anyone here familiar with the British tv series called "The Hitchiker's Guide to the Galaxy?"  I was introduced to  --- and fell in love with -- this classic bit of nerd culture back in the early 1980’s when I was an exchange student in Edinburgh, Scotland for my junior year of college.  My fellow nerds who I hung out with there were mostly atheist physics majors  -- but, still, the Biblical account of Hagar’s prayerful vision reminds me of the Hitchiker’s Guide to the Galaxy all the same. 

You see, the “Hitchiker's Guide to the Galaxy” is supposed to be this guidebook for cheap and adventurous sightseeing in the universe.  The offscreen omniscient narrator would often remind the viewer as follows: 

"It is said that despite its many glaring (and occasionally fatal) inaccuracies, the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy itself has outsold the Encyclopedia Galactica because it is slightly cheaper, and because  …  in large, friendly letters on the cover it has the words…….."  (quote revised to leave slogan to the end…)       

(Note:  Here I inserted a dramatic pause….)

I know we have some Anglophiles and science fiction nerds in the house.  So let me ask you:  What were those two words cheerfully emblazoned on the cover of the Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy?......

(Note: Here, as expected, several congregation members shouted out the answer, which I then repeated…)

DON'T PANIC!

(which by the way is the advice I often give myself when getting ready for the High Holidays!)

Well, it seems to me that Hagar ultimately follows this sound advice  --- DON’T PANIC.

After pacing back and forth for a while she stops wandering around and SITS DOWN.  She pours out her heart to God.   I imagine her then, after the last sobs have convulsed her body, that then, when she's gotten out her cry, that then she takes a deep, long breath.

And then, and only then, God opens her eyes, and she sees the well that had been there all along, but that she had been too panicked to notice.  It is as if a fog has been lifted.

Let me close with one more example of prayer from this morning's Torah service that I think might be the most meaningful portrayal of all:  The prayer of Ishmael.

Now you may say, hey wait a minute, Ishmael isn’t quoted at all in our Torah reading.

But that's the point --- Sometimes we may be so distressed that we don't even have the kuyekh   --- the strength --- to cry out in agony like Hagar, let alone to put our words into the timeless poetry of Hannah’s prayer of thanksgiving that concludes the haftarah.   The Torah doesn’t directly describe Ishmael praying to God.  Yet what does the Angel say to Hagar?

אַל-תִּירְאִי, כִּי-שָׁמַע אֱלֹהִים אֶל-קוֹל הַנַּעַר בַּאֲשֶׁר הוּא-שָׁם./ Don't be afraid, for God has heard the voice of the youth WHERE HE IS.

Our tradition teaches us that God hears us --- WHERE WE ARE --- even if where we are is someplace so painful and scary that can’t even summon up a prayer.   Even if where we are is someplace so confusing that we don’t even really know where we are.   

Indeed, the very first question God poses to a human being in the Torah is God’s question to Adam in Genesis 3:9 --- אַיֶּכָּה. (“Ayekah”)/WHERE ARE YOU?

And that’s ultimately the question that each of asks ourselves during the Yamim Nora’im/ The Days of Awe ---  אַיֶּכָּה / where are you?

There’s a wonderful reading in the old Gates of Prayer siddur that says:

“Prayer cannot bring water to parched fields, nor mend a broken bridge, nor rebuild a ruined city; but prayer can water an arid soul, mend a broken heart, and rebuild a weakened will.”  (Gates of Prayer: A Gender Sensitive Prayerbook, Chaim Stern Editor, CCAR 1994, p. 75)

However each of us personally experiences God, however each of us personally understands the role and nature of prayer, wherever each of us finds ourselves in life’s journey in this season of personal inventory, repentance and renewal  ---- May our eyes be opened, may our prayers be answered --- and may we be blessed with the ability and the courage to meet our loved ones --- and the strangers we encounter as well --- whenever they cry out to us ---- or even when they are unable to cry out  -- meeting them where THEY are, as God met Ishmael באשר הוא שם (ba’asher hu sham) where  he was.    Faced with life’s challenges and faced with the tasks ahead in the quest “letaken olam bemalchut shaddai“ (“to do tikkun olam to repair the world under God’s sovereign rule”) --- May we be able to return to our better selves, to be present in the world – to say HINENI – Here I am.

L’shana Tovah Tekatevu/  May you be inscribed for a good year – and may 5773 be shanah tovah u’metukah  --- a good and SWEET year for us, for all Israel, and for all who dwell on earth.

And whatever challenges come our way just remember – take a deep breath – open your eyes – and don’t panic.

(c) Rabbi David Steinberg 5773/2012

Rosh Hashanah Evening Sermon 9-16-12

Who’s the Boss?

With Election Day less than two months away, we may be preoccupied with the race for the job sometimes r eferred to as “Leader of the Free World.”  But Rosh Hashanah puts that contest into perspective.  Wherever our personal politics might lead us, Barack Obama and Mitt Romney are each human beings like the rest of us.   

By contrast, our prayers on Rosh Hashanah are preoccupied with the One whom the machzor refers to as “melekh al kawl ha’aretz, mekadesh yisra’el v’yom hazikaron.”   / the ruler over all the earth who sanctifies Israel and the Day of Remembrance.”    And when we say “melekh” (meaning “ruler” or “sovereign”), we refer not only to God as a transcendent force but also to God as the indwelling spirit within us.  The Kabbalists teach that the terms “malchut” (“sovereignty”) and “shechinah” (“indwelling presence”) are alternative ways of referring to the same aspect of the Divine, what Rabbi Adin Steinsaltz describes as “the divine power as manifested in reality, operating in an infinite variety of ways and means…”  (Kabbalah 101: Friday Night Live, article by Rabbi Adin Steinsaltz at  http://www.jewish-holiday.com/shabbatkabbala.html  )

If you come to all of our Rosh Hashanah services you’ll hear these words a lot:  “Melekh al kol ha’aretz mekadesh yisrael v’yom hazikaron”  ---  It’s part of the silent amidah for every Rosh Hashanah service. It’s the climactic line of the Rosh Hashanah evening Kiddush.  It’s the climactic line of the blessings following the Rosh Hashanah morning haftarah.  And we’ll also be using it as a sing-along tune during the return procession of the Torah scrolls tomorrow and Tuesday mornings.

I thought I would use these moments tonight to share a few reflections on that phrase of our traditional liturgy as we enter these Days of Awe.

מלך על כל הארץ מקדש ישראל ויום הכיפורים

MELEKH AL KOL HA’ARETZ MEKADESH YISRA’EL V’YOM HAZIKARON.

“Ruler over all the earth who sanctifies Israel and the Day of Remembrance”

I invite us to probe our hearts and to consider how this teaching speaks to each of us or how this teaching challenges us.

*************************

A classic midrash relates the following story: 

A heretic came to Rabbi Akiva and asked, "Who made the world?". Rabbi Akiva replied, "The Holy Blessed One". The man said, "Prove it to me." Rabbi Akiva said, "Come to me tomorrow". When the man returned, Rabbi Akiva asked, "What is that you are wearing?" "A garment", he replied. "Who made it?" Rabbi Akiva asked. "A weaver", he said. "Prove it to me," said Rabbi Akiva.  To this the man replied: "What do you mean?  How can I prove it to you? Here is the garment, how can you not know that a weaver made it?" Rabbi Akiva said, "And here is the world; how can you not know that the Holy Blessed One made it?" After the unbeliever had left, Rabbi Akiva's disciples asked him, "But what is the proof?" Rabbi Akiva said, "Even as a house proclaims its builder, a garment its weaver, or a door its carpenter, so does the world proclaim the Holy Blessed One Who created it.”  (Midrash Temurah 3, as recounted in Sefer Ha’Aggadah/ The Book of Legends, Bialik and Ravnitsky, ed. 2:6)

When the machzor (High Holiday prayer book) refers to Rosh Hashanah as “Yom Hazikaron” (“The Day of Remembrance”), we are reminded of the Shabbat Evening Kiddush, whose words every Friday night refer to Shabbat as “zikaron lema’asey verasheet.”  A “remembrance of the work of Creation.” 

But if the weekly Shabbat is zikaron lema’asey vereyshit/ A remembrance of the work of creation --- How much more so is this true for “Yom Hazikaron”/ “The Day of Remembrance”  itself? 

Jews are not biblical literalists.  When Genesis 1 speaks of the world being created in “six days” we understand this as poetic metaphor.

כִּי אֶלֶף שָׁנִים, בְּעֵינֶיךָ-- כְּיוֹם אֶתְמוֹל, כִּי יַעֲבֹר;
וְאַשְׁמוּרָה בַלָּיְלָה.

------ says Psalm 90 -- “For in your sight a thousand years are like yesterday that has passed like a watch in the night.” (Ps. 90:4).  ---- The Tanakh, our Jewish Bible, is neither a science textbook nor a history textbook.  Rather it is the spiritual autobiography of the Jewish people which leads us back to the First Cause of all things. 

So, first things first:  When we open the machzor on Rosh Hashanah, we don’t check our scientific understandings at the door as we join together in those  prayerful words spoken by generation after generation of our ancestors, and by millions of our fellow Jews around the world:

מלך על כל הארץ מקדש ישראל ויום הכיפורים

MELEKH AL KOL HA’ARETZ MEKADESH YISRA’EL V’YOM HAZIKARON.

“Ruler over all the earth who sanctifies Israel and the Day of Remembrance” (which is Rosh Hashanah).

Science need not be in conflict with religion.  Rather, as history progresses, each new scientific discovery magnifies our sense of awe.  How miraculous the universe is in its intricate design!    הַשָּׁמַיִם, מְסַפְּרִים כְּבוֹד-אֵל; וּמַעֲשֵׂה יָדָיו, מַגִּיד הָרָקִיעַ – says Psalm 19 -- “The heavens are telling the glory of God, the sky proclaims God’s handiwork.” (Ps. 19:2)

And, as history progresses, each new work of artistic inspiration deepens our sense of wonder.  How miraculous it is that we even exist at all!  How miraculous is the gift of awe and wonder itself!  מַה-גָּדְלוּ מַעֲשֶׂיךָ ה'; מְאֹד, עָמְקוּ מַחְשְׁבֹתֶיךָ  -- says Psalm 92 -- “How vast are your works, Adonai; how very deep are your designs.” (Ps. 92:10)

We often think of Rosh Hashanah as the “Birthday of the World.”  In particular, on Rosh Hashanah morning, at three different points in the shofar service we sing the piyyut )religious poem( which begins with the phrase “Hayom Harat Olam”/ “Today the World is Born.”  The 20^th century Polish-born Israeli Rabbi Eliyahu Kitov taught that  the three occurences of “Hayom Harat Olam”  on Rosh Hashanah morning refer to three “fresh starts” that the world has experienced:  The first Hayom Harat Olam, refers to the original creation of the world;  The second Hayom Harat Olam refers to the renewal of the world after the Flood, described in the Torah’s story about Noah; and the third Hayom Harat Olam – the third fresh start for the world -- refers to the Giving of the Torah on Mount Sinai.  We invoke all of these moments of birth and rebirth in our observance of Rosh Hashanah.

Of course, even our traditional weekday liturgy includes the idea that God is “hamechadesh betuvo bechawl yom tamid ma’asei vereysheet”/ “The One who renews in Divine goodness, every day, continually, the work of creation”

But there is something extra special, is there not, about Rosh Hashanah.  Yes, the world is renewed every day, but we especially feel it when we gather together to mark the Jewish New Year.  With our individual and communal prayers and with our fellowship with one another during these Yamim Nora’im/ Days of Awe -- we affirm our faith in the possibility of renewal.  

It’s tempting to dwell on aspects of our lives that seem to be ending – on crossroads that we are approaching:  whether we think of relationships or jobs or even our own mortality.  Rosh Hashanah is THE Day of Remembrance/ Yom Hazikaron.  But Rosh Hashanah is also a day of rebirth/ Hayom Harat Olam/
“Today the world is born.”

Each one of us asks ourselves ---- What sorts of rebirth and renewal can I imagine for myself as I enter this new year?

**************************************

מלך על כל הארץ מקדש ישראל ויום הכיפורים

MELEKH AL KOL HA’ARETZ MEKADESH YISRA’EL V’YOM HAZIKARON.

“Ruler over all the earth who sanctifies Israel and the Day of Remembrance”

Within this blessing we’re also reminded of a creative tension that exists in Judaism:  The words of the blessing prompt the question:  What is the relationship between “melekh al kawl ha’aretz”/ “the one who rules over all the Earth” and “mekadesh yisra’el”/ “the One who sanctifies Israel?”  

Judaism is a world religion and we observe Rosh Hashanah as the birthday of all of the created world and of all of humankind.  But our prayer -- as it were in the same breath -- describes God as “the one who sanctifies Israel.”  In our traditional texts, the word “Yisra’el”/ “Israel” refers primarily to “B’nei Yisra’el”/ “The children of Israel” or “Am Yisra’el”/ the people of Israel, aka “the Israelites,” or-- to use a formulation from later centuries -- The Jewish People.  But when we sing on Rosh Hashanah, “melekh al kol ha’aretz, mekadesh yisra’el”  -- “sovereign of all the earth who sanctifies Israel” – we surely think of Israel as referring to both the Jewish people and the Land of Israel.

And as we do so --- we pray that this new year 5773 will be a time for renewal for all the world – AND ALSO we pray in particular for the welfare of our own particular people – “Am Yisra’el” – scattered throughout the world but concentrated in “Medinat Yisra’el” -- the modern State of Israel -- where our roots as a people remain. 

This time last year we were talking about the efforts of the Palestinian Authority to gain UN membership for Palestine and of the pros and cons of such an approach.  Earlier this year, the formation of a national unity government in Israel raised hopes for at least some of us that Israel would be able to follow through on a comprehensive settlement with the Palestinians.  However, the chief opposition party, Kadima, left the national unity government over the government’s inability to formulate legislation for integrating ultra-Orthodox recruits into the national military draft.  With the collapse of the super-coalition, the governing Likud party again needs to rely on the ultra-Orthodox and ultra Nationalist parties of the far right to remain in power.  And meanwhile, any possible momentum on resolution of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict has been further sidelined by current crises around the region over Iran’s nuclear program, the Syrian civil war, and now – just in the past week – violent protests by Islamist extremists that have erupted in Libya and elsewhere. 

As we gather together to usher in 5773, we pray for the security of the State of Israel and all its inhabitants.  We pray for a realization of the historic national aspirations of the Palestinian people in a state of their own existing side by side in peace with the State of Israel.  And we affirm Israel’s role as the realization of the historic national aspirations of the Jewish people. 

And we pray that the new democratically elected government in Egypt will serve its people while remaining a peaceful neighbor of Israel.  So far, after an initial stumble, it appears that Egyptian President Morsi is acting in a responsible manner to protect embassies and to maintain the peace treaty with Israel.

And we pray that the Syrian people may be freed from the murderous Assad regime and become a nation which promotes justice towards its own population and peaceful relations with its neighbors. 

And then there’s Iran.

My gut instinct is that an attack on Iranian nuclear facilities, whether by Israel alone or by the United States alone, or by the two in collaboration, or by some international force --- would be a calamitous mistake.  My gut instinct is that such an attack would not ultimately prevent Iran from developing nuclear weaponry if Iran is determined to do so -- but would lead to a widespread regional war whose limits we cannot know. 

But I have to admit, I’m not sure about this.  I don’t have all the military intelligence.   I haven’t made the commitment to make aliyah to Israel myself.  And I can’t claim to know how much of the heated rhetoric coming out of both Israel and Iran is intentional posturing for psychological or political effect and how much of it should be taken at face value.

Despite the controversial public statements of Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu in recent days, reports suggest that the majority of the Israeli population does not believe that there will be an Israeli attack on Iran in the coming months. (See, e.g., http://972mag.com/its-over-there-will-be-no-israeli-attack-on-iran/52230/  and http://972mag.com/netanyahus-interviews-confirm-idf-doesnt-want-to-attack-iran/52247/ .  It appears to be the case that Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak favor an attack on Iran but they don’t command a sufficient consensus within Israel’s security cabinet of high level government officials.

Meanwhile, Iran insists that it has no intention or plan to build nuclear weapons.  And Iran, correctly, emphasizes that it has the right under international law to develop nuclear energy for civilian purposes.  Meanwhile, as the international community continues to pressure Iran concerning nuclear weapons that Iran denies it is building, it seems more and more surreal to continue to look the other way with respect to the nuclear weapons that Israel actually does possess yet whose existence Israel continues to refuse to acknowledge.

With regard to the United States presidential race, it seems to me that both President Obama and Governor Romney are equally supportive of and committed to Israel’s security.  At least as far as that issue goes, the question for everyone going to the polls is not whether Obama or Romney would be more supportive of Israel.  Rather, the real question is which man is better qualified to steer our nation through the moments of crisis, danger and opportunity that are sure to come in the months ahead.  Regarding this question, each of us can draw our own conclusions from the public actions and statements of each presidential candidate in recent days.

But, whoever is chosen in November as “leader of the Free World”, Rosh Hashanah is all about how we as Jews keep our faith and trust in the true “Ruler over ALL the world, who sanctifies Israel and the Day of Remembrance.”/“Melekh al kol ha’aretz, mekadesh yisra’el v’yom hazikaron.”

We enter these Days of Awe and this new year 5773 in uncertain times for Israel, for the United States, and for the world at large.  But as the words of Psalm 27 remind us – words that are traditionally recited throughout Elul and the fall holiday season --  קַוֵּה, אֶל-ה': חֲזַק, וְיַאֲמֵץ לִבֶּךָ; וְקַוֵּה, אֶל-ה'  – “Hope in the Eternal, find strength and courage within your heart – and hope in the Eternal.” (Ps. 27:14)

L’Shanah Tovah Tikateyvu – May you be inscribed for a good year.  And may it be for us, for all Israel, and for all who dwell on earth a year of peace.

(c) Rabbi David Steinberg 5773/2012