The Walking Silent Kollel Learning Program

For 50 NIS a day, it seems you can be a Kollel Torah student on the Temple Mount but, I presume, you have to keep walking and keep silent as well as keep your lips shut.  Otherwise, you'll be thrown off.

That is a real Torah challenge.

^

"The Torah Is Not To Be Investigated"

This is the latest political poster protesting the request that Rabbis be questioned in a possible criminal case involving the publication of the Torah study, "Torat HaMelech", last November:

The book, written by Yitzhar Rabbi Yitzhak Shapira, researches the Torah and Talmudic deliberation over the subject of murder as regards Jews and non-Jews. See my prvious post, among them Torat Hamelech I and Torat HaMelech II.

The Rabbis is the poster (r-l) are Yitzchak Ginsberg (who actually has been questioned by police authorities already), Yaakov Yosef and Dov Lior.

The extract below is from the August 1 letter of Shai Nitzan from the Public Prosecuotr's Office informing a lwayer that the Rabbis are to be questioned in connection with the crime of instigating to violence and to racism.

As MK Professor Arye Eldad said, "I suggest the PPO undergo a speed-reading course if it took tham so long to know investigate".

UPDATE

New report.
- - -

A Dvar Torah for Lech-Lecha

Adapted from Imrei Shefer, published in 1895, the Parshot HaShavua commentaries of Rav Shlomo Kluger (1783-1869) who was chief Dayan and preacher of Brody in Galicia for more than 50 years.

Rav Kluger opens by noting that, as Rashi points out, the word לך - “to yourself” - in the opening verse is presumably superfluous. Rashi interprets it as “for your own benefit and well-being”. But Rav Kluger reminds us that there is a parallel use of the word in Bamidbar 13:2 – “send you - לך - men” but there, Rashi interprets it as meaning “according to your understanding” in the sense of God is not actually commanding Moses but leaves it up to Moses’ own volition.

To solve the differentiation in the two instances, Rav Kluger recalls the principle that ‘one who is commanded and acts accordingly, his reward is in the World-to-Come’. He surmises that God’s intention was that Avram should gain and benefit from his residency in Eretz-Yisrael and therefore we should understand the use of “to yourself” as permitting Avram to gain benefits in This World by absolving him of a cognizant act.

A Word of Torah

Invited by our neighbors for the second meal (lunch) of the Shabbat, I said the following:

This week's Torah Reading Portion of the Week (Parasha) was a double, Nitzavim-Vayeilech, Deuteronomy 29:9-31:30. My first task is to say a short vort that will connect the two and then, to delve into a textual observation I have perceived stemming from the connection.

Nitzavim (from the root יצב) means 'standing', usually in a formal situation rather than the usual verb that is used (עמד). And it appears in the next Parasha, verse 31:14, translated as "and you shall present yourselves". So, we have an overlap.

But each portion presents an immediate question. Nitzavim starts off "you are standing this day...". "This day"? Which day? Any day? Perhaps, the Shabbat. The day of rest is a special day of sanctity, of family cohesiveness, of rest. This is the day best outiftted for a covenant.

Avraham of Slonim (Avraham Weinberg of Slonim, 1804-11 Cheshvan 1883), makes the observation (Beit Avraham, p. 179, column A) that the Hebrew word for the plural (אתם) can be reassembled as אמת, which means youtruth. And I would say that if we Jews are all together, if we are standing as one, as one for a specific purpose - then we represent truth.

Vayeilech also starts off with a mystery: "And Moshe went...". To where did he go? To what place? Menachem Mendel of Rimanov, (1745-1815), in his Ilana D'Chayai (p. 185), notes that Moshe was going from one spiritual level to a higher one.

So, at this point, I suggest we return to the wrap-up element.

At the verse 31:14, we have a grammatical problem. The Hebrew reads:

וילך משה ויהושע ויתיצבו באהל מועד

"And Moses and Joshua went, and they presented themselves at the Tent of the Meeting".

But the verb "went" is in singular form whereas the verb "present" is in the plural. A truer translation should be:

"And Moses went, and Joshua, and they presented themselves at the Tent of the Meeting".

The lesson of singular, singular and plural?

Moses went and achieved a higher degree of knowledge, of sanctity, of spirituality. And Joshua went along with him and the result was that the both of them arrived at a moment when they both could present themselves before God at the location where His Presence is.

May we merit to know to where we should be going and that our journey there should be as pure as possible for a very good purpose. And in going there we should be all together, as a people even if our need is private.

And that ascent and togetherness was required so that Joshua should be the replacement, the new leader.

By the time I finished transcribing this, we received the news that our neighbor, Penina Siton, has succumbed to the cancer that was discovered two years ago. The Siton family suffered the loss of their eldest son, Avraham Chaim, who was killed by Arab terrorists, on May 28, 2002 at his high school at Itamar when a gunman infiltrated the community and fired on him and his schoolmates while they were playing basketball, killing three and wounding two others.

May these words of Torah be for her memory and merit.

Wonder What Obama Meant

we have seen faith wielded as a tool to divide us from one another - as an excuse for prejudice and intolerance. Wars have been waged. Innocents have been slaughtered. For centuries, entire religions have been persecuted, all in the name of perceived righteousness.

There is no doubt that the very nature of faith means that some of our beliefs will never be the same. We read from different texts. We follow different edicts. We subscribe to different accounts of how we came to be here and where we’re going next - and some subscribe to no faith at all.

But no matter what we choose to believe, let us remember that there is in religion whose central tenet is hate. There is no God who condones taking the life of an innocent human being. This much we know.

From

Remarks of President Barack Obama
National Prayer Breakfast
Thursday, February 5th, 2009
Washington, DC

and a correction:

Obama noted that

The Torah commands, "That which is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow."

Not exactly. It's part of the Oral Torah.

The Written Torah has a verse "Love your neighbor as yourself".

What Obama quoted was the dictum of Hillel the Sage in The Babylonian Talmud, Shabbat 31a

It's easy to be correct if you have a better staff assistant.

What I Do on Saturday Nights

For the past dozen years or so (I really can't recall now), I participate in a shi'ur every Motzei Shabbat (Saturday nights for those unfamiliar with the Hebrew term).

First, we went through Mishna Middot. Then the Rambam Sefer Avodah. And now Sefer Shoftim.

The Rav is Yaakov Navon (second from right) and the present participants are (left to right) Tzvi Shavit, Mitch Meyers and yours truly.



(The wine and cake were on the occasion of Rav Navon's birthday. We don't drink every shi'ur).

A Jewess Midrash

Let's learn a bit of Torah.

In this week's Bar-Ilan Parsha sheet, To"r [Tovah Rivkah?] (+) Rachel Levmor, takes a decidedly unexpected unfeminist feminist postion on the story of Hagar's expulsion from Avraham's family.

Let's start with the basic text

as it is recorded in Genesis, Chapter 21:

:

9 And Sarah saw the son of Hagar the Egyptian, whom she had borne unto Abraham, making sport. 10 Wherefore she said unto Abraham: 'Cast out this bondwoman and her son; for the son of this bondwoman shall not be heir with my son, even with Isaac.' 11 And the thing was very grievous in Abraham's sight on account of his son. 12 And God said unto Abraham: 'Let it not be grievous in thy sight because of the lad, and because of thy bondwoman; in all that Sarah saith unto thee, hearken unto her voice; for in Isaac shall seed be called to thee. 13 And also of the son of the bondwoman will I make a nation, because he is thy seed.' 14 And Abraham arose up early in the morning, and took bread and a bottle of water, and gave it unto Hagar, putting it on her shoulder, and the child, and sent her away; and she departed, and strayed in the wilderness of Beer-sheba. 15 And the water in the bottle was spent, and she cast the child under one of the shrubs. 16 And she went, and sat her down over against him a good way off, as it were a bow-shot; for she said: 'Let me not look upon the death of the child.' And she sat over against him, and lifted up her voice, and wept. 17 And God heard the voice of the lad; and the angel of God called to Hagar out of heaven, and said unto her: 'What aileth thee, Hagar? fear not; for God hath heard the voice of the lad where he is. 18 Arise, lift up the lad, and hold him fast by thy hand; for I will make him a great nation.' 19 And God opened her eyes, and she saw a well of water; and she went, and filled the bottle with water, and gave the lad drink.

What bothers Ms. Levmor is that a close textual reading reveals that Hagar, the mother, physically distances herself from her child whereas Levmor expects that she would hold the lad and comfort him even as he is dying. A mother is there when the child is born and a mother should be there when he dies, if that is the case. She should be near, not far.

She even points out that whereas it is her voice we read about, And she sat over against him, and lifted up her voice, and wept, it is the lad's cry which is answered, And God heard the voice of the lad. But nowehere do we read that he cried out. Levmor even suggests that Hagar's cries were those that drowned out those of the child. In fact, she sits so far away, and sat herself down opposite him him a good way off, as it were a bow-shot - and in the Hebrew, there is a doubling of the distance:
הַרְחֵק כִּמְטַחֲוֵי קֶשֶׁת,
that is, two times a bowshot's distance, so that not only couldn't she see him but couldn't even hear him. Levmor insists this is not maternal behavior. Indeed, it is self-centered behavior.

Furthermore, whereas our text has it that she now strayed in the wilderness of Beer-sheba, previously, she was able to navigate herself fairly well, as it is recorded in Chapter 16, when she was first expelled from Sarai's household, she managed to find a water source:

6 But Abram said unto Sarai: 'Behold, thy maid is in thy hand; do to her that which is good in thine eyes.' And Sarai dealt harshly with her, and she fled from her face. 7 And the angel of the LORD found her by a fountain of water in the wilderness, by the fountain in the way to Shur.

Levmore continues in her exegis but I will stop here and add my own two Torah thoughts.

a) Avraham, for one, actually does exhibit paternal instincts when, in verse 11, we read: And the thing was very grievous in Abraham's sight on account of his son. It wasn't Hagar he was concerned about but his son. Therefore, G-d needed to intervene and instruct him to obey his wife's request despite his natural reaction to protect his own progeny no matter what.

b) In the Haftarah reading for this Shabbat, II Kings we read of a woman who couldn't conceive and was aided by the prophet Elisha to bear a son but then:

18 And when the child was grown, it fell on a day, that he went out to his father to the reapers. 19 And he said unto his father: 'My head, my head.' And he said to his servant: 'Carry him to his mother.' 20 And when he had taken him, and brought him to his mother, he sat on her knees till noon, and then died.

Note, she held the child on her knees, comforting him as he expired, supposedly. That is the behavior I think Levmor would have understood.

Shavua Tov.

=====================
UPDATE

(+)
Ruchie informs me "That’s toenet rabbanit = טוענת רבנית which means "pleader before a Rabbinical court".
Rachel Levmore, an old friend, is in charge of the agunot and mesuravot get department in the rabbanut".