--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Torah Thoughts Relating To Current Events
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
An Occasional Series by Michael Freund of Raanana, Israel
Comments/Feedback/Subscribe: parsha_sheet@hotmail.com
1. Religion and Ethics
The Parsha opens with G-d telling Moshe ?And these are the statutes that you shall place before them? (Chap. 21, verse 1). The Torah details the laws regarding various matters such as Hebrew slaves, torts, murder, arson and theft. The Parsha also contains numerous moral directives, such as the obligation to help the poor, to judge court cases honestly and to return lost property.
The question: Last week?s Parsha concluded with a selection of laws regarding the construction of an altar for use in offering sacrifices to G-d, whereas this week?s Parsha opens with laws concerning day-to-day issues confronting society. What is the connection between the two?
The answer: Commenting on the opening verse of the Parsha, Rashi cites the Mechilta, which states that the two sets of laws are adjacent to one another to indicate that the Sanhedrin (the Rabbinical High Court) was to be seated next to the Sanctuary in the Temple in Jerusalem. This, says the Avnei Ezel (cited in the Maayanah Shel Torah), is to teach us that Judaism views the seemingly mundane laws of day-to-day life as being infused with sanctity. Just as the sacrifices performed in the Temple Sanctuary were a form of service to G-d, says the Avnei Ezel, so too are the statutes that guide the Jew in his daily affairs. Hence, the Sanhedrin was to be seated next to the Sanctuary, and the laws in this week?s Parsha adjoin those regarding the altar in last week?s Torah reading, to emphasize the connection between the two.
The lesson: Judaism has two components ? the ritual and the legal/ethical. We are obligated to put on tefillin (phylacteries) and we are required to be honest in our business dealings. We are supposed to say a blessing before and after eating, and we must give generously to charity. These two components go hand in hand and they encapsulate what Judaism requires of us. Sadly, there is a tendency among many people to overemphasize one at the expense of the other. Some take great pains to be ritually precise, while seemingly ignoring their ethical obligations. Others stress the ethics, but downplay the ritual. Yet, as we see from Rashi and the Avnei Ezel, the ritual and the ethical go together - they sit side by side, as symbolized by the Sanhedrin and the Sanctuary. Preferring one over the other distorts Judaism. Only by balancing the two, and giving each one equal weight, can one truly hope to personify all that Judaism stands for.
2. Medical Insurance for the Soul
The Parsha discusses a case in which two people are fighting and one strikes the other with his fist or with a stone, thereby causing him injury. The perpetrator is required to compensate the injured party for lost wages as a result of his being out of commission and he must also pay the medical bills, as the Torah states, ?VeRapoh YeRapeh [and he shall be healed]? (Chap. 21, verse 19).
The question: Why does the Torah use the seemingly repetitive language of ?VeRapoh YeRapeh? in the verse?
The answer: The Talmud in Tractate Baba Kamma (85a) says that this verse is the Biblical source for the permission given to doctors to heal sick people. Tosafot says that had the Torah used only one word instead of two, we might have thought that a doctor is permitted to heal only when the injury was caused by another person, since that is the context in which the verse appears. But in a case where a person takes sick by the hand of Heaven (for example, ?an act of G-d?), one might have mistakenly thought that a doctor would be forbidden from interfering (after all, it was G-d?s will that the person took ill). Thus, says Tosafot, the verse uses the double language of ?VeRapoh YeRapeh? to teach us that the doctor should heal people in such cases as well. Hence, we see that the doctor?s task is not to get too philosophical about why the injured person is not well ? rather, his obligation is to heal the sick, regardless of the cause behind it.
The lesson: For 2000 years, the Jewish people have suffered from the illness of exile. The malady of being expelled from one?s land has virtually always proven fatal to other nations throughout history. Severed from their homeland, the crucible of their formation, culture and identity, other exiled nations have faded away into the shadows of history. But the Jewish people kept alive their links with the homeland, the Land of Israel, carrying its memory with them wherever they went and never losing sight of their longing to return to it. In the past few centuries, one of the sharpest controversies to arise regarding this issue was: should the Jewish people actively take steps to bring the exile to an end or sit patiently and wait for G-d to redeem them? This argument hinges on several different issues, but one of its underpinnings is the philosophical question of whether or not we have the right to ?interfere? with G-d?s plan. If G-d sent us into exile, one might argue, then who are we to try and leave it? Better to wait for Him to act, for to do otherwise would be arrogance on our part. And yet, we see from the case above that the doctor should not refrain from ?interfering? to heal a sick patient, and a nation living in exile certainly qualifies as such. The upsurge in intermarriage and assimilation in Western countries is a clear sign that the patient (the Jewish people) is not doing well and requires immediate treatment to ensure its longevity. Thus, acting to end the exile is not interfering with G-d?s plan. Just the opposite. Taking steps to settle the Land of Israel and redeem the Jewish people are merely the application of much needed medicine to a patient sorely in need of therapeutic care. And that is exactly what G-d is asking of us all at this critical hour.
3. With Friends Like These?
The Parsha states that a person should not join together with a wicked person in a conspiracy to give false testimony (under Jewish law, testimony is considered valid only when it is given by two or more witnesses ? thus, joining the wicked person?s plot makes it possible for the testimony to be accepted in court). The Parsha says, ?do not proffer your hand with the wicked to be a false witness? (Chap. 23, verse 1).
The question: Why does the Torah speak of joining together with the wicked person in the plot rather than simply warning against giving false testimony?
The answer: The Torat Moshe (cited in the Maayanah Shel Torah) says that the Torah is teaching us an additional lesson: that one should not become overly friendly or involved with wicked people, as that will have the effect of granting them legitimacy in the eyes of others. If you are seen in the company of such a person, people will assume that he is honest and trustworthy, based on your association with him. Hence, one must be wary of becoming too mixed up with wicked people.
The lesson: Even as the peace process unravels seven years after the signing of the Oslo Accords, Yasser Arafat can look back with satisfaction on a major achievement: he has been transformed in the eyes of much of the world from a terrorist thug to a head of state. Across the globe, Arafat is welcomed as a statesman, thanks in no small part to the legitimacy conferred on him by the Israeli architects of Oslo. When they extended their hand to Arafat, the leaders of Israel irreparably altered his status, something that is now coming back to haunt Israeli policymakers. Had the Torat Moshe?s warning been heeded, and had Israel not chosen to associate with an unrepentant adversary, Arafat would not have found himself enjoying the legitimacy that he does today. And who knows how much suffering and bloodshed might otherwise have been averted.
Torah Thoughts Relating To Current Events
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
An Occasional Series by Michael Freund of Raanana, Israel
Comments/Feedback/Subscribe: parsha_sheet@hotmail.com
1. Religion and Ethics
The Parsha opens with G-d telling Moshe ?And these are the statutes that you shall place before them? (Chap. 21, verse 1). The Torah details the laws regarding various matters such as Hebrew slaves, torts, murder, arson and theft. The Parsha also contains numerous moral directives, such as the obligation to help the poor, to judge court cases honestly and to return lost property.
The question: Last week?s Parsha concluded with a selection of laws regarding the construction of an altar for use in offering sacrifices to G-d, whereas this week?s Parsha opens with laws concerning day-to-day issues confronting society. What is the connection between the two?
The answer: Commenting on the opening verse of the Parsha, Rashi cites the Mechilta, which states that the two sets of laws are adjacent to one another to indicate that the Sanhedrin (the Rabbinical High Court) was to be seated next to the Sanctuary in the Temple in Jerusalem. This, says the Avnei Ezel (cited in the Maayanah Shel Torah), is to teach us that Judaism views the seemingly mundane laws of day-to-day life as being infused with sanctity. Just as the sacrifices performed in the Temple Sanctuary were a form of service to G-d, says the Avnei Ezel, so too are the statutes that guide the Jew in his daily affairs. Hence, the Sanhedrin was to be seated next to the Sanctuary, and the laws in this week?s Parsha adjoin those regarding the altar in last week?s Torah reading, to emphasize the connection between the two.
The lesson: Judaism has two components ? the ritual and the legal/ethical. We are obligated to put on tefillin (phylacteries) and we are required to be honest in our business dealings. We are supposed to say a blessing before and after eating, and we must give generously to charity. These two components go hand in hand and they encapsulate what Judaism requires of us. Sadly, there is a tendency among many people to overemphasize one at the expense of the other. Some take great pains to be ritually precise, while seemingly ignoring their ethical obligations. Others stress the ethics, but downplay the ritual. Yet, as we see from Rashi and the Avnei Ezel, the ritual and the ethical go together - they sit side by side, as symbolized by the Sanhedrin and the Sanctuary. Preferring one over the other distorts Judaism. Only by balancing the two, and giving each one equal weight, can one truly hope to personify all that Judaism stands for.
2. Medical Insurance for the Soul
The Parsha discusses a case in which two people are fighting and one strikes the other with his fist or with a stone, thereby causing him injury. The perpetrator is required to compensate the injured party for lost wages as a result of his being out of commission and he must also pay the medical bills, as the Torah states, ?VeRapoh YeRapeh [and he shall be healed]? (Chap. 21, verse 19).
The question: Why does the Torah use the seemingly repetitive language of ?VeRapoh YeRapeh? in the verse?
The answer: The Talmud in Tractate Baba Kamma (85a) says that this verse is the Biblical source for the permission given to doctors to heal sick people. Tosafot says that had the Torah used only one word instead of two, we might have thought that a doctor is permitted to heal only when the injury was caused by another person, since that is the context in which the verse appears. But in a case where a person takes sick by the hand of Heaven (for example, ?an act of G-d?), one might have mistakenly thought that a doctor would be forbidden from interfering (after all, it was G-d?s will that the person took ill). Thus, says Tosafot, the verse uses the double language of ?VeRapoh YeRapeh? to teach us that the doctor should heal people in such cases as well. Hence, we see that the doctor?s task is not to get too philosophical about why the injured person is not well ? rather, his obligation is to heal the sick, regardless of the cause behind it.
The lesson: For 2000 years, the Jewish people have suffered from the illness of exile. The malady of being expelled from one?s land has virtually always proven fatal to other nations throughout history. Severed from their homeland, the crucible of their formation, culture and identity, other exiled nations have faded away into the shadows of history. But the Jewish people kept alive their links with the homeland, the Land of Israel, carrying its memory with them wherever they went and never losing sight of their longing to return to it. In the past few centuries, one of the sharpest controversies to arise regarding this issue was: should the Jewish people actively take steps to bring the exile to an end or sit patiently and wait for G-d to redeem them? This argument hinges on several different issues, but one of its underpinnings is the philosophical question of whether or not we have the right to ?interfere? with G-d?s plan. If G-d sent us into exile, one might argue, then who are we to try and leave it? Better to wait for Him to act, for to do otherwise would be arrogance on our part. And yet, we see from the case above that the doctor should not refrain from ?interfering? to heal a sick patient, and a nation living in exile certainly qualifies as such. The upsurge in intermarriage and assimilation in Western countries is a clear sign that the patient (the Jewish people) is not doing well and requires immediate treatment to ensure its longevity. Thus, acting to end the exile is not interfering with G-d?s plan. Just the opposite. Taking steps to settle the Land of Israel and redeem the Jewish people are merely the application of much needed medicine to a patient sorely in need of therapeutic care. And that is exactly what G-d is asking of us all at this critical hour.
3. With Friends Like These?
The Parsha states that a person should not join together with a wicked person in a conspiracy to give false testimony (under Jewish law, testimony is considered valid only when it is given by two or more witnesses ? thus, joining the wicked person?s plot makes it possible for the testimony to be accepted in court). The Parsha says, ?do not proffer your hand with the wicked to be a false witness? (Chap. 23, verse 1).
The question: Why does the Torah speak of joining together with the wicked person in the plot rather than simply warning against giving false testimony?
The answer: The Torat Moshe (cited in the Maayanah Shel Torah) says that the Torah is teaching us an additional lesson: that one should not become overly friendly or involved with wicked people, as that will have the effect of granting them legitimacy in the eyes of others. If you are seen in the company of such a person, people will assume that he is honest and trustworthy, based on your association with him. Hence, one must be wary of becoming too mixed up with wicked people.
The lesson: Even as the peace process unravels seven years after the signing of the Oslo Accords, Yasser Arafat can look back with satisfaction on a major achievement: he has been transformed in the eyes of much of the world from a terrorist thug to a head of state. Across the globe, Arafat is welcomed as a statesman, thanks in no small part to the legitimacy conferred on him by the Israeli architects of Oslo. When they extended their hand to Arafat, the leaders of Israel irreparably altered his status, something that is now coming back to haunt Israeli policymakers. Had the Torat Moshe?s warning been heeded, and had Israel not chosen to associate with an unrepentant adversary, Arafat would not have found himself enjoying the legitimacy that he does today. And who knows how much suffering and bloodshed might otherwise have been averted.