Parshas Vezos HaBracha - a thought on the last Rashi in the Torah

“And there has never arisen a prophet in Israel like Moshe, whom God knew face to face. For all the signs and wonders that God sent him to perform in the land of Egypt, to Pharoah and to all his servants and to his entire land. And for all the strong hand and for the entire great display that Moshe performed in view of all of Israel.”

~ Devarim 34:10-12

In view of all of Israel. When he [Moshe] took the liberty of shattering the tablets before their eyes, as it is said “I shattered them before their eyes.” [Sifre, referencing Shemos 34:1]. The Holy One, Blessed is He, consented to his opinion as it is said “which you shattered” – [as if to say] “More power to you for shattering them!”

~ Rashi on Devarim 34:12

What are we to make of Rashi’s last note, on the last clause of the Torah, which appears to commend Moshe for shattering the two tablets God gave when he saw the golden calf? What is Rashi’s parting thought teaching us?

Perhaps it is this. There are times when each of us sets out to do a ‘great thing.’ We have only noble intentions, invest a lot of time in the effort, and the initial signs are very favorable. We continue on our mission and after many days and much investment, we turn around to discover that the conditions are not at all right for our project. If we try to advance our project, it may do more harm than good.

What do we do? Do we ignore reality and forge ahead anyway? We learn from Moshe, our greatest teacher, in the midst of one of his greatest projects, that as frustrating as it may be, sometimes you have to be prepared to shatter the tablets and start again.

Parshas Ha’azinu – A thought on the first Rashi

“Hearken, O heaven, as I declare and let the Earth hear the sayings of my mouth.”

~ Devarim 32:1

Hearken, O heaven. That I [Moshe] admonish the Israelites, so that you may serve as witnesses to the matter. For so I informed them, that you would be witnesses [see Devarim 30:19]. Similarly, “let the Earth hear.” Why did he designate the Heaven and the Earth to testify against them? Moshe said [to himself]: I am only mortal and tomorrow I may die. In case the Israelites declare ‘We never agreed to fulfill the covenant,’ who will refute them? He therefore designated, to testify against them, Heaven and Earth, witnesses who endure forever…

~ Rashi on Devarim 32:1

Can inanimate objects serve as witnesses? It seems from Rashi’s comment that they can. And this is not the only time in the Torah that an element of nature is designated as a ‘witness’ to the affairs of humanity. Another instance is in Bereshis, where Lavan states (after a heated argument with Jacob) about a monument and a mound of stones raised by Jacob and his sons: “This mound shall be a witness and the monument shall be a witness that I may not cross over to you past this mound, nor may you cross over to me past this mound and this monument for evil.” (31:52).

How do we understand these instances? I find it unlikely that these elements are being designated as actual witnesses, if for no other reason than the fact that it’d be rather difficult to obtain their testimony if it was ever needed. Rather, the speakers in both verses (Moshe in Devarim and Lavan in Bereshis) are using the term ‘witness’ in an effort to invest the elements with added symbolism that will trigger associations, in the future, in the minds of the listeners.

We do the same thing, for ourselves, in many ways. For example, we return from an enjoyable vacation with a memento (could be a stone from the beach or a pinecone from a forest) that, when we view it, reminds us of the ease and calm we felt during our getaway. People may look at their engagement rings (glorified rocks!) or wedding bands (molded metals!) and be reminded of the hope, love, and commitment they undertook at the start of their marriage.

On the first Shabbat of the New Year, it might be worthwhile to look around our homes and consider what (and how many) objects we have consciously set in our own paths, to serve as conscious reminders of our dedication to serve God’s will. Is there a leftover esrog from a prior year, a prized Tzedaka box, a spice box from the Olive Wood factory in Jerusalem, or something else? Do they still speak to you?  Perhaps, as we age, it is worthwhile to take stock of our witnesses, assess how well they are testifying, and see if some new witnesses are needed.

Parshas Nitzovim/VaYeilech – A thought on the first Rashi

“You stand this day, all of you, before the Lord your God; your tribal chiefs, your elders, and your officers, every man of Israel. Your young, your wives, and your convert who is within your camps; from the wood cutters to the water drawers.”

~ Devarim 29:9-10

You stand, this day. This teaches that Moshe gathered them [every one of the people] before the Holy One, may He be blessed, on the day he [Moshe] died, to introduce them into the covenant.

~ Rashi on Devarim 29:9  

The verse Rashi highlights, in his view, strikes a strong note of inclusiveness. Rashi’s comment resonates for me in two different very recent occurances in my life.

This past Friday a colleague in another department at work called to tell me that she was distressed to learn that I’d begun work to plan an event, which she would be asked to support, without first consulting her. I told her that I had consulted with her boss and was under the impression that he had advised her of this new activity. She was not placated by my reconstruction of the events. As I thought the matter over, it occurred to me that I had put this colleague in an uncomfortable spot by leaving her out of the loop; I had failed to be as inclusive in the decision-making process as I could have been.

Over the weekend I thought it would be a nice thing to invite guests for dinner on Sunday night, both to share the abundant leftovers we had from Shabbos and to help celebrate my daughter’s planned departure, the next day, for her year in Israel. I asked my wife who we could invite and she said: “Ask your daughter.” My initial instinct was to recoil at the added consultation required to set up a social engagement; after all, my wife was the only opinion I needed to consult for the past 18 years – why change now? But, of course, she was right. My daughter is now a young woman and it is a good measure of decency to include her view when making social plans.

Both episodes make me wonder, as I try to look back on this past year – were there other situations where I could have been, should have been, more inclusive and by failing to do so I left people feeling hurt, estranged, or anxious?

Parshas Ki Savo - A thought on the first Rashi

“When it happens that you come to the land that the Lord, your God, is giving you as territory and you inherit it and settle it.”

~ Devarim 26:1

When it happens that you come … and you inherit and settle it. This teaches that they were not obligated to bring the first fruits until they conquered the land and apportioned it.

~ Rashi on Devarim 26:1

Rabbi Avrohom Davis explains that we understand from Rashi’s comment that before the Jewish people finished their conquest and division of the land of Israel, Jews could eat the fruits and vegetables grown there without first bringing first fruits to Jerusalem.

How do we think the Jews of that era viewed their ‘freedom’ from the mitzvah of first fruits, during the interim period? They would have been well aware of the commandment to bring first fruits to Jerusalem, reiterated in this week’s parsha, and would know that the rule was only applicable after the conquest of Canaan was complete.

Perhaps some Jews at that time found the produce sweeter, because it came with fewer restrictions than (they knew) would apply later. Perhaps other Jews ate the fruit yet quietly pined for the conquest to be complete, so they could fully celebrate the bounty of the land by sanctifying a portion to thank God for His great kindnesses.

 

Which attitude do you relate to best? Are you quite comfortable when something happens and you are ‘free’ of certain restrictions in Jewish life? A great example of this, suggested by my teacher Rabbi Eli Reisman, would be when it rains on Succos and you are compelled to eat indoors; Are you quietly (or not so quietly) relieved? Or are you more akin to the almost-Bar Mitzvah boy, who (according to custom) starts putting on his teffilin weeks in advance of the big day, to show his eagerness for the mitzvah yet to arrive?

Parshas Ki Seitzei - a thought on one of the first Rashis

"If you should go to war against your enemies and the Lord your God puts them in your hand and you capture prisoners from them. And you see among the prisoners a beautiful woman; if you desire her, you may take her as your wife."

~ Devorim 21:10-11

You may take her as your wife. The Torah speaks only to go against the evil inclination, because if God would not permit her, he (the Jewish soldier) would live with her illicitly. But if he does marry her, he will ultimately hate her, as it is further stated: "If a man has two wives, etc. " [see 21:15] and ultimately he will father, with her, a wayward and rebellious son [see 21:18]. That is why these chapters adjoin one another.

~ Rashi on Devorim 12:11

Rashi's view is that the Torah grants permission to a Jewish soldier to marry a captivating captive only as a necessary but unfortunate (and ill-fated) concession to human nature. As I'm aware, this is not the only instance of the Torah  making such a concession. For example, it is the opinion of Rav Avraham Yitzchak HaKohen Kook that God granted Noah and his descendants permission to eat meat, after the Flood, (Bereshis 9:3) only as a last resort, in recognition that humankind had become desensitized to violence and could no longer restrain its desire for meat [see Nehama Leibowitz, Studies in Bereshis, p. 77].

These two instances are, at least, well within the realm of Torah-approved allowances to our less refined tendencies. Two questions we should ask ourselves, as we prepare for Rosh HaShana, are: What are the allowances we give ourselves that fall outside the realm of Torah-sanctioned concessions? And can we, perhaps, hold ourselves to a higher standard in the upcoming New Year?

Parshas Shoftim - a thought on the first Rashi

“Judges and police officers you shall appoint for yourself in all the cities that HaShem, your God, is giving you for all your tribes; they should judge the people (with) righteous judgment.”

~ Devorim 16:18

Judges and police officers. Judges – the magistrates who render legal decisions. Police officers – who compel the people to abide by their (the judges’) instructions by administering punishment, with clubs and whips, until they accept the judge’s decision.

~ Rashi on Devorim 16:18

Rashi’s comment on this verse suggests that, in an ideal situation, wherever there is an institution that adjudicates legal disputes there must also be a group charged with enforcing those decisions. Without such a pairing, judgment is a hollow exercise and justice becomes a mockery.

Adding to our understanding of this verse, the Seforno points out that the Gemara (Makos 7a) notes the use of the phrase “… in all your cities that HaShem, your God, is giving you for all your tribes” and uses it to qualify the command that you have judges and officers ‘in all your cities.” The Gemara instructs us that this imperative only applies in the lands that the Jewish people conquer within the Land of Israel. If the Jewish people go to war and win lands outside the Land of Israel, they only require judges and officers in every district but not in each city.”

Seforno’s comment, and the Gemara’s ruling, instructs us that in an area of greater holiness (the Land of Israel), greater efforts must be made to offer and administer justice while in an area of lesser holiness, efforts to insure justice need not be as comprehensive.

Having just entered the month of Elul, it is worth asking ourselves if we are making the greatest efforts in the areas of the greatest holiness in our own lives. Or perhaps our levels of vigilance and exactitude are not always aligned with our values. Consider these questions - What is the current balance in your bank account? What is the latest standing of your favorite baseball team (or political party)? What Torah idea did you learn or consider anew this week? To which mitzvah are you giving special attention this month?

If you can answer all four questions substantively, great! But if only two or three of these questions are relevant to you, which ones are they? And what does that say about you?

Parshas Re'ey - a thought on one of the first Rashis

“Look, I am placing before you today a blessing and a curse. The blessing, that (if) you heed the commandments of HaShem your God that I am commanding you today. And the curse, if you do not heed the commandments of HaShem your God and you veer from the course which I command you this day, to follow other gods which you did not know.”

~ Devarim 11:26-28

From the course which I command you this day, to follow etc. This teaches that anyone who worships idols has strayed from the entire course commanded to Israel. From here we learn that anyone who admits to idolatry denies the entire Torah.

~ Rashi on Devarim 11:28

Rashi’s explanation underscores the frightful gravity of the offense of worshipping gods beside HaShem, which is a viewed as a direct affront to God and a rejection of the entire Torah. This message is communicated repeatedly in Sefer Devarim (see, for instance, the reiteration of the Ten Commandments, Devarim 5:6-18, and later in our Parsha, 12:28-13:17).

This pointed injunction against the worshiping of other gods can prompt us to consider its correlates in interpersonal situations.

I’m confident that, if I asked what constitutes a similar unforgivable betrayal in a marriage, most people would answer “adultery.” If I considered what was the most painful betrayal for a child, it might be a situation where his/her parents violated his trust or acted in a way that showed they had no confidence in her skills or judgment.

In the same vein, what would be a painful betrayal of a good friend? Or a professional colleague you work with frequently? Or an aging, sometimes forgetful, and occasionally difficult parent? 

And if we accept that every potential offense exists on a continuum, from slight to severe, are there small betrayals we commit without thinking more commonly?

Our answers to these questions may differ, of course, as personalities and circumstances vary. The important thing is to ask ourselves the questions.