So much of Parshat Ki Tetzei centers on marriage, though not from a perspective we will discuss today. We no longer have “war brides” or polygamy, nor is virginity our primary concern in finding a partner. Rather, we will turn to the Sixth Aliyah, which begins “when a man marries a new wife he is not taken into the army, nor shall it impose upon him any manner; he shall be free to reside at his home for one year, and he shall bring joy to the wife he married.”[1] Our ancestors are given this law just as they are about to enter the land of Israel.

Why exempt one from battle who was just married? There are numerous servicemen and servicewomen in the United States who deploy soon after marrying, not granted this reprieve. In contemporary Israel, only women are exempt from service on account of marriage, not men.[2] What’s interesting to me is that in last week’s parsha, Shofetim, it states, “Whichever man has bethrothed a woman and not married her, let him go home lest he die in battle and another marry her.”[3] That section deals with unfinished business, as opposed to this one, which talks about a consummated process.

The Talmud points out that the woman in our parsha is called אשה חדשה, a new wife, and that it does not matter whether she has been married before.[4] Rashi asserts that the point is not the wife’s status but rather a man bringing joy to his wife.[5] I would add that because this woman has just married, for her to be left by her husband would be an act of exceptional cruelty, especially if he disappears, making her an agunah, or “chained women,” forbidden to move on to someone else. There’s also something to be said for the fact that a husband and wife need to learn to live with each other before they separate for any length of time.

Nowadays we have the honeymoon as a week, maybe two, for the bride and groom to be alone and celebrate together. The Torah, in contrast, teaches us to have a yearlong honeymoon with the special custom of dipping challah into honey. Just as we dip challah in honey on Rosh Hashanah for a sweet new year, so too do we dip for the entire first year of marriage for a sweet new life together. There’s also a tradition to call the couple hatan and kalah (bride and groom) during their entire first year of marriage, to emphasize the newness of their relationship. I’ve also heard (though found no basis for it) a tradition of the couple not separating from one another during the first year of marriage-that a wife would actually accompany her husband to work! Of course this is impractical nowadays with two-income families-not to mention that the couple might just get tired of one another if they’re never able to be apart.

Why emphasize this today at the auf ruf of a couple who is not getting married until July? I would argue that the longer one is together the more difficult it can be to rekindle that sense of newness and freshness. That’s why our parsha teaches that one who has recently married needs time to develop the relationship with his/her partner before going off. The Torah recognizes that without a solid foundation, the marriage will not have what it needs to succeed amidst life’s challenges. The joy of the Shanah Rishonah where the focus can be on just the couple, creates a basis that will weather any storm or surprise. This is evidence that the purpose of marriage in Judaism is not merely procreation but rather for a couple to bring joy to one another.

Sam and Heather, I know you’ve succeeded to bring joy to your families this morning. It was such a mitzvah that you joined us here to celebrate your aufruf, the synagogue which Sam’s grandfather, Bernie Berko, helped build and shape, and that you were called up to the Torah that he dedicated in memory of his father. We wish you nothing but happiness and bliss as you continue to strengthen your relationship, bringing joy to one another as רעים אהובים, loving companions. Mazal Tov on your aufruf! So that we can celebrate together as a congregation, I ask that we turn to Page 838 and continue responsively.

[1] Deuteronomy 24:5

[2] Section 39 of the Israeli Security Service Law

[3] Deuteronomy 20:7

[4] Sotah 44a

[5] Rashi on Deuternomy 25:5 ושמח

Let us take a moment of silence to remember all who perished in 9/11, including Glen Winnick, who had his Bar Mitzvah at the Jericho Jewish Center, served as a volunteer fire fighter and worked at the World Trade Center.

I put on the headphones and slowly stepped into the room. I felt the cold metal in my hand as I carefully gripped the handle. I steadied myself, pushing my finger back to the trigger and saw the target. I raised the pistol, aimed and fired. The guy next to me had what looked like a semiautomatic machine gun and kept firing round after round. After I finished my ammo, I was shaking. I spoke to the congregant who brought me and said, “this is such a foreign experience to me.” He replied, “going to a shooting range in Arizona is like eating a deli sandwich in New York.”

This was my one experience with guns. For some gun use is recreational. For others, however, gun use is pathological. By the time I finish this talk, 15 people will die from guns. The fact that over 300 people are shot each day demonstrates that we have a broken process that must be changed. It’s far too easy to obtain a firearm and use it for destructive purposes.

One need only think of the shootings in Charleston, San Bernadino, Paris, Orlando, Sandy Hook Columbine, and all those that have not made the national news. I imagine that each of us decries these shootings and felt our heart wrenched for the innocent victims. Whenever we hear of innocent blood being spilled, our hearts are torn and we can get full of anger and outrage. We worry about our lives and those of our loved ones and we strive to protect ourselves. That’s why we have increased security for this year’s high holidays. At the same time, we want to have a sense of healing and wholeness, some semblance of an answer to this senselessness.

This summer I read an article by Rabbi Joshua Flug entitled “Gun Control in Halachah”[1] in Jewish Action, the magazine of the Orthodox Union. Rabbi Flug begins with next week’s parsha, which states that one may not place hazards in his/her home.[2] Rambam, or Maimonides, a 12th century physician for among others the Sultan, asserts that any potentially lethal hazard must be removed from one’s possession.[3]

There are different opinions as to whether one can bring a gun into shul on Shabbat. The Talmud records a debate between Rabbi Eliezer and other rabbis over whether a weapon counts as carrying. While the rabbis assert that it does, Rabbi Eliezer proclaims that a weapon is an adornment to one’s clothing, like jewelry, and therefore is permitted.[4] The Shulchan Aruch states that some forbid entering a synagogue with a long sword because a synagogue lengthens the days of life through prayer whereas a sword shortens them.[5] However, Mishnah Berurah cites Eliyahu Rabbah which states that one can bring a sword as long as it is covered.[6] Of course a sword is different than a gun, so we need to go to the modern Poskim, rabbinic decisors. The Tzitz Eliezer states that one can bring a gun to shul as long as the bullets are taken out, for then it no longer resembles a weapon.[7]

But is this really the final word? What do we do when a terrorist enters our house of worship? I remember too well the shooting at a Sikh Temple outside of Milwaukee as well as the murder of African Americans at Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church in Charleston. We also remember bombings of Jewish institutions throughout the world, in Istanbul, Buenos Aries, Atlanta, Jerusalem to name a few.

I’m sure we have different views on guns, yet I imagine we agree that these senseless acts of violence need to stop. There’s a group called Rabbis Against Gun Violence, of which I am a member. In June after the Orlando massacre, a book was written for which rabbis were welcome to submit essays, poems or thoughts. Here is what I wrote, called “Two Worlds”:

 

In which world will my daughter grow up?

The world in which people are loved for who they are

Or the world in which people are hated for being different?

 

In which world will my daughter grow up?

The world of open-mindedness and compassion

Or the world of prejudice and racism?

 

In which world will my daughter grow up?

The world in which we work together

Or the world in which we grow apart?

 

In which world will my daughter grow up?

The world of self-fulfillment and happiness

Or the world of frustration and anger?

 

In which world will my daughter grow up?

The world where guns are melted down to make building tools

Or the world where guns are used for wanton acts of violence?

 

I will do my part to ensure

That my daughter grows up in the world of embracing others

Loving all people regardless of race, religion and sexual orientation

And pray that the world in which she will live

Will no longer know the horror of these shootings.

 

We need to act to ensure a better future, one where people are taught love not hate, one where there is room for those who look different or are of a different race or religion. Obviously I’m preaching to the choir. However, I believe that healing begins with oneself, letting go of any prejudices or animosity that we feel and striving to bring forth a world filled with love and compassion. This is easier said than done in our world which too often has violence and senseless hatred, yet if we work hard to teach the next generation kindness and acceptance, we have a chance to bring it forward. As Rabbi Shalom Noach Borozovsky teaches in his book Netivot Shalom, we cannot be another, only ourselves, and we must use our full self to engage in תקון עולם, repair of the world.[8]

Almighty G-d, let us pray for all the victims of the shootings. May we be vigilant against those who seek to do us harm while trying to bring goodness and healing to those who have experienced tragic losses. Let us never take life for granted, striving to live each day with a sense of wholeness and purpose even when newspaper articles, the internet and the television seem to be focusing on violence and divisiveness. G-d, help us to do everything we can to work constructively to repair the shards of emptiness and desolation in our world, and in so doing, we must do our part to bring healing. May we protect ourselves while concurrently praying for the day when “men shall beat their swords into plowshares and spears into pruning hooks.”[9]  In your name רפאך, the healer, we pray, Amen.

[1] “Jewish Action,” Summer 2016.

[2] Deuteronomy 22:8

[3] Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Rotzeach 11:4

[4] Mishnah Shabbat 6:4

[5] Shulchan Aruch 151:6

[6] Mishnah Berurah 151:22

[7] Rabbi Eliezer Waldenberg, Tzitz Eliezer 10:18

[8] Netivot Shalom, Parshat Lech Lecha

[9] Isaiah 2:4

See this video about all the great things happening at the Jericho Jewish Center.

A Place for You to Call Home

Have you ever wished that someone would just do what you asked of them? Perhaps it is an obstinate child or a friend who won’t take your advice. Have you threatened to punish the person for his/her disobedience? A familiar passage from the end of our Torah reading should come to light.

The sixth Aliyah in Parshat Eikev has become the second paragraph of the Shema. It begins by stating that if the Israelites listen to and follow G-d’s commandments, specifically when they are living in the land of Israel, they will be rewarded with rain in its proper time as well as flourishing crops. In contrast, if they disobey, there will be no rain. The commandments are supposed to be bound on our hands and between our eyes (the Tefillan) and inscribed on the doorposts of our homes and our gates (the Mezuzah).

This passage, at the center of our worship, has troubled many, including the rabbis, who stated צדיק ורע לו רשע וטוב לו, “the righteous suffer and the evil prosper.”[1] Because of this, the Reform Siddur has excised this paragraph of the Shema and the Reconstructionist offered an alternative section about blessings that will befall our people when they enter the land of Israel.[2] The question is just because there are examples liturgy?

In the Conservative Movement, rather than removing passages which seem incongruous with contemporary life, we keep them in and try to reinterpret them. I truly believe that our performing mitzvot contributes to improving society. Our taking one day out of a week to rest recharges our batteries, making us better parents, employees and friends. Following the commandments to look after those most vulnerable in our society helps protect those who have no advocates, strengthening them to hopefully one day be in a position of self-sufficiency. Our inviting people who have nowhere to go to Rosh Hashanah dinner or Yom Kippur breakfast not only engenders goodwill but also motivates them to “pay it forward” and continue to look out for others.

Even if we do not always see the manifestations of justice in the world, we must strive to believe in a G-d who is just, who wants our betterment and for us to do what we can to strengthen those who need support. A Talmudic statement reads מה המקום נקרא רחום וחנון אף אתה  הוי רחום וחנון, “Just as G-d is compassionate and merciful, so too must you be compassionate and merciful.”[3] The passage continues that we must follow every one of G-d’s 13 attributes because we are commanded to “walk in G-d’s ways”[4] and as G-d is called all of these things so too must we emulate G-d.

What it means for us to listen to G-d’s commandments is not just a matter of obedience but also to take on the opportunity to emulate G-d in providing for those who have needs. The people of Israel are viewed as   אגודה אחת, a collective bundle. If one of us is suffering, all of us are suffering. We therefore must ensure that we are the best people we can be, as we are emissaries of G-d working to make the world a better place. In that vein, all of us will have the crops that we need, the resources that we require in our proper time. Let us stop relying on G-d to provide for those in our midst and take it upon ourselves to contribute to creating a just society. In that vein the second paragraph of the Shema remains relevant to us, one which must be said and acted on by us at least twice a day.

[1] Babylonian Talmud Berachot 7a

[2] Deuteronomy 28:1-6 in Kol HaNeshamah

[3] Sifrei Eikev 49

[4] Deuteronomy 26:17

Once again we find ourselves reading the Ten Commandments this Shabbat. Deuteronomy means deutero nomos, or second word, and it is often a repetition of what came before. However, there are some key differences between this version of the Ten Commandments and the one we have in Exodus, and I’d like us to look at why they are different. In Deuteronomy Moses says he will serve as the people’s intermediary because they were afraid and would not go up to the mountain an account of the great fire.[1] We do have a parallel to this in Exodus, where the Israelites tell Moses, “You speak to us and we will obey; but let not G-d speak to us, lest we die.”[2] However, prior to that Moses says to G-d
“The people cannot come up to Sinai, for You warned us, saying ‘put boundaries around the mountain and sanctify it.”[3] Why would Moses say in Deuteronomy that the Israelites had an option to ascend and chose not to when in Exodus he asserts that G-d forbade them from ascending?

Perhaps another difference between the texts will shed light on this. In Exodus G-d is proclaiming the words, whereas in Deuteronomy it is Moses. According to Midrash, the people heard the first commandment from G-d and could not take it-their souls departed from them. After the angels revived them, G-d said the second commandment, and the Israelites’ souls departed again. Finally they pleaded with Moses to say the rest of the commandments, and he did so. This is one source for the 613 commandments, for the gematria of the word תורה is 611, corresponding to the 611 commandments that Moses taught them, whereas the additional 2 corresponds to the commandments they heard directly from G-d.[4]

The next difference of note is that the Exodus text takes place at Mount Sinai, whereas the Deuteronomy text occurs at Horev. Ibn Ezra responds to this conundrum by stating that Horev is just another name for Sinai.[5] However, perhaps Horev was a different place where the Israelites made a covenant with G-d before accepting the commandments. Moses is speaking to the next generation of Israelites here (as the ones at Sinai had already died in the desert) so he is emphasizing that this covenant was not only with that generation but to those that followed. Further illustrating this point is that the commandments are referred to in Exodus as d’varim,[6] or statements, just referring to those words alone, whereas in Deuteronomy Moses refers to hukim v’mishpatim, [7] an inclusive term for all of the commandments. Moses is now addressing the Israelites with all of the commandments so that they will observe them when they enter the Land of Israel.

Now we examine the content of the commandments themselves. The first major change (besides just the absence of a “vav”) is in the fourth commandment, where in Exodus it says zachor (remember) whereas in Deuteronomy is says shamor (observe).[8] The well-known Midrash to this is that G-d said both words at the same time, something which the mouth cannot say and the ear cannot hear. After all, this is G-d saying the words, and G-d had the power to communicate in ways that we as mere humans cannot. We refer to this in Lecha Dodi when we proclaim שמור וזכור בדבור אחד, ‘observe’ and ‘remember’ were said with one word. The next major difference is that the passage in our parsha focuses on the importance of one’s slaves resting on the Sabbath day because we were slaves in the land of Egypt.[9] It thus ties our redemption from slavery to our giving our slaves a respite from labor on the Sabbath. While we no longer have slaves, this same law would apply to our servants as well. In contrast, the Exodus text has our resting on the Sabbath as an act of imitatio dei, following in G-d’s example of resting on the Sabbath.

The next change of note comes in the ninth commandment, where in Exodus the word שקר is used for not being a false witness whereas in our portion the word  שואis used. שוא was previously used in the third commandment for not taking G-d’s name in vain. The Yerushalmi takes a similar line of thought as to what we previously discussed, stating that the words שקר ושוא were both said at the same time.[10]

Finally we reach the tenth commandment, which uses the word תחמוד, or “covet,” when referring to one’s neighbor’s house. However, in our parsha it uses תתאוה, speaking about an inappropriate desiring, when referring to one’s neighbor’s wife, as opposed to Exodus, which uses תחמוד again. The Torah Temimah indicates that desiring leads to coveting which leads to taking by force.[11] Hence, one cannot even have desirous thoughts about one’s neighbor’s wife. Generally Judaism does not penalize people for their thoughts but here an extra fence or precaution is taken to prevent someone from engaging in an inappropriate act.

Why so many differences in the two sets of 10 commandments-especially if the tablets were stored in the Ark which followed the Israelites throughout their journeys? It appears to me that the differences indicate that one should not place too much import on these commandments. It is true that they are the basis for creating a just society, but they are not the be all and end all. This is the reason why the recitation of the 10 commandments was taken out of our daily liturgy, as people were ascribing too much import to these commandments and not all the other aspects of living Judaism. We should learn from this that while we stand for these commandments and relive their majesty each time they are read, we cannot stop there but rather must utilize it as a base point for increasing our observance and turning to all of the mitzvot. As we turn towards the coming year 5777, let us determine how we want to strengthen our Jewish observance in the year ahead. How do we want to make Shabbat, Kashrut, Prayer or Hagim more integral parts of our lives?

[1] Deuteronomy 5:5

[2] Exodus 20:16

[3] Exodus 19:23

[4] Babylonian Talmud Makkot 24a

[5] Ibn Ezra on Deuteronomy 5:2

[6] Exodus 20:1

[7] Deuteronomy 4:45

[8] Mechilta Exodus 20:3

[9] Deuteronomy 5:14-15

[10] Yerushalmi Nedarim 3:2

[11] Torah Temimah on Exodus, Page 265

One of my favorite streets in Jerusalem is Emek Refaim in the German Colony. I lived off of it when I studied at Pardes and the Conservative Yeshiva, and I loved going out on Saturday night to the restaurants-especially Burgers Bar. Emek Refaim is generally taken as meaning “valley of the ghosts” but an alternative meaning is “valley of the giants,” and it is that on which I want to focus today. Og King of Bashan, who was killed in Parshat Hukkat, is described in this week’s portion as the only survivor of the Refaim.[1] The Refaim were a group of giants who lived during biblical times. They were larger than any other people-as we learned in Tractate Soferim, Og was so big that he could hide Abraham’s feet in the palm of his hand, and Abraham himself was the height of 74 men![2]

What happened to the Refaim? In Genesis,[3] King Chedarlaomer waged war against the Refaim and killed them all, except for one refugee[4] who told Abraham of the destruction and of how his nephew Lot was captured-and that refugee is said to be Og.[5] Abraham made Og into his servant and there is even an account of Og being Eliezer who went down to find a wife for Isaac.[6] A different account has Og surviving the flood by sitting on one of the wooden planks in the ark after promising Noah and his sons that he would serve them forever.[7]

Where in this story did things go wrong, where Og became a king who waged war against Israel during its journey in the desert? Midrash Rabbah presents a different account-that Og had told Abraham about the capture of Lot so that he would die in battle, at which point Og could marry Sarah.[8] It appears that Pharaoh and Avimelech were not the only two jealous of Abraham’s marriage to Sarah. It was therefore quite to Og’s surprise when Abraham can back unscathed from his defeat of Chedarlaomer, and Og would from that point on be at war with the descendants of Abraham.

In addition to Og surviving from among the Rephaim, the Torah describes him as having an iron bed which can still be found in Rabbat B’nei Amon and which was 9 cubits (13.5 feet) long and 4 cubits (6 feet) wide. According to Midrash, when Og was a boy placed in a crib, he broke through the wood and hence needed iron to sustain his massive frame.[9] He was certainly a giant of a man.

Why should we care about this? After all, Og had become an enemy of our people so his massive size should not be described in such great detail. The Midrash states that Og’s giant nature needed to be described to show the greatness of Moshe in defeating him.[10] Similarly, many verses are given to describing Goliath in detail in order to show the greatness of David in being able to defeat him. This is why G-d had told Moses אל תירא אותו “Do not fear him,”[11] as you have the ability to defeat him. Through faith in G-d, Moses was able to defeat this giant and conquer his land.

As we prepare for Tisha B’Av this evening and tomorrow, the day on which we recount the destruction of both our Temples, our expulsion from Spain and all the other calamities that befell our people, we need to take a moment to have the faith of Moses that through trust in G-d we will eventually prevail over those who seek to do us harm. If the giant Og could have been defeated, how much more so can we defeat our adversaries. We also have to keep in mind the possibility that people are not always who they appear to be. According to our tradition, Og began as a “gentle giant” and full-fledged member of the household of Abraham. It’s only later on that he turned against our people. As vigilant as we are and as we must be against our enemies let us also keep in mind the possibility of their repentance and turning back to join with our way of life.

[1] Deuteronomy 3:11

[2] Tractate Soferim 21:9

[3] Genesis 14:5

[4] Genesis 14:13

[5] Midrash Tanhuma 153:25 and Talmud Niddah 61a

[6] Masechet Soferim 21:9

[7] Pirkei D’Rebbe Eliezer 23

[8] Bereshit Rabbah 48:8

[9] Devarim Rabbah

[10] Lekah Tov

[11] Numbers 21:34

As the father of a young daughter, I often look to tradition to find qualities that are empowering to women. A great example comes from this week’s portion. The daughters of Zelophehad, a man whom we have never heard about before this portion, stand before Moses and ask for a share in their father’s inheritance. They state that their father died in the wilderness not out of an act of rebelling (such as that of Korah) but rather from his own sin, a sin which is not specified.[1] Zelophehad’s daughters asked for a portion in their father’s inheritance, as there are no sons. Moses was not sure what to do, one of only a handful of times when he turns to G-d to adjudicate. G-d tells Moses to grant Zelophehad’s daughters their father’s inheritance. We learn that a man who has no sons transfers his inheritance to his daughters.[2]

There was a concern that the land would pass from the hands of one tribe to another and thus one tribe could gain land from another. Our concerns are laid to rest when we learn at the end of the Book of Numbers that Zelophehad’s daughters married within the tribe and hence the land remained within the holdings of Manasseh.[3] Nevertheless, I find it revolutionary that women were allowed to own property in the Bible. The biblical idea was that women would pass from the domain of their fathers to the domain of their husbands, yet this is one example (another is a widow) where women were able to inherit property from a loved one.

The reason given for the inheritance to pass on to the daughters is so that the father’s name will live on. If it went to another tribesman, the father’s portion of land will be absorbed in another family, and his identity will be lost. We often see in the Torah that genealogies are listed in accordance with one’s family, the importance of the משפחה as a unit. It therefore makes sense that one’s family’s holdings must continue.

Some follow the tradition of Beit Hillel, striving to have one son and one daughter. I have no doubt that Zelophehad, even though he lived well before the time of Hillel, strove to do just that, and instead he ended up with 5 beautiful daughters. These daughters, unlike many women in the Bible, are referred to by their names. They also merited going before our great leader Moses, making a request and having that request granted not by Moses but by G-d Himself! What a great honor to be given this opportunity to speak before Moses.

I think part of the merit of the daughters was in how they handled themselves. First they drew near to Moses, not making their request from afar or through the grapevine but by approaching Moses directly. Then they stood before Moses, demonstrating to him the respect that he deserved. Next they gave background about their father, indicating that he was not one of the rebels against Moses. Then they asked a question regarding the inheritance, not for the sake of their own benefit but for their father’s. Finally they requested an inheritance-not necessarily the entire land, but a holding “amongst their father’s kinsmen.”[4] With such a thoughtful and gentle approach, how could they be denied?

The lesson we can learn from this is that when we want to get something, we need to approach someone in the right way. First we need to go face-to-face rather than relying on email, a text, a tweet or a secondary messenger. Second, we must ensure that the person has necessary background information regarding the situation. Third, it is important to indicate that the benefit that we want to receive is not just our own but rather that of others. Finally, we make the request but we do so not in a forceful, vindictive way but rather gentle and assertive. Because Zelophehad’s daughters became close (תקרבנה) to Moses, he was drawn close (ויקרב) to them when he brought their case before G-d.

Zelophehad’s daughters have much to teach us about how to achieve what we want, even if such action is unprecedented, in a calm, thoughtful and thorough way. Let us learn from their example and make it our own, conquering whatever challenges we face along our way.

[1] Rabbi Akiva posits that Zelophehad is the one who gathered wood on Shabbat, a position which is rebuked by Rabbi Ishmael.

[2] Numbers 27:8

[3] Numbers 26:10-13

[4] Numbers 27:4

Who was Bilam Ben Be’or? On one hand he blessed Israel three times, one of which became part of our liturgy every time we enter a synagogue, מה טובו אהלך יעקב משכנותך ישראל, “How great are your tents O Jacob, your dwelling place O Israel.” On the other hand, he was a mercenary prophet hired by King Balak to curse Israel. Last year I spoke about how Bilam was meant to sanctify G-d’s name but instead desecrated it. This year I want to go more into the character of Bilam to determine the type of person he was.

From our parsha it does not appear that Bilam is a bad guy. He will only go with Balak with G-d’s permission and he blesses our ancestors rather than cursing them because that’s what G-d wants. However, what do we do with Parshat Matot[1] two weeks from today when we read “and Bilam the son of Be’or they killed with sword?” If Bilam was such a great guy, why would we have killed him along with the five Midianite kings? One interpretation is that Bilam had engaged in sorcery, forbidden even to non-Jews in accordance with the seven Noachide laws and punishable by the sword.[2]

Another interpretation is that Bilam tricked Israel. The Talmud teaches that Bilam recognized that he could not curse the Israelites because G-d wouldn’t allow him to. Therefore, he seduced them with the Midianite women, and they succumbed at Baal Pe’or, which resulted in 24,000 Israelites dying from a plague. Bilam went to receive an award for causing their destruction at which point Israel saw him and killed him.[3] Others say that the rulers of Midian turned on Bilam and killed him for his sorcery.[4]

However, the story gets more fascinating when considering the interpretation of Rabbi Yonatan.[5] He stated that Pinhas saw Bilam, the instigator of Baal Pe’or, and rushed to kill him. When Bilam the sinner saw Pinhas the Kohen pursuing Bilam from behind, he did a sorcery trick and floated in the air.  Immediately Pinhas mentioned the great, holy name, floated after him, grabbed him by his head and lowered him to the ground.  He pulled out a sword and sought to kill him.  Bilam opened his mouth with words of supplication and said to Pinhas “If you allow me to live, I swear to you that all of the days that I live I will not curse your nation.”  Pinhas replied to him, “Aren’t you Lavan the Aramean that you wanted to cut off Yakov our father and you went down to Egypt on account of trying to destroy his seed? After they left Egypt, you provoked them with evil Amalek, and now you have surely provoked to curse them, and since you saw that they will not be moved by your deeds, and you did not accept the words of God, you gave evil counsel to Balak to put his daughters at the crossroads to entice the Israelites, and as a result of this  24,000 of them fell.  Because of this, there is no way for you to continue to live,” and Pinhas pulled his sword from its sheath and killed Bilam.

Is it really fair to blame Bilam for Israel’s downfalls? Why does Balak get off scot-free, merely fading from the scene whereas Bilam is the one of whom an example was made? The lesson here is that the prophet is punished not for being a mercenary but because his actions led to the downfall of our ancestors. He kept trying until he was successful. Evidence of this is in Rashi’s comment “He (Bilam) set upon Israel and exchanged his craft for theirs, for they (Israel) are only victorious through verbal expression and through prayer and supplication.  He came and took their craft to curse them verbally.  So they came to him by exchanging their craft for the craft of the nations, who come with sword, as it says (Genesis 27:40) “You shall live by your sword.”[6] Bilam had seen that fighting the Israelites would not work, for they had already defeated the great armies of Sihon and Og. Therefore, he needed to speak against them. When that did not work, he got the Midianites to seduce them and turn them away from G-d. He was so determined to bring down the Israelites that he himself had to be brought down.

Where does this leave us? We are commanded to be like Aaron, to love peace and pursue peace. This does not mean to love the concept of peace but to actively pursue it in every action. Bilam represents the antithesis of this, one who loved to oppose our people and eagerly and craftily pursued ways to do so. That is why he had to be brought down.

When we are in pursuit of a philosophy or ideology, we cannot blindly run towards it, pursuing it at any cost, but rather we must be reflective of whether or not it is in our best interest. We cannot be like Bilam, who refused to see all the signs that he was going in the wrong direction, even his obstinate donkey, which instead of stepping back and reflecting on his actions blindly pursued the same course. Let us instead take the time to think about our motivations and our emotions. Are we trying to avoid someone because of feelings of enmity towards him/her? Do we hate someone because of a petty grievance? What signs are we missing that can teach us to utilize this negative energy for positive purposes? Let us also recognize that our talents come from G-d, unlike Bilam who used his prophetic abilities to serve his own ends. Ken Yhi Ratzon, may it be our will to do so.

[1] Numbers 31:8

[2] Sanhedrin 56b, retold in Baal HaTurim’s comment on Numbers 31:8

[3] Sanhedrin 106a

[4] Malbim on Numbers 31:8

[5] As told in Targum Yonatan on Numbers 31:8

[6] Rashi on Numbers 31:8

One of the strangest sections of the Torah appears this week. Moses and Aaron are challenged again, the people proclaiming “there is no food or water, and we are disgusted with this rotten bread.”[1] The response from G-d is to set against the people fiery snakes to bite them. According to Rashi the fire was venom which burned the people it bit.[2] Rashi views this punishment as an act of מדה כנגד מדה, a measure-for-measure punishment: as the snake was smitten for speaking wickedly, it is fitting that it punishes the people who spoke wickedly.  Likewise, as the people who complained about manna, which tasted like anything they wanted, were punished by the animal for which everything tastes the same. [3]

We know from the beginning of the Torah that snakes are not endearing animals. We have the trickster snake which entices Eve to eat the fruit in the Garden of Eden. We have Moses’ rod turning into a snake which Rashi takes as a rebuke for Moses doubting G-d.[4] Now we have snakes afflicting the Israelites. What’s even more bizarre is that the when the Israelites cry out to G-d, He tells Moses to construct a fiery seraph[5] and hang it on a pole and when those bitten look at it they will recover. Moses follows G-d’s command, making a copper snake, a נחש נחשת, which healed our ancestors of their afflictions.

Why create a serpent to look at? Isn’t this a form of idolatry? Why not tell the Israelites to pray to G-d? As a matter of fact the Mishnah[6] does just that, proclaiming “at such time as the Israelites directed their thoughts on high and kept their hearts in subjection to their Father in Heaven, they were healed; otherwise they died.” Similarly the Zohar[7] states “as soon as the victim turns his eyes and sees the likeness of the serpent, he becomes filled with awe and prays to G-d, knowing that this was the punishment that he deserved.”

However, are these serpents really a sign of G-d rather than of an alternative deity? While the original intent might be for the serpent to be a sign for one to turn to G-d, we see later in the Bible that it became viewed as a separate deity. We learn that King Hezekiah destroyed “the brazen serpent that Moses had made for in those days the children of Israel made offerings to it; and it was called Nehushtan.”[8] The Torah does not give a name to the serpent presumably because it was a tangible emanation of G-d. By turning to it in repentance, our ancestors were healed from their snakebites. As we learn from the Talmud,[9] it was not the serpent that healed the Israelites but rather their looking up and submitting themselves to G-d. However, over time the serpent became viewed as a deity on its own, having been given a name and receiving its own offerings.

Was this snake ever meant to promote worship of our G-d or was it taken from a religion who worshipped the snake? While we can speculate about the origin of the snake, it is clear that snakes have played a vital role in our sacred text. The first reference to the snake is that it was cleverer  ( ערום) than any other animal[10]. Although its cleverness would prove to be its undoing, the snake has remained a key figure in our tradition. The same seraph, or winged, fiery snake described in our sedra, becomes one of the classifications of angels up in heaven. The seraphim are the angels that cry out קדוש קדוש קדוש ה צבאות מלא כל הארץ כבודו-Holy Holy Holy is the LORD of Hosts; the entire earth is filled with his glory![11] These seraphim maintain a lofty place in the celestial realms as messengers of G-d and as angels which proclaim G-d’s greatness. They represent what the serpent was supposed to be before its fall in the Garden of Eden: an intelligent, exalted creature of high magnitude.

Things are not always as they appear prima facie. The snake of the Garden of Eden is a messenger of G-d, sent not to give into temptation. The snakes which bite the people are also messengers of G-d to be grateful for what you have and not take it for granted. The snake, the animal which punishes the people, also saves them from death, for G-d can use any creature or any representation as a means through which to bring about salvation. It is this lesson that we need to remember: nothing is good or bad per se; what’s important is what it represents at any given moment in time. We need to remember that everything comes from G-d and can be used for good or for bad. The snake can represent G-d’s great power, messenger of G-d, or become worshipped in and of itself, devoid of the Almighty. We need to keep it as the former, a symbol of G-d’s great power.

[1] Numbers 21:5

[2] Rashi on Numbers 21:6

[3] Ibid

[4] Rashi on Exodus 4:3

[5] A snake with wings, taken by our tradition to be one of the types of angels.

[6] Mishnah Rosh Hashanah 3:5

[7] Zohar Shelach Lecha 175

[8] 2 Kings 18:4

[9] Rosh Hashanah 29a

[10] Genesis 3:1

[11] Isaiah 6:3

One of the most common refrains in the Torah after a punishment is enacted is ובערת הרע מקרבך that you shall “sweep out evil from your midst.”[1] It’s not uncommon to find sinners who receive the ultimate punishment: death. At the same time, there is a discrepancy between this week’s portion and last week’s in terms of how Moses and Aaron respond to the evil. The punishment for the Israelites’ being influenced by the 10 spies who gave bad reports after scouting out the land for 40 days was to wander in the desert for 40 years, each year corresponding to a day that the spies had scouted. Every single Israelite from “the old generation” will die, making way for a new generation who will conquer the land. G-d was planning to destroy the people in that instant. Moses did not deny G-d’s ruling that the entire nation is unjust, only challenging their destruction in that moment. He states that if G-d destroys them now, His reputation will suffer, for the other nations will murmur, “G-d brought out this people from Egypt only to kill them in the desert.”[2]

One parsha later and once again Moses and Aaron’s authority is challenged. Once again, G-d threatens to destroy everyone, and Moses and Aaron intervene. The difference, however, is Moses and Aaron’s response: “if one man sins shall You be angry with the entire congregation?”[3] Why did Moses and Aaron blame the entire people for rebelling in the incident of the spies, whereas here they seem to put all of the blame on Korach?

Rabbenu Hananel from 11^th century North Africa deals with this quandary. He states, “if the Israelites had in no way sinned or rebelled against their master, why the anger against them and the threat to consume them in an instant? If they too had rebelled like Korah and his band how could Moses and Aaron say ‘Shall you punish the entire congregation for one man’s sin?”[4] The answer he gives is that G-d had only intended to punish “the congregation of Korah” and not the entire community of Israel. However, Rabbi Yitzhak Arama writes that not all of Israel had sinned with the Golden Calf yet there G-d also states that he would consume the entire nation. He concludes, “The individual is part of the whole; just as the whole man is sick even when only one part of his body is affected.”[5] This is related to the statement כל ישראל ערבים זה בזה, all of Israel is responsible for one another.[6] We are not an assortment of individuals but rather one community, so if someone acts wrongly, it is our responsibility to correct it in that moment, הוכח תוכיח את עמיתך.[7]

How do we feel about this notion of collective punishment? We certainly have precedent for it in the Torah. After all the continuation of the 13 attributes of G-d reads פוקד עון אבות על בנים ועל בני בנים על שלשים ועל רבעים, “G-d revisits the sins of the fathers on their children and on the children’s children to the third and fourth generation.”[8]  At the same time, we have the statement from Deuteronomy, “Parents shall not be put to death for the sins of children nor children for the sins of their parents: a person shall only be judged for his/her own crime.”[9] How do we reconcile the two? Some argue that collective punishment is necessary in order to truly wipe out evil, that by punishing not only the perpetrator but his/her entire household, we set an example that evil actions will not be tolerated, and we deter others from acting accordingly. Others assert that it is unjust to punish someone for a crime they did not commit and that we can only target the perpetrators.

How is evil best uprooted-through targeting everyone who is influenced by the evil or just those actively perpetuating it? Some would argue the former because just targeting terrorists and not their loved ones leaves alive those who have been motivated by their train of thought and who might very well commit an attack in the future. Others assert that we cannot collectively punish an entire group based off the actions of an individual terrorist. It is not for us to decide this question today but rather to recognize that in this case Moses did not propose attacking all of Israel, just taking out the ringleaders. At the same time, the way he and his closest followers were “taken out,” being swallowed up by the earth, set an example that stopped others from challenging Moses’ and Aaron’s leadership. May we recognize the best approach to sweep out evil in our day and age and utilize this to build a community which serves the high ideals emphasized by our tradition.

[1] See Deuteronomy 13:6 and 17:7; Also Deuteronomy 17:12 for a reference to ובערת הרע מישראל.

[2] Based off Numbers 14:16

[3] Numbers 16:22

[4] Rabbenu Hananel on Numbers 16:22

[5] Akedat Yitzhak on Numbers 16:22

[6] Babylonian Talmud Shavuot 39a

[7] Leviticus 19:17

[8] Exodus 34:9. A contemporary understanding of this is that the children learn from the parents’ example, so they internalize their parents’ sins and perpetuate them onto the next generation.

[9] Deuteronomy 24:16