The eternal question: “What time will services be over?”
I suppose this question would not be so bothersome if the reason it was asked related to some important duty that needed to be performed after the service. At the end of Yom Kippur, when everyone is hungry, I can understand why people want to get out as soon as possible. These are the rare cases. The real question behind the question “What time will services be over?” is “How fast can I get out of here?” Non fundamentalist Jews seem to want to be anywhere but in a synagogue praying. If they have to be at the service, they will often come late to minimize the time they have to spend in prayer.
Ritual Committees and Boards of Directors have issued ultimatums to their clergy staff to have services end “on time”. Letters get written and apologies made when services run “late”. It is not just a Jewish problem either. One Christian minister, I am told, tells his congregation that the service will be over “When they have nothing more to talk to God about.”
I agree with Educator Joel Grishaver, that the real issue that underlies our question is never about time, it is about engagement. Grishaver talks about the other big issue in Judaism, the amount of time we require our children to be in “Hebrew” School. There is a common thread in both issues. As long as people don’t see religious education and prayer as important, they will find all kinds of ways to spend less and less time in both.
This puts the issue squarely in the hands of Rabbis and Cantors. I have way too many colleagues who complain that their own services are deadly boring. My good friend, Rabbi Jack Moline has chided them that if the services are boring then they have no one to blame but themselves. They set the tone of the service and it rests, almost exclusively in the hands of the Rabbis who put the service together.
But before you go out with this message to your own Rabbi and Cantor, remember that they almost always try to give a congregation what they want. Most of the Jews in the pews tell their clergy that they want the service to change as long as the change does not affect their own “favorite” part. Rabbis and Cantors regularly receive advice on how to change the service for the better that is contradictory and often at odds with what a Jewish prayer service is all about. Every generation tries to craft a service that they like, with words and melodies that call up warm memories and then fight tooth and nail to keep it that way forever, to the chagrin of those who came before and have different melodies and to those who will follow them who want to change these melodies.
That being said, there still is much that can be done to improve how we pray in synagogue.
First of all, we need to be true to the meaning of prayer. We neglect teaching about God and the meaning of prayer at our own peril. Many of our members have no idea who they are praying to and are not challenged to think their theology through. Our members are not “greenhorns” anymore. They are college educated and have the resources of the internet and more at their disposal. We should not be afraid to challenge them to spell out what they mean when they say words like “God”, “Prayer”, “Revelation”, “Redemption”, “Repentance” and “Torah”. Dr. Arnold Eisen, the Chancellor of the Jewish Theological Seminary of America would also have us add “Mitzvah” and “obligation”. Rabbi Sharon Brous, on the website of her congregation, has every board member’s name listed with some of the reasons they are active in the congregation. When our members have an understanding about why faith, God and Torah are important, they will have a better understanding of why they are in synagogue in the first place.
Next we will have to remember that prayer is a very personal and individual process. That is why it is becoming less likely that any one service can fill all the needs of every one of our members. The days of “one service fits all” is coming to a rapid close. We need to fall back to an earlier format where different groups of people had their own service that they did in their own way, at their own time and with their own melodies. We need to get away from the big box service and open instead small, intimate prayer groups that perhaps only come together as a community for a communal meal or collation after all services are finished.
I like to listen to a good singer as much as anyone else and I know many Cantors who are beautiful singers and accomplished musicians. But there are too many concerts on television, on cable, on line and in the concert halls for people who want to pray to sit through another. Many congregations are opting to go without a Cantor so that the congregation will have to pick up the slack and lead the service. I would hope that a modern Cantor would understand that the real job today is to teach congregants the melodies and nusach of our liturgy and enable them to lead and participate in the service. We need Cantors who can write the music that will change the way our congregations will experience prayer using all the tools that this kind of composing can bring to bear. We need relevant prayers, to be sure, but we also need relevant music. I have already written that there are composers who are not Cantors who have changed the way our congregations sing. If Cantors want to make a difference, they need to use the skills they have to go beyond these non-cantorial composers and create a new golden age of liturgical music for our congregations.
Many have written about how we need to get away from our services as a “show” with a Rabbi and Cantor in the front and everyone seated theater style in the room. We need to have more movable chairs so that our members can see each other when they pray and sing and the Rabbi and Cantor must move among them, not stand in the front. At least they should face the same way as the members to be a part of the congregation not separate from them. High bimahs that have clergy “standing over” the congregation must be torn down and the wall between the bimah and the seats must be removed.
There has been a lot of ink spilled over using musical instruments at Shabbat Services (There is no reason not to use them at daily minyan but I don’t see people demanding that change.) For the most part this is a false issue. Musical instruments in a place that has not had them will be, at best, a curiosity for a while and then things will return to what they were before. It is not the instruments that make the difference, it is the music itself. The right music, with or without instruments, will draw people in. There are just as many exciting congregations who only clap their hands on Shabbat as there are those with guitar, drums and keyboard.
Cutting and changing the liturgy is also a critical issue. The first part of this issue is the language problem of Hebrew text. When someone says they don’t understand the words they are praying, they don’t mean that they can’t translate the Hebrew, because that translation is often right on the opposite page! What is not understood is the reason that this prayer belongs in this place. We all sing songs when we don’t really know the words, because the music inspires us (Kol Nidre, for example is all about music, for the words are about as unspiritual as you can get.) Jews will sing in Hebrew if they have an understanding about the importance of this one prayer. We have a hard time trying to teach why we need a long string of psalms at the beginning of the service, why we repeat so many prayers so many times and how to use the liturgy as a springboard to touch the pain and gratitude that is in our hearts. Most of the time, all we teach our congregation is that everyone needs to be on the same page at the same time. We need to teach that it is OK to spend some time on a page that speaks to us, and let the rest of the congregation move ahead and we can catch up later.
We should challenge ourselves and our members to write personal prayers and share them with the congregation. We need to make a place for this in the service. I was in a congregation where the Bar/Bat Mitzvah stood before the ark as the Torah was put away and offered a personal prayer. Every week a Jewish adult should be asked to do this for the congregation. It is an exercise that will change the life of the one offering the prayer and change the lives of all those who listen to it. We live in a technological age where we should be able to add new words and translations to our prayer books regularly, and not feel tied by the bound texts we currently use. We print up announcements for the congregation, why not print up special prayers to be inserted in the service each week or a selection for the month.
Rabbi Brous has taught that our services should reflect the lives of our congregation. The Shabbat service before a natural disaster should not be the same as the one that comes after it. She is correct. We need to find ways to tailor the service to the mood of the congregation and the mood of the country. Our members do come to synagogue when they are celebrating and when they are sad. They come when they are happy and when they are insecure with themselves and with the world. They come to pray for loved ones who are sick and to find meaning in the face of death. There should be something in our service to speak to these needs.
I recently attended a theater production on a Showboat on the Mississippi River. The actors came out at the beginning of the performance and insisted that the audience participate in the show. We were to boo the villains, cheer the heroes and express our happiness or dismay with what the characters were saying. I have been to Baptist churches where this is so common that when I spoke, they verbally encouraged me on and were right in there with me as I shared my message. Rabbi Eugene and Annette Labowitz say that we should swap our sermons for a story that has a message for the congregation. Others go out into the congregation and engage them in learning, to struggle together with a difficult text. Storahtelling, the group in NY that makes the Torah Service come alive believes that a good song in the right place can help bring the message home. We need to do more to put the focus on the lesson and not on the Rabbi.
Dr.Ron Wolfson, has written a book on how to make our synagogues more welcoming. (This is a topic all of its own!) His method is to visit any religious institution that gets a huge crowd at services and then he ask them how they do it. There are many models out there of successful liturgy and engaging services. We would do well to visit them, understand them and then adapt their ideas into our own communities. Let me also add here that there are other, non liturgical issues with our service. We functionally exclude from the congregation young families if we don’t offer babysitting. We exclude the elderly if we don’t have large print books and hearing assistance. We exclude the disabled when our buildings and our bimah are not accessible. We exclude the intermarried when we don’t address their needs in the service. We exclude Jews with little Jewish education when we don’t have pamphlets with transliterations and explanations of what the service is all about.
The movie trilogy, “Lord of the Rings” consisted of three very long movies. I never heard a complaint that any of the movies were too long. Time problems are problems of engagement in the service. If we make the service come alive, they will come and they will stay. Let us encourage our Rabbis and Cantors to use all of their creative talents and we will soon reap the blessings of a fully engaged community.
Author: Rabbi Konigsburg
You Don’t Send Me Flowers Anymore
One of the topics that always comes up when lay leadership or Rabbis talk about Conservative Judaism is why things can’t be like the “good old days”. Back in the “heyday” of our movement, back in the 1950’s, congregations were large, suburban and filled with families with lots of children. It was the center of Jewish life. Fathers, Mothers and Children had many activities to fill their days and there was a sense of community that everyone felt they needed to join. One could not be a “full” member of the general community without membership in a religious institution so everyone was a member. We were drawing members who were disgruntled with the Orthodox movement in this country and those who wanted more than what Reform was prepared to give them. So our congregations were growing like crazy.
We may all agree that those days are gone. We only need to read the above paragraph to understand that the world has changed in the last 60 years. For better or worse, we live in a different reality. We can look at all the demographic changes and instinctively understand that we can not live in the past. So why is it that Conservative Judaism can’t get it’s act together and grow? It is not the fault of Jews, or even synagogues. Members and congregations are all struggling. Everyone is trying to find the solution to why our movement is shrinking, yet the answers are painfully obvious. We have set our benchmark as the way things were in the 1950’s. We can not be the movement between Orthodox and Reform because there really is no one seeking that space between them anymore, at least not like there was six decades ago. Our Jews are not looking for a movement, they are looking for God, and if we show them how we seriously search for God, we can ask them to join us in our quest. Being a movement that is “between Orthodox and Reform” is the wrong benchmark and it directs us to the wrong goals. Our vision is limited, so our results are limited too. It is time to face the world and revision our place in it.
There are those who say that Conservative/Masorti Judaism is aging and dying, that we have failed to inspire and motivate our congregations.
The facts of this are correct, we don’t have as many young Jews joining our synagogues. I believe that there are great changes taking place in Judaism today and our communities have yet to adjust to the changes. It is still true that people only join a “full service” congregation when they have children, just as they have done for almost a century. One of the main differences, however is that today, parents have their children when they are 35 instead of 25. Our congregations are aging because parents are aging. Take a look and see how many 40 year old parents we have in our pre-schools. We have lost 10 years in the lives of young Jews because we see ourselves only as a place for “families with children” There are young Jews, lots of them, but they are not interested in our synagogues which are still “business as usual” i.e. waiting for couples to have children. Young Jews marry later, often only when they are ready to have children. They live together, sometimes for 5-10 years before they marry and then return from the honeymoon pregnant. Why should they join a congregation that has no programming, religious or social for these young Jews? There are congregations who have attracted younger Jews but our movement still does not embrace these kind of synagogues. We don’t really publicize their programs nor learn from their experiences. Why? I think it is because we are still clinging to the older model.There are others issues too. Let us look at synagogue music. There is new music for liturgy being written every day, but how much of it finds its way into our synagogue? Most of the Cantors and those trained by Cantors are using music that is almost 100 years old, from the beginning of the last century! Besides Adon Olam and L’cha Dodi, how much new music do we really see in our congregations? Part of this problem is that the people writing this music today, are not trained Hazzanim. They are lay people expressing their spirituality through their musical talents. Instead of co-opting this talent and embracing the new music, instead of refining the trend and writing their own music, Hazzanim bemoan the loss of cantorial music from the “golden age”. I believe that we are beginning a new “golden age” of liturgical music and Hazzanim and congregations ignore this at their own peril. I like my “oldies” as much as anyone else, but there is no point in bemoaning the fact that my favorite music is not played on “top 40” stations anymore. This is not about musical instruments on Shabbat or no musical instruments on Shabbat. Musical instruments will only bring attention as a curiosity for a limited time. If the music is right, a service a cappela or with instruments will draw Jews to our services.
Let us look at learning. Have we done all we can do to make the Torah Service more interesting? It is not about full or triennial readings, it is about engagement. While having an aliyah is interesting for the family who is honored, take a look as what is happening to the others who are in the congregation. They are as unattached as they can be. We need to discuss how we can engage our members in the Torah Service. How can we do this? There are models out there that have just never gained traction. Do we discuss the parasha with the congregation between alioyot? Do we challenge congregants to dig into the text before we start to read? Does the congregation ever get a chance to discuss the interesting comments at the bottom of “Etz Hayyim” or do they just sit there and watch what is going on in front? Far too few congregations have any kind of discussion either before or after the service. Can’t change the “Bar/Bat Mitzvah show every week? Why not offer a Torah discussion in the chapel or in a classroom or even in the Rabbi’s study during the Torah service for those who are interested. There will be plenty of Jews left in the main service to hear the students recite their haphtara. Check out “Storahtelling”(www.storahtelling.org) for a radical Torah adventure and then see how we can make it a part of our more halachic service.
Another way we live in the past can be found in our sanctuaries. We are still building large synagogues with fixed pews as the standard for our movement. Fixed seating is just not the way we need to go. Take a look at many successful congregations of any denominations. Modern prayer spaces need movable chairs. Worship space today should require that pray-ers need to see the faces of those with whom they are praying. We don’t need theater seating with everyone watching the Rabbi and Cantor. In the round? Maybe; certainly in a semi circle where people can see each other. If we try that configuration for services we will see an immediate difference.
In our world today, not everyone comes to a synagogue for a religious service or to provide a religious education for their children. Synagogues today have to have many ways to enter the Jewish world. One of these ways is Social Action. How many Conservative congregations have really active Social Action/Social Justice groups making a difference in our communities? Do we feed the hungry, provide shelter for the homeless, support for those recovering from addictions, lobby our representatives? (When was the last time one of our congregations sent a delegation to Washington DC or a state capital to lobby our legislators?) Do we support our local volunteer fire and ambulance corp? Do we open our doors for town hall meetings for neighbors and the larger community? When we ask someone to join a congregation, are we asking them to just sit in a seat a few times a year, or do we challenge them to greater commitment in life? I know absolutely that there are USCJ congregations that are doing this but they operate almost alone. Where do we highlight their work and where do we encourage others to follow their lead?
Permit me one final example of misguided visioning. We no longer live in a world where one size fits all. Small congregations can focus on the needs of those who are their core constituency. Larger congregations need to have more diversity to meet the needs of their large and varied community. We need to experiment with alternative minyanim where people can try out different ways of practicing their Judaism. If Conservative congregations don’t provide these alternatives, then our members will go to the synagogue/temple that does. In the synagogue world today, we are so attached to the B/M show service that most weeks, our members only want to come if they are friends of the family. We complain that the B/M takes over the synagogue; so why let them? If we have smaller alternatives, we will soon see smaller more intimate B/M services with happier students and happier families.
We live in a world where Rabbis and Synagogues have to work together to compete in this world. We should be promoting models that work instead of bemoaning what we have lost. We are still looking backward in too many cases, when we need to be looking forward.
Everything I have mentioned are all programs out there in the open market for those with vision to see and understand. It is up to us Rabbis and Congregational leadership to embrace these models and move these models forward. I know that there are many forces in an established congregation that don’t see this vision and don’t want to leave the models of the past behind. But if staff and lay leadership develop a common strategy and language to work on these changes, a new direction can be achieved. The role of the movement, i.e. The United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism and the Jewish Theological Seminary is to be there to help us learn about new approaches and guide us to find new solutions of our own. We should not dwell on the frustrations. We need to be motivated by the future.
I have been a Rabbi in the pulpit for over 25 years. I should have many good reasons to be frustrated that our congregations don’t do more and our Movement does not do more. Instead, I try to motivate myself to do more to make Conservative/Masorti Judaism and the synagogues that I lead, the fine jewels that I know they can be.
I would love to hear your opinions and I invite you to leave a comment. Just click on the link below.
28-5768: Mitzvah N-31
Talmidav Shel Aharon
28-5768: Mitzvah N-31
July 15, 2008
Negative Mitzvah 31 – This is a negative commandment: do not swear an oath of expression over a falsehood.
Hafetz Hayim: For Scripture says, “and you shall not swear by my name falsely.” (Lev. 19:12). This is called an oath of expression. A person is punishable for this if he takes a [false] oath over things that are possible to do, whether in the future or the past. For example, “That I ate” or “I threw a stone into the sea.”or that so and so spoke to so and so” “that I did not eat” or “I did not throw a stone into the sea” or “so and so did not talk to so and so”. And in the future: for example, “ That I shall eat,” or “I shall not eat” or “I will throw a pebble or stone into the sea” or “I will not throw.” If a person swore to one of these statements, he would violate this prohibition. It is in force everywhere and at all times for both men and women.
In keeping with the theme of the importance of words, we have the rules about more standard oaths. When one would offer an oath, it would include the Name of G-d and would be spoken in the presence of the court or witnesses. The value of this oath was to testify about something when another witness was not present or about an intention that no one else can know. The examples here are the mundane activities of life. We don’t go around looking for witnesses every time we want to do something. We go to lunch, talk to those around us and take little notice of it until it becomes important. When someone else gets into trouble, we want to help if we can.
The reminder here is that we are forbidden to speak a falsehood even about the most mundane activity. G-d’s name is involved and we have to be meticulous about how we use that name. If we know that we are being asked to swear to something, even in the future, we have to make sure that we only speak what is true. Maybe you meant to eat but for some reason you didn’t eat that meal that day. Maybe you always see two people together for lunch but you are not sure that on the particular day in question, they were in their usual seat. Just because you always go on a picnic in the park during the summer, does not mean that you can swear that you will be in the park this coming weekend since weather and a host of family issues could prevent this from happening.
Do we really remember what we had for lunch last Tuesday? Even if we always eat at the same sandwich shop, are we sure that last Tuesday was the exception, or perhaps this coming Tuesday will be different. You could get sick, the office could close early, the diner could burn down. This mitzvah teaches us to watch our words and make sure that we don’t swear to something that, later, could prove to be wrong or false. This would damage our reputation and would damage G-d’s reputation as well. We need to keep our daily dairy current and refer back to it before we invoke it before we take any oaths.
The later Rabbis did not like oaths for this reason. It is too easy to make a false oath like these and they would undermine the entire legal system. Better to avoid as many oaths as possible.
27-5768: Mitzvah N-30
Talmidav Shel Aharon
27-5768: Mitzvah N-30
June 23, 2008
Negative Mitzvah 30 – This is a negative commandment: do not swear falsely over the denial of a monetary matter.
Hafetz Hayim: For Scripture says, “nor shall you lie one to another.” (Lev. 19:11). If someone sues his fellow human being for something of value (excluding land or deeds) worth from a peruta (the smallest coin) and up, where if the other admitted it he would be obligated to pay (excluding cases of fines) but he denied it and took an oath, or the claimant (plaintiff) pronounced an oath on him and he denied it (falsely) – the defendant is punishable, even if he did not answer “amen”. This is known as an oath over a Pikadon (an object entrusted for safekeeping) and he is obligated to pay the principal (original amount) and a fifth. Whoever violates this prohibition violates also violates the injunction, “and you shall not swear by my name falsely,” (Lev. 19:12) which applies to an oath of expression. (See next week’s lesson). If a person denies his fellow human being’s claim to landed property or deeds and he swears falsely, although hi is free of penalty over an oath of pikadon, he is nevertheless liable on account of an oath of expression, since he swore to a lie. It is in force everywhere and at all times for both men and women.
In the ancient world, words were very important and an oath to G-d was a very serious legal matter. When there was something brought to court that could came down to a dispute between two parties and there was no other proof except for the claims that each was making. The court could demand an oath from one or the other or from both parties as to their side of the story. Many times someone would rather pay the damages than take an oath that perhaps could turn out to be false. In our case here a person has been given an object of value to safeguard for someone else. For example, you give a friend your antique vase to keep in their home while your house is under repair. For some reason the vase disappears or is damaged. Your friend is only liable for the disappearance or damage if it can be shown that he did not take due care with the vase. One can be pretty careful with something that belongs to someone else and still there could be damage. Clearly your friend is not responsible for an earthquake or a violent home invasion. It is still hard to prove if the friend did take good care of the object or not. Since the friend was not paid to guard the vase, rather he was just a volunteer, the court allows him to swear an oath that he was indeed careful with the vase and the friend cannot force him to page damages.
But if it can be proven in another way that the friend did not take all normal precautions, but carried it around all day and to show it off to friends and left it by an open window all day and night where the weather and thieves could easily damage it, then the friend has sworn a false oath and he must pay for the vase, pay a fine of 1/5th the value of the vase. He is also in violation of the law of swearing a false oath which we will deal with in our next lesson.
If land or property deeds were given over for safe keeping, the law different and one does not take an oath like the unpaid watchman of a movable object, rather the issue is usually who is the owner of the land. He can swear that he is the rightful owner. If it is found later that he lied about his ownership, then the only punishment is because he took a false oath, he does not pay damages or the fine.
27-5768: Mitzvah N-29
Talmidav Shel Aharon
27-5768: Mitzvah N-29
May 26, 2008
Negative Mitzvah 29 – This is a negative commandment: Do not swear in vain.
Hafetz Hayim: For Scripture says, “You shall not take the name of the Lord your G-d in vain.” (Ex. 20:7). A vain oath is divided into four categories: 1. If one swears to a change in something known: for example, if he swears about a man that he is a woman or about a stone that it is gold. 2. if he swears to no purpose; for example, he takes an oath about a stone that it is a stone. 3. If he takes an oath to fail to observe a mitzvah. 4. If he swears to do something which is impossible to fulfill; for example, that he will not sleep for three days in a row, or that he will taste no food for seven days in a row. Over every one of these oaths, if he swore it willfully, he should receive whiplashes; and if it was unwittingly, he is free of penalty. If someone says a benediction in vain [needlessly] or he utters the name of G-d to no purpose, he violates the injunction, “You shall not take the name f the Lord your G-d in vain.” It is in force everywhere and at all times for both men and women.
When it comes to using G-d’s name, there are two possible uses. One is to invoke holiness and the other is using it improperly for shock value. The purpose of a vain oath is either for its shock value or else we have to assume that this person is a fool. Let’s take a look at the four examples. In the first case, he does not have to swear at all. Anyone can see for themselves what the correct answer is. Why should he have to use G-d’s name to prove that a man is a woman or a stone is really gold? It is easy to prove him right or wrong without his taking an oath. An oath would only be necessary if there was no other way to know the status; For example, if the person in question was missing at sea or if the stone in question were lost.
In the second case he is taking an oath about something that is already known to everyone. A proper oath would be to testify about something that nobody else would know. The testimony is the only proof of that can be obtained. If everyone knows the information and it is accepted by the court as true, then what reason would he have to swear in G-d’s name? In the third case, he is taking an oath to disobey the law. He thus gets stuck in a dilemma, should he keep the law, he breaks his oath (and the law), if he keeps his oath he has broken the law. The mitzvah is more important and the oath is in vain. Finally, in the last case, the oath is in vain because it can never be fulfilled. It is one thing to promise to give ten percent to charity if one wins a million dollars. This is a legitimate oath. But if he promises to give a million dollars to charity and does not have that kind of money to give, then the oath is in vain. All of these oaths are vain oaths. They are not only a waste of time, breath and court resources, but there is no holiness that comes from them. It is only the shock value of making such an oath and this is the sin involved.
We see the same issues arise at the end of the teaching, when it is extended to blessings or curses. There are some who interpret this prohibition against blessings broadly, explaining that you can only say a blessing one time. Such people get themselves in trouble if they forget if they said the blessing or not or discover that they may or may not have said it correctly. I prefer to keep this interpretation narrow. It is not an issue to me if one forgets if the blessing was said to say it over. The intention of the blessing remains the same; to bring holiness into the moment of prayer. If one is teaching a blessing than it is also permitted to say the blessing over and over again to learn it properly. If one has said the blessing and then leads others in the same blessing, I still believe that holiness is still being brought into the world. If one is making fun of the blessings or is mindlessly repeating it over and over this would be a violation of this mitzvah. (This is why we don’t make popular music out of the words of a blessing).
Cursing through the use of G-d’s name, with its ability to shock and without any aspect of holiness, is always a sin.
I should also mention that these laws do not apply to every name of G-d. There are actually dozens of names for G-d that appear in sacred literature. There are only seven names whose use is regulated by this mitzvah, and only the Hebrew words make one liable. This includes the four letter name of G-d that is never pronounced as well as Elohim and Shaddai. These names, in Hebrew, must be not be destroyed but placed in a Geniza (a special place for sacred texts) and may not be used in vain.
26-5768: Mitzvah N-28
Talmidav Shel Aharon
26-5768: Mitzvah N-28
May 12, 2008
Negative Mitzvah 28 – This is a negative commandment: Do not make gashes or incisions in one’s flesh in idol-worship or [in grief] over one’s dead.
Hafetz Hayim: For Scripture says, “you shall not gash yourselves” (Deut. 14:1). Whoever cuts his flesh in grief over his dead violates this prohibition, whether he makes the gash by hand or with an instrument. In idol-worship, however, if he uses an instrument his is punished by whiplashes, but if he uses his hand, he is free of penalty. Included in this law is the warning not to separate into agudot, (groups). This teaches us that there should not be two religious courts in town, one following one practice and one following another practice. It is in force everywhere and at all times for both men and women.
The first part of this commandment is pretty easy to explain. First of all, in Judaism, we do not own our bodies. Our bodies are a gift from G-d and we use them as long as G-d is willing to let us. In this sense, we only rent our bodies for the duration of our life and we have, therefore an obligation to take care of our bodies. When we get sick, we must seek healing. We need to eat healthy foods, exercise and make sure our body is as healthy as can be. Drugs and excessive alcohol are forbidden as is tobacco. We are not permitted to over pierce our body or decorate it with tattoos. It only follows that we cannot scar or maim our bodies, especially in the name of an idol or on behalf of the dead. Cutting for idols is clearly forbidden and the punishment is set. Ritual gashing is done with a ritual knife, so if one gashes by hand, then this law does not apply. Gashing for the dead is a sign of grief so it does not matter how you do the slashing, it is all forbidden. Just as one should not spend too much to bury the dead, I can see here a similar problem. Just how much pain should I endure to show how much I loved the one who died? The more gashes, the more blood, the more love? We can see where this is going. Jewish law would have us rip our clothing to mourn the dead, one rip, over the heart. That is all that is allowed. Our grief is enough pain without the added pain of gashing our bodies.
The second part seems to be honored in the breach more than in reality. I can think of few times in Jewish History where the Jewish People were not divided into camps. Orthodox, Conservative, Reform and Reconstructionist are only the most modern divisions. In Israel there are Sephardic and Ashkenazic communities, Hasidic and Mitnagdic, and the Hasidim are divided into even smaller camps. The sages were divided into the schools of Hillel and Shammai, into political camps of Pharisees and Sadducees. The priests who worked in the Temple were divided into “families” who were rivals of each other. You get the picture. We are not a very unified people. The trick is not to divide into sects that don’t talk to each other and who do not intermarry with each other. We may divide ourselves into groups that don’t agree with each other, but there are only rare moments in Jewish History where we were so divided that we stopped talking and intermarrying with each other. Underneath it all, we are still Jews.
The most famous schism was the one that opened up between Rabbinic Judaism and the Jews who were followers of Jesus of Nazareth. Eventually, there was no reconciliation possible and the two groups moved off in separate ways and began to see each other as new religions. Other than this one historical event, we may not agree on much but we agree that we are all Jews. The rest is just details. In Israel today, there is a movement against the official “Rabbanut” because they are becoming so particular in how one proves one is Jewish, that the rest of the country is almost in rebellion against them. We will see how it plays out. In any event, our communities, both here and in Israel have many different rabbinical courts. The Hafetz Hayim is making his pitch for Jewish unity, but that is an ideal, not the reality of Judaism, neither in history nor today.
25-5768: Mitzvah N-27
Talmidav Shel Aharon
25-5768: Mitzvah N-27
May 5, 2008
Negative Mitzvah 27 – This is a negative commandment: Do not prophesize in the name of an idol. Hafetz Hayim: For Scripture says, “and make no mention of the name of other gods” (Ex. 23:13). His death (if one does prophesy so) is by strangulation, even if he spoke in the name of an idol and was in accord with Halacha (definitive law), to declare the defiled unclean and the pure clean. It is in force everywhere and at all times for both men and women.
We can understand the prohibition against idolatry when it is commanding us to do something that is forbidden by Jewish law. But here, the real issue is when an idol commands us to do exactly what G-d would have us do. This sounds like a rather innocuous idol. What could be the harm in it? Does it really matter if we say we worship G-d or an idol as long as, in the end, we have the same moral laws and the same religious activities? If the result is the same, who cares how we get there?
I almost sounds like someone in a cult declaring that there is no difference between what they promote and what we already have. It is only slowly, over time that differences become apparent and we are encouraged to slowly “evolve” our understanding of Judaism to fit with the “new” or “ancient” “improvements” that the new religion entails. After all, this is how Christianity separated itself from Judaism, by slowly, over time, changing the rules for those who professed to be followers of Jesus. It is a time-honored way of enticing people away from the faith of their ancestors.
It is all the more effective if there is a “Jew” who is doing the enticing (and we can see why an group like Jews for Jesus uses “rabbis” in their churches) it makes it all the more comfortable when one begins and the changes can be slow and small until a whole new religion is being practiced.
Again, I want to state that Judaism does not see Christianity and Islam as pagan religions and they would not fall under this ban if someone were to teach a class, for example in Islamic theology. Those who don’t like what other Jews are teaching as differences in Jewish law have also abused it. One does not incur the death penalty for not holding a “glatt” standard when it comes to Kashrut.
Jews have been enticed for thousands of years to come and join other faiths that were “almost” the same as what we already practice. Our response has always been the same, “You can worship how and whom you please but for me and my family, we will follow the Lord our G-d and the G-d of our ancestors”.
24-5768: Mitzvah N-23-24-25-26
Talmidav Shel Aharon
24-5768: Mitzvah N-23-24-25-26
April 28, 2008
Negative Mitzvah 23 – This is a negative commandment: Do not entice a Jew to worship an idol.
Hafetz Hayim: For Scripture says, “If your brother… entices you secretly, saying, “Let us go and serve other gods” … Then all Israel shall hear and shall fear, and shall never again do any such wickedness as this.” (Deut. 13:7,12). If anyone entices a Jew to worship idols , whether he entices him speaking in the plural or in the singular, he is to be stoned to death, even if neither the entices nor the enticed person worshipped any idols. – but [he deserves death] only because he instructed him to worship An enticer needs no prior warning to warrant the death penalty. It is in force everywhere and at all times for both men and women.
Negative Mitzvah 24 – This is a negative commandment: Pay no attention to one who entices you to worship idols.
Hafetz Hayim: For Scripture says, “You shall not befriend him.” (Deut. 13:9).
Negative Mitzvah 25 – This is a negative commandment: You shall not quit hating the enticer
Hafetz Hayim: For Scripture says, “neither shall you listen to him.” (Deut. 13:9).
Negative Mitzvah 26 – This is a negative commandment: Do not rescue the enticer from danger.
Hafetz Hayim: For Scripture says, “nor shall your eye pity him.” (Deut. 13:9).
The Torah starts in a difficult position. Israelites are about to enter a new land that has been promised to their ancestors. The problem is that it is filled with idolaters. Many of these will be killed in the conquest. Some will flee the invading Israelite army. Some will join with the invaders and become a part of the religion of Israel. But there will be some who will stay and in their own personal way, continue to worship the traditional idols of the area. Remember, idols were particular to a neighborhood. One worshiped the local gods who knew the specific needs of those who lived there. These secret idolaters are good people; they work hard and try to earn a living for themselves and their families. Maybe they do better than others and the local Israelites ask what is the secret to his success. Maybe there is a drought, or a flood, or a fire or blight and the Israelites wonder why things have turned bad. What is a secret idolater to do? He calls aside a trusted friend and confides that the local gods are angry with the Israelites and if they just go up that mountain over there and put a small offering on the large rock under the tree, things will get better. Nobody has to know.
In many ways it is like sharing gardening tips with your neighbors except that these tips involve corrupting your religion. It means having to make a choice between being faithful or being successful. Judaism knows that this kind of a choice will undermine all that our faith stands for. It takes our reason and laws and begins the slow slide into superstition and magic.
Now we can understand why there can be no compromise with pagans. Their faith needs to be removed from the land and we must not show them any pity. For they sit in waiting for our faith to falter and then they begin to creep in and cause us to question what we believe. This is not the same as living in an open society and letting each one practice what they believe, this is about an insidious undermining of what Judaism stands for.
The list of negative commandments appears to be strong and the punishments are strict. Even if we agree that the death penalty is no longer in use in Judaism, it still creates a strong wall of separation that can not be crossed even if want to treat the pagan as a human being.
I prefer to see this entire series as a reminder that we can not let even the slightest trace of other gods into the realm of true religion. It is not so much about how we treat one who would entice us away from our faith, but about how strong we must be in the face of religions that have as their only good point the fact that they are part of a majority culture. Is paganism a majority culture today? Well, let’s just say that “American Idol” would not be the same show if it was about a competition to find the greatest educator or the finest poet. Perhaps these laws remind us that just because someone declares “This is your god!” doesn’t make them anything other than a call to suspend our logic and our power of reason. These are hard lessons for the human psyche. We must not give even a toehold to those who preach magic and superstition. Don’t have pity on them, just walk away.
23-5768: Mitzvah N-21-22
Talmidav Shel Aharon
23-5768: Mitzvah N-21-22
April 14, 2008
Negative Mitzvah 21 – This is a negative commandment: Do not follow the customs of the heathen.
Hafetz Hayim: For Scripture says, “And in their statutes you shall not walk” (Lev. 18:3). One is not to emulate them in any way of dress that is distinctive for them, nor let the locks of the hair grow. Neither is one to shave the hair at the sides, leaving the hair in the middle of the head, which is called a crest. Neither is one to shave the hair in apposition to the face, from ear to ear, leaving a long growth behind him. Whoever does any one of these, or anything similar, is to receive whiplashes. If someone is close to the ruling circles of government and he needs to dress in their kind of clothes and emulate them, he is permitted. It is in effect everywhere, at every time, for both men and women.
Negative Mitzvah 22 – This is a negative commandment: Pay no heed a person prophesying in the name of an idol.
Hafetz Hayim: For Scripture says, “You shall not listen to the words of that prophet.” (Deut. 13:4). One should not get into any long discussion with him or ask for a sign or a wonder. If he performed a sign or a wonder, no attention is to be paid him. Whoever thinks of a sign of his that perhaps it is true, violates this prohibition. It is in effect everywhere, at every time, for both men and women.
In Mitzvah 21, the Hafetz Hayim is concerned that by mimicking the practices of pagans, we will come to follow their lure. Judaism was a minority religion and if we do not maintain or special practices, than it is so easy to slip away into the majority religion. Even last weeks lesson, which spoke of intermarriage, it was always assumed in pre-modern times, that the majority religion would eventually pull the Jew away from the Jewish faith. Many Jewish rituals are designed to keep Jews separate and apart from the rest of the world and to uphold the unique elements of our faith.
The thrust of this mitzvah is not to go around looking like a pagan. It is not about refraining from a “Mohawk haircut” but trying to look like something that you are not. We have evidence, in Greco-Roman times of Jews, wanting to participate in gymnastic games that were always performed nude. Such Jews were embarrassed by their circumcision and actually had “surgery” (a very crude plastic surgery) to make it look like they were not circumcised. That is how far they were prepared to go to look like everyone else. Many cults insist on certain types of clothing and haircuts to this day to help identify followers. Jewish history is filled with people who dressed like pagans because they had jobs that put them in contact with pagans everyday and they needed to look like those they served (the Talmud often mentions Barbers as wearing their hair in pagan styles). It was not forbidden, but the Sages always tried to get Jews to look like Jews.
This is not about fashion necessarily. Much of what is fashionable today may be a violation of modesty rules in Judaism, but would not constitute looking like a pagan. But note that many signs of royalty and government also use religious symbols and if that is part of the “job” of working for government, this could be of help to the Jewish people in a time of trouble (think Queen Esther) and it is permitted to dress like a pagan.
In Mitzvah 22, the issue that it raises for us today relates directly to cults. Signs and wonders are very interesting things to see. There is no prohibition of attending a magic show or a “wonders of Science” show. The trouble begins in the interpretation of the “wonder”. If the result is given a “religious” interpretation, it is a sign that Jews need to get away quick. Cults depend on such interpretations to gather in members, using these wonders to convince others of the importance of the cult and its leader. For a long time Jews seemed to be the primary targets of such cults, unable to see that the connection between wonder and explanation was at fault. It does no good at all to enter into the discussions over the merit of the wonder or not. And here it does not matter if we are talking about cults, missionaries, or anyone else trying to convince a Jew that this religion is better because of this wonder or sign. We are not to argue with them, or show them the error of their ways, we are to pay no attention and walk away. We are not even allowed to consider if the wonder may be true or not.
So does this leave us in the dark about modern discoveries in science and the natural world? Again, the issue is not the wonder, but the explanation of the wonder. As long as it does not demand that we give up our faith, we can study and learn. As soon as it is used to “prove” that they are right and we are wrong, it is prohibited.
22-5768: Mitzvah N-19-20
Talmidav Shel Aharon
22-5768: Mitzvah N-19-20
April 7, 2008
Negative Mitzvah 19 – This is a negative commandment: Do not intermarry with a non-Jewish person.
Hafetz Hayim: For Scripture says, “Neither shall you make marriages with them.” (Deut. 7:3). It is in effect everywhere, at every time, for both men and women.
Negative Mitzvah 20 – This is a negative commandment: Have no mercy on idol-worshippers.
Hafetz Hayim: For Scripture says, “nor shall you show mercy to them.” (Deut. 7:2). If someone sees an idol-worshipper drowning, he is not to save him. In his illness, he is not to cure him. If he is afraid of him or there is the consideration of consequent enmity, let him cure him for a fee, but not for free. It is, however, forbidden to end the man’s life with one’s own hands or toe push him into a pit and so on, if the other makes no hostile attack against him. One is not to give him any free gift, nor is one to speak his praise, and all the more certainly not in praise of his actions. It is in effect everywhere, at every time, for both men and women.
The Hafetz Hayyim lets Mitzvah 19 go without comment because, for him, it is evident and plain to see that intermarriage leads to idolatry. It happened in the Torah, in Parshat Balak, and it happens in the rest of the Bible over and over again. A non-Jewish spouse leads one away from the faith of one’s ancestors. This is one of the main reasons that paganism was to be kept far away from Israel and from Jews. One can even claim that the laws of Shabbat and Kashrut were designed to keep Jews and non-Jews from mixing in social situations, whether they are of a religious nature or not. Judaism does not recognize marriages between Jews and non-Jews. This is why there is no reason to have a Rabbi perform an intermarriage. The entire wedding ceremony presumes a marriage between Jews. The wedding would have no meaning if one of the parties does not claim to be a part of the Jewish people.
For the Hafetz Hayim, a Jew who married a non-Jew was lost to the Jewish people. Whatever Jewish customs they might maintain would almost certainly be lost in the next generation.
Today, there are families that intermarry and choose to maintain ties to Judaism. It is often a very difficult road and statistically, the next generation has a much less connection to Judaism. This, of course, does not apply if one person converts to Judaism. In this case, it is a marriage between two Jews and does not fall under the prohibition above. We live in a world where people do what they feel they need to do but living in a home where there are two religions is hard for the couple and hard on their children. We find that homes should have one faith to raise the children and the time to address this is before the marriage. As I said, it is not impossible for intermarriage to work, it is just very hard and one faith or the other will fade into the background, as the other becomes a larger part of family life. The vast majority of the literature on dual faith families is that children raised with two faiths, will, in the end, practice none.
Mitzvah 20 is complex for the Hafetz Hayim but far less for us. Jewish History is filled with Jews who worked on behalf of ancient and modern empires and faiths and did not follow the strict, almost bigoted, rules above. The Talmud states that one is to treat every non-Jew as one would treat a Jew if, for no other reason than “for the sake of peace” a topic the Hafetz Hayim touches on briefly in the explanation of the Mitzvah. If they are drowning, let me make this clear, we rescue them (as long as we do not endanger our own lives in the process; we are not allowed to save any other person, Jew or non-Jew if we endanger our own life). We treat the non-Jew and the Jew the same way when it comes to medicine and healing (The State of Israel heals Palestinian sick every day, ignoring borders and family connections). We treat the property of the non-Jew as if it was our own property and we return lost animals to non-Jews as we would return the lost animal of a Jew.
Also, it is forbidden to kill any human being for any reason or to endanger their lives in any way. All human beings are created in G-d’s image and all life must be treated as holy. We cannot be best friends with an idolater nor can we join them socially, but we do have to act to them as human beings who deserve basic human rights and privileges. This is not Conservative Judaism but all found in basic Jewish texts. There has always bee this trend in Judaism to favor Jews and reject all contact with non-Jews. It is always a minority opinion and the majority of Jewish sources insist that we treat all people fairly and with justice. Also, I remind everyone again, that Christianity and Islam are not considered pagan in Jewish legal circles.
In our interfaith world, we can learn about the faiths of others as long as they do not try to convert us to their faith by enticement or by force. Short of proselytizing, a non-Jew must be treated as we would a Jew in every other basic civic situation.
Rabbi Randall J. Konigsburg 