Friday, April 29, 2011

Parshat Kedoshim- Kedusha: The Spirit of The Law

BY: DP BLOG

In the opening words of this week`s parsha we read:

"קְדֹשִׁים תִּהְיוּ כִּי קָדוֹשׁ אֲנִי יְ־הֹוָ־ה אֱלֹהֵיכֶם:"-
You shall be holy because I Hashem your G-d am Holy.
(Leviticus 19:2). 

Much has been said about the concept of kedusha in Judaism, which is often translated as holiness, and here we will present what may only be a simple understanding, yet one vital to our identity as a nation. Rashi on the verse explains that kedusha refers to distancing oneself from forbidden sexual relations and sin; in separating oneself from those things, one finds holiness.

The Talmud in Yevamot 20a extends the demands of what it means to be "kadosh", stating:

אמר רבא: קדש עצמך במותר לך 
"Rava said: Sanctify yourself also regarding that which is permissible to you."**

That is to say,the mitzvoth (commandments) of the Torah have many of technical details, like the laws of forbidden relations which Rashi refers to, and surely as Jews we must adhere to them  What Rava is saying is that one must read between the lines of all those laws, and when he feels it necessary, distance himself even from what is technically permitted. Keeping the mitzvoth is about keeping the letter of the law, but it also recognizing the spirit of the law and maintaining its integrity as well.

The Ramban (Nachmanides)) explains:

The meaning of this is that since the Torah has warned against forbidden sexual relations and forbidden foods, while permitting relations with one's wife and eating meat and wine, the lustful person can find a place to...be of "the guzzlers of wine and the gluttons of meat", and converse at will of all licentious things (since no prohibition against this is specified in the Torah). He can be a hedonist with the Torah's permission. Therefore, after enumerating the things which it forbids entirely, the Torah says: "Be holy." Constrain yourself also in that which is permitted."**

Kedusha is a state of mind,a philosophy to live by. As the Ramban explains, one could theoretically live the life of a hedonist, and not out-step the boundaries set out by the Torah.The injunction to be "Kedoshim"(holy) therefore demands of us to not only act according to law, but to uphold  its spirit as well. 
Only in that way may we merit to fulfill our designation as G-d`s "kingdom of priests and holy nation", a מַמְלֶכֶת כֹּהֲנִים וְגוֹי קָדוֹשׁ (Exodus 19:6).

_____________

** translations taken from Rabbi Levi Osdoba, director of the Belle Harbor Torah Institute. You can read find his Divrei Torah here: http://www.belleharbortorah.com/






Thursday, April 7, 2011

Metzora– In the Land of Your Possession

BY: CHANA TOLCHIN

An important element of the law of tzara’at, leprosy, on a house is revealed in its peculiar introduction. The verse says, “כִּי תָבֹאוּ אֶל-אֶרֶץ כְּנַעַן, אֲשֶׁר אֲנִי נֹתֵן לָכֶם לַאֲחֻזָּה; וְנָתַתִּי נֶגַע צָרַעַת בְּבֵית אֶרֶץ אֲחֻזַּתְכֶם.”“When you come to the land of Canaan that I am give you as a possession; and I will inflict leprosy in the houses of the land you possess.[1]” (Leviticus 14:34). As opposed to the laws of tzara’at on the body or on a garment, which the People of Israel observed immediately in the desert, tzara’at of the home applies only in the Land of Israel (Chezkuni, 13th century, France). This is not, as we might have thought, due to the fact that tents in the desert were temporary and the houses in the Land of Israel were actual homes; rather, the law of tzara’at on a house seems to be fundamentally linked to the land of the Land of Israel. The Malbim (19th century, Ukrainian) questions the seeming redundancy in the opening verse when God tells us that “the land of Canaan” is the land “that I give you as a possession” – didn’t we know that already? The Malbim’s answer is that the additional phrase exists to specify that this isn’t referring to the land of Sichon and Og, settled by the 2½ tribes on the other side of the Jordan River, but instead exclusively to the land within the borders of the Land of Israel. The fact that the case of tzara’at on a house can only occur within the boundaries of the Land of Israel figures prominently in the nature of the laws concerning it.
As we know, when the People of Israel entered the Land of Israel they conquered the land from the seven nations that inhabited it. The houses of the Land of Canaan were built and lived in by these nations before the People of Israel defeated their armies and took over their homes. Rashi (11th century, France) explains that tzara’at of the house is actually an advantageous occurrence because when the house is demolished the owners will discover all the jewels that the Amorites who lived there previously hid in the walls. Rashi’s interpretation is fascinating firstly because it suggests a positive reward as a result of tzara’at, but also because it reminds us that these homes did not originally belong to the People of Israel.
Rashi’s explanation that tzara’at strikes a house in order to reveal the hidden treasures inside seems to have nothing to do with the wrongdoings of the current Israelite resident. Even in the simple reading of the verses, there is a noticeable distance between the house and its resident. The verse refers to the homeowner as the “ish asher lo habayit,” almost as if it were arbitrary who happens to live in which house. When the house contracts tzara’at, the family is ordered to remove all of their possessions, currently pure, so that nothing will be left inside and designated “tamei””impure” once the kohen, the priest, gets there. This looks suspiciously like a way of fooling the system – the family has to hurry to move everything out before the kohen arrives, or else he will pronounce it all tamei! The verses ensure that only the house obtain impurity, and not anything or anyone that was inside it. The residents and possessions are purposefully removed from the site of the tzara’at, and they remain absent from the rest of the description.
Chezkuni posits that the reason the verse explicitly states that God will inflict tzara’at onto a house (“וְנָתַתִּי נֶגַע”“and I will inflict”) is because the Canaanites practiced idol worship in these very homes, and since we have no way of knowing exactly where that took place, God sends tzara’at so that we may destroy those places of sin. For Chezkuni, the sin of the former residents is the cause of the tzara’at and the reason for the destruction of the home, as opposed to Rashi, for whom the deeds of the Amorites result in the silver lining element that comes after the destruction of the home. However, both interpretations pick up on the same key element: that tzara’at of the home is inherently linked to the sinful actions performed in these homes by the nations who lived there before the People of Israel inhabited them.
Various examples across the Bible shed light on the meaningful connection between a homeowner and his home, which prompts many commentators to interpret tzara’at of the home as being a physical manifestation of the slanderous speech or corrupted behaviors of those who live in it. However, in light of the opinions of Rashi and Chezkuni, the statuses of ownership and residency become less clear. When the People of Israel enter the Land of Israel they take over homes formerly built, owned and lived in by idol worshipping nations, and the ownership status of those sinful people remains on some level until the house is destroyed. Although it wouldn’t make sense for God to send tzara’at as punishment for the sins of non-Jews, the tzara’at seems to be coming at least partially from a source of corruption that existed before the People of Israel even got there. Next week’s parsha, Acharei Mot, articulates a similar notion: “וְלֹא-תָקִיא הָאָרֶץ אֶתְכֶם, בְּטַמַּאֲכֶם אֹתָהּ, כַּאֲשֶׁר קָאָה אֶת-הַגּוֹי, אֲשֶׁר לִפְנֵיכֶם.”“And if not, the land will disgorge you because of your defilement of it, just as it disgorged the nations that were before you.” (Leviticus 18:28). This is a direct warning to the People of Israel against contracting tumah, impurity, and being expelled from their land, in a similar manner to what happened to the nations before them. It sounds like a macrocosmic level of our case of tzara’at on a house, where the inhabitants are expelled because of tumah, in connection to the “הַגּוֹי, אֲשֶׁר לִפְנֵיכֶם”“the nation that came before you”.
When the People of Israel arrive in the Land of Israel, the land is literally built on the stones of corruption. Living in the Land of Israel immediately following the conquest of the land is to live a precarious existence. The People of Israel are responsible for altering the spiritual state of the land, but with this responsibility also comes a vulnerability to the very forces that they are commanded to eradicate. Tzara’at on houses functions as a warning to the People of Israel not to act in the ways of the nations before them. According to Sanhedrin 71a, “There has never been, nor will there ever be, a house smitten with tzara’at.” Although this scenario never actually occurred, the challenge of combating surrounding forces is one that always exists for our nation. The laws of tumah and taharah, purity and impurity, in our parsha are crucial to monitoring our own levels of purity, not just internally but also as a means of resisting the forces that surround us.

[1] Translations provided by Dov Fields
**Re-posted with permission of the author from: Amud -The Columbia/Barnard Undergraduate Journal of Torah http://columbiaamud.wordpress.com/

Friday, April 1, 2011

Parshat Tazria: Grappling With The Tradition

BY: ILANA HOSTYK
As students at Stern College, and thus extremely conscious of our label as both women and as Jews, my friends and I consistently grapple with the struggle presented by misogynistic texts. Sitting in our seats during Stern’s shabbes davening, many of us squirm during certain parts of Torah reading, listening to hurtful sections being proclaimed by men in lyrical sound to the community. How one reacts during those different sections is very much up to one’s personal discretion. This dvar Torah offers a few suggestions for a smoother listening experience of this week's parsha, which my friends and I bounced around in preparation for this week’s reading of the Torah portion, for every person must take the words of her heritage and turn it into their own Torah.
Parshat Tazria, a parsha about impurity, begins with a woman giving birth and details the necessary actions during the impurity that follows. This bizarre result, that the essentially female natural process of childbirth thrusts women into impurity, creates the necessity to reexamine the essence of this law. The following are two suggestions for ways one may look at it:
The first is a more metaphysical notion. Since all of life is a journey through impurity, through the ups and downs, the trials and the errors, it is a humbling yet reassuring thing to be able to start off one’s life confronting the notion of impurity. The metaphysical impurity surrounding childbirth is a reassuring way to begin one's life, showing her/him that just because something goes through it's times of impurity, doesn't necessarily mean life is doomed. It is a way to embrace the vitality of the human experience, human frailty cast in a new light. Impurity is that much a part of the human experience, an essential part along the road. R` Avraham Ibn Ezra echoes a similar theme in his commentary on the parsha.
Although the metaphysical answer still requires a loss of dignity for the mother, this second answer reframes the biblical law in an entirely positive way. One can very easily view this law as a protection of the woman.  In the law, the woman is deemed impure for a week if she gives birth  to a male, and two weeks if  she gives birth to a female. Having a resting period after giving birth was, and still is, an important and ethical thing, but probably many times not granted. A man would have been able to control the woman, and might not have allowed her that healing period before forcing her back into routine. This week break serves as a strong sexual protection for the healing woman.
No matter how one comes to grip with the different biblical texts that serve as the foundation of our tradition, one should keep in mind that there is a vastness of ethical potential hidden within.