Active Faith (Lech Lecha #3)

One interesting understandings of the name Yisrael is as He Who Wrestles with God. As the Torah clearly states, the Children of Israel are a stiff-necked people; we wrestle with God because basic, blind faith is not the foundation of our relationship with the Divine. The thirteen principles of faith, as enumerated by Maimonides, are referred to as Ani Ma’amin, which is usually translated as “I

believe.” But the grammar is a little awkward. On OU.org (from 2006), there is a definition of the term ma’amin that states that translating it as believe or one who believes is inaccurate because “the grammatical form is ‘hepheil,’ the ‘causative,’ rather than ‘pa’al,’ the ‘active,’ indicating a more pro-active verb. In other words, believing in something of a spiritual nature, requires an effort of the mind and the imagination of the individual, and is not merely a passive ‘act.’”

It may seem strange to speak of Yisrael, the name given to Yaakov after he wrestled with a Divine messenger, in a dvar Torah of Parshas Lech Lecha. Perhaps, however, it is the perfect spot, for does not any journey of achieving active belief begin with lech lecha – go for yourself. More than that, within the parsha and the journey of Avram, we see that even the greatest of believers has questions and seeks assurance.

In five separate instances in Parshas Lech Lecha, Hashem speaks to Avram and reassures him. The first appearance is the command of lech lecha, go for yourself. This was Hashem’s first direct communication with Avram. His second is shortly thereafter, when Avram and family arrive in Canaan and Hashem declares that “to your seed I will give this land” (12:7). These two promises are necessary since they are, in a way, explanatory of why Avram should make this journey and to confirm that this is the land he will inherit.

But when Avram finds his promised land suffering a dire famine, Hashem doesn't speak to him or offer a reassurance. Avram didn't need it. He was on a journey. There was no questioning from Avram because he was actively moving forward. He went to Egypt, and, for his hishtadlus (effort), he eventually saw the necessity of going to Egypt, to acquire wealth and to demonstrate Hashem’s direct protection of his family.

After such a dramatic journey to Egypt and back, it seems, then, particularly interesting that it is only after the departure of Lot that Hashem felt the need to repeat His promise. After Avram sends Lot away, Hashem immediately speaks to him of inheritance and ownership of the land, commanding him to “walk the land, to its length and to its breadth,” (13:17).

The first time Avram separates from Lot, Hashem knows Avram will benefit from reassurance. After all, Lot had been with him on his entire journey thus far. The second time they separate, after Avram intervenes in the war between the kings, rescues his nephew, and sends Lot away again, Avram steps forward to question his childlessness. “O Lord God, what will You give me since I am going childless, and the steward of my household is Eliezer of Damascus?...Behold, You have given me no seed, and behold, one of my household will inherit me” (15:3-4). Avram trusts Hashem, but he is willing to question Him. His question is a request for clarity, for seeing the path forward. For this, Hashem instructs him in the Bris Bein Ha’baturim, the Covenant of the Parts, and provides him with a prophetic testimony of the future.

It is interesting that Hashem does not feel a need to reiterate his promise to Avram for another 13 years. Perhaps because Avram was seeing how his wish for a son when it is fulfilled in Avram’s time frame is not the path set out by God. Avram’s oldest son is Ishmael, the son of Hagar. For 13 years, Avram must have struggled to understand how this child – willful, devious, and so oppositional to Avram’s journey – could be his heir. Avram must have wondered how Hashem could fulfill his promise of a child and made that child so not right for journey ahead. But Hashem needed Avram to see and to understand so that he could accept Hashem’s request and requirement of bris milah. His watching Ishmael prepared him for the physical covenant made through his body that was necessary for Yitzchak to be born, for the spiritual DNA to pass from parent to child. This too was the moment when he developed past his own wants to one who could fully understand that he needed to heed Hashem’s desires for him. This understanding was critical for the coming test of the Akeida.

Lech Lecha is a parsha of emuna. Most of us have grown up reading it in awe of Avram’s seemingly blind faith to leave his home and everything familiar. But it was never blind faith. It was always about being ma’amin, an active and engaged believer. And from here we can learn how it is through being a ma’amin that we develop a true relationship with Hashem.

This dvar Torah is dedicated to a refuah shelaima for: Binyamin Yisrael ben Chanita, Dovid Chaim ben Tzipora, Melech Chaim ben Bella, and Chaim Yehoshua ben Frumit.

What Clean Means (Noah #3)

Life is precious - all life. This might be a strange statement with which to start a Dvar Torah on parshas Noah, the parsha in which Hashem destroys all life save for Noah, his family, and all the animals he brought with him into the Ark. However, in an era where people are once again clamoring about distinctions being both good and bad, perhaps we can find a new insight into the role of the Jewish people.

Of all the stories in the Torah, Noah is one of the most familiar. It has been absorbed, shared, and retold by the common culture. And yet it is interesting to note that in almost every depiction - whether artistic, toy, or comical - there is more focus on the animals arriving two by two than on the actual details given in the Torah that necessitate some animals boarding the teva in seven pairs. The confusion is easy to understand. First of all, it is much easier to envision two of every animal rather than trying to understand how the Ark could contain two of each animal and then some. Just picture six additional sets of oxen, not to mention twelve more giraffes. More seriously, however, the two by two depiction is most probably because Hashem first declares: "And of all that lives, of all flesh, you shall take two of each into the Ark. To keep alive with you; they shall be male and female. From birds of every kind, cattle of every kind, every kind of creeping thing on the Earth, two of each shall come to you to stay alive" (6:18 - 19).

It is only four verses later, into the next chapter and after Noah has completed the Ark., that Hashem tells him: Of every clean animal you shall take seven pairs, males and their mates, and of every animal that is not clean, two, a male and its mate; of the birds of the sky also, seven pairs, male and female, to keep seed alive upon all the Earth " (7:2-3).

The most intriguing thing about these verses is that Hashem does not, here, specify what He means when He tells Noah "of every clean animal." Later in the Torah, after Bnei Yisrael has been established, we learn about the requirement of chewing the cud and split hooves and about which animals to be careful not to mistake for acceptable, but not here. Here is just a vague instruction. Rashi says that in these verses there is proof that Noah knew the Torah. Other commentators postulate that Noah came to his own correct conclusion of which animals were clean based on whether the animals were faithful to their species in their mating. Interestingly, Nachmonides suggests that "From each of them came two - a male and female - of their own accord. Noah additionally brought six pairs of the clean animals. Those [two] animals that came to be saved came of their own accord, but as for those that were needed as offerings, [Noah] exerted himself in the performance of the commandment [to take them in]."

This commentary hints at the secondary discussion of the question as to why Noah needed more clean animals than regular animals. At this time, humankind was still forbidden from eating meat, so the goal here could not have been a permissible food source. Rather it is understood by most of the commentators that the instructions to bring seven pairs of clean animals into the Ark was in order to provide a supply of acceptable offerings after they exited the Teva. The concept of clean and unclean animals may have been mysterious to Noah - as, indeed, one might even say about the need for a diet with such distinctions remains mysterious today since it is a chok (a halacha/law that has no common sense explanation) - but there are some particular characteristics that do appear common among, although not exclusive to, the kosher animals. For instance, the fact that kosher animals are neither hunters nor scavengers.

Within his larger commentary, Chizkuni makes an interesting statement: “Seeing that due to the fact that these species (clean animals) would [one day] be allowed as food, the dangers that unless there were multiple pairs of them in the Ark, they might die out, make it plausible that the Torah ordered him to take seven pairs of each. Even though certain other unclean mammals serve as food for the gentiles, such as pigs, etc, the fact that these give birth to multiple young made it unlikely that they would die out even if only a single pair of them would be taken into the Ark…. ‘take for yourself;’ seven males and seven females each, so as to diminish the chances that they would die out” (translation from Sefaria).

This seemed an interesting thought in that while there are plenty of wild animals that give birth to only one or two offspring at a time (like elephants), many of the unclean creatures have surprising rates of reproduction. No kosher animals produce their young in litters or broods, and so Hashem took action to make certain of their survival.

Rabbi Shimshon Raphael Hirsch comments on the term habehaima hatahara, the clean animal, that "tahar is related to tzahar, the transparent, the particles of which are homogeneous, and allow rays of light to pass through them. So that tahar is receptive, that which allows God’s rays to pass through, offers no resistance to them."

There is an integral aspect of the so-called clean animals that makes them tahor, that makes them more receptive to the Divinity in the world, which is why they were acceptable as offerings and, eventually, designated as food for the nation that chose an active relationship with Hashem.

Rav Hirsch concludes his commentary, however, by explaining that the commandment for additional animals doesn’t have such a mundane purpose. Why are these animals designated as clean, or pure, he explains that the command to take "seven pairs of the clean animals, was given to Noah with an eye to his future offerings, or for the future requirements for food in accordance with the laws of God, or out of consideration of both factors, in any case we can understand why this command is introduced with the name Hashem. Simply for the purpose of the preservation of the animal world in general there would be no reason for taking more than three times more of the clean animals. The ‘purity’ of animals only exists in connection with the purposes of the education of humankind which the name Hashem represents.”

These ruminations on the animals declared clean and the animals declared unclean have a shadow of a thought about the world population in general and the Jewish people. The concept of being a nation singled out is often misunderstood. It does not make us better; it means that we are expected to live up to a higher purpose. Hashem provided the children of Avraham, Yitzchak, and Yaakov with special rules and a different task from the rest of the nations because they opened themselves up to be receptacles of Hashem’s gifts, like the tahor animals. And like the clean animals taken in as extras on the ark, the Jewish people have been willing to sacrifice themselves to bring Hashem into the world. But while the extra clean animals are wanted and needed, this does not mean that Hashem’s love for the whole is any less, for Hashem made it clear first and foremost that “of all that lives, of all flesh, you shall take two of each into the Ark.”

*Tahor is most often translated as either clean or pure, neither of which is an accurate definition.

Seeing God (Bereishis #2)

 Bereishis: Seeing Good

When the time came for the Ribono Shel Olam, Master of the World, to make the first human being, the ministering angels made themselves into competing counsels. Some of them said, ‘don’t create humans,’ and the others said, ‘create them.’ The angel of chesed (kindness) said, ‘create them, for they will do acts of loving kindness.’ Then the angel of emes (truth) said, ‘do not create them, for they will be full of lies.’ The angel of tzedek (righteousness) said, ‘create them, for they will establish justice.’ The angel of shalom (peace) said, ‘do not create them, for they will be in constant strife!’ What did the Ribono Shel Olam, do, but grab up emes and hurl it to the earth. Whereupon the ministering angels said before the Ribono Shel Olam, ‘Ruler of all worlds, what have You done? Why have You so chastised the chief of your court? Let emes arise again from the earth’ (Bereshit Rabba, 8:8).

The Zera Shimshon, as recorded by Rabbi Nachman Seltzer, explains that “the Ribono shel Olam listened to what emes was saying. When it was time to create man, He threw emes down to earth, forcing it to play a role in a world whose default setting is one of compromise, and which desperately needs truth to balance the scale so the compromises bring it close to truth and ultimate justice” (page 46).

Truth was cast to earth, and yet we are all aware of how difficult a time humankind has both with sticking to the whole truth and with discerning when people are or are not telling the truth. Indeed, this seems even more so the case in recent times, when rather than participate in conversation, many feel justified in shouting their opinions rather than researching facts. And even when facts are known they are used as justifications for one point of view over another rather than as information upon which a person can use their own free will and critical thinking. Indeed, a little more of that necessary spirit of compromise would be greatly beneficial.

While things feel more desperate today, one could look at history and suggest that this is simply the way of the world. Humanity has always struggled with balance and compromise. God cast truth to the earth, but truth itself was hidden in the world. More importantly, the ability to see absolute truth – to understand the greater picture from all perspectives – remained purely in the hands of the Ribono shel Olam. This is perhaps reflected in the first chapter of Bereishis, when it is written on the first day: “And God saw that the light was good. And God separated between the light and the darkness” (1:4).

We see here, in the very first steps of creation, the seeming necessity of division, of having two sides to contrast against one another. Could there be light if there was not darkness? Rabbi Yonason Eibeschutz, quoted in Sefer Talelei Oros:

Observes that normally good qualities are recognized in contrast to their opposites. For instance, if we see a good person and an evil person we recognize the goodness of the first by contrasting it with the evil of the second. Therefore, the order of the verse should have been reversed. The recognition of the goodness of the light would come as a result of its contrast to darkness. However, this limited vision only applies to human beings. God knows the value of everything in absolute terms.

Humankind can only choose what they believe is good based on what they believe is bad. But being able to look at the integral essence and know something is good is a quality reserved for the Divine. This is how the world needs to be if it is not to be torn apart by division. Free will demands that we have to shape our morality, even within the parameters guided by Torah, just as Free Will necessitates the lack of open miracles so that we might retain the ability to make choices.

It is easy, of course, to sit here and write a reminder to all that humankind’s hold on truth is fluid. We like to make much of being on the right side, of the us versus them, which leads, unfortunately, into a thought pattern of good verses evil. But rather than focusing on the division, or on claiming to be the light – the good and true - perhaps we need to spend more time thinking about how our world thrives on differences.

There is a phrase that has become quite common in the media and in public discourse: “My Truth.” No phrase brings to mind so quickly the fact that humans are incapable of pure objectivity. We always have an agenda of some level or another. And in a world where truth is so heavily influenced by perspective, it is especially important to remember that the ultimate decision of what is good is in the hands of Hashem.