Good to be a Jew

2008-03-16T13:39:00.007-05:00

REALITIES OF RELIGION, II

Sometime in the late’50's, when I was a rabbinic student in Cincinnati, I read The Realities of Religion, a short book by Abraham Cronbach, who had been my father’s teacher at the same school. Cronbach, who had taught, so I was told, every subject at Hebrew Union College, had retired to retelling Bible stories with a humanist twist, to writing books, and to leading a pacifist discussion group which I attended. He was a thoroughgoing rationalist -- as was my father, Rabbi Alexander S. Kline, HUC 1933 (Born, Budapest, 1902, died Lubbock, Tex, 1982). I hoped to be a rationalist as well.

The book shaped my thinking.

Cronbach wrote about language. Three points stand out in my memory, having shaped my thinking for 45 years. First: religion is a value system. “Religionize” and “dereligionize” describes what we do when we raise a value to central importance or lower the value to the periphery. For example, in the ancient farming culture, our ancestors religionized fertility. They celebrated harvest festivals and gratefully offered animal and vegetable sacrifices in their Holy Temple. In a later development, in a more urban context, Amos religionized fairness towards the poor and powerless and attempted to dereligionize the sacrificial cult. Today, we Reform Jews follow Amos, and, in place of the ancient cult, we have religionized a long list of moral and ritual practices.

Second, Cronbach conceived God to personify the ultimate in virtue: love, mercy, wisdom, strength, sympathy, imagination. Associating the word “God” with an idea or a value asserts the importance of that idea or value.

Third, believing, as intellectual activity, is but a weak reflection of knowing, far less secure.

One more point. I forget whether Cronbach wrote this or said it in my hearing (claiming to have learned it from another): “The same man may philosophize, theologize, or pray, but he should not attempt them at the same time.” Which is to say, the God we discuss in philosophy class is not the same as the God we have in mind when we pray. This escape – from rationality – clause amounts to bifurcating the mind but has frequently comforted me and others. Irony.

My work and thinking as a rabbi has led me to simplicity (in the sense of Occam’s razor), what I take to be minimal belief. In years of sermons I repeated what I considered a comforting thought: you don’t have to believe in God to function as a Jew. I follow the arguments of the atheists but never really joined them, for two reasons: first, they are strong believers while I am a non believer. Their argument depends on the absence of deity while mine allows for scepticism. Second: I have experienced God – see below. I remain not quite agnostic.

I religionize actions – both ethical and ritual – over ideas. The early years of my career I devoted to two movements, racial integration and ending the war in

Viet Nam

. Once our children were born, I turned to experiential practice – spirituality in doing things. Eventually my interest focused on God. (My beloved wife, Barbara, patiently put up with the shifts.) Perhaps my father’s teacher still reaches me. I name this essay with Cronbach and my father in mind. It is a personal statement. Come to think of it, Cronbach may have written his Realities as a brief, personal, statement. Mine is briefer, with far less claim to scholarly standing.

PHILOSOPHIZING

Note the Hebrew verse from Proverbs that serves as part of the title. Its translation: “Trust in Yah (Adonai, frequently rendered “The Lord) with all your heart (i.e. “mind”) and rely not on your understanding?” The question mark is, of course, not there in the original. I supplied it. Perhaps there once prevailed an anti intellectual attitude which valued trust over thinking. Read as advice, Proverbs 3:5 would be one more of the obsolete prescriptions found in ancient writings. On the other hand, as a rhetorical question, the words point to the contrast between thinking and believing.

Theorem: there is no data about God. We have no testable and repeatable observations that would satisfy our scientific way of thinking. Vast libraries of reasoning and personal stories fall short of the simplest test. Personal history leads me to accept the validity of religious experience mine and others’, through which a person may claim to “know God.” A similar event seems to affect everyone who cares to talk about it: for a moment a person feels with certainty the presence of God. The knowledge is absolute if subjective, less than scientific but sufficiently empirical to impact a lifetime. Surprising, but real enough.¹ Absent such an experience, believing (or not believing) in God must be our sole standard. Once we have had the experience, we can say we know, though not much! Still, there is a big difference between knowing and believing, i.e., receiving/accepting stories and credos regarding God. Epistemology counts.

I can tell you about my two religious experiences and in one respect, mine will, I’m certain, resemble anyone’s. The flash of awareness leaves us momentarily reassured, strengthened, and at peace.

The first stunned me at age twenty, towards the end of junior year abroad at Hebrew University. On a holiday I hitched a ride with a trucker headed south from Beer Sheva. The road was long, narrow, twisting, and mostly free of traffic. In 1956, from time to time, fedayeen attackers from the Sinai Peninsula and the Gaza strip struck. One traveled armed through the Negev on the way to Eilat. The driver asked if I had a pistol so that I could ride “shotgun.” He told me he would take me anyway, just for conversation. He reached over to the glove compartment to show me his armament, a hand grenade. In his military experience, he told me, hand grenades were more reliable than guns for personal protection. About halfway into the six hour drive, we saw another big truck pulled over to the side of the road, apparently abandoned. A bad sign. My instinct was to step on the gas and get as far away as quickly as possible from this scene. Instead, the driver stopped on the road, looked around, and spoke softly and tensely: “You stay here. I know the driver of that truck and I’m going to look for him.” He took his grenade and went where I could not see him or he me. Nightmare conditions. The driver and I were exposed and vulnerable. He was courageous and seemed to know what he was doing. I was alone and unprotected, feeling totally helpless. I have never before or since been frozen in such threat. I remember thinking snatches of prayer for my life, but I was not among those of great faith. Then it happened. I became aware of a Presence. No visuals, no sound, or any other sense contact. But I experienced God being there as clearly and surely as anything you can see, hear, feel, smell, or taste. The awareness lasted for maybe a second. I felt linked, at one, with the Other. The effect was instantaneous: I was no longer alone. That made a world of difference. Terror vanished, replaced not by terror of attack, or a feeling of being protected, but by the immense comfort of Company. Had I been attacked, which I wasn’t, I think I might have responded with courage and intelligence. The author of Psalm 23, “The Lord is my shepherd. . .” may have had an experience similar to mine in the Negev, and felt security in “Thou art with me.” The theological imagery and hyperbole of protector/provider is a matter of poetic license, the warm feeling is real.

The second encounter, 13 years later, happened a week after our first child was born. Fears of unknown genetic threats had been just below the surface during the previous nine months. Now that Avi was here and healthy I felt weighted with a responsibility for his care and education that seemed too great for any one or two people to bear. His bassinet was by the table at the first Shabbat dinner of his life and he was crying. Barbara lit the candles. I had read in Heschel about the practice of fathers blessing their children at the Shabbat table and we had decided to reclaim the ritual. I picked him up and held him at eye level so that we looked at one another. He quieted down as the words began. At some point during that blessing it happened again: the Presence was there. The oneness with humanity, the world. This time the resulting feeling was of supportive backup, replacing the terror of inadequacy. The moment energized me for the task ahead.

That’s it for me. Two brilliant flashes. Since then there have been hints and reminders (twice while meditating) but no further revelations, much as I have yearned for and sought after the powerful endorphin-like dose of reassurance. I think that at the heart of the mystic tradition is a similar search. Once you experience God, you may well spend the rest of your days craving more and writing poetry about the craving, as for example: “As the hart panteth after the water brooks, so panteth my soul after Thee.” (Psalm 42:1)

Not everybody has had such a revelation to point to, to remember. Scriptures are packed with stories of communications from God, most all of which, in my reading, are literary devices, conceived by authors who spoke of the distant past to lend importance to ideas and events. They don’t remotely resemble my experience. On the other hand, here are two classic descriptions of revelation that ring realistic, one from Hebrew Scriptures, the other from rabbinic/ philosophic treatment of a Scriptural passage. The first, despite its being undoubtedly a legend, is the most sensitive description of spiritual experience I have encountered in literature. The second astounds me in its comprehensive effect.

Elijah the prophet (I Kings 17- II Kings 2) in the days of King Ahab in Samaria, must have been a spirited and unpredictable, rather wild type. The stories about him amaze with miracles and strange deeds. The king calls him “troublemaker.” The queen, Jezebel, seeks to have him killed. At one point, Elijah runs away, from the northern kingdom,

Israel

, all the way to Mt. Sinai, called Horeb here, a forty day wondrous journey on the strength of one preparatory meal. Once there he holes up in a cave to meditate about his life. The question, from God, is: what is he doing here? He answers with a complaint: “I have been a zealot for Yah² while the nation has broken their Divine covenant, torn down their altars, killed their prophets, and now they’re after me.” What better place, Moses like, to be in the presence of God? First comes a mighty wind, powerful enough to split mountains and fracture stones. Yah was not in that wind. Next came an earthquake but Yah was not there either. Following the earthquake a fire, and Yah was still not there. Finally, the sound of silence.³ Having “heard” the non verbal, non objective (sound of one hand clapping?), Elijah rises, wraps himself in his mantle, and heads back home, knowing exactly what to do. The awesome immediacy of God returns him to task. The specifics follow secondarily, listed in pedestrian Biblical terms as instructions from above – political acts in Damascus and Samaria, and naming a successor among his acolytes. (II Kings 19:8-17)

In Exodus 20 and Deuteronomy 5 we read the fundamental story of Moses and the Decalogue on Mt. Sinai: the entire nation gathered at the foot of the mountain, while Moses stands, in the clouds and smoke at the top, with God. “Face to face Yah spoke with you on the mountain from the midst of the fire. I stood between Yah and you at that time to relay to you the word of Yah, for you were afraid of the fire and would not ascend the mountain.”(Deuteronomy 5:4f) An early rabbinic interpretation has it that

Israel

heard distinctly from God only the first two commandments: I am Yah. . . and You shall have no other gods. . ., before they chose to let Moses listen to the rest, trusting his word. (Makkot 24a, Midrash Rabbah, Exodus 33:7, among others) Another early source has all the laws conveyed in a single utterance (dibur echad, Mechilta Bachodesh 4). And the Zohar (13^th century or earlier kabalist text) holds that the opening Divine utterance of I (anochi) contained all commandments of the Torah. (Zohar Book 2 85b) I first heard this midrash from my teacher Jacob Petuchowski and he added that all the Israelites had to hear from God at Sinai was the first letter of the first word, the silent alef of anochi. The rest of Torah devolves to us via human agency. This classic rabbinic source offers the thought that what we call “revealed law” is in reality an ongoing response to experiencing God. My take on this: human experience of God is universal; creative individuals within diverse cultures develop beliefs and practices always to suit their own time, place, and character. I address the Jewish character in the sections on Torah and

Israel

Revelation itself contains no data. No commandments. No details or descriptions. “God is source of strength” describes how an event makes me feel, not a quality I observed in God. God-talk, and its associated ethical and ritual prescriptions, comes from the peculiar genius of some individual or individuals.

Jews attribute our religion to the patriarchs, to Moses, to the prophets of antiquity. We hold our ancestors to have been closer to God and hence more deserving than we. The greater the distance in generations, the higher we hold them. In reality, we know little or nothing about those characters. Scriptures may be said to be stories told by our ancestors about their ancestors. They wrote because their subjects were worthy of saga.⁴ The story tellers and law codifiers may have preserved words they heard or read. To me it seems more likely that they authored the narrative and dialogue and collected from contemporary usage lists of laws and regulations. The 8^th century BCE prophets Amos and Isaiah couched their pioneering moral thought in memorable verse. (E.g. “Let justice roll down as water and righteousness as a mighty stream,” Amos 5:24. “They shall beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks,” Isaiah 2:4.)

I have come to empathize with the prophets. It may be that where they took their revelation as a command to speak out I took mine as a personal discovery that affected only me. I certainly would never argue that God granted me any extra insight or knowledge. I doubt that Isaiah, who felt a Devine demand for justice, ever meant to convey that God spoke the lines, ventriloquist like, that he, Isaiah, composed.⁵ We rabbis, like those ancient preachers, attempt to interpret life in ways that make sense and that help people move in the direction of health and peace. Some of us get quoted in the media. Once in a great while a phrase enters common vocabulary, as A. J. Heschel (1965): “When I marched in Selma, my feet were praying.”

What is remarkable here is, I think, that Divine encounter can not be said to confirm the theology of this or that religion, nor is spiritual experience required for one to be religious or to preach sermons.

Five years following my initial God encounter I found myself studying in Mir Yeshivah in Jerusalem. A kolel scholar (sort of a graduate student) gave me private lessons every morning because I could not have kept up with the teenage students, all accomplished in Talmud. After a few weeks I told my instructor about the day in the Negev. He declared that this was surely no divine revelation because it did not affect my observance of Jewish law. He also assured me that he had never had anything he would call an encounter with God but that did not prevent him from an exemplary dedication to Torah study and practice. He knew what he had to do because he had learned it and he believed he was commanded by God to observe the law.

A common usage in Koran is the distinction between believers and non believers (more accurately, “deniers”). In Islam – and in Christianity – correct belief is primary and essential. You might expect the same in Judaism, but you’d search the classic sources in vain for references. In Torah, deeds, moral and ritual, constitute the primary and essential, with not much talk about belief. Belief seems to be assumed, but absent belief, the act, counts just the same. For us a parallel to the encomium “believing Christian” is “practicing Jew.”

I have met religious people who make a virtue of believing – the more there is to believe, the better they like it. They are the ones who take pride in accepting that Jonah lived three days in a big fish. Some religions start with Bible and add more scriptures and their adherents have no problem believing it all. Believing is a facility that, like muscle strength, becomes stronger with practice. I have met skeptics who admire such strength. Some say they wish they could have faith like so-and-so. Such incongruity, I think, comes from living as a minority among satisfied believers in creationism and the supernatural. It resembles yearning for childish innocence.

Belief has its function. "I know that water is H₂O" can be said by someone who has done the laboratory test where you separate water into its elements. One who has not had this experience can accept the witness of a teacher or a book or what we like to call "common knowledge." Realistically, this would be better described as a "belief." Most of us, most of the time, get along perfectly well basing decisions on such beliefs. Saves time, effort, and thinking. Besides, we want to believe what authorities tell us – parents, teachers, presidents. When reality offers evidence in conflict with belief, we are apt to question our beliefs but we do not give them up lightly. Beliefs that motivate us to action we call “faith,” synonymous in popular usage, with “religion.” Patriotism too raises belief to a virtue. We want to believe our leaders act in the best interests of the country and the people.

Belief is a choice. We choose to believe that God is great, good, loving, that God wants us to be fair and honest, etc. Belief may in itself be a good thing for society. Consider the commonplace: “God rewards the good and punishes the bad.” As troublesome as the statement is for thinkers, just so useful it is for rulers.⁶ For some people, believing signifies confidence, trust, and so stands equal or even superior to knowing, but not for me.

So, philosophically, we can know God but nothing about God. I use here “know” as a relationship term, as I would say “I know” a person after a brief meeting. Knowing God results only from such an encounter. That’s the real “revelation.” Encountering God changes your life in a crisis and the memory persists, but the encounter teaches you no theology. You may be strengthened, encouraged, or validated by the experience but you remain in the dark as to God’s nature (substance or incorporeal, wise, good, or loving). Seek as you may, you have no way back to the encounter. Knowing God, unlike scientific knowledge, is subjective, idiosyncratic, and without intellectual content.

Religion stems from real encounters with that which is beyond us, what we might call spiritual experiences. This tells us about people, not about God. Believing is a secondary, a derivative phenomenon. Still, believing comes to be the essence of religion for followers, adherents, and even non believers who reject religion. What we believe about God depends on who we are, what we have been taught, what we have seen. Established religions suggest to their populations that prophecy, i.e. Devine communication to humanity, was vouchsafed only to long ago, selected individuals, and we have no need for additional revelation, only study and interpretation of what we have received.⁵

I would like to think that emphasis on believing is less risky in religion than in politics and physics. But the world is now all too aware of suicide bombers motivated by belief who see themselves as virtuous martyrs bound for heaven. Leaders long ago learned to blend religion with politics to influence a population, to agitate for change. Preachers helped bring down Jim Crow in the

U.S.

The difference between the bombers and the marchers, I think, is the element of nonviolence as value and strategy. (We see little of nonviolence in the west prior to the mid 20^th century when Mahatma Gandhi convinced an occupied population of its effectiveness in the struggle for independence.) Violence seems primordial. The stories make us see the Israelites as fearsome warriors. Nonviolence must be taught and learned. Humanity created “in the image of God suggests the value of life. In Leviticus we find: “Love thy neighbor as thyself.” Isaiah and Micah both speak of peace as a goal.⁶ Nonviolence in the political sense is not there. It is new Torah, the result of fresh thinking inspired by our forebears thinking. Contemporary interpreters seek and find foreshadows, hints in the ancient writings (as they do for feminism and environmentalism) but these contemporary understandings are our generation’s effort to make sense of the world. It is not that God has had a change of heart and reordered priorities.

THEOLOGIZING

When it comes to theology – talk about God’s nature, attributes, and relation to the world – those who know God from experience and those who do not are in the same boat: logic.⁷ We study and internalize received teachings (i.e. Torah) about God. We reason our own way to concepts, thoughts, and attitudes that make sense. (When our son, Avi, was four, he figured that God kept an eye on whomever He wished simply by changing the channel on His TV.) It would seem that the basic issue of “the existence of God” should be resolved for those who experience God, and perhaps it is, to some degree. The resolution, however, does not turn a non believer into a believer or confirm the veracity of Torah. The knowledge is limited to a moment, and does not include anything about: creation, power, love, justice, mercy, etc.

Judaism, like other religions, is a human effort to deal with existence. The big question is not about God but about the world. What we know about the early ideas and practices of the people known as the Children of Israel (B’nai Yisrael) comes to us from Hebrew Scriptures, a collection of documents reflecting the course of a millennium that began roughly 1,000 BCE.⁸ In that literature of family archives we find ancient wonderings about the world, and, perhaps, responses to religious experiences.

For example, in Exodus we find the story of God as lawgiver at Mt. Sinai. God speaks in thunder and smoke. The whole nation shares the exalting experience though only Moses is called to the top of the mountain to be close to God. The moment results in lists of laws for an orderly society with regulated worship suitable for the world of the time and place. Every list is preceded by “And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying. . .,” or a variant. The idea was to religionize these teachings. The repeated phrase is a literary device. We might call it “homiletic license,” a subset of poetic license. The phrase signifies God as the source of the words in a way similar to a poet invoking the muse but with added weight. In addition to religionizing the practices, it is theologizing, characterizing the figure of God. Lawgiver becomes part of the definition of God.⁹

To my ear, the motif, “And God spoke. . .” invites us to associate with our ancestors and participate in the process of Torah. We should keep listening. Perhaps we will hear God

Exodus – along with Genesis – contains the foundation myth of

Israel

. There is no extra biblical document that corroborates the Egyptian sojourn or Mt. Sinai, or the forty years in the wilderness so the narrative can not be called history, but no matter. (“It may not be history but it’s our story,” said one of my teachers.) We recall and celebrate Mt. Sinai to this day seeing ourselves as having been present there in the person, as it were, of our DNA. We plug ourselves into the image. Some resort to belief, that is we believe that our ancestors stood at the mountain and shared a group religious experience. I prefer skepticism, reading the vivid account as imaginative, insightful and valuable, offering a string of shared “memories,” a common vocabulary of moral concepts. That’s the way myth works. Myth is fiction that we take to heart.

Hebrew Scriptures stories about the world mostly feature God as leading character. (Esther is my favorite exception to the rule.) Who wrote the stories? With the possible exception of the literary prophets, we find no names – authors had no reason, commercial or egotistic, to sign their work. On the contrary, they preferred attributing their work to prominent predecessors. Scholars point to critical details – vocabulary, ideas, attitudes – that might identify a writer’s time and place. These authors may or may not have had religious experiences like yours and mine but some redactor¹⁰ appreciated the value of their writing and collected it into the library we call Torah.

Torah¹¹ amounts to the Jews' received teaching. Primarily, we accept (vŠkŠC©e kabalah refers to that which is “received” or “accepted”) Hebrew Scriptures plus the accretion of ongoing intellectual efforts, featuring those of the rabbis¹². Time honored belief holds Torah to be divine revelation, all of it. With God as source, stories become trustworthy accounts of history. Laws and regulations become authoritative expressions of divine will. To this day some Jews accept the teachings as revealed, rejecting several centuries of critical studies and theorizing. This is idealistic, not realistic, mythological, not epistemological. With human beings as source, which is to say, realistically, Torah is the Jewish cultural, intellectual response to existence, to questions of values, to religious experience. And every chapter reflects historical and geographical conditions. Torah study is a course in intellectual history.

Theological diversity in Torah makes the point. My favorite illustration:

Two distinct and opposing concepts of God present in the opening chapters of Genesis when we read with eyes opened by literary criticism. Classic interpretation sees a unified narrative: first a general account of step by step creating, followed by a more detailed, human interest illuminating of the sixth day episode.¹³ Critical reading, on the other hand, finds two distinct accounts of creation, one that might be named: "The First Week," the other: "The Garden."

Cosmogony is an attempt to explain how the world as we know it came to be. Authors of Hebrew Scriptures pointed to God as the key to understanding existence and this is nowhere more obvious than these two stories where God is the main character. The stories, however, reflect widely divergent understandings of the world and hence alternate God concepts.

We look first at the "Garden" story, most likely the earlier of the two compositions – possibly from the 10th century BCE.¹⁴ The story opens with a dry, desolate vista, unpopulated by vegetable or animal because there is no moisture. Then God, named Yah in this story, brings forth water, and from the mix of earth and water -- clay, forms the man, ha’adam. Next, Yah plants a garden and puts the man there as caretaker. The garden exists for the Owner's pleasure but the gardener may enjoy most of its fruits. Then Yah observes: "It is not good that the man be alone." He Who formed ha’adam from earthy (adamah) raw materials shall correct the defect, the mistake. He forms animal companions, one by one, anticipating a reaction that will indicate which one is the helpmeet, the suitable companion. The man only calls out names: Yah's efforts have failed. Eventually, Yah takes a fresh approach, constructive surgery, and the man awakes to find his female counterpart. Yah is pleased (and relieved?) to hear the words: "Bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh!"

The world of "The Garden" is chaotic but intriguing. Events proceed unpredictably, because the Deity works by trial and error to achieve whatever notion may occur to Him. Human missteps, in the world as we know it, mirror divine missteps in the building process. Yah is well meaning but not always successful, as witness the attempt, several chapters later, to improve the world by flooding it and hoping for better results through selective breeding. The imperfect world reflects its Maker. Rather than perfect, Yah is immanent, sympathetic and approachable, intimately involved in changes that can go in any direction.

"The First Week"¹⁵ – the likely later, 6^th century BCE story – opens on a fluid scene: a shapeless blob of liquid and solid matter. In the first creative act, God (unnamed in this story) speaks light onto the scene. God observes that light is good, names it, and we have day one. Then continuing, in orderly fashion, day by day: space/sky; dry land and plants; sun, moon, and stars; fish and birds; land animals last of which is human, male and female, in the divine image. Each but one step is good, and in the end, all is very good. The seventh day is off, restful, and God blesses it and makes it special. Propagation is the first order of business: plants bear species specific seeds. “Be fruitful and multiply,” God blesses birds, fish, animals, and human beings. People are not only to fill up the earth but to dominate all the rest of creation.

"The First Week" propounds a world of order, purpose, balance. God’s work leaves room for no mistakes, no unintended consequences. All follows a plan, to good effect. Sexual reproduction is natural and desirable in human beings as in other creatures – even plants do seeds. Life and death, good and evil, light and dark, hot and cold, are all cycles in a cause and effect string. The cosmos works perfectly because it was made that way by a perfect God.¹⁶ Natural law is God’s will. God is transcendent, praiseworthy but remote.

The redactor of these stories, possibly P himself, set "The First Week" before "The Garden," allowing, thereby, readers who wanted to, to understand the latter as a footnote to the former and to conflate the God concepts. The order of creation in the two accounts differs. Humanity comes last in “The First Week,” and first in “The Garden.”¹⁷ As for the distinct world views and characterizations of God, the rabbis avoided analyzing either of the two, as if they placed little importance on literary and philosophic aspects. They determined to read the stories as one, allowing for no contradictions, let alone separate human sources. Instead they overlaid the ancient narratives and concepts with their own postbiblical theology: God is omnipotent, omniscient, just, loving, merciful, etc.

For the reader prepared to see the text as it is, the two ways of looking at the world, with their consequent theologies, are, for two reasons, a wonderful opening for Torah. First, the viability of both ideas, order and chaos, determinism and existentialism. Each can effectively describe the world. Sometimes we favor one and sometimes the other. Perhaps we need both (and other ideas, as well) to make sense of what goes on in the world. Second, the fact that religious perspective builds on two, not one (authoritative answer), but two widely divergent God concepts, points in the direction of thinking rather than submissive acceptance.

No Hebrew term comes even near rendering the Greek derived “theology,” suggesting to me that theology is not really a normative Jewish pursuit. In my years at Hebrew Union College, the 1950's, there was no course labeled “Jewish theology.” Under “Jewish Religious Thought” we first studied Midrash – stories and principles derived from Hebrew Scriptures, continuing what might be called “narrative theology.” We turned to systematic philosophers, the first of whom were influenced by Moslem teachers of Aristotle and Plato. Maimonides (12^th century

Spain

and North Africa) wrote a lot about God, even listing a set of principles which some accept as “articles of faith.”¹⁸ I am fascinated by the God concepts of our biblical ancestors. Later theology is of lesser interest to me except for its appearance in the Sidur (“Order [of worship],” prayer book).

PRAYING¹⁹

Jewish public worship as we know it today follows Sidur compiled by the rabbis. In the context of interfaith actions in Monroe, Louisiana, (where I held a pulpit for 15 years) on numerous occasions I shared a religious service with members of Church of God in Christ, a Black Pentecostal denomination. One woman, bright and enthusiastic, undertook to teach me how to pray as they did, “from the heart,” and, over the course of a few years, with her encouragement, I developed a small facility at speaking extemporary words of thanks, praise, and petition. I attempted it at those small gatherings that opened and closed with prayer (the norm in Louisiana). For Jewish meetings, I sought classical liturgical material for the given situation, with perhaps a few lines of carefully prepared words to bridge from antiquity to the present. I printed out these invocations and read them, as if from my own prayer book. I would still avoid extemporizing.

To the unaccustomed, reading prayer from a book seems an oxymoron, no matter the literary and spiritual quality of the writing. Jews may express ourselves simply and directly in private devotions but personal words are generally not spoken aloud, by one on behalf of others. In the group activity, t’filah b’tsibur, “prayer in public,” we approach God in recognized order and support one another with familiar words and melodies.

Basic form and content in our liturgy have survived two millennia of editing, translating, additions and subtractions, so that prayer style remains one of the distinguishing characteristics of Jews in all cultural and spiritual diversity. Sidur has become Torah and praying blends study and thought with reaching outward, beyond ourselves.²⁰ Sometimes the printed words speak meaningfully for us and sometimes we pay no attention to the meaning – whether out of ignorance or due to rote recitation – and sometimes the words contradict our thinking. Despite judicious deleting on the part of modern editors, a book simply can not continuously speak for a group of individuals nor even for a single individual at different turns of life. Still, we are people of the Sidur, even when worshiping in Hebrew which most of us do not understand. By way of illustration, a memoir:

From Clarksdale, Mississippi, where the Jewish community was grounded in Reform Judaism with its Union Prayerbook, I went to Brandeis University. Hillel, the national organization, provided for two styles of services for Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kipur, one with the UPB, the other with the old Rabbinic Assembly prayer book. Another rabbi’s kid (RK) and I volunteered to help organize the Reform services and a hundred or so of us attended. The two of us thought to try for weekly Shabbat morning services. We made the announcements and posted the signs and nobody showed up. Meanwhile, those from Conservative congregations, particularly those from Camp Ramah, had a dozen regulars every week. OK, I thought, they must be doing something right. At lunch following my first two-hour-plus Shabbat service, I asked the others what kind of praying they were doing when none understood the Hebrew they were singing or rushing through? They agreed that it would be better if they knew the language and understood the words. They were praying by rote the way they had been taught and this troubled them just a bit. Still they felt it proper to pray in Hebrew and every one of them was comfortable with the words, the tunes, the choreography. What’s more, they came back over and over again. I craved what they had, the enthusiasm and sense of community. I was determined to learn and do.

First year Hebrew class was hard for me – grammar mostly, with slow reading and slower writing, no help at all with praying. At summer camp Tel Yehudah when I was fifteen, I had witnessed this style of praying, this “davenen.”²¹ As a child in Mississippi, I sat in awe as Orthodox worship, led by a guest cantor, alternated with Reform, conducted by my father, on Yom Kipur. A few of the melodies have stayed with me. At Brandeis, I continued to attend the Conservative service and by the end of my freshman year, I could keep up with the rest in singing or murmuring on the right page, though, much as I pushed myself, I never learned to read as fast as the leader or those around me. I still can’t.²²

I discovered, that year, classic Jewish prayer. With but minimal comprehension I could still daven and come back for more. Dissolved was disconnect between davenen and what I had thought of as prayer. Not only that, but, where a Reform service seemed overly long at an hour, I remained engaged for as much as two and a half hours when I participated actively. I joined the regulars, and as a sophomore, took my turn leading the service. I began junior year at Hebrew University with an intensive language course. Learning the language was like turning on a new light to words of prayer. Shabbat mornings at different types of synagogues became a highlight of that year in Jerusalem. Even the single, small Reform congregation davened. Over the course of forty plus years in the pulpit, I ceaselessly attempted to reintroduce davenen (including in English) to Jews, who resisted just as I had at Brandeis. Today’s Reform Jews are more likely to enjoy davenen, given summers at camp, given rabbis and cantors who have studied in Israel, given greater comfort in peculiar Jewish ways. When my children were young, I served a congregation that followed Reform practice on Friday evenings and Conservative on Saturday mornings, so all three of them became Sidur adepts.

So, what does the Sidur mean to say about us and our world? The morning liturgy contains a rabbinic list of ten important mitsvot, the eighth of which is וְעִיוּן תְּפִלָּה, v’iyun t’filah, “concentrating in prayer.” “Mindful praying,” is the way I understand it, using the terminology of meditation and Yoga. Praying is largely a thought process but it can work, endorphin like, for good feelings and comfort, and it can be theatrical. In order to have their full effect, Sidur prayers are intended to be repeated, daily, weekly, seasonally, or annually. I’ve selected three lines out of a library of statements to illustrate these three realities in our way of prayer: Sh’ma, Hashkiveynu, and L’chah Dodi.

שְׁמַע יִשְׂרָאֵל, יְיָ אֱלהֵינוּ, יְיָ אֶחָד

Sh’ma Yisrael Adonai Eloheynu Adonai Echad. “Hear O Israel, the Lord is our God, the Lord is One.”²³ We recite this best known – to Jews – of prayers as a declaration of unity framed in theological terms. It is not as if we are arguing with believers in two gods or six or sixteen. We proclaim one God as a way of saying that a single source lies behind all else. Monotheism reflects a one world perspective, universalism. All too commonly, people call themselves monotheists and allege that everyone with a different religion is wrong. They miss the point and venture into absurdity and danger. Realistically, if there is One God, then all of us human beings are family, including monotheists, polytheists, and atheists. Strictly speaking a monotheist is unconcerned about other religions’ claims. Sh’ma is a principle. In Reform synagogues a generation back, the reader would lead in with: “Let us rise to recite the watchword of our faith.” We rose where others sat because we wanted to emphasize an idea.

Monotheism was not at issue in late 7^th century BCE Jerusalem where the Book of Deuteronomy seems first to have appeared. Hebrew Scriptures offer a confusing picture of accepted religious practices and beliefs in the days of the kings. King David is praised for his single minded devotion to Yah, but his son, Solomon, who built a fine temple to Yah, continued building temples, to every other god that the people were accustomed to worshiping in those days. Elijah is said, in the 9^th century BCE, to have demanded the Israelites cease contact with Ba’al, god of fertility. Hosea, in the 8^th century, preaches that Yah feels like a rejected husband when the Children Of Israel consort with other deities. II Kings 22 contains the story of the appearance of what is probably Deuteronomy, or a substantial part of it. We get the impression from the story that prior to discovering this text, people knew of no prohibition against worshiping others along with Yah. Precisely that prohibition is one of several dominant themes running through Deuteronomy, backed up by dire threats for non compliance.²⁴ In this context, Sh’ma reads like an instruction: the people must worship only Yah – our God. Neither this line nor the second commandment, “You shall have no other gods beside Me”(Deut 5:7), implies that none other are available.

By the time of the rabbis monotheism had become a central and unchallenged teaching and that is what they had in mind when they designated Sh’ma as a key prayer. The Mishnah tractate B’rachot records the early prayers and discussions about their meanings and functions. There, regarding the order of paragraphs, we find the following: “Rabbi Y’hoshua ben Korchah said: ‘Why does Sh’ma precede V’hayah im shamoa. . .(“And if you will carefully obey. . .”)? Just so that one accept for oneself the yoke of the Kingdom of Heaven first and then the yoke of commandments.” (M Ber 2:2) First comes the principle, then the consequent actions, in this line of thought. The V’hayah im shamoa paragraph speaks of rewards that come from obedience and punishments for disobedience. The lines are Deuteronomy 11:13-21, and they contain no list of commandments (mitsvot). Rabbi Y’hoshua was thinking of principles, one that must precede another. “Yoke” implies a burden to bear, an obvious metaphor for a list of obligations. But in what sense is the primary principle, one God, “Kingdom of Heaven,” a burden, absent the commandments?

Monotheism is not an easy theology to hold and teach. Polytheism and paganism have colorful stories and facile explanations for life’s questions. Theodicy, for example, bad things happening to good people, is not a problem when there are two or more gods. For many believers God the good has an opponent in Satan the evil. In effect this is dualism. Nationalism goes well with henotheism – one nation, one god. Religions differ so dramatically that they might as well be relating to different gods. Indeed, Judaism’s own mystical trend hints at an aspect of dualism in God’s male and female manifestations.²⁵ Theological universalism offers few simple answers on issues of human rights or bioethics. Monotheism demands maturity and intellectual discipline and offers, in return, a thought provoking way of finding meaning in existence.

This sense of meaning underlining existence is, I think, what the rabbis valued and enshrined in God (i.e. they religionized unity). Liturgists commonly used “King” as metaphor for God. (E.g. the repeated: . . .Eloheynu melech ha’olam. . ., “. . .our God, King of the world. . .”) A king governs alone. And, what is more,“yoke of the Kingdom of Heaven” suggests that, despite conflicting evidence, there is order, purpose, and meaning in all that happens to a person or to a nation. We might get closer to the rabbis’ thinking were we to render for the common phrase, rather than “ruler of the world:” “rule of the world.”

For me, the first and foremost principle is positing/accepting/believing that there is meaning in the universe, that our lives make a difference, that there is right and wrong. Belief in monotheism derives from belief in meaning in the world. “There is one God (– corollary meaningful existence)” is a credo that satisfies my desire for minimal believing. All else follows. A classic practice in reciting Sh’ma is closing and covering the eyes, the better to concentrate and focus on this most abstract and yet critical of visions. Unity frames decision making. Without the demands of monotheism, how to argue whose needs and desires should prevail? In a meaningless existence there is nothing wrong with selfishness there is no standard. Might makes right. It is not that morality proceeds from God (by revelation or by logic), but that morality depends upon: what ultimate difference does it make? No need to belittle or reject non theistic moral thinking in favor of the Jewish approach. On the contrary, when monotheism is real, it is universally humanistic. I think it would be a good idea to return to the “watchword of our faith” idea. Maybe rephrased as: “critical creed.”

In Ma’ariv (“evening service”) is a prayer for a good night’s sleep: Hashkiveynu Adonai Eloheynu l’shalom v’ha’amidenu malkeynu l’chayim. . . “Lay us down, Yah our God, in peace, and stand us, our King, to life...”²⁴ It has something in common with the 18^th century child’s prayer that many of us were taught: “Now I lay me down to sleep, I pray the Lord my soul to keep; And if I die before I wake, I pray the Lord my soul to take.” When we go to sleep we give up control, we loose consciousness, we leave ourselves vulnerable. Going to bed should be relaxing but sometimes it is not. “To die: to sleep; No more,” Hamlet muses. And our liturgy includes a morning wake up line that implies we have been virtually dead in bed: “Modeh ani. . . I am thankful before You, living and existing King, for Your having returned to me my breath (life, soul – nishmati). . .”

Insomnia, however, for most of us, has a more proximate cause: worry. Unfinished tasks, guilty memories, ongoing threats, burdensome responsibilities, fear of bad dreams (Hamlet, again), stress over our exhaustion – the list could go on and on. If only we had some mental/spiritual technique to turn off our insecurities, to relax our worry muscles. Actually Sidur has a remarkably specific bed time prayer, called Kriat Sh’ma al Hamitah (“Sh’ma reading on the bed”) because it features that line. The four page sleep preparation includes Hashkiveinu along with selected Psalms and references to guardian angels and ends with the familiar hymn, Adon Olam.

Sometimes, in leading prayer, I would read aloud a paragraph in Hebrew (different from singing a passage or reading in English). Hashkiveinu became Barbara’s favorite reading as she faithfully attended services as my steadfast supporter and severest critic. The sound of the words in this composition, along with minimal comprehension, affects us like music. (Another example of this is Mourners’ Kaddish, where the cadence and the vibrations, along with our associations, reach beyond the cognitive, into the soul.) You don’t need to be able to parse hashkiveynu to appreciate its poetic sound. Barbara told me that the sound “hahsh” comes to her comfortingly like “sh, be quiet.” And the familiar words l’shalom and l’chayim add to the feeling. Sukat sh’lomecha (“Your sukah shelter of peace”) adds a metaphor. On Shabbat the prayer concludes with Yah spreading the sukah over us, over the people of

Israel

, and over Jerusalem. This nearly palpable picture reminds me of the scene in “Fantasia” where, to the Beethoven “Pastoral Symphony,” Hesperus and his assistants gently draw the blanket of night over the sleepy inhabitants of earth, assuring them good, untroubled, sleep.

No realist would embrace the thought that God will miraculously shelter us from war or any of the other threats mentioned in Hashkiveinu: plague, famine, grief. That would exemplify wishful thinking, i.e. prayer is petition for an impossible or unlikely boon. We could classify the prayer as a faith statement: we place faith in peace. Contrary to evidence in history books and newspapers, peace is real and vital to our sleep and to the wellbeing of all and especially to Jerusalem. This would be plausible and a useful for teaching about the world. I see a third possibility: reciting/hearing Hashkiveinu is in itself, with its sounds and one of the real rewards of public worship. We need such healthful moments for strength to meet the onslaughts we face. The words themselves are good for us.

A bridal march for Shabbat. Emotive, not philosophical. A sensual image to enhance our week. In 16^th century Ts’fat (Safed) there flourished a culture of scholarship and mysticism with big name contributors: Joseph Karo, Shulchan Aruch (“set table”), a four volume compendium of instructions for how to practice Judaism, and Isaac Luria, called “Ari” (“lion”), the Kabalist master. One of the circle of scholars was the poet Shlomo Halevi Alkabetz who wrote the happy words to accompany his group’s weekly practice – walking at Friday sunset to the western side of the mountain, there to greet Shabbat, personified as a bride come for a visit. I have sung a lot of different melodies for this prayer and they are all dance tunes.

L’chah dodi likrat kalah, p’ney shabbat n’kab’lah. “Go, my friend, to meet a bride, let us receive the presence of Shabbat.” The metaphor first appears in Talmud²⁵ and develops in mystical writings.²⁶ The Ts’fat school enlivened the imagery into a weekly wedding between

Israel

and Shabbat, and they sang nine verses filled with scholarly tidbits and cheerful messianic promises. My favorite of the former, verse two, contains this about Shabbat: sof ma’aseh, b’machashavah t’chilah, “end of the act (of creation), in thought the beginning,” or in the felicitous translation of Gates of Prayer, “the last of days for which the first was made.” With “The First Week” story of creation in mind, the poet sees Shabbat as the goal of existence, God’s aim in creating the world. Workdays are the lead up to Shabbat.

But the high point comes at the closing verse: Bo’i v’shalom. . . Bo’i kalah, when we invite the bride to come in. Congregations rise to their feet and turn to face the door at the rear to watch the procession down the aisle! This is theater. Everybody stands, even for an imaginary bride!

Our granddaughter, Ela, age three, who lives upstairs, attended when she was two the wedding of her mother’s dear friend. She was swept away by the bride in her glorious white and thrilled at dancing with her. For weeks afterwards she spoke of little else. And then she learned that her aunt Shira’s recorded song, Bo’i Kalah, that we sing at the table at Friday dinner, was about a bride coming in. And now, she dresses from her costume box in a half slip from her grandmother. It’s her bridal gown. Following the candle lighting, she dashes to the kitchen calling out, Wait! Wait! We start singing Bo’i Kalah “Come on in bride,” and she enters and dances around the table to oohs and aahs.

Ela and her family are acting out the words of the prayer. Bowing when we recite Aleynu, kissing the Torah when it passes by, putting on t’filin are classic examples of theater in the order of worship, Sidur.

A few more brief comments on my experience of prayer:

I incline towards literalism, being moved by words in their simple and compound meanings, so praying the Sidur always stimulates thinking. Worship does not follow from belief, so much as the reverse: worship shapes beliefs. Sidur serves as textbook for Torah teachings and prayer educates. I am not among those committed to frequent and regular synagogue worship but every attendance whets my appetite. The words intrigue and frequently amaze me even with long familiarity. Reciting a prayer, the words, the thoughts, the motions, the music has its effect on me to some degree, every time I do it.

Jogging first thing in the morning six days a week became for me an essential routine when I was 36 years old. Years later, serving a Conservative congregation, I found myself attending Shacharit (“morning”) services, for a half hour davenen with t’filin. This was only for a few days at a time, the course of someone’s shiva (seven day mourning period). Praying that way was a good experience and I considered giving up my morning run permanently. Then, realizing that through repetition, I had learned by heart a significant number of passages, I began reciting them as I jogged each morning. Unquestionably a lesser spiritual moment than the formal service but gratifying enough to continue the practice till this day. Halfway through the run the morning blessings, with their melodies, flow through my consciousness and continue through Sh’ma.²⁷

When I theologize, the order, perfection, and transcendent imagery of “The First Week” creation story appeals to me. When I pray, the personable imagery of “The Garden of Eden” creation story comes to mind more so than the other.

Among the morning prayers is one that opens with the soul coming pure from God and proceeds to one day having it taken away and still later returned. I don’t recite this every day, but when I do (likely close after a funeral) I find comfort in the concept of bodily resurrection. This, despite the strangeness to my thinking of the notion. Similar incongruities occur for me on most pages of the Sidur. This is what Cronbach meant by not attempting to philosophize and theologize while praying. Generally, I can’t turn off the first two processes, and irony strikes me over and over.

I think I heard somewhere that the melody ascends to heaven quicker and more directly than the words of a prayer. Music adds wings to the words. That works for me.

Meditation was a novelty to me when the Transcendental Meditation folks brought it over from

India

back in the 1960's. It was nice to learn that Rabbi Nachman of Bratslav had a version of meditation that we Jews could feel good about but I am grateful to the Hindus for this particular spiritual effort. A sometimes meditator, I have attempted to introduce meditation, guided and unguided, to adults, to teens, and even to elementary school children in my congregations. I consider it a powerful form of prayer.

Music meditation, that is a worship service consisting mostly, if not entirely, in mantra melodies, with druming and dance, is a new and wondrous experience for me. I have long loved inserting nigunim (wordless melodies) into the services, Hassidic style. At B’nei Jeshurun in NYC, the crowd dances the eighth verse of L’chah Dodi. Irresistible. Recently my wife and I, along with our children and grandchildren, were present at a Storahtelling© Shabbat service. The music meditation and the dramatic rendition of the Torah portion convinced us to travel to New York for Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kipur, conducted in part by our daughter, Shira. I am not ready to give up the intellectual and spiritual activity of davenen but I am drawn to this new direction.

The headings, God, Torah, and

Israel

, that outline this essay are the three categories of sermons we were taught at HUC to preach. Thus far is God talk, to borrow an expression from the Christian evangelicals who sprinkle their every conversation with piety. The reality of God talk lies not in theological speculation or argument but in making sense of the world. For our earliest writers, God was key to understanding life, existence, and all the good and bad that we encounter. We moderns rely on science for most such explaining, though we sometimes resort to God in cases of mystery. Einstein liked to say: “God doesn’t throw dice,” (though I don’t see why not) his way of saying that physics is wondrously purposeful. God talk is mostly evaluative, not informational. When we discuss this or that belief about God, we are mostly judging the believers. “An act of God” refers to an event terrible beyond human comprehension. “Under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance, was our nation’s claim to superiority over the godless Communists. In petitionary prayer God is grantor of favors. In other prayers God symbolizes, dramatizes, or focuses thought. Materialism is everything to do with physics and biology. Spirituality is everything beyond the material – feelings, passions, beauty. Spirit is where God comes in. I follow our Biblical ancestors in finding order and purpose in life. I too think of the world and God.

PART TWO: TORAH (Highlights of Torah I have learned)

PART THREE:

ISRAEL

(Varieties of Jewish experience I have enjoyed)

¹ I wonder if this is what Shakespeare had in mind in the matter of ghosts (Hamlet I,5):

HORATIO

O day and night, but this is wondrous strange!

HAMLET

And therefore as a stranger give it welcome.

There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,

Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.

². The Hebrew here is YHVH, the Tetragrammaton, the unpronounced name for God, specific to Bible and Jewish usage. Since at least the third century BCE, readers of Hebrew Scriptures have substituted “Lord” every time the four letters appear. As evidence we have the Septuagint, the translation into Greek by Jews living in Alexandria. For the Name they wrote κύριος, rendered into Latin as Dominus. Hebrew for “Lord” is Adonai, (literally, the plural form “my lords”). When vowel marks were introduced to the text, in the 9^th century CE, the vowels for Adonai were superimposed on the Tetragrammaton as an aid to readers. (The uninitiated read it incorrectly as “Jehovah.”) I am indebted to Rabbi Zalman Schacter-Shlomi for suggesting “Yah” in place of the forbidden whole name and in place of “Lord,” which suggests both royal domination and machismo. Michael Kagan, introducing his “Holistic Hagadah,” explains Reb Zalman’s usage: People are familiar with “Yah” since it appears in “HalleluYAH – Praise God. “Furthermore, YAH is the name associated with the Godly attribute of Hokhmah, which is the level of greatest expansion and is thus fitting for the Pesah theme of ‘from the narrow straits I cried to YAH, from the great expansion YAH answered.’ (Psalm 118). To support this the Talmud states (Eruvin 18b) that: Since the Sanctuary was destroyed it is enough for the world to use only two letters [of the Tetragrammaton].

³.This translation gets closer to the Hebrew than the traditional “still small voice.” I wonder how much Hebrew Simon and Garfunkel knew and took into account when they sang the phrase in 1964.

⁴ My teacher, Cyrus Gordon, introduced to me “worthy of saga,” as a literary value.

⁵ See, for example: “Give ear to the word of Yah, commanders of Sodom, Hear the Torah of our God, people of Gomorrah . . . cease doing evil, learn doing good; seek justice . . . judge the orphan, defend the widow.” Isaiah 1:10-17.

⁶ Presidential candidate Mitt Romney, in a campaign speech, quoted John Adams: “Our constitution was made for a moral and religious people,” presumably in support of his, Romney’s: “Freedom requires religion.”

⁵ “Since the last prophets, Hagi, Z’charyah, and Mal’achi, died, the ruach hakodesh (“holy spirit,” i.e. “prophecy”) was withdrawn from Israel. But still, they had used of the bat kol (“little voice,” literally, “daughter of voice,” i.e. restricted word from God). (T Sanhedrin 11a, et al.) Talmud adds that certain individuals were worthy of being prophets but that their generation was unworthy of receiving prophecy.

⁶ “They shall beat their swords into plowshares, their spears into pruning hooks...” Isaiah 2:4, Micah 4:3.

⁷ In a freshman modern philosophy survey I learned that philosophy/science (natural philosophy) emerged as a subset of theology. We moderns place science first and then, maybe, philosophy, and then, maybe theology. From that same class I remember the term “epistemology” and that is my interest in this essay: how we come by what we say we know or believe in religion.

⁸ .References to Hebrew Scriptures will take into account the critical understanding of this text, including the documentary hypothesis, which holds that the earliest documents in Genesis date from the days of Solomon, tenth century BCE and the latest writing was in the fourth century BCE. Deuteronomy, dating apparently from the seventh century BCE, is the earliest “published” section of the Pentateuch. See note 23.

⁹ Ctr.“When Marduk commissioned me to guide the people aright, to direct the land, I established law and justice in the language of the land, thereby promoting the welfare of the people.” (Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament, p 163, translation by Meek) So ends the prologue of the Code of Hammurabi, from Babylonia, 18^th century BCE. Nowhere does the text say that Marduk spoke the words for Hammurabi to transcribe. The well known stele on which the code appears shows Hammurabi standing, gesturing obeisance to the seated Shamash, god of justice. The prologue is a long list of acknowledgments to the deities, establishing the king’s piety and divine right to legislate. The gods are interested in orderly society but they are not lawgivers.

¹⁰ “Redactor” is the technical term used in Bible studies to refer to the person or persons who collected and edited the documents and set them in the order we find them in Hebrew Scriptures. We have no data about how this process occurred but literary considerations suggest that care went into the redaction. One likely redactor would be the priest, Ezra, in the fifth century, post Babylonian exile period. He is described as “a quick scribe of the Torah of Moses,” (Ezra 7:6) and it was he who brought the scroll before the public and read it aloud (Nechemiah 8:2f).

¹¹ I shall be using the word “Torah” in different contexts, each of which influences the specific reference. The word “Torah” has no simple meaning. Its root, ירה yud-resh-heh, means “shoot” or “throw” and also “instruct” or “decide (a case)”. The word commonly appears in Scriptures with a meaning of “law code” or “instructions.” We find the expression “Torah of Moses” and also “Torah of God.” In one instance the word is in plural. We are used to referring to Pentateuch as Torah, as in ספר תורה “Sefer Torah.” There is the distinction of “written Torah” from “oral Torah,” the latter referring to rabbinic teachings. The idea here is that Moses received all of Torah from God at Sinai with instructions to write down part and pass the rest orally to Joshua who would pass it to the elders and so on (cf. Pirkey Avot 1:1). In practice, Oral Torah amounts to rabbinic innovations, eventually written down in Mishnah, Talmud, etc. The Babylonian Talmud, Berachot 5a, attempts to shed light on the problematic word. Commenting on Exodus 24:12: Yah said to Moses, “Ascend the mountain to Me and be there, and I shall give you the stone tablets and the torah and the mitsvah which I have written to instruct (l’horot) them.” THE TABLETS, those are the Decalogue; TORAH, that’s Scriptures (מִקְרָא mikra – Rashi explains this as ‘Pentateuch, for it is a commandment to read קרא in the Torah’); THE MITSVAH, that’s the Mishnah; WHICH I HAVE WRITTEN, those are Prophets and Writings (the second and third sections of Hebrew Scriptures, following Torah); TO INSTRUCT THEM, this is Talmud: teaching that all of them were given to Moses from Sinai.

¹² The term “the rabbis” refers to the scholar class who assumed leadership, especially once the Holy Temple was destroyed in 70 CE and the priests’ function ended. Prior to 70, they are referred to as “sages,” “scribes,” and “Pharasees”(by their opponents, the Saducees.) The rabbis left us the early postbiblical literature, notably the Talmud (instruction on how to act and think like a Jew, from דמל lamad, “study, learn”) and Midrash (seeking meaning and law in scriptural verses, from darash, “examine, question”). They argued with the fundamentalists of the times, the Saducees, that Hebrew Scriptures were not the totality of revelation, but that their teachings were also Torah, Oral Torah (Torah Sheb’al Peh, see footnote 5). By this concept of dual Torah they kept alive the tradition of thinking about God and of innovating practices. Today’s rabbis are their distant heirs.

¹³ Over the course of many years teaching Bible at a university, I found that this hard to support single story reading is never-the-less all but universally accepted. I attribute this uncritical approach to Genesis being treated as Bible tales for children. Any gain in children’s literature is overwhelmed by loss to mature thinking. Primary education wins out over secondary education, to the detriment both of the text and of our ideas.

¹⁴ Scholars have long called Genesis 2:4b through several following chapters the “J” story, short for “Jahwist,” because of the regular use of JHVH, see note 1, above. Possibly a court chronicler for King Solomon in Jerusalem was the author. Passions and conflict, drama and character development characterize J writings.

¹⁵ Scholars call Genesis 1-2:4a the “P”, short for “Priestly,” story. Following the return from Babylonian exile, in the absence of local monarchy, priests dominated the nation in a sort of limited autonomy permitted by the Persians and later the Greeks. The Priestly literature emphasizes regulations and genealogy. Grandeur and formality (and genealogy) characterize the style. The P cosmogony justifies the seven day week culminating in Shabbat.

¹⁶ As I was writing this I came across a column in the New York Times, 8/7/07, by Dennis Overbye, called “The God Particle,” with the following: “With Einstein, we always knew where he stood in relation to “God” — it was shorthand for the mystery and rationality of nature, the touchstones of the scientific experience. Cosmic mystery, Einstein said, is the most beautiful experience we can have, “the fundamental emotion that stands at the cradle of true art and true science.”

¹⁷.The rabbis found ingenious explanations for the apparent contradiction, e.g. plants were created only in potential on the third day. On the sixth day, in the Garden, it rained and the plants sprouted and grew. The rabbis also had a peculiar principle by which to resolve this and other details, a Midrashic declaration: "There is no earlier or later in Torah," (P’sachim 6a) but I can’t find any use of the phrase to deal with the obvious inconsistency in the first two chapters of Genesis.

¹⁸.Ani ma’amin . . . “I believe. . .” recited by some Jews in morning devotions and poetically in the familiar hymn Yigdal. 1) There is a Creator 2) His Oneness is absolute 3) He is without material form 4) He is eternal 5) He alone may be worshiped 6) The prophets are true 7) Moses was the greatest of all prophets 8) The entire Torah was divinely given to Moses 9) The Torah is immutable 10) God knows all the acts and thoughts of man 11) He rewards and punishes 12) messiah will come 13) There will be resurrection.

¹⁹.The English word “prayer,” serves to translate the Hebrew “t’filah.” “Prayer,” derives from the Latin prex, “ask, petition,” and “pray” has something of that denotation. The root for “t’filah” is palal, meaning “intercede, mediate, judge.” The two terms suggest differing concepts and actions, but in practice both include petition, praise, and thanking. And both refer equally to private devotions and public worship.

²⁰ I learned that prayer is “reaching out beyond ourselves” from Rabbi Shlomo Twersky, of Denver. In a lecture in the early 80's, he contrasted the act of praying with the narrow world of solipsism. In many a sermon I quoted the explanation of this modern Chasid, scion of a line of scholars going back to the days of the Besht.

²¹ Yiddish word with unknown but much debated etymology. It refers to reading or chanting the liturgy, and is frequently accompanied by shoklen, rhythmic back and forward, side to side, or twisting movements, another Yiddish word. Davenen is never totally silent. The words must be vocalized, even if softly, which sounds like continuous mumbling.

²² Only in the Mir Yeshivah, where they took their time at davenen could I really keep up. The Rosh Yeshivah, the principal rabbi, was always the last standing for the “silent” section. By that time I understood the Hebrew and could savor the words.

²³ As translated in Birnbaum: Daily Prayer Book, 1949; also in Gates of Prayer, 1975. “Hear O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is One,” Union Prayerbook, 1940; also Sim Shalom, 1985.

The line is: Deuteronomy 6:4, and the older Reform and newer Conservative translators followed the 1917 JPS translation. The 1985 JPS has “. . . the Lord alone. The generally excellent vernacular rendition, Good News Bible, 1976, reads: “

Israel

, remember this! The Lord – and the Lord alone – is our God.” The differences signify unclear syntax in the original.

²⁴ Scholars following the Documentary Hypothesis deduce from this Yah exclusive theme that the “discovered” scroll was actually composed by a priestly descendent from the officiants at the shrines in Israel, the northern kingdom, destroyed by the Assyrians in 721 BCE. The Torah Scroll would serve as a warning to

Judah

, the southern kingdom, not to continue the sins that had led to such punishment in the north. Deuteronomy appears to have been the earliest “published” text of the Torah.

²⁵ See Sidur Minhag S’fard, favored by Chassidim: לְשֵם יִחוּד קֻדְשָא בְּרִיךְ הוּא וּשְׁכִינְתֵּהּ Lshem yichud Kudsha Brich Hu u'shechintei, “In order to unite the Holy One Blessed be He with His Sh’chinah.(i.e. the masculine and feminine in God)” This is a כַּוָנָה kavanah, an “aim,” that focuses the mind on the meaning of what one is about to do, declaring the function/purpose of a mitzvah act. The mystics insert the line prior to the mitzvah b’rachah (asher kidshanu b’mitsvotav…) which is itself a sort of kavanah aligning hand and heart. The idea is that every mitzvah performed is a small tikun, repairing, just a bit, the fracture in the unity of God.

²⁴ My literal translation. The Hebrew is rabbinic style at its poetic best. The prayer is not found in Mishnah but in Gemara of the Babylonian – and not the Palestinian – Talmud.

²⁵. “Rabbi Chanina, robed and standing, before the entrance of Shabbat would say, 'Come and let us go out to meet Sabbath the queen. Rabbi Yanai would dress himself in his garment at the entrance of Shabbat and say, 'Come, O bride, Come, O bride!'” (B. Shab 119a) Chanina was a student of Rabbi Judah Hanasi, the compiler of the Mishnah (200 CE), and Yanai was a student of Chanina. Chayim Nachman Bialik quoted Chanina in his poem, “Shabbat Hamalkah.” In his poem that is one of the latest additions to the classic Sidur, Alkabetz closed L’chah Dodi with Yanai’s words.

²⁶. “Regarding Shabbat it is written, ‘L’dorotam’ (“throughout their generations,” with word play on dirotam, “their dwellings.” Ex 31:16). What does it mean? Just as He sanctified (with word play on meaning “wedded”) the day, the dwellings of

Israel

must be with candles lit and table set and the apartment prepared as a groom’s room, suitable to receive the bride. . . And should this bride arrive and not find the dwelling prepared, with set table and candles lit, this bride will say, ‘This is no dwelling of

Israel

.’” (Zohar, Tosefet, part 3, p 301a) A.J. Heschel discusses the theme and cites more sources in The Sabbath, p 54f. The Mystical Meaning of Lekhah Dodi and Kabbalat Shabbat, by Dr. Reuven Kimelman. discloses the poem’s kabbalistic meaning and its function within the Sabbath evening service. It explains how the ceremony for the welcoming of the Sabbath developed in Safed as a wedding and coronation ceremony in which the Sabbath was personified as bride and queen. The song merges erotic, mystical, and historical images into a kabbalistic vision of redemption. It urges one to join the divine Lover in greeting the weekly Sabbath to get to experience the cosmic Sabbath. (From publisher’s description. 2003, in Hebrew.)

²⁷. Modeh Ani (thanks for restoring my breath), Asher yatsar (Thanks for health and healing), . . .la’asok b’divrey Torah (Torah study is a mitsvah, pleasant in our mouths) followed by the list of five and the list of ten mitsvot, fifteen b’rachot about getting going in the morning, ashreynu (we are happy to be Jews who recite, twice a day the), Sh’ma. These passages flow breath by breath, to the rhythm of my strides. Some of them tend to repeat as much as a mile.

BIBLE STORY: ELIJAH, and The Sound of Silence

2008-02-26T19:40:00.003-05:00

Back to Mt. Sinai for revelation. "Small still voice" is a nice idiom, but misses the point of the Hebrew. The description of an authentic religious experience, non-verbal but life-affirming. Click here for the story.

BIBLE STORY: DEBORAH, Liberated Woman

2008-02-25T19:38:00.001-05:00

Women, smart and strong, triumph in this story of the old days. And there must have been two narrators, a storyteller and a troubadour. Click here for the story.

BIBLE STORY: JOSHUA Fought the Battle of….

2008-02-24T19:36:00.001-05:00

Jericho fell to a miracle. Other towns fell to tactics. With God on your side, you win every time, but what happens when you get on God's bad side? Click here for the story.

BIBLE STORY: REVELATION, Ups and Downs

2008-02-21T19:15:00.002-05:00

The way they told this story, Moses had to do a lot of climbing up and down Mt. Sinai to get the Ten Commandments, and the ones he got there are not the ones we memorize and memorialize. But they do contain the prohibition of that which the Israelites did while Moses was up there all that time. Aaron claimed he cast the calf to keep the peace. Click here for the story.

BIBLE STORY: ZIPPORAH, Hidden Heroine

2008-02-20T19:12:00.009-05:00

Zipporah's story is hidden in the drama of Moses, her husband. She is a minor character, with no speaking lines, until suddenly one night, she steps up and does a gutsy if bizarre act that saves Moses from God! Then she reverts to the background. Click here for the story.

BIBLE STORY: JACOB VS. ESAU

2008-02-19T19:08:00.001-05:00

Sibling rivalry. Fraternal twins, one a hunter, the other a nerd. What's in a name? What's in a blessing? What's with our ancestors? Click here for the story.

BIBLE STORY: HAGAR, Surrogate Mother

2008-02-18T19:05:00.005-05:00

Polygyny: what's a man to do about uxorial rivalry? Foreshadowing Muslim/Jewish conflict. Click here for the story.

BIBLE STORIES: THE GARDEN

2008-02-17T19:01:00.013-05:00

The story of Creation in Eden in which Eve takes the lead. This is no story of "The Fall." Rather it is about the rise of humanity from carefree infancy to responsible adulthood, from passive existence to the introduction of the intellect. The etiology of education. Click here for the story.

BIBLE STORIES: TEST? Genesis 22

2008-02-16T09:59:00.000-05:00

The Akeida, "The Binding of Isaac" is one of the best known and most challenging stories in the Bible. The dialogue raises questions about religion and our father Abraham that the Rabbis thought important enough to set the passage as Torah reading for Rosh Hashanah. I think the post exilic P, the Priestly author who edited and added his own spin to the earlier document, intended the story as the final word on child sacrifice: that the heroic Abraham was willing but God really did not demand such a thing, and the episode was only a test. To read the story go here.

BIBLE STORIES: David 5 (2 Samuel 4-6)

2008-02-14T15:22:00.000-05:00

The messy business of David's becoming king. Dramatic capture of Jerusalem for a capital. The danger of ark moving. Michal the sourpuss.
To view story click here.

TELLING BIBLE STORIES

2008-02-14T13:37:00.003-05:00

This project aims to tell the stories the way their authors intended them. Here are the principles that guide this work: Introduction to Telling Bible Stories.

BIBLE STORIES: FOOLISH FACEOFF

2008-02-10T19:03:00.000-05:00

Kings did a lot of fighting. Wealth and territory, vengeance, and perhaps bragging rights. There were wars between the northern kingdom, Israel, and the southern kingdom, Judah. One of the stories is here.

BIBLE STORY: Creation in Seven Days

2008-02-01T11:03:00.003-05:00

How did the world come to be orderly and purposeful? God created it that way.
To read the story click here.

BIBLE STORY: YOUNG DAVID (I Samuel 16-20)

2008-01-25T15:16:00.003-05:00

Young David was a folk hero. Stories about him read like folk tales reworked by an artistic author. Click here for the stories.

BIBLE STORY: DAVID 3 (1 Samuel 26-31)

2008-01-04T20:28:00.000-05:00

Tension, drama, and death mark this stage of the David story. To read it click here.

BIBLE STORY: DAVID 2 (1 Samuel 21-25)

2008-01-03T13:46:00.004-05:00

David is an adult. A successful warrior and commander, close with Jonathan, and King Saul continues attempting to kill him. As a fugitive, David becomes something of a gangster. He flourishes and gets a smart and good looking wife and a few more. To read the story click here.

BIBLE STORY: DAVID 4 (2 Samuel 1-3)

2008-01-02T15:43:00.000-05:00

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1TS6Mm_5MR8CGvXC_X9P94LNsk159L3YaJqPtnia2n0c/edit?hl=en_USDavid elegizes Saul and especially Jonathan. He moves to Hevron and is made king of Yehudah. Avner deserts Ishboshet and makes David king over Israel. Yoav kills Avner. To read the story click here.

BIBLE COURSE: Ezra/Nehemiah reading guide

2007-12-01T14:06:00.000-05:00

EZRA/NEHEMIA Reading Guide (DLK)

1 :2-6Letter of Koresh (Cyrus) re building of temple in Jerusalem 539 BCE

:7-11 List of released k’leikodesh (“Sacred vessels”)

2 Listof people returning :36Priests :61 The disqualifiedpriests

3 Altarbuilt, priests and Z’rubavel :4Sukot :10Foundation of Temple 520?

:12 Wailing and shouting in joy

4 Zand priests reject offer of help from locals, who then become adversaries

:6 Letters to and from Artachshasta/Artaxerxes, sedition,prohibition, trouble

5 Enterprophets Chagai, Z’charyah :6 Tattenai informs Darius by letter that summarizes historyof the temple

6 Daryavesh(Darius) finds records that back up the Jews, orders Tattenai to help Jews

:15 Temple completed 515 :19 Pesach (Passover)

7 Ezra enters, 458 or 398? 11 Artachshast appointment of Ezra, hakohen hasofer, sofer divrey mitsvot Yahvchuqav al Yisrael (“the priest, the scribe, scribe of the commandments ofYah and His laws for Israel”)

8 Listof olim (“ascenders”) with E :15 finding priests :21 fasting and other preparations :32 arrival, offerings, officials

9 Ezrashocked to hear about intermarriage! Mourns and prays

10 Muchweeping :7 Required 3 day assembly– divorce! :18 Court record

NEHEMIAH

1 Nehemiahin Susa, hears of troubles in Jerusalem, prays Deuteronomy theme 446

2 Artachshastasends N to Jerusalem to rebuild :11 N inspects the walls atnight :17 convinces officials torepair :19 Sanbalat and alliesscoff

3 Workreport: who did what where :33 Sscoffs :36 N counterprays Work with a will

4 Sanbplots attack :3Counterprayer plus armed workers :9 Organized work and defense

5 Complaintsvs wealthy taking pledges from poor :6 N reacts, calls great assembly

:14 N does not take governor’s due for reasons of conscience

6 Sanbalatetc. attempt to trap N :5 Accuse Nof rebellion :10 N senses hiredprophets

:15 Wall completed, enemies disheartened :17 Alliances between nobles and enemy

7 Gateinstructions, scant population :5Geneology, olim (“immigrants”)statistics :26 Towns :39 Kohanim andother officials :61 olim of questionable descent, including kohanim :66 Totals, population breakdown, livestock, gold, etc. :72 Settled by the 7^th month

8 Allgather, summon Ezra, Bring the TORAH! Reads from daybreak to midday

:13 Torah study, Sukot

9 Dayof fasting :6 Ritual history,~Deut. :32 Confession of guilt

10 Covenantsigners :30 Conditions: marriage,Shabbat, Temple support – 1/3 shekel, first fruits, tithes

11 Lotteryto populate Jerusalem :4 Residentby family and numbers, officials

12 Listof kohanim and other officials :27 City wall dedicationparticipants :44 People are happywith the kohanim, etc, and gladlygive

13 Halfbreedspurged :4 N clears Toviah’simplements from Temple chamber :6N returns to Persia :10 N enforces portions to L’vi’im :15 Nhalts commerce on Shabbat :23 N sees mixed marriages even among Kohanim

BIBLE COURSES: WISDOM LITERATURE

2007-12-01T11:47:00.000-05:00

THE EXAMINED LIFE:WISDOM LITERATURE IN BIBLE

ὁ δὲ ἀνεξέταστοςβίος οὐ βιωτὸς ἀνθρώπῳ

Rabbi David L Kline, BOLLI

Mythsand legends, ancestor tales, court records, prophetic innovation, poetry, andlots of laws, ritual and moral. Then, apparently beginning in the 4^th century BCE, ourancestors turned to introspection about life, the world, values, and meaning.They posed questions some of which had answers and some did not. Their writings never resembled thephilosophic argument of the Greeks, their hegemon since Alexander the Great butthe new intellectual discourse was doubtless influenced by Hellenism..Thewisdom literature sheds light on late biblical thinking, preparing the way forRabbinic creativity and eventually, systematic philosophy.

Biblechallenges modern readers with its ancient vocabulary of words and ideas. Webenefit from the work of earlierscholars who offer us notes and commentaries. Look for a “Study Bible.” There are commentaries that devote an entire volume to asingle book of the Bible. TheSoncino series presents a classic Jewish interpretation. The International CriticalCommentary was the standard in my student days. The Anchor Bible occupies that place today. Both tend towards the technical. Books on Bible abound and the internetseems endless on the subject.

BOOKOF PROVERBS seems to be the work of a school of thinkers and anthologists. Anearly tradition ascribed the words to King Solomon whose wisdom waslegendary. See Proverbs readingguide on Wiggio.

1 Pr.1-9 introductory admonitory discourses, 2poems about Lady Wisdom

Pr.10-22:16; 25-29 proverbs inpoetry, 2 line adages

What,do you suppose, was the life of the intellect back in Biblical days? Whatquestions would have been on peoples’ minds?

2 Pr.22:17-24:22 “30” parental precepts. Cf: “Instruction of Amenemope”

http://www.touregypt.net/instructionofamenemope.htm

Pr.30-31 – 4 appendices

Howdo you define “wisdom”? Where iswisdom to be found?

GREEKPHILOSOPHY introduced to the world systematic argument over ideas anddialectic. A BOLLI Scholar fromthe philosophy department willpresent the topic.

3 Hellenisticinfluence thanks to Alexander the Great

http ://www .philosophypages .com /hy /2 d .htm Introduction to Socrates

http ://en .wikiquote .org /wiki /Socrates Greatquotes from Socrates

http ://www .gutenberg .org /files /1656/1656-h /1656-h .htm Translation of Apologia

http ://en .wikipedia .org /wiki /Aristotle Extensive intro to Aristotle

http ://www .gutenberg .org /dirs /etext 05/8 ethc 10.txt Aristotle’s Ethics

Whatmight Apollo have meant by “Know thyself,” inscribed on the front histemple at Delphi?

BOOKOF ECCLESIASTES, in a literary device, like Pr., gets attributed to King Solomon. Ec.however develops the character ofthe speaker to represent a disillusioned and cynical elder Solomon. To my ear, Kohelet (Hebrew forEcclesiastes) was a thinker challenged by the questions raised by the Greeksbut satisfied to leave the questions unresolved, that is, he was moreinterested in the questions than in the answers. See Kohelet reading guide on Wiggio.

4 Ec.1-6:9 All is ephemeral and existential

Ec.4:17-6:9 Behavior, coping withuncertainty

Whatwould be the opposite of “all is vanity?”

Psychologicalsuggestions?

5 Ec.6:10-8:17 Who knows what is good?

Isit sheer coincidence that Kohelet and Gautama Buddha were near contemporaries?

6 Ec.9-12 Behavior:coping

Does12:13 negate all that comes before it by offering the ultimate affirmation? Maybe cynicism is OK?

BOOKOF PSALMS collects poetry composed for all sorts of religious functions from earlyto late periods. About half thepoems are attributed to David, an editorial statement no more likely thanattributing Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Song of Songs to Solomon. Some of the poems were likely sung aspart of the worship in the Holy Temple. Others may have been intended for private devotion. Some seem to celebrate a royalcoronation or birthday. These selectionssound like attempts to deal with tough and complex questions in a piouscontext.

7 Ps.1simple piety; complex piety 37:1-6, note grass metaphor. Questioning:90:1- 6;104:15ff

Ps.8 contemplation: What is man in the cosmos?

Ps.49 would-be wisdom

Ps.73 losing and regaining faith

Ps.112 sophist recasting of 1

Ps.128the good family

8 Ps.104 a world of order and purpose. Note distinction between animal and human,v 14

Ps.19 science, then piety, leading to hope (?)

Ps.44 a prayer: What’s the matter, God? (~ 79)

Ps.50 rethinking sacrifices (cf Amos, et al), what God really demands

Ps.88 thoughts about death: dark and mindless (cf 6:6)

Ps.139 meditation on theology and piety

BOOKOF JOB, like Ecclesiastes, runs radically counter to dominant themes andthinking in the rest of the Bible. Authorship is moot. Theearly rabbis thought of Job as a contemporary of Abraham. For me, the book must be at least postDeuteronomy since Deuteronomicthinking on retribution is the author’s main target. Job is the closest to systematic theology of any passage inBible.

9 Jb.1-3 Theprimary story, which shakes up the theodicy question: “If God is good then why.. .?”

10 JOB4-42 (see reading guide on Wiggio)

Thepoetic development, guided by wisdom, asking if suffering is punishment and ifwe deserveto suffer.

BIBLE COURSES: STORIES II

2007-12-01T11:41:00.000-05:00

STORIES OUR ANCESTORSTOLD ABOUT THEIR ANCESTORS

What’s Going On Here,VII Rabbi DavidL. Kline BOLLI Spring2012

Continuing the Intro to Bible courses, we focus on thestories, narratives as found in Bible. Selections from the three sections of Tanach (Bible): Torah(Pentateuch), N’vi’im (Joshua through Malachi), K’tuvim (Psalms throughChronicles) The object is twofold. First, literary appreciation, reading for pleasure, discovering a pastworld of creative writing, an ancient genre. This will include critical reading to distinguish betweenfactual and fictional passages. Second, relating to our ancestors, our history and idea development.

Priorknowledge is desirable but the course will be appropriate for any levelstudent. Participants will beencouraged to make class presentations.

Mostof the assigned stories can be found on my blog, “Good to be a Jew.” See the right hand column, headed“Bible Project.” Click on a titleand follow the instructions.

Textbooks

Required: Bible,Hebrew or any translation. Footnotes/commentary desirable

Suggested: RichardEliot Friedman, Who Wrote the Bible, $ 5

RobertAlter, The Art of Biblical Narrative, $ 15

MYTHS OF REALITY

1. March6

Two Creation Stories Genesis1-3

A) “The FirstWeek,” B) “In the Garden.”

Babyloniancreation story http ://www .crivoice .org /enumaelish .html

Egyptiancreation stories http ://en .wikipedia .org /wiki /Ancient _Egyptian _creation _myths

Greek, Hesiod: Cosmogeny http ://www .theoi .com /Text /HesiodTheogony .html

Googleyour curiosity.

How does theorydiffer from myth? What’s theweltanschauung? Who is God?

2. March13

The Man and His Woman and Their Kids Genesis4-6

Psychologically speaking http ://www .lifeissues .net /writers /gro /gro _110 painofrejection .html

Midrashically speaking http ://www .myjewishlearning .com /texts /Rabbinics /Midrash /Midrash _Aggadah /How _Midrash _Functions .shtml

Life expectancy? Whose families are these? Brotherly hate?

FAMILY LEGENDS

3. March20

Avraham Avinu Genesis12-23

Classic, with Rashi http ://www .aish .com /jl /b /eb /kbc /48969836.html At the window labeled“CHUMASH,” enter the chapter and verse you want. You will see a translation of the text. Select a verse and you will be linkedto the Rashi commentary.

Classic critical http ://www .archive .org /search .php ?query =critical %20 and %20 exegetical %20 commentary %20 AND %20 collection %3 Atoronto &page =1 At the site, selectGenesis (6^th on the list). In the “View the book” window at the left margin, select “ReadOnline.” What you will see is aphoto of the book. Place cursorover image of page edges and numbers will appear. Click to go to any page. Search by flipping pages.

Joseph Campell (Google “Joseph Campbell”Abraham, bottom of 1^st page)

What do we hope to find when we tell stories about ourancestors?

4. March 27

Yitschak Genesis24-27

A) Rivkah at the well B) Child rearing C) Travelprecautions D) Food is destiny

Rashi and Critical commentaries asabove

Wife/sister motif (Speiser, in Anchor Genesis)

http ://books .google .com /books ?id =HhYSAQAAIAAJ &q =wife +sister #search _anchor

Have we got skeletons in the closet? Arewe at risk?

5. April3

Ya’akov Genesis28-36

A) Ladder B)Trickster tricked C) Assistant wives D) Genetic engineering E) God andgods F) Trickster > Wrestler G) Semireconciliation

Rashi and Critical commentaries asabove

Anita Diamant, The Red Tent

Arthur Waskow, God Wrestling

Who wrestles with God?

HEROIC TALES

6. April17

Gid’on Judges6-9

A good start http ://en .wikipedia .org /wiki /Book _of _Judges

Rashi http ://www .chabad .org /library /bible _cdo /aid /15814/showrashi /true

Classic critical http ://www .archive .org /stream /criticalexeget 00 moor - page /n 11/mode /2 up

Judge or king? Charisma or birth? Tribe ornation?

7. April24

Sh’lomo the King I Kings 1-11

Rashi http ://www .chabad .org /library /bible _cdo /aid /15885/showrashi /true

Classic critical http ://www .archive .org /stream /criticalexegetic 10 montuoft - page /n 5/mode /2 up

What? http ://en .wikipedia .org /wiki /Philosopher _king

Google: Solomon

What’s a good king? Uneasy lies the head that wears a crown?

EYEWITNESS ACCOUNTS

8. May 1

Return From Babylonia Ezra 1-10, Nehemiah 1-13 (see readingguide)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Ezra

http ://en .wikipedia .org /wiki /Book _of _Nehemiah

http ://www .jewishencyclopedia .com /articles /14309-temple -the -second

Apocrypha 1 Esdras 3-4

Josephus Antiquities, book XI 1-5 http ://www .ccel .org /j /josephus /works /ant -11.htm #EndNote _ANT _11.1 b

9. May 8

The process of change, Malka Simkovich, BOLLI Scholar.

10. May 15

Torah for 5^th century BCE

BIBLE COURSES: STORIES I

2007-12-01T11:39:00.000-05:00

STORIES FROM MEMORIES

WHAT’S GOING ON HERE, II, Introduction to Hebrew Bible

Rabbi David L. Kline,BOLLI

This course uses critical reading. I follow the Documentary Hypothesis, for a briefintroduction to which, see:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Documentary_hypothesis For a more thorough grounding, I recommend: WhoWrote the Bible? By Richard E. Friedman.

1) Genesis12; 20; 26:6-14 Ourstory opens. What did ourancestors have in mind about their ancestors? Whence the subject matter? How the telling?

12:1-4a (first half of verse 4), The first promise, cf12:7; 13:14; 15:4,18; 17:4,19

12:4bf (followingverse), vital statistics, genealogy, geography, cf 11:22-32

12:6-20 2^nd promise. Wife/sister narratives. Ch 20; 26:6-14

2) Genesis22 Thisis a test?

22:1a Title. By the narrator or the redactor? What about Akeidah,(“Binding”)? Note Hebrew refers to “the God”(HaElohim). Why the mistranslationthroughout?

22:1b-13 The narrative. Look for vivid detail, suspense, tension, repetition, etc.

22:2 “Only son?” cf Qur’an, Sura 37:99ff (see supplement)

22:14 Geographicalgloss, unclear meaning. Cf TargumOnkelos: 14. And Abraham worshipped and prayed there in that place, andsaid before the Lord, Here shall generations worship: wherefore it shall bepaid in that day, In this mountain Abraham worshipped before the Lord. Targum Jonathan: And Abrahamgave thanks and prayed there, in that place, and said, I pray through themercies that are before Thee, O Lord, before whom it is manifest that it wasnot in the depth of my heart to turn away from doing Thy decree with joy, thatwhen the children of Izhak my son shall offer in the hour of affliction, thismay be a memorial for them; and Thou mayest hear them and deliver them, andthat all generations to come may say, In this mountain Abraham bound Izhak hisson, and there the Shekina of the Lord was revealed unto him.

22:15-18 Additional response, from Yah. Redundant? Cf.12:2f; 13:16

22:19 Be’er Sheva? Cf 21:33f;23:2!

3) Genesis 37; 38 Josephand his brothers (see supplement)

37:1-2a Bridge from preceding chapter to the story ofJoseph. P detail. Cf 36:1

37:2b-4 Simple characterization. J

37:5-20 Dreams, device favored by E but a psychological element here for J.

37:21-29 Two narrative traditions present here, E and J. See deconstruction.

37:30-36 E concludes: note Midnianites in 36 and Judah, not Israel, in 34.

38 An easy read, pure J. Remember J also signifies Judah, thesouthern kingdom, as E signifies Ephraim, the northern. Interesting points: don’t displeaseYah; levirate marriage (Deuteronomy 25:5-10); onanism; strong women. The tale concludes with a bit ofetiology – Perets is ancestor of David.

4) Joshua2; 6; 7; 8 Onetough God

2 Spy story, sex, danger, treachery, escape.

6 The Battle of Jericho! Proscribe! Ban! Devote! Curse!

7 Crime and Punishment

8 Divine military tactics. :30-5 Cf Deuteronomy11:29-32

5) Judges3:7-11; 4; 5 Jewsof yore

3:7-1 Template at its formulaic simplest. Deuteronomistic historiosophy.

4,5 Heroines, their stories and songs. Data and imagery. Folkmemory.

6) ISamuel 8 – 16 Transition:tribes to monarchy

Possibly getting closer to a contemporary account.

7) ISamuel 17 -19 Theadventures of young David. (CtrII 21:19)

What’s wrong with this story? What’s right about it? What’s a folktale?

8) IKings 2 – 11:10 Solomanson of David.

Politics, violence, ambition, dreams of wisdom.

9) IKings 18; II Kings 2 ElijahRock

Legendary, but provocative.

10) IIKings 21-23 Historyof history?

The launching of Deuteronomy. Things have never been the same.

BIBLE COURSES: Deuteronomy

2007-12-01T11:35:00.000-05:00

DEUTERONOMY, SEVENTH CENTURYTORAH

What’s Going on Here, VI,Introduction to Bible

Rabbi David L. Kline, BOLLI

We shall study Deuteronomy as a revolutionary,constitution like, document, a window into the religion of our ancestors of theperiod that followed the great eighth century prophets, Amos, Hosea, Isaiah,and Micah. The book so influencedthe writers of Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings that these narrators arereferred to as The Deuteronomic Historian. We understand ourselves better when we understandDeuteronomy.

The fifth of the Five Books of Moses, calls itself thewords of Moses to Israel, following forty years in the wilderness -- justbefore they were to cross the Jordan into the new land. The author wrote it as Moses’peroration, his last words in which he legislates thought and practice for thenation. However, from the perspectiveof critical scholarship, Deuteronomy is actually the earliest book of Torah,reflecting the seventh century BCE ideal. Its appearance in the days of King Josiah is boldly described in IIKings as the shocking discovery of a long lost text, leading to a purge ofpagan worship at the Jerusalem temple and the regulation of moral and ritual behavior.

Prior knowledge is useful but the course will beappropriate to students at any level. The book list includes background material. A chapter by chapter reading guide lists themes throughoutDeuteronomy. Participants take anactive role in commenting on the readings, raising questions, and offeringanswers. We invite classpresentations.

Readings:

Bible in Hebrew or any translation. Text with footnotes or commentary willhelp and raise discussion. APentateuch (Chumash) volume will serve in this course. Assigned readings for each week in thesyllabus below.

Who Wrote the Bible?, Richard Elliott Friedman,introduction to Documentary Hypothesis, particularly useful to those who havenot taken earlier courses in this series.

Internet sources. Google away, e.g.: 7^th Century BC

Deuteronomy for the determined: Anchor Bible, technical butaccessible. International CriticalCommentary, volume by SR Driver, the classic, my favorite. Available online:http://www.archive.org/details/criticalexegetic00drivuoft

1. History,early 1^st millennium BCE, Egypt, Assyria, kings, politics, priests,prophets. What do the sources tellus about the world of King Josiah, the prophet Jeremiah, and the Book ofDeuteronomy?

2. IIKings 22, 23. Publication of Deuteronomy,the back story of the first Sefer Torah. II Kings 17:5-23 explains “why”Israel was destroyed. (See also Ps 106) The “found” book appears as a warning to Judah about angering God. A purge of pagan religious practicesfollows.

3. Deut1-4. Preliminaries andlegends. Covenant makes Israeldifferent. This section lays outgeneral direction of the rest of the book: laws and ordinances.

Deuteronomy 5 (Cf. Exodus19,20; 34). Which are the real Ten Commandments?

4. Deut6-7. The Sh’ma. Relating toYah. Chosenness. Retribution עקב. Beware outsiders.

5. Deut8-13 Depend on God, show gratitude by keeping commandments. Proper worship. Prophets. Suppress idolatry.

6. Deut14-16. Rules for ritual andethical behavior. Courts oflaw.

7. Deut17-21. High court. Monarchy. Prophets. Murder. Witnesses. War. Polygyny

8. Deuteronomy22-25. Laws and ordinances.

9. Deuteronomy26-32. History. Reward and punishment.

10. Deuteronomy33, 34. This is the blessing? See commentary: Zot HaBrachah

The Code of Special Laws, Deut. 12-26, 28

(Thematic outline, fromDeuteronomy volume, International Critical Commentary, pp 135f)

1. Sacred observances 12:1-16:17

a. Law of the single sanctuary 12:1-28

b. Repression of idolatry 12:29-13:19; 16:21-17:7

c. Holiness of the laity 14:1-21

d. Sacred dues and sacred seasons 14:22-16:17

2. Office bearers of the theocracy

a. Judges 16:18-20; 17:8-13

b. King 17:14-20

c. Priests 18:1-8

d. Prophets 18-9-22

3. Criminal law 19; 21:1-10

a.Homicide and murder 19:1-13

b. Encroachment on property 19:14

c. False witness 19:15-21

d. Expiation of an uncertain murder 21:1-9

4. Miscellaneous laws, relating (mostly) to civil and domesticlife (20; 21:10 -25:16), not systematically arranged, but embracing suchsubjects as: the conduct of war, 20 and 21:10-14; family law (primogeniture,seduction, divorce, etc.), 21:15-21, 22:13-30, 24:1-5, 25:5-10; interest andloans 23:20f, 24:6,10-13; just weights, 25:13-16.

5 Parenetic conclusion, 26 and peroration 28.

BIBLE COURSES: MAJOR THEMES

2007-12-01T11:28:00.000-05:00

MAJOR THEMES

WHAT'S GOING ON HERE? Reading the Hebrew Bible for Pleasure, Ideas and God
Rabbi David L.Kline, BOLLI

1.            Introductions Cosmogeny Genesis 1-2   To prepare for the opening class, readGen 1:1-2:4a. Here’s the translation of the jargon used in Bible studies: Eachsection of Bible is called a "book," even if it has only onechapter. Books, except for Obadiah, are divided into chapters. Chaptershave verses and verses generally are dividable into first part and secondpart,labeled "a" and "b". Genesis is the first book of theBible. So the reading assignment is Book of Genesis, chapter one, verse one,through chapter two, verse four to the middle of the verse. Feel free to readmore. The assigned reading is what I hope we'll cover in class.
Here is a Wikipedia article that will serve as a reference.It has to do withwho wrote Hebrew Scriptures, when, how, and why.There areno end of views onthis subject on the Web.What we call "The Documentary Hypothesis" isone of the tools of critical reading of Bible.You may want to wait till afterthe first couple of sessions, when we shall be referring to the hypothesis,before getting into Wellhausen.On the other hand, if you are not intimidated bytechnical stuff, read it
right away: http ://en .wikipedia .org /wiki /Documentary _hypothesis      (right click the link, and open in a new window)

Here is a link to How to Read the Bible, James Kugel, from NYTimes Bookreview,9/16/07.
http ://www .nytimes .com /2007/09/16/books /chapters /0916-1 st -kuge .html ?pagewanted =2&_r =1&ref =books     (right click the link, and open ina new window)

2.            The Garden plot thickens Gen 2-3    How does this story differ from“The First Week?” Which story makes more sense as a description of theworld as we know it?

3.            Antedeluvian Conditions Genesis 6-9    I have prepared adocument called "Flood Story Deconstructed" set in parallelcolumns. Where the two Creation stories were presented one after theother (in reverse order, to be sure) the two Flood stories, J and P, aresandwiched together so that there is overlapping and redundancy. Following the literary clues, it is possible to separate them out intosomething resembling their original condition. This makes it easier toread and comprehend. Right click and open into a new window: The Flood Story Deconstructed
4.            PostdeluvianConditions Genesis 6-9     See above mentioneddeconstruction. Right click on this start for a web search: http ://www .jhom .com /topics /birds /noah .html #5

5.         Moral revolution. Ethical God. Amos 1-7. Here's a reading guide to these chapters: AMOS reading guide    Right clickand open into new window.

6.         Who's a Prophet? Hosea the homeletician 1-4, Jeremiah 1, 7:1-28. Right click on this reredaction of the first few chapters of Hosea to ease thereading. The Jeremiah chapters are straightforward. Bear in mindthe setting, near the end of the monarchy, and the publishing of Deuteronomy.

7.         Deuteronomy, the First Edition of the Book ofTorah, Jerusalem,622 BCE. Read Deut 5-14. See 2 Kings 22:1-13 for publicationstory. (For more on D/Deuteronomist, click on the above Wikipedia link orjust do a search.) In Deuteronomy look for relationship between Israeland Yah, laws and ordinances, reward and punishment (retribution) attached tothe laws. Keep in mind the teachings of Amos and Hosea two centuriesearlier.

8.         Monotheism and mission Isaiah 40-42. The 66 chapters of Book of Isaiah include the writingsof at least 3 people. For a taste of Isaiah of Jerusalem, try Is. Acontemporary of Amos, he criticized injustice and reliance on religious rituals. TritoIsaiah (chapters 60-66) seems to be post exilic, talking about a restoredJerusalem. Our subject is DeuteroIsaiah (chapters 40-59) who seems to bewriting from Babylonia, before the return from exile. He is a theologian,introducing monotheism and a new approach to the special relationship betweenIsrael and Yah.

9.         Ancient wisdom Proverbs 1-3, 10; Ecclesiastes 1-3, 12.  Read this as an entry into our ancestors' minds. Agree or argue. Enjoy the nicety of nuance. and prepare to be amazed at the scope of thought.

10.         Sing a Song of Eros Song of Songs 1-8

BIBLE COURSES: Introduction to Prophets

2007-10-01T12:25:00.000-05:00

Rabbi David L. Kline            http://good-to-be-a-jew.blogspot.com/

INTRODUCTION TO PROPHETS
WHAT’S GOING ON HERE, III     Rabbi David L. Kline, BOLLI

    This course promotes reading. Syllabus and reading guides list sections for focus. Read relaxed.   Go for the overall picture, as with a novel. Use commentary sparingly – incomprehensible passages are part of the experience. Keep a writing pad handy for lines and passages you want to remember and discuss in class.
    The course opens with Deuteronomy so as to present, as clearly as possible, a view of religion as decreed for our ancestors. Who and what was a prophet?

1)     Deuteronomy (see reading guide). The fifth book of the Pentateuch (Chumash) contains, in the critical view, the earliest “Book of Torah.” II Kings 22-3 tells the story of its “discovery”, with the attendant shock and religious purge. In the narrative a court prophet authenticates the newly found scroll as a long lost document. More likely, a well meaning priest had recently composed the scroll and we see here an official portrait of religion as practiced in late seventh century BCE Judah, a framework for study of prophets.
    Either read through Deuteronomy or check over the reading guide for items that interest you. Note the references to true and false prophets in chapters 13 and 18.
    Jeremiah 26 describes the trial of Jeremiah in which he is sentenced to death for his temple sermon where he challenges Deuteronomy. Cf. Micah 3:9-12.

2)     Subversive sermons: Jeremiah 7:1-15, 21-26, vs. idolatry: 7:16-20, 30-8:3. Confessions – see Confessions of Jeremiah on Wiggio.   Distinct from public statements, these appear to be critical ruminations by the prophet, offering us a glimpse of his inner, spiritual experience.

3)     Radical religion: Jeremiah 1,2,7,31. Consider these in the light of Deuteronomy.

4)     Old time religion and its prophets
1Samuel 8, 10   Prophet/judge/king. Transition from tribes to nation.
1S 15    Who holds the power? Prophet or king?
1S 19    Is Saul among the prophets?
1S 28    The Witch of EinDor conjures a dead prophet.
2S 7    The prophet as royal advisor
2S 12    The prophet as moral critic.
1K 1    The prophet as political power.

5)    Certified prophets
1K 11, 14:1-20 What’s a Deuteronomist prophet doing back in the days of Solomon?
1K 13    Which is the truer prophet?
1K 17- 2K 2    Elijah, legendary super prophet! (He doesn’t even die!)
1K 18 Seeing is believing?   19:1-14 The sound of silence
1K 20:35-42 Tough job
1K 22    A minority of one (“Truth always starts from …” Will Durant)

6)     Amos, the innovator, reading guide

7)     Isaiah, the poet, reading guide

8)     Deutero Isaiah, the monotheist, reading guide

9)     Hosea, reading guide

10)     Post Exilic: Hagai, Zechariah, reading guide

BIBLE COURSES

2007-09-11T12:16:00.000-05:00

MAJOR THEMES

STORIES OUR ANCESTORS TOLD I

STORIES OUR ANCESTORS TOLD II

INTRODUCTION TO PROPHETS

DEUTERONOMY, SEVENTH CENTURY TORAH

WISDOM LITERATURE

Anti-anti-establishmentarianism (www.shma.com)

2007-08-14T15:48:00.000-05:00

A young rabbi with high expectations.
Status quo versus status halevai.https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=explorer&chrome=true&srcid=0B2GuIWwprZVUZGU1YmFjYmMtNzk4NS00MTY5LWI4ZDEtMGI3ODhjNTk1NDFl&hl=en_US

Instead of tying yourself in knots (www.shma.com)

2007-06-19T16:01:00.000-05:00

How to tie tassels. The wearing of tsitsit.
Tsitsit (Shma Magazine, p 45)

BAKING MATSAH (MATZAH, MATZO)

2007-06-07T10:07:00.000-05:00

DO-IT-YOURSELF PESADIG MATSOT
(As done for 20 years by Rabbi David L. Kline)

Ingredients:
1 part water (cold)
3 parts flour (approximatly)

Knead quickly into firm, non sticky dough.
Divide into 1" - 1 1/2" balls, the rounder the better.
Roll out to 1/8" or less thickness. Poke holes.
Bake on tiles, at hottest setting till done (2-3 minutes).
No more than 18 minutes may elapse from the touch of the water to putting the
matsah into the oven.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Notes for mehadrin("meticulous beautifiers") 1 Flour: the everyday product is acceptable. My Hungarian predecessors include Solomon Ganzfried, than whom no one could be Orthodoxer. In his Kitsur Shulchan Aruch , among the meticulous instructions is the following: "If part of a bag of flour has been moistened by water, whether it is still moist or already dry, we may hold that part of the bag in our hands while emptying from it the rest of the flour, the use of which is permissible; only the moist part may not be used. If, however, the bag of flour has become wet in many places, so that it is impossible to proceed as aforementioned, then if it is still moist, we sift the flour, and the lumps alone which remain in the sieve is leaven, but the rest may be used. If mice have eaten some of the flour, it should also be sifted. If, however, the bag of flour has already become dry, sifting is of no avail, and the use of the entire four is forbidden." (English edition, Book 3, page 24) Kal v'chomer(a fortiori), I consider a nice, sealed, bag of flour from the super market to be shamur("kept") from the hazards of moisture.

2 Water: H2O from the cold faucet. Ganzfried prefers a river to a well because the water is generally colder. He lets the water rest overnight so that no sun rays may touch it. I figure the tap runs with water that has rested at least that long and the pipes are opaque.

3 All bowls, measures, rolling pins, hole punchers, peels, tiles are reserved for Pesach preparation.
A Stainless steel mixing bowl works fine.
B I use styrofoam cups, one for flour, one for water.
C Rolling pins, either the expensive long tapered model or 1 1/4" dowel cut into 18" lengths. Clean them with sandpaper after each rolling.
D The hole puncher is called a "dough docker" (tahker!). I found a neat plastic toothed roller, made for pizza preparation. (I also have a gadget with metal disks bearing wicked looking perforators designed for tenderizing steaks.)
E A peel (sometimes called "spade") is the flat wooden or metal plate with handle, used for taking baked bread out of a brick oven.
F Line oven shelf with tiles, plain red or brown, such as are sold for floors. One inch fire bricks will do but they are heavier. Leave room at edges for convection.
G Some say oven must be purified by flame, such as a blow torch. Not hard to do but less effective, in my opinion, than an hour at self clean, followed by a wipedown.

4 To avoid any chance for onset of yeasting -- chometsdigity -- eighteen minutes is the just-to-be-on-the-safe-side maximum preparation time. Ganzfried takes it for granted. The Soncino footnote to Pes 46a considers it "generally regarded." Talmud offers the charming definition: "the time it takes to walk from Migdal Nunia to Tiberias, a mil." Rashi, in Yoma, says that a mil is 2000 cubits, and Soncino concurs. I say that doing a mil (not a mile) 18 minutes is strolling, not walking, but why should I be more machmir("stringent") than the Hungarians? (I'm German on my mother's side.) Besides, bread dough, even with the addition of yeast and kept warm takes hours to leaven.

5 Line the kneading/rolling surface with layers of brown paper. Remove a layer at the end of each 18 minute session. (I learned this by watching the Shmurah Matsah makers on the Lower East Side.)

6 Best for 8-10 to work together. Dough needs to be kneaded constantly till rolled, perforated and baked. Assembly line does the trick. At the start of each session, and maybe once or twice more for good measure, all recite: "L'shem matsah shel mitsvah."("intended as mitsvah matsah," i.e. the matsah we are commanded to eat, particularly at the seder)

MORAL JUDGEMENT AND GENOCIDE

2006-10-18T14:51:00.000-05:00

KNOWLEDGE OF GOOD – AND EVIL
yk
In the Garden of Eden grew two trees whose fruit the Lord didn’t wish Adam to eat. The Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, and the Tree of Life. The fruit of the former worked as catalyst for awareness, key to cognition: to taste was to know. The fruit of the latter granted eternal life, which we like to think of as exclusively divine. We’ve all heard that, thanks to Eve, Adam ate the first fruit and, sure enough, his eyes were opened. The Lord threw the both of them out before they could reach for the second fruit. And the rest is history, in which we are born knowing good and evil, and we die.
This past August a psychology professor at Harvard, Marc Hauser, published Moral Minds, in which he argues that human beings are born hardwired for morality the way we are predisposed to language. Specific language depends upon your culture but all human children pick up at least one tongue easily. Similarly, our behavior is determined by emotions and experiences but the way we judge actions is a universal trait, independent of religion or no religion. We all have a sense of fairness. We all consider it graver when bad things result from actions than when similar bad things result from omissions. An example would be active euthanasia, speeding up a slow and painful death by administering a drug, as opposed to passive euthanasia, speeding up a slow and painful death by withholding treatment. We condemn the first and allow the second. We all judge intentional evil consequences to be worse than the same consequences if unintentional. For instance, deaths caused by terrorist bombs are worse than deaths caused by bombs meant to kill the terrorists, collateral damage. I have not read Hauser’s book but I have heard and read three interviews, and seen several reviews. What interests me here is that I have always thought that conscience was an inner quality. Though we don’t necessarily behave morally, I think we instinctively know good from evil, though, for sure, instinct does not mean correct. Hauser writes about faulty judgement too and hopes that a better understanding of the universal process will help us to make better judgements. His thinking backs me up. It also fits right in with the Garden of Eden story.
Ethical questions confront a person again and again, throughout life. Frequently the distinction is between evil and less evil, and we might prefer not to choose. We’d rather follow the lead of someone else who will make the difficult decision. Choosing, and taking responsibility, characterizes maturity. Had our mythical ancestors obediently refrained from the forbidden fruit, they would have remained blissfully infantile and you and I should not have come to be.
Torah, on the other hand, teaches us many a list of do’s and don’t’s, mitsvahs, “commandments,” as we call them. Some continue to believe that God revealed these lists so that we should know how to behave. I prefer the thesis, suggested by Genesis and Hauser: moral thinking is part of human nature. Torah reflects our ancestors’ culture and historical context. They thought and wrote a lot about ethics.
We shouldn’t be surprised that of the Ten Commandments, five are universal morals: honoring parents, not murdering, not committing adultery, not stealing, not bearing false witness. In the other famous list, in Leviticus: “Love thy neighbor as thyself,” morphs into Hillel’s “What is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbor,” and later on to the formulation by Jesus that we call the “golden rule.” “Don’t stand idly by your neighbor’s blood,” is the one that Eli Wiesel counts as the most important single Torah line for today. Leave part of your crop for the poor. Pay a worker right away. Don’t curse the deaf or put a stumbling block before the blind, taking unfair advantage. This list is called “K’doshim,” the rules for being a holy, special, people, but they are worthy teachings common in many a culture. Could it be that they reflect innate attitudes across humanity? Hauser does not have that answer, but it makes sense to me that they would.
Sei a mensch, we say, be a decent person. Modern Torah like that, along with ancient Torah, are the Jewish vocabulary for thinking and talking morality – the relationship between people of any religion. Some of us were Boy Scouts so we also know the 12 Scout Laws. They, like much of Torah, are global. Different cultures have distinct ways but all embrace these basic morals. The word “moral” comes from the Latin mor, “usage, custom. Ethics comes from the Greek ethos, “usage, custom, character.” Both refer to human relations, as distinct from the bond between a person and God. When it comes to moral judgement, we are the same as populations throughout the world. Mark Hauser demonstrates this by posing hypothetical moral dilemmas. You can participate, online, as I did, if you wish to. His point is that absent written rules people judge just the same. Torah or lack of Torah, this religion or that or no religion makes no difference in the directions people take in his tests.
So, if human beings know good and evil and if we are predisposed to moral thinking, how come all the wars, the oppression, the genocide? Why do we keep choosing evil? How is it that in a world that can discover and produce, that can grow food in abundance, so many people suffer terrible poverty, hunger, and disease. Why all the meanness, cruelty, even in the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave? How is it that our president defends torture as part of our arsenal in the war against terror? What root of evil has grown so deep that we haven’t been able to dig it out? What is so wrong with the human condition? Why are we so insecure that we choose offense as the best defense? How do we come to equate strength with firepower? Have we lost our real strength, our capacity to learn and live, to flourish and to share, to build a just society? Is enlightened self interest totally corrupted? Have we lost our knowledge of good? Would another bite of the forbidden fruit help?
Public policy occupies a lot of my thought these days. I posted the “Non Sequitur” cartoon in the vestibule. Wiley Miller is not, I think, a Jew, but he teaches a key point about the Holocaust. The little girl notices the tattoo. The old man explains it. “The tattoo is to remind you of evil in the world?” she says. “No, dear, to remind you.” We Jews remember only too well. Our mission is to remind the next generation.
Wiley Miller has a sharp wit. He doesn’t use the world “evil” in this strip. Instead the old man says: “Imagine yourself in a land where your countrymen followed the voice of political extremists. . .” Hitler and Goebels and their Nazis, political extremists? I hadn’t thought of them that way, but Wiley may be advancing a helpful point. Hitler conceived a thousand year reich , “empire”. Using racism as a political tool, he convinced Germans that they were superior to all others and entitled to conquer and dominate the world. Antisemitism was popular in those days. Blaming Jews for all the ills of the nation, the world, attracted followers. Killing Jews, along with gypsies and a list of others he considered lower forms of life, was a Nazi political goal. Ridding the world of Jews was a slogan, like a bumper sticker. The Germans thought highly enough of Hitler to elect him chancellor and follow him blindly. That’s politics. And it led to war and genocide. That’s extremism.
Back to Eli Wiesel. I heard him, in a lecture, call לא תעמוד על דם רעך, “Don’t stand idly by your neighbor’s blood,” the most important verse in Torah. Wiesel knows a lot of Torah. He knows the usage of teachers to select a single mitsvah to represent Torah. He teaches us that “Do not stand idly by your neighbor’s blood” is Torah response to the Holocaust. The Nazis and their collaborators were the perpetrators of the Shoa, but most of the rest of the world stood idly by the blood of our family. We are commanded not to do the same for others.
Alas, the blood of genocide has flowed more than once since WW II: Cambodia and Rwanda come to mind. I just read the following: “In Phnom Penh, Cambodia, still haunted by memories of the brutal Khmer Rouge regime's rule in which some 1.7 million were killed in the late 1970s, protesters held a candlelight vigil for Darfur in a local mosque. Ly Sok Kheang said he feared the international community was repeating the same mistakes from Cambodia. He said, ‘As far as the genocide in Cambodia is concerned, for over three years the state committed killings of its own people while the international community, including the United Nations, failed to intervene to stop it.’”
Just before Rosh Hashanah Eli Wiesel joined with American Jewish World Service and groups in many countries to protest the genocide being carried out by the Sudanese government against the civilian population in Darfur. Civil war has gone on there for years. Militias claim to be defending local rights, including those of Christian and Animist residents. Victims of the present genocide, however, are Moslem villagers. Armed horsemen, supplied and backed up by the Sudanese airforce have carried out what in Russia the Czars called pogroms. Cossacks, following government orders, attacked, pillaged, raped, and murdered in the shtetle. The Sudanese gangs are called Janjaweed – “armed horsemen.” They are the Einsazgrouppen assigned to rid the region of its population already suffering poverty and famine brought about by war. They have driven two and a half million from their homes and killed two hundred thousand. No one has lifted a finger to stop the Janjaweed. Refugees have fled to neighboring Chad, itself unstable, and the Janjaweed have pursued them there as well. NGO aid agencies can no longer operate. The African Union gathered and sent a force of 7000 soldiers, but they are underfunded and ill equipped, able to do little more than observe what is going on. After the worldwide protests in September, al Bashir, the president of Sudan has declared that the African Union contingent, scheduled to terminate at the end of September, could stay longer, and that the government would pay part of the cost. And Qatar, one of the Arab League countries that pledged $150m last March, became the first to pay its share to support the AU. The U.S. continues to insist on a U.N. force, threatening dire consequences if Sudan refuses. Al Bashir rejects the proposal as reverting to colonialism.
In days past, the way to oppose an evil power was by war, bombs and armies. The war in Iraq and the much shorter one in Lebanon may be evidence that war is no longer the way to go. So here’s the situation: Bashir is still fighting and supporting genocide. Refugees are suffering disease and starvation. Kartoum will, however, accept UN forces participating with the AU as well as logistic support for the weak African Union presence. There is room for hope. A possibility of better judgement.
Here’s a quote from a South African editorial: (Business Day, Johannisburg, 9/27/06)
So while the AU's continued presence is a positive step, much more is needed. Increasing the number of AU troops will do little to stop the reported genocide. The soldiers will still be underequipped and thus hard-pressed to intervene effectively when needed. But the US and its European allies could seize the current momentum to empower the African troops by giving them strong logistical support.
This would serve two purposes. First, it would help the AU force to become more efficient. What those troops need is more equipment, more weapons and more transport. Most of them are disciplined units that know the terrain and can adapt quickly to the environment.
Second, empowering them would not be opposed by Al-Bashir, and this would help minimise the hostility created by the presence of troops which have, at times, been perceived as being part of a plot to overthrow a regime.
During terrible days of World War II , there were in Europe hundreds of individuals who defied the Nazis to save Jews. Israel has sought them out and honored them as Hasidei Umot HaOlam, “Righteous Gentiles.” These brave people – I read a book by one of them, an
Evangelical Christian woman in Holland who was part of an underground organization that sheltered old and young and were themselves sometimes captured and imprisoned – these brave people are the model of what Wiesel teaches is our main mitsvah, what you and I are obliged to do as Jews. “Do not stand idly while your neighbor bleeds.” What might have happened had there been tens of thousands defying the Nazis? Suppose multitudes around the world had raised their voices, pressured their leaders to act, standing up to the Nazis publicly, even from a distance?
Those protests, the letters we have written, money we have donated to AJWS that they spend on food and medicine for the Darfur refugees: we are not standing idly by a new Holocaust. We are opposing political extremism. It may be working. Perhaps the genocide will stop and the refugees will be able to return home and live. The Sudanese, after all, when it comes to moral judgement, are the same as you and me.

CHOOSING TORAH

2006-10-18T14:46:00.000-05:00

WHAT KIND OF JEW DO YOU WANT TO BE?
kn
David BenGurion, one of the founding fathers of M’dinat Yisrael, had a joking but useful answer to the question: Who is a Jew? He said: “A Jew is a person who keeps asking, Who is a Jew?!” He dealt with a lot of Jews, all sorts of us: frum and frumer, secular and more secular, refugees and colonists, left and right wingers, kibbutsniks and scientists, writers, sportsfans, military, unskilled workers, all and more gathered and living in the new state. BenGurion had in mind also the rest of us dispersed all over the world. What do we really have in common? Well, among other things, we like to think about ourselves and who and what we are. And we certainly ask questions.
In America we generally see ourselves as Orthodox, Conservative, or Reform, but these three words begin with capital letters, that is they are names of organizations first, and descriptions of movements, of streams (זרמים) second. We all understand the popular definitions of the three, “doing a lot,” “doing little,” and “somewhere in between.” But all three are alike in being responses to modernity, to liberation, to freedom to chose. Each has its history and ideology, its set of defining actions. Reform started in 1818, among the Jews of Germany who hated to see so many of our people leaving Judaism because they thought conversion to Christianity was the ticket to the new world of education, culture, participation in the economic and political scene. So the reformers said that Jews could be like the rest of the population in most ways while still holding to the monotheism of Abraham and the ideals of the prophets. They prayed in everyday speech and gave up distinctive clothing and dietary restrictions and anything else that they saw as antithetical to western civilization. Orthodoxy began in the 1820's in Hungary as a reaction to Reform, saying, O no! There is only one right way to be a Jew, and that is Halachah, the commanded law, authoritatively interpreted by right thinking rabbis. Conservatism began in the US, in the 1890's, among some modernists who thought the Reform movement had gone too far, what with eating shrimp and treif, in not following the rules for Shabbat and holidays. Conservatives opted for Halachah as interpreted by liberal rabbis who took into account historical development and the demands of society.
When we ask what kind of Jews we want to be we find a lot of choices. The lines demarcating the classic three denominations, Orthodox, Conservative, and Reform, have by now become so diffuse that a new term has become relevant: “pluralism.” Why should an individual limit himself or herself to this or that one of the three. Why not pick and choose from the broad menu of Torah? And, while we’re at it, let’s think of Torah as the cumulative intellectual product of several millennia of Jews asking our questions about ourselves and the world. From Bible and Talmud to contemporary writings, and including what you and I might add to the ongoing mix.
Our passionate black hatted, long sleeved, brothers and sisters, despise and reject pluralism. They call themselves Chareidim, “tremblers,” meaning they tremble over mistaking the will of God. (Ez 9:4, Is 66:2) They take orthodoxy literally. As in the Greek: orthos “straight, upright, correct,” combined with dox “belief, opinion.” They think of themselves as giving up choice in favor of obedience, submission to God’s will which they see in the laws of Torah. They are modern when it comes to technology but anti modern when it comes to attitude and thought. OK by me but not for me. We are all Israel, together, by destiny, but I belong with the modernists among us.
If being a Jew is a matter of choice, we must bear in mind that today you can easily choose not to be a Jew at all.. Call it “assimilating out,” that is becoming so American that you leave Jewish identity behind. When everything is optional the term “born a Jew” hasn’t much meaning. In other times and places being born a Jew involved restrictions. Antisemites defined us. Some thinkers went so far as to say that we remain Jews in response to antisemitism. – we rise to the challenge and make the best of a difficult situation. Zis schver zu sein a Yid. But in today’s America there must be a reason for you or me to go on being Jews, to seek out and be with other Jews, to raise our children as Jews. No law says we have to be different. We choose to be different in select ways from, say, the Christians, the Moslems, the Hindus. Some of us might choose to be Chareidim. It’s a free country.
So, what’s the reason? Why be Jews? I argue that, as with any other option, we choose based on qualities that please us. It is good to be a Jew and that’s why we want to remain what we are: Israel. This choice does not depend on claiming to be better than others, truer, more Godly, more advanced, more ethical, more aesthetic. But we have come to like, for example, our way of celebrating marriage and we prefer our funeral practices. We have effective practices by which we focus on values and deeds – as we are doing on these Days of Awe. We respond to evil by taking action. Our theology is subtle, poetic, and rational. I find Judaism meets human needs as well as any other religion. In addition there is Torah study – the early rabbis declared it to be as important as all the other mitsvot combined – and I like that. I especially like the minimal demand on credulity and maximal demand on the intellect, on thinking.
Many of us liberal Jews have ambivalent feelings that Orthodoxy really is the sole authentic Judaism. Some of us admire such faith and pious ways and we wonder if our thinking and practice are inadequate. Some of us yearn for certainty. We would like to believe that God revealed Torah to Moses on Sinai, as we chant in our prayers. The old teaching charms us: God selected us from among the families of the earth and gave us Torah so that we might please God. Identifying as God’s special people makes poetic sense and satisfies our longing for authority. But when we think of chosenness as historic event, as if it were fact, we restrain our critical thinking. We end up simplistic, self centered and out of touch with other peoples and other ways of thinking. If we want peace between civilizations rather than clash, we must note that Christians and Moslems also read their scriptures as God’s word. Both of them relate to Judaism in triumphal supersession, that is each holds itself to be the ultimate development of our people’s religion. They tell us our religion is superseded by theirs because theirs is based on updated revelations from God. They say we should accept their better religion and convert. Jews, of course, deny being out of date. We do not claim that our religion is better than theirs, but we are satisfied that ours is as good as any. And we choose to remain Jews, thank you very much.
I once got into an dispute with a Yiddish actor who was playing Tevya in “Fidler on the Roof.” He told me he was non religious because he had never been exposed to the “tradition” as referred to in the famous song he knew so well. In the Broadway version of Shalom Aleychem, the reason we Jews do whatever we do is tradition! I argued , on the contrary, that we keep Shabbat because it is good, healthy for mind and body, filled with pleasant activities and associations. Shabbat is fun and that’s a value. He said, no, he had never heard of such a thing as doing a Jewish act for its inherent benefit or value. Shabbat was a tradition. He even brought up the Hebrew word masoret. Yes, I argued, we have all sorts of traditions, of m’sorot, but that’s not the rabbinic justification for doing. There is always a rationale for a deed. We call it, following Maimonides, ta’amei mitsvot, the “taste” or the “point” of the mitsvah. Think challah, for example. You could I suppose, eat it everyday – it’s tasty. But we don’t. We reserve this fanciest of breads for Shabbat and holidays, because we want to heighten our aesthetic experience both of the day and of the food. Eating it everyday would make challah ordinary. Shabbat is special (קדש) and challah is a classic special shabbesdig treat. My wife bakes world class challah and it helps make Shabbat every week of the year.
We are in the midst of a prayer marathon to save our souls and improve the world. Repeatedly, we confess long lists of sins, some of which we may not even be guilty of. Sure the Ashamnu’s and the Al Chet’s are traditional, but the reason we recite them is they are guides to self criticism. They focus us on what we really are guilty of and what we should do by way of t’shuvah, repentance. That’s good, and when I say “good” I mean good for us as individuals, as families, and good for the wider community and ultimately, good for the world. It’s good to do Yom Kippur. Even fasting, unless you are pregnant, nursing, or ill is good.
Rabbi Akiba, philosopher, among our Talmudic forbears, once commented:
ואהבת לרעך כמוך – זה כלל גדול בתורה“‘Love your neighbor as yourself” – this is the greatest Torah rule.’” (Sifri, K’doshim 4:12) Hillel, a couple of centuries before him, is said to have taught that the whole of Torah can be summed up in the words:
דעלך סני לחברך לא תעביד “What is hateful to you, do it not to your neighbor.” (TB Shabbat 31a). Our system of moral values begins in our story of creation בצלם ` להים
(Gen 1:26). No words could be clearer than these in stating the value of human life. Do we have a fine, humane way of looking at relationships, politics, world events? This quality is what we choose in being Jews. We have a religion that invites critical thinking.
What kind of Jew do you want to be? Picture Torah as a treasure chest, packed with mitsvot, ancient and contemporary, all yours, the inherited accumulation of millennia of people determined to get the most from life. Open the lid and have a look, study the possibilities. Take your pick. Experiment. You may find your family enriched by, say the Jewish way of eating. Beyond nutrition, how and what we eat binds us to one another spiritually. We end up with all kinds and degrees of kashrut, from the most restrictive classic form to organic or vegetarian considerations. And here is the payoff in doing a mitsvah – keeping kosher or any other: wanting to be this or that kind of Jew fades into the background as an issue. What happens is that the mitsvah has its effect on your life, your family and friends, your community, and, eventually, the world. The mitsvah adds goodness.

When is Rosh Hashanah! 5767 Agent of change for the better.

2006-10-15T18:20:00.000-05:00

WHEN IS ROSH HASHANAH
rh
An old story, a Midrash, told by Rabbi Pinchas and Rabbi Chilkiah in the name of Rabbi Simon: Once upon a time all the malachei hasharet – the ministering angels – were gathered together for a meeting. One raised the question, when is Rosh Hashanah this year? Turns out none of them knew the answer for sure so they turned to the highest authority, the Kadosh Baruch Hu, the Holy One, Blessed Be He. “Ribono Shel Olam,” they asked, “Master of the World , when is Rosh Hashanah?” אימתי ראש השנה A bemused expression came over His countenance: “You’re asking Me? Let’s you and I go ask the earthly court.”
What a great story. The most significant date in the calendar, the day that leads to all other holidays, Yom Hadin itself, with the blowing of shofars – and neither the ministering angels nor even God knows when it is. They have to go down and see what’s doing on earth. Have you heard of any other religion in which God asks us? Here’s confirmation in our prayers: Un’taneh Tokef, “ Let us ascribe power to this day... when fate is determined” Rosh Hashanah is powerful because we make it that way. Let us pick a day when we want to change our lives.
Back to the story and some history. The אימתי ראש השנה problem was and is, that the solar year is out of synch with lunar months. We Jews have always favored a lunar calendar for our holidays but we want Sukot to be in the fall and Pesach in springtime, so that the lunar months of a little over 29 ½ days can align with a solar year of a trifle more than 365¼ days. We do this by adding an extra month of Adar, seven years out of 19. Simple enough, for a Talmudist. Of course we’ve come a long way since rabbis Pinchas, Chilkiah, and Simon. We have wall calendars provided by our friendly funeral directors. We have computers now and even my PDA is programed to tell me not only what day but precisely what time the year begins. It’s all a matter of astronomy and mathematics, and seems to be the one thing that all Jews, everywhere, agree on. And, we must assume, God and the angels go along with our calendars. In Talmudic days they also used astronomy and mathematics, but neither science was sufficiently developed to be considered reliable. So they had a special court whose business it was to hear the latest observations of the moon and the position of the sun relative to the stars. They also studied leap year records. Based on the best evidence, that court of experts would decree that this day or that be Rosh Hashanah. Then the court would send out word by bonfires on hilltops all the way to Babylonia. Possibilities of missed messages lead diaspora authorities to decree two days of holidays, just to be on the safe side.
And now a personal story. I first heard Ematai Rosh Hashanah from one of my professors almost fifty years ago, and this is the first time the midrash has made its way into my Rosh Hashanah talks. Two years ago I retired from the full time pulpit, moving from Louisiana to Boston so that my wife and I could be active grandparents to our then new granddaughter, Ela. Best move we could have made. Last year I traveled to Juneau, Alaska, to conduct High Holiday services in a small, enthusiastic congregation there. They invited me to return this year but this past February, our daughter announced our second grandchild, this one due on September 23, the first of Tishri, Rosh Hashanah. We were not about to miss such an event, so no Alaska for us. And the denouement: our second granddaughter arrived early. Gila Kline Solmsen was born to Aliza and Bradley early on the morning of September 11! Her parents named her Gila, “joy” partly for the “G” in Gershon, Bradley’s deceased father, and partly as antidote to the bitterness of the date in American history. For this rabbi, for this year, Rosh Hashanah fell on September 11.
September 11, 2001, the day said to change everything. Who here does not remember just how, when, and where you heard the news? And the images, repeated over and over, of the planes crashing into the towers, the fires, the implosion, the smoke and dust, the dazed survivors in the rubble, the fire fighters, the police. After the horror of the images and the loss, I remember two feelings, first the gloomy awareness of vulnerability – our shores have not been struck like that since 1812, and now, any enemy, not just nations, can do us serious damage. We are as vulnerable as countries that lack our vast military capability. Second the sickening sense that we were back at war, with premonitions of worse to come. For eleven years the Vietnam war embarrassed, depressed and angered me into protest. I hate the futility of opposing a war that our president favors.
That Tuesday evening, all over the country, folks gathered for prayer. Our congregation joined with Baptists and Catholics, the clergy taking turns. Never before had the song “God Bless America” been sung with more meaning and fervor. And then began a year and a half of national solidarity that brought back memories of childhood during World War II. We Americans knew that, working together, we could prevail and flourish in the face of any threat. Sympathy and help for the victim families and survivors, concern for safety throughout our infrastructure, willingness to give and sacrifice. Flying “Old Glory” symbolized mutual commitment and support. B’nei Israel of Monroe, about as distant from New York City as you could get, resolved to “adopt” a victim family. We made contact, the wife and four children of a computer technician who had worked on the top floor of one of the towers. Our bulletin carried pictures and stories. We phoned, wrote letters, and sent money. Barbara and I visited them when we were in New York.
The world seemed to be on our side against Al Kaida and the Taliban who supported them. When, American and British forces invaded Afghanistan in October, that year, they were supported by Canada, Australia, most of Europe, and, think of it, Jordan, Pakistan, Uzbekistan,
and even Iran. Osama Bin Ladin escaped capture but the Taliban was uprooted and the forces of violent Islamicism were dealt a knockout blow. With this kind of unity, international police cooperation would have protected us from, if not eliminated terrorism. For a while, one might have thought that the world had changed for the better in response to the attack on America.
Untaneh Tokef is the defining prayer of Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur. We recite it in the Musaf section on both days. Here’s the image: the blast of the great shofar, along with the sound of silence, קול דממה דקה, and even the angels tremble to say: “הנה יום הדין It’s judgement day.” This is the moment when each of us must pass in judgement, the way sheep file past the shepherd who determines which will graze, produce, and reproduce for another year, and which will slaughtered for market. Our fate is in our hands and we have ten days to improve our chances.
We do a lot of introspection sitting here in synagogue on these Days of Awe. On Yom Kippur we shall repeatedly confess long lists of sins by way of reminding ourselves. Of course we can justifiably deny most of those bad deeds compiled by prayer book editors, but we could also call to mind a few new ones. T’shuvah, the repentance process is simple to explain: 1) acknowledge guilt, 2) repair damage done to the other, 3) when the opportunity arises to repeat the offense, don’t do it. That’s all there is to it. That’s how to achieve virtue. No need to wait till Rosh Hashanah to begin the process but, just as Thanksgiving Day comes annually to remind us of our dependence, so Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kipur come to remind us of our part in good and evil in the world.
Number 1 is the easy step. Any one of us can go for days without thinking of the meanness of our actions, of the hurt we have caused our wives, our children, our parents, our friends, and who knows who else. But when we come to think of it, we have no trouble recognizing ourselves as perpetrators. We may be loathe to admit anything – who wants to be liable for criticism, let alone lawsuit or indictment? But we know, and if we make but the least effort, we can confess to our injured party. Haven’t we all been brought up to “say you’re sorry?” Number 2, reparation, is much tougher, because it involves listening to the other. But number 3, don’t do it again, is the acid test of t’shuvah, the sign of success.
Over the many years since my Bar Mitsvah I can’t claim a whole lot of successes in t’shuvah. I keep trying. A congregation working together in this sort of effort supports one another. Your resolve strengthens mine.
So, when is Rosh Hashanah for you? Think about it. Judgement day? Life changing day? Turn around day? Which day is will launch a sweet and healthy year?
Alas, September 11, 2001, turned us only temporarily. Five years later we are back to where we were before, if not worse off. To be sure, Al Kaida had no intention of benefitting America. They sought to harm and eventually to destroy us. Perhaps it is fallacious reasoning to expect anything good to come out of such evil, but good did happen, at least for a time. Let’s not think for a moment that only disaster can effect change or that only a greater disaster would bring about peace in the world. Thank you, Gila for making the point. Thank you God for a world of lively, children. Ela, and her sister, demand our attention and motivate us to take good care of ourselves, our home, our country. I’ll do my praying this year, as in others, on the first of Tishri, but September 11is the real Rosh Hashanah for me, this year.

SERIOUS FUN

2006-08-24T20:04:00.000-05:00

HEDONIC JUDAISM
(A Conversation with my father on his 17th yahrtseit)
Rabbi David L. Kline

On the news this morning, arrests of prominent persons at
the entrance to the New York City Police Department. Last month
a squad of four officers shot forty one bullets into an unarmed
West African in the lobby of his home. Such is the political
atmosphere in New York that the mayor grants the police broad
force to suppress crime. Complaints of police brutality run up
against claims of reduced crimes of violence and the present
protesters are willing to be arrested to call attention to abuse
of power.

Also, this 5th of Nisan morning, rereading some of my
father's sermons brings up strong feelings: were I living in New
York, I should have been one of those protestors. Alexander S.
Kline, a.h., was a thinker and a teacher. His ideas in my life
led to encounters with the law over racial repression and unjust
war. I do my best to continue his emphasis on what he called
"Prophetic Judaism," the centrality of justice and righteousness.

But his writing reminds me that we differ, he the
intellectual and I the pursuer of experiences. From my college
days on, I had such a wonderful time at Shabbat and holidays,
with Hebrew language, at Bible studies, at folk dance and song,
at travels in Israel, that fun occurred to me as the best reason
for being a Jew. My teacher was unamused, and warned me against
trivializing Torah.

He agreed that fun was important, but, in his words, for
"survival value." He was wary of easy gratification. He
esteemed chopped liver and Yiddish jokes and anything that helped
keep us going so as to preserve that which was important: our
mission of perfecting the world.

I share with my father (and mother) a love for good words,
their etymology, their denotations and connotations. I think I
have found the word I needed in our discussion long ago:
"hedonic" (of, characterizing, or pertaining to pleasure), coming
from the Greek hedonikos, "pleasurable." I inherited suspicion
of "hedonist" and "hedonism" for their devotion to pleasure as a
way of life. But "hedonic" is a proper psychological term for an
important area of human experience, and it has lately become a
highly technical word in marketing. As a descriptive, it is more
specific and useful than the usual: Reform, Orthodox,
progressive, gastronomic, cardiac ("I feel Jewish in my heart"),
secular, all of which and more we recognize.

Here's my argument for hedonic Judaism. So much bad
stuff happens to us, to our families, our communities, our nation,
our world. Pain and death, degradation, alienation, despair -- no
one promises us a rose garden. I propose Judaism as the antidote
to all the hurt: the hedonic we can count on for balance,
meaning, purpose, and quality in our lives. Like the arts,
Judaism does not negate evil. Pleasure is neither distraction
nor satisfaction for our unanswerable questions. We can not
avoid suffering but we need not give in to it so long as we can
look forward to, say, Shabbat.
We don't achieve pleasure by pursuing it. Like happiness,
pleasure is our response to certain persons, places, and things
that affect our lives. Short lived and sometimes hard to reach,
the hedonic works not as goal but as operating principle: we go
to temple because we look forward to an agreeable time spent
there.

Of course hedonic Judaism presupposes enjoyable rituals,
pleasant spiritual experiences, and delightful values. I am
professionally and painfully aware that many of our people have
neither experience nor expectation of pleasure from being Jews.
On the contrary, we can more readily list the problems than the
pleasures of our peculiar status. What is more, the surrounding
majority thinks of religion as obligation, as solace, as the sure
answer to questions, allowing beauty only as enhancement.

Judaism, over the millennia, has acquired a rich trove of
literature, values, rituals, music, foods, and arts. I should like to
think that I have over the past seventeen years learned an answer
to my father’s argument of seriousness: Torah operates by
enriching our lives so that when the time comes for personal effort
and sacrifice we have ready reserves of morale. I would call it
“spiritual survival value.” I wonder if my father would accept
this usage of “spiritual.” Maybe he would approve of “hedonic.”

MONOTHEISM?

2006-08-23T09:18:00.000-05:00

HOW MANY GODS ARE THERE?

Rabbi David L. Kline, Sermon at Northminster Church, Monroe, LA, 9/19/2004

One of the truly important actions of Temple B’nai Israel was sharing its building for a time with Northminster Church. When I was interviewing to come here 15 years ago I thought it good economics and good use of space and resources. Then I got to know and like the people and learn from them. I began thinking of them as “my” Baptists. Cathy Nixon told me that at a conference discussion on some Bible topic, she told her colleagues she would return home and consult “her” rabbi. What a natural association. Why shouldn’t we feel this family relationship? Both our traditions were enriched. We stimulated one another. Cathy even went so far as to have Barbara be the one to bless her as she entered the ministry. Wow! I recall only one problem: every Wednesday evening, when the church choir rehearsed, I found myself breaking the tenth commandment. I admit, however, that listening to that music comforted me for the guilt of coveting.

Talks with Don and Cathy, DH Clark, and a list of others in the church, got me started thinking about theology. What is significant about the theological differences between Judaism and Christianity. Actually, in my younger years, while I was still, say middle aged, I hardly ever thought, let alone spoke on the subject. I’ve always focused on the action side of Torah, and when I spoke about God, it was about moments of spiritual experience. Discussing Christianity and Judaism led to curiosity about other religions and the thought arose: if there is only one God, what difference does it make to God what we believe? And the corollary: How justify the claim to knowledge by one religion over another? Faith certainly has its function, but I am talking theology now, that is I am talking about God, hoping to make philosophical sense.

Bible, particularly Hebrew Scriptures, has been my brush with scholarship over the years. In ancient writings of my ancestors the B’nei Israel we find some good writings on monotheism and its implications, but contrary to what rabbis, myself included, like to teach, the text shows the earlier biblical writers to have allowed for the existence of any number of deities. Whoever it was in later times who redacted the stories in Judges and Kings, left a heavy editorial spin about how awful idolatry was, and how it was the cause of all Israel’s troubles, but there seems to have been little or no awareness of any problem before the time of Hosea. In the mid 8^th century BCE, the prophet Hosea taught that Israelites should worship only Yah, their God, because Yah felt like a cuckolded husband when Israel went chasing after other gods like a whoring wife. A husband gets jealous of other men. How could God be jealous of other gods if there is only one God?

We all know about great King Solomon and his reputation for wisdom. He built the Bet Hamikdash, the Holy Temple that stood in Jerusalem till destroyed by the Babylonians. The Book of Kings goes on to tell of his building temples for every other god. His many wives came from all over and he was broad minded enough to honor their beliefs as well as his own. Why not? Apparently neither he nor his priests or advisors had heard of the second commandment. In fact, for centuries to follow, our ancestors blithely carried on all sorts of practices not listed in Exodus or Leviticus. Now, if as children are taught, Abraham discovered monotheism and Moses passed on the Ten Commandments, then all those generations were big time transgressors of the idolatry and polytheism laws. But suppose Bible scholars since Wellhausen 125 or so years ago, are correct in understanding that Torah, that is Pentateuch, was written after, not before, the prophets, that the prophets introduced the ideas about God and justice and later writers systematized the stories and teachings, presenting the material as the work of an ancient lawgiver, Moses. I am long persuaded that this is the correct way to read Hebrew Scriptures. I appreciate what the redactors and all the later teachers were getting at, acceptance of the received writings together with creative explanations. The aim is piety and a world of moral teaching. I have done my share of homilizing over the years. It’s comfortable to think of King David as having the same beliefs about God as we do, but for purposes of theology, homiletics gets in the way.

Let two well known verses illustrate the point for now. The second commandment reads Lo yihyeh l’cha elohim acherim al panai, “Thou shalt have no other gods before me (or: besides) Me.” What other gods has the author in mind? How many gods are there? In Deuteronomy we find Sh’ma Yisrael, Adonai Eloheynu, Adonai echad. “Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is One.” We like to think of that as the statement of oneness of God, period. But wait a minute, what is our doing here? Turns out that in the context of Deuteronomy (sixth centurh BCE), the idea was that Israel was to worship the one and only Yah – that’s a shortened form of the name we used for our God. By implication other nations were free to worship their gods, whoever they were. The Deuteronomist taught that were Israel to worship Yah exclusively and faithfully, Yah would grant them victory over their enemies. Yah beats all others. We rabbis and other preachers have for millennia taken these unprotected lines out of context and used them for our own purposes, good purposes, of teaching monotheism, but with all the virtue of our sermons, therein lies a problem: our theology is weakened, our monotheism is less than perfect.

Lets take a look at what Deutero Isaiah had to say. Ani rishon, va’ani acharon umibal’adai ayn Elohim, “I am first and I am last and besides me there are no Gods.” Bear in mind that these lines were spoken/written in Babylonia, following Nebuchadnetsar’s destruction of the nation of Judah with its temple in Jerusalem. The listeners were the exiles, feeling lost from their land and their national religion, their protector God, Yah, having been defeated by the Babylonian God, Marduk. Deutero Isaiah was a theologically inclined homiletist. He preached that God was one , Who alone determined the comings and going of all nations. But the preacher also wanted his listeners, the Jews, to keep their faith, which for them meant a feeling of special relationship to God. So Deutero Isaiah called them servants of God, and in particular: Atem Edai, “You are My witnesses” that there is God besides me.

We can only imagine how easy this sermon was to listen to but how difficult to grasp. Deutero Isaiah was a great poet. In magnificent images he drove home his point about one God, creator of the world, in control of all, with a great plan for redemption. But monotheism was a radically new idea. It challenged ages of teachings. It raised new questions: Who was God? Where did God come from? Whom does God favor and why? What does it take to please God? What is God’s will?

The toughest, most living question is: how do we escape the triumphalism, a whiff of which Deutero Isaiah left in the mix: the notion that the God of Israel was God and all other peoples were mistaken. We miss the point of monotheism when we insist that my religion is the right, the true, the ultimate approach to God: all would be well if only everybody converted to my religion. If there is one God, then all religious experiences, all contacts with God, all speculation and contemplation, all is humanly true, equally. Each religion is a cultural expression, with its own history and sociology, and its specific, idiosyncratic inputs. If there is to be comparing of religions, let them compete in doing good. I learned that from Muhamad, in the Koran.

The corollary of monotheism, is monohumanity. Scientists since Einstein have spoken of “unified field theory,” a single principle that ties all material existence together. Monotheism is the spiritual statement of unified field theory. One God means one standard for all. One justice, one fairness, one value of human life, one standard of health care. Do you remember Abraham Lincoln’s great answer to the question of whether God was on the side of the Union? He said, “My great concern is to be on God's side.” Lincoln understood monotheism.

Let two well known lines from our own culture illustrate missing the point: “One nation under God.” I was there when this political use of piety was introduced, added to our alliegence. We were to believe that we were the better for claiming to be under God. We were to ignore the contradiction to monotheism in suggesting that other nations were not under God. We saw virtue in belief and evil in disbelief. It was as if we thought God was of such small ego that God would be pleased by our statement. The second statement: “God bless America.” You and I, B’nai Israel and Northminster Church came together to pray at the end of that awful day, September 11, 2001. The most fervent of our thoughts was God bless America, under attack, suffering a bloody wound to the nation, beaten down. But for years and years we have mostly spoken and sung the line to set our nation apart and above other nations. Monotheists should be singing “God bless the world.”

Christians and Jews and Moslems and more as well like to describe ourselves as monotheists. But war proves we fall short. World hunger shows we are uttering empty words. Injustice abroad or at home reminds us that we have a ways to go before we understand oneness. I say lets have more resource sharing between religious groups.

Barbara Kline's World Class Challah

2006-08-22T17:51:00.001-05:00

BARBARA'S CHALLAH

Sponge:

1/2  tumbler size glass hot water
1 tbls. yeast (or 1 envelope) regular not rapid rise
2 tbls. sugar
(stir together and let it do its thing while you combine . . . )
8 cups unsifted, UNbleached flour
1/2 cup sugar
2 tsps. salt
Make a well in the center of the flour and pour sponge
(frothy head, liquid, and all) into it.  Cover sponge with some
of the flour mixture.  Add to this . . .
4 beaten eggs
4 tblsp. vegetable oil (canola, sunflower, etc.)
Combine well with wooden spatula or spoon.  Begin to
knead by hand, adding water until all flour can be absorbed.  Add
water a little at a time.  The weather (dampness) determines
whether you need a little or a lot.  Remove from bowl and
continue kneading on a formica or stainless steel counter until
the dough is smooth and springy (like a baby's bottom).
Scrape the bowl clean.   Pour a little oil into the
bowl and return kneeded dough to it, lightly coating all the
dough with the oil.
Cover with wax paper and let sit for at least four (4)
hours.
. . . . . .
When dough has risen double its original size, remove
from bowl and punch down to get the air out.  Kneed a little
more.   Divide into three equal amounts for three challahs.

Braiding the challah:

Divide the dough into four equal amounts.  Set one lump
aside and roll out three ropes with the remaining three lumps of
dough.
Braid these three ropes beginning in the middle,
stretching the dough as you get to each end.  This will give your
challah a lovely shape.
Repeat this process with the fourth lump that you had
set aside, dividing that piece into three parts, rolling them
into ropes, and braiding from the center out.
Secure ends, and let rest for approximately 20 minutes
on a greased cookie sheet.  Preheat oven at 350 degrees.

After this second rise, paint the challahs with beaten
egg and sprinkle with poppy seeds or sesame seeds if desired.

Bake for 1/2 hour.  Remove from cookie sheet and
continue baking for another 10 minutes, or until challah sounds
hollow when tapped on the bottom.

Remove from oven and let cool on baking rack.

Shabbat Shalom! Eat and enjoy!!!


Instructions for Making Challah with Young Children


You will be making 40 cups of flour for 15 children.

You will need five sets of:  large mixing bowls
cereal size bowls for mixing eggs
measuring spoons & cups
large spoons (to fill cups w/flour)
large paint brushes

Divide children into 5 teams of 3 each.  There should be one
older child in each group.

Pour hot water into glasses and give one to each group. 

Assign one young child to be in charge of making and observing
sponge.

Another young child can measure the flour with older child
supervising.  Use handle of large spoon to level off cup of
flour.  Young child can also measure sugar.

Older child should measure salt and oil.

Young child can break eggs, older child beating eggs with fork.

If a child is truly uncoordinated, let the child create own
shape.  However, with a little help, anyone can do a three strand
braid.  I have done this alone with about six children.

Good luck.  Seeing the look of pride on their faces when they see
how large their challahs have risen in the oven is worth all of
it. 

By the way, the older children can wash the dishes and younger
dry. I have found (through desperation) that a hyper child makes
an excellent dish washer.  The warm, soapy water seems to calm
them down (water therapy!).  They should complete the clean up.
Better give them 45 minutes for entire braiding and cleaning
kitchen.  Put challahs in oven as they leave.  You can bake three
at a time one one sheet.

Build a Bamboo Sukah (Sukkah)

2006-08-21T17:31:00.000-05:00

                           BAMBOO BOOTH

Here's a colleague's learned and poetic disertation:
Rules of the Sukkah, Rabbi Art Gould
href="http://artgould.com/articles/RulesoftheSukkah.html">

                   
   After years of Sukah ("booth") designing and building, using
two-by-fours, four-by-fours, plywood, available scrap, and PVC
tubing (for a geodesic dome), I have discovered a material that
stands beyond all the rest: bamboo.  I have long admired this
grand grass for its smooth elegance and its potential.  A stalk
of bamboo, more properly a "culm," seems to suggest uses, as if
already half processed into, say, a flute, a container, a fishing
pole.  I had begun thinking of it as Sukah element when the local
university library found me a copy of a 52 page reprint by the
Peace Corps of a 1953 USDA document: "BAMBOO AS A BUILDING
MATERIAL."  A real architect, my brother-in-law, liked the idea
and sent me a few suggestive and inspirational sketches.  Now,
with a couple of years of hands on experience, I recommend,    
without reservation this new way to build an old structure: the    
eight day shelter.




























   Nothing approaches bamboo for being lightweight and yet
strong and rigid at lengths up to 30 feet and more; easy to cut,
drill, shape; a smooth, hard, splinter free, surface, requiring
no paint, and all natural, readily available, and cheap!  I would
use it on a balcony, but for a large, public booth, only bamboo
goes up (and comes down) with such ease in the hands of
volunteers.
   The following 16 by 20 foot model has worked for two years
and its components are resting in storage for assembly after Yom
Kipur breakfast.  It fits nicely on a cement patio behind our
synagogue in Monroe, LA, but would stand as elegantly on grass or
gravel.  We wall ours with rolls of bamboo curtain (that cost
more than all the rest of the material) but industrial rolls of
burlap served well with the old, much more painful, wooden
structure.  For schach ("cover branches") we prefer a load of
fresh cut young bamboo but tree and bush prunings will do as
well.  Local needs determine the measurements -- we crowd tables
and chairs for 30 diners into ours.


   The following bamboo pieces will make a 16' X 20' sukah:
   number    description    diameter  length
        4    Corner posts   4"-5"     9'
        3    Door posts     4"        9'
        2    Beam braces    3"-4"     7'
        2    Beam members   3"        22'
        2    Beam members   3"        18'
        20   Rafter members 1"-2"     17'
        (For the walls, of whatever flexible 7' wide material:
      37' and 24' lengths.  Seven 2' lengths of iron pipe, 5"
        inside diameter, for permanant installation.  Lots of 
 schach.)

   We found bamboo available locally for little more than the
cutting but a source in New Orleans was prepared to sell us the
pieces already cut to order for about $100.  (One of our members
provided the shipping on his truck that was headed back from
N.O.)  An ad in the local paper requesting bamboo brought us
several offers.
   A few minutes on the Internet will yield sources for bamboo
poles.
























                    Advanced Preparations
   The culms should be precut to length.  A handheld saber saw
makes short work of the U shaped slots at the top of the corner
and door posts and the J shape of the beam braces.  We had a
professional drill the concrete and set two foot lengths of five
inch iron pipe for the corners and door posts (with iron disks to
cover the holes the rest of the year).  A post hole digger would
do the job on dirt.  Mark out a 20' by 16' rectangle and drill in
each corner.  We set door posts for front and back doors, 4'
wide, to make it easy to carry tables in and out of the Sukah.
Your location will determine whether the doors should be in the
longer or shorter side.
   Gravity holds the whole thing together, aided by a simple
trick: heavy rubber bands cut from an inner tube.  With a pair of
large, sharp scissors, cut into one-inch wide loops an automobile
inner tube, with maybe a couple of bicycle tubes for good
measure.  Once this is none, you need no tools for construction,
year after year.  Even dressed for Yom Kippur, a few Jews of all
ages (at least one tall) will have a good time doing the mitsvah
in an hour or so.
   Assembly:
   1) Set corner posts and door posts into their holes.
   2) Set 22' beam members into slots in corner posts.
   3) Set 18' beam members at juncture of 22' beams and corner
         posts, passing through slots in door posts.
   4) Secure beams to posts with rubber bands.
   5) Lay rafter members across 22' beams at 1 foot intervals.
         Attach with rubber bands -- loop around rafter inward
       of beam, stretch around beam, loop around
rafter
       outward of beam.
   6) Take photographs.
   7) Hang wall using wire, string, depending on material.
  
   Finish:
    Schach on top, more bamboo, if it's plentiful, otherwise any cut
green branches.
   Hiddur haMitsvah: decorate

   Party for 8 days!