THE FIRE ON THE ALTAR

SHALL BE KEPT BURNING, NOT TO GO OUT; EVERY MORNING THE PRIEST SHALL FEED WOOD

TO IT, LAY OUT THE BURNT OFFERING ON IT, AND TURN INTO SMOKE THE FAT PARTS OF

THE OFFERINGS OF WELL-BEING. A PERPETUAL FIRE SHALL BE KEPT BURNING ON THE ALTAR,

NOT TO GO OUT.

                                                                                                                                                 (Vayikra 6:5-6)

THE SPIRITUAL FIRE, THE FIRE WHICH CONSUMES, AND THE

FIRE WHICH LIVES IN PEACE WITH WATER

Had you been deserving you would be reading in the Torah "A

perpetual fire shall be kept burning on the altar." But now that you

do not merit, you read: "From above He sent fire into my bones."

 (Eicha Rabba, Petichta)

Said Rabbi Yehuda bar Shalom – said Moshe before The Holy One, Blessed

Be He: Master of the universe. You told me to make an alter of acacia wood and

to cover it bronze, and you told me "A perpetual fire shall be kept

burning on the altar." Does not that fire penetrate the covering and

burn the wood?

Replied The Holy One, Blessed Be He: Moshe, because these properties

exist in your [physical] world – do you assume they exist in mine? Consider the

angels, who are burning fire – yet how many treasures of snow and hail have I,

as is written,: "Have you penetrated the vaults of snow, seen the

vaults of hail" (Job 38:22). And

similarly it says "He sets the rafters of His lofts in the waters"

(Psalms 104:3). Yet the waters do not

extinguish the fire nor does the fire consume the waters, and similarly,

concerning the fiery creatures and the firmament above the waters, it is

written, "Such then was the appearance of the creatures. With them was

lightening issued from the fire" (Ezekiel

1:13).

Rabbi Berekhia said in the name of Rabbi Helbo who spoke in the same of

Rabbi Abba: Even the hooves of the animals covering a distance of four hundred

years, all of them carry fire in a firmament which is all water, yet the fire

does not burn the water, nor does the water extinguish the fire. Why? Because

"He imposes peace in his heights" – but when I tell you "A

perpetual fire shall be kept on the altar" you fear lest the trees be

consumed?!

                                                                                                                                 (Tanhuma, Teruma 11)

OUR REDEMPTION AND OUR SALVATION

Yisrael Chazani

In the Talmud

Yerushalmi (Rosh Hashana, 3:5, p. 48:4) we

read:

Said Rabbi Shmuel bar Rav Yitzhak: "And

Israel… to bring the Children of Israel out of the land of Egypt" (Shemot 6:13) – regarding what did He charge

them? To observe the mitzvah of freeing slaves. And these words are similar to

that which Rabbi Hilla said: Israel was punished only because of [their failure

to observe] the freeing of slaves. And so is it written: "At the end of

seven years one must set free his Hebrew brother" (Jeremiah 34:14).

"And he charged the Children of

Israel to bring out the Children of Israel" – is explained

according to its plain meaning (pshat) as follows: God spoke to Moshe

and to Aharon and charged them to go to the Children of Israel to inform the

Children of Israel regarding the exodus from Egypt. (See Rashi and Ibn Ezra)

But Rav Shmuel bar Rav Yitzhak expounded

otherwise: God commanded Moshe and Aharon to go to the Children of Israel and

to charge them to free from their midst the Children of Israel who were

indentured to them! In his words – "Regarding what did He charge

them? Regarding the freeing of slaves" – in Egypt. And the author

of the Korban HaEdah emphasized: "Israel, exiled from the Land, were

punished only because of the issue of freeing slaves. And why because of this

infraction in particular? Because this was the first mitzvah with which they

were charged in Egypt (even before the mitzvah of the New Moon, as is written

in the Tanhuma and in Rashi 1:1), and for its sake they were redeemed from

Egypt".

"Israel was not punished" – refers

to the destruction of the First Temple, as articulated by the prophet (Jeremiah 34:8-16):

The word which came to Jeremiah form the

Judean enslaved.

Everyone, officials and people, who had

Jeremiah from the Lord:

Thus said the Lord, the God of Israel: I

made a covenant with your fathers, when I brought them out of the land of

Egypt, the house of bondage, saying "In the seventh year each of you must

let go any fellow Hebrew who may be sold to you; when he has served you six

years, you must set him free. But your fathers would not obey Me or give ear.

Lately you turned about and did what is proper in My sight, and each of you

proclaimed a release to his countrymen; and you made a covenant accordingly

before Me in the House which bears my name. But now you have turned back and

have profaned My name; each of you has brought back the men and women whom you

had given their freedom, and forced them to be your slaves again.

Assuredly, thus said the Lord: You would

famine; and I will make you a horror to all the kingdoms of the earth.

Two interesting elements come to the fore:

A.    

The Children of Israel in Egypt held slaves; even in an

enslaved society, such as that of Israel in Egypt, there was no social

solidarity. There existed slavery, repression, and oppression. (See Shemot Rabba 14:3, Ed. Shinan, p.263: "Why

One, Blessed Be He, who shows no favoritism, who investigates hearts and

examines kidneys – because there were sinners in Israel, who had Egyptian

patrons and they enjoyed prestige, honor, and wealth, and they did not want to

leave Egypt" etc.)

B.    

Freedom and redemption cannot be achieved without internal

social reform (as stressed by all the prophets). This is expressed in Midrashic

fashion, in connection with Pesach: It is not enough to eliminate the external hametz;

one must – first of all – eliminate that which is within. (See Zohar, Vahehi, 226b: "And hametz is

called "yetser hara [the evil inclination]. See also Rabeinu

Behayey on Vayikra 2:11: "The leavening and the honey are the yetzer

hara itself, as our Sages said regarding hametz and matza on

Pesach, one has to clear his heart of the yetser hara." Rabeinu

Bahayey's words are a combination of the words of the Zohar and of the Talmud

Pesahim 6b: "Said Rav Yehuda in the name of Rav, one who inspects must

nullify [in his heart – Rashi, as per Pesachim 31b: "Hammetz upon

which rubble of a collapsed building has fallen is considered to be eliminated.

Said Rav Hisda, and he must nullify it in his heart"]")

            Even

if we reject this explanation, saying that "He charged them"

means that while the Children of Israel were yet in Egypt, His command

concerned the future when they will have entered the Land of Canaan, when they

will possess slaves (See Tosefta Kiddushin 1:12,

p. 280: Said R' Leizer to R' Shimon, Every mitzvah with which Israel charged

before entering the Land is binding in the Land and outside the Land; those

which became binding upon entering the land is in force only in the Land, with

the exception of relinquishment of vessels, the redemption of land, and the

release of a Hebrew bondsman – these, even though they became mandatory only

upon entry into the Land, are in force both in the Land and outside it.")

– the words are very severe: Redemption from Egypt and the inheritance of the

Land are conditional (in addition to well-known conditions, such as idolatry

and incest) – upon release of slaves. This condition is not mentioned in the

Torah passages dealing with the Hebrews slave, (Shemot

21:2-11; Vayikra 25:39-43; Devarim 15:12-18.) but the prophet Jeremiah

postulated the requirement, (Jeremiah elaborated

upon Vayikra 39:42, and Devarim 15:15, 18; see also Shemot 6:6-8, Vayikra

25:55, Nehemiah 5:1-13.) and the author of the Korban HaEdah emphasized

it ("and because of it they were redeemed from Egypt").

In the actual context of our times: Since

"In every generation one must regard himself as though he himself had

exited Egypt", we must not forget that in our State and in our society

there are those who rob the wages of the worker and take in pawn (literally and

figuratively) the garment of the widow, and they delay the geula from

"Egypt". Because many are strict in their observance of the laws of

Pesach, they are "permitted" to be stringent in observance of this

law, too, and to apply it also to the Arab workers and the 'foreign' laborers,

some of whom are oppressed and humiliated by Jews who left "Egypt"

and treat them as slaves. (Swindling of a

gentile is more serious than the swindling of a Jew, because it leads to hillul

haShem – desecration of the Name" – Sefer Hassidim, Ed.

Vistinsky-Freiman, 1214, p. 323, based on Tosefta Bava Kamma, 10:15, p. 53.)

The main points of this article were written

on the eve of Pesach 5759; later I discovered that the idea had already been

expressed by a great scholar, Rabbi M. M. Kasher, who incorporated them into

his Torah Sheleima, X, p. 117. (See also Ramban on Shemot 21:2)

Yisrael Hazani lives in the Old Quarter

of Yerushalayim and is an editor.

Readers

Write:

Final Reactions to Shammai Leibowitz's Letter (Tetsaveh issue)

            Could

our father Avraham serve as a precedent for soldiers in Tzahal who refuse to

serve in the territories?

            True,

the soldiers demand justice, just as Avraham demanded justice from "the

judge of the all the universe". But it seems to me that the prophet Elijah

provides an even more impressive precedent (I

Kings, 18, haphtara for Parashat Ki Tissa; it can be said that Moses breaking

the tablets set a precedent for Elijah).

            With

ironic and bludgeoning tongue, Elija taunts the hundreds of the prophets of

Baal who attempt to offer a bull on an altar on Mr. Carmel. They fail, whereas

Elijah drenches his bull with four vessels of water three times, resulting in

"A fire of God descended and consumed the offering and the wood and the

stones and the dust and it licked up the water in the ditch" (Ibid. 38). All those present prostrated themselves and

cried "The Lord is God, the Lord is God."

            Elijah's

action is most dramatic; it is also forbidden by the Torah ("Beware

lest you raise you offerings [on altars other than that in place chosen by

God]" (Devarim 12: 13-14). But "It is a time to act for God, for

they have violated your teaching" (Psalms 119) (See Rashi Berachot

54a: Sometimes laws of Torah are cancelled in order to act on behalf of God…

such as Elijah on Mt. Carmel, who brought offering on an altar when altars were

forbidden…). It is interesting that this explication of the passage from

Psalms has become part of our legacy, even though it is not the "pshat

of Scripture."

            When,

however, according to this traditional understanding, is the Torah to be

violated?

            Elijah

violates the Torah for the sake of the Torah, in a situation where there is

no Torah.

            Soldiers

of Tzahal are sent to the territories, regions where democracy does not reign;

democracy, in Greek: "Rule by the people", meaning, the people ruling

themselves. In there territories, however, one people rules over another

people.

            It

is common knowledge that many of our people deny this, and claim that the

occupation was forced upon us and not upon the Palestinian people, but the

soldiers who refuse to serve in a place where there is no democracy do so in

the name of democracy, just as Elijah the prophet did for the sake of the

Torah. In my opinion, this is a most impressive act.            

                                                                                                             Daniel Rorlich

                                                                                                             Yerushalayim

            In

the beginning of his letter, the author writes that during his service in the

territories, brutal acts of oppression took place, including prevention of

medical attention for the wounded. I do not know where Mr. Leibowitz served and

where he witnessed the acts, but it is strange that he should choose the path

of sweeping refusal over the his obligation as a soldier and citizen to condemn

these acts as they occurred and to do all possible in order to stop them and to

bring the guilty to investigation by relevant officers.

            The

writer's attempt to base himself upon noble figures such as our father Avraham

– "the first conscientious objector" – is simplistic and lacking any

depth, like any other attempt at practical transference form Biblical events to

our time.

            The

Bible is replete with tens of contradicting events, in which our fathers were

commanded to exhibit cruelty against those who are ostensibly innocent of all

sin; we are commanded to wipe out their seed and to destroy many only because

of their belonging to a certain nation – as we read on Parashat Zachor and in

the haphtara of that Shabbat – Shaul's war against Amalek. Therefore, it is

more proper to deal with the essence of moral dilemmas which arise these days

without seeking parallels in a Biblical narrative which differs from the

current realities in various circumstances.

            From

a religious and moral viewpoint, today's war in the territories presents a

dilemma between conflicting principles.

            On

the one hand, the obligation to respect the civil rights of the Palestinians

and to avoid any damage and injury to their property and bodies; on the other

hand, the existential obligation to protect the lives of our people. Any

attempt to provide a value-based answer which turns a blind eye to either of

these principles sins against the truth. Mr. Leibowitz regards the limitations

of Palestinian movement as 'a cruel offense against their basic rights";

by ignoring the fact that because of freedom of movement on the roads, hundreds

of Jews have been killed, he has deceived himself. Is it morally conceivable

that the blood of innocents can be placed in the hands of chance or in the

hands of those who seek to kill them everywhere?

            Refusal

to serve in the territories is equivalent to the forfeiting of innocent

Jewish life. Morality does not accept this; on the contrary – the moral

person must chose the difficult path of struggle and of stubborn defense of

those principles which I enumerated above.

            It

worth remembering that Tzahal is the only army in the world which – in its

defense activities – continues to persist in employing the most accurate

weaponry available in the region, in order to minimize as much as possible

civilian causalities. After a year and a half of war in defense of the

inhabitants of the State, Tzahal has not employed curved-trajectory projectiles

(cannon or mortar) to limit the radius of the target area. We can be proud of

the moral level of Tzahal which, in contrast to other armies, has always

refused to accept the rule "A la guerre comme à la guerre" ("In

war as in war") in order to justify deviations from rules of morality in

war.

            We

vigorously protest the writer's call to sweeping refusal, which ignores the

complexity of the moral dilemmas in which a nation finds itself when fighting

for its existence while guarding the basic values of its belief. We are

encouraged, however, by the fact that these acts are limited to very few. Even

more are we encouraged by the fact we have yet to hear of such soul searching

on the part of our many enemies; our strength lies in our faith and in our

morality.

                                                             Emanuel Semama

 (Lt.

Colonel, Battalion Commander in reserves)

            "Shabbat

Shalom" recently published Shammai Leibowitz's letter, in which he

describes the distress to which he is exposed during reserve duty in the

territories, and which led him to refuse to serve in the territories.

            One

has the right to refrain from what he considers to be a moral abomination.

Without doubt, he has the right to declare "I cannot". This principle

is valid in moral and religious matters.

            Opposing

the moral argument raised by Shammai is a different value, "You shall

not stand by when your brother's blood is being spilt" – the

obligation, the mitzvah, to defend the citizens of the State. Even when they

dwell in Yesha, their presence in the settlements cannot be defined as a sin, a

crime, or an illegal act. Therefore, from a moral standpoint I am obligated to

protect them, just as they are obligated to protect me.

            It

is true that this presence is preventing a peace agreement, but as long as the

government has not ordered them to leave their homes, the government is

obligated to protect them, and I, as a citizen, provide this protection. To

serve in the territories is not just "to occupy" – it is also to

protect; refusal to protect is a very serious moral issue. This and more.

Refusal pulls the rug from under our feet. When we return to negotiations, and

reach accord with the Palestinians, we will have the right to demand of the

inhabitants of Yesha to pay the price of peace; if, however, we do not stand by

them in their hour of distress, can we demand of them to comply with government

decisions?!

            For

both moral and pragmatic reasons, Shammai, please change your mind.

                                                                        Shmuel

Reiner

Rabbi Shmuel Reiner is rabbi of Kibbutz Tirat

Zvi and head of the Religious Kibbutz Movement Yeshiva at Maaleh Gilboa.

I wish to clarify that the

the the letters.

Rabbi Hanoch Goldberg,

Chairman

Netivot Shalom – Oz Veshalom

Editor's

Note:

Because of the many

summarizing this penentrating and important discussion.

Heartfelt blessings to our member, Professor

Uriel Simon, a founder of OzVeshalom and Netivot Shalom, and long-time member of the the

in the series "Judaism Here and Now" published by Yedioth Aharonot.

Editorial Board of Shabbat Shalom

The Executive, the Moetza, and the Membership

Editorial Board: Pinchas Leiser (Editor), Miriam Fine (Coordinator), Itzhak

Frankenthal and Dr. Menachem Klein

Translation: Kadish Goldberg

This weekly publication was

made possible by:

The Moriah Fund, the Tisch

Foundation and private donors

To our readers:

We will be happy to have you actively participate in "Shabbat

Shalom" by:

·       

Letters to the editor

·       

Publication of Divrei Torah (in coordination with the

editorial board)

For details, contact Miriam Fine (053-920206 or

02-6730196)

If you enjoy Shabbat Shalom, please consider contributing towards

its publication and distribution.

·       

Hebrew edition distributed in Israel $1000

·       

English edition distributed via email $ 100

Issues may be dedicated in honor of an event, person, simcha, etc.

Requests must be made 3-4 weeks in advance to appear in the Hebrew, 10 days in

advance to appear in the English email.

US, Canadia or British tax-exempt contributions to OzveShalom may be

made through the New Israel Fund or through P.E.F. Israel Endowment Funds, Inc.

Contributions should be marked as donor-advised to OzveShalom/Netivot

Shalom, the Shabbat Shalom project.

New Israel Fund, POB 53410, Jerusalem 91534 (Please include Israeli

address and telephone number)

New Israel Fund, POB 91588, Washington, DC 20090-1588, USA

New Israel Fund of Canada, 801 Eglinton Ave. West, Suite #401, Toronto,

Ontario M5N 1E3 Canada (Canadian tax exemption)

New Israel Fund of Great Britain, 26 Enford Street, London W1H 2DD, United

Kingdom (British tax exemption)

P.E.F. Israel Endowment Funds, Inc., 317 Madison Ave., Suite 607, New

York, New York 10017 USA

About us:

Oz Veshalom-Netivot Shalom is a movement dedicated to the advancement of

a civil society in Israel. It is committed to promoting the ideals of

tolerance, pluralism, and justice, concepts which have always been central to

Jewish tradition and law.

Oz Veshalom-Netivot Shalom shares a deep attachment to the land of

Israel and it no less views peace as a central religious value. It believes

that Jews have both the religious and the national obligation to support the

pursuit of peace. It maintains that Jewish law clearly requires us to create a

fair and just society, and that co-existence between Jews and Arabs is not an option

but an imperative.

Oz Veshalom-Netivot Shalom`s programs include both educational and

protest activities. Seminars, lectures, workshops, conferences and weekend

programs are held for students, educators and families, as well as joint

seminars for Jews, Israeli Arabs and Palestinians. Protest activities focus on

issues of human rights, co-existence between Jews and Arabs, and responses to

issues of particular religious relevance.

9,000 copies of a 4 page peace oriented commentary on the weekly Torah

reading are written and published by Oz VeShalom/Netivot Shalom and they are

distributed to over 350 synagogues in Israel and are sent overseas via email.

Our web site is www.netivot-shalom.org.il.

Oz Veshalom-Netivot Shalom`s educational forums draw people of different

backgrounds, secular and religious, who are keen to deepen their Jewish

knowledge and to hear an alternative religious standpoint on the subjects of

peace and social issues.

Oz

Veshalom-Netivot Shalom fills an ideological vacuum in Israel's society.

Committed both to Jewish tradition and observance, and to the furthering of

peace and coexistence, the movement is in a unique position to engage in

dialogue with the secular left and the religious right, with Israeli Arabs and

with Palestinians.

Our activities are funded by donations and one

part time employee.

OzveShalom/Netivot Shalom                Tel./Fax

972-2-5664218

Pob 4433                                             Email:

ozshalom@netvision.net.il

Jerusalem 94310, Israel                        www.

netivot-shalom.org.il