And the Lord said to Abram, "Go forth from your land and from your birthplace and from your father's house, to the land that I will show you. (Bereishit 12:1)

 

Go forth - lekh lekha [literally: go for yourself] - for your own good and benefit I will aggrandize your name there. This requires study: even if his name would not be aggrandized and - God forbid - all the evils befall him there, in any event the going itself is for his own good and benefit, since it is commanded and desired by God.

It is worth looking into how our father Abraham, of blessed memory, risked his life and broke Nimrod's idols and stood up against him, but did not do so in the land of Canaan which was full of abominations and there wasn't a single verdant tree [in Canaan] without idolatry beneath it and so too with every tall mountain or high hill (Avodah Zarah 45a). But we do not find that Abraham shattered their idols - on the contrary, he prostrated himself before the sons of Het and was submissive to them. However, the truth is that back in Ur Kasdim they did not listen to him at all, and his rebukes were ineffective, and he did not win a single soul as he did in the Land [of Israel], and no one recognized the Lord there but he. That is why he risked his life [in Ur] to separate them from idolatry, and if they killed him, what would it matter? However, in the Land of Israel he called in the Lord's name and he became famous and received tens of thousands of them and won many souls (as RaMBaN writes on verses 2 and 8). That is why he was not permitted to risk his life by irritating those who did not listen to him and convert: what would all those students who depended on his teaching and instruction do [if he were killed]? You cannot say he should have trusted in a miracle - that is not the way of the wise, since a miracle might not occur to save him and he would just be submitting himself to death. That is why he was not permitted [to risk his life] if that might be a loss to the disciples, and he lived in the Land of Israel in order to publicize his name, thus gathering many converts. He served God in tranquility and did not need to quarrel with the wicked, rather, those who listened would listen and those who did not did not, and so it [his going to the Land of Israel] was for his own good and benefit.

(Hatam Sofer Bereishit 12:1)

 

Wisdom and Desolation on the way to an Encounter with God

Yaron Schur

Abraham's story - and with it, the story of the Jewish People - begins with the command, Go forth from your land and from your birthplace and from your father's house, to the land that I will show you. Why didn't Scripture locate the beginning of its description of Jewish history in the Land of Israel, instead recounting the three legs of Abraham's journey, which began in Ur Kasdim, continued to Haran, and only then reached its completion in Canaan? Most of the commentators are hard-put to explain this. They think that Abraham was adversely influenced by the lands in which he grew up, "Terah believed that his dwelling in Ur Kasdim caused the problem" (Abarbanel). Rashi explains the place-name Haran: "Until Abraham arrived, God's anger - haron af - was in the world." The choice of Canaan is also left unexplained, and the commentators mostly treat the fact that no particular land of destination was mentioned in the command Abraham received, rather the verse speaks of the land that I will show you. Rashi finds a similarity between the command to move to the Land of Israel and the later command telling Abraham to go to Mount Moriah, Abarbanel says that Canaan is advantaged by its unique air: "It's air is good since it is a mountainous and hilly land, so much so that its good climate caused the sons of giants to live there."

The ancient Jewish commentator, Philo of Alexandria, who lived in the first century of the Common Era in the important Hellenistic center of Alexandria, Egypt and died about twenty years before the destruction of the Second Temple, viewed Abraham's journey from Ur Kasdim through Haran and ending in Canaan, as having an important role in preparing Abraham for his life's mission. Each of the stations of his journey had a positive affect on Abraham's development. The very act of journeying from one country to another allows for inner development. Philo says that a journey is an opportunity "to investigate things not previously known, something that brings the soul both pleasure and profit; those who sit at home are to those who travel as the blind are to the sighted" (Philo, On Abraham, 65).

Philo describes Abraham's wisdom as developing through three stages, each of which derives from a place where he lived. Abraham's soul experienced an inner journey in each of the places and his intellect developed to such a degree that God could communicate with him directly.

The first stage involved Abraham's gaining a comprehensive education. This can happen in a place of superior culture. In Abraham's case he received his education in Ur Kasdim, which was the great power of his day. Abraham learned astronomy, which was highly developed in Babylonia. Those who believed in the great power of science had no doubts about its truth. Science granted them a strong foundation for belief in the truth of that which they observed and the lawfulness deriving from observation. Philo claims that the early name - "Abram" - refers to his knowledge of astronomy: "For Abram - av ram - means ‘Exalted father'…the first name marks its bearer as an expert on the stars or an expert on heavenly phenomena, who cultivates the opinions of the Kasdim as a father cultivates his children" (ibid, 82). The scientific view of the Kasdim saw astronomical observation as constituting the acme of human wisdom: "Everything in the world is controlled by powers which are contained in numbers and relationships between numbers. They glorified visible reality and neglected invisible and intellectual reality…they assumed that the world is god, thus accepting heresy and identifying creation with the Creator" (Ibid, 69).

The second developmental stage involved the ability to look inward into the soul of man. This insight is also learned within the framework of human society. Deeper study takes place in a narrower framework of scholars. The group of scholars lives in a smaller place; it is less sure of itself and sees fit to ask questions and raise doubts not only about the details of the phenomena being studied but also about the general framework of knowledge within which it toils. Abraham's encounter with the sages of Haran focused upon understanding man. "'Haran' in Greek means "holes" - a symbolic reference to the places where our senses are located" (ibid, 72). That is to say, we must attend to two different components in order to understand man. The first is self-knowledge, "Know thyself," while the second is acquaintance with one's body's systems. The combination of these two allows us to understand that man can use his mind and control the various parts of his body and use his senses in a thoughtful way. Philo claims that understanding the function of the human brain was for Abraham an important step towards understanding that there is also something controlling the large natural systems. Just as the brain controls the body there is a brain - God - who controls the natural world. The move to Haran allowed Abraham to leave the Kasdian astronomical view that is concerned with the material world and to understand the need to undertake a spiritual quest for God. "Abraham, who had passed through this way and learned the entire sensual philosophy could progress - leave Haran - and gain superior knowledge" (Philo, On Dreams 1).

The third stage of wisdom's development took place with the entry to Canaan. For Philo, Canaan is not a developed country enjoying special qualities, but rather a wasteland. Philo describes Abraham's move from Haran to Canaan: "The second migration is again undertaken by the virtuous man under the influence of a sacred oracle, but this is no longer one from one city to another, but it is to a desolate country, in which he wandered about for a long time without being discontented at his wandering and at his unsettled condition, which necessarily arose from it" (On Abraham 85). Abraham did not despair of his new place, as Philo believed would happen to most people for whom such exile is worse than death. Rather, Abraham finds his purpose in isolation and desolation: "But this man alone appears to have behaved in the contrary manner, thinking that life which was remote from the fellowship of many companions the most pleasant of all. And this is naturally the case; for those who seek and desire to find God, love that solitude which is dear to him" (ibid, 87). In the desolation Abraham became aware of his nothingness compared to the world: "To the extent that a person grasps himself, his nothingness and the nothingness of all creatures, he will be able to grasp his Creator" (On Dreams 58). Only then could God reveal Himself to Abraham, bringing him to ascend. "Immediately after the sage left, it is said: and God showed Himself to Abraham. From this it is clear that He had not revealed Himself to him previously, when he behaved like a Kasdian, devoting his thoughts to the host of stars" (On Abraham 77). Only this combination of change of place with change of outlook and the move to searching for that which is beyond the material allowed God to reveal Himself to Abraham: "But He, by reason of his love for mankind, did not reject the soul which came to Him, but went forward to meet it, and showed to it His own nature as far as it was possible that he who was looking at it could see it. For which reason it is said, not that the wise man saw God but that God appeared to the wise man; for it was impossible for anyone to comprehend by his own unassisted power the true living God, unless He Himself displayed and revealed Himself to him" (ibid 79-80).

For Philo, wisdom combines knowledge and understanding of the world with the ability to act; this results in the possibility of connection with God. Abraham's physical journey granted him the possibility of achieving wisdom and each of the stations along the way prepared him to ascend to a new intellectual-spiritual level towards the intimate encounter with God in the desolate land of Canaan. His association with different people allowed Abraham to gain wisdom in both Ur Kasdim and Haran, but the arrival in the wasteland allowed him to search for new and personal paths in the search for God. Like RaMBaM, who lived a thousand years later, Philo saw in rational-scientific wisdom a means towards thinking about God. Abraham's intellectual ability allowed him to reach the supreme level of human thought, which was a precondition for God's revelation to him.

Philo shows us a way to develop wisdom that finds practical expression in life. He emphasizes the need for broad education and self-knowledge of one's strengths and limitations as the foundations for the development of independent thought. The first two steps prepare one for entering the desolation where one can raise the deepest questions. The wasteland, described as an empty place where other people have never operated, is where the educated person can make his stand and decide to seek out the challenges which will grant meaning to his life. And there are many wastelands in our vicinity.

Prof. Yaron Schur teaches at the Hebrew University and at the Lander Institute.

 

The Ends do not Justify the Means

Know that Abraham our father unintentionally committed a great sin by bringing his righteous wife to a stumbling-block of sin on account of his fear for his life. He should have trusted that God would save him and his wife and all his belongings, for God surely has the power to help and to save. His leaving the Land, concerning which he had been commanded from the beginning, on account of the famine, was also a sin he committed, for in famine God would redeem him from death. It was because of this deed that the exile in the land of Egypt at the hand of Pharaoh was decreed for his children. In the place of justice, there is wickedness and sin.

(RaMBaN on Bereishit 12:9, Chavel translation)

 

"The Deeds of the Fathers are a Sign for the Sons": Israel's Flight as a Moral Consequence of Hagar's Flight

It is from the presence of my mistress Sarah that I flee [borahat]: It [the word borahat] occurs twice in the traditional biblical text. Here, and there [i.e., in the verse:] All of the city flees from the sound of cavalry and bowman (Jeremiah 4:29). Since Sarah caused Ishmael to flee, Israel had to flee from him; for bowmen refers to Ishmael, as he is called a shooter of bows (21:20).

(Ba'al Ha'Turim Bereishit 16:8)

 

Conflict between Brothers Leads to Desecration of the Divine Name

The Canaanites and Perizites were then dwelling in the land: And the matter involved desecration of the Divine Name, since they knew that Abraham and his household were great and sanctified to the Name of God, and while the Canaanite and Perizites were living in peace amongst themselves there was conflict between Abraham and Lot. This caused a desecration of the Name since it could be said that Abraham's faith led to it. Eventually, Abraham could bear it no more.

(Ha-Amek Davar on Bereishit 13:7)

 

 

Fourteen Years Since the Murder of Prime Minister of Israel Yitzhak Rabin z"l

Who remembers? What to remember? When?

It seems that as the years pass since the murder of an Israeli prime minister, the confusion regarding how it should be commemorated only increases.

Unfortunately, a painful event of national importance which should have unified all sections of the people without distinction between "right" and "left" or religious and non-religious, has become a divisive force. This makes it impossible to genuinely contemplate the significance of the murder, the events preceding it, and its consequences for the future of democracy in Israel.

In contrast to other, agreed upon, dates upon which Israel's Jewish public (or at least its Zionist components) marks Yom HaShoah, the Memorial Day for fallen IDF soldiers, and Israel Independence Day, the various different sections of the public commemorate the murder at different times, and this lack of consensus reflects the divisive confusion mentioned above.

The Sages taught us that in order memorialize a particular event so that it will remain significant for future generations, it is sometimes appropriate to join the commemoration of several different events together on a single date (Mishnah Ta'anit 4:6):

Five things befell our fathers on the seventeenth of Tammuz and five on the ninth of Av. On the seventeenth of Tammuz the Tablets were broken, and the daily offering was discontinued, and the city was broken into, and Aphastimos burnt the Torah and set up an idol in the sanctuary. On the ninth of Av it was decreed that our fathers would not enter the Land, and the First and Second Temples were destroyed, and Beitar was captured, and the city was plowed under.

The Gemara treating this mishnah questions the historical accuracy of the dates it gives, but, at the end of the day, the need to lend public significance to a particular day overcame the drive for historical precision.

The last issue of the journal Akdamot, which is published by Beit Morasha, includes an interesting and important article by Prof. Yisrael Rosenson, who heads Michlelet Efrata. The article, which is titled, "Gedaliah, Rachel, Rabin - Religious-Zionist Meditations on Days of Commemoration," reviews different ways the Religious-Zionist community has dealt with the Rabin murder over the years, beginning with the attempt to "revive" Tzom Gedaliah by pointing to elements shared by the political assassination mentioned in Scripture with the Rabin murder and concluding with the attempt to connect Rabin's murder with the eleventh of Heshvan, the day which commemorates the death of our mother Rachel. Prof. Rosenson quotes a passage from an article which appeared a year ago in Makor Rishon concerning "the reinvesting of historical dates with irrelevant significance as an important mechanism for dealing with memory formation and alternative membership in an over-heated and multi-sectoral society." As Yohai Ben Gedaliah wrote in his article, "Without Relevance" (Makor Rishon 14:11:08, pg. 21):

The anniversary of the death of our mother Rachel offers a more recent and therefore less pleasant example. I remember that when I was a child this day was not celebrated in the government-religious school system…at that time the gatherings at Rachel's Tomb were not large, and mostly attended by Haredim. For various and understandable reasons, the mourning for Rachel was reawakened by the national-religious community in reaction to Rabin's murder and the unease felt in its wake. It was easy to flee from self-scrutiny - and especially from the campaign of incitement against the kippa-wearing public - to the warm and consoling embrace of our mother Rachel. While the character of the memorial day for Rabin had not yet crystallize for the general public, an alternative character of the day had already been crystallized for the national-religious public

Beyond any specific issue, Prof, Rosenson's article points to the distress stemming from the fact that this day had become a day of divisiveness, underlining political disagreements and Israeli society's lack of tolerance. It is not merely a problem of disagreement over the particular date of the murder's commemoration.

Besides the group which believes in a conspiracy theory and which denies that Yitzhak Rabin was murdered by Yigal Amir - and which therefore is unwilling to view what happened as a worrying symptom of the rise of anti-democratic forces in Israeli society, an atmosphere has been created in which the murder and the right to mourn it has been monopolized by people who identify with Rabin's path, and the public that disagreed with Rabin's politics feels alienated from its commemoration and mourning.

This is a troubling phenomenon because beyond legitimate disagreements regarding one policy or another, there is room to join together in shock over the murder and in a joint effort to create an atmosphere of mutual tolerance and respect between holders of different opinions in which, naturally, decisions will be made on a democratic basis.

I recall with admiration a statement made by Tzipi Livni at one of the memorial rallies for Yitzhak Rabin: "His political path was not my path, but he was my prime minister and he was murdered."

May we all learn to internalize that message. Every individual; and group should undertake honest and courageous self-examination. However, I feel that the main lesson of this event for society should be the internalization of tolerance and pluralism as values which allow us to conduct even the most difficult of disagreements with mutual respect within a democratic society.

Pinchas Leiser, Editor

 

 

 

If you enjoy Shabbat Shalom, please consider contributing towards its publication and distribution.

• Hebrew edition distributed in Israel $700
• 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.

In Israel, checks payable to Oz VeShalom may be sent to Oz VeShalom-P.O.B. 4433, Jerusalem 91043.

US and British tax-exempt contributions to Oz VeShalom may be made through:

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

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

Please note that the NIF is no longer accepting donations under $100

PEF will also channel donations and provide a tax-exemption. Donations should be sent to P.E.F. Israel Endowment Funds, Inc., 317 Madison Ave., Suite 607, New York, New York 10017 USA

All contributions to either the NIF or PEF should be marked as donor-advised to Oz ve'Shalom, the Shabbat Shalom project. For Donations to NIF, please mention that Oz veShalom is registered as no. 5708.

 

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 that 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.

4,500 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.