IF SOMEONE SLAIN IS FOUND IN THE LAND THAT THE LORD YOUR GOD IS ASSIGNING TO YOU TO POSSESS, LYING OUT IN THE OPEN, THE IDENTITY OF THE SLAYER NOT BEING KNOWN...

(Devarim 21:1)

 

If someone slain is found: "But not in times when [murder] is commonplace" (Sifri). This commandment is observed in times when laws are enforced and murder and killing are rare, when a slain body on the ground is something "found" - something that arouses attention. In contrast, when the law loses its power and murder becomes an everyday occurrence - as in the eve of the destruction of the Second Temple - this commandment is not observed: "When murderers became numerous, the eglah arufah [ceremony of the broken-necked calf] was discontinued" (Sotah 47a)... that the Lord your God is assigning to you to possess - God gives you this land so that you can take the place of its previous inhabitants. He does this so that His Torah will be observed by you throughout the area of your habitations. The law court of each area is responsible for the doings within its area, and they are responsible for that to you, i.e., to the highest representatives of your national collective.

(Rabbi S.R. Hirsch on Devarim 21:1)

 

That the Lord your God is assigning to you to possess - [The law court of] Jerusalem does not bring an eglah arufah, because Scripture says to possess, and "Jerusalem was not apportioned to the tribes."

(Sotah 45b)

 

Rather, every Israelite owns a portion of it [Jerusalem].

(R. Barukh HaLevy Epstein, Torah Temimah)

 

 

This article is dedicated to the memory of my firstborn son,

Amit Yitzhak. If he had not left us ten years ago, this Shabbat

we would have celebrated his thirtieth birthday.

For man is a tree of the field

Esther Alexander

Hanokh,

Now, between the final class trip and the first trip, after all of the tasks and shows, I sit down for a moment to write something to you. How can I move on without thanking the person who toiled and invested in me for such a long time?

I tried a few times to begin something, but it always turned into a boring speech just like all of the boring speeches at graduation. So, I decided to write something different - a "composition." While it is not as good as the compositions of my "childhood" (since in order to write a really good composition, one must be inspired by an atmosphere of punishment hovering over the page), I hope that it will end up being reasonable (there is no need to correct and grade it).

 

The man and the sapling

Once upon a time there was a man who raised a potted sapling in his home. The man did not raise the sapling for decorative purposes, as does everyone else with their potted plants. The man we are dealing with had a much more important reason for growing the sapling. He raised it so that it might flourish and become a tree, a tree that would join the rest of the trees of the world in performing the crucial process of photosynthesis, without which the oxygen balance of the atmosphere would be disrupted. Of course, raising a plant for such an important purpose requires much work and investment on the part of the gardener. Indeed, the man threw all of his time and energy into the sapling's cultivation.

The first day that the man had the sapling, he saw that it could grow perfectly well by itself. It seemed that it could grow up to be a large tree without any serious investment on his part. However, the man knew that no matter what its size, not every tree can photosynthesize efficiently. That would require broad green leaves, a sufficient number of pores, and many various additional actors whose absence could reduce the efficiency of the process.

The sapling could grow in any shape or direction it chose, which created a few problems. One morning, for instance, the sapling decided that red leaves would suit it much better than green leaves. It started assiduously sprouting red leaves instead of its old green ones. Of course, he man did not agree to that; everyone knows that red leaves do not perform photosynthesis. Without hesitation, the man took a pair of scissors and cut all the red leaves off of the sapling. It was furious and screamed: "You are supposed to help me grow, not cut off my leaves!" The man explained to it simply that as long as it sprouts red leaves he would remove them, because his job was to raise it for the sake of photosynthesis, in contrast to other people who raise potted plants for decoration. He further explained that photosynthesis was crucial not only for the rest of the world, but also for the sapling itself - that is how it creates the sugars necessary for its own development. The sapling was left without any choice in the matter. It returned to sprouting green leaves. Here and there it would sprout a few red leaves just to make trouble, or in order to prove that it still grew as it wished. With time, these problems were solved and the sapling understood the purpose and great importance of its growth. However, the arguments did not come to an end - they only changed. The sapling claimed that it should concentrate its pores on the top part of its leaves, where they could better absorb CO₂, while the man said that the pores should be concentrated on the bottom part of the leaves in order to avoid excess transpiration, which could lead to the sapling's dehydration.

The sapling concentrated its pores in the top part of its leaves, but the man scraped off the epidermal layer, destroying the pores. "I don't understand!" screamed the sapling "I grew those pores for the sake of the goal you raised me to realize. True, they are not located where you wanted them, but their purpose was photosynthesis." The man explained to the sapling that as long as he was raising it in his home, he would determine the positioning of its pores. The sapling did not agree and continued to concentrate its pores on the top side of the leaves, despite the pain of having its epidermis scraped off. In the period before the sapling was to be taken outside the man granted it more freedom to grow as it pleased and was not so strict with it, as long as it continued to grow in accordance with its original goal.

The time came to take the sapling out of its flowerpot and plant it outside in the ground. Now it was all up to the sapling; if it wanted to, it could grow as the man wished, becoming a large tree which, together with the other trees, would supply the world with oxygen. If it did not want to, it could grow as an ornamental tree, just like the other plants that people raise in flowerpots.

The man no longer made decisions for the sapling about how it would grow. He was already busy raising a new young sapling. Still, there was no doubt that the man left his mark all over the mature sapling and would continue to influence it for the rest of its life.

 

For man is a tree of the field

(Do you think that after all of those Bible quizzes I am going to cite the chapter and verse? Forget it.)

With thanks and friendship,

Amit

 

Our son Amit, z"l, wrote these words to his teacher at the completion of his studies, two years before he was cut down from among us.

The parasha of Shoftim opens with the duty of establishing a clear and orderly judicial system. That system works in accordance with very clear and well-defined rules; rules in black and white. Expectations and demands are very clear.

You shall appoint magistrates and officials for our tribes, in all your settlements that the Lord your God is giving you, and they shall govern the people with due justice. You shall not judge unfairly; you shall show no partiality; you shall not take bribes... Justice, justice you shall pursue...

and towards the end of the parasha we are commanded not to cut down fruit trees in time of war

For man is a tree of the field.

The comparison between man and the tree of the field which Amit related to in his letter may form the foundations for the development of the individual as a condition for the existence of a just and moral society, a society which requires a judicial system that works in accordance with standards of justice and honesty.

True, a judicial system is a necessary condition for the existence of a moral society, but it is not a sufficient condition.

An honest and just judicial system can only survive as long as long as it is grounded in a stable world of values and a high quality educational system. The responsibility of the city elders, which finds it expression in the law of the eglah arufah, also belongs to the meta-legal dimension to which a moral society must relate.

We now find ourselves at the beginning of a new school year. The educational system is a cornerstone of any human society. Today's children are tomorrow's citizens.

The difficulties expected in education are greater than those expected in the judicial system because education involves more complex and ambiguous issues. That creates much greater expectations from teachers and educators, a point I would like to focus upon.

 

a) Tractate Ta'anit 24a tells us of a unique teacher of young children:

Rav happened to visit a certain place. He proclaimed a fast, but the rain did not come. The leader of the prayers began praying before him; when he said "Who makes the wind blow" the wind began to blow. When he said "Who brings down the rain" it started raining. He [Rav] said to him: "What do you do?" He told him: "I am a teacher of young children. I teach Scripture to the children of the poor as I do to the children of the wealthy, and if anyone cannot pay, I do not take anything from them. If anyone is lazy [is truant or will not read], I have a pool of fish, and I bribe him with fish. I send [fish] to him and appease him until he comes and reads.

Why were the teacher's prayers answered? What was his advantage?

The Holy One blessed be He made a decree and Rav (the first Amora of Babylonia, founder of the yeshiva of Sura) follows His lead and makes his own decree. Rav proceeds according to the accepted halakhah, but in fact he is strengthening God's own decree. We are being told about a rabbi who happened to come across the place; is he acquainted with the local population? Does he know its strengths and weaknesses? Did he attempt other means before declaring the fast? On the other hand, we have the teacher, who chooses a different path. He is involved in local life and allows each and every child to learn Torah. He does not distinguish between rich and poor or between the talented and the challenged. Going beyond that, he gives to each according to their personality, according to what is proper for them and unique about them ("bribing them with fish"). He is not pedantic and forgives the children for their mischief (appeases them).

Then the Holy One blessed be He acts like the teacher. He stops being strict and is instead forgiving and appeasing, granting wind and rain to the local people according to their needs. (This interpretation follows Ruth Kaldron's discussion in her HaShuk/Ha Bayit/HaLev).

 

b) Tractate Yevamot 62b tells us about Rabbi Akiva's students:

They said: Rabbi Akiva had twelve thousand pairs of students from Gevat to Antiparas, and all of them died during the same stretch of time - between Pesah and Shavu'ot - because they did not show each other respect. The world became barren until R. Akiva came to our Rabbis in the south and taught Torah to R. Meir and R. Yehudah and R. Yossi and R. Shimon and R. Elazar ben Shamu'a. He told them: The first [students] died only because they were envious of each other's [knowledge of] Torah. Set your minds not to act as they did. They rose up and filled all of the Land of Israel with Torah. [This telling of the story follows Sefer Ha'Agadah's version]

Here we have two stories about R. Akiva: one reports on a failure, the other on a success.

I shall begin with the failure: R. Akiva, whose motto is "Love your neighbor as yourself - that is the great principle of the Torah," manages to raise up intelligent and knowledgeable students, but they are completely unskilled in matters of interpersonal behavior. They never internalized the main point; their self-love remained greater than their love for others. Their death teaches us that a person whose wisdom does affect the way he relates to other people cannot endure. However, I find the Rabbi more troubling than his students. How was it that of all people, R. Akiva did not manage to inculcate his own view of the Torah's priorities to his students? The number of his students and their scholarship is most impressive, but none of that had any right to exist without their internalizing the principle of love for one's fellowman. And why was it that R. Akiva - who had failed in his role - was then chosen to repair the breach and redeem the world from its desolation ("...until R. Akiva came...)?

Apparently, R. Akiva learned his lesson and changed his way of teaching. Earlier, R. Akiva had invested in teaching large numbers of students (twelve thousand pairs) strewn across a large geographical area (from Givat to Antiparas). This method of instruction made it impossible to reach each student individually. Heart-to-heart talks could not take place. Students could never really get to know their teacher and his family, making it impossible for him to serve as a personal example. Indeed, R. Akiva changed his approach significantly and avoided repeating his mistakes. He concentrated upon a small group of students, allowing him to offer them all of the advantages of a personal connection that go beyond formal Torah instruction. He taught in one area - in the south - and he focused on just five students, whom he knew by name. We may assume that the listing of their names marks a deeper, richer acquaintance with them. The change allowed all of the Land of Israel to become filled with Torah. That fullness was not the result of numbers and quantities, but rather of personal qualities and interpersonal connections. Only the personal connection, intimacy between teacher and student, can allow us to act in accordance with the instructions of the wisest of men: Train a youth according to his own path, he will not swerve from it even in old age (Mishlei 22:6).

Regarding that verse, HaRav Klonimos mi'Pazienza, HaYaD (the "Aish Kodesh") wrote in his Hovat HaTalmidim:

King Solomon did not only tell us the goal of education, which is to bring the youth to a state where he will not swerve from it even in old age. With the words Train a youth according to his own path, he also told us how and with what tools we can reach it - that is the main point... he must stoop himself down to the [level] of the one he teaches, to penetrate into his smallness and short-stature until he reaches the hidden, even invisible, spark of his [the student's] soul, to draw it out, to cultivate it and let it grow.

A tree of the field requires proper conditions in order to grow. Amit z'l's letter shows that he was blessed with a teacher who understood that. We are grieved that we did not get to see his growth continue.

Esther Alexander is an educational counselor

 

 

Readers respond

In his letter (Mase'ei issue of Shabbat Shalom), Rabbi Hanokh Goldberg compares refusal to serve in the occupation with refusal to evict residents from settlements and condemns them both. It is clear from his letter that he is trying to establish a responsible moral position that is moderate and balances right and left. However, his moral position is not logical.

The State of Israel is a democratic state of law. Therefore, claims Rabbi Goldberg, its citizens possess sufficient legal means to oppose their government's injustices. Truth be told, that claim is not accurate when we consider military orders rather than laws. When an immoral order is given to a soldier, he does not necessarily have any means to oppose it other than refusal. However, here I would like to concentrate on another problem with his claim. The essence of democracy is the protection of the individual from the government; in some countries the individual enjoys no protection at all from government actions. The United States offered a good example of this in the days when slavery was legal. It was impossible to put an end to the injustices of slavery through democratic means - not by those citizens opposed to slavery, and certainly not by the slaves themselves. As we all know, only a bloody war ended slavery. Abolitionists knowingly broke the law requiring slaves to be returned to their masters and instead helped them to escape. Thus they acted in accordance with morality, with their conscience, and also, by the way, in accordance with the Torah - but against Rabbi Goldberg's position. Does he condemn them?

The doubling of legal systems is the essence of the occupation. Israeli citizens (settlers) are subject to civil law, while Palestinians are subject to military law. As was the case with slavery, this doubling is entirely unjust, and Rabbi Goldberg's claim regarding refusal to participate in it is invalid. The colonel who said that every soldier must obey his conscience was correct. Could it be that Rabbi Goldberg is not subject to the authority of his own conscience?

Daniel Rorlich, Jerusalem

 

Editor's note: The above letter continues an important debate going on within Israeli society in general and the Religious Zionist community in particular regarding the State of Israel's identity as Jewish and democratic, and regarding the connection between policy, law, morality, and Torah. We invite readers to join this debate, while remaining respectful towards the various positions.

 

 

 

 

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 made out to Oz VeShalom may be sent to Oz VeShalom-P.O.B. 4433, Jerusalem 91043. Unfortunately there is no Israeli tax-exemption for local donations.

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 NEW ISRAEL FUND 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 should be marked as donor-advised to Oz ve'Shalom, the Shabbat Shalom project.

 

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.

5,000 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.