Sukkot

WHAT IS OCCURRING OCCURRED LONG SINCE, AND WHAT IS TO OCCUR OCCURRED LONG SINCE: AND GOD SEEKS THE PURSUED.

(Kohelet 3:15)

 

In connection with that which is written, and God seeks the pursued -

Rabbi Huna said in the name of Rabbi Yosef: In the future, God will exact the blood of the pursued from their pursuers:

A righteous man pursues a righteous man - and God seeks the pursued,

A wicked man pursues a wicked man, or a wicked man pursues a righteous man - and God seeks the pursued.

You are found implying: Even if a righteous man pursues a wicked man, in any case: and God seeks the pursued.

Know that it is such, for Abel was pursued by Cain, and therefore the Lord paid heed to Abel and his offering, but to Cain and his offering He paid no heed (Bereishit 4:4-5). Noah was pursued by [the people of] his generation, and it is written that Noah found favor with the Lord (4:8). Abraham was pursued by Nimrod, and it is written, You are the Lord God who chose Abram, who brought him out of Ur of the Chaldeans (Nehemiah 9:7). Isaac was pursued by the Philistines, and it is written, and they said, "We have plainly seen that the Lord has been with you, and we thought: Let there be a sworn treaty between our two parties, between you and us (Bereishit 26:28). Jacob was pursued by Esau, and it is written, for the Lord has chosen Jacob for Himself, Israel, as His treasured possession (Tehillim 135:4). Joseph was pursued by his brother, and it is written, the Lord was with Joseph, and he was a successful man; and he stayed in the house of his Egyptian master (Bereishit 39:2). Moses was pursued by Pharaoh, and it is written, had not Moses His chosen one confronted Him in the breach to avert His destructive wrath (Tehillim 106:23). Israel is pursued by idolaters, and it is written, the Lord chose you to be His treasured people (Devarim 14:2). Rabbi Yehudah ben Simon says in the name of Rabbi Nehorai: The ox is chased by the lion, the lamb by the wolf, the goat by the leopard - God said: Bring only the pursued before Me as offerings - the ox, or the lamb, or the goat.

(Tanhuma Emor, 9)

 

 

 

Remembering the Days of Stress in the Days of Prosperity

Pinchas Leiser

 

Unlike Rosh Ha-Shanah and Yom Kippur, Sukkot is a holiday which commemorates an element of the national/historical memory. The Torah points out a clear connection between the principle commandment of the holiday, for which it is named, and the events which occurred in the wilderness after the Exodus from Egypt: You shall live in Sukkot seven days; all citizens in Israel shall live in Sukkot, in order that future generations may know that I made the Israelite people live in Sukkot when I brought them out of the land of Egypt, I am the Lord your God (Vayikra 23:43).

The Torah's interpreters have discussed the nature of these sukkot ever since the time of the Sages (Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Akiva in Sukkah11). Is the Torah talking about literal sukkot (booths) built by human beings (as suggested by Ibn Ezra and others) or is it referring to clouds of glory (Rashi, RaMBaN, etc.)? The outcome of this controversy is quite significant for determining the kind of memory we want the holiday to establish and shape. Clouds of glory emphasize the heavenly aspect of the wilderness experience, the absolute dependence of humans on God. Man-made Sukkot represents a developmental stage characterized by added maturity and responsibility, but this kind of national memory may also lead people to take all the credit for blessings given them by God.

The RaMBaM (Guide of the Perplexed 3:43, all quotes from Pine's translation) explains the holiday's timing: "When you gather in your labors out of the field (Shemot 23:16); this refers to the season of leisure when one rests from necessary labors." In addition, "It is possible to live in the sukkah during that season, there being no great heat nor an uncomfortable rain." The RaMBaM also relates to the holiday's educational and psychological facets. He compares the contribution of Sukkot to the shaping of the religious consciousness with that of Pessah:

Both these festivals, I mean Sukkot and Pessah, inculcate both an opinion and a moral quality. In the case of Pessah, the opinion consists in the commemoration of the miracles of Egypt and in the perpetuation of their memory throughout the periods of time. In the case of Sukkot, the opinion consists in the perpetuation of the memory of the miracles of the desert throughout the periods of time. As for the moral quality, it consists in man's always remembering the days of stress in the days of prosperity, so that his gratitude to God should become great and so that he should achieve humility and submission. Accordingly, unleavened bread and bitter herbs must be eaten on Pessah in commemoration of what happened to us. Similarly, one must leave the houses and dwell in Sukkot, as is done by the wretched inhabitants of deserts and wastelands, in order that the fact be commemorated that such was our fate in ancient times: That I made the children of Israel live in Sukkot, and so on (Vayikra 23:43). From this we went over to dwell in richly ornamented houses in the best and most fertile place on earth, thanks to the benefaction of God and His promises to our fathers, inasmuch as they were perfect people in their opinions and in their moral character - I mean Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. For this too is one of the pivots of the Law, I mean the belief that every benefit that will be or has been granted is due to the merits of the Fathers, since they kept the way of the Lord to do justice and judgment (Bereishit 18:19).

RaMBaM views the commandments associated with Pessah and Sukkot as educational devices meant to utilize historical memory, emotions, and humility in order to help people develop religious consciousness. The short extract from the Guide of the Perplexed quoted above relates to several aspects:

1) Proper timing takes into account a person's situation. In an agricultural society, at least in the land of Israel, this season is quite convenient in terms of weather conditions and leisure from crucial farming chores. In other words: It is possible to demand of someone who is not emotionally engaged with other pressing matters to meet the requirements of the holiday.

2) Man is required to transcend his immediate comfortable existence and to recall that none of his material accomplishments may be taken for granted. He "deserves" nothing, and nothing is guaranteed to him. Reminiscence upon the days of stress may help him develop empathy towards "the wretched inhabitants of deserts and wastelands," making him more sensitive to the sufferings of others.

3) Consciousness of "the merit of the Patriarchs" connects here directly with images of the Patriarchs as models of "charity and justice." (The NeTziV, in his wonderful introduction to Bereishit, refers to it as Sefer Ha-Yashar [the "upright" book], following verses from Joshua and II Samuel, since the Patriarchs were "upright" - that is, in contrast to other generations in which there were righteous and saintly people, the Patriarchs dealt honestly with all men.)

It seems to me that this way of looking at the commandment of the Sukkah sees it as offering a rare opportunity to develop, by means of the collective memory, a perspective of social sensitivity and empathy. If we succeed in taking the RaMBaM's words to heart, those moments in which we feel a "bit" less comfortable and slightly less protected may bring us to an empathetic appreciation of the suffering that surrounds us, and which is no longer merely the lot of "the wretched inhabitants of deserts and wastelands," for wretchedness and misery exist everywhere.

The Patriarchs, "Gaurdians of Charity and Justice," the "Upright," who are invited as ushpizin to our Sukkot, and by whose merit we are here, set before us lofty moral and religious demands. Would that we fulfil them and insure our existence in a dirat keva [permanent dwelling].

Pinchas Leiser, editor of Shabbat Shalom, is a psychologist.

 

 

READERS RESPOND (a response to Rabbi Yonatan Chipman's article from Shabbat Shalom for parashat Re'eh)

In his article, Rabbi Chipman develops an absolute contrast and contradiction between associating the Temple Mount with feelings of national pride on the one hand, and submission to God, prostration and the halakhic aaspects of the Temple Mount, which he believes express the neutralization of egocentricity before the divine infinite.

To quote his words: "There are those who speak of the Temple Mount as a national symbol,... There are those who see ascent to the Temple Mount as a gesture of national pride,... the gesture of hishtahavayah, of prostration in the Temple precincts, was an integral part of every visit of an individual to the Temple... It symbolizes the precise opposite  -  abnegation of the human self before the Infinite."

He continues, concluding his words with a sentence stating that, "Jerusalem - and certainly its heart of hearts, the Temple Mount and the site of the altar - cannot abide, by their very holy nature, subjection to any form of human rule."

As for the philosophical issues involved, I could generalize further and say that the earth is the Lord's and all that it holds (Tehillim 24:1). As such, all the earth is His, and it can never be a proper object of human acquisitiveness... Is this really true? I think Rabbi Chipman would agree that our knowledge that everything belongs to God does not render all human acquisitions null and void. In-as-much as these involve human acquisition in the context of interpersonal and international relations, claims of ownership can be entirely legitimate and enforceable.

So it is in the case of Jerusalem and the Temple: Of course it is the central locus of God's indwelling, of course everything associated with it points to our abnegation as mortals standing before Divinity. However, in a different stratum, i.e., the stratum of inter-human and international relations, the Jewish mandate over the Land of Israel extends to Jerusalem and to the place of the Temple.

The writer based his conclusions upon the RaMBaM's beautiful words in Hilkhot Beit Ha-Behira which, in my humble opinion, have no bearing upon his conclusions. To the contrary, the RaMBaM in Hilhot Beit Ha-Behira (7:17) explicitly states in connection with the ten successive levels of holiness that, "the inner walled area is yet holier, for idolaters, and those impure from contact with a corpse, or who had sex with a menstruant woman are not allowed to enter it." And even more! The RaMBaM in the Guide of the Perplexed (3:45) asks: Why does the Torah never specify the future location of the Temple, but rather uses the generic phrase, the place the Lord shall choose? He answers: God wanted to keep the nations from coming to fight over the place and desiring it - He wanted it to remain empty and anonymous until Israel could enter the land, conquer it, and build the Temple, placing it under Israelite jurisdiction. That is to say: Despite all of the symbolism of the laws of the Temple, the prostration, and the profound holiness of Infinite God, which do indeed require self-abnegation before God from the individual - at the national level, the mandate over the organization and management of the Temple remain in the hands of the Jewish People, as has been demonstrated above both from the halakhah (Hilkhot Beit Ha-Behirah) and philosophically (The Guide of the Perplexed). Paradoxically, it ends up that the nationalization of Jerusalem and the Temple by the Jewish People will lead to Jerusalem's proper internationalization.

Only the Jewish People is universal in its very essence. Only the Jewish People, as possessor of a God-given mandate (by right, but also by obligation) over the Temple Mount, can see to the true and universal internationalization of the Presence which radiates from it. Only the Jewish People can mediate between the abnegation of the self before God, and its own centrality, as God's People, the Treasured People, "God's Emissary to the World," which has been given responsibility over God's place, the "Divine Embassy" to this world. The verse for Torah will come forth from Zion will be fulfilled if Torah comes forth from Zion, from Zionism and from the Jewish State, with its counsel and control over the management of the Temple's place - only then will God's word go forth from Jerusalem to all the world in proper fashion quickly and in our days, Amen.

Rabbi Yoram Kohen-Or

Kfar Maimon

 

Rabbi Yehonatan Chipman replies:

1) It is true that the laws of the Temple distinguish between Jews and Gentiles, in regard to their admission to the Temple. The Torah makes exactly analogous distinctions between men and women, between priests, Levites, and Israelites, and even between the High Priest (who enters the Holy of Holies on Yom Kippur) and his fellow priests.

2) The Guide of the Perplexed (3:45) offers three reasons why the Torah conceals the identity of the place that God will choose. Rabbi Kohen-Or mentions only one of them. The third and "most important" reason is to keep the tribes from competing with each other over possession of the territory where the Temple will be built. That implies that the place is extra-tribal, and unites all of Israel. Possession of the land was achieved through its distribution to tribes, clans, families, etc., while, in a way, the Temple Mount was excluded from the regular scheme of possession.

3) It appears that Rabbi Kohen-Or tacitly agrees that the Temple Mount is not subject to human ownership in the usual sense, since he repeatedly uses the term "mandate" instead of "ownership": "At the national level, the mandate over the organization and management of the Temple remain in the hands of the Jewish People." I certainly agree with him on this point.

4) It seems to me that his central message is expressed in the sentence stating that it is precisely "the nationalization of Jerusalem and the Temple by the Jewish People [that] will lead to Jerusalem's proper internationalization." He adds that, "Only the Jewish People is universal in its very essence."

If only it were so. However, I see this as a messianic precept: a spiritual characteristic of the Jewish People that may exist potentially, but certainly not actually, in today's reality. The people's moral level is no higher than that of other nations, as is demonstrated by the constant parade of new scandals revealed every day. The prevalent contempt for the sufferings of others, and policies which trample the weak, the poor, and the elderly do not strengthen Rabbi Kohen-Or's claim. How can "universalism" persist together with xenophobia, and with disregard for the most elementary human rights of the Palestinian people with live by our side. True, there are not a few murderers among them, but our Sages said "honor him and suspect him": we are very good at suspecting, but not at "honoring."

The main point of my article was not directed towards controversy over the status of Jerusalem in some possible future peace agreement - that also seems to be a messianic issue for the foreseeable future. My words came mostly to warn against the "liberation of Jerusalem" becoming a purely national/secular achievement. To my mind, the leading - almost exclusive - role played by the national-religious community in these celebrations point to a profound conceptual confusion.

 

Editor's comment:

I think that the important debate between Rabbis Chipman and Kohen-Or regarding the national and religious status of the Temple Mount constitutes the bone of contention between those who lend religious significance to Jewish statehood in the Land of Israel and view the State of Israel as Ikveta de-Mishiha [events leading to the messianic age], as against those who view the existence of a Jewish State as a moral, spiritual, and religious challenge for the Jewish People without attributing religious significance to sovereignty itself. We consider this discussion to be of great importance; conducted for the sake of heaven, and out of mutual respect.

 

 

Finished But Not Completed - A Backwards Look at Our Seventh Year

With the publication of this issue, we end the seventh series of Shabbat Shalom. Its pages express a different order of preferences regarding matters of Torah and Zionism than that found in many sheets that are distributed in synagogues. Already in our very first issue (Bereishit 5758) we declared our intentions: "'Unity' is not measured by unanimity, but rather by people's ability to tolerate and include different ideas, in the manner of "these and those are both words of the living God."

A person who believes in the Torah and the commandments is frequently called upon to cope with what appear to be mutually vexing and contradictory values. The Sages offer us models for contending with a complex world, replete with contradictions and difficulties. They handed over full responsibility for dealing with all of these to the individual and the community when they declared: it is not in heaven and "we take no account of a voice from heaven."

The resurrection of the Jewish People in its land and the new and continually developing situation in the State of Israel and in the world as a whole set exceedingly complex value-challenges before today's Jew. We try to remain faithful to this proclamation, with the help of all those who have a hand in the production of Shabbat Shalom, and with the help of our loyal readers.

With the conclusion of this issue, we want to thank all those who made its production and distribution possible this year: To my fellow members of the editorial board and the Governing Board of "Netivot Shalom," for their encouragement ad support, to Miriam Fine for her devoted efforts in organizing the editorial work, to Dov Abramson, Harry Langheim and Devorah Fein for the graphic "midrashim" which appear on the front page of each edition, to Danny Lazar for graphic editing and Internet distribution, to Kaddish Goldberg and other translators, to Grafos-Print for printing, to our many supporters in Israel and elsewhere for their contributions which made possible the continuation of our project, and to all of our readers across Israel and the entire world. May we grow ever stronger!

Pinchas Leiser - editor