Compassion, Blame, Humiliation in the Hagar Sarah Dynamic - Lech Lecha

This week, I had the pleasure of talking with Christian leaders in Perth about polarisation and compassion in our time, and a confronting story in Genesis about two humiliated women, Hagar and Sarah. While questions of blame and justice are always important, there needs to be a strong element of compassion whenever we are confronted with pain, regardless of the blame and justice response.

The story of Hagar and Sarah begins with admiration, according to the Midrash (1). Sarah caught the attention of Pharaoh’s daughter Hagar, when Sarah was abducted to the house of the Pharaoh (2). The princess was struck by Sarah’s character and righteousness to such an extent that she volunteered to be a maid in the house of this great woman – in modern terms, her intern – rather than stay in the palace.

The relationship between Hagar and Sarah changed, twice. First, Sarah’s infertility led Sarah to propose that her husband Abraham take Hagar as a second wife (3), with the idea that Hagar would become pregnant and the baby would be raised by Sarah. This was taking internship to the next level, but was common practice in the ancient world, as recorded in Hammurabi’s code (4). The Torah also has examples of this, with Rachel naming the children born by her maid Bilhah (5). Abraham either too quickly (6) or reluctantly (7) – depending on two interpretations - agreed to this arrangement, and Hagar became his second wife.

When Hagar became pregnant, there was a further shift in her relationship with Sarah, with her previous admiration being replaced by contempt (8). Hagar thought that Sarah’s infertility must have been a punishment from God because of hidden faults that did not match her public persona. (9) Hagar assumed that Sarah was not authentic and was deeply disillusioned with her former hero, whom she now saw as deeply flawed. Hagar made humiliating comments to Sarah about there being no place for her because she was barren and old (10), in contrast to her own pregnancy and youth.

Sarah might have felt that Hagar saw herself as Sarah’s replacement in Abraham’s life (11). Her response was to become enraged both with Hagar and Abraham (12). Abraham’s response was to encourage Sarah to do whatever she wanted to her maidservant (13).  According to the Midrash (14), Abraham feebly objected to changing Hagar’s status back from wife to maidservant, but was either too conflict-averse or too taken with Sarah’s humiliation to assert himself and his understanding of what was ethical. Perhaps he hoped that the change of status from wife to maidservant would be sufficient to cool Sarah’s rage and diffuse the situation (15).

Sarah took up Abraham’s invitation to dominate Hagar with gusto. She “afflicted” Hagar to the point that Hagar ran away from what felt like an abusive workplace (16).

There is much discussion about whether what Sarah did was wrong or somehow justified. Several highly respected early authorities are adamant that Sarah was in the wrong and use words including “sin” and “great cruelty” to describe her actions. They are also critical of Abraham for being complicit in her behaviour (17).

I am drawn to the views that the humiliation of the powerless servant at the hands of her “master’ was wrong and to be condemned.

On the other hand, the Torah is less clear about a judgement of Sarah. There is an implicit criticism of her deeds, hinted at by the fact that the Torah uses very similar words to describe Hagar’s situation and that of the powerless Hebrews who were “afflicted” by the Pharaoh (18). Both Abraham and Hagar are given very similar promises of many descendants and wealth as apparent compensation for their affliction (19). On the other hand, Hagar is addressed by an angel as “maidservant of Sarah” (20) and instructed to go back to her master and continue to suffer the abuse (21).

I will invoke Rumi here. “Somewhere beyond right and wrong, there is a garden. I will meet you there.”

“Beyond right and wrong”. There is a powerful message from the angel that God has heard Hagar’s cries (22) and encouraged her to name her son Yishmael, “God will hear”. Her suffering calls for a divine response of compassion. The Talmud writes that the gates of tears (to heaven and God) are never locked (23).

Hagar herself was deeply moved by God’s compassion. She named God, “God of my seeing”. I suggest this could be read as “God who sees me.” In other words, Hagar feels heard and seen by God.

By all means, let us not shy away from blame and seeking justice for all who are harmed, especially – but not limited to- the weak victims of the strong. At the same time, let us ensure that along with the indignation and the rage, there is compassion, and even some calm, to hear and see all who cry out in pain.

Notes   

1)       Midrash Sechel Tov to Genesis 16:1

2)       Genesis 12:15-20

3)       Genesis 16:1-3

4)       Cited in Nachama Lebovitz, Studies in the Weekly Torah Portion, Genesis, p, 156

5)       Genesis 30:3-6, see Rabbi Yaakov Medan, https://etzion.org.il/en/tanakh/torah/sefer-bereishit/parashat-lekh-lekha/banishment-hagar-did-avraham-and-sarah-sin

6)       Midrash Hagadol on Genesis 39:10 cited in Torah Shlaima, p. 675 "Our father Avraham, when Sarah told him come to my maidservant, ' immediately hearkened to the voice of Sarah, and in the end what happened to him? [Sarah said] "May God judge between me and you". However, Joseph, when propositioned [by Potiphar's wife] did not listen to her and in the end what happened to him? he took kingship and married her [Potiphar's wife's] daughter.

7)       Ramban

8)       Genesis 16:4

9)       Rashi based on Midrash Rabba 45:4

10)    Ohr Haafela - in Torah Shlaima p. 678, 21,

11)    Medan, ibid, Medan links Hagar's perspective to "The Good Earth, by Pearl S. Buck”, ..a poor Chinese farmer of lowly standing who marries a woman of equally humble background, homely, but devoted and resourceful. She helps him to the best of her ability with the difficult work in the fields, even when she is pregnant, and fights alongside him most conscientiously in their struggle to survive. They experience years of drought and hunger; the village is deserted, and the couple moves with their children to an unfamiliar town, with no income and no home. The husband despairs and becomes feeble; his wife assumes the helm of the family, and by virtue of her efforts and resourcefulness the family is delivered from its troubles. The couple returns to the village, rebuild their home and their farmstead, and grow prosperous. Once the husband is finally in a position to rest a little from his hard work by hiring laborers, he looks at his wife, whose face has been blackened and whose body has grown old from all the effort during the difficult years, and he feels that he deserves a younger, more beautiful wife. The now-wealthy farmer is inundated with offers, and a beautiful young concubine joins his household to entertain him in his free time. Slowly, his wife is pushed aside and marginalized as the concubine comes to occupy her central position in the home".

12)    Genesis 16:5, Targum Yonathan, and Targum Yerushalmi

13)    Genesis 16:6

14)    Midrash Rabba, Bereshit 45:6

15)    Tzror Hamor

16)    Genesis 16:6

17)    Ramban, Radak, Tzror Hamor

18)    Prof. Yonatan Grossman –https://etzion.org.il/en/tanakh/torah/sefer-bereishit/parashat-lekh-lekha/lekh-lekha-suffering-hagar-and-enslavement-egypt

19)    Grossman compares Genesis 16:10-12 to Genesis 15:13-14

20)    Genesis 16:8

21)    Genesis 16:9

Sweetness and Judgement

Complainers!

The Rabbi's sermon to two twelve year old girls, celebrating their coming of age bat mitzvah celebrations, highlighted the virtue of positivity, but I heard something else. I have often judged myself for not being positive enough. The Rabbi mentioned the fact that people who are deemed to be “complainers” are often avoided by their peers. This reality is not just a personal preference but is linked to a societal judgement that complaining is bad. This pushed my buttons; I agree that in some contexts negative thoughts are unwarranted or unhelpful, but I also think that the common overemphasis on positivity is harmful. I want to reflect here on the value of having a balanced approach instead.

I offer my solidarity to “negative people” with first world problems. We might feel frustrated with a work colleague, or with workplace demands that feel overwhelming. These feelings are ok. No! It is not always right to tell people they just need to be positive.

Yes, there are people who manage to be hopeful and upbeat, despite terrible suffering, physical or emotional. These efforts are rightly celebrated and admired. There are contexts where one can and should push oneself to present a pleasant expression on one’s face, in order to be able to contribute in a workplace or in our families. Some of our sadness comes from a feeling of entitlement, and sometimes it helps to count our blessings, and reject unrealistic expectations of what our circumstances “should be”. However, sometimes, some people can’t be positive.  Often, what is called for is a compassionate approach, in response to negative emotions, rather than adding to their suffering with judgement.

This balancing act is tricky. In Judaism we have such great emphasis on gratitude (1), and among Chasidic Jews also on joy (2), that it would seem that we are supposed to always be filled with joy and sweetness. This emphasis on sweetness is also highlighted in the traditional Rosh Hashana greeting, in which Jews wish each other a good and sweet new year.

All of this positivity is challenging for me, whenever I am feeling anxious or self doubt. Feeling a high degree of self confidence seems to be the highest obligation our age. However, I learned something remarkable the other day. It is written that the last words of the great master of Hasidism, the Baal Shem Tov, before he died, was to call for a suspicious attitude toward one self. He told his disciples, that it is only through feeling concerned that one might have sold out to the evil side, that one can feel confident that evil will have no dominion over him or her (3). Of course, excessive self- doubt is destructive, so we need a mix of self-doubt and confidence. 

I am particularly concerned about messages to members of minority groups, as well as to women, about expectations to avoid expressing anger or disappointment. The pressure on the former, not to be the angry black man, or the angry Muslim, prevents open and honest listening to legitimate grievances. The demand made of women to be “sugar and spice and everything nice” all the time, is demeaning, unjust and similarly destructive. 

Regardless of one’s political opinions, there are valid reasons to be angry and sad, about a lot of what happens between Palestinian and Jewish people, in the holy land of Israel. On one visit to Rachel’s tomb in Bethlehem some years ago, I was confronted by something that made me feel terrible, to the point that it was visible on my face. Someone asked me if I was ok. I said that I was not, but I would be worried if I was.

As I join my fellow Jews in two days of prayer, during the Jewish New Year and days of divine judgement, that begin on Monday, I will certainly be praying for all the people residing in the holy land, for all types of blessings and relief from the problems they face. I will pray for all who suffer, regardless of their ethnicity, for them to be relieved of many of their troubles, to find a sympathetic ear, and a compassionate, rather than a judgemental response, to their complaints, as well as finding it within themselves, and us within ourselves, to develop an attitude of gratitude, to count our blessings and adopt a more accepting attitude to some difficulties beyond our control. That would be pretty sweet. May we all be inscribed for a good and sweet new year!   

Notes:

1)       Deuteronomy 26:1-11 is one example of this.

2)       Deuteronomy 28:47 states that the Jews would be punished because they did not serve God in a time  of joy and plenty, but a mystical approach to this, taught by the Arizal, is to read this as the problem being a failure to serve God joyously. 

3)       Deuteronomy 28:68 states that G-d will bring you back to Egypt in ships... and you will [seek to ] sell yourselves as slaves to your enemies, but no one will buy. The Baal Shem Tov’s interpretation of the verse is that you regard yourself as having sold yourself to the spiritual enemy, by acting out of impure motives, then you are assured that in fact no evil force will “buy you” eg. Have control over you. 

Brush Turkey “Battle” “Blessed Violence?” & prejudice - Vzot Habracha

Brush Turkey happily
back on his mound

The battle to banish the
Brush Turkey

Apart from reminding ourselves that perpetrators of violence should not be taken to represent everyone from any cultural or religious community, it is useful to explore the nature of violence. Not to condone it, but to remind ourselves that it is something that is done by people of many faiths and walks of life rather than being the domain of the poor or the Aboriginal as seems to be suggested by one journalist 1 this week, or intrinsic to Edom as suggested in Midrash relating to our reading this week of Vzot Habracha. 2

Let us define violence broadly as doing something that causes distress to another creature. I engaged in “violence” this week against a perceived threat, a male Brush Turkey who decided to create a mount for himself in my backyard. I believed, falsely, that they are very territorial creatures who might harm my two year old daughter. I began my battle to get rid of it. I got on the internet to gather intelligence against my “enemy” and learned that these are determined creatures that will not go quietly. I spent two hours under the cover of darkness, reclaiming my land. I covered his mound with a sack and other stuff. I cleared excess leaves and watched him pace the next day, as our battle of wills played out.

I was wrong about the Brush Turkey. A knowledgeable friend persuaded me that my next planned step, putting down chicken wire would be very cruel. He told me that they are not territorial. They will come for a few months, lay eggs in the mound then go away. He also suggested that I was the colonizer as “they were here before us”. So I removed the impediments to the mound making. Now I am getting a lot of pleasure watching this amazing natural process play out as this energetic creature builds his mount by flicking leaves backwards, for hours on end.

As I reflect on my battle with my new friend. I notice how quickly people can be moved to perceive a threat and seek to eliminate it. The thinking can be focused on how to conquer the enemy instead of exploring how we might be able to coexist. Yet, unfortunately, not all conflicts are so easily resolvable. There are real enemies. These are not monsters. They are people that are essentially like me who are up against something they think threatens them or something precious to them.

This is one way for me to think about an implied message in the Torah reading this week that killing even family members is virtuous. Moses says of Levi. “The one who says of his father and mother, I did not see them, and his brother he did not recognise and his children he did not know”. 3 This is taken to mean that he was willing to kill his relatives who worshiped the Golden Calf, including his grandchildren. 4

I  Find this particularly disturbing in light of the following. In the final moments of Moses’ life, he blesses all but one of the Jewish tribes, 5 the one tribe that is left out in Simeon. This is the second time that all are blessed except for Simeon. Jacob’s deathbed blessings to almost all his sons instead contained a curse of Simeon’s and his Brother Levi’s anger because of their massacre of the inhabitants of the city of Shchem. However when Moses does his blessings, Levi is blessed while only Simeon misses out. One way of explaining this is that both brothers were like “borrowers” when they massacred the people of Shchem. However Simeon did not redeem himself, 6 Levi did redeem themselves in their conduct during the golden calf, which might be about the fact that they showed their loyalty by not worshiping the calf, but of course they also demonstrated their loyalty by the very disturbing killing in the previous paragraph.

To fight is not glorious although sometimes a decision is made that to fight is necessary to protect that which one cherishes. I recently attended a ceremony, alongside an Australian Sheikh of Turkish descent at Australia’s War Memorial. We heard about the personal sacrifices by young men who gave away most of their lives and about families who lost multiple members. Dr. Brendan Nelson, who spoke to our group, told us that the miserable business of war was ultimately about; love of country, about loyalty to “mates” and that our ability to live our lives in freedom is a result of their sacrifice. I was moved by the speaker. Yet, I am also aware of the temptation to minimize the brutal consequences of war on the “enemy”, the non-combatants caught in the cross fire, the psychologically damaged soldiers who suffer for years after the war in addition to “our soldier-martyrs” who lost their lives.
Violence is a complex business. We must continue to strive against it. It is a fight worth getting into, with compassion and determination.

Notes
1.    http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/opinion/miranda-devine-demonising-men-wont-stop-domestic-violence/story-fni0cwl5-1227545469411
2.    The verse states “God came from Sinai, and shined from Seir” (Deuteronomy 33:2), which is linked in Me’am Loez to a Midrashic story that God offered the Torah to various nations including Edom but was turned down. In the case of Edom, they refused to accept the Torah because of the prohibition of killing which the Midrash sees as being very much part of the nature of Edom.  Essentialising is one key element of prejudice which sees the person not as an individual human being to be taken as they are.
3.    Deuteronomy 33:9
4.    Rashi based on earlier sources, more specifically it is relates to them being willing to kill their grandfathers, half-brothers and grandchildren who worshiped the golden calf. Klei Yakar interprets this as a reference to the dedication to Torah study at the expense of family as the sage Rabba states in the Talmud (Eruvin 44) that Torah is found in one who is cruel to his children like a Raven and Rav Ada Bar Matna dismissed his wife’s concern when she asked him question “what will be with our young children?” as he was preparing to leave to study at the academy of Rav. He replied “there are plenty of greens in the meadow" Talmud Eruvin 22a, a variation of the theme of acting harshly to protect something, in this case one’s learning
5.    Deuteronomy 33:6-25
6.    Sifre 33:8, Ibn Ezra relates this to their idol worship and sinning with the daughters of Moab. The sin in this case was not that of Simeon alone, however it was predominantly members of this tribe that were implicated. This can be seen by the dramatic decline in the number of people of the tribe of Simeon in the census at the end of the book of numbers (26:14), 22,200 in comparison to the number of members of this tribe in the earlier census at the beginning of the book of numbers (1:23) 59,300.

Our Toddler/Their Toddler My God/Your God, Aylan Kurdi and Ki Tavo

Aylan Kurdi with dad and brother

The image of the little boy, Aylan Kurdi, washed up on the beach and his cruel avoidable death calls out accusingly like the blood of the murdered Biblical Abel. God said to Cain “The blood of your brother is screaming to me”. 1 While responding to the immediate catastrophe is vital, we must also consider the factors that are inhibiting a compassionate response. One of these is a sense of that the desperate refugees are the other.

One of the markers of otherness is the belief that ‘the other’ worships a false God. Some people talk about the “Christian God” and how this differs from the “Muslim God Allah”. One man wrote on Facebook, without giving the context 2 of his citation of a fragment of Islamic scripture, “surely those Gods are not the same. One God is said to be about forgiveness and one is about cutting heads!” Religious competition is an old practice. One Torah text talks about ‘making known the difference between the true God who desires loving kindness and the false gods who desire wickedness’. 3

Difference of belief does not need to divide people. This week an Anglican Bishop, a Muslim Sheikh and I chatted and laughed about who is going to hell according to which faith. Yet despite our good time I am concerned that some people who believe that others worship a ‘cruel god’ might not care as much about the suffering of the ‘cruel-god-worshipers’ as they do about people who, like them, are saved and aligned with the good God. Is there a connection between an ‘us and them’ orientation and the fact that Aylan’s death has prompted one politician to comment that this doesn’t happen in Australia because “we stopped the boats”, instead of offering assistance?

Children sometimes ask the Together For Humanity teams of Christians, Muslims and Jews that visit their schools whether we all believe in the same God. I used to think that each of us could say something about our belief in an invisible God-creator who expects us to behave with care toward our fellow humans before the Christian would add something about his belief in Jesus. My incorrect or incomplete understanding of this was that Christians’ belief about God, the creator, was similar to mine but they think that at one point in time this God decided ‘to engage in some sort of “partnership” 4 with a human named Jesus. This simplistic view fails to account for the belief in a trinity beyond the limitations of time that was explained to me by the Bishop this week. Perhaps it is not that easy to answer a simple question about who does or does not believe in the same god.

The Anglican Bishop asserted that the term "Christian God" is wrong. "God does not belong to any religion! We belong to him, not he to us. There is only one God. A term like Christian God can even be idolatry. God is not a thing or a being.  We can have very different understandings about God, like different people might have ways of describing the same distant aunt that are so different from each other, that it sounds like they are talking about different people, although they are actually talking about the same person. And yet maybe sometimes we do get to the point where we are no longer describing the one God differently but in effect now talking about different Gods altogether. Only one of which is real”. 5

In my own tradition there are many references to the God of Israel, God of Abraham or in the ritual of bringing a first fruit offering, we have a formula by which God is referred to by the Israelite farmer as “your God” when speaking to the priest. 6 This does not mean that God is owned by the priest, nor is He owned by Israel, but rather that there is a relationship between the priest, Abraham or Israel with the one unknowable God. 7

Regardless of our beliefs about who is worshiping correctly, we must cross the barriers of “us” and
“them” through the practice of compassion. The horrific images on our computer screens are the living hell that our fellow humans are going through that echo the words of our reading this week: “You will be only wronged and crushed all the days… You will grope at midday, as the blind man gropes in the dark …You will be only oppressed and robbed all the days, and no one will save”. 8 But we can change the last words in the sentence, someone must save! That someone is us.

Notes:
1.    Genesis 4:10
2.    Context was explained in a response by Sheikh Soner Coruhlu “this is in response to those who did their utmost to bring pain and suffering to the newly established Muslim community. They were vulnerable and instead of being nurtured they were tortured, persecuted, starved, and even killed for nothing other than believing in One Deity as opposed to the hundreds the idol worshippers believed in at that time.
It is not unlike Exodus 32:33 where the Almighty decrees quite clearly that He will blot those out who has sinned against Him. The punishment is also mentioned herein.
When we look at the context, we can see in both instances, that punishment is implied to evil doers and those that spread corruption and tyranny on the land. Who take advantage of the poor and destitute, steal what little belongs to the orphans, and indulges oneself in an almost animal like manner in order to satiate their desires even at the pain and suffering of others. Even Muslims fall into the trap of being picky with verses and use such verses with general application. Thus, such individuals partake in what we call selective retrieval in order to implement desired ideologies”.
3.    Rabbi Moshe Dovid Valli, (1696-1777) Mishne Torah page 243 on Deuteronomy 23:16
4.    One word in Jewish traditional sources to make sense of Christian beliefs in a trinity is שיטוף “Shituf” which means partnership
5.    My recollection of a conversation with Bishop Robert Forsyth that was cleared with him in a follow up email on the same day, both on 1 September 2015
6.    Deuteronomy 26:3
7.    Torah Temima on Deuteronomy 26:3
8.    Deuteronomy 28

Shame: Personal and Regarding People Seeking Asylum - Ki Teitzei

Shame is sometimes a wonderful thing but, when inappropriate, can be very destructive to human dignity, 1 spirit and motivation. 2 This may explain the tendency to regard shame as something to be avoided. Despite the problems with shame, we are rightly indignant about people who are “shameless”. In an “aha!” moment this week I realised that I may feel angry with someone because I feel some shame that I am not doing the right thing by them. If I am able to embrace shame as a gift and use it as an (imperfect) “values violation detector”, I can respond to it either by making a choice to do better or by clarifying for myself that I am satisfied with the choices I have been making.

There are different types of shame. The Torah discusses a woman who intervenes when her husband is fighting with another man, and uses the word “shameful parts” when it refers to her grabbing his genitals. 3 When Adam and Eve were in the Garden of Eden “they were naked and they were not ashamed”.4 It is only after eating from the tree of knowledge of good and evil that they feel shame, perhaps because they then recognise their vulnerability to inconsiderately selfish and even exploitative sexuality. There is something healthy about Adam and Eve initially not being ashamed of their bodies. Shame is more appropriate in respect of moral failure, with reference to actions, words or attitudes, than in respect of natural imperfection. Shame is often unhelpfully felt, e.g. for being “fat”, or disorganised. Inappropriate or excessive feelings of shame have made some people reluctant to embrace shame where it is useful and needed.  

I wonder if shame avoidance is part of the explanation for the way people seeking asylum are being treated. Perhaps there is an underlying sense of shame, which is covered up by denigrating those whom we know deep down deserve our compassion. 5

It is tempting when refusing to assist vulnerable people to portray them as undeserving. The Torah states: “Beware, lest… your eyes will look in an evil way on your needy brother and not give him”. 6 This is interpreted to mean that, in our reluctance to help a needy person, we must not ascribe evil characteristics to the person seeking our help to justify our refusal. An example of this is the inhabitants of the wealthy city of Sodom; they were concerned about diluting their wealth if they accepted outsiders, so instead they denigrated the visitors as evil, 7 not unlike governments in Australia and Israel that use words like “Illegals” or “infiltrators” in relation to people lawfully seeking asylum. 8

In a discussion in a Sydney synagogue last week, one man asserted that not one of the Africans seeking asylum in Israel was a genuine refugee. He also expressed anger about criminal acts that have been perpetrated by African asylum seekers in South Tel Aviv. He can’t possibly know what the circumstances of the asylum seekers were in their home countries and surely he must know that blaming all members of a group for the acts of some is wrong. Could it be that his assertion that the asylum seekers are not genuine is covering up his discomfort with holding a prejudiced position?

The Torah calls for justice for the stranger 9 and particularly for a compassionate response to and protection of people fleeing oppression. “You shall not deliver a slave to his master if he seeks refuge with you from his master. He shall reside among you, wherever he chooses within any of your cities, where it is good for him. You shall not oppress him”. 10 Many of the refugees who have reached Israel are from Eritrea, where they were slaves in all but name before their escape. According to Israeli NGO, The Hotline for Refugees and Migrants, “citizens of Eritrea flee a country with no civilian judiciary… and whose citizens are obligated to perform endless ‘national service’. This service is unlike the service performed in other armies and includes performing various forms of hard labour for the benefit of the regime, including: mining, paving roads and agricultural work. Eritreans who defect from national service are considered traitors and if they are caught, they are tortured and sometimes executed or tortured to death”. 11

In Australia and Israel, there are restrictions preventing asylum seekers from enjoying the benefits and dignity of work. Their conditions do not justify the choice to commit criminal acts; however we should not sit in judgement of those whose circumstances 12 are conducive to increasing crime. Instead, we should work at changing the situation. The verse mentioned above commands that former slaves should be housed “among you”. This is interpreted as cautioning against creating a separate city for the former slaves as this might lead to social unrest or “rebellion”. Instead, the former slaves should be integrated among the people. 13

It is a shame that people who have suffered so much are having doors slammed in their faces by governments. We should not accept this. We are not shameless.

Notes
1.    Dignity is regarded as so important that, in our Torah reading, there is a requirement to ensure that, if someone is hanged for a capital offence, the corpse does not remain hanging overnight. Deuteronomy 21:22-23. Dignity in punishment is also emphasised in relating to flogging, where the Torah warns that excess lashes might lead to your brother becoming cheapened in your eyes. Deuteronomy 25:1-3
Dignity is also hinted at when the Torah states: “You shall not see your brother's ox or sheep straying, and you would ignore them. [Rather,] you shall return them to your brother”. The words:  וְהִתְעַלַּמְתָּ מֵהֶם “you would ignore them” are creatively interpreted in the Talmud as referring to an elder who is unaccustomed to carrying large parcels in public so it would not be dignified for him to do so. In this case the words “you shall ignore them” are taken to mean the exact opposite of the plain in the meaning in the text: he should in fact ignore the lost object, rather than compromise his dignity. Talmud Bava Metzia 30. It comes up again in the command that Israelite soldiers have a designated place outside their camp to relieve themselves and that they carry a spike to dig a hole to cover up their excrement. Deuteronomy 23:13-14 , see Targum Unkelus to 13.
In the case of a debtor, the lender is forbidden from entering the home of the borrower to take a security, but must stand outside. If the borrower is poor and gives his night garments as security, the lender must return the night clothes every evening at sunset so that the poor person can sleep in his garments in dignity. This would be an act of kindness that the Torah predicts would lead the poor borrower to bless the lender. Deuteronomy 24:10-13. 
2.    Tanya Chapter 1 alludes to the problem of being depressed if one sees oneself as wicked
3.    Deuteronomy 25:11
4.    Genesis 2:25
5.    This principle is articulated strongly in our reading this week relating to an escaped slave, discussed in the next paragraph. It is also reflected in the criticism of Amon and Moab whose male members are never to be allowed to join the Jewish people, even to the tenth generation, because they did not welcome the Israelites with bread and water on the road when we left Egypt. Instead they related to us as a threat.  Deuteronomy 23:4-5, compassion for the stranger is also the subject of several commandments relating to sharing one’s crops such as not gleaning and leaving a forgotten sheaf of wheat etc. Deuteronomy 24:19-22
6.    Deuteronomy 15:9
7.    R. Shmelkeh of Nikolsburg. A variation of this in Yalkut Hagershuni creatively reinterprets the last words of the following verse in Genesis 18:20 about the city of Sodom: “Since the cry of Sodom and Gomorrah has become great, and since their sin has become very grave,”. Literally, the verse is understood as the words of G-d about the inhabitants of Sodom. But it could also be interpreted as the words the Sodomites themselves used about poor visitors to their city, to justify their inhospitable practices - “their sin” – like the sin of the “illegals” , the “economic migrants”, “queue jumpers” or “infiltrators” is very great and this alleged sin is seen as justifying their cruel treatment. Both cited in Nachshoni, Y., (1989) Studies in the Weekly Parshah, Mesorah Publications, Brooklyn New York,  p.1280. This citation is from my previous article relating to these themes: http://torahforsociallyawarehasid.blogspot.com.au/2012/08/curbing-compassion-for-asylum-seekers.html August 2012
8.    My friend, KL, insists that the term “asylum seekers” is unhelpful and that we should speak instead of “people seeking asylum”.
9.    Deuteronomy 24:17
10.    Deuteronomy 23:16-17
11.    http://hotline.org.il/en/about-us/
12.    Tanya, Chapter 30
13.    Abarbanel and Ralbag on these verses

Cross-cultural generosity, not mean-spiritedness

Cooking Kosher dinner,
vegetables and veggie
burgers on a sandwich maker
at the Aly home.

Last week I posted an impassioned grave side sermon by Mohammad Hoblos, a Lebanese Muslim preacher (i) on Facebook Hoblos told the mourners at the funeral of Hedi Ayoub: "there are no gangsters in paradise", "...twenty-two years old, built like a tank... (a) one dollar (bullet) brought him to the ground" and quoted a line from a rap song: "Why are we so blind to see that the ones we hurt are you and me?". He spoke against glorifying violence and materialism and stated that a Muslim who kills another Muslim will never get to heaven.  One Facebook comment, however, got caught up on the inward focus of the talk - “Why doesn’t he talk about the real issues, such as ISIS and violence against non-Muslims?”! 

It is wrong to look at Muslims in general through the lens of ISIS and terrorism. Hoblos was certainly talking about issues that are very real to people he actually knows.   A generous approach would be to look at the merit of what he was saying, at an open grave no less, rather than seeking faults in what he didn’t say.  In fact, many of my Facebook friends of Jewish and other backgrounds did make positive

and appreciative comments afterwards about Hoblos’ sermon, e.g. “that was a great post yesterday of the speech at funeral...”.

Last week I myself experienced the cross-cultural generosity of a Muslim family.  Zohra and Abbas Aly had invited me for dinner at their home, which is difficult for me because of the way I practice Kosher. I can’t eat anything cooked in pots used for non-Kosher, for example. They generously agreed to allow me to cook my meal on a sandwich maker in their own kitchen!

The theme of generosity can also be found, if one looks for it, in the Torah reading this past week. God commanded the Jews to take revenge against Midyan (ii). While a critical approach would, reasonably, focus on the revenge, a more generous approach will probe further.

The crime that Midyan was to be punished for, according to our oral tradition, was that the Midyanites and Moabites used sex as a weapon of war. Not by raping the enemies’ women, as still happens today, but as a way to spiritually destroy the Jews by having their own daughters seduce Jewish men and then pressure them to worship the gods of their enemies. 

In this context, spiritual strength or weakness was everything. The Moabites and Midyanites had sought to destroy the Jews through the curses of the sorcerer Balaam.  Balaam had let them down by blessing the Jews instead of cursing them, yet he also provided a clue to their vulnerability (iii).  He asserted that God “did not look at evil in Jacob (iv)”. Balaam went on to advise his clients that if the Jews could be led to sin this will result in their destruction (v). This plan was implemented although the Torah places responsibility (vi), at least initially, on the Jewish men who we are told “began to commit harlotry with the daughters of the Moabites. They (the Moabite daughters) invited the people to the sacrifices of their gods, and the people ate and prostrated themselves to their gods (vii)”.

Despite the Moabites participation in this bizarre sin, they are not included in Gods planned vengeance, which is restricted to Midyan. This is for two reasons involving generous thinking. One is the fact that the Moabites legitimately feared attack by the Jews (viii).  A second is that although, technically speaking the Jews had done nothing against the Moabites, they had possession of land that had been traditionally Moabite. The Jews had conquered that land in a war with the Emorites who had themselves taken the land from the Moabites. This legitimate grievance is seen as a significant mitigating factor (ix). 

My thoughts and prayers are with the Hedi Ayoub, his family, friends and community. Just as, when I was grieving over the violent loss of my brothers’ friend, the late Gabi Holzberg, in the Mumbai terrorist attack in 2008, many of my Muslim friends sent me messages of condolence. Let us respond to each other, in good times and bad, with cross-cultural compassion and generosity.

Notes:
i.    https://www.facebook.com/theaustralianmuslim?ref=ts&fref=ts, also available at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2fGEwzptQew in full, or edited version at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ROpW9ygp5Y
ii.    Numbers 25:18
iii.    Chizkuni
iv.    Numbers 23:21
v.    Talmud Sanhedrin 105, also see allusion to Balaam in Number 31:16
vi.    Lebovitz, N, New Studies in Bamidbar
vii.    Numbers 25:1-2
viii.    Ralbag
ix.    Chizkuni

“Girly Men’s” Redemption - Vayeshev

The strip search of "Love Makes A Way" protesters
this week and the broader asylum seeker  policy
debate in Australia illustrates the soft vs hard debate

Although I like to think that I am happy with my mix of strengths and weaknesses, I occasionally feel concerned about being “a soft person”. I can sometimes be indecisive, spontaneous, impulsive and conciliatory. I find that my energy levels fluctuate. There are times when I am filled with hope. At other times, I feel daunted by my work challenges and life. Occasionally I feel envious of successful “hard men”. They are decisive, disciplined, determined and consistent. They know what they want, and appear able to bend people to their will. I suspect however that redemption - whenever it comes - might be due more to the influence of women (or “girly men”) than “hard men”.

In this week’s Torah reading we are introduced to a puzzling story about a family whose two oldest sons marry the same beautiful (1) woman (named Tamar); one after the other. Both brothers die young (2). Eventually Tamar, pretending to be a prostitute, seduces and later marries her father in law, giving birth to twins, after having narrowly escaped being burned alive. What is even more intriguing for me is that this adventure is understood by the Jewish sages as God being “occupied with creating the light of the Messiah” (3). This is because one of the twins (that were born out of wedlock) is the ancestor of King David, who in turn, is professed to be a predecessor of the Messiah! 

This ancestor of the Messiah is named Peretz, which means “to burst forth”. His twin brother is Zarach, which means “to shine”. The children’s names are linked to the sun and the moon. The name Zarach/Shine is associated with the sun that shines consistently, while Peretz, the ancestor of the Messiah, is connected with the moon (4), which waxes and wanes, just as the passionate King David’s royal dynasty fluctuated over history (5). This suggests that those “who live the ups and downs” are closer to the character of the Messiah than those who appear to consistently “shine brightly like the sun”. 

In addition to the value placed on those of us who fluctuate, which is arguably a sign of living to the full,  there is also emphasis on the feminine. In patriarchal societies there is a sense that men are the ones to take the initiative in relation to sex and marriage. Men propose. Yet when it comes to the ancestors of the Messiah (who are also the ancestors of King David from whom the Messiah descends), there are three strong women who take the initiative in orchestrating a sexual encounter or marriage (6), as pointed out in an article by Rabbi Arthur Waskow. 

Ruth, the Moabite takes the lead in initiating a relationship with Boaz. She sleeps at his feet (7) uninvited. When Boaz wakes up frightened, Ruth invites him to “spread his coat over her” (8), which is an expression of marriage (9). Ruth descends from the daughter of Lot. She and her father (and sister) escaped the destruction of Sodom and thought all the men had perished. So she got her father drunk and was impregnated by him (10). Moab, the baby born of that liaison, is another ancestor of the Messiah; his existence the result of an assertive woman taking the lead. 

According to Kabbalistic traditions, in the Messianic era, women will be in an elevated position compared to men (11). One Rabbi put it simply: “In Messianic times, the female's superiority will be apparent” (12). As we strive for a more redemptive way of being, as represented by the Messianic age, it makes sense to prioritise feminine perspectives and ways of being. 

Of course, one can argue that the traditions should allow for the possibility of a female messiah, but this is a topic for a separate discussion. The material in this blog is sufficient to inspire me to harness and assert my more feminine or softer characteristics, to nudge the people in my sphere of influence slightly and gently closer to the way of redemption.

Notes:
1) Midrash Hagadol, cited in Torah Shlaima, vol. 2, p. 1449
2) Genesis 38
3) Midrash of Rabbi Nechunya Ben Hakaneh, cited in Ramban to Genesis 38:29,
4) Midrash of Rabbi Nechunya Ben Hakaneh, cited in Ramban to Genesis 38:29,
5) Rabbenu Bchaya, he also suggests that the twins were reincarnations of the two older sons of Judah who died, Er and Onan. These two were either ego centric, in the case of Onan, who did not want to have children “for his brother” (Genesis 38:8-9) or, Er who commentary tells us did not want to have children lest it make Tamar ugly (Midrash Hagadol). It could be argued that both of these men, were what might be termed as very masculine in their approaches and needed to be reincarnated to correct these flaws before one of them could be the ancestor of the Messiah.
6) Rabbi Arthur Waskow, https://theshalomcenter.org/content/lots-daughter-tamar-and-ruth-mothers-messiah, accessed 10/12/14
7) Ruth 3:7
8) Ruth 3:9,
9) Taking her ‘under his wing’ by spreading the corner of his coat over her is an expression of marriage (Rashi). According to one opinion the Jewish wedding custom in which the groom put a vail over the brides face is a variation of this theme in the book of Ruth, and is in fact the true expression of the significant marriage ritual referred to as Chuppah (Meiri, Ketubot 7b, Piskey Riaz Ketubot 1:11, Sefer Hamanhig 109, Avudaram order of blessings of Erusin, and Maharil laws of marriage all cited in Hanesuim Kehilchatam, Adler, B, (1985) Hamesorah,  Jerusalem
10) Genesis 19:30-38
11) Often cited in Chabad teachings, Rabbi M. M. Schneerson, Likutei Sichos vol 11, p. 62,
12) Markus, Rabbi Y, http://www.kabbalaonline.org/kabbalah/article_cdo/aid/379377/jewish/Elemental-Strengths.htm

Hard and Compassionate approaches to inter-community and personal improvement

Harsh talk is sometimes needed. Yet, compassionate talk can achieve more in many situations. It creates the safety and space to calmly struggle for improvement if there is the will to improve.

I write these lines on the morning before Rosh Hashanah, the Jewish New Year. This morning we had media reports about two police officers stabbed by a “known terror suspect” who was then then killed. The temperature is rising, the infamous image and threats of beheadings have enraged and scared people. Bigots feel emboldened: the daughter of a Muslim woman I worked with, was spat on. Yesterday, I spent hours on the phone with communal leaders, discussing efforts to calm tensions and reservations about these efforts. An important question, relating both to intergroup relations in Australia and my worship on this holy day, is whether to approach issues with harsh or gentle talk. 

Muslim display of Love for Australia
The other Sunday I attended the “Muslims Love Australia BBQ”. I was very warmly welcomed by many of the guests. There was a festive atmosphere. Muslim men and women wore white “Proud Australian” t-shirts. I danced with my friend, an Arabic Muslim school principal, and other men in a circle to Arabic music. At one point I noticed that some of my steps might have been better suited to a Jewish wedding than an Arabic context, but no one seemed to mind!

Australian Love for Muslims
This display of love was partly in response to harsh (implicit) questioning of the loyalty of Muslims by politicians and present, to a significant extent, in the media and the larger community. It was also prompted by a gesture of solidarity that I organised at the Lakemba Mosque in Sydney in collaboration with Pastor Brad Chilcott around a message: “Australian religious leaders say “We will love Muslims 100 years”, countering a newspaper headline that stated “We will fight Islam for 100 years”.

Not happy with the love
Not everyone was happy with the events. There were the suggestions from some critics within the Muslim community that the participants were ”sell outs”, trying too hard to impress the media and non-Muslim Australians rather than representing their own angry youth and their grievances about Australian foreign policy and about being stigmatised by questions about their loyalty.

“The Love 100 years” gesture was both welcomed by some (1) and attacked by others as being the work of ‘Useful Idiots’ (2). One argument is that Muslims need to ‘be persuaded  collectively to tackle extremism and ensure community-wide goodwill toward “the west”’. (Absent from this assertion is the question of how responsive fanatics are to influence? Assuming that the answer is that these radicals are not very open to influence, it begs the question: how can leaders be held responsible for people who refuse to follow?). More relevant is the need for outreach to “disaffected youth” and fostering positive interfaith relations. Another factor is the insinuation by some Muslims and their supporters that anyone who is feeling afraid or angry is guilty of bigotry. While there has been much  generalising and prejudice against Muslims, labelling all expressions of fear or anger as bigotry is not fair or helpful. This is a complex and painful situation with fear and resentment flowing in both directions. There is a reasonable desire on the part of both non-Muslim and Muslim Australians for reassurance. One legitimate response is a robust and honest discussion.    

Better through beating?
Assertiveness and even threats, have their place: so does a compassionate posture. I explore this broader question from a personal and spiritual perspective. “Beat the horses until they will know they are horses”, goes the old Hasidic saying.  It would appear that harshness or self- flagellation is a useful method to advance personal improvement. Indeed, the Torah threatens divine smoking rage and obliteration for the cavalier person, who thinks it ok to indulge his sinful desires (3).  I have tried harsh self-criticism and guilt as a means of self-improvement. It worked for me to some extent some of the time, I think at a basic level to deter me from being my worst. However, when I have overused guilt or fear, I found it can be quite destructive. 

Acceptance combined with Spiritual restlessness and striving 
I propose a different approach. I need to be honest about my short-comings. I need honest criticism from others and myself to recognise what my flaws are. At the same time, I also need to accept myself as the imperfect, flawed but still worthwhile, precious human being that I am.  There is wisdom in the Buddhists’ showed calling for acceptance as a way for joy. Tanya, the classic Chasidic text that guides people in fulfilling the biblical idea that we can easily serve God with our emotions (4), urges us to manage our expectations of ourselves. Beating ourselves up about not achieving unrealistic goals, will only make us depressed; this decreases our motivation to make the changes and choices that ARE realistic for us because we have fallen into despair. Instead, we need to combine our dissatisfaction with our current level of spiritual achievement with an element of self-acceptance and compassion if we are to joyously strive to improve ourselves.
 
I find the sequence of events in the Torah instructive. It is only after the reconciliation between the straying Israelites (5) and God that real growth is possible. God’s mercy and bringing back the exiles is followed by the “circumcision of the hearts (6)”, which is interpreted as developing the capacity to serve out of love instead of fear (7). Meaningful growth is more likely to be the result of compassion than threats.

The organisers of the BBQ were right to make a statement of love to their fellow Australians, regardless of any reservations or grievances some Muslims might have. I think we were right to stand in solidarity with our Muslim neighbours when they were subjected to a barrage of hostility.  Does my compassionate stance mean that I think that all Australian Muslims, a diverse and dispersed community, have had enough success in integrating into Australia or countering extremism? No, it doesn’t. I share the concern of many Muslims I know, about the hostility felt by some young Australian Muslims towards people of other backgrounds.. I also share their concern about the bigotry and abuse faced by Muslims. There is a legitimate role for robust discussion and airing of grievances. Equally, there is a role for support and compassion. The really positive change will result more from the latter than the former.

Notes:   

1) The gesture was warmly welcomed by Muslims who were moved to create a website with the following response - http://www.lovefor100yearsresponse.com/ It was covered in the general media, such as Channel 7, http://youtu.be/KClv9YNeM8M, Channel 10 News:  http://youtu.be/JEbdZggQ7lA and the Australian: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/latest-news/religious-heads-show-muslim-support/story-fn3dxiwe-1227033604150. Also, specific Muslims sites, such as http://www.amust.com.au/2014/09/interfaith-support-by-religious-leaders-well-love-muslims-100-years/ .
Muslim Village: http://muslimvillage.com/2014/08/24/57197/australia-christian-and-jewish-leaders-rally-in-support-of-muslims/
2) http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dgreenfield/well-love-muslims-100-years-say-hamas-useful-idiots/  This website attacks Together for Humanity and our President, Madenia Abdurahman, as well as Pastor Brad Chillcott and me. The website generally seems quite one-sided regarding all matters relating to Muslims or Blacks. See review of this article. http://www.biblesociety.org.au/news/media-watch-will-really-love-muslims-100-years
3) Deuteronomy 29:18-19
4) Tanya by Rabbi Shneur Zalman of Liadi, Chapter 27
5) Deuteronomy 30:1-5
6) Deuteronomy 30:6
7) Klei Yakar