Escape the Inner Noise

I am reading, in a book by Christine Jackman, about the problem of the stream of troubling thoughts or chatter in our minds [i] and the virtue of achieving quiet and stillness.  Such thoughts are sometimes self-recriminating: “Why was I such a fool?” They can be stewing about other people’s faults: “She is so horrible.” Or fearful thoughts. All these thoughts can flood us with negativity, outrage, envy, anxiety, and stress. What is to be done?

Shame

Jackman is searingly honest about the self-critical thoughts that would sometimes torment her. She is not alone in being afflicted by the stream of thoughts in her mind. “Studies have revealed that most people find it hard to tolerate being alone with their thoughts, even for relatively short periods of time.” “Simply being alone with their thoughts for 15 minutes was apparently so aversive that it drove many participants to self-administer an electric shock…[ii]” just to avoid the discomfort of facing themselves. I understand this as some of us feeling ashamed of our own inadequacies and afraid of being confronted with these.

It doesn’t make sense because most of us are not really so shame-worthy. Yet, such thoughts persist.

Fear and Worry

Sometimes we ruminate not on our self-worth but on what we should do, especially relating to earning a livelihood. “The many thoughts in the heart of man, that hassle the person by raising many doubts about every matter…being pulled this way and that way…[iii]”. More ominous, are undefined fears that are not related to a clear danger. This is explained by the sages as a fear that “although he does not see it, his guardian angel [iv]  his soul [v] or perhaps his subconscious - sees the danger [vi]”. This could be very unsettling.  

Don’t run

Rumi wrote, “Your old life was a frantic running from silence [vii]”. Jackman quotes Rumi as a way of reflecting on the fact that her ruminating thoughts were a way to avoid confronting her deeper self, hidden beneath the noisy, repetitive, and meaningless thoughts. Instead, she encourages us to stop the flow of ruminating thoughts and be still – primarily through meditation or walking mindfully in a forest [viii]. This is not a quick fix, but this capacity can be built over time. Like Jackman, Carl Jung called us to look at the “shadow” part of ourselves, those parts of ourselves that might otherwise remain hidden, but still influence our thoughts and life.

At the right time

I agree with Jung and Jackman that it is better to confront ourselves, than to escape, at least sometimes. On the other hand, I think escape can sometimes be a good thing as well. Chasidic writings suggest that, if ruminating thoughts about sins we’ve committed, or not being good enough, pop into our head, “this is what one should take to his heart, this is not a good time… [to effectively deal with such concerns and for introspection], this requires specially scheduled sessions, at an appropriate moment, with a settled mind [ix]”. I have tried this technique and it worked for me. After telling myself that now is not a good time for ruminating on my faults and past shortcomings, I was able to park that thought for another time and refocus on what was in front of me at that time.

Silence in Conflict

One of the great men of the Talmud stated, “I grew up among the wise and I have not found anything better for the body than silence [x].”  One virtue of silence is when one, for example, hears him/herself being denigrated, and is silent [xi]. A lot of the “noise” in our heads consists of rehearsed or rehashed conversations we might have with other people in response to their hurtful words. It would be much better for us if we could stop those thoughts and shift to equanimity. A beautiful phrase in a Jewish prayer expresses this aspiration: “To those who curse me, may my soul be silent [xii]”. Alternatively, another prayer states, “I forgive anyone who sinned against me… [including] sins against my honour [xiii].”

Jackman cautions against expecting a complete and quick transformation. Instead, she urges the reader to keep at it. The Torah would certainly agree.

---

[i] Jackman, C (2020), Turning Down The Noise: The quiet power of silence in a busy world, Murdoch Books, Sydney, London

[ii] Wilson, T.D. et al, In Jackman, C (2020), p. 146

[iii] The Rebbe, Rabbi Shmuel, known as the Maharash, in Toras Shmuel, Maamar Mayim Rabbim, p, 1

[iv] Rashi commentary on Talmud, Megila 3a

[v] Steinzaltz commentary on Talmud, Megila 3a

[vi] Talmud, Megila 3a, cited in Rabbi Chayim Yosef David Azulai, Toras Hachida , Devarim, p 11

[vii] Jackman, C, (2020), p. 73

[viii] Michelle Brenner has introduced me to the concept of forest bathing and walking meditation – which can be achieved, at least partially, by walking in nature and being very mindful of one’s surroundings. Jackman also writes about walking in nature.

[ix] Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi in Tanya chapter 26, as adapted by Miller, C. (2016), the Practical Tanya, part 1, p. 305

[x] Pirkey Avot 1:17

[xi] Ovadia Bartenura on Pirkey Avot 1:17

[xii] The end of the Amida, Elohai Netzor

[xiii] The prayer before going to sleep

Responding to Violence - Joseph, Mandela, Muslims and Ukrainians Vayigash

I, wearing a black hat that marked me as Hasidic Jew, stood in middle of a large circle of Ukrainians this week. This image, if I thought of it a year ago, would have conjured in my mind associations of anti-Semitic violence, or Pogroms. Instead, it was a circle of solidarity that I had joined and was most warmly welcomed into. We stood together as freedom loving people of Ukrainian and Jewish heritage praying for an end to the violence being perpetrated against peaceful protestors in Ukraine. It was also a quiet step closer between two communities with a past that could keep us apart if we allow it to.

The death of Nelson Mandela today, a giant of forgiveness and reconciliation coincides with the Torah reading this week, Vayigash, about Joseph who like Mandela was locked away in prison and persecuted, like him triumphed and rose to power, and again like Mandela repaid his tormentors with kindness rather than revenge. 

A number of years after Joseph is thrown into a pit and sold into slavery by his own brothers, he meets them again. This time Joseph is not a lone defenceless teenager, instead he is a national ruler in Egypt. In a remarkable act of forgiveness Joseph tells his brothers; “do not be distressed and do not be angry with yourselves for selling me here, because it was to save lives that G d sent me ahead of you. For two years now there has been famine in the land... So then, it was not you who sent me here, but God” (1).

It is Joseph’s faith that leads him to see the cause of his being sold into slavery being God’s plan to save lives during the famine, rather than it being simply the result of his brothers’ cruel choice to sell him (2).  This is surprising, as surely people must be held responsible for their own actions and intentions, rather than being let of the hook because of a positive end result (3). One suggestion is that there are exceptionally important circumstances such as the case of Joseph which had far reaching historical consequences in which God over-rides free choice and directs people to carry out his plan (4). A Chasidic approach sees much broader application of Joseph’s approach. It affirms absolute freedom of choice while also embracing full divine providence over every single object and every single occurrence with every object (5). This being the case there is no point in being angry or holding a grudge against anyone because everything that happens is the will of God (6). My discussions with a Sheikh last night showed me that some discussions in Islam on this issue were quite similar to those in Judaism.

The dignified prayer Vigil for Ukraine began with a reading that included a prayer to be “the one who forgives”. Yet, the violence this prayer vigil was addressing is continuing with students being brutally beaten in Kiev as we heard directly from people who witnessed it. It is not the time to think much about forgiveness. The priority now is that the violence stop and the rights of the people to protest are upheld. For some at the prayer vigil, the murder of 10 million Ukrainians by Stalin’s Russian government was seen as relevant to questions of the relationship with Russia today.

Last night I was deeply moved by another story about violence and dignity. We heard from the very eloquent, Hijab wearing, Najah Zoabi, a survivor of domestic violence. She talked about the first slap of an open hand against the skin of her face. About being devalued as a human being, constantly being told she was not good or beautiful enough until she believed it. She told how of the change in herself, from being raised with kindness and respect by her parents to feeling degraded by her husband. Eventually she sought and received help and healing from the Muslim Women Association and their support centre. It amazed me that the confident articulate woman speaking last night was able to triumph over the violence and abuse to be the person she is now and reclaim the dignity she enjoyed in her parent’s home.

I told the Ukrainian group of an experience I had in 1992 in the city of Kharkov, Ukraine. I danced outside the KGB headquarters around midnight on the Festival "Simchat Torah" when we celebrate the end of the yearly cycle of the Torah reading for the year. At that time it seemed that oppression by the state that my grandfather and his parents experience in Ukraine, was a thing of the past was a thing of the past. Sadly, it seems that dance was premature. However as we celebrated Chanukah this week, we hope and pray that once again freedom and dignity will triumph over violence.

Faith and grace can help us respond to violence in a variety of positive ways.


1.    Genesis 45: 5-8
2.    The classic Jewish concept that things that happen are ultimately part of God’s plan but wicked people will choose and have the opportunity to be instruments for the harsh components of the plan and good people will play the pleasant roles.
3.    Abarbanel Genesis Chapter 45, Vayigash p 415
4.    Abarbanel ibid.
5.    The Baal Shem Tov as discussed by the Lubavitcher Rebbe in Likutei Sichos Vol 8
6.    Rabbi Schenur Zalman in Tanya, Iggeret HaKodesh, Epistle 25 

Revenge, Torah and Christianity

Anger, By Shubhojoy Mitra, creative commons license
http://www.cyberartgallery.org/?gallery=portal

The movie Ajami is an Israeli-Palestinian co-production that for me is about the heartbreaking cost of revenge. Much of the plot is driven by two Arabic teenagers, one a gentle sweet faced boy of around 14 who is a bit of an artist, and their family being pursued by a Bedouin crime family bent on avenging the death of one of theirs, unless they receive a financially crippling payment of blood money. An Israeli character also has his own vengeance to attend to after his soldier-brother is found dead near a Palestinian village. I empathised with both the Israeli and Arabic characters, portrayed as every day human beings who deeply love their families. Apart from humanising protagonists from both sides, my overwhelming impression was of the horrible needless suffering directly flowing from the perceived for some kind of vengeance.

I wonder if my low tolerance for revenge is the result of Christian influences on me, particularly from a young devout Christian peace builder I greatly admire named Jarrod McKenna. I remember when I first started work as a Rabbi 15 years ago, I was teaching a young adult about divine retribution as one of the themes the Friday night prayers. At the time, I thought this idea of divine justice was quite beautiful, righting the wrongs of the world. My student challenged me, would it not be better if at the end of days no one suffered? I remember reflecting on how different my perspective had been to that of my student who was raised with more exposure to Christian and secular influences.

These influences have been blocked out to some extent in the Hasidic community in Crown Heights that I was raised in. One on level it is fair enough for communities to stay true to their own teachings, the question is how to do that while fostering respectful interfaith relationships. The International Council of Christians and Jews’ called on Jewish communities to include basic and accurate background information about Christianity in the Curricula of Jewish schools[i]. In my very orthodox Chasidic community this is simply not going to happen.  I will not argue about the core objection to learning about other faiths generally, except to share what I was told by Chief Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks[ii] that schools could teach about other faiths in the same way as one learns about other cultures.

This post looks at Torah sources about revenge and considers the Jewish- Christian relationship in that light.  

Prohibition of revenge and promotion of forgiveness

The verse “an eye for an eye[iii]” is not about revenge but monetary compensation[iv]. Revenge and even holding a grudge is forbidden in the text of the Torah[v]. One way to overcome the urge for revenge is by considering a case of a person cutting meat that accidentally cuts his arm, would he then take revenge and cut the hand that was holding the knife[vi]?! Faith can help a person see the hand of God in the offence, and this can help him not bear a grudge against the person who ‘acts as God’s tool’[vii].  This is dramatically played out in the story of Joseph when he insists on not holding a grudge against his brothers who sold him into slavery because he sees it all as fulfilment of God’s plan so that he could save many lives during the famine in Egypt[viii]. In the prayers before going to sleep, we proclaim forgiveness for anyone who sinned against me… in this life or another life…no one should be punished on my account[ix]. 

Permission and even encouragement of revenge

The teachings against revenge need to be considered alongside other guidance such as the clear instructions to take revenge against Midiyan[x] and never to forget the evil deeds of Amalek who attacked you us when we were vulnerable[xi]. This apparent contradiction is probably the reason the Talmud gives a very mundane example to illustrate this principle, a case of two people who want to borrow tools from each other. Refusal to lend a tool should not be reciprocated or even mentioned[xii]. The definition is narrowed to exclude cases of in which there is a monetary obligation[xiii], or in offenses against one’s body where there has been no apology[xiv], or murder in which case the relative would be encouraged to “redeem the blood” of his relative by killing his relatives killer with permission of the court[xv]. Scholars are encouraged to stand up against people who disrespect them, one sage going so far as to state that any sage that does not take revenge and hold a grudge like a snake is no scholar[xvi].  This has been explained as being about disrespect of the Torah the stage studied. Even God himself is portrayed (in addition to compassionate etc) as a God of vengeance[xvii]. One explanation of this is that God conquers anger while in a person who takes revenge the anger will conquer him[xviii].

Another consideration is that the prohibition of revenge refers explicitly to “the sons of your nation” and is understood to apply only between Jews[xix]. One argument by an East European commentator of the 16^th early 17^th century is that “disputes between Jews will typically be about unimportant offenses relating to money or body that don’t merit revenge but when revenge is permitted against someone from another nation because typically he wants to cause you to transgress the commandments of God and to lead you astray from God”[xx].  In his context that was probably true, yet it is ridiculous and highly offensive not to recognise the change of heart and efforts of Christians in the 2^nd half of the 20^th century toward reconciliation with the Jews.

A bold idea, embracing enemies

My Christian friend Jarrod is into radical peace building. He is not a saint and felt plenty of anger when a man he knew was murdered. Yet he believes that he is called to love his enemies. The Truth and Reconciliation process in South Africa seems to be an example of the value of that kind of approach. While not the same, parallel teaching can be found in Judaism. Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi famously warned his followers about his opponents known as Mitnagdim who framed him and caused him to be imprisoned in Czarist Russia. He called on his followers not to “jeer nor whistle derisively at them, heaven forfend… (instead to respond to their opponents)… with “a soft answer [that] turns away anger[xxi],” and with a restrained spirit. And through all that, perhaps God will put [a conciliatory and loving response] into the heart of their brethren”[xxii] God tells the offended party, “let your love for me overcome the hatred you have with him and through this peace will come between you[xxiii] and in another version,” let your love with him” presumably the one who hurt you, overcome the hatred…so that peace will come to the world[xxiv]”.

Conclusion

As a Jew, I still see some merit in the arguments that retribution has its place. There is a reason for the presence of this device in so many cultures. There are flawed human beings who will only restrain their unsavoury impulses out of fear of punishment[xxv]. While my tradition provides a mix of ideas about how to respond to grievances, I think in many cases it is worth emphasising the more generous teachings and applying them to people regardless of race or religion. Yet, there is something to be admired in the bold, positive, “game changing” approach of Christians to their enemies that can be supported by teachings within my own tradition.

---

[i] A time for recommitment, the twelve points of Berlin: A call to Christian and Jewish communities worldwide

[ii] Conversation I had with the Chief Rabbi at a private visit in his home March 2011

[iii] Exodus 21:24

[iv] Mechilta on Exodus and the Talmud in Ketuvot 32b and Bava Kamma 83b

[v] Leviticus 19:17

[vi] Jerusalem Talmud Nedarim 9:4

[vii] Sefer Hachinuch Mitzvah 247, Tanya: Igeret HaKodesh - Epistle 25

[viii] Genesis 50:20

[ix] Siddur Tehilat Hashem p.141

[x] Number 31:2

[xi] Deuteronomy 25:17-19

[xii] Talmud Yoma 23a

[xiii] Ramban

[xiv] Hizkuni 19:17

[xv] Ramban

[xvi] Talmud Yoma 23a, commentary then softens it to say that the sage holds a grudge but does not fight back, he simply keeps it in his heart and then if someone else takes revenge on his behalf the sage is silent

[xvii] Psalms 94:1

[xviii] Hizkuni on

[xix] Kohelet Rabba 88:8

[xx] Klei Yakar, by Shlomo Ephraim ben Aaron Luntschitz (1550 –1619)

[xxi] Proverbs 15:1

[xxii] Tanya Igeret Hakodesh 2, translation from Chabad.org

[xxiii] Bchor shor

[xxiv] Hizkuni

[xxv] Pirkey Avot 3:2

After a Lapse

There are times we fail to live up to the standards of those we care about or to our own. It would be nice if these can all end in complete redemption, is that how it works? Let us examine the case of the Golden Calf.

The context for this lapse is the overwhelming experience of a downtrodden people being rescued and embraced by the most magnificent being. The exodus of the Israelites from Egypt followed by the experience at Mt. Sinai has been compared to a “great king showing great intense love to a lowly, despised man, who is dirty and sitting in the garbage. The King goes down to him with all his ministers and lifts him up from the garbage and brings him into the inner rooms of the palace…and hugs and kisses him and forms an attachment with him of “spirit to spirit” and real closeness”[1].  Part of what God wants is an exclusive relationship with this people. But they go ahead and make a golden calf.

A member of the Jewish community in Sydney told me about his conversations with Muslims in Lebanon who seemed to suggest that the Jews were rejected by God and replaced with the adherents of Islam. One of my religious, knowledgeable, Muslim friends tells me that this not what Islam teaches, while an Imam I know explained to me that there is a view that the covenant was conditional, was not an all time covenant, and was broken by the Jews later on". There are also arguments about whether Christians should see the covenant with Israel as having been superseded[2]. Pope John Paul II was of the view that the original covenant is current and continues to be binding. Still, the question is an interesting one. Can a relationship recover after a great betrayal?

A careful reading of the exact wording of God’s rage after the incident provides some clues. “And the Lord said to Moses: "… your people that you have brought up from the land of Egypt have acted corruptly. They have quickly turned away from the path that I have commanded them; they have made themselves a molten calf! … Now leave Me, and My anger will be kindled against them so that I will annihilate them, and I will make you into a great nation.[3]"

One the one hand God is distancing himself from the Jews. They are no longer God’s people; they are now the people of Moses[4], “your people”.  He also seems quite open to eliminating the Jews and replacing them with a new people to be descended from Moses.    

Yet there are a surprising few words in which God tells Moses “leave me”, as if saying; let me destroy them. Was Moses holding on to God that He needs Moses to let go?! This is compared to a king who was angry with his son and took him into a small room and began seeking to kill him. The king then begins screaming from the room, leave me to beat him. The prince’s teacher is standing outside. He thinks to himself, the king is in there alone with the prince why is saying leave me? Surely it is because the king wants me to go in to appease him about his son. This is what God was hinting to Moses, immediately Moses began to ask for mercy[5].  God was “opening the door”[6] and implying that this decision was negotiable and that “the matter depended on him, if he will pray they will not be annihilated[7]”.  

We are taught that Moses was rewarded for this prayer, meriting a “shining face” in this world from what God will give the righteous in the future, in the Messianic era[8]. 

We can more clearly see the hint that Moses’ prayer would be accepted if we compare this text with a similar text[9]. God tells the prophet Jeremiah. “And you, pray not on behalf of this people, neither lift up a cry nor prayer, and entreat Me not for I will not hear you[10]”. No ambiguity in that verse, in contrast with ours where God is almost hinting to Moses that his prayer will be accepted.

When I think of God’s rage from a Chasidic perspective I think of it (at least in a sense) as a bit of theatre[11]. God chooses to express great rage so that the people understand the seriousness of their lapse. I would see this as consistent with the following teaching about anger. “A person should train himself not to anger even on a matter regarding which anger is appropriate. If a person wants to instil awe upon his children and family[12], or if he is an officer of the community and wants to anger at the community members in order that they mend their ways, he should only feign anger in their presence in order to castigate them, but his mind should be composed within. He should act as one impersonating an [angry] man while not being angry himself[13]”.

I tried this once, when as a Yeshiva student I was responsible for a performance at a Sydney Public School the morning after some very late night Purim alcohol fuelled celebrations. One of the guys with a minor part told he was going back to sleep. I did not really need him, but I knew the guy I really needed to play the king in the other dorm room could hear what was going on. I could not let this seem ok. I screamed as if I really lost it. When I went into the other room, the other guy said, ok, ok, I am getting up. Cool, I thought, that went to plan.   

Regardless of how angry God really was, and putting aside the view that the Golden Calf was not actually idol worship[14], the bottom line is that we see the Israelites bouncing back from a dramatic betrayal of the 2^nd of the Ten Commandments. God’s reconciliation with the Israelites is also illustrated by God’s instruction to them to create a house for him. It is interpreted as a testimony to all the nations that they were granted atonement for the sin of the calf[15].

Still, despite the reconciliation after the Golden Calf, it is not forgotten. Whenever the Jews would sin in the future, God would remember a little of this sin, (1/24^th) together with the other sins[16]. This reminds me of the story about the nails in the fence.

There once was a little boy who had a bad temper. His father gave him a bag of nails and told him that every time he lost his temper, he must hammer a nail into the back of the fence. The first day the boy had driven 37 nails into the fence. Over the next few weeks, as he learned to control his anger, the number of nails hammered daily gradually dwindled down. He discovered it was easier to hold his temper than to drive those nails into the fence.

Finally the day came when the boy didn't lose his temper at all. He told his father about it and the father suggested that the boy now pull out one nail for each day that he was able to hold his temper. The days passed and the young boy was finally able to tell his father that all the nails were gone.

The father took his son by the hand and led him to the fence. He said, "You have done well, my son, but look at the holes in the fence. The fence will never be the same. When you say things in anger, they leave a scar just like this one. It won't matter how many times you say I'm sorry, the wound is still there[17]. 

Conclusion: Reconciliation is possible even after some serious lapses. In some cases the scars that remain are still serious.  This should bring us hope about the problems we already have as individuals, groups and nations, and caution about inflicting harm that might never completely heal.

---

[1] Tanya chapter 46

[2] I do not have a lot of knowledge about this complex issue of supersession, but it seems worth exploring

[3] Exodus 32:7-10

[4] Midrash Tanaaim 177, Pesikta Drav Kahana 16:128

[5] Midrash Shemot Rabba 42

[6] Midrash Tanchuma 22f

[7] Rashi

[8] Seder Eliyahu Rabba 4

[9] Rabbi Avraham the son of Maimonides, cited in Torah Shlaima vol 21, p.103

[10] Jeremiah 7:16

[11] This is based on my understanding of the concept of Tzimtzum – divine “contraction” in Chabad Chasidic teaching, God is compared to a father who wishes to play with his young son, so he takes on a playful persona and plays with the child. While the parent is present with the child in and in his role, this is very different to the way the father is essentially

[12] This text was written over 800 years ago in a particular social context, family dynamics have fortunately moved on from then

[13] Maimonides, Yad Hachazakah, Laws of De'os – 2:3, translation from http://www.torah.org/learning/mlife/ch2law3c.html

[14] Bchor Shor

[15] Midrash Tanchuma Teruma 8

[16] Rashi to Exodus 32:34, Talmud Sanhedrin 102a

[17] http://www.inspirational-short-stories.com/bad-temper.html