Embrace the pain

Embrace the pain

I felt quite uncomfortable as I observed a five-year-old girl erupt in frustration and rage when he was rejected by his peers as he tried to join them in an activity. At times, in the quest for scarce means of sustenance, status or companionship, there is plenty of pain to go around. 

One strategy is to escape into fantasy. In my late teens, as a somewhat insecure young man, I was chosen to be a ‘lieutenant general’ in a summer camp ’colour war’ activity.  As part of this role, I was carried on someone’s shoulders dressed in a camouflage army uniform. At the time I thought I looked glorious and once told a friend that I liked “that [inflated] Zalman” better than the real one.

That memory came to me while studying this week’s Torah reading about Pharaoh dreaming of standing on the water of the Nile River[i].  Pharoah dreamed of cows and grain, hinting at catastrophic famine for his nation and people in the region. But first, Pharaoh noticed his own position in the dream: ְbehold he was standing on the Nile River, like a god walking on water. His dream reflected the fact that he made himself into a god who controlled the Nile[ii]. “My Nile is my own; I made it myself[iii]”. While this delusion served Pharaoh’s political interests[iv], it might have also served an emotional need to overcompensate for any insecurities.

This blog post is an argument for not running away from pain, before or after it occurs. In the Torah reading, the Pharoah’s nightmare-induced funk was relieved when a prisoner with a talent for dream interpretation, Joseph, was brought before the king. Joseph had been imprisoned for two years (in the final phase of his jail time), yet it felt like a few days for him. This was because “afflictions are treasured by the righteous”, and these two years [of imprisonment] were [for Joseph] like two days[v]. He saw the problem as something to accept rather than resist.

Joseph’s father was not so accepting of the troubles in his life. He craved tranquility as he ‘settled’ in the land of Canaan[vi]. Not long after Jacob had ’settled’, a terrible event occurred. His favourite son Joseph disappeared. Joseph’s own brothers sold him into slavery then misled their father about what happened. While the loss of a son is a terrible tragedy, Jewish tradition suggests that Jacob’s suffering was related to his seeking to be ‘settled into tranquility’ in his life on earth, rather leaving such aspirations for the afterlife in heaven. We are encouraged to feel like foreigners passing through this life, to expect and accept hardships in this foreign place rather than resisting the inevitable disappointments with false hopes of a trouble-free life[vii]. 

One challenging form of pain many people seek to avoid is the shame and guilt that arises from causing harm. For Joseph’s brothers, many years passed and still they failed to confront the cruel robbing of their young brother’s freedom until they found themselves the victims of false imprisonment. This predicament caused the penny to drop. The brothers reflected on what they did to Joseph and proclaimed; “but we are guilty about our brother, that we saw the distress of his soul, when he pleaded with us but we did not listen”[viii].

Joseph’s brothers felt a mixture of shame and guilt about their sin. Yet, the eldest brother Reuben chose not to ease his brothers’ discomfort; instead, he seemed to rub it in. “Did I not tell you, do not sin with the boy, but you did not listen, and also his blood is now demanded of us[ix]”. Reuben gave his brothers a master class in repentance. It is not enough to say ‘sorry’ as a response to being punished. He invited his brothers to make a deep personal commitment to now take responsibility for the choice they made to commit an injustice and sin against an innocent child all those years ago. He urged them to put aside any excuses, and own up to their choice[x].

The rejected five-year-old girl got a ‘sorry’ from the other girls. It did little to change how she felt. Sitting with the harm caused to, and by us is a slow and painful but useful path to healing.

---

[i] Genesis 41:1

[ii] R. Bchaye, on Gensis 41:1

[iii] Ezekiel 29:3

[iv] Chemdas Yamim manuscript in Torah Shlaima, p. 1530, tell us more about this. Pharoah was constantly ruminating about the matter of the Nile. He would say to himself, “if the Nile will not rise this year then there will be a great famine, or if he add a lot of water then it might ruin the crops and I told the Egyptians that I made the Nile and now I will be [considered] a liar to them”. He saw his dream in a way that was similar to his ruminations… In the end he recognised that his dream will require him to tell the people that he in in fact not God, and he admitted this to Joseph when he said that after God made all this known to you, he acknowledged that there is a God other than himself. 

[v] Midrash Habiur, a manuscript, cited in Torah Shleima, p. 1529, 8. The midrash is based on the fact that the verse states it was two years – days. If it was two “years”, why does it say “days”?

[vi] Midrash Rabba on Genesis 37:1

[vii] Rabbi Yitzchak Ben Aramaa, in Akedat Yitzchak, Genesis Shaar 30, p. 257

[viii] Genesis 42:21

[ix] Genesis 42:22

[x] Rabbi MM Schneerson, The Lubavitcher Rebbe in Likutei Sichot, Vol 16, Miketz

 

My “Jewish God”?

In 2012, the last time I wrote about this topic, I began with the following disclaimer: “This is a critical reflection on certain aspects of my tradition. It has been suggested to me that, in highlighting these elements, I am reinforcing a misconception of Judaism as overly harsh. A balanced study of Judaism and the Yom Kippur service will show concepts of God as both compassionate alongside themes of judgement”. This disclaimer is still relevant.

On Saturday 23rd September this year, I will have the solemn Jewish New Year Holy Day prayers echoing in my mind. Many of these will reflect the idea of God as a judge. God’s verdicts will determine ‘Who will live and who will die? Who at their pre-destined time and who before their time?’ (1). One week later, Jewish people observe the Day of Atonement, where the theme of God as judge comes up again, along with language referring to God as father and king. It leads me to consider what the traditional Jewish concept of God is (This is what my topic means, not that there is a God that belongs to Jews or a God who is Jewish somehow.)  

In our highly poetic Torah reading this week, we are told that “all of God’s ways are ’judgement’” (2). The Talmud takes this verse as a warning against daring to say that God is clement (e.g. one whose nature it is to let people get away with sins) or indulgent (3). This teaching is puzzling because God is praised in the Torah as forbearing of sin (4). An implausible resolution of this contradiction is that God is forgiving of one or two sins, but not with repeat offenders (5).

A far more compelling teaching encourages us to have faith and confidence in God’s forgiveness. God is described as “generously forgiving the instant one pleads for forgiveness…” (6). This teaching refers to the daily prayer that praises God for being abundant in forgiveness (7).  “It is characteristic of people, that if one injures another and asks his pardon which is granted, and then repeats the misdeed, it becomes more difficult to grant pardon again, and certainly a third and fourth time. But, by the standard of God, there is no difference between once and a thousand times. Pardon is a manifestation of [God’s] ...mercy. Divine [mercy is] not bounded and finite; they are infinite.” (8). .."For His mercies have not ended" (9).

Recently, I have been learning a little about assertiveness and management  from a wise woman, Michelle Brenner, and the impressive business coach Wade Ebrahimi. (10) (Yes, this is a plug.) A key lesson for me is about the importance of being clear in my communication as a “boss”. I don’t like the idea of being a “boss”. I would rather just be a colleague and still get everything magically done as I think it should. I am learning that I can continue to be collegial with those who report to me. However, I must also give them clear direction. I must differentiate between suggestions, requests and, if need be, orders. Similarly, God relates to humans in multiple ways - in mercy mode as well as holding us accountable. The former should not be taken to override the latter, particularly in a moment of decision making about whether or not to do the right thing (11).  

If I was seeking a neat resolution, I would end this discussion with the abundant forgiveness teaching above. One Jewish man I met the other day, thought of God as predominantly forgiving. That works for him. For me, I am caught between the different characterizations of God in both Torah and prayers.

I was struck by an anecdote that included an apparently tactless statement made to a grieving father mourning the death of his young son. The father was told that the death of young children is a Divine punishment of parents for the parents’ sins (12). The basis for this troubling idea is the verse “God saw and became angry, from the anger of his sons and daughters” (13). This is interpreted as parents provoking God, causing Him to punish the parents through their children (14). The modern reader can either howl in protest or respond with silence.

These teachings, somehow, sit side by side with parental concepts of God.  We read of God carrying the Jew like an eagle carries its young on its wings, (15) “nursing him with honey from bedrock” (16).

Despite the contradictions, I take some comfort from the fact that, whenever the Torah calls us to imitate God, there are always references to God as caring and compassionate, never cruel and harsh. “Just as G‑d is called merciful, so too, you must be merciful. Just as G‑d is called kind, so too, you must be kind...” (17). Similarly, we are taught:  "Just as God clothes the naked, ... so too, you must clothe the naked. Just as God visits the sick, ... so too, you must visit the sick. Just as God comforts mourners, ... so too, you must comfort mourners" (18).

I end, as I began, without a clear Jewish concept of God. I don't speak for all Jews, but I think it is fair to say that it is not a simple question to answer for those of us who seek guidance from traditional texts. This time of the year, with the days of judgement, repentance and atonement, is a time for re-engagement between the Jew and his God. I suggest that the repeated references, in our liturgy, to God as both father and king, is a useful indication of a complex Jewish understanding of God.  

1.     Reflection on who will live and who will die is prominent in the Unesaneh Tokef prayer, which is a key part of the Rosh Hashanah prayers.

2.     Deuteronomy 32:4: Surprisingly, Ramban suggests that Mishpat here relates to mercy.

3. Talmud Bava Kama 3a: The context of this teaching is a story about a righteous man who dug wells for the community, whose daughter fell into a well but was saved from drowning in the merit of her father’s good deeds. Yet, her brother died of thirst, despite his father’s merit in supplying people with drinking water, because God is very demanding of the righteous and even small sins can result in harsh punishment.
4. Exodus 34:7
5. Torah Temima on Deuteronomy 32:4
6. Tanya, Igeret Hateshuva 11
7. The Amida, חנון המרבה לסלוח
8. Tanya, Ibid
9. Lamentations 3:22
10. http://www.triserv.com.au/
11. Torah Temima
12. Talmud Kesubot 8b
13. Deuteronomy 32:19
14. Rashi on Talmud Kesubot 8b, also in Maharsha commentary
15. Deuteronomy 32:11
16. Deuteronomy 32:13
17. Sifrei Parshat Eikev., cited in Maimonides’ Sefer Hamitzvot, Mitzvah 8, based on Deuteronomy. 28:9, 11:22, and 13:5
18. Talmud, Sotah 14a

A God who hides: Vayelech and Yom Kippur

“Don’t hide from me” pleads Hasidic singer Avraham Fried. The idea of God hiding has been used in response to the question “Where was God during the Holocaust?” and to explain the persecution of “God’s treasured people”. I am curious about how a people with a terrible history of suffering interprets the symbolism of a God with a “hidden face”.

In our Torah reading this week (Vayelech), we encounter the idea of God hiding as punishment for a disloyal people. “My fury will rage against them on that day, and I will abandon them and hide My face from them, and they will be consumed, and many evils and troubles will befall them, and they will say on that day, 'Is it not because our God is no longer among us, that these evils have befallen us? And I will hide, [yes] I will hide My face on that day, because of all the evil they have committed, when they turned to other gods”.1

One Jewish response to “God hiding” that resonates for me is deep sadness. “Rabbi Johanan, when he came to the [following] verse, wept: And it shall come to pass, when many evils and troubles are come upon them. A slave whose Master brings many evils and troubles upon him, is there any remedy for him?!”2  Some have argued that God didn’t cause the Holocaust, or the terrible violence of our own time, that man instead is to blame. I agree that humans must certainly be held to account, but letting God off the hook in this way does not work for me. My orientation to God is as the source of sustenance and protection. God must have been present at Auschwitz and could thus arguably appear to be complicit in the evil deeds of the Nazis. The response to suffering I find most useful is in the statement that “it is not in our hands to grasp [the reasons for] the tranquillity of the wicked nor the ordeals of the righteous”.3

One approach to the verse about the slave seems to be focused on making sense of the words, but also sheds some light on the reality they describe. “What is the meaning of ‘evils and troubles’? — Rab said: Evils which become antagonists to each other, as for instance the [bites of] a wasp and a scorpion”. This is a classic catch 22: the treatment of one kind of bite is to wash it with cold water and that bite is made worse by hot water, while the reverse is true with the other.4 A variation of this bind is seen when “Jews in exile would be mistreated by a non-Jewish person. If the Jew complained it increased the hatred of the perpetrator and would be spread to others, but if he is silent then the perpetrator will become accustomed to doing this in this way”.5  Australian Muslims, like American Blacks, sometimes find themselves in a similar bind. If they complain they are the “Angry Muslim”, like the “Angry Black Man”; if they are silent the problems persist.

The attraction of the idea of God hiding, in some interpretations, is that one can continue to believe in benign divine providence and engagement with the Jews despite intensely cruel oppression. One such approach, implausible to me, is that God’s hiding his face is “in a way of affection” like a father of a misbehaving child who instructs the child’s teacher to beat him but cannot bear to look himself, and turns away, because of his feeling for the child.6  This anthropomorphism comforts persecuted believers by telling them that although they may feel abandoned by God, God still cares. In fact He cares so much that it is as if he is looking away because he cannot bear to witness their pain. 

One of the themes of Christian antisemitism was the idea that God had rejected the Jews. Although God hiding his face from the Jews could be understood as supporting that idea, commentators argue that the opposite is true: “it is not as they [the Jews] think, that I [God] am not among them [which explains their suffering] but indeed in every place that they will be, my presence will be found there but I will hide my face from helping them”.7  Other commentators go as far as condemning the Jews for their belief that God had abandoned them, declaring that this lack of faith in God’s continuing providence is the very sin that leads to God redoubling his determination to hide from them.8

Sitting in the comfort of 21^st Century Australia it is hard to imagine the hell experienced by our people in other times and places, or that being endured by members of many other nations and faiths today.  As I prepare for Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement, for me also a day for reconciliation with God, I wonder about this punitive cruel God. One way of explaining the Kol Nidrei prayer, which calls for the absolving of vows, is that God Himself is asking to be absolved from the system of rewards, punishments and “hiding” that he promised in the Torah.  Yes, there needs to be accountability by the Jews for compliance with God's laws but punishment is not the only option available to God for holding us to account. The approach of restorative justice uses shame and awareness of the harm itself as more potent alternatives to punishment.9

Perhaps God hides because of an estrangement between humans and God, and our failure to live up to the ideals and principles that God calls us to live by. I am up for this kind of reconciliation.

1.       Deuteronomy  31:17-18

2.       Talmud Chagiga 5a

3.       Pirkey Avot, (Ethics of the fathers)  4:11

4.       Rashi

5.       Bchor Shor,  Meam Loez, p. 1247, Vagshal edition

6.       Bchor Shor, Chizkuni, Daat Zekainim Mbaalei Hatosafot,

7.       Seforno

8.       R.A Hacohen, cited in Meam Loez, p. 1272, Vagshal editiontheme is discussed in Meam Loez, p. 1248, Vagshal edition

9.       This theme is discussed in Meam Loez, p. 1248, Vagshal edition

Enemies

Tyrant Turned to Toy  by Divine Power

When I first started out as a Rabbi, I did a lesson for young adults in which I talked about the greatness of God expressed in punishment of the wicked. A participant challenged me; why would we aspire to that instead of just wishing for peace for all. Good point, I thought.


Since then, I have been moved by the way some Christians seek to love their enemies. I see that idea as radical, visionary and subversive; not accepting the dynamic of conflict and hate but rather insisting on a spiritual approach grounded in love. This is not a comparison between Judaism and Christianity or their histories, I am well aware of the blood shed by Christian crusaders. I also think the fact that Jews were powerless for 2000 years is a factor. This is an honest exploration of my own tradition and familiar stories to discover ideas about the response to enemies I had not noticed before. I have discovered some legalistic elements, but most exciting was a radical and subversive aspect to what could seem to be callous harshness.

Playing with enemies?!

According to one traditional translation[1], we have a seemingly scary idea about enemies. God tells Moses that in the future, “you will tell into the ears of your son and your son's son how I played with the Egyptians[2]”. Putting aside other translations that reject the meaning of “played with” instead rendering the Hebrew word הִתְעַלַּלְתִּי, as “my actions[3]”, can it be right that God has fun punishing people?! A sloppy translation of another verse would seem to support this idea, “just as the Lord rejoiced over you to do good for you and to increase you, so will the Lord rejoice over you to annihilate you and to destroy you[4]”.  The Talmud argues convincingly that the meaning here is not that God will rejoice over annihilation but rather will cause others to rejoice[5] in the destruction of the Jews. The Talmud categorically states that God does not rejoice in the downfall of the wicked[6].

Non-Fun-Play

The meaning of God’s play with the Egyptian tyrants is about subversion of power rather than fun. The verse about Kings and Nation, “He Who dwells in Heaven laughs; the Lord mocks them[7]”, is explained as “a metaphor for mockery about something that is not considered anything[8]”. The tyrants with their exaggerated self-importance and trappings of power can seem invincible. Yet, the Jew, threatened, beaten, ridiculed and humiliated can take comfort that the Pharaoh in his/her own day may yet prove to be a plaything of God, like Saddam or Muammar in our recent times.

Funny Honda Boss

Here is a personal anecdote that is an illustration of the subversive power of humour.
As a Yeshiva student, I was sitting in the library late one night with a book while some of my fellow student has broken the lock to the kitchen and were frying shnitzels when they should have been in bed. The head of the Yeshiva, a bit of an absent-minded professor type, came screaming up the street in his orange Honda, vrrroommmrrmrmm.  He throws the door open to the building and screams at the top of his lungs, “Ahh Chutzpehhhhh!” All the guilty young scholars are by now safely in their beds, their lights out, while the Shnitzels continue to fry as if being cooked by ghosts. The authority figure- my Yeshiva head, runs up and down the stairs through the building like a ball in one of those old pinball machines. He finds no one, until he discovers me in the library. He gave me what sounded like a very harsh long angry lecture about how I was destroying the whole school. I put on a very sad puppy-dog face, nodded my head and was not in the least bit offended by the whole comic spectacle.

Does punishment upset God?

The mystics state that when we talk of divine emotions, these are not to be understood in human terms[9] at all and are essentially metaphoric. In this vain, one commentator understands the verse relating to rejoicing about the destruction of the Jewish people as being a message that one should not  “think that God will be harmed, or will mourn” if he must punish us[10]. This is linked to the verse “If you are righteous, what do you give Him? Or what does He take from your hand?[11]”

Other sources suggest that God does care about the suffering of the wicked. In introducing the story of the splitting of the red sea[12], in which the Israelites were saved while the Egyptians perished, the word Vayehi  וַיְהִי (literally “and it was”, but linked to vai, or oy vay) is used which traditionally is used in situations of pain and sadness. This is attributed at least in part to the death of the Egyptians[13]. We are told that the angels wanted to sing praises to God for the miracles at the red sea. God exclaims, “the work of my hands are drowning in the sea and you will sing praises?![14]” Even, this is not simple, in another version of the same story God objects because he wants  the angels to wait until after the Israelites sing of their own salvation before the angels get their turn[15], but does not object to the singing itself at a time of great human suffering.  Yet, the view is better known among Jews is not the one in which God is concerned with the sequence of the praises, but his rejection of the content of the angels praise because of his care about the destruction of the wicked. This view is also reflected in at least one meaning behind the ritual of pouring out drops of wine at the Passover Seder in sympathy for the suffering of the Egyptians[16].

Other less pleasant approaches – all out war and legalism

It might make sense to stop while I am ahead, yet I think it would not be completely honest. Jewish responses to enemies also include less attractive options such as fighting them directly, and acting cleverly or even legalistically. I have little I can say about the take-no prisoners-wars against Amalek[17] and Canaan except that they challenge me.

Another approach is also difficult. The “clever”/legalistic option which is seen in the Jews either borrowing (or asking[18]) their Egyptian neighbours for “silver and gold objects and garments[19]”, just before they left Egypt and never returned. There is a strong attempt to make this technically Kosher. After the Jews left Egypt, Moses having told Pharaoh that they were going to the desert for three days[20], the Jews suddenly turn back toward Egypt[21] . This was because God “did not want the Jews to be liars, as you had said we will go for three days and will return and borrowed vessels…therefore you should turn around to stand on your faithfulness…” Perhaps conveniently, Pharaoh goes out to war against them and does not allow them to return so it will be his fault that they cannot go back or return what they borrowed [22]. Oh well.

Yet, there is a broader context here. In the Talmud, this act is justified as constituting a round about way of receiving the unpaid wages for the Jewish slaves[23]. There is surely a difference between being legalistic when one is in the right or when is in the wrong. The message for me in this is that there are times when things get messy, where broadly speaking one is morally entitled to fight, even in those situations it is important to dot the i’s and cross the t’s. I don’t think it is about legitimising legal fictions and legalistic arguments in cases where the broad moral balance is against the action one is taking.    

Conclusion

There is more to the sources than first meets the eye. While playing games with people is generally wrong, when God does it to a tyrant there could be a message of hope in it. Despite Judaism’s ultimate aspiration for universal peace, it is has a range of ideas about managing conflict until that time. One of these is the deep sadness of the loss of every human life, even if he is a soldier in the army of a wicked oppressor. Of course, using legalistic arguments to defend the indefensible is inexcusable, yet legalistic considerations have their place in the pursuit of justice, even the case of an unforgivable crime such as the slavery in Egypt. The letter of the law must be considered, even if one is in the clear according to its spirit. Some of this is uncomfortable for me, other aspects are inspiring, but this is what I have been able to find for now.  

---

[1] Rashi, Ramban, Chizkuni, translate הִתְעַלַּלְתִּי as meaning either played with or mockery, relating to a similar word to in Isaiah 3:4, the same understanding of the word is supported by MaHari Kra, Metzudat Tzion, and Metzudat David

[2] Exodus 10:2

[3] Targum Unkelus, Targum Yonatan Ben Uziel. Another alternative relating to pruning a vineyard is found in a manuscript of Lekach Tov, cited in Torah Shlaima parshat Bo, p3-4

[4] Deuteronomy 28:63

[5] Talmud Sanhedrin 39b, the spelling of the word relating to rejoice over the destruction  is spelled  יָשִׂישׂ  which means will cause others to rejoice, if it mean that God Himself would rejoice the spelling would have been with ו a instead of a י

[6] ibid

[7] Psalms 2:4

[8] Meiri commentary on the Psalms

[9] Tana Dbei Eliyahu

[10] Ibn Ezra commentary on Deuteronomy 28:63, this is so out of step with the Talmud Sanhedrin that Avi Ezer states that Ibn Ezra must have overlooked it

[11] Job 35:7

[12] Exodus 13:17

[13] Ohr Hachayim

[14] Talmud Megila 10b, and Sanhedrin 39b

[15] Shemot Rabba 23:8

[16] Rabbi Yitzchok Abarbanel in his Passover commentary Zevach Pesach, cited on http://www.askmoses.com/en/article/169,2202336/Why-do-we-pour-wine-out-of-the-cup-at-the-Seder.html

[17] Exodus 17, is where it first appears 

[18] The Hebrew word is וְשָׁאֲלָה which although it can mean borrow, it can also mean ask for an outright gift which is how it is understood by Rabbenu Bachaya and Rashbam, cited in Leibovitz, N, (1996) New Studies in Shemot, The Joint Authority for Jewish Zionist Education, Jerusalem, p.188

[19] Exodus

[20] Exodus 3:18

[21] Exodus 14:2-4

[22] Bchor Shor, Mosad Rav Kook edition, 2000, Jerusalem p.120

[23] Talmud Sanhedrin 91a

Degradation & Grime, Abundance & “Good Breeding”

How do we respond when confronted with the impact of degradation on people? Political correctness seems to demand that because people are of a minority we must never speak about their faults, which can't be right. On the other hand those of us who are privileged can be judgmental and patronizing.

I reflect on my reaction to a group of Indigenous people I saw in Todd Mall, in the center of Alice Springs (Australia), the first time I met Indigenous people outside a “Westernized” situation. Their eyes were blank, they seemed completely zoned out, their clothes dirty and shabby, they appeared to be wandering around aimlessly. I could not help looking down at these degraded people. I did not think, 'there but for the grace of God go I'.

I was reminded of this experience recently while reading Mark Twain's very disparaging, even racist comments about the “Goshoot Indians"ⁱ. I now think I should have thought about the effects of privilege and degradation before I judged these people who I learned later were probably drunk.

3 ways of God relating to us, Abundance, Punishment,
and Covenant

This week, Jews read about two sets of circumstances in which God places the “children of Israel”. These involve either prosperity and peace or frightening calamities, and are primarily a lesson about reward and punishment and our relationship with God (this is reflected in the drawing of three ways of being with God, grace, retribution and unconditional covenant). On another level, the dramatic effects of these conditions on the moral, social, psychological and communal lives of the people are worth exploring.

Privilege and Plenty on the Macro level

If the Jews will “walk in my statutes and keep my commandments ⁱⁱ” great reward will follow. We are promised “rain in its time”ⁱⁱⁱ. These rains will result in an abundance of produce, and according to commentaries, also “clean and good air”, and will be good for the “wells and rivers and cause good health for bodies and fruits…people will not fall ill…^iv”.

Peace – Outer and Inner

We are also promised the blessing of peace, “Peace is equal to everything!”^v. “You will dwell securely in your land. I will give peace in the land, you will sleep and not be afraid”^vi.

Some see peace on an international level. “it is possible that it means peace in the world in general …he assures them that there will be peace in the entire world…the desire of God is for this, which is reflected in the 70 oxen offered as sacrifices on the festival corresponding to the 70 nations of the world…^vii

There is a strong trend among commentaries to interpret peace in social and psychological terms. “There will be peace between you; a man will not fight with his brother”^viii. Putting it another way, “God will plant peace and friendship in your hearts. As a result of the great harvests, people will not need to wander looking for work, instead they will feel deeply rooted in the land and automatically there will be no crime^ix.

The Torah verse “and a sword will not pass in your land^x” is interpreted to mean that “People will feel so secure that they will not be accustomed to use swords ^xi”. Or that the sense of security will result in the elimination of the ancient equivalent of airport security. There was a custom that no man was allowed to enter a land in time of war with their weapons, instead these would be confiscated and given to the guard and the city ruler, but during times of peace they will not go out to remove the swords “because each man will trust in his brother and believe (in each other)^xii”.

In this scenario, we live dignified, happy, peaceful, admirable lives, made far easier by privilege. I acknowledge that being happy if one is privileged is not effortless, too many people have everything and are still miserable. Still, for those of us who have so much, we must never think ourselves superior to those tested in the most difficult circumstances.

Calamity and its social and personal impact

“If will not listen and not do all these commandments”^xiii, we are warned that this will result in Illness, failed crops, drought, wild animals, desolate roads, pestilence, military defeat, destruction of cities and land, and exile.

On an internal level we are warned that the illness is such that it makes the eyes fail and the soul languish ^xiv, and the patient is “depressed and worried”^xv.

Famine will not only mean that many people will go without food, but that even if you get some food, “You will eat but not be satisfied ^xvi”. The famine will drive people to cannibalism, “you will eat the flesh of your sons and the flesh of your daughters you will eat”^xvii. “The image of God will be removed from their faces, and replaced with a face of fury, when their enemies see these “faces of fury” they will be filled with cruelty ^xviii”. You will run away, but there will be no one chasing you^xix. God will bring a weakness in their hearts, they will be pursued by the sound of a driven leaf, and they will flee as if from a sword ^xx. “Death will kill them from within^xxi”.

Turning on each other

Communally, things will go bad. “Even as exiles in the lands of their enemies they will be apart from each other, instead of of following the (usual) way of exiles to comfort one another...each seeks to push his friend with strong arm tactics, to knock him down from his (meager) situation. Like reeds that are hit twice, once by the wind, then as they knock each other...it is like honey, sweet in his mouth if he can find an opportunity to speak badly about his fellow”^xxii. “Enemies will arise from among your nation, because they are familiar with you they know where to search for your hidden (goods), and they are worse them enemies from (other) nations…they will steal your flesh and skin”^xxiii.

Importance of Choice

Heather Laughton is an impressive Indigenous Australian woman from Alice Springs. She believes one very important lesson young people in her community need to learn is that they have a choice about how they respond to their situation. One of the most passionate arguments in defence of people whose “place lead them to sin” combines this with the insistence that he has no excuse for his sins because he should have chosen to do what is right out of fear of God^xxiv. The exercise of this kind of choice by people in the worst situations and hardship is profoundly inspiring.

Unconditional Love

Perhaps one source of strength for people in hard times is stated at the lowest point of our reading. “And even when they will be in the lands of their enemies, I will not despise them, not will I abhor them to destroy them utterly, to break my covenant with them, because I am YkVk^xxv their God. I will remember the covenant…^xxvi This is unconditional love and an unbreakable bond.

The prophet Jeremiah said four things ^xxvii (about God’s relationship with the Jews), disgust, abhorrence, abandonment and forgetfulness. “Have you become disgusted with Judea, if with Zion your soul (finds) abhorrent ^xxviii” but he was answered by Moses “I will not despise them, not will I abhor them to destroy them utterly”, He also said “why forever will you forget us, abandon us for length of days ^xxix”, in this he was answered by Isaiah who brought God's message that “also these should be forgotten, but I will not forget you”^xxx.

Conclusion

For me living in great abundance in comparison with most of the earth's inhabitants, I must be grateful for what I have and recognize that ever I achieve has been done with profound advantages. When I look at those who subsist on crumbs and live with powerlessness, I must stand in awe of those who choose to live with dignity and standards, and avoid judgement of others for whom civility itself can become hard to preserve and crime hard to resist. For there, but for the grace of God, go I. Perhaps ^xxxi. 

Notes 

i Twain, Mark, in “Roughing it” chapter 19, p127-129. The name “Go-Shoot Indians” suggests that it might be a satire, although it might just be an ironic renaming of the “Gosiutes”. Regardless of his various intentions, what he writes is a view held by some about various groups living in poverty and diminished circumstances and struggling with social problems). Among other things he states “It was along in this wild country somewhere, and far from any habitation of white men, except the stage stations, that we came across the wretchedest type of mankind I have ever seen, up to this writing. I refer to the Goshoot Indians....inferior to all races of savages on our continent... small, lean, "scrawny" creatures; in complexion a dull black like the ordinary American Negro; their faces and hands bearing dirt which they had been hoarding and accumulating for months, years, and even generations, according to the age of the proprietor; a silent, sneaking, treacherous looking race; taking note of everything, covertly, like all the other "Noble Red Men" that we (do not) read about, and betraying no sign in their countenances; indolent, everlastingly patient and tireless, like all other Indians; prideless beggars--for if the beggar instinct were left out of an Indian he would not "go," any more than a clock without a pendulum; ...savages who, when asked if they have the common Indian belief in a Great Spirit show a something which almost amounts to emotion, thinking whiskey is referred to...It was curious to see how quickly the paint and tinsel fell away from him and left him treacherous, filthy and repulsive”. For more on this, see a general scholarly discussion at http://homepage.mac.com/jim_sullivan/writings/goshoots.html or a more focused critique at http://tselfoninternets.blogspot.com/2009/02/mark-twain-and-holmbergs-mistake.html,

ii Leviticus 26:3

iii Leviticus 26:4, Rashi points out that in addition to the agricultural benefits of the rain, it will also not even inconvenience people because it will fall on Friday nights when people are not usually outdoors

iv Ramban

v Rashi on Leviticus 26:6

vi Leviticus 26:5-6

vii Ohr Hachayim, I wondered how he reconciles his wonderful interpretation with the following verse “and you will pursue your enemies and they will fall before you by the sword” (Leviticus 26:7). He states in his commentary to the next verse, “what He assures (us) is that from the other nations not will do evil or destroy but not there will not be (harm and destruction) from Israel to (the) nations…you will pursue them and destroy them and in spite of this you will sit securely and in peace…they are called enemies, not because they come to lay siege to the holy city (of Jerusalem) because if this was the case, there is no security and there is no peace for its inhabitants, rather it calls them “enemies” because they are the enemies of God, the wicked of the nations, therefore they are called the enemies of God and are therefore also our enemies…” I will not attempt to explain this.

viii Ramban, and Ibn Ezra, Ramban goes on to state that animals will not miscarry or be barren

ix Hoffman, R. David Zwi, quoted in Nachshoni, Y, Studies in the Weekly Parsha Artscroll Publications, Jerusalem, p.873. Even the International understanding of peace of the Ohr Hachayim, has a psychological element as he states “when there are wars (anywhere) in the world, even those in living securely will tremble for the sounds of war .

x Leviticus 26:6

xi Haemek Davar

xii Pirush Yonatan, in the name of “my older brother, the Aluf, my master and teacher, Rabbi Naftali”.

xiii Leviticus 26:14-43

xiv Leviticus 26:16

xv Radak

xvi Leviticus 26:26

xvii Levticus 26:29

xviii “Shach” ( I don’t think it is the sifsei Chachomim as I was unable to find it), quoted in Greenbaum, N, Otzar Mefarshei Hapshat al Hatorah on Leviticus 26:17

xix Leviticus 26:17, see a wonderful piece on modern applications of this idea by Rabbi Zalman Posner,

http://www.chabad.org/parshah/article_cdo/aid/477831/jewish/The-Tremulous-Heart.htm

xx Leviticus 26:36

xxi Sifsei Chachomim on 26:17

xxii Klei Yakar on Leviticus 26:36

xxiii Yalkut Bechukotai 673

xxiv Tanya 30, Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liady

xxv Chasidic custom is to refer to the Tetgramaton as Yud Kay Vav Kay.

xxvi Leviticus 26:44-45

xxvii Eicha Rabba 5:20

xxviii Jeremia 14:19

xxix Lamentations 5:20

xxx Isaiah 49:15

xxxi I learned the idea of adding the word perhaps at the end of a thought from my colleague Fuzz Kitto