Receiving Charity is Divine - Terumah

Nine year old Bert Facey was a slave in 1904-5. He desperately wanted to escape the house of the stranger who had him working from morning to night, but could not. He was brutally beaten. His family’s terrible poverty deprived young Bert of schooling, and the love of family through his childhood and adolescence (1). He grew up resilient and stoic and is the author of the classic and inspiring book, “A Fortunate Life”. Despite his heroic life, it is a shame, he never received charity. My argument in this blog is that the acceptance of needed charity is a beautiful thing. 

Image by Sachin Modgekar
Reproduced under 
Creative Commons License

The Jewish mystic the Baal Shem Tov taught that taking charity is a sacred act. Like other solemn activities such as a wedding or prayer, it ought to be done with the right intention. In this case, it should be accepted with the intention of it being “for the sake of heaven”. [Thus] “the one who receives should not accept charity for superfluous items ,... but instead to take what is needed to sustain oneself and one’s family as is appropriate and right [for them]” (2).

Let me pause here with a disclaimer. My intention in citing this teaching is not to endorse the implication that the poor should never have any luxuries. I interpret the second half of the statement that sets an aspirational standard of “appropriateness and right” as subjective, to be determined by the recipient rather than society. It is wrong for members of the community to police the poor to ensure they use what is given to them for necessities. (The virtues of not taking what is not needed is beyond the scope of this blog (3)).  Sometimes there are factors that others are simply unaware of (4) and so we must give people the benefit of the doubt (5). 

Putting this aside, the point I want to emphasise is the way the Baal Shem Tov turns the focus away from the experience of the giver to consider the dignity of, and the spiritual significance of the act for the recipient. 

Receiving charity is linked to what the mystics would regard as the holiest spiritual processes: the repair or “unification” of God’s name. Unification is a key underlying purpose of many of the rituals of Judaism. God’s name is split apart by human evil. Virtuous deeds reunite the four letters of God’s name. The exalted process is activated by the receipt of charity. The letter Yud י is shaped like a coin. The letters Hey ה (the 5th letter of the alphabet, linked to the number five) represent the hands - with their five fingers - of both the giver and recipient, and the letter Vav ו represents the giver’s arm (6).

One scholar tried to restrict the designation of the divine character of receiving charity to apply only to poor scholars who receive without asking for help. This restriction is dismissed (7). Regardless of how it happens, the act of receiving charity is considered a greater gift to the giver than what the giver of charity provides to the recipient” (8). 

I love these teachings. On the one hand, I admire people like Facey, who despite all his troubles named his book “AFortunate Life” as an expression of incredible positivity and gratitude. However, we need to combine an emphasis on the virtue of resilience and self-sufficiency with the virtue of asking and accepting help when we truly need it. Like many others, I have tried both paths. Being tough and independent when I needed help, and later learning the value of receiving support. I am a better man for learning to do the latter, and I pay forward the support given to me to others who benefit from my strengthened self.  

Notes

(1) Facey, A.B. A Fortunate Life. 

(2) The Baal Shem Tov- in Tshuas Chein, Teruma, cited in the Baal Shem Tov on the Torah

(3) Numerous sources in the Talmud and Jewish law, Pesachim 112b, רמב"ם (משנה תורה, הלכות מתנות עניים פרק י הלכה יח

(4) Thank you too PS on the Facebook discussion for highlighting this. 

(5) Pirkei Avot 2:5

(6) The Arizal, cited in Chido on Teruma, p. 255, 1

(7) Chido, ibid. 

(8) Midrash Rabba Ruth 5:9

 

“Jewish Soul”, Is it a software thing? Yitro

The idea of the Jews being a “chosen people” (1) can motivate us in worshiping God (2) and service to humanity. I don’t think of it as me being better, or more worthy than virtuous people I know and admire who are not Jewish. However, there is a risk that the idea of being ‘chosen’ - if it is taken to mean that there is an intrinsic difference to the Jewish soul - can make some Jews feel less connected to, or to devalue their non-Jewish neighbours (3).

How we choose to understand ethnic identity can be compared either to computer software - that is installed and added on but not essential, or to hardware, in that we regard it as intrinsic to who we are (4). If it is software, the brotherhood of mankind is more plausible than if it is hardware. Jewish scholarship on this question is mixed and complex.  

Image by Steven Depolo, used under 
Creative Commons Licence 3.0
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0

On the hardware side of the argument is the idea of a unique Jewish soul (5) which, according to a mystical perspective, is “a part of God” (6). However, this needs to be taken in the context of the belief that God is present in everything in existence. Even rocks, according to the mystics, contain a “divine spark” (7), although these “sparks” are deemed to differ between inanimate objects and different peoples (8). 

We should not overstate the concept of the “Godly soul” because, according to its chief proponent, it is quite marginal to the lived experience of the Jew. The day-to-day life of the Jew is an experience of an “animal soul” rather than a Godly one. It is this animal soul that is the true everyday identity of the Jewish person (9). The Godly soul is something “that has been placed within him” (10) but is not him or her (11). It seems more like an obscure “plug in”, than a core element.

On the other side of the argument stands Maimonides (12). Repeatedly, he emphasises that it is an individual’s knowledge and motivations that are key to one’s spiritual standing. “Every person can be righteous like Moses” (13). “Every single person from all inhabitants of the world whose spirit guides him and whose intellect leads him to understand, to separate himself and to stand before God...to walk straight as God created him...he is sanctified [with the greatest holiness],“Holy of Holies”...” (14). 

A Chasidic master put it: “Holiness is not found in the human being in essence unless he sanctifies himself. According to his preparation for holiness, so it comes upon him from on High. A person does not acquire holiness while inside his mother. He is not holy from the womb, but has to labor from the very day he comes into the air of the world” (15). Indeed, whatever faults one might attribute to a non-Jewish idol worshipper’s soul would also describe our Jewish ancestors when we worshipped idols in Egypt, “with no difference!” (16). Clearly holiness is determined by behaviour.

Regardless of hardware or software, the idea of chosenness is linked to service (17). One form of this service is the role of the Jews in bringing an understanding of monotheism to all humans and uniting them in worship (18). This emphasises the importance of humanity as a whole, and sees the role of the Jewish people to benefit mankind rather than one of self-centeredness. This is because “all humans are cherished by God, and the Righteous of the Nations are precious to God without a doubt” (19). Furthermore Jews are urged to approach this concept with humility (20). 

I will end with a quote from one of the Rabbis, who, despite being aligned with the inherent differences approach, still strongly embraced love of all humanity. He wrote:

“The highest state of love of creatures should be allotted to the love of mankind, and it must extend to all of mankind, despite all variations of religions, opinions, and faiths, and despite all distinctions of race and climate. It is right to get to the bottom of the views of different peoples and groups, to learn, as much as possible, their characters and qualities, in order to know how to base love of humanity on foundations that approach action. 

For only upon a soul rich in love for creatures and love of man can the love of the nation raise itself up in its full nobility and spiritual and natural greatness. The narrowness that causes one to see whatever is outside the border of the special nation, even outside the border of [the people of] Israel, as ugly and defiled, is a terrible darkness that brings general destruction upon all [efforts at] building of spiritual good, for the light of which every refined soul hopes" (21).

 

Perhaps hardware or software does not matter quite as much as it would seem, as long as we can embrace all of humanity. 

 

Notes: 

I acknowledge Rabbi Hanan Balk and his essay referenced in the notes below as the basis of much of what I have written above. 

1. Exodus 19:5-6, Isaia 41:8-10
2. Targum Yonasan Ben Uziel to Exodus 19:6
3. Ohr Hachayim commentary to Exodus 22:20
4. Murray, D. (2019) The Madness of Crowds, Gender, Race and Identity, Bloomsbury
5. Zohar, Genesis 170, & 171, Kuzari, 1:41-43, in In Balk H., (2013) The Soul of a Jew and the Soul of a Non-Jew, p. 49, 
6. An Inconvenient Truth and the Search for an Alternative in Hakira, vol 13, http://www.hakirah.org/Vol%2016%20Balk.pdf 
7. Eitz  Chayim gate 5:2, Tanya chapter 1 and 2 by R. Shneur Zalman of Liady (1745–1815), and Nefesh ha-Ḥayyim sha’ar 1, ch. 4, by R. Ḥayyim of Volozhin (1749–1821)
8. Tanya, Shaar Hayichud V’Haemuna, chapter 1
9. cited in the discussion between the Lubavitcher Rebbe and Hilel students, cited in Balk, H.,  p.51 
10. With the exception of the extremely rare super saint or tzadik as defined in Tanya chapter 1
11. The text of the morning prayer Elokai Neshama, my God, the soul that you placed within me...
12. Tanya chapter, 29
13. Balk, H., (2013) ibid, see also his strong approach to the interpretation of the coerced divorce
14. Maimonides, Yad Hachazakah, Laws of Repentance 5:2
15. Maimonides, Yad Hachazakah, Laws of Sabbatical and Jubilee Years, 13:13
16. R. Simḥa Bunim of Przysukha, Kol Simḥa, Parshat Miketz, p. 47 and Mesharatav Eish Lohet, p. 228, quoted in Noam Siaḥ, p. 263. In Balk, p. 47
17. Ohr Hachayim commentary to Exodus 22:20, נשמות ישראל עצמם היו טבועות בקליפה ואם כן יהיה גר זה כאחד מכם באין הבדל
18. Targum Yonasan Ben Uziel 
19. Seforno on Exodus 19:5-6  
20. Seforno ibid
21. Chatam Sofer on Yitro, p. 38-39
22. Kook (Mussar Avikha (Jerusalem, 1985), p. 58, no. 10; Orot ha-Kodesh (Jerusalem, 1990), vol. 4, p. 405. In Balk p.54

Frantic to Equanimity? Jacob Renamed Israel

I have set myself a goal for December – to shift from feeling driven in the way I work, to calmer and more accepting ways of being at work. I often feel like I am frantically moving my attention from one urgent task to another, doubting myself, feeling disappointed, and worrying about what might happen next. However, change is risky because we can try to change too much and either fail to change very much at all –  or, worse, succeed in overbalancing from too anxious to become too relaxed and passive. This is an exploration of the challenges of equanimity and personal change, and draws on the example of the patriarch Jacob. 

Equanimity

Jewish tradition extolls the virtue of השתוות – Hishtavut, equanimity. This quality is illustrated by the story of the man who sought to join a group of Kabbalists as an initiate. The admission test, which he failed, was whether he felt the same when people praised or insulted him (1). I remember, as a child, being in awe of my father when something went wrong in his work and his reaction was of one of utter calm.  However, equanimity is an ideal that eluded the patriarch Jacob.

Jacob – the name means the crooked blocker

Jacob’s name and identity was inherently about trying to stop the inevitable. When Jacob was born, his hand held on to his brother's heel, which is interpreted as him trying to prevent the inevitable fact of his brother being the first born (2). This act earned him the name Jacob (3), which has connotations of thwarting someone and trickery. As a teenager he again tried to change the facts of the birth order by offering his brother a bowl of lentils in exchange for the birth-right (4). Despite Jacob’s scheme for advancing his status, his dying blind father still chose to bless Jacob’s older brother. In response Jacob, disregarding his deep ethical reservations, impersonated Esau and was blessed instead (5). This deception enraged Esau, which led Jacob to flee to another country. When he arrived there, he boasted that he could be devious if someone tried to trick him (6). Yet, despite his boast, he was repeatedly deceived (7), and resorted to strange tricks with sticks in a never-ending fight for his rights (8). 

Frantic approach to a brother

Two decades after the bitter falling out with his brother, Esau, Jacob returned to his homeland.  Anticipating a confrontation with Esau, Jacob prepared frantically with gifts, flattery, and preparation for war (9). He cried out to God with a heartfelt prayer, “Save me, please, from the hand of my brother, from the hand of Esau, for I fear him, lest he come and strike me, (and my family too) a mother and children” (10). Yet, it turned out that his brother kissed him when they met rather than sought to attack him as Jacob had expected (11). Esau even reassured Jacob about the disputed blessings (12), with the statement: “let what is yours, be yours” (13).

Jacob was criticized for not simply letting things be (14). Jacob’s anxious approach is linked to an interpretation to the verse in the psalm, may “goodness and kindness pursue me” (15). We can be too anxious or unaware of blessings that are sent to us, so we run away. In this psalm we request that the blessings pursue us despite our difficulty in receiving them (16). 

Personal Rebranding

In the middle of all the frantic preparation, Jacob stopped. It was the middle of the night, and he was alone (17). Jacob entered a heightened state of consciousness and inner struggle,   separating himself from his material self and his external identity and his name Jacob (18). Perhaps he had enough of being “Jacob”, was tired of hustling, of the ethical ambiguities and the anxiety and stress. We read that Jacob wrestled with a “man” while he was alone. The man was “the guardian angel of his brother Esau” (19) – or perhaps it was how Jacob would imagine his brother’s angel (20).  

At the end of this epiphany or spiritual encounter, Jacob emerged with a new name, Israel; he was not to be called Jacob anymore. This new name symbolises strength and ability to confidently negotiate with humans or divine beings (21). This experience was intense and left Jacob scarred in his thigh (22). Perhaps the thigh represents walking and movement (23), and it being injured was symbolic of reducing Jacob's hectic pace. According to the mystics, the thigh represents the drive to victory or competitiveness (24), and it being hit represented shifting to a calmer approach.  

Balance

When I studied this transformation of identity, I was drawn to it and thought I might model my personal growth on Jacob-Israel's dramatic change. As I read more and reflected on this, it started to become disturbing. Despite Jacob’s new identity as Israel, a new man filled with confidence and strength, a new crisis arose with the abduction of Jacob-Israel’s daughter Dina (25). The old frenetic Jack-in-the-box Jacob was silent and missing in action, but so was the new Israel identity. New ways of being taking practice and time to develop, and can’t always be manifest. Yet, it seems like Jacob did not fall back on his old ways either, to save his daughter through desperate measures or tricks.

My conclusion is to aim for equanimity, but also to embrace my New York-Chabad forged drive and hustle as tools in my toolbox and aspects of my personality. Like Jacob, I can become an Israel, but I am not aiming for a negation of my earlier way of being or identity. Equanimity begins for me with being ok with being a little stressed. I anticipate that I will learn how to work more calmly, but I am trying to be ready for the times when “I don’t, because sometimes I won’t” (26). And when that happens, I hope to be ok with that too.    

Notes

1)  Gates of Holiness, 4^th chapter, Third Gate, section 5- By Rabbi Chaim Vital; translated and adapted by Zechariah Goldman https://www.chabad.org/kabbalah/article_cdo/aid/380555/jewish/Equanimity.htm
2)     Rashi
3)     Genesis 25:26
4)     Genesis 25:29-31
5)     Genesis 27:11-14, the sin of his deception was considered so serious that the in the Talmud, Sanhedrin 92a Jacob’s behaviour is compared to idol worship.
6)     Genesis 29:12 Jacob states that he is Laban’s sister’s brother which is understood by Talmud Megila 13b to state that he “is his brother in deception”
7)     Genesis 29:18-23 and 31:7
8)     Genesis 30:31-41
9)     Genesis 32:4-21, see Jonathan Sacks, in Covenant and Conversation p. 230
10)   Genesis 32:12
11)   Genesis 33:4, See Midrash Rabba 78:9 (33:4), p. 773, it was sincere and with his whole heart. 
12)   Rashi to Genesis 33:9, see Baal Haturim:  the Gematriya, the numerical value of the letters in the words אחי יהי לך אשר לך (my brother let what is yours be yours) is the same as זה הברכות they both equal the number 645.
13)   Genesis 33:9
14)   Midrash Rabba Midrash Rabba 32:4
15)   Psalm 23:6
16)   Baal Shem Tov, in Shimon Menachem Mendel of Gavaratchov (ed).  on the Torah, p. 271, 9
17)   Genesis 32:25
18)   Malbim on 32:25 p.319, his being alone relates to his preparation for prophecy, in a state of התבודדות
19)   Beresheet Rabba 77
20)   Ralbag, p 202 & 204, The Midrash Aggada, cited in Kasher, Torah Shlaima, p. 1282, 146 tells us that Jacob pleaded with his brother’s angel for forgiveness for the blessings from his father, but the angel representing Esau, seemed to have moved on as he responded with the question “who is complaining about you [about this]?
21)   Genesis 32:29
22)   Genesis 32:26
23)   Netziv, in Lamm, N. A commentary for the ages- Genesis, p. 176, it is associated with the hip that is linked to walking and it represents movement.
24)   Derech Mitzbotecha, Mitzvat Gid Hanasheh
25)   Genesis 34:1-5
26)   Dr. Seuss, Oh, the places you’ll go.

 

 

Absence of Honest Communication - Rebecca’s Marriage - Toldot

I have been thinking about people who are afraid to speak honestly to their intimate partners about difficult topics. This blog post is about those who are reluctant to speak and their partners, who might need to build the trust that makes open communication more likely and ‘safer’.

I was very surprised to learn that, in the Torah text (1) that contains Rebecca’s story, she never spoke openly with her husband, Isaac. In fact, she only spoke to him once in the whole story. In this instance, instead of disclosing her terrible fear that one of their children was scheming to kill the other, she talked about prospective marriage partners as a reason for her son – the potential victim – to leave town (2).

Although the Torah informs us that her husband Isaac loved her (3), and described their intimacy as laughter (4), their love and laughter did not necessarily lead to strong communication. When Rebecca felt distressed during her pregnancy she spoke about her pain, but not to her husband (5). She and her husband each had different favourite sons: Isaac loved Esau, but Rebecca loved Jacob (6). We do not read that they ever discussed their divergent views about their children. On Isaac’s deathbed, he decided to bless his favoured son, Esau. This was not acceptable to Rebecca, so she orchestrated for her favourite son, Jacob, to deceive her husband by impersonating his older brother (7). Perhaps a discussion between Rebecca and her husband could have prevented this drama that led to much pain for all concerned (8).

One commentator (9) suggests that this reticence began the moment Rebecca first saw Isaac. It was fright at first sight. Rebecca first set eyes on her future husband and quickly fell off the camel she was riding on, then grabbed a veil and covered herself (10). She fell of the camel out of fear, and veiled herself out of shame, believing that she was not worthy to be the wife of such a holy man (11). The veil was not merely an expression of modesty, but symbolic of the way Rebecca metaphorically veiled her personality in her dealings with her husband (12).

Rebecca’s reticence is remarkable in how it contrasts with the accounts of the other matriarchs and patriarchs who spoke out when they were upset. Sarah vented her simmering resentments passionately, when she felt slighted by her fellow wife, Hagar (13). Jacob expressed his anger toward Rachel when she demanded he solve the problem of her infertility (14).

Rebecca’s predicament illustrates the way some couples fail to communicate and suffer. No doubt, there are cases where they tried to communicate, and the response was disappointing. It could be that an expression of pain meets a defensive reply, or one that seeks to assign blame to the one complaining. It can be scary to give voice to unhappiness, and no doubt some partners decide it is not worth it. This blog invites two questions. One is to those of us who are reluctant to talk. Are we willing to think again about the possible benefits of speaking our truth and whether the risks can be mitigated in the way we talk? And the second question is to partners or family members who might be viewed as less than approachable. How do we ensure that our partners or family members feel safe and confident to talk to us and expect that we will listen with an open heart and mind?

 

Notes

 

1)     See from Genesis 24:64 to Genesis 27:46

2)     Genesis 27:46

3)     Genesis 24:67

4)     Genesis 26:8

5)     Genesis 25:22

6)     Genesis 25:28

7)     Genesis 27:1-29

8)     Haemek Davar, to Genesis 24:64, https://www.sefaria.org/Haamek_Davar_on_Genesis.24.64?lang=en cited in Lamm, N. Drashot L’Dorot, Genesis.

9)     Haemek Davar, ibid

10)  Genesis 24:64-65

11)  Haemek Davar, ibid

12)  Lamm, N. (2012), Drashot L’Dorot, Genesis. P. 105

13)  Genesis 16:5 as translated and interpreted in the Targumim Yonatan ben Uziel and Jerusalem for fuller detail

14)  Genesis 30:2

 

Acknowledging our shadow selves and prejudices - Lech Lcha

In striving to improve ourselves and transcend our prejudices, we invariably fall short. It is imperative to be aware of our own limitations. One can aim too high, with destructive results. My colleague Donna Jacobs Sife taught me to acknowledge any prejudicial thoughts that may arise in my mind and to deal with these rather than remain unaware of them. Let us explore the case of Sarah, the partner (1) and wife of Abraham, in how she related to Hagar, who happened to be an Egyptian woman, after her own terrible experience with Egyptians. 

 

Sarah was a prophet (2). Alongside her husband, she converted non-believers to ethical monotheism (3). Yet, she afflicted her maidservant, Hagar (4), physically - throwing shoes at her face (5) - emotionally and verbally (6), to such an extent that Hagar fled their home. Her harsh behaviour is criticized as sinful (7) and as a failure of ethics (8). Here is some more of her story.   

 

Sarah and her husband were promised children and blessings by God (9). However, instead of blessing, they faced a famine (10). To escape the famine they travelled to Egypt. On arrival there, Abaraham asked Sarah to lie about their relationship, instead she should say that she was his sister rather than his wife because he was afraid that he would be killed by the Egyptians, who would be attracted to his beautiful wife. Indeed, Abraham was left alone while Sarah was taken to the Pharaoh to become his wife. She narrowly escaped this fate (11).  

 

After this ordeal, Sarah remained childless. Yet, unlike other biblical women who appeared very distraught about this (12), Sarah seemed quite matter of fact about it. She requested that Abaham have a child with her maidservant Hagar and gave her to him to become his second wife (13). Sarah appeared to reflect a “deep sense of security and personal connection to her husband, [to such an extent that] she was willing for Abraham to have children by another woman because she felt certain that the ties between them (14)” were far deeper and spiritual.     

 

It did not quite work out so well. Hagar lost respect for Sarah when Hagar fell pregnant while Sarah remained barren (15). The tensions (16) for Sarah at this point reached boiling point. Sarah cried out bitterly to her husband. “I left the house of my birth and my father, and came with you ...I have gone in with you before ...Pharaoh King of Egypt... and I said of you, he is my brother, so that they might not kill you. ...I took Hagar the Egyptian, my handmaid, and gave her to you as a wife, ...But now my honour is cheapened and despised in her eyes. May the Lord judge between me and you, ...that we may not need the son of Hagar the Egyptian handmaid” (17).

 

Perhaps Sarah was too ambitious in taxing her “moral and spiritual powers” when she set aside her inevitable feelings of displacement as Abraham’s wife (18) and chose not to acknowledge her past trauma with other Egyptians and resultant generalised animosity she felt toward them. Sarah might have thought that she doesn’t need to bother with ‘petty little feelings’. Yet regardless of one’s greatness, “every living heart, feels” (19). On another occasion Sarah experienced a lack of faith, yet she denied this was the case because she was afraid (20). She believed that it was improper to acknowledge or “own” her doubts (21). 

 

I am writing in the shadow of the US presidential election and terrorist attacks in Europe. There is an ocean of pain, injustice and anger that needs to be acknowledged and dealt with. As always, part of the job to look inward inside ourselves. As we strive to be our best selves, let us never lose sight of our own feelings, and be alert to our unconscious biases, so that we may care for ourselves and do right by others. 

 

Notes

Image by Jo Power https://www.flickr.com/people/23623021@N02 used under Creative Commons License

1.      Steinsaltz, A. (1984), Biblical Images, Men and Women of the book. Basic Books. 

2.      Talmud, Megillah 14a

3.      Bereshit Rabba, 39:24

4.      Genesis 16:6 

5.      Bereshit Rabba, 45

6.      Radak

7.      Ramban

8.      Radak

9.      Genesis 12:2, and 12:7

10.   Genesis 12:10

11.   Genesis 12:11-19

12.   Rachel in Genesis 30:1 says give me children and if not I will die, see also Hannah in Samuel I, 1. Contrast is highlighted by Steinsaltz, A. (1984), Biblical Images, Men and Women of the book. Basic Books, p. 25

13.   Genesis 16:1-3

14.   Steinsaltz, A. (1984), Biblical Images, Men and Women of the book. Basic Books, p. 25

15.   Sacks, J. (2009), Covenant & Conversation, Genesis, p. 91

16.   Genesis 16:3-4

17.   Genesis 16:6 as translated in Targum Yonatan & Targum Yerushalmi

18.   Lebovitz, N. (Undated) New Studies Bereshit, p. 156,

19.   Ohr Hachayim, to Leviticus 9:1 

20.   Genesis 18:12-15

21.   Ohr Hachayim, to Genesis 18:15

 

Can G-d’s mind be changed? Turned toward Mercy by A Smell

Changing one’s mind is helpful for reconciliation and peacebuilding. So, I wonder whether God does this? The Talmud suggests that “one who is appeased over his wine, has something of his creator's mind” (1). The Talmud proves this with the example of God smelling the pleasant aroma of Noah’s sacrifices after the flood and promising never again to destroy the world with a flood (2).  

The idea that God’s mind can be changed is controversial in Judaism. In fact, the prophet Samuel emphatically rejected that idea in declaring to a crestfallen and rejected King Saul that “God is not a human to change his mind” (3). Surely, if God knows everything including the future, there can never be new information to justify divine regret (4).

To get around this problem, scholars suggest that, although God is inherently unchanging, God’s stance can shift in response to changed circumstances. God is said to be our shadow (5), mirroring our deeds, for better or worse (6). Following this line of argument, the reason the world would never be destroyed again was because the circumstances were different after the flood, either in the maturing of humanity from its youth to adulthood (7) or that the earth itself had changed (8).

Whatever the merits of the arguments against God’s mind changing, I am drawn to the teachings that God did in fact do so (9). This approach is based on the idea that we can learn about God by observing ourselves (10). In God, as in humans, one’s desire influences one’s thoughts. Republicans' desire to have Amy Coney Barrett on the Supreme Court leads them to think that appointment of judges shortly before an election is a good thing for democracy, despite having vehemently opposed a pre-election confirmation by Democrats only a few years ago on the basis that this was undemocratic. It is for this reason that the same observation of evil in human hearts can lead to opposite conclusions by God, first as a reason to destroy humanity (11) and then as a reason for mercy (12).

Remarkably, this dramatic shift in God’s will came about in response to a smell (the aroma of Noah’s offerings). Smell is a very subtle thing that involves only the finest particles that emanate from something (13). It is believed to have the power to stir the soul, as we can see in the historical practice of administering smelling salts to someone who fainted (14).

Fainting is used by a Chasidic master as a metaphor for how God’s energy is withdrawn when confronted by the reality of the corruption of the people prior to the flood (15). In contrast to God’s enthusiastic appraisal of the world as being “very good” (16), we read that God was grieved in His heart (17). This led to a Divine withdrawal from the world.

The mystical idea of God being disheartened and almost depressed by the state of the world was on my mind as I attended a Regional and Rural mental health symposium this week. There I learned that “It is argued by some that adversity impacting the environment, whether natural or man-made, can lead to a disconnection with the land” (18). Reconnection was one of the themes discussed at the Symposium. In the case of God after the flood, Noah’s gratitude (19) or self-sacrifice (20) implicit in the aroma of Noah’s offering (of one of his very limited surviving livestock) reengaged God with the world with new goodwill toward humans (21).

The idea of smell has been linked to intuition (22). The Messiah will be able to judge using his sense of smell (23). Thus in contrast to some pagan idea of a God, who they hoped can be managed through offerings thus reducing uncertainty but could not “smell” (24), the Biblical God can mysteriously shift and be moved to grace (25) as occurs in response to Noah.

Rabbi Shai Held writes: "Judgment gives way to mercy, condemnation to compassion. The crucial lesson is that the same attribute that we see as cause for reproach can often serve as a basis for forgiveness…Imagine someone you know who struggles with impulse control. Some days you are tempted to write her off as totally hopeless, and maybe even to dismiss her as utterly unworthy of your concern or affection. But then there are moments when the very same deep failing elicits something very different in you, and you find yourself viewing her with compassion rather than judgment. ...our evaluations of people depend on more than just the facts about their nature or character; they also depend on what posture we adopt toward those facts. …God's change of heart after the flood reminds us of something crucial: Where there is judgment, there is often also the possibility of compassion... we can be forgiving toward people for the same reasons we are inclined to condemn." (26). 

Notes:

1)     Talmud Eruvin 65a

2)     Genesis 8:20-22

3)     Samuel I, 15:29

4)     Midrash Rabba 27:7, Abarbanel questions on Genesis 8

5)     Psalm 121:5

6)     Midrash cited in Nefesh Hachayim, gate 1, 7 regarding Exodus 3:14

7)     Abarbanel, 2nd approach, p. 286, this idea was expanded on by Avi Rabinovich in a comment on Facebook 25.10.20: that there is a shift in Gen 8:21 from 6:66 in which it states that the thoughts of man’s heart were רק רע, - only evil all day long, always, to just bad from youth, possibly implying that God realizes there is hope of change in the future maturation.

8)     Malbim

9)     Schneerson, Rabbi MM, (1968) The Lubavitcher Rebbe in 2.13. Maamar Baasi Lgani 5728,

10)  Job 19:26 as interpreted in the Kabalistic writings of the Ari Z”L and Chabad Chasidism

11)  Genesis 6:6

12)  Genesis 8:20-22

13)  Hirsch, R. Samson Raphael, commentary to Genesis 8:21

14)  The Rebbe Maharash, Rabbi Shmuel of Lubavitch, in Mayim Rabbim, 5636, p.11.
והנה הסיבה לזה שנעשה שינוי בהרצון, מבאר בהמאמר, דלאחר שוירח הוי' את ריח הניחוח , דרזא דקורבנא עולה עד רזא דא"ס, אז נמשך רצון חדש. והענין הוא כמו שמבאר אדמו"ר מהר"ש בהמשך מים רבים)  תרל"ו – פ"ו (ע' יא).,דריח מעורר את עצם הנפש. דזהו שהמתעלף ר"ל, כשנותנים לו להריח ריח חזק הוא מתעורר מהתעלפותו, כי ענין ההתעלפות הוא העדר התפשטות החיות, וע"י הריח חזק שמעורר את עצם הנפש, נמשך החיות מחדש. ועד"ז יובן למעלה, דענין ויתעצב אל לבו (היפך וירא אלקים את כל אשר עשה והנה טוב מאד) היא תנועה דסילוק (דוגמת ענין ההתעלפות), וע"י שהריח את ריח הניחוח דקרבנות, … נמשך רצון חדש מהעצמות שלמעלה מבחי' גילוי.
Note also at the end of the Sabbath there is the Jewish ritual of smelling something pleasant like cloves, to comfort the soul during the transition from the holiness of the sabbath to the ordinary days in the week ahead and the loss of “an additional soul”, See Tur and Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim 297:1.

15)  The Rebbe Maharash, ibid

16)  Genesis 1:31

17)  Genesis 6:6

18)  Rigby, C.W.; Rosen, A.; Berry, H.L.; Hart, C.R. And Stain, H.J.; Kelly, B.; Carr, V.J.; Lewin, T.J.; Fitzgerald, M.; Fragar, L. and O’Connor, M.; Horwitz, P. in Lawrence-Bourne, J, Hazel Dalton, H, David Perkins, D, Farmer, J, Georgina Luscombe, G, , Nelly Oelke, N, 4 and Bagheri, N. (2020) What Is Rural Adversity, How Does It Affect Wellbeing and What Are the Implications for Action?

19)  Chizkuni

20)  Midrash Rabba 34, The Rebbe Rashab, Rabbi Sholom Ber of Lubavitch in Ayin Beis, Parsha Noach, .

21)  The Rebbe Maharash, ibid

22)  Powel, C. & Koltz, T, 2012, It worked for me, in life and leadership. Harper Collins.

23)  Isaiah 11:3. He shall sense the truth by his reverence for the LORD: He shall not judge by what his eyes behold, Nor decide by what his ears perceive. he shall judge the poor with equity. See Talmud, Sanhedrin 93b: rejection of Bar Kochba because he failed the smell test.

24)  Psalms 115:6

25)  Mechilta Drashbi, in Torah Shlaima, 86, p. 451: they have a nose, but they do not smell. Contrast with our verse. The contrast would appear at first glance to be ridiculing the worship of inanimate statues who have a nose but cannot smell. That is a red herring, because as Abarbanel points out the statues were only symbols of the gods. I think the way I explain it in this post adds a deeper contrast.

26)  Rabbi Shai Held, The Heart of Torah