March 21, 2015 1 Nisan, 5775 Shabbat Candle Lighting: 6:52PM Friday Night Mincha: 6:30 PM Morning Services: 9:00 AM Shabbat Mincha & Mussar – 6:40 PM Shabbat Ends: 7:53 PM Vayikra Shabbat Announcements Page 544 (Torah) Page 890 (Rosh Chodesh) Page 348 (Maftir) Page 1218 (Haftarah) Shabbat Hachodesh! Rosh Chodesh Nisan! Mazal Tov and Welcome to our Newest Member, Darsi Beauchamp! Thank you Darsi for sponsoring Kiddush March Birthdays & Anniversaries March Birthdays: Karen Goldberg (1 ), Brad st st th Krosser (1 ), Samuel Reich (5 ), Alle-Faye Monka th th th (6 ), Jacob Scheer (7 ), Mark Goldberg (8 ), Cindy th th Billinson (11 ), Ariel Eckstein (11 ), Lisa Monday th th (12 ), Kate Rubenstein (12th), Lauren Cooper (13 ), th th Adeena Hudes (13 ), Rebeccah Kerievsky (13 ), th th Yafitte Bendory (14 ), Rita Karmiol (14 ), Zulya th th Moss (14 ), Marlene Selke (15 ), Jordan Mayor th th th (16 ), Steve Okun (16 ), Barry Schwarz (16 ), Alan th th th Antin (18 ), Kate Arian (18 ), Roni Hudes (19 ), th th Izzy Sweifach (20 ). Janet Tammam (20 ), Alan th st st Winter (20 ), Tori Podell (21 ), Scott Winter (21 ), rd rd Mark Gelbert (23 ), Jill Sacks (23 ), Ron Silberman rd th th (23 ), David Rehaut (25 ), Sally Cooper (28 ), th th Arielle Paris (28 ), Noa Russo 29 ), Dana Shalit th th th (29 ), Fawn Zwickel (29 ), Sonya Goldberg (30 ), st st Mitchell Antin (31 ), Cantor Edward Roffman (31 ). March Anniversaries: Javid & Sima Hakakian (3 ), rd th George & Robin Muskal 11 ), Shimon Korish & Dora st nd Zuker (21 ), Craig & Sharon Nessel (22 ), Ron & rd Kate Rubenstein (23 ), Cantor Edward & Robin th Roffman (29 ). MFJC INFO ~ www.mtfjc.org Address: 1209 Sussex Tpk., Randolph 07869 Phone Numbers: Office: 973 895 2100 Rabbi: 973 895 2103; Rabbi’s Cell: 201 923 1107 Rabbi’s Office Hours: Mornings: Tues - Fri, 9-1PM; afternoons/evenings: 3-6PM; or anytime by appt Menashe East [email protected] Office Hours: M-Th, 10- 5PM; F, 10-4PM David Paris [email protected] This Week: March 21: Chodesh Tov for Rosh Chodesh Nisan March 21: Shabbat Hachodesh March 21: Me Drash – Janet Tammam delivers the Dvar Torah this Shabbat March 21: Jr Cong, Teen-led & Youth fun, 1030AM March 22: Talmud Study, 9AM March 22: Yahrzeit Minyan @ 6:30PM March 24: Model Seder Hebrew School, 430PM March 26: Torah Thursday, 10AM Upcoming Events: March 27 & 28: Shabbat Hagadol/ March 27: Relaxation Shabbat - RSVP for Friday Dinner March 28: March Shared Kiddush, RSVP to the office! March 31: No Hebrew School, Spring Break April 2: Search for Chametz, 8PM April 3: Chametz Burning, 1145AM April 3-11: Chag Pesach – Happy Passover!!! (see attached Schedule and Chametz Sale Form) April 7: Passover Hebrew School & Youth Film Screening, 430PM April 16: Yom Hashoah Service, 7PM April 18: Communal Torah Reading – from our Shoah Scroll Sign up with Steve Okun to read an Aliyah from Shmini April 19-20: Rosh Chodesh Iyar April 20: Traditional Minyan at GRTWA, 820AM April 21-23: Yom Hazikaron/Yom Haatzmaut How To Connect With Us Mt. Freedom Jewish Center - on the Web! www.MTFJC.org - YES we have a NEW LIVE website!!! Please visit and give us feedback as we are still adding new features and content! Facebook Please “Like” our page Mt. Freedom Jewish Center Not on Facebook? Visit www.facebook.com to enter your email and create an account! Instagram Follow us, tag us, like us! Mtfreedomjewishcenter Not on Instagram? Download the app for iphone or android and get started and enter your email address or link your facebook to get started! Twitter Chat with us on the twitterverse! @Mtfreedomjc To join download the Twitter app for your smartphone or visit www.twitter.com to get started! Having Trouble? Please email [email protected] for help getting connected. Thank you to those who made donations in the month of February 2015! February 2015 Tribute Donations to MFJC Tributes In Honor Of Edden Chirnomas’ Bat Mitzvah Steven & Helen Schwartz Birth of Maya Esther Klar Hezy & Janet Cohen Noa Russo’s Bat Mitzvah Steven & Helen Schwartz Birth of Caleb Svirsky Bruce & Hannah Goldman Virginia Baker’s Continued Good Health Geoff & Marilyn Lampel Tributes In Memory Of Paul Fishbein’s Continued Good Health Geoff & Marilyn Lampel, Stephen & Shelly Winters, Michael & Rochelle Zeiger Al Wolf Rob & Susan Gaynor David Leibowitz’s Continued Good Health Geoff & Marilyn Lampel, Michael & Rochelle Zeiger Beena Levy’s Continued Good Health Geoff & Marilyn Lampel, Stephen & Shelly Winters, Michael & Rochelle Zeiger Joseph Feit Rob & Susan Gaynor Sam Lewin Siddur Donation by: Marvin & Miruam Raber David Yarosh’s 3rd Yahrzeit Siddur Donation by: Mark & Martha Moritz February 2015 Yahrzeit Donations to MFJC IN MEMORY OF: Aaron Engel Alice Horowitz Allen Bain Ann Herman Annie Saltz Archie Schwartz Bernard Trachtenberg Bessie Hirschhorn Celia Krosser Esther Gruss Frances Lasker Francis Lasker Harry Brooks DONOR Bendory, Yair & Aliza Horowitz, Janet Ledner, Susan Benson, Fred & Judy Koval, Lou & Linda Digaetano, Mona Shapiro, Stanley & Gladys Dolch, Sylvia Lasker, Jeffrey & Weiss, Susan Spielman, Joel & Gruss, Leah Lasker, Jeffrey & Weiss, Susan Levat, Gary & Suzanne Brooks, Jack & Doris IN MEMORY OF: Harry Robert Rippel Julius Beber Mamie Lerner Maurice Kirshenbaum Milton Levine Miriam Schwartzbard Pauline Rehaut Rebecca Desick Rebecca Merson Rita Bodnar Rose Koshar Sarah Schwartz Steven Lerner DONOR Selke, Marlene Kirshenbaum, Caroline Lerner, Seymour Kirshenbaum, Caroline Levine, Skip & Louise Rosenfarb, Jack Rehaut, Elaine Gaynor, Robert & Susan Merson, Howard Bodnar, Joel & Ruth Koval, Lou & Linda Digaetano, Mona Rehaut, Elaine There are many ways to honor a person, commemorate an occasion, or memorialize a loved one at Mt. Freedom Jewish Center Please call the office at 973-895-2100 with any questions. Before Pesach it is a requirement to eliminate all Chametz from our possession. Halacha does allow for Chametz (e.g. liquors, mixtures, etc.) to be sold to a non-Jew in those circumstances when elimination is not an option. Arrangements for such sale should be made through our rabbi using the attached contract. We welcome you to visit us at the synagogue to complete the transaction. The rabbi will be available after morning minyan during the week. Or, if you would like, you can arrange a specific appointment with the rabbi. If you will be unable to come in, you can complete the contract and send it in to the office as soon as possible. It must be received by Thursday, April 2, 2015. This year, Pesach 5775/2015, the general sale of Chametz will take effect on Friday morning, April 3rd before 11:00am. All Chametz which was not sold must be burned/destroyed by 11:57am on Friday. While the rabbi does not accept personal monetary gifts for this service, he encourages contributions to MFJC’s Relief Fund (for Ma’ot Chitim - Fund for Those in Need). All of these funds will go to Pesach needs and support needy people in and around our community. NOTE: Kitniyot (food made from legumes, not eaten by Ashkenazim on Pesach) need not be sold. Chametz utensils as well, should not be sold so as not to require a new Tevilah immersion. CONTRACT FOR AUTHORIZING THE SELLING OF CHAMETZ Passover 5775: April 3 – April 11, 2015 Be it proclaimed that I hereby empower and authorize Rabbi Menashe East to sell all Chametz that may be in my possession, wherever it may be - at home, a place of business or elsewhere. This includes all goods which may be delivered to me over Passover as well as stocks owned in full or in part in corporations which sell or deal with Chametz. The rabbi has full rights to sell, dispose, and conduct all transactions, including rental of the store where the Chametz is stored and rental of right of way as he deems fit and proper, for such time which he believes necessary in accordance with detailed terms and forms explained in the contracts in their possession. The above power hereby being given is meant to conform with all Torah and Rabbinic regulations and laws, and also in accordance with the laws of the State of New Jersey. NAME:___________________________________________________________ ADDRESS(ES) WHERE CHAMETZ IS STORED (Home, Office, etc.): STREET:___________________________________________ CITY:_____________________ STATE:__________ PLACES WHERE CHAMETZ IS STORED (Kitchen, Pantry, etc.): _________________________________________ ESTIMATED VALUE OF CHAMETZ (Edibles):___________________ ACCESS TO CHAMETZ CAN BE ARRANGED BY CONTACTING: NAME:__________________________________________ PHONE NUMBER:_______________________ If you or your Chametz will be in a different time zone for Pesach, please detail so that your Chametz will be sold and repurchased at the appropriate time:___________________________________________________________ TO THE ABOVE, I AFFIX MY SIGNATURE: SIGNATURE:____________________________________________ DATE:__________________ P.O. Box 202, 1209 Sussex Turnpike, Mt. Freedom, New Jersey 07970 PHONE: (973) 895-2100 FAX (973) 895-2232 Email: [email protected] Pesach 5775 - 2015 Candle Lighting and Services Schedule Thursday, April 2, 2015 Bedikat Chametz (Search for Chametz) Friday, April 3, 2015 EREV PESACH Morning Minyan Siyum B'Chor Finish eating Chametz before Complete Sale and Burn Chametz Candle Lighting Mincha & Maariv FIRST SEDER 8:00 PM 6:45 AM 7:30 AM 10:53 AM 11:57 AM 7:07 PM 7:00 PM Shabbat, April 4, 2015 SHACHARIT - First day of Pesach Mincha & Maariv – 1st Day of Omer Candle Lighting SECOND SEDER 9:00 AM 7:00 PM After 8:08 PM Sunday, April 5, 2015 SHACHARIT - Second Day Pesach Mincha & Talmud Class Maariv, Havdalah & Yom Tov Ends 9:00 AM 7:00 PM 8:09 PM Monday, April 6, 2015 Shacharit – Chol HaMoed Pesach 6:45 AM Tuesday, April 7, 2015 Shacharit – Chol HaMoed Pesach Youth Film Screening - Prince of Egypt 6:45 AM 4:30 PM Wednesday, April 8, 2015 Shacharit – Chol HaMoed Pesach 6:45 AM Thursday, April 9, 2015 Shacharit – Chol HaMoed Pesach Set up Eruv Tavshlin Mincha & Maariv Candle Lighting 6:45 AM Friday, April 10, 2015 Shacharit – Seventh Day Pesach Mincha & Maariv Shabbat & Yahrzeit Candle Lighting 9:00 AM 6:30 PM 7:14 PM Shabbat, April 11, 2015 Shacharit – Eighth Day Pesach YIZKOR Mincha, Maariv and Final Matzah Meal Yom Tov ends 9:00 AM Approx. 10:30 AM 7:05 PM 8:15 PM 6:30 PM 7:13 PM Sold Chametz can be eaten after 9PM on April 11th From Sorrow to Joy Please join MFJC during the State of Israel’s High Holidays as we remember our loss and redemption as a people, a nation, and community. Yom HaShoah V’Hagevurah Thursday, April 16th Service: 7:00 PM Commemorate those who perished in the Holocaust as we share stories of our loss and resilience Yom HaZikaron Wednesday, April 22nd Service: 6:30-7:30 PM Remember Israeli soldiers who fell defending Israel and victims of terror who have fallen supporting Israel’s struggle to survive Followed by ~ Yom Ha’aztmaut Celebration 7:30 PM Hallel and Song Honoring Israel’s 67th Independence Day – We celebrate the Jewish people’s return to Eretz Yisrael with music and song! Thursday, April 23rd Festive Morning Service 6:45AM followed by Breakfast These programs are Free and open to the Public! The Huntington News: Independent Student Newspaper of Northeastern University Letter: SGA to vote on SJP divestment referendum, by Zachary Ramsfelder Posted by news on Thursday, March 5, 2015 · Recently, the Student Government Association (SGA) allowed a referendum to proceed from Northeastern University’s Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) that called on Northeastern to divest from several corporations due to their commerce with the Israel Defense Forces. The SGA had previously rejected this referendum, and, in response, its proponents claimed that the negative vote had denied students a “true educational experience” and free speech, and that this rejection constituted “institutional oppression of SJP.” These claims were patently false. No one at NU was denied an education because of this now-overturned SGA decision. Anybody who wanted to learn about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict could attend a variety of events on campus, hosted both by SJP and pro-Israel groups. The fact that SJP loudly and successfully protested SGA’s original decisions contradicts the claim of free speech abridgment, which is especially ridiculous in light of SJP’s history of obstructing and disrupting pro-Israel students’ and their guests’ free expression. As for “institutional oppression,” not getting your way simply does not qualify as oppression. As George Deek, an Arab-Christian and Israeli diplomat, recently remarked at NU in reference to the Palestinians, “The narrative of victimhood is a narrative that paralyzes us and corrupts us…when a group defines itself as a victim, it no longer takes responsibility.” The SGA originally rejected the proposal, citing well-founded concerns about students’ comfort. I can speak for many Jews, who comprise a minority on campus, when I say that I would be deeply offended if a student government referendum called for divestment as a means of attacking Israeli policies while giving countries with far worse human rights records a free pass. The “discomfort” felt by Jewish students, and mocked by SJP’s petition, contradicts NU’s core value of “foster[ing] a culture of respect that affirms inter-group relations and builds community.” Why has Israel been so targeted? SJP provides a facile explanation in its referendum for why Israel is the subject of this divestment campaign. It argues that more international business is conducted there than in countries with worse human rights records, a lacking rationale. Firstly, it is false by any measurable standard: as of 2013, Nigeria, the United Arab Emirates, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, Thailand, Turkey, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia and Singapore were all recipients of more foreign investment than Israel despite having worse human rights records. Secondly, even if it were true that more international business is conducted in Israel, perhaps it would be because Israel has an educated, liberal society that is conducive to such commerce. Furthermore, when it comes to claims that the investment of the university’s endowment in Caterpillar, Hewlett-Packard, Raytheon and Motorola Solutions is financing Israeli control of the Palestinian territories, proponents of these allegations should do some simple math. NU’s endowment was $713 million in 2014. Even if every last dollar were invested in those companies, this would represent less than one-half of one percent of those companies’ combined $170 billion market value. So what is to be gained by divesting from companies that do business in Israel? In actuality, the referendum does not intend to make a difference, but it intends to indict Israel as the most significant human rights violator despite the fact that it is not. Is Israel perfect? No. And despite the allegedly moderate Palestinian Authority having been found liable for lethal terrorism in federal court, I would still argue in favor of its evolution into a full-fledged state, as all people, including both the Jews and Palestinians, deserve self-determination. But unless you have ulterior motives in targeting the Jewish State, there is simply no reason to support SJP’s petition. – Zach Ramsfelder is a sophomore political science major. Dear Senators, My name is Zach Ramsfelder, and I am a sophomore studying Political Science at Northeastern University. It has come to my attention that numerous organizations external to the University community have written you in support of Students for Justice in Palestine’s divestment referendum, the matter of whose advancement is scheduled for an SGA vote on Monday. I feel it is my responsibility, as a Jewish member of the Northeastern student body, to address the claims made by these intervening parties both on my own and on my community’s behalf. First and foremost, I must confront SJP’s and the intervening parties’ chosen tactic head-on. Divestment from Caterpillar, Raytheon, Motorola and Hewlett-Packard is unfeasible, due to the nature of the mutual funds through which Northeastern has indirectly invested its endowment in those companies, and feasibility is a requirement for all referendum questions pursuant to the SGA Bylaws. Its effect on those companies will be completely immaterial, as Northeastern’s total endowment was about $700 million in 2014, and even if every last dollar was invested in the four companies, this sum would amount to less than one half of one percent of their $170 billion market cap, meaning that Northeastern’s stake in those businesses almost assuredly has no impact in the Palestinian territories. Additionally, as studies of other divestment campaigns have shown, divestment is completely ineffectual in terms of applying financial pressure to a target. Therefore, the sole effect of symbolic divestment is to defame the State of Israel and denigrate its supporters on campus, while giving a free pass to countries with utterly despicable human rights records. The interfering external organizations made several arguments that must be refuted. Firstly, nonadvancement of the referendum should not be conflated with censorship of free expression, a rhetorical sleight of hand that basically every intervening party attempted in their letters to you. Any interested students have been, will be, and should continue to be able to discuss and learn about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict at numerous events on campus hosted by both Students for Justice in Palestine and Huskies for Israel, regardless of the outcome of Monday’s SGA vote. Furthermore, I would argue thatadvancement of the referendum would preclude actual dialogue by substituting a one-sided and misleading yes-or-no question for meaningful discussion and debate of the relevant issues. Secondly, despite their attempts to claim otherwise, neither Martin Federman nor Jewish Voice for Peace should be considered legitimate representatives of the mainstream Jewish community, as their political views on this matter lie on its left-most fringes (I do not comment on their left-wing orientation in order to disparage either them or the political left, but it is simply the case that their views are not representative of most members of the community). In fact, they should be counted as part of the inappropriate outside interference they warn about but that has actually come overwhelmingly from referendum proponents. Thirdly, the ACLU’s and Palestine Solidarity Legal Group’s assertion that they or the Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights reserve the right to tell the Jewish community what does or does not constitute anti-Semitism is frankly absurd and offensive on its face, and furthermore, their rejection of the notion that support for the State of Israel is characteristic of the mainstream Jewish community is willfully ignorant of the 2000 or more years in which Zionism has been integral to Judaism and Jewish culture. Their faux-intimidating and condescending legalistic arguments, made in order to declare that anti-Israel sentiment is categorically not anti-Semitic, relied heavily on OCR findings, published after the investigation of three complaints filed in the University of California system; these arguments are misleading for several reasons on which I will elaborate. The OCR letters cited by the ACLU and PSLG all specifically state that “this letter is not a formal statement of OCR policy and it should not be relied upon, cited, or construed as such…The complainants may have the right to file a private suit in federal court whether or not OCR finds a violation.” Yet this admonition didn’t stop the authors of the letter to the SGA from doing exactly that. The OCR investigations also focused solely on manifest behaviors such as pro-Palestinian students verbally harassing a pro-Israel female student by calling her a “slut” and a “whore”, and made no consideration of the unduly Israel-obsessive condition of campus activism, and the ulterior motivation behind such monomania.The initial complaints in the investigations were about anti-Israel events on campus (those who oppose this referendum by no means seek to prohibit such exercises of free speech), not a student government-approved referendum that has the potential to officially codify a hostile environment for pro-Israel students. The authors of the arguments also repeatedly try to conflate referendum-voting rights with the freedom of expression in order to assert that nonadvancement of the referendum would represent censorship of free speech, which, as I have written above, is simply untrue. The Northeastern students who oppose this referendum absolutely stand for the freedom of expression, but calling on the Board of Trustees to divest from four companies that do business with Israel is not conducive to the multilateral dialogue that can help bring peace to the Middle East. By putting this impractical divestment campaign to a yes-or-no vote, we are denying the possibility of a more meaningful campus discussion and reducing some 70 years of debate to a punitive measure designed to demonize one side of the controversy. As such, this referendum would discourage complex dialogue, could stand to hurt Northeastern co-op opportunities, would introduce an unprecedented degree of hostility and antagonism to campus climate, and has been completely ineffective at every university that has passed a similar measure. A more productive venture would be a campus-wide forum of the issues facilitated by the Center for Spirituality, Dialogue and Service. Finally, I would like to encapsulate my view, and the view of the SGA Cabinet members, when they originally declined to proceed with this referendum, with an exceptionally applicable University policy. One of Northeastern University’s core values is “foster[ing] a culture of respect that affirms intergroup relations and builds community.” Allowing the advancement of a referendum, already acknowledged by the SGA Cabinet to be incredibly divisive, would contradict the above mission and would be a grave error. As members of our student government, I believe you recognize the importance of supervising student affairs for the better, and Monday’s referendum vote is one such opportunity. Thank you for taking the time to thoughtfully consider this matter, and I hope that tomorrow, you will stand for a united Northeastern community and vote “no”. Regards, Zach Ramsfelder ‘18 WEEKLY PARSHA By Rabbi Dov Linzer, Rosh HaYeshiva and Dean of Yeshivat Chovevei Torah Rabbinical School _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Parshat Vayikra | March 20, 2015 / 1 Nisan 5775 A Sweet Savor "The priest shall bring it all, and burn it upon the altar: it is a burnt sacrifice, an offering made by fire, a sweet savor unto the Lord" (Vayikra, 1:13). We are told eight times in this week's parasha that the sacrifices are a "sweet savor" to God. This graphic anthropomorphism of God is challenging to modern ears, but we can understand the power that it held for people in the past. It communicates the idea that our sacrifices rise up to God: the smoke rises to heaven, bringing with it the smell of the burning meat, and God is pleased by our offering. The message is clear: God desires our sacrifices. Rambam believed otherwise. He was bothered by the institution of sacrifice and claimed that God only commanded it as a concession to human weakness. In his Guide to the Perplexed, Rambam suggests that God used sacrifices as a way of weaning the people off idolatry (III:32). As the method of worship for all the pagan gods, sacrifice was the only form of worship the people of the time could conceive of; they would not have been able to worship God solely through prayer. Thus, God moved them away from idolatry and commanded that they redirect their worship - with sacrifices - to God. God may have desired sacrifices as a temporary concession, but God certainly does not desire the practice as an ideal form of religious worship. Ramban rejects Rambam's position, pointing out that sacrifices were used to worship God even in situations free from a context of idolatry. Indeed, Kayin and Hevel offered sacrifices that were acceptable and pleasing to God, as did Noah. Furthermore, Ramban states that it is religiously offensive to suggest that the entire institution of sacrifice was not God's true will: His [Rambam's] statements are preposterous. They "heal the great hurt superficially" and render "the table of the Lord disgusting" by limiting its use to placate the wicked and the foolish. But the Torah states that they are "...a sweet savor" (commentary on Vayikra, 1:9). This debate - and the significance of sacrifices as a "sweet savor" - becomes central in the context of Pesach: Should we still bring a korban Pesach today? Starting with the Hatam Sofer (19th century, Hungary), there have been those who have argued for continuing the practice, even in the absence of a Temple. Putting aside questions of politics and practicality, is such a thing even halakhically possible? On the one hand, one could argue that we are all considered temei met, impure due to contact with a corpse. Indeed, last Shabbat was Parashat Parah, named after the special maftir from Bamidbar 19 detailing the laws of impurity of corpses and the purification ritual involving the ashes of a red heifer. This reading reminds us how the people had to purify themselves in order to bring the Pesach sacrifice. But this is not an obstacle today. Given that we are all impure, we could bring the sacrifice regardless, based on the principle of tumah hutra bi'tzibbur, communal impurity is set aside for communal sacrifices. But what about the absence of the Temple? This also need not be a halakhic barrier. The Gemara in Megilah (10a) states that the original kedusha, the sanctity, of Jerusalem and the Temple from the time of Joshua remains today. Rambam rules this way, explaining that the kedusha of the Temple and Jerusalem never departed, for once God's Presence rests in a place it remains there for all eternity (Laws of the Temple, 6:1416). One might argue that this does not sufficiently address the lack of a physical Temple, but the Gemara Megilah (10a) also says "makrivim af al pi she'eyn bayit," "one can offer sacrifices even without a Temple." Rambam also rules in accordance with this. So, even though we are ritually impure and without a Temple, it would seem that we could still offer sacrifices. (And the priestly garments could be easily manufactured - there is an institute in Israel that has already done so!) This position was argued by Hatam Sofer in a responsum, but for him the discussion was merely theoretical (YD 2:236). In the following generation, his student, Rav Tzvi Hirsch Kalisher, tried to make the theory a reality. Rav Kalisher wrote an entire book, Drishat Tzion, arguing for the obligation to bring the korban Pesach. In writing the book, he hoped to put the bringing of the korban Pesach at the top of the communal agenda. Rav Kalisher's initiative and his motivation for it can be better understood in a larger historical context. He began it when the Reform movement was just starting. The rejection of both the significance of the Land of Israel and the concept of shivat Tziyon, the return to the Land of Israel, was high on the agenda of the budding Reform movement, and the repudiation of the whole institution of sacrifices went hand-in-hand with this. It was thus important for Rav Kalisher to reassert the centrality of the Land of Israel, the Temple, and the sacrifices. In hopes of getting other rabbis to sign on to his initiative, Rav Kalisher sent his book to Rav Yaakov Ettlinger, a staunch opponent of the Reform movement in Altona, Germany, for approval. Rav Ettlinger did not sign on. Instead, he offered a surprising counter-text to the passage in the Talmud allowing one to bring sacrifices without a Temple, and his response brings us back to the phrase, "a pleasing smell" (Teshuvot Binyan Tzion 1). Rav Ettlinger quotes a Biblical verse at the end of Vayikra that prophesizes the destruction of the Temple. That verse states: "And I will lay waste to your Sanctuaries, and I will not smell the sweet savor of the sacrifices" (Vayikra, 26:31). According to Rav Ettlinger, this verse is telling us that, although the Sanctuary retains its sanctity even after its destruction, and one can technically still bring sacrifices, God declares that God no longer desires such sacrifices, that they will not be considered li'rayach nichoach, as a sweet savor. And it is a halakhic principle that a sacrifice that is not considered to be for a sweet savor is invalid. In an astounding move in the context of a halakhic, Torah she'b'al Peh argument, Rav Ettlinger states that, "although the Talmud says that one can still bring sacrifices, God states: 'I will not smell their sweet savor.'" God trumps the Talmud! But what about the statement that sacrifices can still be brought? This, answers Rav Ettlinger, is only when God is no longer "laying waste to the Sanctuary." At any time in which the Temple is being actively rebuilt but has not yet been completed - such as the beginning of the Second Commonwealth or as will be in Messianic times - one can bring sacrifices without a Temple. But as long as the Temple is laid waste, then God is telling us that God does not want our sacrifices. Rav Ettlinger's approach is of great importance. It speaks to how we deal - theologically and practically - not only with the destruction of the Temple, but with other historical developments that the Jewish people have had to face. He argues that God sends us messages through historical events, and in our responses, we should not try to recreate previous realities in today's world. Rather, we should respond in a manner appropriate to the context of contemporary realities. The question of how to respond to the destruction of the Temple, and along with it the corresponding transition to a Judaism in which prayer and Torah learning are the central forms of worship, is actually debated in Hazal. There are those that see our contemporary forms of worship as mere substitutes for a more ideal, sacrificial order - "nishalma parim si'fateinu," "let our lips be a substitute for oxen" (Hoshea, 14:3) - and there are those who state that prayer and Torah are greater than sacrifice. The latter approach can be seen in a verse from Tehillim, a verse that follows the opening of the Shemoneh Esrei itself: "God, open up my lips, and let my mouth speak of Your praise. For You do not desire a sacrifice, that I should give it. A burnt offering you do not want" (Tehilim, 51:16-17). As we approach Pesach and prepare to celebrate the seder with all its rituals, we can reflect on the meaning of the seder night and how it has transformed from the time when we had a Temple and the entire people gathered together to sacrifice and eat the Paschal lamb. While our sedarim are certainly less bloody, and while we may believe as Rav Ettlinger did that such sacrifices are no longer desired, we can still be saddened by the loss of the sweet savor that came from a truly communal, nationwide celebration of the chag of Pesach. Without sacrifices, it is up to us to identify how our worship, on the seder night and throughout the year, can bring us together as a people and connect us to God, so that it may rise up and be received by God as a sweet savor. Shabbat Shalom! Shabbat Shalom Vayikra 5775 (Leviticus 1:1 – 5:26) Efrat, Israel – “He [God] called to Moses, and the Lord spoke to him from the Tent of Meeting saying…”(Leviticus 1:1) So opens the third book of the Pentateuch, the book known as Torat Kohanim, the book of the priest-ministers of the Divine Sanctuary, the guardians of the rituals connecting Israel to God. Indeed, this book in Hebrew is, like the others, called by its opening word, Vayikra. And herein lies a problem. Each of the other four books is called by its opening words, but in those instances the opening words have great significance. Bereishit [Genesis] is the beginning, the moment in which God called the world-creation into being; Shemot [Exodus], the names of the family members who came down to Egypt, and the exile-slavery experience which transformed them into a nation with a national mission; Bamidbar [Numbers], the desert sojourn of a newly freed people who had to learn the responsibilities of managing a nation-state; and Devarim [Deuteronomy], the farewell words of Moses. But what is the significance of Vayikra – God calling out to Moses, as the name for a biblical book? Did not God call out to Moses from the time that he came onto the scene of Jewish history? And why is it specifically this time that Moses chose to express his modesty, the word is spelled with a small alef, as if to record that God merely “chanced upon him” (Vayiker), but had not specifically called out to him? I believe that the answer lies in the very strange final words of the last portion of the Book of Exodus, at the conclusion of Pekudei: “The cloud covered the Tent of Meeting, and the glory of the Lord filled the Tabernacle. Moses could not enter the Tent of Meeting, for the cloud rested upon it, and the glory of the Lord filled the Tabernacle…” (Exodus 40:34-35) We saw in last week’s commentary the majestic words of the Ramban (Nahmanides), explaining how the Book of Exodus concludes the Jewish exile with the glory of the Lord resting upon – and filling – the Tabernacle. Was it not Moses who asked God to reveal His glory to him? Was Moses not the supreme individual in human history who came closer to the Divine than anyone else, who “spoke to God face to face,” whose active intellect actually kissed the active intellect of the Shechina? Why is Moses forbidden from entering the Tent of Meeting? Moses should have entered straightaway, precisely because the glory of God was then filling the Tabernacle! Apparently, the Bible is teaching a crucial lesson about Divine Service: God wants human beings to strive to come close to God, but not too close. God demands even from Moses a measured distance between God and human beings. We must serve Him, but not beyond that which He commands us to do. In Divine Service, we dare not go beyond the laws He ordains that we perform. There is no “beyond the requirements of the law” in the realm of the laws between humans and God. God understands the thin line between kadosh and kadesh: Divine service and diabolical suicide bombers, fealty to the King of all Kings and fanatic sacrifice to Moloch. Hence not only does our Bible record the commands God gave to Moses regarding the construction of every aspect of the Divine Sanctuary (Truma and Tetzaveh) but it painstakingly informs us again and again in Vayakhel and Pekudei that those orders were carried out exactly as they had been commanded, no less and no more: “Moses did according to everything that the Lord had commanded, so did he do” (Ex. 40:16). This is why, further on in the Book of Leviticus God metes out a stringent death penalty upon Nadab and Abihu, sons of Aaron, when they bring before the Lord a “strange fire which they had not been commanded to bring” (Lev. 10:1) in the midst of national fervor of exultant song. Moses even explains this tragic occurrence by saying, “of this did the Lord speak, saying ‘I will be sanctified by those who come [too] close to Me.’” Too close to God can be more dangerous than too distant from Him. This is why both the Rambam (Maimonides) and the Ramban interpret the commandment par excellence in interpersonal human relationships, “You shall do what is right and good” (Deut. 6:18), to necessitate going beyond the legal requirements, to make certain that you not act like a “scoundrel within the confines of the law,” whereas in the area of Divine-human relationships, you dare not take the law into your own hands; our legal authorities are concerned lest your motivation be yuhara, excessive pride before God, religious “one-upmanship.” Thus the sacred Book of Vayikra, the book which features our religious devotion to the Lord, opens with Moses’s reluctance to enter the Tabernacle of the Lord unless he is actually summoned to do so by God. His humility is even more in evidence when he records only in miniature the final letter alef in the word Vayikra, as if to say that perhaps the call he had received by God was more by accident than by design. The Midrash (Tanhuma 37) teaches that the small amount of ink which should have been utilized on the regular-sized alef of the Torah (as it were), was placed by God on Moses’s forehead; that ink of humility is what provided Moses’s face with the translucent glow with which he descended from Mount Sinai (Ex. 34:33-35). Fanatic zealots are completely devoid of humility; they operate with the fire without rather than the radiant light from within! Shabbat Shalom Attitudes to Leviticus This week is a week of beginnings in our Torah reading cycle. We experience the rare event of taking three scrolls from the Ark this Shabbat. The first is the regular Shabbat portion cycle. This week we begin the third book of the Torah, Leviticus, Vayikrah. Our second scroll is read in honor of the coincidence of the new month of Nisan, beginning on Shabbat. And our third scroll is the final installation of the special unit of Torah readings that are arranged as we lead into Pesach. This final, special reading is called Parshat Hachodesh and it marks the historic event of the start of God-given time to the Israelites in Egypt. Our regular Shabbat reading, Leviticus, also known as the Law of the Priests, centers on the sacred realm - the pure, impure, holy and profane. Of all the books of the Torah, Vayikrah is the most esoteric. Some students may approach this book, feeling similar to the Talmudic explanation as to why the Torah would include the mitzvah for parents to stone their wayward son, to which, the answer is given - there never was such a case, but the Torah included that injunction as opportunity to learn. We don’t perform these mitzvot, but we can learn from them. Perhaps, the great yeshivot and study halls would start children on their course of study with Leviticus as a pedagogic value: the student of Torah must study all of Torah, no matter the degree of application. Torah Lishmah, Torah study for its own sake is the highest achievement in the sphere of Torah. If teachers give students a demanding, intellectually challenging goal in their studies, students are more likely to try and reach, rather than settle with the lowest common denominator. By beginning a life of Torah study with Vayikrah, students understand that they are being challenged to study Torah for its own sake. However, Maimonides laments in his introduction to the Mishna that of all talmudic discourse the order of Kodshim, the sacred realm, has the least original insights. He suggests that the reason for the dearth is because we don’t offer the sacrifices daily. Prayer in synagogue has replaced the sacrifices that were offered in the Temple in Jerusalem. So a regular challenge that we face as we move through this book is making the texts and the commandments relevant. On a somewhat painful note, Nachmanides explains in his introduction to the book of Vayikrah that the goal of this book is to teach the community how to preserve the Divine presence in the Temple. But the painful reality is that when the Temples fell and our exile began, we lost the Divine presence. We live in a state of hester panim, the hidden face of God. Then studying Leviticus is to look at a portrait of a world long gone. Finally, when thinking about Vayikrah, we recall the prophetic mantra, which finds many resonances from the phrase ‘why do you offer Me all these sacrifices?’ In ancient Israel, sacrifices were so commonplace that they became empty; meaningless gestures. This is the danger of ritual; our sacred task can become ritualized. We put food in our mouths at dinner time even though we are not hungry; we offer a sacrifice to God, even though it is insincere. Solomon wrestled with this idea: ‘Righteousness and justice is more desirable to God than sacrifices.‘ (Proverbs 21:3) Prayer, like sacrifices has the danger of becoming routine. This is the work of the searcher - sanctify the ordinary. Shabbat Shalom Umevorach, Rabbi Menashe East
© Copyright 2024