Saturday, December 17, 2005
Torah? From Me?!?
I went to a Tisch for High School boys Friday night. Good times on an early Shabbos. Silly kids...they asked me to speak. So here is a reworked version of the Dvar Torah I gave.
There is a famous joke, "Why did the Jews wander in the desert for 40 years? Because somebody dropped a quarter."
It seems that this stereotype is based in this week's Torah portion. The Torah mentions that after Yaakov crossed over the river with his family in order to face his brother Eisav, he remained alone for the night. The Midrash asks, if he crossed the river with his family, how could he have been left alone? The Midrash concludes that Yaakov returned to the first bank of the river in order to retrieve "Pachim K'tanim - small vessels," and remained there alone for the night. Was Yaakov really so cheap, the forefather of the generalization of Jewish cheapness? What was the value of such small vessels on the eve of such a pivotal moment in Jewish History in general, and Yaakov's life in particular?
Even more troubling is that the traditional commentaries applaud Yaakov's decision and hold it up as an example for future generations. Is cheapness then a Jewish ethos?
I read this week in The Tzedakah Treasury a comparison between King David's plans for the first temple in Jerusalem, and the rededication of the second temple by the Chashmonaim at the time of Chanuka. King David gathered gold and silver from around his kingdom and set it aside for use in the temple that he hoped to build. He reserved the finest treasures of his empire for the sole purpose of glorifying Gd's name. There was one problem, however. During his reign, the land of Israel suffered from a terrible drought. Starvation was rampant. Despite the extreme poverty, King David held onto his wealth for use in the temple. The Midrash learns that it was this mistaken priority that served as one of the reasons that King David was never able to see the glory and splendor of the temple in his lifetime.
The temple of the Chashmonaim was different, however. Most notably, at the time of the Maccabee's rededication of the temple, a wooden Menorah was used. As times improved, the Menorah was slowly upgraded, until a solid gold Menorah was again used. But the question was asked, why didn't they start with a gold Menorah? As the conquering power, surely they had enough resources to properly build the temple! The answer is that although they could have afforded it, the Chashmonaim recognized that the daily needs of the Jewish people take precedence over ceremonial objects. They first channeled the nations wealth towards alleviating poverty, and only later directed the excess towards the temple accoutrements.
What separated the Chashmonaim from King David? What knowledge did they have above that of the Psalmist? The Chashmonaim recognized the value of everything. They realized that money isn't a means of displaying accomplishment, but a method of achieving it. The secret of the Maccabees was that they knew that a little money goes a long way when used correctly.
We see this in one of the central miracles of Chanukah. After regaining independence for the Jewish people, the Chashmonaim find only one "Pach Shemen - vessel of oil" left to light the Menorah. Just like Yaakov in this weeks Parsha, the Chashmonaim knew the power of even the smallest amount of material wealth. That same small "Pach" wasn't disregarded, viewed as unnecessary. And when even the small things are valued, they go a long way. The same spirit that saw that gold should be invested in people, not tributes, didn't overlook a dusty, forgotten container in the temple courtyard.
And now we can see why Yaakov was lauded for returning for such immaterial items. Far from being cheap, he simply realized the value of even the smallest possession that Gd had blessed him with. The Commentaries meant to instill this value, not cheapness, as one of the highest ethics of the Jewish fabric.
If one "Pach" of oil can last eight days, how much was accomplished with the "Pach" that Yaakov might otherwise have left behind? And how many "Pachim K'tanim - small vessels" are there in our lives that go unappreciated? We should not only be thankful for the smallest blessings, but realize that like the miracle of Chanuka, we have the potential to turn them into limitless gifts for others.
Editorial Update: I checked back on The Tzedakah Treasury quote, and it was way off. The story unfolded very differently, although the moral lesson was the same. I encourage you to open the book to learn the actual occurence of events.
There is a famous joke, "Why did the Jews wander in the desert for 40 years? Because somebody dropped a quarter."
It seems that this stereotype is based in this week's Torah portion. The Torah mentions that after Yaakov crossed over the river with his family in order to face his brother Eisav, he remained alone for the night. The Midrash asks, if he crossed the river with his family, how could he have been left alone? The Midrash concludes that Yaakov returned to the first bank of the river in order to retrieve "Pachim K'tanim - small vessels," and remained there alone for the night. Was Yaakov really so cheap, the forefather of the generalization of Jewish cheapness? What was the value of such small vessels on the eve of such a pivotal moment in Jewish History in general, and Yaakov's life in particular?
Even more troubling is that the traditional commentaries applaud Yaakov's decision and hold it up as an example for future generations. Is cheapness then a Jewish ethos?
I read this week in The Tzedakah Treasury a comparison between King David's plans for the first temple in Jerusalem, and the rededication of the second temple by the Chashmonaim at the time of Chanuka. King David gathered gold and silver from around his kingdom and set it aside for use in the temple that he hoped to build. He reserved the finest treasures of his empire for the sole purpose of glorifying Gd's name. There was one problem, however. During his reign, the land of Israel suffered from a terrible drought. Starvation was rampant. Despite the extreme poverty, King David held onto his wealth for use in the temple. The Midrash learns that it was this mistaken priority that served as one of the reasons that King David was never able to see the glory and splendor of the temple in his lifetime.
The temple of the Chashmonaim was different, however. Most notably, at the time of the Maccabee's rededication of the temple, a wooden Menorah was used. As times improved, the Menorah was slowly upgraded, until a solid gold Menorah was again used. But the question was asked, why didn't they start with a gold Menorah? As the conquering power, surely they had enough resources to properly build the temple! The answer is that although they could have afforded it, the Chashmonaim recognized that the daily needs of the Jewish people take precedence over ceremonial objects. They first channeled the nations wealth towards alleviating poverty, and only later directed the excess towards the temple accoutrements.
What separated the Chashmonaim from King David? What knowledge did they have above that of the Psalmist? The Chashmonaim recognized the value of everything. They realized that money isn't a means of displaying accomplishment, but a method of achieving it. The secret of the Maccabees was that they knew that a little money goes a long way when used correctly.
We see this in one of the central miracles of Chanukah. After regaining independence for the Jewish people, the Chashmonaim find only one "Pach Shemen - vessel of oil" left to light the Menorah. Just like Yaakov in this weeks Parsha, the Chashmonaim knew the power of even the smallest amount of material wealth. That same small "Pach" wasn't disregarded, viewed as unnecessary. And when even the small things are valued, they go a long way. The same spirit that saw that gold should be invested in people, not tributes, didn't overlook a dusty, forgotten container in the temple courtyard.
And now we can see why Yaakov was lauded for returning for such immaterial items. Far from being cheap, he simply realized the value of even the smallest possession that Gd had blessed him with. The Commentaries meant to instill this value, not cheapness, as one of the highest ethics of the Jewish fabric.
If one "Pach" of oil can last eight days, how much was accomplished with the "Pach" that Yaakov might otherwise have left behind? And how many "Pachim K'tanim - small vessels" are there in our lives that go unappreciated? We should not only be thankful for the smallest blessings, but realize that like the miracle of Chanuka, we have the potential to turn them into limitless gifts for others.
Editorial Update: I checked back on The Tzedakah Treasury quote, and it was way off. The story unfolded very differently, although the moral lesson was the same. I encourage you to open the book to learn the actual occurence of events.
# posted by Josh : Saturday, December 17, 2005
Comments:
<< Home
great dvar torah!
that makes so much sense. but it seems like that is such a common theme and lesson throughout the torah, but one of those lessons that has to practically be beaten into us. i mean, even when we were wandering the desert, how often did we complain, and forget the big miracles, and then overlook the little miracles (like the mannah, and the protection afforded us)???
but the truth is, it is probably one of the most difficult lessons to learn (is that why yaakov is the one chosen to show us this?)
i think that yaakov's retrieval of these small items also shows that he has a propensity toward compassion as well.
that makes so much sense. but it seems like that is such a common theme and lesson throughout the torah, but one of those lessons that has to practically be beaten into us. i mean, even when we were wandering the desert, how often did we complain, and forget the big miracles, and then overlook the little miracles (like the mannah, and the protection afforded us)???
but the truth is, it is probably one of the most difficult lessons to learn (is that why yaakov is the one chosen to show us this?)
i think that yaakov's retrieval of these small items also shows that he has a propensity toward compassion as well.
Bec - Your point is spot-on. It seems that most religious concepts fall into a certain number of pre-defined categories, and any Dvar Torah can usually be filed directly into one of them. (When I listen to a shiur or dvar torah, I tend to space out as soon as I've dropped it in the appropriate bucket.) But it seems that no matter how obvious the idea, we are ever slow to internalize it, and repitition and saying it in just the right metaphor are the keys.
Masmida - Not that I'm the authority on the subject (thank goodness nobody asked me any questions on my speech when I gave it. I surely would've fumbled), but I'll venture two possible answers. The first is that King David simply had the option of never making the wealth Kodesh. As it came in, he could have distributed it to people instead of setting it aside for Temple use. The second answer is more complicated, and I'm not sure if it would actually work. Since the Temple hadn't been built yet, any gifts intended to be used for decorative purposes could be said to not be made Hekdesh. Since the temple was not in existence, any promise relying on the fact of something which may never actually come into being would be nullified. I'm not sure if we'd apply this logic to Kodshim, but I think I've seen the Gemara use it in Civil oaths.
Masmida - Not that I'm the authority on the subject (thank goodness nobody asked me any questions on my speech when I gave it. I surely would've fumbled), but I'll venture two possible answers. The first is that King David simply had the option of never making the wealth Kodesh. As it came in, he could have distributed it to people instead of setting it aside for Temple use. The second answer is more complicated, and I'm not sure if it would actually work. Since the Temple hadn't been built yet, any gifts intended to be used for decorative purposes could be said to not be made Hekdesh. Since the temple was not in existence, any promise relying on the fact of something which may never actually come into being would be nullified. I'm not sure if we'd apply this logic to Kodshim, but I think I've seen the Gemara use it in Civil oaths.
Ah, it's all about the money!
One thing that overwhelmed me early on in my journey to Orthodox Judaism is the importance of "beautifying a mitzvah". Not that non-Orthodox Jews flaunt mieskeit during the holidays; but the attention to ritual Judaica given by the Orthodox can be breathtaking at times.
Now for me, a woman who watches the gas prices like investors watch the stock market, it has taken time to feel "ok" with spending $200 + on Shabbos candlesticks instead of just settling for some neo-modern glass ones for a fraction of the price (not that those are ugly or non-kosher even). Everything is like that; the challah cover, the esrog, the seder plate. To do the mitzvah is the main point for sure. But to spend a little bit more on it and foresake buying a Kate Spade purse.
Ahh....priorities!
Yasher Koach.
One thing that overwhelmed me early on in my journey to Orthodox Judaism is the importance of "beautifying a mitzvah". Not that non-Orthodox Jews flaunt mieskeit during the holidays; but the attention to ritual Judaica given by the Orthodox can be breathtaking at times.
Now for me, a woman who watches the gas prices like investors watch the stock market, it has taken time to feel "ok" with spending $200 + on Shabbos candlesticks instead of just settling for some neo-modern glass ones for a fraction of the price (not that those are ugly or non-kosher even). Everything is like that; the challah cover, the esrog, the seder plate. To do the mitzvah is the main point for sure. But to spend a little bit more on it and foresake buying a Kate Spade purse.
Ahh....priorities!
Yasher Koach.
Thanks guys.
Shona - You bring up a great point. Hiddur Mitzvah is something special. But sometimes I wonder if it gets mixed up with not-so-pure intentions (ie trying to out do others). Maybe an idea for another post. It is a fascinating concept!
Elster - ;?) (That's with a big stereotypical nose. Now I just need a big tongue in cheek smiley.)
Shona - You bring up a great point. Hiddur Mitzvah is something special. But sometimes I wonder if it gets mixed up with not-so-pure intentions (ie trying to out do others). Maybe an idea for another post. It is a fascinating concept!
Elster - ;?) (That's with a big stereotypical nose. Now I just need a big tongue in cheek smiley.)
i think early european anti-semitism was because jews were relegated as money lenders.
but josh...oh man, totally bril--you are so awesome!
but josh...oh man, totally bril--you are so awesome!
My favorite reason for the Jews wandering for 40 years is that they wouldn't stop to ask for directions, thus proving they were lead by men!
Last night I read some commentary about the very episode you noted with Yaakov going back to get the jars. What was such a big deal that he had to risk his life to get them? (the following is based on an analysis of an address by the Lubavitcher Rebbe, Pesach 5721) As I'm sure you're aware, every object has within it sparks of G-dliness. When a person uses something to serve G-d, we elevate the sparks in that object. Now here's the kicker: every soul has its own sparks - and "no soul is complete until it has redeemed those sparks related to its being. Thus a person moves through life, impelled from place to place ... through seemingly random forces, but everything is by divine providence, which guides every man to those possessions and opportunities whose essence is intimately connected with his (soul)."
Therefore, the Talmud says that the righteous "value their possessions more than their bodies." (I believe this is Chullin 91a).
"For they recognize the divine potential in every bit of matter, and see in each of their possessions a component of their own spiritual integrity."
(All ideas above quoted from "Week in Review, Dec. 18, 1999, Published by Vaad Hanochos Hatmimim, www.meaningfullife.com, Editor-in-Chief Simon Jacobson."
Post a Comment
Therefore, the Talmud says that the righteous "value their possessions more than their bodies." (I believe this is Chullin 91a).
"For they recognize the divine potential in every bit of matter, and see in each of their possessions a component of their own spiritual integrity."
(All ideas above quoted from "Week in Review, Dec. 18, 1999, Published by Vaad Hanochos Hatmimim, www.meaningfullife.com, Editor-in-Chief Simon Jacobson."
# posted by 
: January 01, 2006 6:31 AM
: January 01, 2006 6:31 AM<< Home
