Tag Archives: Yeshayahu Leibowitz

Great to have you Rabbi, You are in the holy city of Jerusalem and I am in Long Island and we just finished catching up as to what’s happening on the streets literally, of Israel and Jerusalem in particular, the demonstrations are still going on. And we Jews are still struggling with what it means to be a Jew what it means to have a homeland. So about two, three weeks ago, I saw a thread in Facebook from a young Jewish scholar who I love dearly. I invited on to the podcast but he’s doing a seminar tonight. His name is Joe Schwartz. He has a law degree he has smicha. He made aliyah to Israel, and he works for the Jewish Agency. And he out of the blue wrote the following post he wrote: It seems to me that if you ask Jewish Israelis how, on one leg, they understand the basic message of Torah, the overwhelming majority would answer: That God gave the land of Israel to the Jewish people. (This would surely not be the Haredi response, of course, though I think it would be the Hiloni view, even if they think the Torah is irrelevant.) This is a reading of Torah under the influence of what Chaim Gans calls “propriety Zionism,” which Gans believes represents the Israeli-in-the-street.  That Torah might stand for a different proposition — that it could stand for concern for the most vulnerable, or religious tolerance, or freedom of conscience — seems almost completely foreign to Israeli discourse. It’s for this reason, for example, that at the weekly protests one barely sees any signs quoting any Jewish text. “We are faithful to the Declaration of Independence” is a common slogan — since in the popular understanding it is that document, and not Torah, that guarantees liberal civil rights. Torah doesn’t have an ethical character of any relevance to the protests.  This may be obvious, but in the American Jewish setting — even among most traditional Jews — I think the assumptions are quite different. Even as conservatives rail against “tikkun olam Judaism” and complain that liberal Jews read Torah as no more or less than the platform of the Democratic Party, they generally assume that Torah is a source of ethical values and has a liberal character that is relevant to a just political order. So it’s really striking to me how illiberal the prevailing understanding of Torah is in Israel, and how little liberals look to it as a source of authority.    The way I’m seeing it now is that the way we read Scripture is largely shaped by the larger ideological context in which we find ourselves. Americans are broadly liberal in their ideological commitments; and so Torah becomes in that context a liberal document. Israelis are largely “proprietary Zionists.” And so Torah becomes read in that light here. I don’t want to be fatalistic about that. I would hope that Torah itself could exert some pressure on the larger ideological commitments of the society. But I don’t know how that counter-ideological reading of Torah emerges in the first place, and what factors will account for its gaining ground. I think it is undeniable that Torah’s “core message” is that the Jews are entrusted with upholding a high ethical standard; for as long as we do, we are permitted to live in the land; when we do not, we are expelled from the land. The land is therefore not ours, not even conditionally. It is God’s, to dispose of how He sees fit. And yet, it is exceedingly rare for me to meet *anyone* in Israel who shares that basic understanding of Torah. Religious Zionists seem to simply ignore the conditionality of our tenancy.  And he had one comment. Shoshana Cohen who wrote: As I’ve probably shared, I’ve ask this question point blank (what is the most important verse or concept in the Torah) to groups of young Israelis and groups of young Americans. The Israelis almost always answer ‘am segulah’ or the like and the Americans almost always answer ‘tikkun olam’ or the like.  So, Rabbi, I was reading this week’s parsha. And I felt that it actually combines so many of these thoughts, it talks about the fact that we are privileged to have the land of Israel. And in the same breath, it talks about how contingent that is. It talks about both ethical and religious requirements that we have, that I really thought it was a case study, maybe not how to answer the question, but certainly to have the discussion about these two kinds of conflicting views of Torah. But first, let me ask you, do you do you experience the same type of I wouldn’t call it polarization but polarity in the way, Israelis, whether religious or not religious, or Americans, same….  view, the Torah and its message.   Adam Mintz  06:29 It’s such a great topic you bring up, I will go so far as to say that if I were to go now, after our clubhouse and go on a walk on Emek Rafai’im Street and say to an Israeli, what is Tikkun Olam? I mean, they would look at me like, what are you talking about? Like, what does Tikkun Olam mean? It’s a Hebrew phrase, but it’s only a phrase used by Americans. They don’t talk that way. Obviously, part of the reason is, because Israel is Israel, it’s a Jewish state. So they don’t think in terms of tikkun olam. They want to make sure that their state is solid, they’re not worried about saving the world, we have a different attitude.   Geoffrey Stern  07:10 On the most personal level, I remember my grandfather in-law would be sitting in the afternoon reading TANACH without a kippah. And I remember once I had the privilege of meeting, you know, people like Moshe Dayan, who was extremely knowledgeable in the Torah, and many times they saw the Torah, almost as a tour guide of the land, they could walk the length and width of Israel, and point out where biblical battles happened, where miracles happened. I’m not making a highly charged ideological statement. I’m just seeing it as a fact, very few Americans would look at the Bible as a travelogue. So, we are looking at two different Bibles, if you will. And I think Joe Schwartz really raises a fascinating, fascinating question. But I think we all can look at the Torah itself, and see how it weighs in. And I think our parsha, or I should say, Moses’ sermon today, in Parshat, Eikev really tries to thread that needle, and have exactly the right ,I think, emphasis on all of these different variations. I mean, even the title of the podcast is Jewish homeland, or homeland for the Jews. And at one level, you could say Jewish homeland is like it’s a homeland that is spiritual, that is driven by Jewish values. And homeland for the Jews is more like a refuge, an Er Miklat.. But the alternative reading that is Jewish homeland is this land that was given to the Jewish people as an am Segulah. It’s ours. It’s based on theology and Torah, and homeland for the Jews is a more secular approach, where it’s just for us to live in. Even the way we read those two sides of the equation. Is polarized. So let’s just jump in. It’s Deuteronomy 8: 1 and it says You shall faithfully observe all the Instruction that I enjoin upon you today, that you may thrive and increase and be able to possess the land that ה’ promised on oath to your fathers.  Now the English says possess the land. And I in the introduction even referred to occupying the land, which is a heavily loaded political way of referring to it and I’ll get to that later because I think I have a leg to stand on. But possess the land is probably a bad translation of the Hebrew וִֽירִשְׁתֶּ֣ם אֶת־הָאָ֔רֶץ  because Yirashtem comes from the word inherit, and that literally means that you have a claim to this land as opposed to possess the land, which could mean Germanic tribes are coming into Brittany and, and putting up their flag. So even in the translation, it’s kind of loaded, it goes on, therefore keep the commandments so you get the therefore already. There’s no question. This is not a possession that comes without strings attached. Therefore keep the commandments of your God. Walk in God’s ways and show reverence for your God is bringing you into a good land a land with streams and springs and fountains issuing from plain and hill, a land of wheat and barley of vine figs and pomegranates a land of olive trees and Honey, I’ve said this before, it’s almost like a travelogue. It’s a commercial for this amazing land. For people who clearly did not know anything about it. A land where you may eat food without stint where you will lack nothing a land whose rocks so iron, and from whose hills you can mine copper, when you have eaten, your fill give thanks to your God for the good land given to you. So here we have וְאָכַלְתָּ֖ וְשָׂבָ֑עְתָּ וּבֵֽרַכְתָּ֙ אֶת־ה. Here’s a string attached, you have to say Birkat HaMazon, you have to thank God before you eat, and after you eat, take care, lest you forget your God and fail to keep the divine commandments rules and laws that I enjoin upon you today. So we already have this tension between something that is a Yirusha, an entitlement, I think would be the best way to translate that. And then these requirements, these obligations that you have. Striking, isn’t it?   Adam Mintz  12:05 It really is striking. That first speech in this week’s parsha is one of my favorite speeches in the entire Torah.   Geoffrey Stern  12:13 Now we get into the warning part of it. Beware lest your heart grow haughty and you forget your God who freed you from the land of Egypt, the house of bondage, who fed you in the wilderness with Manna which your ancestors had never known in order to test you by hardships, only to benefit you in the end. And you say to yourselves, my own power and the might of my own hand have won this wealth for me. כֹּחִי֙ וְעֹ֣צֶם יָדִ֔י עָ֥שָׂה לִ֖י אֶת־הַחַ֥יִל הַזֶּֽה . So on the one hand, it starts by almost talking like a Jewish mama, who’s saying just remember all the socks that I darned for you and the food that I cooked for you. And but then it has a warning, don’t ever say it is because of me. Now, typically, that would be almost a taunt against the secular Israeli general who thinks that it’s because of his ingenuity that he won the battle. But I think we will see that it’s just as much against the righteous Jew who says because of his righteousness, he is entitled to this. Do you think that there’s both those messages there?   Adam Mintz  13:31 Yeah, there’s no question. There’s both those messages. They’re, they’re interesting about the you know, the righteousness. What it’s basically telling you is that there are two reasons that people fail in life. One is a you know, an obsession with materialism. The other is thinking that we’re more righteous than the next person. Those are very different things aren’t they?   Geoffrey Stern  13:55 Absolutely, you know, I saw one quote, It was by putting into the mouth of a Palestinian, whose town was destroyed in the 50s by the Israelis. You know that there’s this joke that we always say that the synagogue or the God that secular Israelis don’t believe in is Orthodox, this Palestinian said that the soldiers are taking our land based on a God, they don’t believe it. So, it gets back to what Joe Schwartz was saying, which is even the most secular Israeli if you ask them what the takeaway message of the Bible they don’t believe in, they would say that this land is our land. So, let’s continue. Remember that it is your God who gives you the power to get wealth in fulfillment of the covenant made on oath with your fathers as is still the case. If you do forget your God and follow other gods to serve them or bow down to them. I want you this day that you shall certainly perish like the nations that God will cause to perish before you, so shall you perish because you did not heed your God. So, I want to parse this a little bit, it would have been enough to say, if you don’t follow my commandments and keep my rules, you will lose this land. But it goes a little bit further. And it says you will lose this land, just like the people who you are attacking today who have been blessed with a generation or five or 10 on this land are losing it today. It really is focused on the conditionality of living in this much disputed land. Or maybe you could make the argument on anywhere on Earth. Only by the grace of God. are you the current owner? I think it’s coming through clearly from the verses themselves.   Adam Mintz  15:59 I think that’s right. That’s why this is such a striking speech because it says it so clearly right, so explicitly,   Geoffrey Stern  16:06 and we’re going to see this is a strong Midrash. But I am going to make the argument that it’s not based on the Midrash it’s based on these pesukim.   Adam Mintz  16:15 It’s based on the verses themselves, right?   Geoffrey Stern  16:18 It really is. Hear O’ Israel. You’re about to cross the Jordan to go in and dispossess nations greater and more populous than you great cities with walls sky high. People great and tall. The Anakites of whom you have knowledge for you have heard who can stand. Know this day, that none other than your God is crossing at your head a devouring fire subduing it. And when your God has thrust them from your path say not to yourselves, God has enabled us to possess this land because of our virtues. So here’s the I said it was intimated before when it said כֹּחִי֙ וְעֹ֣צֶם יָדִ֔י  . But here it says it, as we say, in the Yeshiva, B’Ferush. God has enabled us to possess this land because of our virtues. No, it is rather because of the wickedness of those nations that Hashem does possess them before you. It is not because of your virtues and your rectitude that you will be able to possess their country, but it’s because of their wickedness that your God is dispossessing these nations before you and in order to fulfill the oath that God made to your fathers, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, know then that it is not for any virtue of yours, that your God is giving you this good land to possess, you are a stiff-necked people remember, never forget how you provoked your god to anger in the wilderness from the day that you left the land of Egypt until you reach this place. You have continued defiant towards God, מַמְרִ֥ים הֱיִיתֶ֖ם עִם־ה . So really, it is a very humbling remark. But more importantly, it has claws on it. Moses is making the case that your connection to this land is very tenuous. And be very careful when you state your claims, and base those claims based on your righteousness. It’s fascinating,   Adam Mintz  18:25 It really is fascinating. It might be that this is the only time in the Torah itself, where the Torah actually warns against. Right self righteous, right. That’s something that were familiar with, but you don’t see it in the Torah.   Geoffrey Stern  18:40 I love that point. Because normally, we would say, you know, holier than thou, and we would quote from (Wisdom Literature) Mishlei proverbs or Psalms (or Ecclesiastes אַל־תְּהִ֤י צַדִּיק֙ הַרְבֵּ֔ה וְאַל־תִּתְחַכַּ֖ם יוֹתֵ֑ר לָ֖מָּה תִּשּׁוֹמֵֽם: (קהלת פרק ז פסוק טז).) But this is right here. And I want to go back to Deuteronomy 6, because I don’t want to pass up the nuance of what I was saying before when I quoted the verses, and it said that these are high walled cities and stuff like that. This is really not a bunch of immigrants (settlers) coming in and staking a claim to the (wild) west, the Great West, going out and putting down their mark and saying, I am going to build up this barren land. You know, there’s the saying, that the Zionists said That “Israel was a land without a people for people without land”. And of course, that was not true because there were people living in Palestine when they came. Listen to what it says in Deuteronomy 6: 10. When your God brings you into the land that was sworn to your fathers, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob to be assigned to you. It says לָ֣תֶת לָ֑ךְ  great and flourishing cities that you did not build houses full of all good things that you did not fill here. own systems that you did not hue, vineyards and olive groves that you did not plant and you will eat your fill. So I don’t want to get into an argument about colonialism and attacking another country we’re talking 2000 years ago, you know, wake up, that’s how things we’re, the argument that’s being made here is much stronger than that. It is an argument that saying, You are literally getting to take over somebody else’s creativity, buildings, urbanity all of that stuff. And with that comes not only a great responsibility, but there should come also a great level of humility. I mean, it really just comes through the verses, it would have been very easy to say you’re coming to a land without a people. But it’s not saying that.   Adam Mintz  20:53 It’s not saying that I love this, I think this is just absolutely fantastic. Again, for all the reasons that you say. Now, I think the important point about this go back to my self-righteousness point, is of course the fact that God is not making this speech. This speech is being made by Moshe and Moshe can say that, you know, you can’t be self righteous, that’s okay for Moshe to say, God saying it is a little tricky, because God probably wants people to be as righteous as they can be. I don’t want to hear God telling me not to be self righteous, I need another person to tell me not to be self righteous.   Geoffrey Stern  21:35 So now we get to Deuteronomy 10: 12. And this is the end of today’s sermon from Moses. And it says, And now Israel, what does your god demand of you? Only this to revere your God to work only in divine paths to love and to serve your God with all your heart and soul? keeping God’s commandments and laws which I enjoin upon you today for your good. Mark the heavens to their uttermost reaches. Because they belong to your God, the earth and all that is on it.  הֵ֚ן לַה’ אֱלֹקֶ֔יךָ הַשָּׁמַ֖יִם וּשְׁמֵ֣י הַשָּׁמָ֑יִם הָאָ֖רֶץ וְכׇל־אֲשֶׁר־בָּֽהּ . This is critical. God is almost saying, I created the world. And I get to decide who lives where and how long they live (there). Yet it was to your ancestors that I was drawn out of love for them, so that you their lineal descendants were chosen from among all peoples as it is now the case cut away therefore the thickening about your hearts and stiffen your necks no more for your God is God supreme and Lord supreme god. כִּ֚י ה’ אֱלֹֽקֵיכֶ֔ם ה֚וּא אֱלֹקֵ֣י הָֽאֱלֹקִ֔ים . So it’s really making the case that this radical contingency, this radical nature of your ability to be promised and to live in this land is being given to you by the Creator of all things. And that is, I think, a key point. And then it goes on to finish and this is the end and the punch line. And it’s the tikkun olam part of this speech. And it says as follows. That God is beyond the men who sit atop the social hierarchies of rank and gender, the great the mighty and the awesome God who shows no favorite and takes no bribe, but upholds the cause of the fatherless and the widow and befriends the stranger providing food and clothing. You too must befriend the stranger for you were strangers in the land of Egypt. You must revere Hashem only your God said you worship to God shall you hold fast. And by God’s name, shall you swear. I mean this I’ve said this in past podcasts. This is like the parting message. The end of a book of Micha, which is what this guy demand of you will need to walk humbly with your God. This is the punch line. And this is why I said it has it all. It ends up with this stranger with the tikkun olam with the liberalism. Rabbi, before we get to the famous, the first Rashi in all of Humash, it really is a truly a beautiful sermon, is it not?   Adam Mintz  24:35 It’s an absolutely beautiful sermon. You know, there was no speaker like Moshe, you put you Geoffrey had a great met Midrash, two weeks ago, and the Midrash it was a Tanchumah I think. It said that Ela Devarim.. The book begins. “These are the words” and Moshe when he was chosen by God, he doesn’t want to take the position Should because he’s a stutter. And the phrase he uses is Lo Ish Devaraim Anochi, the same word Devarim the man who couldn’t speak gives the most beautiful sermon of all times. Isn’t that ironic? Moshe Rabbeinu. When I said it in shul I use that Midrash in Shul, I said in Shul and my wife didn’t like it. But I’ll tell you what I said, I’ll say what my wife didn’t like. What I said was that it’s sad that Moshe only found his voice when it was too late when he was already punished. And that, you know, and therefore, he wasn’t going to enter the land. And my wife said that wasn’t fair that Moshe Rabbeinu found his voice and we’re still studying that voice in Devarim, you know in 2023. That’s valuable. I shouldn’t look at it as being sad. I should appreciate it for what it was. So I accept my wife’s comment.   Geoffrey Stern  25:53 Maybe Moshe’s Rebetzin didn’t critique his sermons as much as yours and, and that’s why you had to wait so long, but I love it. I love it. So here’s, here’s where I want to finish. The literally the first Rashi on the whole Humash has actually become kind of controversial, and it’s on the catchword. In the beginning. Rabbi Isaac said, quotes Rashi. The Torah which is the law book of Israel should have commenced with the verse in Exodus, which is the first commandment this month shall be unto you the first of months. What is the reason then that it commences with the account of creation. Because of the thought expressed in the text in Psalms, he declared to his people the strength of his works, he gave an account of the work of creation, in order that he might give them the heritage of nations. Here is a verse in Psalms that connects creating the world with giving to his favorite nation, a land. For should the people of the world, say to Israel, you are robbers because you took by force to land of the seven nations of Canaan, Israel may reply to them, all the earth belongs to the Holy One, blessed be He, He created it and gave it to whom he pleased, when he will, he gave it to them. And when he willed, He took it from them and gave it to us. And in the source notes, which are attached to today’s clubhouse, and will be attached to the podcast. I have a YouTube video of a great but very controversial scholar in Israel, named Yeshayahu Leibowitz, who was the brother of Nechama Leibowitz. And he is talking, oh, in the 60s, maybe early 70s to a bunch of B’nai Akiva, (settler) yeshiva students, and they are literally arguing with him about this Rashi. They are saying it says it was promised to the people and Yeshayahu Leibowitz says No!, you’re Misreading it, it says it was taken away from them and given to you which means that it can be taken away from you and given to the next person. And what he quotes is Ezekiel. And he quotes this verse by heart, Ezekiel 33, (24) O mortal, those who live in these ruins in the land of Israel argue, “Abraham was but one man, yet he was granted possession of the land. We are many; surely, the land has been given as a possession to us.”  (25) Therefore say to them: Thus said the Sovereign GOD: You eat with the blood, you raise your eyes to your fetishes, and you shed blood—yet you expect to possess the land!  (26) You men have relied on your sword, you have committed abominations, you have defiled one another’s wives—yet you expect to possess the land!  So Leibowitz’s main argument. And in the notes, you can see a picture of a demonstrator that I took. He’s a secular demonstrator. He is wearing a picture of Yeshayahu Leibowitz with a big black kippah on his head. And it says underneath Emarti Lachem “I told you so” and Yeshayahu Leibowitz felt that the possession the occupation of the Palestinian lands after the 67 War was a cancer and it would spread to all facets of Jewish life. The point that he made though, was really I believe that it goes back to our parsha as much as to any verse in Psalms in our parsha in the fifth book of the Bible, you already has this connection that we read Mark the heavens, Deuteronomy 10: 14. God created the world, he can give it, and he can take it. And we are there only by the grace of God. And we have to make sure that we live by a high standard. And I just think that in this one compact sermon from Moses, we really have the harmonization we have both the dialectic and possibly the resolution, that both are equally important that you have to understand that you were given this land, that it came from Abraham and Isaac that it is a Urusha. But unlike other inheritances, it is contingent, and you can be disowned at a moment’s notice. It’s all there isn’t the rabbi?   Adam Mintz  31:00 It’s all there. And that’s such a great story about Yeshayahu Leibowitz. And it’s also you know, the fact that Yeshayahu Leibowitz said I told you, so and you know, that’s an interesting way to end. So, thank you so much, Geoffrey, as always, this topic is really timely. I feel it in Jerusalem, I’ll be thinking about it and Sharon and I will talk about it over Shabbat. Shabbat shalom, enjoy Easthampton. Next week, we’ll be back in our regular location. Shabbat shalom, everybody.   Geoffrey Stern  31:28 Loren, you’ve been patiently waiting with a muted mic, I’d love to coax you to turn your mic on and say hello. Before we pack up our bags, how are you Loren?   Loren Davis  31:41 Hi, Geoffrey, nice to hear it was a wonderful presentation today. This is kind of an answering parsha for me in terms of trying to evaluate the meaning of what the Israelis say is the guidebook for our religion and our identity as Jews.  Having lived in Israel for a year. There’s a big difference between living in Israel and existing there and living in the diaspora. I think that the if then conditions that are mentioned in this parsha are interpreted in the diaspora, maybe they’re interpreted with a bit more of a theocracy in terms of their meaning and their impact. But in Israel, after my opinion is that the Israelites fulfilled a lot of the preconditions that had been established for them in the Torah, or as the modern Israelites call it their guidebook before they ever got into Canaan. And when they got into that land, it became an issue of survival. And if they didn’t survive, if they didn’t treat each other, and their lands in a manner that were consistent with the ability to flourish and to grow, then they wouldn’t exist. And I think that’s the way they look at it today. I think their ethic, I think there, their preface of living with ethical standards, and maybe even survival standards, you know, you get into so much imagery, it mentions water, it mentions a number of befriending strangers, we were strangers at one point. So, they identified a lot of the things that they had to do before they got there to create and to flourish in the land of Canaan and they’ve done it and I think if they stopped doing those things, if they turn the ethical nature of how they have what’s going on right now, if the if they turn it on themselves, turn it into themselves, I think that’s when they become threatened. And I’m not so sure it’s an if then edict from God, or maybe and if then reality of where they’re living and how they’re living in the State of Israel.   Geoffrey Stern  34:19 Yeah, I love your contemporizing it totally. I mean, you know, I think it’s very easy to fall into the rut and talk about losing our land and catastrophe. And I would I would rather talk about it in terms of losing our mojo losing the spirit that was used to create this land. It is a land as stated elsewhere in the Bible that can eat up its inhabitants. There was no question when something happens in Israel, it gets to the front page a lot quicker than elsewhere I mean, they are living out 1,000s of years of history and destiny. But I think what comes across clearly in our parsha, it has both the sense of you are not occupying a land. And I use that word because that’s what the word that Yeshayahu Leibowitz uses. In other words, once you accept the premise, that God who created the world gives it to this one and gives it to that one, aren’t we all occupants? Aren’t we all tenants? And, you know, to say that we are liberating the land or that we are, it’s there to it has the word Yerusha, which is inheritance, but it’s full of other nuances. That I think what it does more than give us answers necessarily, is it shows that all of the questions can be written in the same sentence can be written in the same parsha can be written in the same Torah. And that Dare us, Dare us to answer just tikkun olam or to answer this, this name, this land has a special place for this nation. There’s only one country in the world that the Jews call a homeland. So, I just think it’s it’s a fascinating document to read, given the conversations that are going on, and the issues that you raised that are part of the contemporary conversation.   Loren Davis  36:42 I think that the tikkun Olam discussion, maybe is, as you suggested, more of a concept, outside of Israel than it is within Israel, at least it says that’s the way it’s identified. I think that the issue probably is defined similarly. But I think the motivation and the context is a little different in in Israel than it is in the diaspora. But that’s just a an opinion. I think this is a beautifully written parsha. And it offers a lot of answers.   Geoffrey Stern  37:18 Well, thanks so much. Thank you, Loren. Thank you, Matt. Thank you Friday for joining us. We’ll see you all next week’s Shabbat Shalom and thank you so much for being part of the journey.