03 Sep 2010 - 24 Elul 5770
Weekly Dvar Torah
As part of the community's education programme, members are invited to deliver a Dvar Torah after the Kiddush each Shabbat morning. If you are not on the list and would like to give a Dvar Torah, please contact the Synagogue office.
On this page can be found some of the many Divrei Torah given by members of the community. If you would like one of yours to appear please send it as a Word document to the Synagogue office.
Ki Tetze
This Dvar Torah was written to mark the end
of the sheloshim for Phyllis Saunders, Faige bat Shimon HaLevi
Today’s parsha begins with war and ends with
war. Superficially it begins as a continuation of the halachic rules of war
already mentioned in the previous parsha of Shoftim. However, the first war
described is against an unknown, unspecified and unidentified enemy. It is so
to speak, a generic war, fought for causes that are not clear and in
undetermined circumstances.
The first war is not a mandatory one. The
Torah prefaces it with the word “ki” – when or if – you go to war. Many
of the commentators have transferred the scene of battle from warring with
external physical enemies to a struggle with one’s own self and one’s base
desires and inappropriate behaviour. Going to war against “your enemy” is thus
really going to war against one’s own self.
Therefore, in this light, the examples that the Torah gives us in this
week’s parsha are most pertinent to a war with one’s own weaknesses and
failings.
The second war is one of the mitzvot of the
Torah. It is described at the end of the parsha and is fought against a bitter
age-old foe, Amalek, and is a war of self-preservation. It is obligatory on
all. It is to save Israel from the hands of an enemy whose sole intention is to
annihilate us. The wars therefore differ not only in purpose and cause but in
intensity as well. In the war against Amalek we seek not temporary triumph but
permanent achievement. We seek literally the obliteration of Amalek.
The parsha of Ki Tetze
contains 74 mitzvot, 27 positive and 47 negative. In this it resembles more the
parsha of Kedoshim in Vayikra than it does the other parshiyot of Devarim,
which are more general and are devoted to national history and Jewish destiny.
But the mitzvot in Ki Tetze are the backbone of all Jewish history and are the
tools of survival that insure that there will always be a Jewish destiny to
pursue. It is undoubtedly with this in mind that the rabbinic commentators over
the ages interpreted the opening verse of the parsha - "When you go out to
war against your enemy" - in an allegorical and not merely a literal
sense. The "war against your enemy" refers to the ongoing war of
conscience and morality within ourselves in which we are constantly engaged all
of our lives. "The enemy" lurks within us. It is a war between right
and wrong, discipline and hedonism, instant gratification and long-term
benefit. Every day of our lives we make these choices and fight these battles.
The Torah, which always advises us to choose life and eternity, supplies us
with these mitzvot - the material aid in our struggle.
The
Torah scroll is mostly formatted in justified columns. The only punctuation
breaking up the narrative is a system of blank spaces and skipped lines.
Eliyahu Ki Tov in his monumental work Sefer Haparshiot explains that the blank
spaces serve two purposes. The blank spaces that are located in the middle of a
line of words (called a Satoom - sealed-space) signify the end of one topic and
the beginning of another related topic. The blank spaces that are
located at the end of a line of words (Patuach - open-space) signify the end of
a topic and the beginning of another unrelated topic. Many printed
Chumashim identify these spaces with the Hebrew letters Samech or Pay. The Artscroll
Stone Chumash has the actual spaces formatted into their publication.
In
our sedra the first seven topics: the woman captive, the first-born's share of
his father's inheritance, the rebellious son, hanging and burial after capital punishment,
returning lost articles, the fallen animal and transvestism are separated from
each other by sealed-spaces, which means that they share a common theme.
As Moshe bid farewell to the Jewish nation he
helped them to focus on the simple truths. Self-respect and personal dignity
are essentials for building a G-d-fearing, moral family and society.
The underlying support for the Torah's
judicial system is the belief that G-d rewards and punishes, and that nothing
escapes the inevitable consequences of His absolute knowledge and control. Our
responsibility is to overcome the instinctive need to be in control of our own
destinies and accept that G-d is the one truly in charge. The focus of this
week's Parsha is to extend the acceptance of G-d's absolute control to all
areas of social and religious law.
The difference between our laws and all other
legal systems is that our laws are divinely commanded, not humanly inspired. As
Rabbi Hirsch explained in many of his essays, the Torah was given in a wasteland
prior to entering the land of Israel. All other legal systems are the byproduct
of an equation made up of the land, the people, and their unique history. These
factors come together to formulate laws and statutes that best accommodate the
needs of the people in their chosen homeland and the specific circumstances of
their histories. Therefore, all legal systems are subject to change as the
needs and perceptions of the people inevitably change. The Torah, on the other
hand, was entirely presented to the people in the desert before the interaction
of nation, land, and history of the nation's interaction with the land.
Therefore, the Torah is not a historically or circumstantially biased document
that is subject to the changes of time or circumstance.
One method for classifying the 613 mitzvot
involves dividing them between the logical, common- sense mitzvot, and the
dogmatic, seemingly illogical mitzvot. In fact, our unique challenge is to
accept all the mitzvot as being divinely ordained and beyond our limited,
logical justification or rationalization. For example, we aim to give Tzedaka
because we are commanded to do so; not because we feel compassion or pity for
the plight of the poor. Yes, we are supposed to feel compassion and pity;
however, the only guarantee that charity will always be given, and be given
properly, is if we accept the obligation to do so, regardless of our feelings
or moods. Parshas Ki Tetze presents a series of laws that underscore this unique
aspect of our legal system.
Starting with Perek 22, Pasuk 1, we can follow
the sequence of laws presented in this week's Parsha.
(1) The law of returning a lost object is
detailed. Clearly, this is a legal issue worthy of note. Questions of ownership
and proof, personal responsibility for each other as well as our own
belongings, are all part of this legal discussion. It makes sense that the
Torah would include these fundamental concerns within the legal code of the
nation.
(2) The Torah continues to detail our
responsibilities for the care and well-being of each other's property in the
law of helping the stumbling ox or donkey. These first two laws are socially
oriented and could be classified as logical and commonsense.
(3) The law against cross-dressing; and the
need for clearly delineated modes of dress between men and woman is commanded.
(4) The law of the Kan Tzipor - sending away
the mother bird before taking the eggs or the young birds, is commanded.
Many might argue that these two laws are more
dogmatic than rational. Our modern and liberal society certainly feels that
dress is a personal issue that is not subject to the whims and concerns of
religious instruction. Dress should be a matter of circumstance dictated by
comfort and need. However, the Torah feels differently. Men and women must
accept their differences and reflect those differences in the dignity of their
dress and behaviour.
Regarding the case of the mother bird, the
Talmud presents this seemingly compassionate mitzvah as the classic example of
a law that must be performed because G-d commanded it, not because of our sense
of compassion or pity.
(5) The obligation to build a guard rail
around an accessible roof (or pool) is detailed, followed by,
(6) the prohibition against Kilayim -
planting mixtures of seeds or plants;
(7) the laws against harnessing an ox and
donkey together for the purpose of threshing grain; and
(8) the law of shatnez - not mixing wool and
linen threads in the same garment, followed by
(9) the mitzvah of Tzitzit.
Planting mixtures, shatnez and tzitzit are
far from logical or rational. They are clearly symbolic or theological having
no obvious impact on the interactions of society or justice! Yet, the Torah
presents all these laws, mixed together in the course of 12 consecutive verses!
The intent of the Torah is clear. Mitzvot are
the commandments of G-d directed to us. Our responsibility is to follow His
laws, regardless of time, circumstance or reason. We attempt to understand G-d's
intent because it brings us closer to understanding what it means to have been
created in His image. However, we accept that our understanding is secondary to
the performance of G-d's laws.
Among the many civil obligations in this
weeks parsha is the mitzvah of “hashavat aveidah”, to return lost
articles to our fellow Jew. Under most circumstances one may not turn away from
the obligation to take in and return something lost. The Talmud spends a great
amount of time and effort detailing this mitzvah in the second chapter of
Tractate Bava Metziah. But the last few words of the commandment need
clarification.
It does not tell us you are not allowed to
hide, rather it tells us, "lo suuchal, you will not be able to hide."
Why not? Who is stopping you? Surely Hashem does not intervene in our free
choice to shun our responsibilities?
When it comes to involving ourselves in
communal responsibilities whether it is returning lost souls or lost items, we
may try to appear as if we do not know what is happening around us. We may act
lost ourselves. We sometimes forget that Hashem is everywhere. We think He is
focused on one place and is not interested in the tiny details of a person and
a lost object. Such thinking is as silly as the story of the kids at a Bar Mitzvah,
when the rabbi stacked a bunch of apples on one end of a table with a sign
saying, "Take only one apple please G-d is watching." On the other
end of the table was a pile of cookies where a friend of the Bar Mitzvah boy
had placed a sign saying, "Take all the cookies you want - God is watching
the apples."
As the
Jews were preparing to move on from their experiences in the desert, Moshe
instructed them in detailed laws of sensitivity and trust. The law of retrieving
and returning a lost object is predicated on trusting G-d. It presumes that all
objects are valuable to their rightful owner, either because of their intrinsic
value or because they were given to him by G-d. As such, we act on the
assumption that the owner did not forgo finding his lost object and would be
grateful for its return. That assumption imposes responsibilities on us to do
everything in our means to return that item
There is no obligation to
return an item if it is clearly insignificant and the owner does not care about
it. Similarly, one need not return an item which has obviously been abandoned
by its owner and is found lying in the street.
Although
the basic halachah does not require returning the item of a non-Jew it is
proper to do so in order to sanctify Hashem's Name.
The
mitzvah of hashavat aveidah applies only as long as the owner of the
item expects and hopes that it will be found and returned. If, however, the
owner has given up hope of recovering his loss and has written it off, the
Torah does not obligate the finder to fulfill the mitzvah.
It is,
however, correct to go beyond the strict requirements of the halachah and
return any object to a person who offers proof of ownership - even if he has
despaired of recovering it. It is considered the "right and proper"
thing to do
The verse in our sedra "You shall not
see the ox of your brother, or his sheep or goat, having wandered off,
and ignore them; you shall surely return them to your brother."
[22:1]
is parallel to one we read in Parshat
Mishpatim, Exodus 23:4
"When you come upon the ox of your enemy,
or his donkey wandering, you shall surely return it to him."
The two verses are similar, but they are also
very different. In Exodus we learn that there is an obligation to return lost
animals and objects belonging to "your enemy," but here we learn to
return property to "your brother." Why is it that when the Torah
first mentions this mitzvah, it refers to the ox of "your enemy,"
while here it speaks about the ox of "your brother?"
The following answer, said in the name of
Rabbeinu Bechaya, is that the Torah is teaching us that it is not enough to
simply return the ox of "your enemy." There is an additional
objective, to remove the hatred from your heart, making him "your
brother" instead. The mitzvah must cause you to lose the hatred, and develop
feelings of compassion and love in its place.
It is always possible for a person to do a
mitzvah as if it had neither meaning nor purpose, and say that he or she has
done the mitzvah - end of story. But one cannot ignore the deeper purpose of
the mitzvot so many of which are focused upon increasing our concern for our
fellow Jews and our fellow human beings. Mitzvot are designed to train a
person, to make him or her into a better and more caring person. The mitzvah of
returning an object is intended to result not merely in the person finding his
goat, keys, glove etc. It is supposed to cause reconciliation and love, even
between two people who were enemies.
Mel and David Lawson 21st August 2010 11 Ellul 5770
1 CECIL PARK, PINNER, MIDDX, HA5 5HJ | Tel: 020 8868 7204 | Fax: 020 8856 7011 | Email: admin@pinnersynagogue.com
Web-site development: Red Sphere Media