Rabbi Neal's Weekly Commentary

Copyright 2014 Neal Joseph Loevinger

Copyright 2013 Neal Joseph Loevinger

Torah Portion: Emor

“None shall defile himself for any person among his people . . “ (Vayikra 21:1)

Greetings!

At the beginning of this week’s Torah portion, Emor, we read a set of laws which keep the kohanim, or priests, in a state of ritual purity and away from the ritual impurity of death. Thus, the verse above teaches that a kohen will not touch a dead body, and the verses which follow offer some exceptions for immediate family members. Yet things are not so clear cut, and Rashi brings an close reading from an earlier text which illustrates an important ethical principle:

none shall defile himself for any person among his people. . .

[this means] while the dead one is among his people. It excludes one who has no one to bury him.

Let’s unpack what Rashi means: he’s reading the phrase “among his people” to mean that if there is a family member or somebody else (that is, there are people around)  to bury the body, then the priest should not come into contact with ritual impurity. Yet Rashi says the priest must bury the met mitzvah, literally the “corpse which is commanded,” that is, someone with no family or “people” to arrange the funeral. It’s a mitzvah, or commandment, to attend to such a person, even for the priest.

OK, so far we’ve learned that the priest has to step in if nobody else is around, but I don’t think this is just about burials- though it’s also certainly true that it is a profound act to honor the dead by attending funerals and making sure that even those without family have dignified interments. Having said that, let’s take a step back and look at the general idea: even one with strict rules and boundaries and responsibilities, such as the priests of ancient Israel, had to step out of their customary role to attend to the immediate need of someone who had no one else.

Seen this way, the text applies not just at the end of life but throughout our journeys. How often is there someone in emotional, financial, spiritual or practical need right in front of us? Yet it’s all too easy to “not defile ourselves” with people’s challenges  and problems, retreating into our roles and jobs and schedules and errands and emails and myriad distractions, instead of attending to others when the need is urgent. Even the priest had to attend to the dead if themitzvah was unavoidable; should the rest of us do less for the living?

Shabbat Shalom,

RNJL

Copyright 2011 Neal Joseph Loevinger

Torah Portion: Emor

The Hudson Valley is blossoming all over, and along with the glories of the
springtime come the Torah readings at the end of the book of Vayikra, or
Leviticus- so named for the tribe of Levi, set apart for religious service in
the ancient Temple. Only one family out of the tribe of Levi were the actual
priests- those were the direct descendants of Aharon, Moshe’s brother and the
first Kohen Gadol, or High Priest.

Yet this week’s haftarah, from the 44th chapter of Yechezkel [Ezekiel], opens up
with a prophesy that not all the descendant of Aharon will serve in the ancient
Temple to be rebuilt after the exile to Babylon:

“But the levitical priests descended from Zadok, who maintained the service of
My Sanctuary when the people of Israel went astray from Me — they shall approach
Me to minister to Me; they shall stand before Me , , , They alone may enter My
Sanctuary and they alone shall approach My table , , , ” {Yechezkel/Ezekiel
44:14-16]

Zadok was priest in the time of Shlomo [Solomon- see 2 Samuel 15 and 1 Kings 1],
and he and his descendants were regarded by the ancient rabbis as exceptionally
loyal, pious and praiseworthy. So when Yechezkel says that the restored
priesthood will be only the line of Zadok, he seems to be saying to the
community in exile that when they return to Jerusalem and rebuild the Temple,
those who serve in it will be even greater than the priests of previous
generations.

This reading is reinforced by the details that follow, which seem to apply rules
formerly only for the High Priest to all the priests, perhaps implying that
after the exile, even ordinary priests will be on a more elevated or exalted
spiritual level.

We’ll leave those details for another time; for today, it’s enough to note that
Yechezkel’s main message: that out of the tragedy of exile can come a renewal
which brings the people to an even higher level than before. Out of suffering or
brokenness can come healing which makes a person, family, or community even more
whole than before- this does not mean that suffering is good, but that a period
of brokenness, alienation, or pain doesn’t have to be permanent, nor a bar to
future growth and service.

There’s a famous saying in the Talmud that in the place where a ba’al tshuva
[one who has repented or returned] stands, even the completely righteous cannot
stand. I take this to mean that human beings have an extraordinary capacity for
spiritual renewal, and this capacity is known and appreciated greatly in one who
has experienced such a return and recentering. That, to me, is the central
message of our haftarah: you may be in exile now, but upon return to your roots,
you can serve with even greater reverence than before. It’s an great message of
hope, of possibility and grace, for all peoples, in the prophet’s age and in
ours.

Shabbat Shalom,

RNJL

Copyright 2011 Neal Joseph Loevinger

Torah Portion: Emor

This week we’re reading the Torah portion Emor, which has lots of
rules for the priests, but also reviews the Jewish calendar, from
Pesach in the spring to Shimini Atzeret in the fall. We learn that the
holidays are also holy days, in which we refrain from “melacha,” or
purposeful labor, as on Shabbat (with some important differences which
we’ll explore another time.) For today, I want to point out that two
of the holidays- Pesach in the spring and Sukkot in the fall- are a
week long, with a holy day at the beginning and a holy day at the end:

“On the first day you shall celebrate a sacred occasion: you shall not
work at your occupations. 8 Seven days you shall make offerings by
fire to the Lord. The seventh day shall be a sacred occasion: you
shall not work at your occupations.” (Vayikra/ Leviticus 23:7-8)

“On the fifteenth day of this seventh month there shall be the Feast
of Booths to the Lord, [to last] seven days. The first day shall be a
sacred occasion: you shall not work at your occupations; seven days
you shall bring offerings by fire to the Lord. On the eighth day you
shall observe a sacred occasion and bring an offering by fire to the
Lord; it is a solemn gathering: you shall not work at your
occupations.” (Vayikra/ Leviticus 23:34-36)

We see from the verses above- the first regarding Pesach and the
second set referring to Sukkot- that there is a period between the
first and last holy days of the festival. This is called “Chol
HaMoed,” or literally, the “non-holy days of the season.” However, as
anybody who has eaten matzah or slept in a Sukkah for a week can
attest, the intermediate days of these two celebrations are not
exactly “regular” weekdays, but they’re not “Yom Tov,” or full
festival days, either.

There is a tractate of the Talmud, called Moed Katan, largely devoted
to the question of distinguishing these intermediate days from either
regular work-week days or “Sabbath” days of refraining from work. In
general, the idea is to make the holidays- all week- as joyful as one
can by not doing during the festival what one could do before or
after, if there was no significant loss involved. This includes happy
occasions like weddings, which the Mishnah specifically mentions as
something we do not do during Chol HaMoed, because of the great joy
involved. (Cf. Mishna Moed Katan 1:7)

Now, granted, there usually isn’t a great demand for weddings or bar
mitzvah celebrations during Passover, but since Sukkot is called “the
Season of Our Joy,” you’d figure that it would be a great time for a
wedding, right? A Sukkot wedding might have interesting catering
possibilities, but the ancient rabbis prohibited weddings during Chol
HaMoed because they wanted us to focus on the joy of the festival- or
the joy of the family occasion- exclusively. Someone who celebrated a
wedding during Sukkot or Passover would be emotionally oriented
towards the life-cycle event, and would not really give due honor to
the festival.

This is why in many traditional synagogues you will rarely, if ever,
see a bar or bat mitzvah during the major festivals (Pesach, Shavuot,
and Sukkot). The rabbis taught us not to “mix joy with joy,” that is,
to let the holiday be the holiday and the simcha [happy occasion] be
the simcha. I do realize that some synagogues do schedule bar or bat
mitzvah celebrations during holidays, but I think it takes away from
each event to mix them together, so I try to discourage it.

Besides the practical concerns, one might note that the major
festivals (Pesach, Shavuot, and Sukkot) each have a historical theme
(leaving Egypt, receiving the Torah, and sojourning in the wilderness,
respectively) as well as an agricultural theme: they are the spring,
“first fruits of summer,” and fall harvest festivals. Seen this way,
we are reminded that celebrating the major holidays is about
connecting our personal lives as individuals with the life of our
people and the seasons of our homeland. A wedding or bar mitzvah, on
the other hand, is much more personal- it’s a time for reflecting on
the joys and history of one particular family and the special
individuals who comprise it.

Thus, “not mixing joy with joy” can be seen as part of the balancing
between communal and personal spirituality which is part of a mature
Judaism. Sometimes we need to connect with the history of our people,
and sometimes we want to celebrate the ups and downs of our personal
lives in a Jewish way, and these complement each other. For a week in
the spring, and a week in the fall, we have special mitzvot with which
we live out our sacred history, a history so rich, with traditions so
compelling, that they invite our full attention.

Shabbat Shalom,

RNJL

Copyright 2011 Neal Joseph Loevinger

Torah Portion: Emor

This week we read parshat Emor, in which we find discussion
of the priestly service, the holy days, and what Moshe did with a
difficult legal case in the camp. Stuck right in the middle of the
discussion of the holy days is the mitzvah of peah, or “corners,” in
which we are told to leave the corners of our fields for the poor, so
that they could come and collect sustenance without having to beg for
charity. Rashi, quoting earlier sages, asks: so, nu, why do we have
this mitzvah of caring for the poor in between the commandments for
observing Pesach and Shavuot [the holy day of “first fruits”] ? It
would make sense to first describe the spring holiday and its ritual
observances, and then the summer holiday with its special rituals, and
then the fall holidays, and put this non-timebound mitzvah somewhere
else in the text. (Cf. Vayikra/Leviticus 23:4-22)

From a purely practical standpoint, it makes a certain amount of sense
to put the mitzvah of peah before Shavuot, which is the holiday of the
early summer harvest: before beginning the harvest, one should make
sure not to reap the entire field, so that some can be left for the
poor. However, Rashi brings a more theological interpretation: the
mitzvah of leaving the corners of the fields for the poor is listed
along with the holy days to teach that one who leaves the “corners”
and “gleanings” of the fields is considered as if he or she had built
the Temple and made offerings within it.

Rashi’s startling midrash [interpretation] creates an internal
coherence to the text which allows it to live and be relevant in
post-Temple Judaism: since many rituals are no longer possible without
a central Temple and priesthood, we might think that living in
covenantal relationship to the Holy One is also no longer possible.
Rashi’s commentary reframes the problem by pointing out that the ways
in which we can, in fact, live covenantally are “considered” (by the
Holy One, presumably) just as valid and beautiful as were the
practices of our Biblical ancestors.

So far, so good, but I also see in Rashi’s creative equation (leaving
the corners for the poor = building the Temple and making offerings
within it) more than just a theory of evolving Jewish practice. Why is
leaving some of the harvest for the poor like building the Temple and
making offerings within it? Because for our ancestors, the Temple was
the center of the entire nation by virtue of being the place where the
people felt the Divine Presence, and for us, concrete acts of humble
generosity and loving-kindness are what “builds” a sacred community
and helps us experience the Divine in the midst of that community.

I say “humble” generosity because the mitzvah of leaving the corners
of the field was done precisely so those who needed help didn’t have
to beg; those who had, gave what they could, in such a way that human
dignity was promoted as a communal value. For our communities, the
simple acts of attending to each other’s spiritual, emotional and
physical needs is what “builds the Temple,” as it were, laying the
foundation for all who participate to feel love and thus be drawn
closer to God and each other. When that happens, our holidays are made
even more joyous, and each day becomes holy.

Shabbat Shalom,

RNJL

Copyright 2011 Neal Joseph Loevinger

Torah Portion: Emor

Greetings! It’s just about the midpoint of the Omer counting, which
means Shavuot is just around the corner (I can taste the blintzes
already.)

However, before we get to the holiday of the “first fruits” (which, by
the way, is described in Chapter 23 of this week’s Torah portion,
Emor), we have to learn a little bit about the sacred disciplines of
the ancient priests. This included refraining from contact with a dead
body under most circumstances; to this day, some Jews who are
descendants of the Kohanim will not go to a cemetery or a funeral home
out of respect for this separation between the priesthood and the
realm of death.

Anthropologists or theologians or historians might have all kinds of
theories as to why the priests should not come into contact with
death, but the Torah merely tells us that the priests must remain
“holy,” as in verse 6:

“They shall be holy to their God, and they shall not desecrate their
God’s Name, for they offer up the fire offerings of the Lord, the food
offering of their God, so they shall be holy.” (Vayikra/ Leviticus
21:6)

Rashi notices that this verse begins with “they shall be” holy, not
“they ARE holy,” and brings an earlier teaching to the effect that
this wording in the future tense implies that the priest’s holiness is
conditional on his actions, and in fact, if he wanted to do things
which would reduce his sanctity (like coming into contact with a dead
body), he could. So if he did want to do this, he should be restrained
by the beit din [rabbinic court.] In other words, Rashi reads this as:
“they shall be holy, even if we have to make them holy against their
will!”

Again, we’ll leave for another time the exploration of why, exactly,
the Torah didn’t want priests to come into contact with death. For
today, I’m more interested in Rashi’s idea that if the priests wanted
to take actions which would impede their ability to offer the public
service, they should be restrained. To me, this is a fascinating
teaching, and an extension of the principle “kol Yisrael aravim zeh
l’zeh,” or “All Israel is responsible for one another.”

As I see it, Rashi’s explanation implies that there are times we
simply have to get involved in other people’s lives, to help them
achieve the holiness and sacred purpose that they are capable of- not
only for their own satisfaction, but also for the sake of the
community. A priest who defiles himself is unfit for service- not only
he but the entire people lose out on the opportunity to experience the
Sacred in the way that the priest could have effected. Similarly, I’ll
bet we all know people who are not achieving the spiritual
contributions that they are capable of; while none of us have the
legal power of the ancient court, we do have the influences of love,
persuasion and caring, which can sometimes bring out spiritual gifts
in even the most recalcitrant person.

“They shall be holy”- not always, and maybe not yet, but the potential
is there, to be fully realized with the help of others. That’s as true
now as it was then- a life whose gifts are made manifest is usually a
life open to the influence of others who care. This, in turn, implies
that part of each life’s task is to help others achieve the sacred
purpose for which they were uniquely born- true then, true now.

Shabbat Shalom,

RNJL

PS- as usual, you can find the text of the parsha and haftarah here:

http://www.jtsa.edu/community/parashah/index.shtml

and a summary and further commentary here:

http://www.myjewishlearning.com/texts/Weekly_Torah_Commentary/emor_index.htm

Copyright 2011 Neal Joseph Loevinger

Torah Portion: Emor

Shalom from the North Shore!

Our Torah portion this week, Emor, begins with rules for the
Kohanim, or priests: they must not become ritually impure, they
have special rules for marriage and family, and must be
physically whole and unimpaired. The portion also reviews the
Jewish holy days, followed by the story of a man executed for
blasphemy. The portion concludes with laws emphasizing
fairness and proportionality in criminal law.

One of the overall themes of Emor is the fitness of the priests for
their service in the Mishkan [portable Sanctuary.] The priests
were not to be ritually impure (from contact with a dead body, for
example) and could not make the holy offerings if they had a
physical blemish, such as missing or crushed limbs or certain
kinds of bodily disfigurements. Such priests could still
participate in eating that part of the sacrifice which was
designated as their portion (since the Kohanim didn’t work at
other occupations, they were sustained by a portion of the
offerings in the Mishkan), but could not make the offerings
themselves. (Cf. Vayikra/ Leviticus 21:16-24).

Now, at first glance, this seems totally unfair, even cruel- why
should someone missing a hand (for example), be excluded
from their life’s work of sacred service? Isn’t sacred service more
a matter of purity of heart than outward appearance- or, at least,
shouldn’t it be? Or, to put it another way, if God knows the
goodness of somebody’s heart, why does it matter if their body is
“imperfect” according to human standards?

One common understanding of these laws is that a Kohen with
a physical blemish is disqualified not because they are
“blemished” in the sight of God, but because the people
participating in the worship would get distracted by the physical
features of the priest and would focus on that rather than
directing their hearts towards Heaven. Seen this way, these laws
are still unfair to the disfigured Kohen, but the unfairness is that
of human beings, who are all too ready to focus on the
blemishes of other people. I

think this is especially true when someone- a religious leader, a
teacher, a community activist- is trying to get people to think
about their problems and what they must do to change things for
the better. It’s always easier to focus on the “blemishes” of the
messenger than the content of the message!

The Torah knows the hearts of humankind: most of us would too
easily notice the problems of others and too easily ignore our
own. Furthermore, I believe that these difficult laws- excluding
the disfigured Kohen from service- need to be seen in a greater
context, which is the Torah’s insistence that every single human
being is made in the image of God. Our challenge, then, is to live
up to that greater ideal, which sees the potential for spiritual
wholeness in all people, and which challenges us to not get
distracted by the wrong things.

Shabbat Shalom,

rnjl

The full text of this week’s Torah portion can be found here:

http://www.jtsa.edu/community/parashah/index.shtml

Copyright 2011 Neal Joseph Loevinger

Torah Portion: Emor

This d’var Torah was originally distributed by Kolel: The Adult Center for Jewish Learning during the year 5761 and can be found in its archives.

Emor (Leviticus 21:1-24:23)

OVERVIEW

Emor begins with laws directed at the kohanim, the priests. They must observe certain restrictions concerning contact with the dead; they are only allowed to marry certain partners, and some kinds of physical abnormalities disqualify them from service. The food that the kohanim eat may not be shared with “regular” Israelites. Just as the priests must be physically unblemished, so too the animals must be physical perfect. The major holidays are described in order. The parsha ends with laws pertaining to the menorah, the bread of the altar, restitution of injuries, and punishment for cursing God’s name.

IN FOCUS

“God spoke to Moses, telling him to speak to the Israelites and say to them:
There are special times that you must celebrate as sacred holidays to God. The following are My special times: You may do work during the six weekdays, but the seventh day is a Sabbath of Sabbaths. It is a sacred holiday to God, when you shall do no work. Wherever you may live, it is God’s Sabbath. (Leviticus 23:1-3, modified ORT translation.)

PSHAT

God tells Moshe to teach the Israelites about the yearly holiday cycle. First among the “sacred occasions” is the weekly Shabbat, and then there is a description of all the major holidays in order, beginning with Pesach in the spring. Unlike the priestly regulations in the first part of this parsha, the holidays are to be observed by the entire people.

DRASH

The term used for an annual holiday, like Pesach, is either mo’ed, which means “set time,” or mikrei kodesh, a “sacred proclamation.” Obviously, the holidays have to occur in the same season every year- Pesach must always be in the spring, and Sukkot in the fall. Yet because the Israelite calendar was based on a sighting of the new moon, the holidays were also “proclaimed,” because the authorities announced each new month as it arrived. Thus the exact date of any particular holiday wasn’t known until the beginning of the month in which it occurred, after the new moon had been announced.

Compare the complexity of the Hebrew calendar with the simplicity of the weekly Shabbat: it just rolls around every seven days, regardless of lunar or solar cycles. There’s no human “input” into the date of Shabbat, whereas the annual holidays are set on specific dates by the calendrical authorities. In fact, the Talmud records more than one instance of authorities disagreeing about the date for important holy days, which of course would have all kinds of implications for ritual observance.

So if the weekly Shabbat is not a “sacred proclamation” in the same way the other holidays are, what’s it doing first on the list in this chapter? One suggestion is that, even though we don’t fix the date of Shabbat, we still must proclaim, or affirm, its holiness- Shabbat doesn’t happen all by itself, but requires communal participation to make it holy, just as we have to do our part to make sure the annual observances happen at in the right times. Nothing of spiritual importance is automatic- it requires a sense of purpose and partnership. Or, as one of my friends put it, “if you don’t work at it, Shabbat happens, but not to you!”

Another interpretation of our text points out that the prohibition on work for the weekly Shabbat seem to be more restrictive than on the annual holidays, which only restrict “servile” or “occupational” work. Measured by the kinds of activities we refrain from, the holiness of Shabbat is indeed on a higher level than the annual holidays, in that greater focus is required in creating a sense of distinctions in time. If a holiday falls on Shabbat, the special rituals of the holiday are often changed to reflect this “dual-status” day- a famous example being that the shofar is not blown in many traditional congregations if Rosh Hashana falls on Shabbat.

The annual holidays- Rosh Hashana, Sukkot, Pesach, and Shavuot- are wonderful experiences, eagerly anticipated and often lots of fun. However, maybe there is something to learn from this insistence that the weekly, “ordinary” Shabbat is “first among equals” in the list of Jewish holidays. Maybe the unusual, extraordinary kinds of spiritual occasions really are secondary to a weekly practice of rest, reflection, and rejoicing. Of course, each holiday has a special message, and each one is important- but a time of weekly quiet might be a doorway to greater holiness than a yearly festival.