I refer you to: http://psalms.schechter.edu/
There, please read the Psalm 46 & its commentary.
Then you can come back here (enlightened). "Hopefully."
Yup. We are going to look a Psalms. Again.
All to often we read the Psalms in our Siddur and if we are not that conversant with the subtleties of the Hebrew language, we read them in someone’s best guess of what the English translation would/should be.
Or some “poetic” English interpretation thereof. Usually in an archaic syntax, or worse- some au courant syntax used by the Chicago Tribune or e. e. cummings and his ilk.
The same is, most likely, true if you are sitting at home reading some favorite collection of Psalms or another (even if it the wonderful Interlinear English/Hebrew ArtScroll), and ‘accept’ the Psalm you are reading for what we have presented to us as being “the whole Megillah”.
Is it?
Do you... do I... stop and consider just ‘what is going on’ here. Hopefully the Schechter presentation will change your mind about all that. And Psalm 45 is a great place to start our investigation - where we find this called-out as: A Grand Song of Faith... and Fantasy.
Ah. But of course you will (hopefully) be sidetracked (as I was) and other questions will arise. Other comments. Other... ‘things’.
For example:
I encountered the word eschatology. Oh yes. I have encountered that before but I was curious about “whose” concept of eschatology are we considering. Well 'Wikipedia 'was quick to tell me that there are MANY concepts of eschatology including: Bahá'í, Brahma, Kumari, Buddhist, Christian, Hindu, Islamic, Zoroastrian, and, just what we’re looking for: Jewish eschatology. And it is there that we encounter the Jewish concept(s) of Idolatry [‘foreign’ or ‘strange’ worship] as discussed in the tractate Nezikin, in the Talmud.
But, of course, the thread leads further. The subject matter; Avodah Zarah, is a controversial tractate, certainly as far as the Roman Christian Church (“fathers”) are/were concerned [but that line of inquiry goes off into yet another direction that we can follow another time]. Instead the thing that caught my eye is “swearing a false oath”.
An observant knowledgeable Jew will typically avoid taking an oath.
Simply: If we respect our own word, then other should have reason to trust us even if do not swear by an oath. Of course the past few years the news media has given ample reasons for any person to question this. HOWever that is not the reason that we avoid swearing an oath. We do not consider the solemn commitment in swearing an oath as something that we approach in a casual manner; this is an undertaking as we stand before G-d and that means a really great deal to us. And it is here that we consider Rashi, when he discusses taking a false oath (or: a true but also a pointless oath) [see Exodus 20:7 &/or Deut. 5:11]. “To swear falsely that (this) pillar of stone is really gold; or that (this pillar of wood is (really) wood.” WHAT is the point, and why would you swear to such a thing?
Are you not really swearing in the name of G-d that you perform not only a falsehood but you actually deny G-d and profane His name (HaShem)? You are indeed. If you are ‘invited’ to appear in an American Court it might be advisable to do as an observant Jew would do and instead of swearing to the Truth, Whole Truth, etc. - to “So Affirm”. This is an acceptable form in our court system. And you avoid the situation of putting yourself in a position that you feel uncomfortable with, vis-a-vis HaShem.
As a rabbi at Beth Israel in Berkeley says; “ We already stand obligated to observe Torah. We have the name of the “People of G-d,” so that we already have to power by our behavior to profane G-d’s name, or to sanctify the name. We do not have the power to escape from that role. ‘Rav’ believes that, we do not misuse our ability to swear it we take an oath to help us fulfill our role.
So where were we? Oh yes. Psalm 46. Look where we can go... where we can get to... if we consider some of the minutia that we can find in Psalms... and in our many holy writings.
If we look.
And think.
Shalom.
Or some “poetic” English interpretation thereof. Usually in an archaic syntax, or worse- some au courant syntax used by the Chicago Tribune or e. e. cummings and his ilk.
The same is, most likely, true if you are sitting at home reading some favorite collection of Psalms or another (even if it the wonderful Interlinear English/Hebrew ArtScroll), and ‘accept’ the Psalm you are reading for what we have presented to us as being “the whole Megillah”.
Is it?
Do you... do I... stop and consider just ‘what is going on’ here. Hopefully the Schechter presentation will change your mind about all that. And Psalm 45 is a great place to start our investigation - where we find this called-out as: A Grand Song of Faith... and Fantasy.
Ah. But of course you will (hopefully) be sidetracked (as I was) and other questions will arise. Other comments. Other... ‘things’.
For example:
I encountered the word eschatology. Oh yes. I have encountered that before but I was curious about “whose” concept of eschatology are we considering. Well 'Wikipedia 'was quick to tell me that there are MANY concepts of eschatology including: Bahá'í, Brahma, Kumari, Buddhist, Christian, Hindu, Islamic, Zoroastrian, and, just what we’re looking for: Jewish eschatology. And it is there that we encounter the Jewish concept(s) of Idolatry [‘foreign’ or ‘strange’ worship] as discussed in the tractate Nezikin, in the Talmud.
But, of course, the thread leads further. The subject matter; Avodah Zarah, is a controversial tractate, certainly as far as the Roman Christian Church (“fathers”) are/were concerned [but that line of inquiry goes off into yet another direction that we can follow another time]. Instead the thing that caught my eye is “swearing a false oath”.
An observant knowledgeable Jew will typically avoid taking an oath.
Simply: If we respect our own word, then other should have reason to trust us even if do not swear by an oath. Of course the past few years the news media has given ample reasons for any person to question this. HOWever that is not the reason that we avoid swearing an oath. We do not consider the solemn commitment in swearing an oath as something that we approach in a casual manner; this is an undertaking as we stand before G-d and that means a really great deal to us. And it is here that we consider Rashi, when he discusses taking a false oath (or: a true but also a pointless oath) [see Exodus 20:7 &/or Deut. 5:11]. “To swear falsely that (this) pillar of stone is really gold; or that (this pillar of wood is (really) wood.” WHAT is the point, and why would you swear to such a thing?
Are you not really swearing in the name of G-d that you perform not only a falsehood but you actually deny G-d and profane His name (HaShem)? You are indeed. If you are ‘invited’ to appear in an American Court it might be advisable to do as an observant Jew would do and instead of swearing to the Truth, Whole Truth, etc. - to “So Affirm”. This is an acceptable form in our court system. And you avoid the situation of putting yourself in a position that you feel uncomfortable with, vis-a-vis HaShem.
As a rabbi at Beth Israel in Berkeley says; “ We already stand obligated to observe Torah. We have the name of the “People of G-d,” so that we already have to power by our behavior to profane G-d’s name, or to sanctify the name. We do not have the power to escape from that role. ‘Rav’ believes that, we do not misuse our ability to swear it we take an oath to help us fulfill our role.
So where were we? Oh yes. Psalm 46. Look where we can go... where we can get to... if we consider some of the minutia that we can find in Psalms... and in our many holy writings.
If we look.
And think.
Shalom.
I need to rely on G-d's strength these days. Here's a parallel Hebrew-English version with an audio reading available by a native Hebrew speaker: http://www.mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt2646.htm .
ReplyDelete