Why: "See"?

The Problem with Betzalel

The Problem that we want to look at is why Moshe says to the Children of Israel "See" in the same way that HaShem told him "See". While Moshe had something/someone to see... the C of I did not. What were they supposed to see or look at? Hmmm...

This week’s Parshat contains a Pasuk that needs some explaining, Vayomer Moshe el B’nei Yisrael, R’u kara YHVH b’Shem. What we find here is that we need to do more than to read the original Hebrew - or read (a) translation of that into English. This is not something new in Torah. This is something that we encounter all too often. But this particular Parshat offers an opportunity into insightful understanding in a manner somewhat different that many phrases or verses that we encounter.

This week’s Parshat we are introduced to a man - really just a lad of thirteen years - who is called by name by G-d to perform a particular function. As you read, study, learn from this reading, remember that this is unique in the Torah (as we shall see).

Here we have the Children of Yisrael bringing the materials that Moshe had requisitioned for the building of the Mishkan and they are informed of HaShem’s choice of Master Architect of His selection. “Moses said to the C of I, ‘See HaShem has proclaimed by name, Betzalel....’.” [Stone Ed. Chumash Shemot 35: 30 pp521] “R’u, Kara YHVH b’Shem; Betzalel ben Uri ben Hur l’Match Yehudah.”

So what’s the problem here? [There Are, At Least, Two Problems] To begin with there are problems with Torah not having any vowels or punctuation as aids to understanding. For that we rely mainly on ‘trope’ which did not come into being until sometime between the 6th and 10th centuries CE. Before that there was the Oral Tradition. Hebrew also has a different syntax that we are familiar with in English, but that is only a minor obstacle. The ‘prose’ that we find in Torah, like that of most ancient Middle East writing, is in what is referred to as binary. meaning that a sentence can be isolated into two main concepts or ideas.

Example:
B’resheet Bara Elokim
Et haShamayim v’Et ha’Aretz
“In the beginning HaShem... created” what?
The Heavens and the Earth.”

So we read the Pasuk as;
Vayomer Moshe el B;nei Yisrael, R’u Kara YHVH b’Shem
Betzalel ben Uri ben Hur.....

But here we have our first problem. The word “b’Shem” means that we need to question the phrasing [as: “...R’u Kara YHVH,” followed by: “b’Shem Betzalel...”] but we do not need to look into this aspect of the problems in the prose right now.

So far this is only preliminary to and for our discussion. The second problem that we encounter is the direction that I would like you to consider for now.

Name. Shem. Names certainly are important (for us). Your name is who you are. Do you get upset if someone uses a ‘wrong’ name in addressing you? Forgets your name? Misspells your name? Of course. And most certainly if that someone is someone that you have an especial relationship with and with whom you feel and attachment.

LiKro Shem means to give a name by ‘function’. That means it is a name with which you identify, or a name with which you have a relationship. [Do you have a ‘pet name’ for your SO - NO! Don’t tell us! - just answer; Yes or No.] How about when we read; “...Eloh*i Avraham, Eloh*i Yitzchak ve’Eloh*i Ya’akov.” Here we see that HaShem has, indeed, a very (if I can add the word ‘very’) special relationship with these very special men. [This could certainly lead us into another and ‘very’ different discussion about the application of this concept into modern day inclusion of four special women - but we can save that for another time!]

Nu? Why not: Eloh*i Moshe? Certainly HaShem had a relationship with Moshe unlike any other person in the Torah. Perhaps closer than with Avraham, Yitzchak and Ya’akov. But we find only one person in the Torah referred to as Ish ha’Elokim - a man of G-d. Moshe.

The difference is that Avraham (as well as Yitzchak and Ya’akov) called out to HaShem. But it was HaShem who called-out to Moshe! There is certainly a difference there. Who is calling out to whom? Who is instituting the relationship? Who wants and needs this special relationship? When Avraham called out ‘in the name of G-d’ he (Avraham) was tying his destiny to G-d. Moshe, we are taught, did not institute this relationship and, indeed, tried, like Jonah, to escape it.

Now, let’s go back to our text for this Parshat. G-d chose Betzalel for the building of the Mishkan. He informed Moshe when He said, “See I have chosen Betzalel...” and, Moshe in turn, told the Children (in free explanatory translation prose) See, Hashem, has chosen, by name, Betzalel.” I have identified Myself with Moshe, so too, the Pasuk reads, “I have identified Myself with someone” (and who is that someone?) See! “It is Betzalel, ben Uri ben Hur l’Mateh Yehudah”.

This is not about Betzalel so much, as what we can learn if we take the time to try to understand just what (any given) verse can teach us. It is not about a thirteen year old who ‘knew the secrets of the Hebrew Alef-Beit... or had the skill to create the Aron and the Menorah” - it is about the Torah and what it can tell us.

Shalom

I rely here on the works of Rabbi Yitzchak Etshalom of the Yeshiva of Los Angeles for many of these concepts.
And the Stone Edition of the Chumash for the actual wordings and translations of this Parshat.
Other sources are also reflected in the Rabbi’s 1998 text as well as the commentators in the ArtScroll Chumash.

Best Weapon

Mashiach’s Greatest Weapon

Mashiach’s main weapon is prayer. All Mashiach’s conquests... will come through the power prayer and, as Reb Noson says, prayer is the essential weapon of each Jew.

The attachment that each Jew has to HaShem is through prayer and it is through that self same prayer attachment that the Jew acquires mastery and control over his desires. __[Rebbe Nachman] And the very essence of our life-force is by way of prayer.

There are three kinds, or types, of prayer. There is the prayer of David, as you find it in Psalm 86. There is the prayer of Moshe, as you find it in Psalm 90. And there is the prayer of the - Common Man, - which, again, you find it in Psalm 102. Don’t believe me. Go look it up. The Schottenstein Edition of Tehillim is an excellent choice of not only finding these Psalms in the original Hebrew and the interlinear direct English translation (without appealing to the ‘Masses’ by use of KJV outdated sweet poetic verse) along with explanatory footnotes.

Of these three Psalms, we are told that the Psalm, the Prayer, of the Common Man is by far the most powerful for here we find the prayer of the broken heart. A pauper stands before G-d, his maker, and cries; “Why me?” “Why do I have to suffer?” When the spiritual pauper cries out, that prayer goes directly to the ear of G-d. He hears the earnest prayer of the Common Man. How often have we been told that HaShem seems to have a Great Love for the ‘common’; after all Shabbat is the most ‘common’ of the Holidays that we observe. Fifty-two times every year we have the opportunity to enjoy the Greatest of Holiday’s - Shabbos! We have also hear the comment made; “G-d must really love the poor (Common) man - He made so many of them!”

Now we come to a different thought on Prayer. Or an elaboration on Prayer: “Faith, Prayer, Miracles, and the Holy Land... are but one concept!” Nu? How’s that? The idea is that when we pray, we are expressing an element of our faith or why would we be involved in prayer at all? So, therefore, Prayer increases faith and gradually we become (a little more) intimate in our feelings for our Creator and, guess what!, this leads to our observation of and awareness of miracles. It follows then that by prayer we ‘attain’ a mastery over the elements because our prayers are directed to HaShem and He is the Master of All, Rebono Shel Olam! And finally, these miracles and prayers are conceptually associated with and related to the Holy Land (why else would it be called the “Holy Land”?) for it is there they reveal the Kingdom of Heaven.

All this said, we come to understand the Power of Prayer, along with its associates and associations, but we have not come to the central question. This is not uncommon because the Shabbos Torah Study Group likes to dance. We are, it seems, always dancing around the fringe of any given topic which seems to provide an emotional wall for us. We don’t seem to want to reach out and become involved in the essential core of a topic. Let’s relax. Take a Deep Breath and ask:

What is Prayer?

Some fifty years ago (give or take) a Comic from “Second City” and a graduate in Philosophy from the University of Chicago; Severn Darden, presented his ‘paper’ to the inmates of the Second City as commented as follows:
“Now, thought.” “For centuries philosophers have told us that thought cannot be seen, it cannot be heard, cannot be felt, smelled, cannot be tasted.” [the same we say about Prayer] “It is not in the key of G - or F. And it is not blue - nor is it mauve. It is not a pot of geraniums. It is not a white donkey against a blue sky. Or a blue donkey against a white sky. Nor does it have aspirations to become archbishop. It is not a little girl singing an old song. Thought is not a saffron-robed monk in the snow. In other words, philosophers can tell you millions of things that thought isn’t, and they can’t tell you what it is! And this bugs them!”
Now, Severn having had his say, we can also say what we know what Prayer is not. Who would venture to say what Prayer is?

---

We are instructed on When to Pray, How to Pray, Where to Pray, and often What to Pray... but: What is Prayer? Is it a collective of all the above? What is the meaning of “to Pray”? We are told that we need to pray with concentration - with kavanah... with strength... and we are told to never let shame stop you from prayer.

We have a story that comes to us from the final days of Rosh HaShannah 5571 when Rebbe Nachman was deathly ill and he asked his grandson to pray for him.
“G-d! G-d!” “Let my grandfather be well!”
The Rebbe said; “This is how to pray. Simply! What other way is there?”

So, is prayer anything other than saying exactly what is in your heart? Do we think that we can do anything other than that when we address G-d? Do we have the chutzpah to think that we know something that G-d does not know? Don’t we pray to do just what Sigmund Freud said the ‘patient’ needed to do - to express what we know in out heart in a manner that our head understands? Perhaps, I suggest, that is what Prayer is. Or not.

.

Welcome to our Study Group

Shabbos mornings 8:30 AM @ Congregation Beth Shalom
[Traditional Conservative] Shul
Bermuda Dunes, CA

Chazal Says: "Improve yourself... then... "

“Improve yourself, then improve others.” Chazal

Chazal, our Sages, teach us; ‘Improve yourself, then improve others’.
Now we find Chaim Kramer, in his book Crossing the Narrow Bridge, asking himself, by what right did he have even considering this work (his book), let alone actually doing it. And indeed, I (as I suspect you also) have asked this question; where do I/we ‘get-off’ presuming that we know something that we can impart to others. That includes so much of life and is not limited to my blogs or my ‘teaching’ but also my art, my concepts and beliefs, my talent, skills and techniques.

Of course, in the world of business, we have to - by the very nature of business ‘competition’ show that we are, indeed, the best choice that the client/customer can make because we have the best skill or best idea or best product. But how much of that is bravado? How much is over-compensation for hiding an inferior skill/idea/product? How much ego driven? How much fear that we are not what we say? [or perhaps worse: that we are what we say?]

Going back to our Chazal, we see that we must first have the improvements made within our being in order to ‘improve’ others. And to do so, Chaim Kramer proceeds to write his book knowing (I think) that he will improve himself in doing so - just a a good teacher admits to learning much, if not more, from his students as they do from him. Thus I have learned from his book (and continue to do so), as he has learned from the ideas of Rebbe Nachman and did so in his attempt to pass those thoughts to us in the 21st Century from the 18th Century. [Common Era, understood]

Let’s see what we can glean from the Rebbe’s mind, with the help of Chaim Kramer.

Understanding and enunciating

Rebbe suggested that we study rapidly(!) - with speed and simplicity - and try not to spend too much time on each and every detail. We should try to understand each thing in its own context and enunciate the words of Torah as we study them. There is no need specifically to elucidate the words... if we carry on, the meaning will become clear. [this works on a specific level certainly but with Torah we can and do find many meanings - but, again, this becomes more and more clear as we study] However the Rebbe says that it is good to elucidate in the language he (best) understands (we are not confined to learning in Hebrew)! In any case we must work to understand the material we are studying and it’s not enough to just repeat the words without an understanding of what the words mean. Lack of understanding cannot be considered learning. Keep on going. Try (first) to understand the text in its own context. What happens if that is not clear? Keep going the Rebbe says. Perhaps a bit further down the page a sentence or two will make it clear. Or perhaps you will understand in a re-reading of the text.

Guard your tongue

Every Jew is a letter in the Torah, we are taught. When the Torah is lifted after the reading of the sedrah, the Jew points, with his little finger, in an attempt to see ‘his letter’. Tradition, if nothing else, teaches that there were 600,000 Jewish souls in Creation and that this corresponds to the 600,000 letters in the Torah. So when you find fault in a fellow Jew, you are, in effect, finding a blemish in Torah and rendering it incompleat (not a misprint). HOWever, by not speaking against or belittling another Jew, and by emphasizing his good points, you will also find the Torah perfectly beautiful. You will then have a deep love for the Torah and this love will lead you to great diligence in your studies.

Original (!)(?) Torah Insights

You may, the Rebbe says, expound on the Torah and originate insights in any area you wish. The only condition is that you do not originate any new laws. Hmmm. Okay. That sounds about right. No new laws. Further, Rebbe Nachman said, regarding his own works: You can twist my teachings whichever way you wish (in order to better understand them), just as long as you don’t depart from so much as a small passage of the Shulchan Arukh. Ah. Catch 22... well, at least Catch 21. You better know the Shulchan Arukh before you start in with manipulations of your own.

Continuing, he says that developing you own original insights into the Torah is truly a great thing. First- it shows that your thoughts are focused on Torah (instead of ‘other’ things). And secondly, it is a sign that your Torah study has had an effect on you and that you truly wish to grow in Torah knowledge. And again he cautions that we need to study Shulchan Arukh beforehand... and again afterward. THIS will help you maintain level thinking and protect against misleading thoughts... and worse- thoughts presented to others that could mislead them. One needs to be careful in how he presents his concepts and ‘original’ thoughts on Torah and on life lest he be guilty of misleading someone else, e.g. Do not put a stumbling block before a blind man. Of course, with these caveats in mind we must be careful that what we say and present is important in G-d’s eyes!

As a final though from the Rebbe: Nobody sins unless overcome by a “spirit of folly”. The sins and spiritual damage that a person may have done literally makes him mad. And that he says, perhaps truer today than some 230 years ago, this is why the majority of people suffer from all kinds of quirks and idiosyncrasies. The remedy: Torah Study. Intensely. Therein you will find the power to crush the Yether Hara and, in doing so, help you guard your tongue (see above) and banish madness and folly.

Go study v’Shalom

some ideas from Crossing the Narrow Bridge, A Practical Guide to Rebbe Nachman’s Teachings by Chaim Kramer

A Review... and New. Nu?

Preface or: “Notes and Comments”,
or: regarding last week’s Discussion-

Item- [or 2...or...] (regarding “Amen”): kEl melekh ne’eman (G-d, Faithful King) The first letters of these three words (in Hebrew, of course) - spell the word: Amen. These three words appear in the (traditional) siddur just before the Shema [and should not be said in a minyan!]. The reason being to bring the number of words in the Shema to a total of 248, to symbolize the positive mitzvot (see below) & the 248 parts of the human body; thereby showing the worshiper that he is dedicating his entire body to G-d and to His Service. The Prayer Leader accomplishes this by saying aloud: “Ad*nai Elokeihem... emet.”

Now the word “Amen” - besides being almost totally and universally accepted - originated in the Torah as a response of affirmation (Deuteronomy - Sh’mot 27: 16-26). Accent is on the second syllable, as in: ahMEN or awMEN. This in simply and “endorsement” of the words just heard and an affirmation of his belief in the veracity o the words spoken.

This then prepares us for the “Rules” of saying “Amen”, namely: One does not respond “Amen” to a blessing that one makes himself! But, of course, as in all things relating to Hebrew and the Jews, there is an exception in the Birkat HaMazon where “Amen” is a link and a part of the blessing’s conclusion.

The apparent reason for not saying “Amen” when you have, yourself, has made to blessing is that you are, of course affirming what you yourself has just said which - if nothing else - is redundant and un-necessary. Also, in polite society, it would be pure hubris to tell your friends something that you had done and then say, in effect, “Yup, I sure did that well!” In addition we are (naturally) prohibited from making an ‘un-necessary‘ brachot.

The question, last week, was asked concerning who and when one says “Amen” during the reading of Kaddish; and the answer is.... well not entirely.... “In such prayers as Kaddish, Mi Shebeirakh, El Malei Rekhamim, & the Blessing of the Month, “Amen” is often said by the one reciting it, not as a response but as an instruction to the listeners, as in: v’imru Amen - which means “...and say; Amen.” So, we assume from this that not only the Prayer Leader, but also those ‘saying Kaddish’ are also instructing the rest of the minyanaires with “...and say: “Amen”.

“Amen” may not be said to a blessing heard electronically (e.g. Radio, TV, Internet, iPod, etc. et. al.).

Mitzvot

There are 613 mitzvot. This number is significant: it is the numeric value of the word Torah [hrvt](Tav = 400, Vav = 6, Resh = 200, Heh = 5), plus 2 for the two mitzvot whose existence precedes the Torah: I am the L-rd, your G-d and You shall have no other gods before Me. There is also complete agreement that these 613 mitzvot can be broken down into 248 positive mitzvot (one for each bone and organ of the male body) and 365 negative mitzvot (one for each day of the solar year).

Many of these 613 mitzvot cannot be observed at this time for various reasons. For example, a large portion of the laws relate to sacrifices and offerings, which can only be made in the Temple, and the Temple does not exist today. Some of the laws relate to the theocratic state of Israel, its king, its supreme court, and its system of justice, and cannot be observed because the theocratic state of Israel does not exist today. In addition, some laws do not apply to all people or places. Agricultural laws only apply within the state of Israel, and certain laws only apply to Kohanim or Levites. The modern scholar Rabbi Israel Meir of Radin, commonly known as the Chafetz Chayim, has identified 77 positive mitzvot and 194 negative mitzvot which can be observed outside of Israel today. ___from: Judaism 101


This week’s Parshat, Terumah (which has two positive and one negative Mitzvot) [Take for Me and offering (25:2), or as Solomon HaMelach says- Take my rebuke, and not money] has this to say about the Torah Ark and Torah Scholars.
They shall make an ark of cedar wood (25:10) which explained as being in the third person plural (in Hebrew) because everyone is enjoined to build an ark for the Torah, or: everyone should learn Torah (because we all have a part in it). An additional reason is put forth by R‘ Bechaye [doesn’t someone always have another comment (or note) to make? That’s what Talmud is all about...] is that it shows that everyone must support Torah learning and if a person is not capable of learning, himself, he should support others and make it possible that they are able to learn.

But why does the Torah command that the Ark be made first and the other furnishing only afterwards attended to? That; to teach (that) a person should begin his day with regular learning of Torah and only after to proceed to his parnassah - or work.
Now that we have spent some time in Torah study we can ask the question; “What are the three Mitzvot mentioned in this sidrah? The Sefer haHinnuch has provided us with that answer as it outlines each and every Mitzvah and exactly where it occurs in Torah. Mitzvah number 95 is the precept of building the Holy Temple and is is to build a House for the sake of the L*rd, meaning that we will have a place to offer our sacrifices to Him there and that this will be the focus of the pilgrimages and the gatherings each year: “And let them make Me a sanctuary...” This includes not only the Temple but the vessels and artifacts needed for the Divine service. The menorah, the table, the altar, the Ark, and everything else necessary. Positive mitzvah.

Number 96 - a Negative mitzvah - is not to remove the staves of the Ark from it. Or not to remove the poles, which are used to carry the Ark, from the rings in which they are place. “In the rings of the ark shall the poles be; they shall not be taken form it”.

And, finally in this Sidrah, we find number 97, which states, the positive command of; The Precept of arranging the showbread and the frankincense. Or to place the bread continually in the Sanctuary, before the L*rd as stated: And you shall set on the table the showbread, before Me, always.

And these three mitzvot are among those that Rabbi Israel Meir of Radin, the Chafetz Chayim, has identified for us as being three of the many mitzvot that cannot be observed by us now, in this time and place. But, what can we learn from these? Even if we cannot perform these mitzvot, how are we do understand what it means, and why it is important that, for example, that we are not to remove the poles, or staves, from the rings in which they are inserted? Is HaShem showing an example of Obsessive Compulsive Behavior? If so is that something good? Should we be following His ‘behavior’ or simply follow His dictates? And why not? Is this not like a commandment not to mix milk and meat? or mix wool & linen (shatnez). Nu? Do you accept that some mitzvot are to a performed in spite of the fact that you don’t understand the meaning for them being a commandment? WHAAT? There is a logic that is beyond my comprehension? That’s not logical! But wait... I’m not G-d... I’m not even a doctor!

My simple question to you is: What are we to learn from these three mitzvot?

Two positive. One negative.

Shalom all y’all