KOL YISRAEL ATLANTA SHAVUOT 5780

YOUR COMMUNITY. YOUR VOICE קהילת קול ישראל KOL YISRAEL ATLANTA KOL YISRAEL ATLANTA SHAVUOT 5780 Letter from the President

Dear KYA Community,

I hope that everyone is staying well and safe. The last few months have certainly been challenging and interesting.

When the Torah was given some 3,300 years ago, the pasuk in Parshat Yitro says, “VaYichan Sham Yisrael Neged HaHar” – “And the Jews camped near the mountain”. “VaYichan” is in the singular – “And he camped”‐ although it is referring to all of Bnei Yisrael. says that this is to teach us the unity that Bnei Yisrael had. They were, “K’Ish Echad BiLev Echad”‐ “like one person with one heart”.

Enclosed in this packet you find a collection of Divrei Torah from various members of our community. Although we cannot gather on Shavuot night to learn from one another as we normally do each year, I know that these pages will bring us together to learn virtually. It is truly heartwarming to see so many of the different voices of our community come together like this. I pray that we continue to always be “K’Ish Echad BiLev Echad” ‐ “like one person with one heart”.

This notion of “one heart” certainly applies to our leaders in these trying times, and I thus want to (again) thank Seeman and Rabbi Boroosan, both of whom have been working overtime the last few months. Although I am not privy to much of what they have been dealing with, I am fortunate to be involved in just a small portion of what they are doing for our community, and I can tell you that it has been non‐stop – the meetings, the calls, the emails, the texts – all of it never ending. We are really fortunate to have them at the helm.

I would like to thank all of those that took their time to contribute Divrei Torah to this publication – especially on such short notice. And a big thank you to Hannah Honey Freedman for the beautiful cover art.

Of course, we thank those who generously sponsored the packet and the goodie bag:

‐The Spicy Peach ‐Rabbi Michael and Channah Broyde ‐Josh and Jodi Wittenberg ‐Brent Delman (The Cheese Guy) ‐Levi and Aliza Afrah

Lastly, I want to thank all of those who put this together, from coming up with the idea to executing it. It wouldn’t have been possible without help from Jodi Wittenberg, Shlomo Pill, Jonathan Farazmand, Shainah Afrah and, of course, Aderet Afrah. 

Finally, on behalf of the KYA Board, I wish everyone a Chag Sameyach!

‐Levi Afrah

YOUR COMMUNITY. YOUR VOICE קהילת קול ישראל KOL YISRAEL ATLANTA KOL YISRAEL ATLANTA SHAVUOT 5780

Matan Torah Rabbi Yehuda Boroosan

In preparation of this most .מתן תורה ,The greatest moment in Jewish history was the giving of the Torah to conduct an assessment and משה רבנו pivotal revelation in Jewish history, Hashem commissions determine if the Jewish people are ready to receive the Torah. What was the criteria that Hashem instructed Moshe to use for this purpose?

"ואתם תהיו לי ממלכת כהנים וגוי קדוש"

"You shall be to me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.”

The first criteria was willingness to be dedicated to leading the world toward an acceptance and embodiment of G‐d’s mission.

Let’s understand this concept more clearly through the following story:

After graduating from the prestigious Yale University, a totally secular young man inexplicably announced that he was going to to study at Yeshiva Aish HaTorah. He studied hard, grew tremendously, and within a year, he was ready to return home as a fully observant Jew. Before he left, Rabbi Noach Weinberg, the famed Rosh Yeshiva of Aish, asked the student what motivated him to come to Yeshiva in the first place.

The young man explained that he had studied at Yale, and spent time in Russia as part of his studies. One night, he was told that there was going to be a Jewish celebration in front of the Great Synagogue. Intrigued, he dropped by the Synagogue, and witnessed 50,000 Jews gathered there to dance on Simchat Torah.

This was a most haunting experience. Muscovites are a hard‐faced people. No one dances in the streets. Yet, there were thousands of Jews dancing in genuine joy! What happened? To find the answer, he became friendly with a group of refuseniks who were learning and teaching Torah throughout Moscow. He joined their class. Although far from knowledgeable himself, he noticed that one of the teachers knew very little. This, however, did not prevent him from teaching.

He asked the teacher, “How long have you been learning Torah that you feel proficient to teach?” “Six months,” the teacher replied. He explained that he had attended two to three classes a week and he was teaching Torah to others now.

“How can you know enough to teach?” he asked.

The teacher looked him squarely in the eyes and said, “I risked my life to learn what I know. My teacher risked his life to teach me. How can I not teach it? Whatever I have learned is so precious and represents so much that I am willing to risk my life to pass it on.”

YOUR COMMUNITY. YOUR VOICE קהילת קול ישראל KOL YISRAEL ATLANTA KOL YISRAEL ATLANTA SHAVUOT 5780

The student told R’ Noach, “it was the power of that message that brought me to Yeshiva and the beginning of my life of Torah observance.”

.ממלכת כהנים וגוי קדוש Shavuot is a time for us to revisit and internalize our mission and role of being a

But it is not sufficient for us to fall back into our old habits in Avodat Hashem. The Torah tells us:

”בחדש השלישי לצאת בני ישראל מארץ מצרים ביום הזה באו מדבר סיני"

had left Egypt, on that day, they דAnd it was in the third month after the Jew came to Har Sinai.

Chazal teach us that our renewed commitment to Hashem, and the manner in which we conduct ourselves on a day‐to‐day basis, must be adjusted to reflect the moments and lessons of the day.

YOUR COMMUNITY. YOUR VOICE קהילת קול ישראל KOL YISRAEL ATLANTA KOL YISRAEL ATLANTA SHAVUOT 5780

A Dvar Torah in Honor Rabbi Don Seeman, NTS and the Holiday of Shavuot A Note On The Title Of Jewish Books Rabbi Michael J. Broyde

A note on the titles of books in the Jewish legal tradition is needed, if for no other reason than to explain why the single most significant work of Jewish law written in the last 500 years, the Shulhan Arukh, should have a name which translates into English as "The Set Table." Maybe this will also help you understand the mindset of a community that has a holiday named “Weeks” or “Booth” or “Pass Over”.

Unlike the tradition of most Western law, in which the titles to scholarly publications reflect the topics of the works,1 the tradition in Jewish legal literature is that a title rarely names the relevant subject. Instead, the title usually consists either of a pun based on the title of an earlier work on which the current writing comments or of a literary phrase into which the author's names have been worked (sometimes in reliance on literary license).

A few examples demonstrate each phenomenon. Rabbi 's classical treatise on Jewish law was entitled "The Four Pillars" (Arba Turim), because it classified all of Jewish law into one of four areas. A major commentary on this work that, to a great extent, supersedes the work itself is called "the House of Joseph" (Beit Yosef), since it was written by Rabbi Joseph Karo. Once Karo's commentary (i.e., the house) was completed, one could hardly see "The Four Pillars" it was built on. A reply commentary by Rabbi Joel Sirkes, designed to defend "The Four Pillars" from Karo's criticisms, is called "The New House" (Bayit Hadash). Sirkes proposed his work (i.e., the new house) as a replacement for Karo's prior house.

When Rabbi Karo wrote his own treatise on Jewish law, he called it "The Set Table" (Shulhan Arukh) which was based on (i.e., located in) "The House of Joseph," his previous commentary on Jewish law. Rabbi Moses Isserles' glosses on "The Set Table"‐ which were really intended vastly to expand "The Set Table" ‐ are called "The Tablecloth," because no matter how nice the table is, once the tablecloth is on it, one hardly notices the table. Rabbi David Halevi's commentary on the Shulhan Arukh was named the "Golden Pillars" (Turai Zahav) denoting an embellishment on the "legs" of the "Set Table." This type of humorous interaction continues to this day in terms of titles of commentaries on the classical Jewish law work, the Shulhan Arukh.

Additionally, there are book titles that are mixed literary puns, and biblical verses. For example, Rabbi Shabtai ben Meir HaKohen wrote a very sharp critique on the above mentioned Turai Zahav ("Golden Pillars"), which he entitled Nekudat Hakesef, "Spots of Silver," which is a veiled misquote of the verse in Song of Songs 1:11 which states "we will add bands of gold to your spots of silver" (turai zahav al nekudat hakesef, with the word turia "misspelled.") Thus, Shach's work is really "The Silver Spots on the Golden Pillars," with

1 Consider for example, for fine work by our Rabbi, Dr. Don Seeman entitled One People, One Blood: Ethiopian-Israelis and the Return to (Rutgers University Press, 2009), which deals with Ethiopian-Israelis and their Return to Judaism.

YOUR COMMUNITY. YOUR VOICE קהילת קול ישראל KOL YISRAEL ATLANTA KOL YISRAEL ATLANTA SHAVUOT 5780 the understanding that it is the silver that appears majestic when placed against an all gold background.

Other works follow the model of incorporating the name of the scholar into the work. For example, the above mentioned Rabbi Shabtai ben Meir HaKohen's commentary on the Shulhan Arukh itself is entitled Seftai Kohen "the words of the Kohen," (a literary embellishment of "Shabtai HaKohen," the author's name). Rabbi Moses Feinstein's collection of responsa are called Iggerot Moshe, "Letters from Moses." Hundreds of normative works of Jewish law follow this model. Consider for example, the works of Rabbi Moshe Schreiber (Moses Sofer) whose primary work of Jewish law in an acronym of his name Chasam Sofer, (trans. Seal of the Scribe and acronym for Chidushei Toras Moshe Sofer). His son, Rabbi Avrohom Shmuel Binyamin Sofer also writes a volume of Jewsh law, entitled Ktav Sofer, (trans. Writing of the Scribe, (1815‐1872) , and a grandson who wrote in matters of Jewish law named Rabbi Akiva Sofer, whose writing are entitled Daas Sofer “The insights of the Scribe). Indeed, many of the decedents of Rabbi Sofer write in Jewish law using the word Sofer within their works.

So the next time you encounter a book name, and when you translated it, you cannot understand the title of the book as relating to the work at all, you should know that this is normal and part of the Jewish Tradition.

As we enter the holiday of “Weeks,” you need to know that names do not always tell us what we need to know about a book, or a person or a holiday.

YOUR COMMUNITY. YOUR VOICE קהילת קול ישראל KOL YISRAEL ATLANTA KOL YISRAEL ATLANTA SHAVUOT 5780 You Can "Count" On Me Harold Steifel

The question is asked why doesn’t Shavuot have a date in the Torah? Every other holiday has a date specified in the Torah and yet Shavuot does not. Rather Shavuot has a process for working out a way to get to the date every year which turns out to be the same calendar date every year yet we don’t set a date we still do the same process year after year.

That process is counting the omer from the 2nd day of Pesach 49 days and poof there appears Shavuot.

To make this process even stranger from a halachik standpoint we make a blessing every night when we count even though it seems to be one long mitzvah from the beginning to the end as the mitzvah is to count 49 days or 7 weeks but it one mitzvah not 49 separate ones. Yet we make 49 separate brachot as if to say we are doing 49 separate mitzvot. The answer to this will be in next years dvar Torah. However the issue I will deal with is that we are told by some that if you miss a day you can no longer count with a bracha when counting the remainder of the days and yet others say you can still count the weeks with a bracha just not the days with a bracha. I want to deal with the view of the Beit Halevi who says that if you miss a day by accident that you can still count the next days with a bracha because of the concept of Kol Israel Areivim Ze Laze, Every Jew is responsible for every other Jew. ( a very loose translation) He says that of course I had you in mind when I counted so its as if you counted so you can keep counting because I had you in mind. Why because I had every Jew in mind.

When you look deeper into his writings elsewhere you find an interesting idea based on a thought by the Maharal. What if no one counted from Pesach to Shavuot would there be a Shavuot? Would Shavuot be only Rabbinic? Could such a reality exist?

The answer is in the very question. It’s a holiday that celebrates not the giving of the Torah but the receiving of the Torah. If we as a nation cant remember to mark it on our calendars and to mark the date and to make it a holiday then its just not worth celebrating. Hashem cant force us to celebrate this holiday. Hashem cant make this holiday. We make this Holiday.

Hashem can take us out of Egypt and make the miracles and take us to Har Sinai but only We can accept the obligation to accept the Torah.

To do this we need to also accept the fact that we are a single nation bound together under an obligation of every Jew is responsible for every other Jew. Just as I can assume that if I missed a counting that someone counted for me I can assume that if I missed doing an Eruv Tavshilin that someone had me in mind. I also can assume that when I need help someone will help me and that when I can give help I will be there for those who need me. Its what we call community and its what we had at Har Sinai when they say the Jews were there Am Echad Blev Ecahad, they we one nation with one heart.

That’s why there is no date for Shavuot, its our Holiday to make as One Nation with One heart.

YOUR COMMUNITY. YOUR VOICE קהילת קול ישראל KOL YISRAEL ATLANTA KOL YISRAEL ATLANTA SHAVUOT 5780 We Will Do, and We Will Listen, and We Will Continue to Do Shimmy and Liora Afrah

When describing Matan Torah, the Torah writes that Bnei Yisroel was encamped “betachtit hahar”, which translates to “the bottom of the mountain”. This phrase gave rise to the midrash that when Hashem was offering the Torah to Bnei Yisroel, He was doing so by holding Har Sinai over them, almost as if He was threatening them.

However, if we look back a few posukim, we see that Bnei Yisroel had already enthusiastically exclaimed “Kol Hashem Diber Naaseh ‐ Everything that Hashem has said we will do!” So why was it necessary to hold the mountain over them?

Two commentaries, the Maharal and the Meshech Chochma offer explanations. The Meshech Chochma teaches this wasn't pshat ‐ literal. Hashem didn't literally hold the mountain above them, but when Bnei Yisroel arrived at Matan Torah, it was such an overwhelming experience! They had just left Egypt, witnessed the splitting of the sea, crossed the Yam Suf, and now they're at this incredible, showstopping experience of Har Sinai! Every moment that they were living was telling them ‐ there is no other option! Of course they would accept the Torah ‐ after everything they’ve been through, how could they not?

The Maharal expands on this idea by teaching that the Torah and the Mitzvot cannot just depend on an exclamation of commitment. Hashem was telling Bnei Yisroel: Don’t think it's just enough for you to decide today that you want it, because maybe tomorrow you won't. Accepting the Torah is exciting, but keeping the Torah isn't always as inspirational as it may have been at Har Sinai!

Rabbi Jonathan Sacks furthers this idea by explaining that this is why Hashem made a covenant with Bnei Yisroel. Hashem was saying: I’ve done miracles for you, now it’s your turn to do something for me ‐ Build a society, yourselves, by working together. In Rabbi Sacks words: “Covenant creates a politics of responsibility, where good things happen because people say: we are going to make a difference.”

Rebbetzin Shira Smiles writes that the entire ritual at Har Sinai is often compared to a wedding between Hashem and Bnei Yisroel. A significant part of the wedding ceremony is the signing of the ketubah ‐ the marriage contract. This is because when the dancing is over and the honeymoon phase has passed and the day‐to‐day mundane duties pile up, the ketubah serves as a reminder of the beautiful commitment made during a joyous time.

When we reach the holiday of Shavuot, we as a nation have spent 40 days counting towards the holiday and working on our attributes. In doing so, we learn about the significance of responsibility and commitment. We learn that exclaiming Naaseh V’Nishma ‐ while important ‐ is insufficient. The Omer, Matan Torah, and ultimately Shavuot teach us that actions are necessary because actions bridge the gap between exclamation of commitment with fulfillment of commitment.

YOUR COMMUNITY. YOUR VOICE קהילת קול ישראל KOL YISRAEL ATLANTA KOL YISRAEL ATLANTA SHAVUOT 5780 Life Is In the Waiting Debra Shaffer Seeman

I’ve always loved the 49 day countdown (CountUp, really) to Shavuot. The building anticipation towards Matan Torah, eagerly breathing in the blooms adorning homes and synagogues, yomtov tastebuds rewarded with blintzes and cheesecake, staying up ‘til first light awaiting the arrival of the Torah. Up until this year, the CountUp has reminded me of the direction I’m heading. I’ve always known that the great build up is leading me towards the main event, the crescendo of Shavuot.

This year, I encountered a teaching of the Kedushat Levi which invited me into a totally new paradigm. The Kedushat Levi was asked why the holiday of Shavuot is called Atzeret, an assembly or a stopping place. One of his responses to this question opened my heart. One might think, explains the Kedushat Levi, that Shavuot (The Festival of Weeks) would be named for something related to the essence of the day, just like other holidays. Instead, it’s named for something that has already happened, an activity that’s been completed: the counting of seven full weeks, effectively making the essence of the holiday of Shavuot a celebratory ending, a siyyum. Generally at a siyyum, we look back at the main event ‐ the learning ‐ and reminisce about what we’ve learned and what’s transpired. We share our learning with others and rejoice about having completed something of significance. We mark an end to our joy, joy elicited by the process of learning. The Kedushat Levi cites the oft quoted Rashi about Shemini Atzeret:

About Shemini Atzeret (when HaShem is reputed to have said,) ‘Your departure (Jewish People) is difficult for Me.’ To what is this similar? To a prince who invites the king with his entire entourage to a meal. After the meal when the king is ready to head home, he (the prince) says to the king, ‘Your departure is difficult for me. Therefore, stay here so that a person will not depart from his brother.’ … For this we have Shemini Atzeret in order to mark an end to the joy.

Here, the meal has ended. The main event is complete. One more day is requested in order to soften the impending separation.

Through this lens, Shavuot is no longer the crescendo at the end of the counting. The main event has already occurred and Shavuot, in turn, becomes the moment when we signify the completion of something precious. It’s the way we mark an end to our process, a celebration added on to soften the blow of losing something of inestimable value.

And what is it that leaves us yearning for one more day?

The only thing that we’ve done is count. And wait. And, perhaps if we’ve attuned ourselves to such behaviors, we’ve intentionally prepared ourselves for what is to come, taking the time to look inside and do our own work on the way.

YOUR COMMUNITY. YOUR VOICE קהילת קול ישראל KOL YISRAEL ATLANTA KOL YISRAEL ATLANTA SHAVUOT 5780 Choosing Torah Rebecca Clark Schmerer

Shavuot was the major Jewish holiday that I had heard nothing about while growing up in a community that is both proudly Jewish and proudly secular. While Sukkot and especially Pesach both can be meaningfully secularized as festivals of nature’s bounty and freedom, respectively, Shavuot cannot. Celebrating the ancient Israelites’ receiving of the Torah at Sinai, the dawn of the covenant with Hashem that binds Jews today, would be challenging to de‐deify. The famously counterintuitive way that the Torah recounts the Israelites’ acceptance of our extensive legal code—"All that the Lord has spoken, we will do, and we will hear,” na’aseh venishma (Ex. 24:7)—makes Shavuot even more challenging to those who take pride in their rationality. To agree to do something without knowing at all what you’re agreeing to seems unthinking, not to mention reckless. Certainly we wouldn’t sign a legal contract without reading at least the large print. Among our sages who regarded the Israelites as having a choice to accept the Torah or not, including Rashi, the Israelites demonstrated their tremendous faith in Hashem precisely by embracing a covenant whose terms were unknown; the bigger the leap, the greater the faith. According to Shabbat 88a, the Israelites’ giving precedence to obedience to the divine teaching over investigation earned them the praise of the angels, who themselves obey the divine will without hesitation. Others point out that, presuming the text precedes chronologically, the Israelites in fact had heard at least the Aseret Hadibrot before affirming na’aseh v’nishma. Ibn Ezra, for example, concludes Moses must have read the contents to the people, or else they might have transgressed the Torah’s laws immediately after accepting them. No matter how strong one’s emunah, a basic understanding of the mitzvot is necessary to perform Hashem’s will. It seems worth noting as well that the Israelites’ acceptance of the Torah was not from a god whom they had just met b’midbar Sinai. By all accounts, we received the Torah after the exodus from Egypt, which, like the dramatic opening act of the Aseret Hadibrot, was experienced by all the people: “You have seen what I did to the Egyptians, how I bore you on eagles’ wings and brought you to Me” (Ex. 19:4). We were agreeing to follow the Torah of Hashem who had shown both great concern for our suffering in Egypt and great power and wisdom in extricating us from slavery. Moreover, both the servitude and redemption fulfilled the terms of the promise generations earlier to Avraham. To agree to follow the advice of one who has demonstrated both good judgment in the past and profound concern for your well‐being, even if the instruction is not fully spelled out, is a sensible decision. If your most prudent and loyal friend asks you to meet her at the corner of LaVista and Briarcliff on Saturday at 11pm with $500 cash, saying I can’t tell you why until then, it would not be senseless to agree. Yes, we should read the fine print in ordinary legal contracts and ask for ambiguous terms and contingencies to be clarified. In the most important decisions we make in life, however, generally we can’t have full knowledge of the consequences—whom to marry, where to live, what and with whom to study. Learning from experience who is worthy of our trust is often the soundest guidance available. Even if Israel chose the Torah sensing the wisdom of the mitzvot, we also chose it in light of Hashem’s demonstrated trustworthiness.

YOUR COMMUNITY. YOUR VOICE קהילת קול ישראל KOL YISRAEL ATLANTA KOL YISRAEL ATLANTA SHAVUOT 5780 Mirror Neurons and Morality Alison Feit & Jordan Mann

For this special Shavuos Dvar Torah, we would like to consider some of the words of Mordechai Yosef Izhbitze, Izbitse, Ishbitze) (1801‐1854) an איזביצע ,איזשביצע :Leiner of Izbica ( important rabbinic Hasidic thinker and founder of the Izhbitza‐Radzyn dynasty of Hasidic Judaism. Rabbi Leiner is best known for his work Mei Hashiloach, a compilation of his teachings by his grandson, in which he expressed the doctrine that all events, including human actions, are absolutely under God's control, or as Rabbinic discourse would phrase it, by "hashgacha pratis." Thus, if everything is determined by God, then even sin is done in accordance with God's will. As such, the Izhbitzer presents defenses of various Biblical sins, such as Korach's rebellion, Zimri during the Heresy of Peor, and Judah's incident with Tamar.

In this Dvar Torah, we choose to talk about the Izhbitzer’s views of morality, empathy and the meaning of a ‘good life’. We chose this topic because we are living in a time where we ourselves are thinking of our own values and trying to extend empathy and understanding towards others who think differently. It is a confusing time, when we are sometimes absent distinct courses of action. We think that the Izhbitzer had deep insight into the soul of a person and thus has a great deal to teach us in how to choose the right thing to do when we have lost the things that center us. We hope you like reading it as much as we enjoyed writing it! Ali and Jordan

YOUR COMMUNITY. YOUR VOICE קהילת קול ישראל KOL YISRAEL ATLANTA KOL YISRAEL ATLANTA SHAVUOT 5780

כו:בראשית לז) ...ויאמר יהודה אל אחיו מה בצע ) And Judah said to his brothers, "What benefit will there be [to killing our brother] ..." (Genesis 37:26)

The Izhbitzer: The states (Sanhedrin 6b), "Anyone who praises Judah [for his role in selling Joseph into slavery] is called a thief." (Our text of the Talmud has "reviler" instead of "thief" ‐ the chavrusas.)

The meaning of this is as follows. The Talmud states (Nedarim 32b), "At the moment of the evil impulse, there is no one to mention the good impulse." That is, when G‐d wishes to test a person, He makes the person entirely forget the grave sinfulness of the act in which he is being tested. And this was the situation with Jacob's sons; when they wanted to kill [their brother Joseph], the entire prohibition became hidden from them, and it was only through non‐Torah calculations that [Joseph] was saved from them and they were saved from sin. Because Judah was a great expert in the wisdom of the material world, and therefore he devised a plot and said, "What benefit will there be," meaning, even though it seemed to him that it was legally permitted to kill [Joseph] ... but what benefit will come to us from it? Will our father love us more as a result? And as soon as it was agreed among them that they would not kill him, they saw the gravity of the prohibition, i.e., that it was legally prohibited to kill him in addition [to being unwise].

And it is forbidden for a person to protect himself [from sin] by means this type of practical calculation at any time, except during a divine test, when no other calculation is possible. But when separating oneself from sin at a time when one remembers that it is forbidden, one may only do so on the basis of G‐d's command, and not on the basis of such a [practical] calculation. And this is the meaning of the Talmudic passage: "Anyone who praises Judah" ‐ i.e., anyone who sees fit to do so at any time ‐ "is called a thief," because even Judah only utilized this calculation at a moment of divine test.

The chavrusas: At first glance, the Izhbitzer seems to contradict himself. He describes what a person may do to protect himself from sin during a divine test. But if, as the Izhbitzer says, during a divine test a person entirely forgets the sinfulness of the prohibited act, then how can he even be aware that there is any sin to protect himself from? And what is G‐d testing exactly when he tempts a person to commit a sin that he has no idea is a sin? Also, what was the "plot" that Judah "devised"?

It would appear that what the Izhbitzer means is that during a divine test, a person loses all of his emotional safeguards against sin, such as his moral revulsion and guilt, but is still aware on a cognitive level that the prohibited act is wrong. The test, then, is whether he can somehow muster the resources to do the right thing when every emotional fiber in his being wants to do the wrong thing. In the Izhbitzer's reading, Judah didn't argue against killing Joseph simply because he was figuring out his own self‐interest so that he could follow it, or because he was trying to convince his brothers to do the right

YOUR COMMUNITY. YOUR VOICE קהילת קול ישראל KOL YISRAEL ATLANTA KOL YISRAEL ATLANTA SHAVUOT 5780 thing. Rather, he was trying to arouse in himself a selfish desire to save Joseph, in order to counteract his own overwhelming urge to kill him. He "devised a plot" against his own evil impulse, because the divine test had stripped him of his usual emotional defenses. He tricked his evil impulse into wanting to save Joseph instead of killing him. The point that the Talmud is making, according to the Izhbitzer, is that Judah's approach is only appropriate under the extraordinary circumstances of a divine test. Under normal circumstances, a person should not cultivate his own selfishness even as a means of motivating himself to do the right thing. His sole motivation should be to fulfill G‐d's will. (The Izhbitzer may have found this interpretation philosophically pleasing as it has Judah passing the divine test, not failing it, and changes the Talmudic passage from an indictment of Judah to an admonition to the rest of us.)

Still, if this is what the Izhbitzer means, it is strange that he doesn't discuss what emotions drive a person to do the right thing under normal circumstances. (We "filled in the blanks" by suggesting guilt and moral revulsion.) He writes extensively elsewhere about love of G‐d and fear of G‐d and their effects on a person, so it is surprising that he doesn't discuss how those come in to play here.

Maybe the Izhbitzer would have expressed himself a little differently if he had had a more modern emotional vocabulary. What normally defends a person emotionally against the evil impulses of selfishness and anger is empathy ‐ the ability to see the humanity in another person, to understand that the other person has desires just as we do and can experience physical or emotional pain as we do. This ability is so deeply engrained in us that it has a neurological basis. We have "mirror neurons" that fire when we see others doing certain actions as if we were doing those actions ourselves. Modifying the Izhbitzer's point a little, we can say that the Talmud is telling us that absent a divine test, empathy should always be the source of our morality, of our observance of mitzvot bein adam lachaveiro, and not our selfish interests, even when our interests happen to coincide with morality. Ultimately empathy allows us to understand the needs of another person in a deeper and fuller way than we possibly could if we only viewed our relationships with others through the prism of practical benefits.

There are people who reach adulthood incapable of empathy or concern for others due to abusive and traumatic experiences during their childhood. They learn growing up that one person's happiness can only come from another person's pain. As adults they may come to understand cognitively that this isn't always the case, but at that point they are incapable of accepting this emotionally. Some such people become psychopaths and are fully comfortable defrauding, injuring, or even killing others. Others "pass the test" and make a decision to live by a moral code and by society's laws despite their emotional handicaps. But even those who choose to live morally are only capable of fulfilling the basic principle of not harming others physically and financially. They may have no way of understanding when they are embarrassing another person or when the person needs consolation or encouragement. A full morality derives from a deep understanding of the needs of the other person, which can only come from empathy.

YOUR COMMUNITY. YOUR VOICE קהילת קול ישראל KOL YISRAEL ATLANTA KOL YISRAEL ATLANTA SHAVUOT 5780

In fact, perhaps this is the reason the Torah derives morality from the notion that "in the image of G‐d did He create man" (Genesis 9:6). Once we learn that we are all created in G‐d's image, we look at the divine in others and see ourselves.

The Meaning of 'Shavuot' Micah Feit Mann

Shavuot has a great deal of names and customs, just like any major Jewish holiday. The name “Shavuot” literally means “weeks.” Many say the name refers to the seven weeks the Jews waited at Har Sinai, from the night following the first day of Pesach, until the day of shavuot. Other sources interpret Shavuot to mean “promises,” to commemorate the promise made by Bnei Yisrael to remain faithful to G‐d. In return, G‐d promised Bnei Yisrael that he would cherish them, and that they would remain his chosen people. Another name for Shavuot, “Yom Habikkurim,” literally translates to “day of the first fruits,” or “Chag Hashavuot” meaning day of the weeks. Some call it “Zman Matan Torah” or the “time of the giving of the torah.” Each of these names gives a different meaning to this special festival. A festival of spring, of rebirth, of torah, and of the Jewish people.

What is Shavuot really about? By: Benyamin Zavulunov

Q: Every Jewish holiday there is something special we do on that day, whether it’s building a Sukkah, eating Matzah and Marror, or even blowing the Shofar, but what is so special about the holiday of Shavuot?! After all, the Jewish nation received the Torah on Shavuot, that is the most important thing in our lives!

A: The Sages teach us: that when Hashem gave the Jewish people the Torah, it was as if we were standing under a Chupah with Hashem, just like a bride and groom on their wedding night. Hashem asked us “Will you accept my Torah?” Without any doubts or concerns, the Jewish people unanimously answered Na’aseh Ve’nishmah (We will do and we will listen), meaning we accept all of the commandments even though we don’t know what they are, and then we will listen or understand why we do them. It is like a newly married couple, who say yes to each other’s requests, with no arguments. This is why Shavuot doesn’t have a “special” Mitzvah dedicated to it. On Shavuot, we are not only celebrating receiving of the Torah, but we are also celebrating our initial commitment to the Torah. That is why we stay up all night with the Torah, we stay up because the Torah is so dear to us. On Shavuot, we turned to Hashem and said Na’aseh Ve’nishmah (We will do and we will listen). This Shavuot let us turn to Hashem, turn to the Torah, and commit ourselves to know each other a little bit more.

YOUR COMMUNITY. YOUR VOICE קהילת קול ישראל KOL YISRAEL ATLANTA KOL YISRAEL ATLANTA SHAVUOT 5780

Yehuda & Tamar: Why is the Mashiach found in such a strange place? A Look at Various Leadership Models by Yoni Graber based on a shiur by Rabbi Yitzchak Etshalom

I. The (Quick) Yehuda & Tamar Story (With my Comments in Bold)

Yehuda separates from his brothers and befriends a man from Adullam names Chirah. (Why do we need this background information?) Then Yehuda meets another local Canaanite man named Shuah and Yehuda marries his daughter. (Again, why do we need all this background information?) We find out that they have three children: Er, Onan, and Sheilah. (These are very strange names 2.) Er marries Tamar but is killed by HaShem. Onan marries Tamar and is also killed by HaShem. Yehuda refuses to give Tamar over to his third son, Sheilah, so he tells Tamar to go live at her father’s house until Sheilah grows up. Meanwhile, Yehuda’s wife dies, and he is looking for some company. (Why else would it matter if Yeshuda’s wife had died?) Tamar, in realizing that Yehuda never intended for her to marry Sheilah, makes her move and tricks Yehuda into sleeping with her by dressing up like a prostitute. Yehuda returns to pay her, but she disappears. Yehuda then sends a friend to try to find and pay her and he asks around the town. (Yehuda is obviously not ashamed of his actions or he would not have sent his friend or had him ask around the town.) Yehuda describes not paying her as a “disgrace.” (So, sleeping with a prostitute is not the disgrace but not paying her is? This whole thing seems odd.) Three months later Tamar is showing. Yehuda assumes that she has relations outside of the family and instructs that she be burned to death. When she is being taken out to be burned, she reveals that she is pregnant via Yehuda and Yehuda says that she is more innocent than him because he did not give her to Sheilah. (She’s more innocent because he refused to give her to Sheilah? What about sleeping with – what he thought – was a prostitute? This whole story is very weird.)

II. Questions to Ask

To sum it up, the Yehuda & Tamar story seems very strange for several reasons:

(1) We get a whole backstory that does not seem relevant. (2) We get introduced to characters that come and go and are not part of the main story. (3) We do not get this type of information on any of the other brothers. (4) Yehuda seems not worried about the “prostitution issue” and much more worried about dealing honestly with the prostitute. (5) Yehuda also seems to indicate that his big failure was in dealing honestly with Tamar vis‐à‐vis Sheilah – again, not the “prostitution issue.”

Additionally, some “bigger picture” questions include:

(1) Its placement in the Torah is a strange interruption to the Yosef story. To exacerbate this issue, the Yehuda & Tamar story likely took place before the Yosef story3.

2 Er means “nothingness,” Onan means “mourning,” and Sheilah means “an illusion.” If you think about it, these names are exactly what happens to each of them: Er and Onan die and Sheilah remains an illusion to Tamar, as we will see.

3 Consider that the most time from Yosef being sold to the brothers coming down to Egypt with Ya’akov was 22 years (it could have been less). The Torah mentions that Yosef was 17-years old in the beginning of the Yosef story (Bereshit 37:2). To calculate

YOUR COMMUNITY. YOUR VOICE קהילת קול ישראל KOL YISRAEL ATLANTA KOL YISRAEL ATLANTA SHAVUOT 5780

(2) Is the point of the story to tell us about the royal lineage? If so, it’s strange because we have the royal lineages recorded elsewhere in Tanach4. (3) Is the point of the story to tell us about the power of teshuva? If so, it is strange because Yehuda’s “teshuva” is unclear. Was he doing teshuva for sleeping with (what he thought) was a prostitute? From the text, that does not appear to be the case. Was he doing teshuva for sleeping with his daughter‐in‐law (albeit without his knowledge)? Again, that does not appear to be the case from the text.

To understand the Yehuda & Tamar story (and to answer our questions), we need to journey ahead to the critical family scene where Ya’akov “blesses” his children5.

III. Ya’akov’s “Blessings”

Ya’akov is dying and his children are all gathered around. What is Ya’akov doing? Ya’akov is assigning tasks, positions and – perhaps – even land6. In assigning these things Ya’akov understands that his family – while large – is still one family and that, when they go back to the Land of Israel, they will need leadership since he will be gone. Remember that – from Ya’akov’s perspective – they are heading back to the Land of Israel quite soon! Ya’akov does not know about the many years of slavery, Moshe, the makot, or Yam Suf. Ya’akov is assigning who that leader will be in the not‐too‐distant future.

This is why Ya’akov plows through Reuven, Shimon, and Levi before landing on Yehuda, while the rest of the family is not in birth order.

So why was Yehuda chosen as the leader? Perhaps we need to ask the question: Why were Reuven, Shimon, and Levi passed over?

IV. Reuven

Reuven, the oldest, should theoretically be in charge. However, Ya’akov is crystal clear7 that Reuven cannot lead because of the “Bilhaa incident.” What happened?

Back in Bereshit8, Rachel dies. In the very next verse Reuven sleeps9 with Bilhaa, his father’s concubine (note Bilhaa’s description as a “concubine” – this is important). Why would Reuven do such a thing?

how Yosef’s age when the brothers came down with Ya’akov requires a little more (easy) math. The Torah tells us that (1) Yosef was 30-years old when he stood before Pharaoh (Bereshit 41:46) (2) the years of plenty started right away and lasted 7 years (Bereshit 41:47 and 53), and the brothers came down with Ya’akov in the 2nd year of the famine (Bereshit 45:6 and 11). Adding it all up, Yosef was 39 when the brothers arrived in Egypt with Ya’akov. Thus, 22 years was the maximum amount of time Yosef’s whereabouts where unknown. Bringing this back to the Yehuda & Tamar story, it’s highly improbable (although certainly not impossible) that – in a span of 22 years – Yehuda marries, has three children, the children become old enough to marry Tamar (including the youngest child, Sheilah), the whole Yehuda-Tamar dalliance happens, Tamar bears a child, and Yehuda’s grandchildren (via his relationship with Tamar) end up going down to Egypt with the brothers and Ya’akov (see: Bereshit 46:12). 4 Most notably, see Megillat Ruth (4:18-22) and Divrei Hayamim (chapters 2 and 3). 5 Bereshit, Chapter 49 6 See: 48:22, 49:7, 49:11, 49:13, and 49:20 7 Bereshit 49:4 8 Chapter 35 9 I am well aware of the famous Gemarah on Shabbos 56b. I do not wish to wade into whether Reuven actually slept with Bilhaa or just moved the beds as the Gemarah describes. The point is the same: Reuven messed with his father’s sexual life.

YOUR COMMUNITY. YOUR VOICE קהילת קול ישראל KOL YISRAEL ATLANTA KOL YISRAEL ATLANTA SHAVUOT 5780

We’re accustomed to 12 stained‐glass windows representing the 12 tribes of Yisrael. What we do not think about is how those 12 children were divided up at that very moment of Rachel’s death. Ya’akov has six children through Leah, two children through Rachel and four slave children through the maidservants, Bilhaa and Zilpah. Let that sink in.

Ya’akov understands family dynamics far too well and understands that the only way to break up (or at least blunt) the hegemony of Leah’s children is to even the playing field with six on one side and six on the other.

What is the best way to do that? Marry the slave children’s moms which will make the slave children full‐fledged sons. We know that Ya’akov, in fact, did this as Bilhaa and Zilpah are described just a few chapters later as “wives10” (not “concubines”). Now, Bilhaa and Zilpah’s four plus Rachel’s two become six – an even playing field against Leah’s six.

Reuven understood this too and – in an attempt to manipulate the power structure to his advantage – slept with Bilhaa as a statement of power: “I’m in charge now!11” Reuven operated on his own and operated prematurely12. Reuven was neither in charge then nor could he ever be in charge after that.

V. Shimon and Levi

If Reuven cannot be the leader, we turn to Shimon and Levi – the next in line. To understand why Shimon and Levi are disqualified we need to roll back to Avraham.

Avraham does not sit off somewhere on a mountaintop to do kiruv. Avraham is interacting. He is cutting covenants (and upholding them!) with locals like Mamrei, Eshkol, and Aner, 13 hobnobbing with local Canaanite kings like Malki‐ Tzedek14, hobnobbing with local Philistine kings like Avimelech (and his general, Pichol)15, and even hobnobbing with Pharaohs16. Avraham is well known throughout the land17 and people generally like him.

Yitzchak is not like Avraham. Yitzchak is the ultimate introvert meditating in the fields and shutting himself off from the outside world. In fact, the Torah records many times Yitzchak gets into fights with the locals as a result. Yitzchak is the opposite of Avraham. Yitzchak, seeing that his modus operandi of isolation is not the right move for his son, Ya’akov gives him “Avraham’s Blessing”18 and instructs Ya’akov to interact with the world around him.

Ya’akov takes this message to heart and very much goes out of his way to talk to people (like by the well). In fact, after the ultimate encounter between Lavan and Ya’akov on Har Gilad, Ya’akov asks his “brothers” to gather stones19. Who are Ya’akov’s brothers? It is a reference to Ya’akov’s treaty partners. The word “achi” can mean treaty partners.

Ya’akov has been spending his whole life since leaving his parents building a name for himself by harnessing the “Avraham model” and interacting with the world around him.

Then comes the Shechem incident. Ya’akov’s daughter, Dina, is kidnapped by the prince of the city and Shimon and Levi trick the entire population in order to decimate the city. It is no wonder why Ya’akov’s response to Shimon and

10 See Bereshit 37:2. 11 See the stories of Avshalom and Adoniyahu, for example. 12 Incidentally, this is a hallmark of Reuven’s legacy: acting alone and prematurely. See Reuven’s actions when they throw Yosef into the pit and see Reuven’s actions when negotiating with Ya’akov to bring Binyamin to Egypt. 13 Bereshit 14:13 14 Bereshit 14:18-19 15 Bereshit 21:22-24 16 Bereshit 12:16 17 Bereshit 23:6 18 Bereshit 28:4 19 Bereshit 31:46

YOUR COMMUNITY. YOUR VOICE קהילת קול ישראל KOL YISRAEL ATLANTA KOL YISRAEL ATLANTA SHAVUOT 5780

Levi sounds timid – Ya’akov’s whole life’s work has been building bridges through influence and trust. Shimon and Levi evaporated that work in an instant. True, something needed to get done. But trickery does not move the needle forward.

Shimon and Levi’s approach are decidedly not the Avrahamic approach. They, too, cannot lead.

VI. Yehuda

Yehuda has an established mode of leadership that:

(1) Is centered around alliances and friendship. (2) Deals honestly with people. (3) When it turns out he’s not being honest he owns up to his error and repairs the situation.

Yehuda is no Reuven. He does not act alone and act prematurely. Yehuda has friends and makes alliances. Yehuda is thoughtful and well‐timed20.

Yehuda is no Shimon or Levi. Yehuda does not trick or deceive people and kick them when they are down. Yehuda deals honestly with people – even prostitutes! – and when he is called out on being dishonest, he makes repairs.

It is no wonder that Ya’akov, in his blessing, tells Yehuda that his “brothers” will praise him. All my life I thought “brothers” were his real brothers. I don’t think so. I think “brothers” in this context means his alliances as we see with Ya’akov himself by Har Gilad.

VII. Conclusion

The story of Yehuda & Tamar is crucial to understanding why Yehuda is the chosen leader. It is there to show us that true leadership is not perfect. True leadership is about going out there, making friends, cutting deals, and being honest. And when you are not honest, it is owning up to your mistakes.

It is no wonder that David HaMelech comes from the union of Yehuda and Tamar. In an almost true parallel, David’s life was all about going out, making tons of friends and alliances, and dealing honestly with everyone around him. The one time he did not deal honestly, he did teshuva and is held up by Chazal as the epitome of how one can bounce back from near failure.

This is leadership.

It is also no wonder why the Mashiach himself, may he be here speedily in our days, comes from these unions.

VIII. Ending with Questions

(1) Why was this story embedded in the Yosef story? (I never addressed this.) (2) Can we play other strange “Mashiach ancestors” into the mix? Think: Lot and his daughters and/or Boaz and Ruth.

Would love to hear your thoughts and feedback.

Bivracha, Yoni Graber

20 See Yehuda’s actions when they throw Yosef into the pit and see Yehuda’s actions when negotiating with Ya’akov to bring Binyamin to Egypt. Think about this in stark contrast to how Reuven responds.

YOUR COMMUNITY. YOUR VOICE קהילת קול ישראל KOL YISRAEL ATLANTA