Parshat Shelach • Birkat Hachodesh June 4-5, 2021
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Parashat Korach 5773 June 8, 2013
Parashat Korach 5773 June 8, 2013 This week’s Dvar Tzedek takes the form of an interactive text study. We hope that you’ll use this text study to actively engage with the parashah and contemporary global justice issues. Consider using this text study in any of the following ways: • Learn collectively. Discuss it with friends, family or colleagues. Discuss it at your Shabbat table. • Enrich your own learning. Read it as you would a regular Dvar Tzedek and reflect on the questions it raises. • Teach. Use the ideas and reactions it sparks in you as the basis for your own dvar Torah. Please take two minutes to share your thoughts on this piece by completing this feedback form . Introduction Parashat Korach opens with a scene of intense political drama in which a coalition of disgruntled Israelites challenges Moses and Aaron’s leadership. An analysis of this rebellion and the motivations of its leaders provides an opportunity to explore questions of politics, power and leadership—our associations with them, why they are important and how we might be able to utilize them to achieve the justice that we seek for our communities and the world. The Torah describes the opening of the showdown between Korach’s coalition and Moses and Aaron, as follows: במדבר טז:א ד, ח יא Numbers 16:1 ---4, 8 ---111111 ַוִ ַ ח ֹקַרח, ֶ ִיְצָהר ֶ ְקָהת ֶ ֵלִוי; ְוָדָת Now Korach, son of Izhar son of Kohat son of Levi, took, along ַוֲאִביָר ְֵני ֱאִליב, ְואֹו ֶ !ֶ לֶת ְ נֵי —with Datan and Abiram sons of Eliab, and On son of Pelet ְרא%ֵב. -
Parshat Korach 5770 by Guy Izhak Austrian June 12, 2010
Parshat Korach 5770 By Guy Izhak Austrian June 12, 2010 “We will keep the victims and their families in our prayers.” So said President Barack Obama after the devastating earthquake in Haiti last January, before concluding with just such a prayer: “May God bless the people of Haiti and those working on their behalf.”1 At the same time, the Rabbinical Assembly of Conservative Judaism distributed a “Prayer for Haiti” by Rabbi Naomi Levy,2 and no doubt, many other Americans prayed as well. Given all of the options for taking action after a crisis in a developing country—donating, organizing and volunteering—why do the President, a rabbi in Los Angeles and ordinary people across the U.S. feel compelled to pray for the victims? What impact can these prayers have? We can find a clue in the haftarah for Parshat Korach, a passage from the First Book of Samuel.3 There, Samuel bids farewell to the Israelites, and he rebukes the people for insisting on being ruled by a king. Yet Samuel promises that though he is no longer their prophet and judge, he will continue to pray for them: “Moreover as for me, far be it from me that I should sin against the Lord in ceasing to pray for you.”4 Samuel juxtaposes his own prayerful support of the people with his prophecy, in an earlier passage, of the king’s coming oppression. The king, he says, “yikach”—will take—your children, vineyards and olive groves, your servants and livestock.5 In contrast, Samuel asks rhetorically, “Whose ox have I taken … from whom have I taken a bribe…?” and the people affirm, “You have not taken anything from anyone.”6 Samuel suggests that a righteous leader prays for the people, while an exploitative leader such as a king will only take. -
Parshat Korach Weekly Dvar Torah for the Sake of Heaven
Parshat Korach 3 Tammuz 5778 /June 16, 2018 Daf Yomi: Zevachim 64; Nach Yomi: Isaiah 24 Weekly Dvar Torah A project of the NATIONAL COUNCIL OF YOUNG ISRAEL SPONSORED BY THE HENRY, BERTHA AND EDWARD ROTHMAN FOUNDATION ROCHESTER, NY,CLEVELAND, OHIO, CIRCLEVILLE, OHIO For the Sake of Heaven Rabbi Naphtali Burnstein Mara D'atra, Young Israel of Greater Cleveland In Pirkei Avot, Chapter 5, Mishna 20, we are reminded of the difference between a machlokes sh’le L’Shem Shamayim ─ “a dispute that is for the sake of Heaven, and a machlokes sh’eino L’Shem Shamayim ─ a dispute not for the sale of Heaven.” In giving us the examples of each, the Mishna chooses that of Hillel and Shammai as that of a machlokes sh’le L’Shem Shamayim, and that of Korach and his entire community as that of a machlokes sh’eino L’Shem Shamayim. The question is asked why the two examples given in the Mishna do not seem to be comparablel. In the first example, Hillel and Shammai are the ones chosen as having disputes for the sake of heaven, and in the latter example, rather than choosing Korach together with Moshe and Aharon, Korach and his community are chosen. Did Korach indeed dispute with his followers or with Moshe and Aharon? Many suggestions have been offered; perhaps the most well-known approach is the following: The Mishna, mentioned above, points out that a machlokes L’Shem Shamayim will have a constructive outcome, whereas a machlokes sh’einoL’Shem Shamayim will not. The reasoning for this striking difference is in the motivation behind each. -
Shlach – the Few That Are Many Simon Wolf Respect to the Antecedent
בס"ד פרשת שלח Parshat Shlach – The Few that are Many Simon Wolf respect to the antecedent. In order to gain a better understanding of this phenomenon, it is worthwhile The Mishna in Megillah records a series of religious to take a deeper look at a couple of examples. The practices that require ten men (Minyan) to be most prominent illustration of this vagueness is the performed.1 Included in the list are reading the Pasuk that we quoted above found in Parshat Torah, Birkat Kohanim, Kaddish, Kedusha, Barchu, Korach. items that are otherwise known as Devarim במדבר פרק טז or expressions of (דברים שבקדושה) Sh’b’Kedusha (כ) וַיְ ַד ֵּ֣בר יְקֹ֔וָק ֶאל־מ ֹ ֶׁ֥שה וְ ֶ ֽא ֲל־ַאה ֖ר ֹן ֵל ֽאמ ֹר: sanctity.2 The Gemara then queries as to the (כא) ִה ָּ֣ב ְד ֔לּו ִמ ּ֖תֹוְך ָה ֵע ָ ֣דה ַה ּ֑ז ֹאת וַ ֲא ַכ ֶּ֥לה א ֹ ָ֖תם ְּכ ָ ֽר ַגע: source of the Mishna’s contention that ten men are (כב) וַּיִ ְּפ ֤לּו ַע ְל־ּפנֵ ֶיה ֙ם וַּ֣י ֹ ְאמ ֔רּו ֕ ֵאל ֱא ֵֹ֥להי ָה ֖רּוח ֹת ְל ָכ ָל־ּב ָׂ֑שר essential for creating a Minyan. In response, Rabbi ָה ִ֤איׁש ֶא ָח ֙ד יֶ ֱח ֔ ָטא וְ ַ֥על ָּכל ָ־ה ֵע ָ ֖דה ִּת ְק ֽצ ֹף: פ Yochanan references to the verse in Parshat Emor,3 (כג) וַיְ ַד ֵּ֥בר יְק ָֹ֖וק ֶאל־מ ֹ ֶׁ֥שה ֵּל ֽאמ ֹר: and I will be sanctified amongst Bnei Yisrael“ (כד) ַּד ֵּ֥בר ֶאל־ ָה ֵע ָ ֖דה ֵל ֑אמ ֹר ֵ ֽה ָע ֙לּו ִמ ָּס ֔ ִביב ְל ִמ ְׁש ַּכ ֖ן־ק ֹ ַרח ָּד ָ֥תן which he claims asserts ”(ונקדשתי בתוך בני ישראל) וַ ֲא ִב ָ ֽירם: that “any expression of holiness should not be recited in a quorum of fewer than ten.” Perplexed by the response, the Gemara inquires as to from where At the climax of Korach’s rebellion, God commands in the verse can this be inferred. -
Peace Between Israel and the Palestinians Appears to Be As Elusive As Ever. Following the Most Recent Collapse of American-Broke
38 REVIVING THE ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN PEACE PROCESS: HISTORICAL LES- SONS FOR THE MARCH 2015 ISRAELI ELECTIONS Elijah Jatovsky Lessons derived from the successes that led to the signing of the 1993 Declaration of Principles between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization highlight modern criteria by which a debilitated Israeli-Palestinian peace process can be revitalized. Writ- ten in the run-up to the March 2015 Israeli elections, this article examines a scenario for the emergence of a security-credentialed leadership of the Israeli Center-Left. Such leadership did not in fact emerge in this election cycle. However, should this occur in the future, this paper proposes a Plan A, whereby Israel submits a generous two-state deal to the Palestinians based roughly on that of Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert’s offer in 2008. Should Palestinians find this offer unacceptable whether due to reservations on borders, Jerusalem or refugees, this paper proposes a Plan B by which Israel would conduct a staged, unilateral withdrawal from large areas of the West Bank to preserve the viability of a two-state solution. INTRODUCTION Peace between Israel and the Palestinians appears to be as elusive as ever. Following the most recent collapse of American-brokered negotiations in April 2014, Palestinians announced they would revert to pursuing statehood through the United Nations (UN), a move Israel vehemently opposes. A UN Security Council (UNSC) vote on some form of a proposal calling for an end to “Israeli occupation in the West Bank” by 2016 is expected later this month.1 In July 2014, a two-month war between Hamas-controlled Gaza and Israel broke out, claiming the lives of over 2,100 Gazans (this number encompassing both combatants and civilians), 66 Israeli soldiers and seven Israeli civilians—the low number of Israeli civilians credited to Israel’s sophisti- cated anti-missile Iron Dome system. -
Opinion New Government, New President, New Israel?
Journal of Military and Strategic VOLUME 20, ISSUE 3 Studies Opinion New Government, New President, New Israel? Melanie Carina Schmoll, PhD Israel in summer 2021 – the end of the pandemic seems to be near. Israel opens up, almost all mask requirements are cancelled, international travel groups are welcome and even the individual guests are allowed to travel to the Holy Land with almost no restrictions. It seems Israel is back in pre-pandemic times. But it is not the same country anymore. Some fundamental changes have happened over the last few weeks. When, in March 2021, the Israelis had to vote again for the Israeli Parliament, the Knesset, it was for the fourth time within two and a half years. The outcome was almost the same as the three times before. Benjamin Nethanyahu, Israel´s long-time prime minister, won most of the seats with his Likud party. As the State of Israel is a parlamentary democracy the executive branch or the government draws its authority from the Parliament (the legislative branch) and needs its confidence. Therefore, the prime minister is not decided directly by the voters but depends instead on a process of bargaining among the various fractions elected to parliament. In Israel, no single party holds most of the seats in Parliament and thus the process of forming a government is long and complicated.1 Israel also has an extreme proportional system of government, 1 For more information see Melanie Carina Schmoll, “Israel and the permanent siege: The people have spoken - who will find an answer to the needs of the voters?” Journal of Military and Strategic Studies 20, 1 (2019). -
An Israeli Labor Party Perspective on Peace | the Washington Institute
MENU Policy Analysis / PolicyWatch 1818 An Israeli Labor Party Perspective on Peace by Isaac Herzog Jun 20, 2011 ABOUT THE AUTHORS Isaac Herzog Isaac Herzog is chairman of the executive at the Jewish Agency for Israel. Brief Analysis n June 16, 2011, Isaac Herzog addressed a Policy Forum at The Washington Institute to discuss Israel's next O steps in the wake of Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu's recent visit to Washington. A member of the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, Mr. Herzog has served in a number of senior positions in the Israeli government, most recently as minister of welfare and social services. He is currently a candidate for the Labor Party chairmanship. The following is a rapporteur's summary of his remarks. Given the huge uncertainties created by the Arab Spring, many Israelis believe that the best response is a "wait and see" approach. That is a narrow, short-term view, however. A better response is to shape the region's changes in Israel's interest, based on the view that it is better to influence history than be swept along as a passive participant. From that perspective, President Obama's recent speech hit on the crux of the difference between the Israeli right and left. The current government chose to focus on a few controversial words in the speech and, in the process, deepened the tension between Israel and the United States. On the other hand, the Israeli opposition -- especially the Labor Party -- welcomed the address as another evolutionary step from the 2000 Clinton Parameters toward the goal of ending the conflict with the Palestinians. -
Parshat Shelach Weekly Dvar Torah
Parshat Shelach 26 Sivan 5779 /June 29, 2019 Daf Yomi: Erchin 13; Nach Yomi: Mishlei 19 Mevorchim HaChodesh Tammuz Weekly Dvar Torah A project of the NATIONAL COUNCIL OF YOUNG ISRAEL SPONSORED BY THE HENRY, BERTHA AND EDWARD ROTHMAN FOUNDATION ROCHESTER, NY,CLEVELAND, OHIO, CIRCLEVILLE, OHIO Fleeing from Fame Brings Respite from Reproach Rabbi Dovid Sochet Associate Member, Young Israel Council of Rabbis This week's parsha relates the mission of the twelve meraglim - spies or scouts - who were sent to scout the land of Cana'an before the Jewish nation entered it. When they returned from their reconnaissance, ten of the meraglim reported that the people would not be able to conquer the land. Only two of those sent - Yehoshua and Caleiv - insisted that Israel would prevail against the Cananites. How were those two able to withstand the pressure of the other meraglim and act independently? Rashi cites a medrash which says that when “Moshe called Hoshea bin Nun, Yehoshua" (Bamidbar 13:16) he was praying that Yehoshua should not be influenced by the evil plans of the other meraglim. The name change implies (as Rashi notes) this prayer. “May Hashem (Yud-Hay) save you from the plot of the Spies." The Targum Yonasan (See Tractate Megillah 3A where the Gemarah attributes its authorship to Reb Yonasan ben Uziel. Its overall style is very similar to that of Targum Onkelos, though at times it seems to be a looser paraphrase.) adds: "When Moshe saw his extreme humility, he called Hoshea bin Nun, Yehoshua." Caleiv, however, managed, on his own, that is without Moshe interceding on his behalf, to withstand the mergalim's scheme. -
Michael Manekin, Sitting on the Fence: the Problems with Herzog’S Disengagement Plan
Michael Manekin, Sitting on the Fence: The problems with Herzog’s Disengagement Plan Mikhael Manekin is the executive director of Molad, the Center for the Renewal of Israeli Democracy. Yesterday he posted the best response I have seen to Isaac Herzog’s Disengagement plan. In essence, he argues that plan looks more like a PR stunt than a real policy. Herzog avoids discussing real issues and does not offer solutions to most problems. But Manekin’s most significant contribution is his observation that Herzog simply fails to perceive himself as an alternative to Netanyahu. He cannot imagine a universe in which Netanyahu will not be Israel’s Prime Minister. This is an interesting psychological failure – one I had not expected of the leader of the opposition. Translation by Maya Haber from The Hebrew original: In recent weeks there has been talk about Isaac Herzog’s new plan and his argument that the two-state solution should be suspended until further notice. It is important to understand the real problems with Herzog’s plan. The plan calls for separation from the Palestinians. This is not new. It has been the Labor Party’s plan for the last few decades. Other than that, the program lacks content and looks more like a PR stunt, as if it was written by people who are seeking a magic formula rather than a political solution. 1. The plan is characterized by inconsistencies. It was presented at various forums and in different formats – Herzog’s speech, several interviews he gave to different media outlets, on the Labor Party’s website, in an email sent to party activists and in several Facebook posts. -
Assessment Report
ASSESSMENT REPORT Policy Analysis Unit - ACRPS | Mar 2015 Netanyahu Returns as Prime Minister: What Lies Ahead? Series: Assessment Report Policy Analysis Unit – ACRPS | Mar 2015 Copyright © 2015 Arab Center for Research and Policy Studies. All Rights Reserved. ____________________________ The Arab Center for Research and Policy Studies is an independent research institute and think tank for the study of history and social sciences, with particular emphasis on the applied social sciences. The Center’s paramount concern is the advancement of Arab societies and states, their cooperation with one another and issues concerning the Arab nation in general. To that end, it seeks to examine and diagnose the situation in the Arab world - states and communities- to analyze social, economic and cultural policies and to provide political analysis, from an Arab perspective. The Center publishes in both Arabic and English in order to make its work accessible to both Arab and non-Arab researchers. Arab Center for Research and Policy Studies PO Box 10277 Street No. 826, Zone 66 Doha, Qatar Tel.: +974 44199777 | Fax: +974 44831651 www.dohainstitute.org Table of Contents Introduction Error! Bookmark not defined. Characteristics of the electoral process 1 A new political landscape 2 Factors influencing the election outcome 3 Conclusion 5 NETANYAHU RETURNS AS PRIME MINISTER: WHAT LIES AHEAD? Introduction The nationalist camp, led by incumbent Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his Likud party, secured a comfortable majority of 67 out of a total 120 seats in elections to the twentieth Knesset, which were held on March 17, 2015. With this win, Netanyahu will be able to form a new government in the coming few weeks. -
Israel and Overseas: Israeli Election Primer 2015 (As Of, January 27, 2015) Elections • in Israel, Elections for the Knesset A
Israel and Overseas: Israeli Election Primer 2015 (As of, January 27, 2015) Elections In Israel, elections for the Knesset are held at least every four years. As is frequently the case, the outgoing government coalition collapsed due to disagreements between the parties. As a result, the Knesset fell significantly short of seeing out its full four year term. Knesset elections in Israel will now be held on March 17, 2015, slightly over two years since the last time that this occurred. The Basics of the Israeli Electoral System All Israeli citizens above the age of 18 and currently in the country are eligible to vote. Voters simply select one political party. Votes are tallied and each party is then basically awarded the same percentage of Knesset seats as the percentage of votes that it received. So a party that wins 10% of total votes, receives 10% of the seats in the Knesset (In other words, they would win 12, out of a total of 120 seats). To discourage small parties, the law was recently amended and now the votes of any party that does not win at least 3.25% of the total (probably around 130,000 votes) are completely discarded and that party will not receive any seats. (Until recently, the “electoral threshold,” as it is known, was only 2%). For the upcoming elections, by January 29, each party must submit a numbered list of its candidates, which cannot later be altered. So a party that receives 10 seats will send to the Knesset the top 10 people listed on its pre-submitted list. -
The Tribe Weekly Newsletter This Week's Parasha Is Eikev
The Tribe Weekly Newsletter This Week’s Parasha is Eikev Shabbat Times in London Shabbat begins: 8.24pm Shabbat ends: 9.31pm In this week’s Parasha (Weekly Torah portion), Eikev, Moshe (Moses) continued to address the Children of Israel, assuring them that if they follow the Mitzvot (Commandments) of the Torah, they would have no need to fear the Canaanites and they would conquer and settle in the Land, with God as their protector. Moshe (Moses) described the richness of the Land of Israel, including the seven varieties of fruit/grain (Shivat Haminim); wheat, barley, grapes, figs, pomegranates, olives and dates). Moshe (Moses) then reminded the people of their acts of rebellion during their forty years in the Wilderness. He reminded them how they had worshipped the Golden Calf when they thought Moshe (Moses) would not return from the top of the mountain. Moshe (Moses) also reminded them of the rebellion of Korach, the sin of the spies and when they made God angry at different places, namely; Taveirah, Massah, Kivrot Hataavah and Kadesh Barneah. But Moshe (Moses) also reminded the Children of Israel that God forgave them and gave them another chance with the second set of Luchot (Tablets of stone). Moshe (Moses) told the Children of Israel that all the great events they had witnessed during their forty years in the Wilderness (the deliverance from Egypt, the splitting of the Red Sea, the miraculous punishment given to Korach and his rebellion, the Manna and the miraculous source of water), would ensure their observance of and commitment to all of God’s laws.