As the new cycle commences

Yes. I am returning to a theme discussed many times before. And yes, one could object saying that this week is really meant to be a new beginning as we commence a new Torah reading cycle – so why return to previously discussed themes? But then the very point of this week’s beginning is that we begin again what we have read in the past. After all, in Kohelet that we read during Succot we find that albeit that “there is nothing new under the sun”, its author (King Solomon) was not satisfied with what he understood had been, and devoted his heart to seek further wisdom concerning all that happens. So let us too revisit a theme that has implications that repeat themselves – of which we need to remind ourselves again and again.

From a prima facie perspective the expression “living with the times” would not appear to be a Chassidic catchcry. Nevertheless, on the basis of a statement by their first Rebbe, Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi, Chabad, always eager to adapt any positive concept to the advancement of Judaism, continually emphasises it as referring to the need for Jews to “live with the parasha of the week” – the weekly Torah reading and its messages.

But there is more to this than just hearing the parasha read in shule – that we hope will soon again be our lot as COVID restrictions on gatherings are lifted.

“Rav Huna bar Yehuda says in the name of Rabbi Ammi: L’olam yashlim adam parshiyotav im hazibbur – a person should always complete (studying) his chapters with the public.  (Berachot 8a)”

This dictum is considered to mandate study of the weekly parasha based on “sh’na’im mikra v’echad targum” – recitation of the (Hebrew) text twice and the (Aramaic) Targum (translation of Onkelos) once (Orach Chayim, 285:1). Many however go further studying each parasha with commentaries; given that each parasha is divided into seven sections for the aliyot on Shabbat, it is obvious that one can be studied each day of the week. And with perhaps less to do during lockdown therein lies an obvious suggestion as to how to profitably fill in spare time.

The commentary of Rashi (Rabbi Shlomo Yitzchaki, 1040-1105) is the most widely studied as it is considered the most outstanding straightforward interpretation of p’shat, the basic meaning of the words of the chumash. He lived in the Rhine Valley during the  period of the first Crusade – the object of which was capture of “the Holy Land” for Christianity. Yet just as the two other monotheistic religions were fighting over our land, (to which at that time Jewry had no realistic hope of immediate return) Rashi began that famous commentary by quoting a person believed by some to have been his father:

“Rabbi Yitzchak said: the Torah should really have begun with Hachodesh hazeh lachem (Shemot 12 – the law establishing Nissan as the beginning of the year) for it is the first command given to Israel as a nation. And why did it begin with Bereishit – the story of Creation? Because, according to Psalms 111, ‘He declared the might of His deeds to His people in order to give them an inheritance among the nations’. For if the nations will say to Israel, you are listim – armed robbers – in that you conquered the land of the seven nations, they (Israel) shall say to them, all the earth belongs to the Holy One Blessed be He, He created it and gave it to the appropriate one in His eyes. His will (originally) gave it to them, and in accordance with His will He took it from them and gave it to us.”

Yes, sometimes words of Torah appear unfashionable. There are arguments for and against adoption of absolute theologically based positions in regard to politics. And it is certainly possible to argue even from a Torah perspective that there are differences between the ownership of our land to which Rabbi Yitzchak refers, and contemporary political reality. Nevertheless, while we may well have varying political views we can still reflect on the meaning of the Land of Israel to the Jewish nation – and also on the fact that establishment of its ownership is the first message of the Torah itself.

We may wonder as to Rabbi Yitzchak’s words being the simple p’shat that is the general emphasis of Rashi’s commentary – but to Rashi it qualified as it is such a basic message of Torah and Bereishit.

Even if facts on the ground as he wrote meant that then physical control over the land was no more than an academic concept, this was not a deterrent to his forthright statement on the subject.

All that aside, a key lesson of so many Bereishit parashiyot we will read over coming weeks, will be to emphasise our ancient connection with our land that so many today seek to deny.

A religious Jew cannot divorce his or her attitude to Israel from Torah. In that context the term “religious Jew” need not coincide with one observant in the traditional “Orthodox” sense.

In 1947 as the fate of Mandated Palestine was under consideration, David Ben Gurion himself waved the Bible in front of those querying our deed to our land saying that it is in the Bible accepted by civilisations worldwide that our rights were first established. (Would that its words would still be so accepted. When David Friedman, former American ambassador to Israel, quoted Rashi at the time of opening the US embassy in Yerushalayim his words were not so widely accepted; Australian Jews may recall his being castigated for that by one-time Australian minister for foreign affairs, Bob Carr.)

The basis of Torah is a unity between worldly life and religion – not just religion of a ritual nature while life goes on. Even as we differ regarding particular matters, the common thread to a religious person’s approaches should be to make decisions on the basis of a Torah philosophy – not as a separate matter from religious practice.

Let us all approach the New Year with that philosophy.

Shabbat Shalom,
Yossi

Yossi Aron OAM is The AJN’s religious affairs editor