Study with Rabbi Perlin (5/28/2020)

June 2, 2019

Do you have a Commander-in-Chief?:

A Shavuot Exploration of How One Approaches the Commanding God of Sinai

A TBS Class with Rabbi Amy R. Perlin, D.D. on Thursday, May 28, 2020 at 1 PM

A Modern Midrash

Just imagine the scene:  God and Moses are putting the finishing touches on the Ten Commandments.  Moses says to God, “My people don’t really like being told what to do.  They are really into their freedom now, after all those years of being slaves.  How about we call them the “Ten Suggestions” or the “Ten Recommendations.”  And God replies, “Not a chance. Have you met MY people?  Too many of them arrogantly ignore suggestions and recommendations, thinking they know better.  At least if we call them “commandments” we’ll have a fighting chance that more of them will make the right choice.”

Rabbi Amy Perlin, opening paragraph of Facebook Post, Monday, 5/24/20

Commandments and Commander: How Do We Hear and Respond?

a selection from a D’var Torah by Rabbi David A. Lyon

– published 3-24-2018 on ReformJudaism.org (Parashat Tzav)

…All of us are commanded to observe the Festival with a seder and Festival services on the first and last days of the seven-day holiday (Exodus 12:14-17). But, are we commanded just as God told Moses, at the beginning of this week’s parashah, Tzav, “Command Aaron and his sons … ” (Leviticus 6:1), or are we commanded differently?

While the parashah outlines details of the sacrifices (for example, olah and musaf) that are obligatory on Festivals, we should ask ourselves what it means to be commanded in our time and place. We simply can’t assume that though we are commanded to make Passover, that we hear the commandment in the same way that our ancestors did in previous generations. The following three rabbinic scholars, in their generation, laid the foundation for us to identify how we might hear the commandment, the mitzvah, which was spoken by the Commander, the Metzaveh.

Rabbi Herman E. Schaalman (z”l) wrote that the voice of the commanding God can be heard as the “Commander,” the Metzaveh behind each mitzvah. He writes, “It all depends on whether I am ready to live my life in relationship to God, in response to Him (sic), in my acceptance of His being Commander and of me as His covenant partner.” It is as if Schaalman, himself, stood at Sinai, and said as the Israelites did, “naaseh v’nishma,” We will do and we will hear; commonly translated as, “All that the Eternal has spoken we will faithfully do!” (Exodus 24:7). Schaalman emphasized, “The number of mitzvot I thus choose to perform is not nearly as important as is the fullness of my awareness and intention, for it is likely that in time I may hear the authentic ‘voice of God’ in many more mitzvot than at first I could have imagined.”1

Rabbi David Polish (z”l) found meaning in mitzvah through the history and shared experiences of the Jewish people. He explained, “When a Jew performs one of the many life-acts known as mitzvot to remind himself (sic) of one of those moments of encounter, what was only episodic becomes epochal, and what was only a moment in Jewish history becomes eternal in Jewish life.”2 For example, in the singular moment of the ritual lighting of the Sabbath candles or participating in the Passover seder, we’re connected with Jews everywhere in the world, today, and with those who came before us in the past.

Therefore, for Polish, the source of mitzvah flows not only from a single commanding voice, but also from the sheer power and enormity of history, which persists in the ways we continue to do what we do. He concluded, “We are called upon to be in the world. Mitzvot enable us momentarily to transcend the world and, strengthened, to return to it as we must.”3

Finally, Rabbi Roland B. Gittelsohn (z”l) wrote from a naturalist’s perspective in his commentary on Schaalman and Polish. Gittelsohn didn’t deny a Metzaveh as the source of the mitzvah in historic encounters between the Metzaveh and the Jewish people, but he made room for the Metzaveh to be a “Spiritual Energy, Essence, Core, or Thrust of the universe; not a discrete Supernatural Being.” He asked, “For the religious naturalist, who is the metzaveh? Answer: reality itself.” For the naturalist, mitzvot represent “the difference between talking or philosophizing about Judaism and living it. They bind him (sic) firmly, visibly, to his people and his tradition. They speak to him imperatively because he is Jewish and wants to remain so.” 4

Still others might feel commanded by their personal duty, rather than by an Eternal Commander (Metzaveh) to demonstrate our people’s legacy of and duty to the cause of freedom. Whatever the source of one’s motivation, it is inextricably bound to a unique moment in our collective narrative. Giving it expression through traditional symbols at Passover, even when it’s woven into a modern context in contemporary Haggadot, enables us to continue seeing ourselves as though we were once “slaves in Egypt,” too; and, that our duty is to bring the power of that redemptive moment into moments in need of redemption, today.

The Book of Leviticus will always challenge us with the meaning of ancient rituals, prescriptions, and remedies. They were an ancient prescription for holiness found in the ways that the community responded to God’s command. That we are commanded, today, is an assumption we’re willing to embrace. What we hear is a matter of autonomy afforded us by Reform Judaism. How we respond to what we hear is also a personal part of being choosing Jews…

  1. Rabbi Herman E. Schaalman, “The Divine Authority of the Mitzvah,” Gates of Mitzvah: A Guide to the Jewish Life Cycle, ed. Simeon J. Maslin [New York: CCAR Press, 1979] pp. 100-103
    2. David Polish, “The Source of the Mitzvah,” ibid. pp. 104-107
    3. David Polish, “The Source of the Mitzvah,” ibid. pp. 104-107
    4. Roland B. Gittelsohn, “Mitzvah Without Miracles,” ibid. pp. 108-110

Rabbi David A. Lyon is Senior Rabbi at Congregation Beth Israel in Houston, TX. He has a bachelor’s degree in Business Administration from the University of Arizona(1984). He was ordained by HUC-JIR in 1990.  Rabbi Lyon serves as a Vice President of the  Central Conference of American Rabbis and chairs its professional development committee. He is the author of God of Me: Imagining God Throughout Your Lifetime (Jewish Lights 2011) available on Amazon.com.

Rethinking Jewish Faith: The Child of a Survivor Responds by Steven L. Jacobs, SUNY Press, 1994 (as part of the SUNY series in Modern Jewish Literature and Culture, Appendix II, 6 & 7, p. 122f.

  1. At the heart of the Jewish experience is the notion of mitzvah or “commandment” as obligatied act in response to the “call” of the Mitzaveh or “Commander.” Having tentatively and painfully rethought such notions of God, Covenant, and Prayer to continue to maintain such an historically traditional notion of mitzvah not only begs the question, but negates the historical reality of the Holocaust itself. The classical understanding of mitzvah is itself an affirmation of a relationship no longer extent.  “God calls, we respond through mitzvot, and God in turn, responds to us” is no longer creditable.  Fackenheim’s “commanding voice of Auschwitz, “ heard only by those already listening, will not be heard by those already sensitized or not so sensitized to their Jewish (and Christian?) responsibilities because of events of the Holocaust.  Besides, even Fackenheim would not have the temerity to maintain that this voice is the Divine Voice of talmudic tradition which seemingly spoke to the rabbis in the ancient academies so very long ago.  Thus, the notion of mitzvah as the religiously commanded act of Deity to creation, imposed upon the Jewish people by an historically bound and committed Authority and authority structure, is, truly, yet another victim of the Holocaust.
  1. In light of the Holocaust, then, having now, sadly, rejected the understanding of God as Mitzaveh, “Commander, “ the question remains: “What criteria or standards can or do we use to incorporate into our lives Jewish (and Christian) behavior, both ritual-ceremonial and ethical-moral, even if we no longer regard them as “commandments?” If we are honest and truthful with ourselves, there are six.
  1. Intellectual:One should be willing to incorporate into one’s Jewish (and Christian) behavior acts which do not offend against one’s intellectual understanding of reality, and also, appeal to an awareness of order and precision in the universe of which one is a part. It is not that one is bound to them by some external Presence or Force; it is, rather, that one chooses to bind oneself to those specifically Jewish (and Christian) acts and behaviors which “make sense.” 
  1. Aesthetic: Too, there are those Jewish (and Christian) acts which provide one with a sense of aesthetic pleasure.  Visually, aurally, orally, tactilely, and yes, even through a sense of smell.  That sense of Jewish (and Christian) “pleasure,” therefore, may very well be a sufficient reason for the doing of certain acts or behaviors for that reason alone.  The Scrolls of the Torah garbed in white for the High Holy Days, the voice of the cantor, the waving of the palm branch at Sukkot, the savoring of the spices marking the end of the Sabbath come readily to mind. 
  1. Emotional: For the child of survivors who wishes to affirm his or her place within the totality of the Jewish people subsequent to the Holocaust by involvement in various Jewish and non-Jewish agencies, institutions, and organizations, such involvements can meet emotional needs and further result in additional Jewish acts and behaviors. Involvement specifically in the synagogue, as the primary institution of Jewish religious life, however, can both raise the issues questioned at this essay’s beginning, and at the same time, provide the warm, nurturing environment where they can be explored safely and without pressure. Such would, also, obviously be applicable to Christianity. 
  1. Physical: There are, likewise, those Jewish (and Christian) acts and behaviors which have a strong physical component to their doing, and evoke Jewishly affirming responses. The “Covenant of circumcision” of one’s own or one’s family’s or friend’s sons, holding aloft the Torah Scrolls on the appropriate festival occasions, even fasting on the Day of Atonement, address uniquely the physical part of one’s being and further connect one with the Jewish community and the Jewish people. 
  1. Psychological: Closely akin to the emotional, participation in the life-cycle and festival cycle of the Jewish people may express a certain validity to the individual child of survivors in light of the Holocaust, and may yet meet important psychological needs, primarily that of loneliness versus non-loneliness. 
  1. Spiritual: Lastly, rejection of the historically traditional notion of God because of its failure to address the reality of the Holocaust does not, in and of itself, remove one from involvement in the Jewish (and Christian) religious enterprise. Nor does a rethinking and restructuring of the understanding of the Jewish (and Christian) religious acts and behaviors away from the time-honored and time-understood idea of “commandment” called forth by the “Commander” negate one’s involvement in Jewish (and Christian) religious tradition.  That sense of awe and wonder at life and the universe, that yearning to reach out beyond for a sense of permanence, are no less real to one whose inherited legacy is as a child of survivors than one who is not so described.  The disciplined acts of religious commitment enable one to reach out beyond oneself, both horizontally towards community and vertically towards the future, and best enable one to be free to search and explore the meaning of life in this post-Holocaust and post-Auschwitz world.

Professor Steven Leonard Jacobs taught in the Department of Religious Studies as the Aaron Aronov Chair of Judaic Studies at the University of Alabama, where he received tenure as a full professor in 2017 and emeritus status in 2019.  He has a B.A. from Penn State University; and his B.H.L., M.A.H.L., D.H.L., D.D., and rabbinic ordination from the Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion. Dr. Jacobs’ primary research foci are in Biblical Studies, translation and interpretation, including the Dead Sea Scrolls; as well as Holocaust and Genocide Studies.

The Commanding Voice of Auschwitz by Emil Fackenheim

in God’s Presence in History (Jewish Affirmations and Philosophical Reflections, NYU, 1970 p.84

What does the Voice of Auschwitz command?

Jews are forbidden to hand Hitler posthumous victories. They are commanded to survive as Jews, lest the Jewish people perish. They are commanded to remember the victims of Auschwitz let their memory perish. They are forbidden to despair of man and his world, and to escape into either cynicism or otherworldliness, lest they cooperate in delivering the world over to the forces of Auschwitz. Finally, they are forbidden to despair of the God of Israel, lest Judaism perish. A secularist Jew cannot make himself believe by a mere act of will, nor can he be commanded to do so…. And a religious Jew who has stayed with his God may be forced into new, possibly revolutionary relationships with Him. One possibility, however, is wholly unthinkable.  A Jew may not respond to Hitler’s attempt to destroy Judaism by himself cooperating in its destruction.  In ancient time, the unthinkable Jewish sin was idolatry.  Today, it is to respond to Hitler by doing his work. (Footnote 44 notes that this is a quote taken from an earlier essay entitled, “Jewish Faith and the Holocaust” in Commentary, 1967.)

Emil Ludwig Fackenheim (22 June 1916 – 18 September 2003) was a noted Jewish philosopher and Reform rabbi.  Born in Halle, Germany, he was arrested by Nazis on the night of 9 November 1938, known as Kristallnacht. Briefly interned at the Sachsenhausen concentration camp (1938–1939), he escaped with his younger brother Wolfgang[2] to Great Britain, where his parents later joined him. Emil’s older brother Ernst-Alexander,[2] who refused to leave Germany, was killed in the Holocaust.  Held by the British as an enemy alien after the outbreak of World War II, Fackenheim was sent to Canada in 1940, where he was interned at a remote internment camp near Sherbrooke, Quebec.[3] He was freed afterward and served as the Interim Rabbi at Temple Anshe Shalom in Hamilton, Ontario, from 1943 to 1948.[3] After this he enrolled in the graduate philosophy department of the University of Toronto and received a PhD from the University of Toronto with a dissertation on medieval Arabic philosophy (1945) and became Professor of Philosophy (1948–1984). Fackenheim researched the relationship of the Jews with God, believing that the Holocaust must be understood as an imperative requiring Jews to carry on Jewish existence and the survival of the State of Israel. He emigrated to Israel in 1984. “He was always saying that continuing Jewish life and denying Hitler a posthumous victory was the 614th law,” referring to the 613 mitzvot given to the Jews in the Torah.[5]