#torah commentary

[jewish-joy]

Me, at our torah book club- I really love this passage where Esau and Jacob make tentative peace. It's my favorite, maybe after Isaac and Ishmael burying their father together. Ah, that's such a toss-up.

Rav David, off the cuff- Hmm. Into all the parts about familial dysfunction, aren't you?

Me, who's just been read for filth in front of 10 other people- Listen-

[penguicorns-are-cool]

I'm pretty sure Avraham failed the test

like if I was given a test and the person giving the test very obviously told me that I was wrong and not to actually do the thing, I would assume I failed the test

also, that's about where the torah switches focus from Avraham to Yitzchak. There were no more tests after that, his story just kind of ends. His next big task is to just marry off his son and that's it he's done.

Like, I really don't think he passed that test I think he failed for refusing to question God for giving him a very unreasonable task.

And it's not like others haven't been rewarded for questioning or even fighting authority

like Yaakov is very definitely rewarding for tricking his Dad cause like right after it says he has a dream where God basically told him good job you will have many descendents. Then later on he literally fights an angel and it's a good thing cause he got renamed Israel as part of a blessing and now we're B'nei Israel

And Moshe definitely questioned authority that was like his whole thing. And even beyond Pharoah, he also had to reason with God to get them to not kill everyone.

Even Avraham that time he convinces God to not kill everyone in Sodom and Gomorrah if there are ten good people. There aren't but Avraham's questioning and reasoning with God is portrayed as a good thing.

Also, Judaism is generally very supportive of questioning authority and child sacrifices are very specifically banned in the torah, so It makes no sense that Avraham passed the test because he would've obeyed God even to kill his child. Like that moral is pretty inconsistent with the rest of the Torah.

so I definitely think Avraham failed that test.

[dogmalilith]

Ragman (1991) is an eight issue mini series that incorporates jewish mythology with a hero. He is one of a limited number of Jewish superheroes, and his continuity is tied to that of the Golem. Ragman is sometimes compared to the other nighttime defender of Gotham City, Batman, and was a member of the Sentinels of Magic and Shadowpact.

[mossadspypigeon]

a little bit about this week’s parsha. the video especially is relevant to today.

[insane-control-room]

as i was reading through the parshiot in relation to adar and purim to prep for a little dvar tora/shiur, i was struck by a fascinating thought. my ancestor, Aharon haKohen, had erred in a unique manner. when the 'rabble' came onto him and demanded the golden calf, he, after witnessing his nephew Chur ben Miriam and Kaliev get killed by the mob for standing against the rebellion, thought wisely to distract the people and agreed to their plan in creating the idol. and yet, he was later punished for this discretion with the deaths of his sons, Nadav and Avihu, for saying 'lest b'nai yisrael transgress by killing a prophet and a kohen in one day' (which he and his sons were). Aharon avi haKohen's trait was that of peace seeking, and yet, this populace came upon him to ensue strife and discord, pressing on his kindhearted, peace loving nature to essentially force him into a role that ultimately caused the jewish people's spiritual (and physical) downfall.

it struck a chord with me, as i see jews swayed to their own destruction in the name of a false form of peace. in order for true peace and sanctity to be achieved, one must stand by their values, and refuse to bow to arguments made in desperation, fear, distortion, or manipulation. in spite of the 'rabble' and the desecration wrought from within, we jews overcome and withstand. only through education, perseverance, and true efforts for peace can tranquility be obtained.

shavua tov l'kulam, and may HaShem bring us peace readily within our days!

[moses-offical]

floating down the river nile as a baby was probably the most relaxed i've ever been. Its similar to being in a hammock or a lazy river

[nonstandardrepertoire]

Parashat Emor: מוּם | mum

Vayiqra 21:17 is not a commandment, it is a warning. It is long past time more of our communities heeded it.

Sometimes, oppressive texts are subtle about their hierarchies of exclusion, requiring careful analysis to fully elucidate their awfulness. Sometimes, tho, they just hit you in the face with it. Emor falls decidedly into the latter category.

As part of the instructions for the priests, G-d tells Mosheh אִישׁ . . . אֲשֶׁר יִהְיֶה בוֹ מוּם לֹא יִקְרַב לְהַקְרִיב לֶֽחֶם אֱלֹקַיו | ish . . . asher yihyeh vo mum lo yiqrav ləhaqriv léḥem eloqav | “a man in whom there is a defect shall not come near to bring near his G-d’s food” (Vayiqra 21:17). And lest anyone think that this might be referring to a defect of character, the next verses clarify that the “defects” in question include being blind, being lame, and having limbs the “wrong” size.

“Defect” is obviously a stigmatizing translation, but I don’t really know that it’s worth looking for a less stigmatizing one. The problem here isn’t with using one term or another, it’s with the very concept the verse expresses: It’s not ableist because it uses an outdated term, it’s ableist because it explicitly ranks disabled bodies as worse than abled ones.

Before anyone suggests that, this legislation being aimed at priests serving in the Temple, it no longer matters today (when we have neither priests nor Temple), the spirit of ableist exclusion is alive and well in our communities. Sometimes it is more passive — synagogue buildings that have no wheelchair access, services offered without interpretation or captioning — and sometimes more active — halakhic decisions banning blind Jews from leyning Torah [a], congregations rolling back masking policies that reduced the transmission of airborne pathogens — but it is widespread and pernicious.

[a] Rabbi Daniel S Nevins, “The Participation of Jews who Are Blind in the Torah Service”, approved by the CJLS in 2003. I don’t mean to pick on the CJLS in these recent divrei, it’s just that they sit at a unique sweet spot where they both operate in a halakhic framework that generates regular təshuvot on many issues and in a social framework that leads them to publish those təshuvot online in English for free. They are useful references, but obviously not the sum total of Jewish thought.

And it seeps its way outward, too. As part of his deeply homophobic 1992 təshuvah (which he doubled down on in another homophobic təshuvah from 2006 [b]) against legitimizing gay relationships, Rabbi Joel Roth cites the Torah’s prohibition on disabled priests to justify his anti-gay position. If the Torah could exclude some members of the holy community based on (potentially) unchosen and unchangeable facts of their lives, then he could be justified in excluding other members of the Jewish community for similar reasons [c].

[b] Still not rescinded by the CJLS, de jure! [c] He doesn’t cite Vayiqra 21:17 explicitly, but the reference is very clear. The pertinent passage appears on p 644 of “Homosexuality”. You can find the PDF on the CJLS website, but I feel I should flag that it’s a long and infuriating document where he repeatedly advocates for conversion therapy. (And here it feels worth noting the direct historical ties between anti-gay conversion therapy and anti-autistic conversion therapy. These issues are all tied up together, always.) He protests vehemently that his halakhic conclusion brings him anguish, and maybe it even did, but I can’t say I can bring myself to care. As with other bigotries, homophobia is often less a question of inner feeling than of power and its exercise: To have power and to use it to position straightness above queerness is, definitionally, homophobic. It also feels worth noting that Rabbi Roth left his faculty position at the Jewish Theological Seminary twice in ten years (once in 1984 and then again in 1993) because he sexually harassed students. (He resigned his position on the CJLS in disgust when they finally adopted a təshuvah partially legitimating gay relationships in 2006. He felt that doing so crossed a point of no return against the integrity of the halakhic system, a set of priorities that is, again, transparently homophobic, no matter what was in his heart.) Outside of being a conversion therapy–boosting sex pest, Rabbi Roth is perhaps best known for authoring the təshuvah that paved the way for the Conservative Movement to begin ordaining women. It’s a complicated təshuvah, and one that I think specifically forecloses some of the more radically gender-egalitarian possibilities that were before the CJLS in favor of leaving the patriarchal substructures of traditional halakhah undisturbed. I am, in case it isn’t obvious, not his biggest fan.

Of course, the ableism here would be a problem even if it were entirely self-contained, with no outward spread, even if it never led to any problems for anyone else ever. It feels mind-warping to have to say it, but given the persistent ableism of our communities, it seems it must be said: Ableism is bad! We must reject it utterly! We cannot and must not exclude disabled Jews from our congregations! And, paradoxically, this verse itself tells us that.

Mum, the word for “defect” in this verse, has a value of 86 in gematria. So does eloqim [d], the word for “G-d”. Read this verse, then, not as a comment on those with a “defect” in them, but on those with G-d in them. Cut disabled Jews out of your community, and you will cut G-d out of your community. You may build a pure community, but it will be pure with the sterile purity of an ultraclean room: no life will go in and no life will come out. G-d will not be found in your midst.

[d] The non-censored version, with a ה instead of a ק. The rules for Divine Names makes this one a little tricky to write about, sorry!

Vayiqra 21:17 is not a commandment, it is a warning. It is long past time more of our communities heeded it.

[This has been an installment of one-word Torah. You can read the full series here.]

[chavasjewishscrapbook]

In this week’s parasha, the Israelites are in a liminal place. Lead by leaders they barely know, recognizing in one moment tremendous miracles being done for them and in the next worried about their ability to sustain themselves, manna is a beautifully complex response. The more the Israelites experience a felt sense of nourishment — physically leaving their tents, going out, gathering the manna from the earth itself, eating it, feeding their households — the more they understand on a foundational and emotional level, beyond the intellect, that they will make it, they will be okay. It’s not enough to be given promises or even flashy miracles. They have to experience it, in small ways, every day.

When we feel a sense of destabilization in our own bones, as our ancestors did, we too have to slow down and intentionally take in all that surrounds us that is nourishing, supportive, even when the world around us is replete with tremendous challenge.

--My Jewish Learning commentary on Parashat Beshalach

Nourishing myself is something I need to get better at -- holistically. And Shabbat is a good way to begin, I think. I find the rest of Shabbat essential -- but I've not been able to be observant for a while due to my theatre commitments. Something to reflect on.

Shabbat shalom, jumblr.