What Does Judaism Think

The Israelites chose what would seem to be repentance. They proclaimed, "Here we are, we shall go up, for we have sinned." They are ready to go into the Promised Land, they will follow God's command. But Moses warned them to cease, because "You should not be routed by your enemies, because God is not with you."

God had told Moses not to allow the people to enter Israel. He had sworn an oath that they must wander in the wilderness for 40 years, until the adult generation that sinned with the spies had passed from the earth. Once God has taken an oath, there is no option for nullifiication. NOT precipitating an entry to the land becomes a Divine commandment. Thus, even though it would seem that the Israelites wanted to repent, by proceeding to attempt to conquer Israel they are committing a new sin.

This moves the goal posts, and brings the question on to God. Why did He swear that they must perish in the wilderness? Why not leave an opening for repentance, and why not embrace the children of Israel's desire to correct yesterday's wrong?

I would like to suggest two answers. The first relates to the manner in which the Israelites, newly freed slaves, connect to the rest of the world. Sovereignty requires maturity, and the ability to carefully weigh all options before making decisions. To run your own country, and run it stably, is not easy. It requires a steadiness and a commitment to foundational values.

The history of the Israelites in the wilderness was the opposite of this. Every time they camped, there was a crisis. When there was no water, people already cried out that they wished to return to Egypt. In the section prior to this story in the Torah, the Israelites resented the manna that was their food, and desired the delicacies of Egypt. Going back to the golden calf, the moment Moses seemed to delay his return, the people panicked and demanded that that calf be created. What is the common denominator of all of these stories?

A lack of stability, and emotional volatility. If this is the way that the people run their affairs, sovereignty will be a disaster for them. They will be completely vulnerable to fear and weakness, and to the seduction of the pagan ways of life surrounding them. In other words, they might quickly sin, thus forfeit God's protection, and hasten their exile.

Modern history has taught us the dangers of granting sovereignty to a volatile people that is not ready for it. When the United States invaded Iraq, many believe that by setting up a democracy, a Middle Eastern civil society would emerge. This naive approach ignored the deep ethnic hatreds and primitive ways of dealing with them that were prevalent in the lands of Iraq. By putting on the outer garment of free elections, the West fooled themselves into believing that the people wearing those garments would be transformed. It did not work that way, and Iraq today is an anarchic mess.

Perhaps for this reason God wanted the Israelites to remain in the desert, even if their next-day-repentance was sincere. God loves his people, and wanted them to be completely ready to enter the holy land. One could say that the spies episode was a test of that readiness. If the people had a steadiness of faith, they would not have been moved by the fear mongering of the 10 spies. They might have said, "It's a challenge, but God will be with us and we can meet that challenge." Had they done so, they would have proven that they were no longer subject to the winds of emotion.

A second, complementary reason for God's desire not to allow the Israelites to succeed on the day after is the lesson of the day after itself. In other words, God wanted to teach them how to deal with failure. After all, the entire exodus has been leading up to the entrance to the land of Israel, and the spies were the first part of making that dream a reality. It blew up in their faces. How do you deal with that?

God sees into the hearts of men, and knew that the repentance the people expressed on the day after was really Freudian denial. What had happened yesterday caused them such shame, that they wished to make believe it had never happened. They stood before Moses and said, "Here we are." Whatever happened yesterday was somebody else. We are here.

The danger of denial is that it prevents identifying and healing the flaw that is being denied. Something was fatally wrong with that generation, and had the Israelites been able to go into Israel the next day, that fatal flaw would have remained untreated. As we have said, that flaw was an instability, and emotional volatility.

King David said, "Yay though I walk through the valley of the shadow of deepest darkness, I fear no evil, for You are with me." There are two concepts that are crucial to the religious person's identity and success: Belief and Faith. Belief means knowing that God exists. The Israelites were certain of God's existence, their belief was complete. After all they had seen in Egypt and at Mount Sinai, it would've been nearly impossible to lack a strong belief.

Faith, though, is another story. Another word for Faith is Trust. Trust that God will protect, trust that God's instructions are good, thus that God has our interests at heart. King David was expressing trust, that no matter how terrifying the world around him became, he knew that God was with him. As a result, he concludes the psalm by saying, "Only goodness and kindness shall pursue me all the days of my life, and I shall sit in the House of the Lord for the length of days."

King David was the greatest sovereign of the entire monarchic era. That was thanks to his Faith, his trust. It was this kind of Trust that was missing from the desert generation. Without it, they would not have lasted as a sovereign nation in the land of Israel. God saw that they needed the time in the desert to gain this trust, to follow God wherever He led them.

"I have remembered the kindness of your youth, as you walked behind Me in the desert." God wanted a new generation to enter the land, a generation that had grown up with this level of Trust. Perhaps the word "youth" might be taken literally, to refer to the children of the Exodus generation, who would be the ones to enter and build sovereignty in the land of Israel.

A third, additional answer, thus emerges. God wished to show this new generation that His word, when accompanied by an oath, will be fulfilled no matter what. If his oath to keep them in the wilderness would be fulfilled, then his promise to bring them into the land of their fathers and bless them would certainly be fulfilled. With that faith, they would be ready to assume the responsibilities of sovereignty. They would be stable, they would be firm, they would be unafraid and unaffected by the threats and temptations of the peoples around them.

As the Israelites stood before the Red (Reed?) Sea, pursued by the Egyptians and cornered, Moses stood to give them a lecture on faith. God rebukes him and says that he must simply tell the people to walk forward, into the sea. There is only one taker, a man named Nachshon ben Aminadav, the prince of the tribe of Judah. He proceeds forward, and wades into the sea.

Nothing happens. The water gets up to his knees, waist, shoulders, and still nothing happens. Is he to commit suicide in front of the entire people? When he finally gets in up to his nostrils, his last chance for air, then the sea majestically splits.

Later, after the people have passed through, and then witnessed the drowning of the entire Egyptian army, the Torah tells us that the people "believed in God and in Moses, His servant."

Why now, after all they saw in Egypt with the ten plagues, do they finally believe in God? And why did the Torah not tell us so at the beginning, at the moment when the sea split? Why wait till after they had already crossed and seen the demise of Egypt? Thirdly, why did Nachshon have to get in up to his nose before the sea split? Was that really necessary? Of course it was. How so?

The Psalmist recites, in the paragraph beginning "When Israel left Egypt" that, "The sea saw and fled, and the Jordan withdrew backwards." The chapter continues with the question, "What, o sea, caused you to flee, and o Jordan River to withdraw backwards?" The answer, "From before the Lord, who initiated the world, and from before the Lord of Jacob."

One may ask, were not the Israelites destined to leave Egypt because of their ancestors' merit? The chapter implies that at the beginning, when it describes the exodus as being so that "Judah should be His holy one, and Israel [should be] His kingdom." That is why they left, so why wonder why the sea split and the Jordan, at the entrance to the Land of Israel, withdrew?

And the answer is, indeed, the ancestors' merit was not sufficient, and their own merit was also lacking. God had made a condition with the sea already at the time of creation. "You must split at the exact moment, many generations hence, when the Israelites arrive on their way out of Egypt". The sea split not because Israel deserved it, but because it was pre-programmed to. that is what the verse means when it says, "From before the Lord, Who initiated the world."

The next phrase, however, gives us more: "Before the God of Jacob." There are three names in this chapter: 1. Israel, 2. Jacob, and 3. Judah. Let's look at the first two, because therein lies the difference and the secret of true faith.

Jacob was promised by God that he would return safely to the land of his fathers after fleeing his brother's wrath. And yet, when he was about to cross the Jordan upon his return, he was seized by fear that his brother would annihilate him and his whole family. Why the fear, if he had a Divine promise?

I believe Jacob doubted himself, not God. He felt inadequate, and feared that God would withdraw his trust from him, thus abandoning him to his fate. And this is the faith that Jacob lost at that point, his faith in God's trust. Previously, about Abraham it was written, 'He believed in God, and God considered it righteousness." Just righteousness? Should belief be a fundamental?

Rather, Abraham believed in God's Trust, that even if his descendents aren't, at that moment, worthy of miracles, God will still show His trust to them and thus make them worthy in the future. Even if they are lacking in merit, God's trust will transform them, IF they believe in it.

This is what Nachshon accomplished. He was challenging God, and, in effect, saying "If You trust me to go forth and change the world, then you will let me cross this sea. If You do not extend trust to me, then my life is of no import and it will end here." Faith means believe in God's Trust, and walk through the sea.

So, too, the Israelites did not need to see the splitting of the sea to believe in God's existence. They needed to see that Egypt would not annihilate them as they emerged on the other side. They needed to see that their path was clear to the future. Only then, after they saw Egypt destroyed, did they believe that, warts and all, they had God's Trust.

And why does God extend His trust so? Because He knows that we are a nation of Judah, the third name in the list. This refers to Nachshon, who came from the tribe of Judah. He knows that we desire to go forth into the world and transform it. "Judah shall be His holy one." This refers to that which is said at Sinai, "You shall be a kingdom of priests and a holy nation."

Because Judah, and all Israel who follow his example, dreams of fixing the world, God gives His trust, and splits seas and rivers for him. Jacob had doubts about whether he deserved God's trust. After he struggled with the angel, his name was changed to Israel. Now he believed that God's trust was forever. Nachshon, therefore, had no hesitation about walking into the sea.

Ours is to have faith that God trusts us. That trust creates a responsibility on our part to live higher lives, and go forth into the world to fix it, piece by piece.

The major event in the Torah portion is the sin of the Golden calf. In that case, it is a bit easier to understand why a death sentence was brought upon the worshipers. After all, people have just received the 10 Commandments, and their entire identity was predicated upon true monotheism. To then, 40 days later, start running around worshiping a golden calf and proclaiming, "These are the gods who brought you out of Egypt," is certainly a terrible terrible sin. What caused the people to do it?

I believe it is hinted at in the way the people phrased their request to Aaron to make a God for them. They needed it, they explained, because, "We do not know what has happened to this man, Moses." The key word in that sentence is "Man".

Moses was certainly a man, so why emphasize his humanity? The answer is because they knew that, although Moses was as human as anyone else, he was not just a man. He was a man of God. They had seen him ascend Mount Sinai when God spoke, they saw him in Egypt being God's agent. This was no ordinary man. He had in him an abundance of an element that is crucial to human fulfillment and purpose: Holiness.

By erasing Moses's holiness, the people demonstrated a rejection of the Torah's holiness, and perhaps even of God's. They sought to bring religion down into the physical world, rather than elevate the physical world towards heaven. Moses was a man, a great one, but a man in this world. If he can't be with us, we want something else physical, in this world. Why did the people not turn to Aaron to lead them if Moses was now missing? Because Aaron oozed holiness, and the people were not interested. They wanted something physical that they could control, a golden god would do just fine.

Holiness is the key ingredient in our lives, or it should be. I remember, as a child, asking a theoretical question. Can a person steal religion? What if a person observes the Sabbath perfectly, but claims they do so not because of God, but because they like it. Do they get credit for this Mitzvah? A friend suggested that one can, indeed, be guilty of theft in so doing. The Talmud tells us that a person should fulfill the Commandments for the sake of heaven. If given the choice between fulfilling the Mitzvah not for the sake of heaven, or not doing it at all, one should do the Mitzvah, because it will help them eventually grow to fulfilling Commandments for the sake of heaven.

In other words, the only value of keeping the religion without God in it is the hope that by continually doing so, God will become part of the picture. On its own, it has no value. I believe this is hinted at in one of the rules of the daily prayer service. The central prayer, the Silent Devotion, contains a series of 19 blessings. The first three are considered a group, and can not be separated. For example, if one omitted a crucial phrase in the third blessing and remembered it later in the prayer, they cannot just go back to that third blessing. They must go back to the beginning of the prayer, since the first three cannot be separated. What are those first three?

The first blessing is about the heritage of the Jewish people, describing our relationship with God, and his relationship with the patriarchs. The second blessing deals with our faith in God, how He sustains all life, heals the sick, revives the dead, brings us rain and sustenance. The third blessing describes God's Holiness. It would seem that the first two are sufficient, since they outline our belief in the Jewish people being chosen, and our faith in God running the world.

And, yet, it is not enough. Even if you believe perfectly, and practice perfectly, but do not have a sense of Holiness, your life is deeply lacking. So much so, that it may not even be worth living. If religion is just a higher form of mundane, and does not touch the mysteries of heaven, our life is simply a biological fact. With no deeper spiritual meaning, we are as dead people, having no lasting influence.

This is why the Priests must wash their hands and feet before entering the sanctuary. It is because of Holiness, it is because they will be in the presence of the Lord. A person's hands represent the deeds they do in their life. Their feet represent the places they travel through during their existence. Both of these must be sanctified before coming into the Tabernacle. By doing so, the Priests recognize the Holiness of the presence of God in His house.

To not wash hands and feet implies erasing the sense of Holiness from the Tabernacle. It becomes another job, to make sure that the religious services are properly delivered, and nothing more than that. It is going beyond "Moses, the man," is saying "this building, the Tabernacle." A life without Holiness is a life bereft of meaning. The Talmud says that there are two sins that ignorant people die from: 1. They call the Ark (where the Torah is kept) a "chest." 2. They call a synagogue a "community center." In other words, by erasing Holiness from religion, life loses its meaning.

It is forbidden to touch the Torah scroll with one's bare hands. The Talmud states that whoever "holds the Torah while naked (meaning that their hands are not covered), will be buried naked." The Talmud asks how this can be? The answer given is that the person, while not physically naked, will be buried without reward for this deed of touching the Torah -- presumably to honor the Torah by tightening or supporting it. They will be "naked from that Mitzvah." What does this mean?

It means that the person who does so, who grabs the Torah with their bare hands, fails to show respect to the Holiness of the Torah scroll. Now it would've been sufficient for the Talmud to say that they will not get reward for having honored the Torah by touching it and fixing it. Why go to the funeral and state, "they will be buried without this Mitzvah?" Because a life without Holiness is akin to death. Even when a person observes a technically perfect religion, if they do not honor the Holiness and strive for it, the religion is simply a mundane mode of living. It is only physical, and the physical perishes in the end.

A Jew washes their hands in the morning, first thing after awakening. Why so? One explanation is because a person might have scratched themselves during the night and got in their hands dirty. Cleanliness is next to godliness, and they say. Another explanation is because the person was one sixtieth dead during the night. Sleep is considered 1/60 of death, and death is impurity. Thus, we purify our hands in the morning when we return to life and have our full soul reinstated in our bodies.

To me, this goes beyond just cleanliness. By washing our hands in the morning, we are embracing Holiness for the entire day. We are dedicating the day to the pursuit of heaven, just as the Priests prepare themselves to enter the Tabernacle by washing. The Talmud says that a person who fails to wash their hands in the morning will be fearful the entire day long. Fearful of what? Well, as King David says, "though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I fear no evil, for Thou art with me." When we are dedicated to Holiness, our souls sense God's presence and protection. Without it, we are afraid of what the physical world might bring.

To truly live, a person must seek out and strive for the mystery of Holiness in everything they do. In the words of a song I once wrote, "I would take a piece of heaven, and with my piece of heaven, I would transform the world."

As God prepares to lead the Israelites out of Egypt, He gives them two important commandments. The first one is to offer up the firstborn of the animals to God. The second is to put the phylacteries on our arms and heads. This latter commandment is known in Hebrew as "Tefillin." Religious Jews wrap two boxes on themselves that contain chapters from the Bible. One is wrapped around the arm, the other is wrapped around the head.

Why were these two commandments given at this particular point in time? What is their relevance to leaving Egypt?

The Israelites were enslaved in Egypt. They were now on the cusp of freedom. And yet, even though they were leaving Egyptian slavery, they might not fully achieve freedom! Freedom is more than the lack of a task master beating you. It is a spiritual state as well. These two commandments point the way towards true freedom. How so?

Going back to Genesis, we recall the story of Cain and Abel. Cain brought an offering of "some of his fruits." Abel brought an offering of his firstborn flocks. God accepted Abel's offering and did not accept Cain's. What was the difference between them?

Simply, it was their entire concept of serving God. Abel served God because he understood that through God comes all meaning in life. Cain served God so that God shouldn't smite him. The true servant of God realizes that the lifelong quest to cleave to the Divine provides all meaning and all worth. Every individual has their own unique gifts, and by channeling them to doing God's will we achieve fulfillment.

The pagan servant of God, or gods, believes that divinity must be appeased. We can pursue our own aims, chase our own pots of gold, as long as we give God his due. In more mundane terms, the gods must be bribed. Then they will leave us alone, or even give us good fortune.

That was Cain. He kept the best for himself, and tried to get away with giving some of the rest to God. Abel, on the other hand, got it right. He knew that by giving the best to God, he could properly fulfill his existence in this world. That's why he gave the firstborn of his flocks.

That is what these two commandments signify. The giving of the firstborn shows that true freedom is the pursuit of the divine. Otherwise we become enslaved by our pursuit of worldly wealth, power, glory. One look at celebrity train wrecks will show how empty that is, how enslaving that is.

The tying of the phylacteries on the arm and head symbolizes dedicating our deeds (the box on the arm symbolizes doing things) and our thoughts (the box on the head) to the pursuit of the divine. Otherwise, we become enslaved by our passions and ego demands.

The amazing story of Nathan Strauss illustrates this. Nathan and his brother Isadore were fabulously wealthy, the co-owners of Macy's and Abraham and Strauss. They were brought to Palestine in 1912 by the Jewish community to get their financial support. There were shown all over the country, and hit up for money. Nathan was especially taken with the Jewish settlements, and chose to remain after their appointed day of departure came. Isadore and his wife made their way back to England, and from there as set forth to return to New York.

They never made it. Their ship struck an iceberg in the middle of the night, and despite its being touted as the "unsinkable ship," the Titanic went down with the Strausses aboard. Nathan's fascination with helping the Jews of Palestine literally saved his life. He would give two thirds of his fortune to building up the future state of Israel.

Nathan understood that charity, that pursuing God's will, is what really matters in life. It's not making millions and then giving charity to make it look good or to feel better. It's seeing charity and kindness as the goals of life. That is true freedom, that is true worth.

The Israelites were commanded to have a Passover offering, a lamb, on that fateful night of liberation. Part of that command involves their wardrobe while eating the sacrifice. "Your loins shall be girded, your staves in hand and your shoes on your feet." Why specify what they Israelites were to wear?

My teacher, Rabbi Aaron Soloveichik, explained the singular historical fact that Jewish liberation never followed the pattern of many other liberation movements. The French Revolution, for example, was followed by a bloodbath of all those who were deemed enemies of the regime. The same happened in many other countries throughout history. When one group rebelled and took control, they usually became equally barbaric to those whom they had just defeated.

Not so the Jewish people. The Israelites were commanded to "love the Egyptian, for you were a stranger in his land." On the surface, one would think they should avenge all of the suffering they were put through! Certainly on a natural level, the Israelites should have desired to smash a few Egyptian faces. Nothing of the sort happened. How is that possible?

I believe there were two critical reasons for the Israelites to be enslaved in Egypt. They both relate to God's ultimate purpose for this world -- Tikkun, correcting. Fixing that which is broken takes precedence, in God's hierarchy of priorities, over rewarding that which is already fixed. As they say, a chain is only as strong as its weakest link. We are all part of the chain of humanity and human history, and as such, must make sure that the weakest links will still hold under pressure.

God's main tool for fixing the world is none other than the nation of Israel. I believe that's why our history has been what it's been. All of that oppression prepared us to go forth and fix the world. How so?

First of all, I believe we were enslaved in order to impress upon us the urgency of this mission. By experiencing suffering, by experiencing the worst injustice in this world, we become sensitized to the need to rid the world of such things. The people of Israel are always in the forefront of the fight for human rights and human welfare. We simply can't stand suffering, and dedicate ourselves towards its alleviation. Jews are always working to find the cure to the worst diseases, marching for the rights of the oppressed, contributing huge amounts of charity to help the poor, to strengthen education, to fix the world! This sensitivity is a direct outgrowth of our having "been there".

The nation that left Egypt marched forth with a sense of mission. We were headed for Mount Sinai, we were headed to receive God's law and finally understand how to make this world a beautiful place for all those who live in it. But still, why was that not also the case in the French Revolution? Why did those who rebelled for equality and brotherhood become oppressors who denied the equality and brotherhood of others?

This question brings me to the second reason for the Egyptian slavery. It was so that we do not become overly attached to this material world. It was so that we disdain physical things, and elevate spiritual purpose above all else. Egypt was a deeply materialistic society. It was hedonistic, licentious. Wealth and power were the highest attributes one could aspire to.

I believe that the terrible cruelty of the Egyptians made the Israelites reject them and their materialistic culture. One rabbi, a Holocaust survivor, once commented that he expected the Jewish people to forever reject all Western culture after the second world war. It should have been seen as being worthless, if such "high culture" could not prevent the countries that practiced it from becoming barbarians. It would've been expected for the Jews to throw out the German poetry and music that covered over the deep hatred that resided in their souls.

In truth, it is not the culture that was to blame. It was the elevation of that culture above all else. It was the stress put on the pleasures, physical or emotional, of this material world. The Israelites learned to put this world in its place. They learn to keep physical things subservient to spiritual things. When you are a slave, this physical world holds no attractions for you. A piece of bread is the most precious thing in the world to a man who is starving.

Rabbi Soloveichik stresses that there were two elements of liberation at the time of the exodus. First, there was the physical liberation from slavery. If that were all there was, though, we probably would have descended into vengeful behavior. After all, if this world is about feeling good, then we should want to punish those who made us feel bad. That, in and of itself, would probably feel good.

So there was a need for another element of liberation. Spiritual freedom. Spiritual freedom is only possible when we are not enslaved by our physical desires. That is the meaning of the wardrobe requirements of the liberation evening. Girding our loins means subjugating our physical drives to the spiritual goal of reaching Mount Sinai. We did not leave Egypt to feel good. We left Egypt in order to fix the world. That is the highest spiritual goal anyone could set.

In a sense, one could say that without the spiritual liberation, there really was no freedom. Yes, we would be losing the Egyptian taskmaster, but gaining the taskmaster of our own uncontrollable drives. Spiritual liberation, which is only possible through controlling our physical desires and de-emphasizing the material world, is what really set us free.

Thus, we gained two crucial tools for our job of fixing the world. We gained a sensitivity to all human suffering, and we gained an understanding that the spiritual, not the physical, is the key to true freedom. Without both of those elements together, you could not succeed in our mission. With them, we are and we will.

Music is very powerful. According to Jewish tradition, as stated by the great Gaon of Vilna, music is the highest form of wisdom, after the Torah itself. And the Torah itself is described as a "song" in the section of Ha'azinu. When the Red sea split, the people sang, and in that song were elevated to highest levels of prophecy.

Yes, music is very powerful indeed. It is an international language, that speaks to the human on the emotional level. Music expresses tension and relief, mystery, holiness, drama, resolution. Music is an absolute requirement in a movie, for it provides the "soundtrack of our lives".

So what music is forbidden? Well, as with anything so powerful, it can be perverted for the bad. Music also accompanies the worst of orgiastic sins. It can lead the thoughts and emotions to lust. Thus, a lot of contemporary music, with its sexual innuendo - and sometimes overt content - is not acceptable to religious Jews.

Songs that urge us to "Come on and do the fill-in-the-blank", when whatever fill-in-the-blank referred to is forbidden, should not be listened to. Period. Despite what Spock says, Harold Robbins steamy novels are not great literature. Music can create a HUGE emotional drive to do something, so we have to be careful that it's for the good.

Fortunately, there is so much good music out there that no sacrifice is necessary. I've heard of an occasional rabbi criticizing classical music, but I can't accept that. He reasoned that military marches advocate warfare and bloodshed, which are not Jewish values. In my opinion, that's an extreme point of view. I doubt someone will go kill someone after listening to Tchaikovsky.

But after listening to some of today's hip-hop stars, I can definitely see murder as a possibility, God forbid. Recall the connection between a certain singer and the Columbine High School killers. Scary. and something to take warning from.

Music is required on Shabbat and festivals. We are to sing special songs for Shabbat, starting with Lecha Dodi and Shalom Aleichem, and continuing through the zemirot. These songs, sung at the meal, are an extension of the Biblical commandment of Kiddush, of sanctifying the day. They should be sung, and thus we fulfill a greater level of mitzva.

Synagogue services require music. In fact, I have an old German prayer book that has printed the traditional melody required in a number of places for some ancient prayers. The cantor's job is to inspire the congregation. Without music, that would be impossible. Even the Torah is read to a singsong melody.

Judaism NEEDS music, of the uplifting quality.

And that is why a lot of so-called Hasidic music is so very wrong. Yes, wrong. Verses from the Torah should not be set to tunes that could be played in a disco. It cheapens them. I've heard too many songs where the words don't even fit, yet the composer insisted on creating some "dance" style pop hit.

If you want to write a pop hit, by all means do so. Write your own lyrics, that are in the same spirit as your pop-dance-whatever melody. Keep it clean, and go for it. Don't take some poor pasuk-verse and twist it into a twisted creation.

Look at Carlebach. His tunes are lively, joyful, and in complete harmony with the words of the verse he chose. That must always be the goal. What is more uplifting than singing the same Carlebach or similar REAL Hasidic tune over and over as you dance with the joy of the festival?

Also, what is more uplifting than Beethoven's Ode to Joy? They are all examples of how important music can be to us. It must be used, not abused. Remember, our Messiah will descend from David, who was the "Sweet Singer of Israel". The more we sing, the better the world!

There is one word that screams out volumes of psychological insight into Joseph's brothers. After their father Jacob had passed away, the brothers convince themselves that Joseph was going to seek revenge. They said amongst themselves, "Perhaps (lu) Joseph will now hate us and return the evil that we did to him upon us." They then send a message to Joseph in the name of their deceased father begging him to forgive them. When they come before him, they throw themselves on the ground and proclaim, "We will now be your slaves." Joseph cries when he hears this. He reiterates that they should feel no guilt, that this was God's plan to save an entire nation.

The word is "lu," which is translated as meaning "perhaps." In truth, this word is never used to mean perhaps other than here. Usually, it means "would that it were so!" It is an expression of wishing! A subtext here is that the brothers actually desired Joseph to take revenge upon them. Indeed, the distasteful scene where they throw themselves on the floor and offer themselves as slaves indicates a desire on their part to get back what they gave. They wanted Joseph to take revenge, for some deep psychological reason. What was it?

I remember encountering this unhealthy feeling when visiting one of the concentration camps in Poland. As we left Birkenau, the friend I was traveling with made an extraordinary comment. "Why do we deserve to be able to walk out of here alive and free?" Had we been there in the early 1940s, we probably would have been murdered.

I was taken aback by the question. I understood it, and the underlying mindset bothered me greatly. Our living a normal life should not have been the question. The question should have been "How was it that they could not walk out of here alive and free?" The question he asked almost assumed that Jew hatred was normal, that Auschwitz was the way things should have been. I'm sure he didn't mean this, but some element of it was implicit in that question.

The brothers were seized by guilt, about that there is no question. But had they properly and completely reconciled with Joseph? No, they had not. Why? Because they could not forgive themselves. That is strange, too. If Joseph had not shown any grudge towards them, why did they show it towards themselves? If Joseph seemingly forgave them, why could they not forgive themselves?

Perhaps it is because they never understood what it means to be a brother. They never understood what it means to be part of the human race. They saw Joseph's dreaming and favoritism as a threat to themselves. It was a zero sum game, and if Joseph was the victor, then they must be the vanquished. They could not conceive of a win-win situation, and therefore Joseph has to take revenge upon them. They are almost begging him to do so! This is because it is harder for a person to change his worldview than it is to become enslaved in Egypt. Internal slavery, to a mistaken ideology, is much harder to escape.

There is an astounding quote attributed to the ancient sage, Hillel. "If I am here, everything is here. If I am not here, who is here?" On the surface, this saying seems extremely egotistical! That is diametrically opposed to Hillel's modest and pleasant demeanor. What does it mean?

My teacher, Rabbi Ahron Soloveitchik, ZT"L, explains its brilliance. "Here" is a physical location that must be defined by other physical locations. There is no place that is disconnected from the rest of the universe. If I say I'm on Main Street, I must define Main Street as being in the town of Pleasantville, in the state of New York, in the country of America, on the continent of North America, on the planet Earth, in the solar system, etc...

So it is with us as people. We are defined by our relationships to other people. In Judaism, a person's name always includes their parents name. Family names are simply based on either ancestry or a town or a profession. Everything about us is defined by where we fit in in the universe. What Hillel is teaching us, then, is a very powerful lesson. We must define ourselves by our place in the world. No one else can occupy our place, "if I am not here, who is here?"

That entails a deep responsibility. Rabbi Akiva taught us that the main rule of the Torah is "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself." In order to love our neighbors, we must love ourselves. And in order to love ourselves, we must realize that we are of tremendous value to our neighbors. We must know that we are the creations of God, and we alone occupy our space in the universe. If we set to ourselves the task of improving our neighborhood, of uplifting and helping all who come in our contact, 24/7, for a whole lifetime, we are fulfilling the core of the Torah. According to Hillel, a human being must love themselves and use their space to share that love with the rest of the universe.

There are two aspects of human behavior that are required: turn away from evil, and do good deeds. There is the carrot and the stick. There is justice, which is the righting of wrongs, and there is kindness which is seeking out to do good. The former is cause and effect, and has value in keeping society from anarchy. But it limits each person to their own space, and disconnects them from the rest of the universe. "As long as I don't hurt you, you won't hurt me."

How does this relate to Joseph and the brothers? Joseph brothers were stuck at the level of "Turn away from evil." They lived disconnected from their brother, and really wouldn't have minded had he kept to himself. But Joseph saw his role as being a font of good, and he interpreted his own dreams of leadership as being for the benefit of the family, and of mankind. That is why he told the brothers his dreams, because he really believed he was giving good news for them as well. He was sharing a win-win vision with people who lived in a zero sum world. The result was the tragic sale of Joseph.

So even when they were again reunited in Egypt, the brothers had not significantly changed that internal feeling. "There must be revenge, we must become slaves, because otherwise our zero sum world makes no sense!," the may have thought. If they would only internalize Hillel's message. If the brothers would say to themselves, "yes, even Joseph's sale was a good thing, it saved an entire nation," their guilt would disappear. It wouldn't even occur to them that Joseph should seek revenge. They would see in Joseph a true partner for fixing the world.

And that is the lesson for the self hating Jews. They are stuck in the world of guilt, of needing to feel hated and persecuted. They can't understand how the world could recognize that the Jewish people, unlike any other nation, lives to make the world a better place. It is ironic that we are accused of the exact opposite of what we actually do. We are more humane, more concerned about the value of human life than anyone, yet the same self haters are blind to this and accuse us of the opposite, of cruelty.

When every Jew, indeed when every human being, says to himself, "how can I improve all of those with whom I have contact?", the world will be on its way towards healing.

The Bible tells the tragic story of Joseph and his brothers. There is one character who plays a critical role in the whole story, but is hardly mentioned. This is none other than the angel Gabriel. Where, you may ask, does Gabriel come into the picture? He's the guy that gives directions.

You see, Jacob had sent his favorite son, Joseph, to check up on his other sons who were away with the flocks. Joseph travels north, and can't find them. According to the Bible, a "man" finds Joseph wandering lost in the field. He asks him what he wants, and Joseph says he's looking for his brothers. The "man" proceeds to give Joseph directions. End of story. Without that man, Joseph might not have found the brothers, and might never have been sold into Egyptian slavery. The whole thing could have been completely different.

Earlier in the Torah, we met another such "Man." This was the man whom Jacob fought with before his confrontation with his brother, Esau. However, that "man" is not identified as the angel Gabriel. Instead, he is identified as the guardian angel of Esau.

How do the sages know that one "man" is the angel Gabriel, while the other is the guardian angel of Esau? What was the difference?

A Hasidic rabbi gave a somewhat lighthearted answer, which is not so lighthearted at all. He pointed out that the "man" whom Jacob struggled with was in a hurry to leave Jacob and fly back to heaven in order to sing the praises of God. Jacob had to force him to remain and give him a blessing. In other words, this angel put singing God's praises ahead of helping another being.

Contrast that with the "man" who meets Joseph. He is willing to help, has the patience to give directions and be of service to another being. Thus, the "good" angel Gabriel is always willing to help out. His own songs of praise can wait. The other "man" disdains helping others, especially if it interferes with his own service of God. That is the guardian angel of Esau. Esau was someone who took care of number one. He saw the world is there to take care of him, and did not see himself as there to take care of the world.

I believe that is the difference between the two revolts. In the first case, the Maccabees represented the silent majority of the people. Most of the Jews were appalled by the open anti-Semitism of the Syrian Greeks. They had defiled the temple, forbidden observance of circumcision and the Sabbath. They put an altar to Zeus right in the Jewish Temple. Even the less religious among the Jews were appalled. Only the completely assimilated elites identified with Antiochus and the Syrian Greeks.

Thus, their rebellion reflected the will of the majority, silent or otherwise, of the Jewish people. They were connected to their fellows and not focused on their own particular spiritual interests.

In the second Temple, however, the main rebels were a minority in their own people. They were known as zealots, and in one tragic incident burned the food supplies in Jerusalem in order to force their fellow Jews to do battle with the Romans.

Now, there is no doubt that the Romans were an oppressive power. However, they did not stop the Temple service as the Syrian Greeks had two centuries before. They did not ban Judaism. There were still sages and Torah study amongst the people. One of the great leaders was rabbi Jochanan ben Zakai, who urged accommodation with Rome. He did not want to see the bloodshed of an unnecessary battle, and feared it would bring great tragedy on the people. And history was soon to speak.

So in this second revolt, the main rebels were disconnected from their fellows. They did not have unity of support. Instead, they forced themselves on the people. Like the guardian angel of Esau, they put their focus on themselves. They wanted a certain type of spirituality, and everyone else be damned. Our sages claim that the second Temple was destroyed because of the sin of baseless hatred. I suspect that this is what they referred to.

So in order for the Jewish people to strengthen their homeland, they must be unified. I think it is of prime importance that the so-called "settlers," the Jewish residents of the ancient lands of Judea and Samaria, reach out to all Israelis and Jews worldwide. Instead of appearing to the less connected as being fanatics and zealots, they must make those Jews understand who they really are. They are fine, peace-loving, ethical citizens who would love nothing more than to have peace and friendship with their Arab neighbors. (Of course there are fanatics on every side of the map, but they do not represent the masses of people -- unless they seize power.)

In other words, they need to work like the Maccabees, to inspire the entire nation. It's a tough job. The best way to do it is through personal contacts. We need to talk to each other. We need to have a dialogue. We need to be guests in each other's homes. We need to visit the communities of Judea and Samaria, and see firsthand just who lives there!

Dialogue, connection, understanding, and unity will be the secrets of our success.

He saw his cousin, Rachel. That vision gave him super strength. And it was not just because she was pretty! Let's examine this.

This was not Jacob's first encounter with a stone. As he was fleeing Esau's threat, he came to a place to be called Bet El, and slept there. He put a stone under his head, and then dreamed a great prophecy of a ladder stretching from Earth to Heaven, with angels ascending and descending. God then appeared and promised Jacob that He will be with him as he goes to his mother's home town, and that He will return him to The Promised Land after all has blown over.

Jacob, upon awakening, takes the stone he slept upon and makes it into an altar. He then promises that, if God will fulfill His pledge and give him protection and bring him back home, then this stone will become a House of The Lord. Indeed, this would some day be the site of the Holy Temple.

This "promise" Jacob makes is hard to understand, because he conditions it on God fulfilling His word. Is there even a question? God's word is as good as done. What was Jacob doubting?

Jacob was doubting himself. The vision he saw in his dream was no less than a clear representation of the way this world works. There is a physical element, the Earth, and a spiritual element, Heaven. Heaven, the spiritual part of our existence, has the power to defeat any physical limitations. Viktor Frankl, the psychologist who was a prisoner in Auschwitz during the Holocaust, sought to understand how the prisoners, in flimsy garments and suffering from malnutrition, could stand for hours in the Polish winter at roll call and still survive. He came to the conclusion that a spiritual sense of purpose, an overpowering Why, gives a man the power to deal with almost any obstacle and find the How.

Jacob, in distinction from his father, knew his lot was to live in the physical world. Isaac had been deeply sheltered, by his parents and by God, and his interactions with the mundane were none too successful. God had to intervene for him quite a bit. For Isaac to be spiritual was relatively easy, as his whole life had been spirituality. But for Jacob, it was not so clear. His brother Esau was completely "Earthy", and he knew he'd have to deal with all types.

So I believe Jacob doubted himself. He doubted that he would keep the "stones", the earthiness, connected to the "Heaven", his spiritual direction. He was afraid that the ladder he saw in the vision would disappear. Thus, he conditions his promise on God helping him, being with him, keeping him connected.

Thus we see the significance of the stone. It represents the earthy part of our existence. On its own, it is heavy, almost unliftable. But when a powerful spiritual call is heard, the earthy must yield. Jacob, as he first arrives at the well, inquires about his mother's family in town. He is told by the local shepherds that, indeed, they know his uncle Lavan, and behold his daughter, Rachel, is now approaching with his flocks.

So Jacob knows who this pretty girl is! She is his cousin, and she is someone whom his parents have urged him to find to marry. He sees, in that instant, that God is truly with him, and that he has fortuitously come to the right place. Jacon's Ladder is still in place. The excitement of that discovery powers his lifting of the stone.

And so it is with all of us. Our worlds our filled with earthy challenges, with heavy stones to lift. If we are depressed and doubtful, they are heavier still. But if we are inspired with a spiritual mission, if we are overjoyed by the faith that God is connected to us, those stones become light. We can lift them, we can be superhuman.

So it is with the State of Israel, which by all logic should not exist. Surrounded by hostile nations that outnumber her by 30:1, she should never have been able to survive th onslaught. And yet here she is, growing and thriving! That is only because of Jacob's Ladder, of the power of the spiritual connection. As long as the Jewish People sense

Esau and Jacob were very different voice. Esau was a hunter, a man of the fields. Jacob was a scholar, a man of the tents. Their parents also differed on their approach to the boys: "Isaac loved Esau, for his hunting was in his mouth. And Rebekah loved Jacob." Later in life, when Isaac came to give the blessing of the firstborn to Esau, Rebekah engineered Jacobs receiving that blessing through deception. It is this story that is the most edifying, so we shall look at it in great depth.

Isaac told Esau to go out into the fields and hunt for him a feast. Thereupon, Isaac would give the blessing to Esau. Esau duly went out to do his father's bidding, while Rebekah overheard the entire exchange. She called Jacob in quickly, encouraged him to pose as Esau and receive the blessing. This could work because Isaac had grown blind at this point in his life.

The trick works, Isaac is fooled and gives the blessing to Jacob. Just as he leaves, Esau arrives with his feast. When he hears his father tell him that someone else had come and received the blessing, Esau is distraught. He begs his father for some blessing, any blessing. After Isaac gives him a secondary blessing, he leaves his father's tent with a promise upon his lips: to kill his brother Jacob after his father Isaac has departed.

Along with the sale of Joseph, this is one of the tragic tales of the book of Genesis. I wish to understand one thing. Why did Isaac require Esau to bring him hunted meat in order to bless him? Was physical enjoyment so important to Isaac? That is certainly impossible to believe. And yet, as in the quote above, we know that Isaac's love for Esau was due to his "hunting in his mouth." What was the significance of this?

Now, Esau was, according to our sages, an evil person. He stole, he killed. We see this in his desire to kill his brother after his father passes away. Why, then, does Isaac wish to bestow the blessing upon him? Why does Rebekah have to conspire with Jacob to get the blessing for him, who truly deserves it? What was Isaac thinking?

I had an intriguing thought on this: perhaps Isaac knew all along that Esau was not nearly as righteous as Jacob, and that he did commit violent acts. Perhaps he also saw that Esau had potential, that he could repent and become a great person. I know people who were completely out of control in their high school years, who became very serious and respected teachers of Torah. I wonder if Isaac was not trying to nudge Esau in that direction.

Very often, responsibility changes in person. The incident early in their lives when Jacob got Esau to sell him his birthright in exchange for some lentil soup may have been what set the tragedy of Esau in motion. Perhaps had Esau kept the birthright, and the responsibility of leadership that comes with it, he might have developed into a different man. As it was, after Jacob had procured it, Esau walked away "and despised the birthright."

According to a rabbinical source, when Isaac sent Esau to get the hunted meat for him, he included a proviso that the meat not be stolen. Firstly, this interpretation indicates that Isaac was aware of Esau's behavior. Secondly, it seems to me that this might be a test. Isaac knew that Esau excelled in honoring him, and this gave him great satisfaction and hope. Perhaps, even if in the outside world he misbehaved, is respect and honor for his father might transform him. It might indicate that there is strong good within him. Thus, Isaac gave him a simple instruction: nothing stolen.

And when he returned, he returned with stolen goods. The blind Isaac senses the opening of purgatory the moment Esau enters. When Jacob had entered, Isaac had smelled the aroma of the Garden of Eden. In the Garden of Eden, there was no theft. Everything belonged to Adam and Eve. But purgatory is for sinners. Thus, Isaac knew that Esau had failed the test, and he then reaffirmed the blessing for Jacob. He had hoped to reform his older son, but realized it was not happening.

I wish to add a new twist to this whole story. Our sages tell us that there are two types of love: 1. A love which is dependent upon a physical factor. 2. A love which is not dependent upon anything physical at all.

The first half of love lasts only as long as that physical factor does. Then it can turn into hate or indifference. The second type of love will last forever. I believe that Isaac and Rebekah represent these two types of love. Isaac loved Esau for a reason, because of the "hunting that was in his mouth," because of his deep respect for his father. An alternative translation of the phrase, "because of the hunting that was in his mouth," could be "as long as the hunting was in his mouth." The word "ki" can mean "because" and it can also mean "during" or "as long as."

I believe that Isaac loved Esau for deep psychological reasons, although he knew intellectually that it was not a well-placed love. Nonetheless, he sought out physical reasons, signs of hope, indications of a goodness that was not there, to justify the love. And, perhaps with the right influence, Esau might have been reformed. Had Jacob not bought his birthright, had the blessing been delivered as planned, maybe Esau would've stepped up to the plate. Much later, when Jacob is returning to the land of Israel, he hides his daughter Dina, lest Esau desire for a wife. Some rabbis are critical of this, claiming that she would have succeeded in reforming him. It is speculation, although Esau did moderate as he aged.

Rebecca, on the other hand, loved Jacob unconditionally. The Torah as no criteria that caused it. That is the difference. A strong emotion can be an indication of a true course of action, as long as the emotion is not accompanied by nagging doubts, and as long as it does not require any justification. Rebecca's internal sense was that Jacob was thoroughly good, and Esau was not. Isaac wanted to loved Esau and favor him, and had to justify it by his remarkable honoring of his father. That wasn't enough.

So be careful when the emotions are not pure, when you feel you need to justify them to choose a course of action. Many women married men who were abusive in nature by justifying their love and grasping at straws to believe that they are not the monsters they are. On the other hand, a true emotion, with no doubts and no need of justification, is a true indication of where the heart is and should be taken seriously.