The first chapter of the moreh

 A flash of bright light this past shabbat with an understanding of a difficult piece in the Moreh Nevuchim. 

For over twenty-five years, I have been studying the Moreh Nevuchim of the Rambam, but the first chapter eluded me, specifically the meaning of "Tzelem" and "demuseinu" in relation to the pasuk in Genesis that compares Man to God.

However, during this past Shabbat, it was as if lightning struck the entire room, allowing me to finally grasp the Rambam's meaning in a way that I have not seen discussed before. I will present the pasuk and my explanation of the Rambam which will pasted at the end of this post.

א,כו וַיֹּאמֶר אֱלֹהִים, נַעֲשֶׂה אָדָם בְּצַלְמֵנוּ כִּדְמוּתֵנוּ; וְיִרְדּוּ בִדְגַת הַיָּם וּבְעוֹף הַשָּׁמַיִם, וּבַבְּהֵמָה וּבְכָל-הָאָרֶץ, וּבְכָל-הָרֶמֶשׂ, הָרֹמֵשׂ עַל-הָאָרֶץ.

"And God said: 'Let us make man in our image, after our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth."

The obvious difficulty with this pasuk is the comparison of man to God using the words "image" and "likeness". The Rambam explains that the corporeality of God is impossible as that would contradict the true unity of God(which he will discuss throughout the Moreh). If that's the case, then how do we explain the torah using physical terms to compare God to man?

The way I understand the Rambams explanation, is  that the term "tzelem" defines the natural form that gives reality to a thing. For example idols are called tzelemim, not because of the shape or figure of the idol but because of what the idol represents. People don't believe that the idol has power but instead the force or god that the idol represents is what they are beseeching  or praying to. This would then separate the idol from say statue of George Washington on a horse. 

When describing the creation of man, the word "tzelem" is used because of what makes us really who we are and at the same time, this characteristic  makes us different than all other creation. The ability to think abstractly or rationally is what makes us unique from all other living creatures.

 This uniqueness is why we were created on a separate day. In the same way that this ability makes us completely different than all of creation, God too  is different than and cant be compared to anything of creation. In other words, the concept that we can't be compared to anything else in creation because of our rational thinking, so too, God cannot be compared to his creation. That's why the words נעשה אדם בצלמנו 

(Let us make man in our image) is used. Both God and man are unique in creation and cannot be compared to anything in creation because of our attributes of what defines man and what defines God.

The next description in the pasuk continues this theme with one additional step. Just like rational thinking has no physical characteristics, as it is not something that can be touched, felt or linked to any appendages of the human body; so too with describing God, there is nothing physical than can be attributed to God. That is the meaning of כִּדְמוּתֵנוּ(after our likeness). Both man's rational thinking and God have no physical attributes. 

In essence, the Rambam is teaching us a beautiful chiddush on this pasuk that seemingly describes the creation of "man". The pasuk in reality, is not actually describing man but instead describing the torahs definition of God.

Isn't it then very apropos that the Rambam in beginning his philosophical book that discusses judaism's understanding of God, that he begin his discussion with these very first pasukim that discusses the creation of man and in reality, the definition of God.

One last idea when we pray three times daily and say in the third beracha of the amidah

אַתָּה קָדוֹש וְשִׁמְךָ קָדוֹש, וּקְדוֹשִׁים בְּכָל יוֹם יְהַלְלוּךָ סֶּלָה

You are holy(separate from anything that exists), your name is holy (separate from anything that exists) and the holy ones(the jewish people/man) praise you daily. In this blessing both God and Man/Jewish people are holy/separate because of our uniqueness from the creation 

מורה נבוכים א:א

׳צלם׳ ו׳דמות׳. כבר חשבו בני אדם כי ׳צלם׳ בלשון העברי יורה על תמונת הדבר ותארו; והביא זה אל הגשמה גמורה לאומרו ״נעשה אדם בצלמנו כדמותנו״ – וחשבו שהאלוה על צורת אדם – רצוני לומר: תמונתו ותארו – והתחיבה להם ההגשמה הגמורה והאמינו בה; וראו שהם אם יפרדו מזאת האמונה יכזיבו הכתוב וגם ישימו האלוה נעדר אם לא יהיה גוף בעל פנים ויד כמותם בתמונה ובתואר אלא שהוא יותר גדול ויותר בהיר לפי סברתם והחומר שלו גם כן אינו דם ובשר – זה תכלית מה שחשבוהו רוממות בחק האלוה.

אמנם מה שצריך שיאמר בהרחקת הגשמות והעמיד האחדות האמיתית – אשר אין אמת לה אלא בהסרת הגשמות – הנה תדע המופת על כל זה המאמר אבל הערתנו הנה בזה הפרק היא – לבאר ענין ׳צלם׳ ו׳דמות׳.

ואומר כי הצורה המפורסמת אצל ההמון – אשר היא תמונת הדבר ותארו – שמה המיוחד בה בלשון העברי ׳תאר׳ – אמר ״יפה תואר ויפה מראה״, ״מה תארו?״, ״כתואר בני המלך״ ונאמר בצורה המלאכית ״יתארהו בשרד... ובמחוגה יתארהו״ – וזהו שם שלא יפול על האלוה ית׳ כלל – חלילה וחס.

אמנם ׳צלם׳ הוא נופל על הצורה הטבעית – רצוני לומר: על הענין אשר בו נתעצם הדבר והיה מה שהוא והוא אמיתתו מאשר הוא הנמצא ההוא – אשר הענין ההוא באדם הוא – אשר בעבורו תהיה ההשגה האנושית. ומפני ההשגה הזאת השכלית נאמר בו ״בצלם אלהים ברא אותו״

ולכן נאמר: ״צלמם תבזה״ – כי ה׳בזיון׳ דבק בנפש אשר היא הצורה המינית לא בתמונת האברים ותארם. – וכן אומר כי הסיבה בקריאת הצלמים ׳צלמים׳ – היות המבוקש מהם ענינם הנחשב, לא תמונתם ותארם; וכן אומר ב״צלמי טחוריהם״ כי היה הנרצה מהם – ענין דחות הזק ה׳טחורים׳ לא תואר ה׳טחורים׳. ואם אי אפשר מבלתי היות ׳צלמי טחוריהם׳ ו׳צלמים׳ נקראים כן מפני התמונה והתואר יהיה, אם כן, ׳צלם׳ – שם משתתף או מסופק יאמר על הצורה המינית ועל הצורה המלאכית ועל כיוצא בה מתמונות הגשמים הטבעיים ותאריהם.

ויהיה הנרצה באמרו: ׳נעשה אדם בצלמנו׳ – הצורה המינית אשר היא ההשגה השכלית לא התמונה והתואר. הנה כבר בארנו לך ההפרש בין ׳צלם׳ ו׳תואר׳ ובארנו ענין ׳צלם׳.

אמנם ׳דמות׳ הוא שם מן ׳דמה׳ והוא כן דמיון בענין כאמרו: ״דמיתי לקאת מדבר״ – לא שדמה לכנפיה ונוצתה אבל דמה אבלו לאבלה; וכן: ״כל עץ בגן אלהים לא דמה אליו ביופיו״ – דמיון בענין היופי; ״חמת למו כדמות חמת נחש״, ״דמיונו כאריה יכסוף לטרוף״ – כלם דמיון בענין לא בתמונה ובתואר. וכן נאמר: ״דמות כסא״, ״דמות הכסא״ – דמיון בענין ההתנשאות והרוממות לא בריבועו ועביו ואריכות רגליו כמו שיחשבו העניים; וכן: ״דמות החיות״

וכאשר יוחד האדם בענין שהוא זר בו מאוד מה שאין כן בדבר מן הנמצאות מתחת גלגל הירח – והוא ההשגה השכלית – אשר לא ישתמש בה חוש ולא מעשה גוף ולא יד ולא רגל – דימה אותה בהשגת האלוה אשר אינה בכלי (ואם אינו דמיון באמת אבל לנראה מן הדעת תחלה). ונאמר באדם מפני זה הענין – רצוני לומר: מפני השכל האלהי המדובק בו – שהוא ב׳צלם אלהים ובדמותו׳ – לא שהאלוה ית׳ גוף שיהיה בעל תמונה.

.

Why no holiday for entering the land

 Leaving the pagan culture behind(shlissel challah). A lesson from this weeks parsha.

Why is there no major holiday for celebrating the entering the land of Israel?

None of our holidays are a celebration of the jews entering the land of Israel. Isn't a major part of our religion based on the fulfillment of God's promise to Avraham that his descendants will inherit the land of Israel? Yet, no celebration when the promise becomes a reality. No celebration/holiday even the second time we entered the land with Nehemiah...?

We have three holidays that are connected to the different seasons and major historical events of the Jewish people 

Pesach- ripening of the wheat. The redemption from Egypt/slavery

Sukkot-gathering of the wheat into the house. Dwelling in huts in the desert or remembering the cloud that protected us.

Shavuot-harvesting of wheat. The rabbinical connection to the giving of the torah

None of these involve the entering or conquering the land of Israel!

It's interesting to note that the founder of our religion, Abraham, is first introduced to us via a command from God, to go into exile.  He is told to leave his family and culture and become a nomad. Rav Soloveitchik describes the jewish nation as an extension of Abraham. Just like Abraham discovered God in exile and spread the philosophy of monotheism,so too  his descendants would do the same. 

It is when we are in exile that the jewish people have truly flourished.

 Any reader of tnach will realize that the short time that the Jewish people were rulers in their own land, was in fact, when they were at their lowest spiritual and cultural point. Just think of pilegesh b'givah, the worshiping of idols, the break away of the ten tribes from Judah, the evil kings and the list goes on. The jewish history in the land of Israel was very far from glorious or anything we as a nation, should be proud of.

It is in fact, in the desert, that the jews flourished religiously and received the Torah(The travelling mishkan represents God being found in the desert.) It was during the beginning of the destruction of our second temple and at the beginning of our current exile, that the mishna and talmud was organized and written down. Post destruction, the greatest thinkers from the geonim to the rishonim, contributed to the treasure of torah and jewish philosophy, that we possess today. Never in history, have so many jews studied and practiced the torah, like in our current exile.

R' Meir Simcha Hakohen discusses in his classic work, Meshech Chochma, how  the jews need to travel in exile, in order for innovation in jewish thought to take place.  When the jews spend too much time in one place, our torah innovation becomes stagnant.  That's why God constantly keeps us on the move in exile and chases us from one country to the next.  It is during these tumultuous times that out greatest religious creativity takes place. The different cultures that we are exposed to, open us up to different ways of thinking and even looking at ourselves. Of course the influence is not always positive, as we can see the influence of paganism in our thinking and practices, even till this day(such as tehillim mantras and this weeks shlissel challah).

It's also interesting to note how the greatest leaders/prophets of the jewish people always found God in the desert/wilderness/exile.  From Abraham, Jacob(who represents the jewish people in exile),Moses, David etc. (I always wondered if chazal created the story of King Solomon going into exile,with his fight with the king of demons; as an allegory that would sync with the greatest leaders and prophets who also became great in exile)

Tying this all together to this weeks parsha, where it discusses the process of the high priest/Aaron entering the holy of holies. There is a major preparation of purification and sacrifices that allow Aaron to enter the holiest place of the Jewish people.  As a representative and extension of the Jewish people, this process is involved in complete forgiveness for the sins of the nation.  It is during this spiritual climax, that the strange service of sending a goat into exile takes place. The Rabbis have had a real challenge explaining what really  seems like a pagan ritual. Perhaps this ritual is placed at this climatic moment of service by entering the holy of holies, to remind us that it's not necessarily where we think that God is found, that we truly find him. It is actually in the desert, which represents the exile of our culture and ideas, that both creativity and a connection to God can really begin to take place

Have a great shlissel free shabbat! :)

Summation of Chumash bereishit

 At the conclusion of the book of בראשית, we can sum up most of the book as conflict within families; with a focus on the struggles of jealousy between siblings that was usually caused by parents or even in some cases, even God himself(Cain and Abel).

 As a sidebar to this discussion, it is interesting, that even within creation itself  we find the seventh day being chosen over the other days, with it being considered holy(separate).The midrash also tried to insert conflict into creation itself, with the quarrel between the sun and the jealous moon (see the full story/midrash in chulin 60b). 

What's very unique about the book of  Bereishit, is the lack of any strong criticism, whether it be positive or negative, as it regards most of its sibling rivalry. Even with Cain and Abel, the Torah spends more time dealing with the lying of Cain and his internal fears/ conflicts vs  the criticism of the first act of homicide. In fact, the punishment of Cain, seems mild compared to the act( to sum up his punishment-you will no longer find success in farming...).

With the conflict between Sarah, Ishmael and Issac, we do have one of the very few comments from God; with his telling Abraham to listen to his wife's demand, that he send Ishmael and his mother Hagar  away. In fact, God tells Abraham that Issac is the chosen one of all his children.

From this point on, we have the story of  Issac and Jacob trying to imitate their father/grandfather Abraham, by choosing one son over the other/s. The Torah and God are completely silent as the stories with its accompanying tragedies take place. Whether it's Esav that is cast out or the exile of Israel and his family, there is only silence. We do see negative consequences of all the deceiving and manipulating that takes place, as a result of nepotism towards one child over the other/s. We see the pain that it causes the parents and siblings but as far as any type of criticism, there is just silence...

Even more disturbing, is that after all the travails that Yaakov has experienced as a result of fighting Esav and showing favoritism to Joseph over his brothers; he now chooses Joseph's children over the rest of his children. Even within this favoritism, he again chooses one son over the other(Ephraim over Menashe)!

The Ralbag comments/questions, that the blessing of Yaakov to Yosef, that he will have an extra share in the land of Israel as a result 

his sons, Ephraim and Menashe being counted as tribes, is puzzling.  When the land of Israel was finally divided, it was based on the population of each tribe. The larger tribes got bigger pieces of land, while smaller tribes got  less. It really made no difference, if Joseph's sons were counted as separate tribes, as it regards the division of the land.

At the end of the day, do these berachot even matter?  Besides the beracha that one says over his children of ישימך אלהים כאפרים וכמנשה) which is probably insulting, since most of us are probably remnants of Judah and Levi);  what advantages did these berachot bring? We know Yaakov had a problem with Simeon and Levi, and yet the very stories that we are reading, are from the Torah that was given to us by a decendant of Levi! You may want to argue, that Joshua, who is a descendant from Joseph/Ephraim brought us into the land of Israel, but that is still very small in comparison to the contributions of Judah and Levi.  

In fact, we have lots of failings from the tribe of Joseph. Saul, the first king was not only a failure but also a total disaster. He was a one term king with no chance of the eternity of his kingdom. Instead Judah/David became the chosen one for eternal rulership. Even when king Shlomo sinned and as a result, his kingdom was divided by Yerovam(from Ephraim), with his taking over rulership of the ten tribes; this too was very short lived. In fact, Yerovam led the ten tribes into idolatry and eventual doom and destruction. Most of the kings after him were not even from Joseph.  In fact,  as a result of Joseph/Yerovam,  there are no longer ten tribes in existence.  Maybe this destruction of the ten tribes via exile/assimilation is the tikkun or teshuva of the entire chumash of bereishit...

It seems to me, that the lesson of Chumash Bereishit, is the danger of division and infighting that rips the Jewish people apart from not only themselves but also their land. Maybe the creation of the world and the creation of our nation, have a common denominator; that division that is not based on serving God, will only lead to destruction. Just like the moon was made smaller as a result of its jealousy of the sun(midrash), so too, we as a nation are made smaller as a result of favoritism and jealousy. Some events that come to mind are, should some of us risk our lives and the lives of our parents and children by fighting, while the rest of us  study within the safety of the confines of the bet midrash? Should we look at those of us  that are less religious in practice as inferior to those of us that are shomer shabbat? When we oppress the wannabee convert or the poor and  disadvantaged, while we adhere to the most extreme kashrut chumrot, are we really closer to God? By saying tehillim as a mantra or magical challah bakes, are we contributing to our brothers on the front line? When we support leaders that insult and curse our country and its children that are risking their lives, are we acting in the ways of God?

Something to think about with all that has happened to us with the current events...

Parshat Toldot and who are the bad guys

 Who are the good guys and bad guys in this weeks parsha?

Just looking at the pasukim alone, Yitchak and Yaakov come across as not the most ehrlich....

Ok, Esav was a hunter but it seems like he got positive reinforcement from his father; who loved him mostly because of his hunting skills(as per the pasuk). Yitzchak doesn't see too impressive either, with his stomach dictating who and what he loves...In fact, why is Esav such a bad guy for willing to sell his bechor while starving; when his father was also willing to "give up" the blessings, to the one that fed him what he liked to eat...?

At the same time, it's true that Yaakov dwelled in tents(not sure why that is considered a compliment)but still teamed up with his mother to steal the blessings of the bechor. Seems like this was common in Rivkah's family, where Lavan swapped the older with the younger when marrying them off (reverse of what Rivka did with Yaakov and Esav). 

Then you have Yaakov outright lying to his father (where emes is normally the virtue required for getting close to God). I know the mepharshim try to explain that Yaakov really didn't lie. By the fact that they had to defend Yaakov, says it all...

Finally, Yaakov leaves to Lavan, pretty much broke(as opposed to Eliezer who left to find a wife for Yitchak, with a wealthy war chest). The aggadah even creates the story of Eliphaz chasing Yaakov to help explain the lack of wealth/gifts. 

I would like to hypothesize that maybe the  family lived in extreme poverty, thus the extreme hunger on both the part of Esav and Yitzchak.  That is why Esav 's hunting skills was so appreciated and why Yaakov left with no gifts or wealth to seek out a mate.

In fact, unlike eliezer, Yaakov was told exactly where to go, to find a wife. That's because, only family would be willing to marry off a poor nephew/cousin. On the other hand when Eliezer had the wealth of Avraham at his disposal, the entire land was open for a potential mate for Yitzchak. 

I will bring down both pasukim and compare the two...

By instructions of Avraham to eliezer-

כִּ֧י אֶל־אַרְצִ֛י וְאֶל־מוֹלַדְתִּ֖י תֵּלֵ֑ךְ וְלָקַחְתָּ֥ אִשָּׁ֖ה לִבְנִ֥י לְיִצְחָֽק׃

" but will go to the land of my birth and get a wife for my son Isaac.”

By Yitzchak instructions to Yaakov (this weeks parsha)

ק֥וּם לֵךְ֙ פַּדֶּ֣נָֽה אֲרָ֔ם בֵּ֥יתָה בְתוּאֵ֖ל אֲבִ֣י אִמֶּ֑ךָ וְקַח־לְךָ֤ מִשָּׁם֙ אִשָּׁ֔ה מִבְּנ֥וֹת לָבָ֖ן אֲחִ֥י אִמֶּֽךָ׃

" Up  go to Paddan-aram, to the house of Bethuel, your mother’s father, and take a wife there from among the daughters of Laban, your mother’s brother."

I noticed something interesting in the above pasuk. You have the exact reversal of God's command to Avraham of parshat לך לך. In fact the actual words לך לך are even written in this pasuk- קום לך and וקח לך.

Just like Avraham left everything to follow God's command, so did Yaakov abandon everything to follow his father's command.

Perhaps as a result, Yaakov had more in common with his grandfather than his own father. Could this be why in next weeks parsha the pasuk says 

וְהִנֵּ֨ה יְהֹוָ֜ה נִצָּ֣ב עָלָיו֮ וַיֹּאמַר֒ אֲנִ֣י יְהֹוָ֗ה אֱלֹהֵי֙ אַבְרָהָ֣ם אָבִ֔יךָ וֵאלֹהֵ֖י יִצְחָ֑ק הָאָ֗רֶץ אֲשֶׁ֤ר אַתָּה֙ שֹׁכֵ֣ב עָלֶ֔יהָ לְךָ֥ אֶתְּנֶ֖נָּה וּלְזַרְעֶֽךָ׃

And standing beside him was יהוה, who said, “I am יהוה, the God of your father Abraham’s [house] and the God of Isaac’s [house]: the ground on which you are lying I will assign to you and to your offspring.

Notice the strange language of אברהם אביך when יצחק was the actual father...

This could be confirming the destiny and adventure of the Jewish people that started with the לך לך of Avraham and was now being  consummated, with the לך לך of Yaakov. 

In fact both Avraham and Yaakov, shared the destiny of God changing their names. That's what happens when you uproot and abandon everything; you reinvent yourself.  Perhaps this was a form of teshuva that Yaakov did for the misdeeds of lying and being deceitful.  That is why the first time that Yaakov receives prophecy is when he is in exile.

This reminds me of the Rambam in Hilchot teshuva -(notice in the English "b" through "f")

ב,ה  [ד] מִדַּרְכֵי הַתְּשׁוּבָה לִהְיוֹת הַשָּׁב צוֹעֵק תָּמִיד לִפְנֵי ה', בִּבְכִי וּבְתַחֲנוּנִים, וְעוֹשֶׂה צְדָקָה כְּפִי כּוֹחוֹ, וּמִתְרַחֵק הַרְבֵּה מִן הַדָּבָר שֶׁחָטָא בּוֹ.  וּמְשַׁנֶּה שְׁמוֹ, כְּלוֹמַר שֶׁאֲנִי אַחֵר וְאֵינִי אוֹתוֹ הָאִישׁ שֶׁעָשָׂה אוֹתָן הַמַּעֲשִׂים; וּמְשַׁנֶּה מַעֲשָׂיו כֻּלָּן לְטוֹבָה, וּלְדֶרֶךְ יְשָׁרָה.  וְגוֹלֶה מִמְּקוֹמוֹ--שֶׁגָּלוּת מְכַפֶּרֶת עָווֹן, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁגּוֹרֶמֶת לוֹ לְהִכָּנַע וְלִהְיוֹת עָנָו וּשְׁפַל רוּחַ.

"Among the paths of repentance is for the penitent to

a) constantly call out before God, crying and entreating;

b) to perform charity according to his potential;

c) to separate himself far from the object of his sin;

d) to change his name, as if to say "I am a different person and not the same one who sinned;"

e) to change his behavior in its entirety to the good and the path of righteousness; and f) to travel in exile from his home. Exile atones for sin because it causes a person to be submissive, humble, and meek of spirit."

Did Eliezer pick the wrong woman for Issac?

 Was Rivka the right match for Yitzchak or did Eliezer drop the ball!

In this weeks parsha it says that Eliezer (the servant of Abraham) arrived at the well(to find Issac a shiduch)-

יב  וַיֹּאמַר--יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵי אֲדֹנִי אַבְרָהָם, הַקְרֵה-נָא לְפָנַי הַיּוֹם; וַעֲשֵׂה-חֶסֶד, עִם אֲדֹנִי אַבְרָהָם.

יג  הִנֵּה אָנֹכִי נִצָּב, עַל-עֵין הַמָּיִם; וּבְנוֹת אַנְשֵׁי הָעִיר, יֹצְאֹת לִשְׁאֹב מָיִם.

וְהָיָה הַנַּעֲרָ, אֲשֶׁר אֹמַר אֵלֶיהָ הַטִּי-נָא כַדֵּךְ וְאֶשְׁתֶּה, וְאָמְרָה שְׁתֵה, וְגַם-גְּמַלֶּיךָ אַשְׁקֶה--אֹתָהּ הֹכַחְתָּ, לְעַבְדְּךָ לְיִצְחָק, וּבָהּ אֵדַע, כִּי-עָשִׂיתָ חֶסֶד עִם-אֲדֹנִי

" And he said: 'O LORD, the God of my master Abraham, send me, I pray Thee, good speed this day, and show kindness unto my master Abraham.

Behold, I stand by the fountain of water; and the daughters of the men of the city come out to draw water.

So let it come to pass, that the damsel to whom I shall say: Let down thy pitcher, I pray thee, that I may drink; and she shall say: Drink, and I will give thy camels drink also; let the same be she that Thou hast appointed for Thy servant, even for Isaac; and thereby shall I know that Thou hast shown kindness unto my master.'"

The Rambam writes in Hilchot AZ- perek 11 halacha 4

אֵין מְנַחֲשִׁין כַּגּוֹיִים, שֶׁנֶּאֱמָר "לֹא תְנַחֲשׁוּ" (ויקרא יט,כו).  כֵּיצַד הוּא הַנִּחוּשׁ:  כְּגוֹן אֵלּוּ שֶׁאוֹמְרִין הוֹאִיל וְנָפְלָה פִּתִּי מִפִּי, אוֹ נָפַל מַקְלִי מִיָּדִי, אֵינִי הוֹלֵךְ לְמָקוֹם פְּלוֹנִי הַיּוֹם, שְׁאִם אֵלֵךְ אֵין חֲפָצַי נַעֲשִׂין; הוֹאִיל וְעָבַר שׁוּעָל מִיְּמִינִי, אֵינִי יוֹצֶא מִפֶּתַח בֵּיתִי הַיּוֹם, שְׁאִם יָצָאתִי, יִפְגָּעֵנִי אָדָם רַמָּאי.  וְכֵן אֵלּוּ שֶׁשּׁוֹמְעִין צִפְצוּף הָעוֹפוֹת וְאוֹמְרִין יִהְיֶה כָּךְ וְלֹא יִהְיֶה כָּךְ, טוֹב לַעֲשׂוֹת דָּבָר פְּלוֹנִי וְרָע לַעֲשׂוֹת דָּבָר פְּלוֹנִי.  וְכֵן אֵלּוּ שֶׁאוֹמְרִין שְׁחֹט תֻּרְנְגוֹל זֶה שֶׁקָּרָא עַרְבִּית, שְׁחֹט תֻּרְנְגֹלֶת זוֹ שֶׁקָּרָאת כְּמוֹ תֻּרְנְגוֹל.  וְכֵן הַמֵּשִׂים לְעַצְמוֹ סִימָנִים, אִם יֵארַע לִי כָּךְ וְכָּךְ אֶעֱשֶׂה דָּבָר פְּלוֹנִי, וְאִם לֹא יֵארַע לֹא אֶעֱשֶׂה, כֶּאֱלִיעֶזֶר עֶבֶד אַבְרָהָם.  וְכָל כַּיּוֹצֶא בַּדְּבָרִים הָאֵלּוּ, הַכֹּל אָסוּר; וְכָל הָעוֹשֶׂה מַעֲשֶׂה מִפְּנֵי דָּבָר מִדְּבָרִים אֵלּוּ, לוֹקֶה

" It is forbidden to practice soothsaying as idolaters do, as [Leviticus 19:26] states: "Do not act as a soothsayer."

What is meant by a soothsayer? For example, those who say: Since my piece of bread fell out of my mouth, or my staff fell from my hand, I will not travel to this place today, since if I were to go I would not be able to accomplish my desires.

Since a fox passed on my right side, I will not go out of my door today, since if I were to go out I would meet a deceiver.

Similarly, [this category includes] those who hear the chirping of a bird and say: This will happen or this will not happen; it is beneficial to do this or it is detrimental to do this. [Also, it includes] those who say: Slaughter this rooster that crowed like a raven; slaughter this hen that crowed like a rooster.

Similarly, a person who sets up omens for himself; e.g., if this and this happens, I will do this. If it will not happen, I will not do it, as Eliezer, the servant of Abraham did, and the things of the like - all this is forbidden. Anyone who does one of these things because of such omens is [liable for] lashes."

The Rambam is clearly saying Eliezer practiced soothsaying which is prohibited and he would be liable for malkut(if he was a jew after matan torah). 

The Rambam further says in the same perek-

יח  כָּל הַמַּאֲמִין בִּדְבָרִים אֵלּוּ, וְכַיּוֹצֶא בָּהֶן, וּמְחַשֵּׁב בְּלִבּוֹ שְׁהֶן אֱמֶת וְדִבְרֵי חָכְמָה, אֲבָל הַתּוֹרָה אָסְרָה אוֹתָן--אֵינוּ אֵלָא מִן הַסְּכָלִים וּמֵחַסְרֵי הַדַּעַת, וּבִכְלַל הַנָּשִׁים וְהַקְּטַנִּים שְׁאֵין דַּעְתָּן שְׁלֵמָה.  אֲבָל בַּעֲלֵי הַחָכְמָה וּתְמִימֵי הַדַּעַת, יֵדְעוּ בִּרְאָיוֹת בְּרוּרוֹת--שֶׁכָּל אֵלּוּ הַדְּבָרִים שֶׁאָסְרָה תּוֹרָה, אֵינָן דִּבְרֵי חָכְמָה, אֵלָא תֹּהוּ וְהֶבֶל שֶׁנִּמְשְׁכוּ בָּהֶן חַסְרֵי הַדַּעַת, וְנָטְשׁוּ כָּל דַּרְכֵי הָאֱמֶת בִּגְלָלָן.  וּמִפְּנֵי זֶה אָמְרָה תּוֹרָה, כְּשֶׁהִזְהִירָה עַל כָּל אֵלּוּ הַהֲבָלִים, "תָּמִים תִּהְיֶה, עִם ה' אֱלֹהֶיךָ" (דברים יח,יג).

"Whoever believes in [occult arts] of this nature and, in his heart, thinks that they are true and words of wisdom, but are forbidden by the Torah, is foolish and feebleminded. He is considered like women and children who have underdeveloped intellects.

The masters of wisdom and those of perfect knowledge know with clear proof that all these crafts which the Torah forbade are not reflections of wisdom, but rather, emptiness and vanity which attracted the feebleminded and caused them to abandon all the paths of truth. For these reasons, when the Torah warned against all these empty matters, it advised [Deuteronomy 18:13]: "Be of perfect faith with God, your Lord."

In other words, what Eliezer  did was complete nonsense and in fact "not a sign at alll", that he picked the right woman for his masters son!

This is a pretty wild idea!

Is it possible that this was all a big mistake and as a  result of Eliezers actions, Yitzchak married the wrong woman, which eventually led to the destruction of the first temple...?

Think about it...

Rivka came up with idea that Yaakov should steal the first born. This created eternal animosity between Yaakov and Esav(amalek).

The stealing of  the first born caused future friction between yosef and his brothers; as they thought yosef was trying to do the same as their father. 

Animosity between the brothers/tribes continued all the way to the incident of the concubine of Gibeah. Almost the entire tribe of Benjamin was wiped out as a result. 

Finally the division of the govt of Israel through a Civil War between yerovom and rechovom, was the final nail of the first temple coffin.

Was all this because Eliezer picked the wrong woman...:)

Is this another danger of the consequences of voodoo judaism...? :)

Maybe in the end, Eliezer did make  the right decision, despite his practice of soothsaying.  Did this turn out to be the rachamim of God?

Third option is, that even though Eliezer messed up, we still managed to make a good thing out of a bad thing by later accepting and following the Torah. By now walking in the ways of God, it no longer matters if Rivkah was the right woman. It has nothing to do with genetics but more about continuing the path of Abraham and the denial of idols/voodoo.

We can now judge Eliezer as a result of the Torah and philosophies that we inherited. We can now be critical of Eliezer with halacha and teach future generations the lie of voodoo beliefs and the false actions/beliefs of Eliezer...

Kedushin 29-the demon in the yeshiva

 Strange gemara in today's Daf -קידושין כט

(I will liberally translate/pararaphrase)

כי הא דרב יעקב בריה דרב אחא בר יעקב שדריה

 אבוה לקמיה דאביי כי אתא חזייה דלא הוה מיחדדין שמעתיה א"ל אנא עדיפא מינך תוב את דאיזיל אנא שמע אביי דקא הוה אתי הוה ההוא מזיק בי רבנן דאביי דכי הוו עיילי בתרין אפי' ביממא הוו מיתזקי אמר להו לא ליתיב ליה אינש אושפיזא אפשר דמתרחיש ניסא על בת בההוא בי רבנן אידמי ליה כתנינא דשבעה רישוותיה כל כריעה דכרע נתר חד רישיה אמר להו למחר אי לא איתרחיש ניסא סכינתין

The gemara just finished having a discussion about one's responsibility to learn Torah over teaching one's own son and the exception when one's own child has exceptional potential. 

The gemara then relates a story about R' Acha whose son R Yaakov was sent to the yeshiva of Abaya and turned out to be  a poor student.  As a result R' Acha decided to leave his son at home and instead  would study himself  at the yeshiva of Abaya.

When Abaya heard that R' Acha was coming to his yeshiva he figured  that he could have R'Acha  eliminate(via a miracle)a problematic demon that lived in his yeshiva, which caused harm even when two students were walking together during the daytime (gemara in Berachot says that demons cannot harm people in pairs or during the day). Abaya told the people of the town not to offer R' Acha lodging so that he would sleep in the yeshiva and would then be forced to deal with the demon. 

Sure enough that night while R' Acha was sleeping in the yeshiva, the demon appears to R Acha in the form of a Tanina(serpent, water monster) with seven heads. R' Acha did seven bows (apparently in prayer) and with each bow, a head of the serpent was severed. The next morning R' Acha said to them(not sure who "them" is- abaya, the students, both ?), if it weren't for the miracle, you would have put me in danger.

Many questions with this story. First of all, who cares? It's nice that R' Acha was able to clean house(figuratively) but what does this teach us? How does this make our discussion about the obligation to teach one's child any clearer. Furthermore, why couldn't the great Abaya eliminate the demon himself; he was after all, the teacher that R' Acha was coming to learn from. 

I would like to suggest that the demon story is a continuation of the story of R Acha and his son R' Yaakov(notice the title of rabbi that the gemara still bestows on his son). R' Acha accused his son of not studying properly and therefore R' Yaakov lost the right to learn in the yeshiva of Abaya and instead his father was going to use his resources to study himself.  The gemara then let's us know that the problem was not actually with his son, R Yaakov but the source of the problem was the yeshiva itself.

Abaya had a problem in his yeshiva.  Perhaps it was conflict and turmoil amongst his students; thus the language of inability to prevent harm even when two students were walking together during the day.  As a result, students like R' Yaakov couldn't learn or study  properly in a chaotic environment.  Sometimes, outside help is required to fix the atmosphere or a problem in a school or education system and that is exactly what Abaya was hoping with R' Acha.

The demon in the form of a sea creature or serpent (תנינא or in hebrew תנין),represents chaos or tumult. The number seven usually represents complete or unification in knowledge or the oral law (seven of the menorah). The tumult in the yeshiva represented by this demon, prevented the students from achieving their learning goals

R' Acha successfully solved the problem in the yeshiva either by unification of the students or humbling them (represented by his bowing). 

These are all my interpretations of this strange story but the point is to show that the gemara is not trying to teach us Greek mythology or how rabbis dealt with magical demons but instead real deep messages. 

Finding blame with the student/s and ignoring the education environment or system is a much easier path for most educators and parents to take. A parent or a teacher doesn't need to introspect or reinvent the wheel, when pointing a finger at the child/student. On the other hand, to examine the school and the education system requires alot more energy, introspection and sometimes even outside help. This could be the powerful and worthwhile message of this gemara.  

Even the great Abaya realized that his yeshiva and education system required help/change...

Kedushin 29

 Interesting and beautiful Gemara in this Mondays Daf(kedushin 29). The gemara says the following (I will paraphrase/ loosely translate with explanation)

 פדאו במנה ולא הספיק למושכו עד שעמד במאתים מה שפדה  פדוי ואין נותן אלא מנה

 

The gemara makes a statement,  that if someone attempts to redeem something that was consecrated to  the mikdash worth a hundred dollars and paid the money (which completes the transaction as far as hekdesh is concerned)but he hadn't had time to finish the transaction (via physical transference), before the price of what he was trying to redeem increased to two hundred dollars; he is still only required to pay one hundred dollars

The gemara then asks, 

אמאי הכא נמי נימא לא יהא כח הדיוט חמור מהקדש

Why don't we say(as we said before) that the strength of a regular persons transaction with other people, should not be more powerful than when making a transaction with hekdish. In other words, when a transaction between two ordinary people takes place; if the transaction was not completed(by transferring the object; even if payment was already made),

the buyer loses out and would then need to pay the increased price(if he still wants to complete the purchase). 

Why don't we say the same when one wants to redeem from hekdesh and now force this person to pay the increased price, if he still wants the object from hekdish?

The gemara gives an interesting answer,

אטו הדיוט לאו במי שפרע קאי

Would then a regular person not receive the curse of "he who punished"...

The explanation is that there was a curse for people that gave over money for a transaction and then the seller backs out before the transfer of the object(even though legally that had every right to back out). The curse was " the one that punished the generation of the flood and the generation of the tower of babel will take revenge against those that don't keep their word".

In other words, even the temple/hekdesh needs to keep their word and not benefit from a transaction that both sides committed to and began  but was not yet technically completed.

 Basically God(or the caretakers of his temple) are required to keep his/their word as it regards transactions, because otherwise how can God expect man, to do so himself. After all, aren't we supposed to imitate God :)