Parshat Miketz: Light to See

Leave a comment

One word appears throughout the story of Yosef and his brothers – הכר – to recognize. The word is first used at the lowest point in their relationship. In   Parshat Miketz however, it marks a turning point in the brothers’ ability to recognize each other’s distress and take steps toward healing.  

First, when Yosef is taken down to Egypt, the brothers deceptively dip his famed coat in animal blood. They then show it to Yacov as evidence of Yosef’s death and ask “haker na?!” “Do you recognize this coat?” Later Tamar says the exact same words to Yehuda, in an attempt to get him to recognize her suffering and take responsibility for her. In parshat Miketz this word is used again, when the brothers come down to Egypt during a famine looking for sustenance. They find themselves standing before Yosef. However, “Yosef recognized (ויכר) his brothers, but they did not recognize (הכירוהו) him.” The midrash Tanhuma interprets their lack of recognition as referring to the past, when the brothers did not recognize Yosef, meaning they didn’t have mercy on him. Yet here, Yosef rises above the past and recognizes them and has mercy on them. 

Interestingly, the same word is used in the Mishna Brachot’s teaching of when one can begin to say the Shema in the morning: “from when one can distinguish (משיכיר) between blue and white…” Perhaps, “הכר” is used here both literally and figuratively. As the new day begins and daylight dawns, we should also look around and be mindful of those who need some recognition and care. This relates to Hanukkah candles as well. Hanukkah is a time to focus on seeing and recognizing, as we increase the light of the candles each night and banish the darkness. May this be a Chag Urim Sameach and Shabbat Shalom! – Karen Miller Jackson

Parshat Vayeshev: Wishing for Tranqulity?

Leave a comment

Parshat Vayeshev opens with the statement that Yacov settled down in Canaan. He had not had an easy life until then: He’d left home to flee Esav, endured years with the swindler Lavan, and suffered the trauma of Dina’s kidnapping and its aftermath. The midrash elaborates that Yakov now hoped to live “b’shalva,” in peace and tranquility. Surely that’s something we can understand.

Chazal, however, viewed Yakov’s desire for “shalva” as problematic. “Yacov wished to live at ease, but the ordeal of Yosef sprang upon him,” says Rashi, citing the midrash. “When tzadikim ask for tranquility, God responds: “The peace of the world-to-come awaits them, yet they also want to dwell at ease in this world?!” This interpretation is based on a seeming connection between Yacov’s desire to settle down, and the subsequent events: intense jealousy between the brothers, the sale of Yosef, and Yacov’s suffering in the belief that Yosef had been killed. 

Yet, there is something bothersome in this commentary. Doesn’t everyone deserve and need tranquility? Should tzadikim never be settled in this world, always doing and moving?

In contrast to the negative view of Yacov’s request for shalva, the Shulchan Aruch cites a custom for women to refrain from work on Hanukkah during the time the candles are lit. The Magen Avraham explains – since “they too were part of the miracle.” This is a time to rest, be thankful, and draw inspiration from the Hanukkah miracle.

Perhaps this is the reconciliation of these two views of the desirability of rest and tranquility: Yacov wanted prolonged tranquility with no end. But endless repose is not the way to live out one’s life. We never fully “retire.” In contrast, women pause on Hanukkah temporarily, at a designated time. Periodic rest and reflection provide the opportunity to recharge ourselves, to renew our creativity, energy and purpose in life. Shabbat Shalom and Hanukkah Sameach! – Karen Miller Jackson

In Praise of Dina: Parshat Vayishlach

Leave a comment

Parshat Vayishlach, contains one of the darkest incidents in the story of Yacov’s family: the taking and rape of Dina. Yet, the inclusion of this account in the Torah suggests that it is important not to ignore the topic of sexual abuse and to find ways to talk about it, protect against it and advocate for the victims. 

The commentaries on Dina’s story grapple with two issues which require moral clarity and which are still relevant today: lack of consent and the tendency to blame the victim. Dina goes out, “va’teze,” to see the women of the area. Shechem saw her, took her and “vaye’aneha.” Studying the interpretations of these two words can be a springboard for discussing the importance of consent in sexual relationships. One possible reading of “vaye’aneha” is that he debased her, downplaying the violence and her lack of consent. Ramban, however, based on other occurrences of this word in Tanach, provides a voice of moral clarity: “The Torah tells us that she was forced, and she did not consent to the prince of the country — to her praise.”

Interpreting the word “va’teze,” the midrash calls Dina a “yatzanit,” she liked to go out, seeming to imply that she shared responsibility for what happened to her. The Lubavitcher Rebbe, however, interprets this to her credit: being a yatzanit was a positive attribute in Dinah, since she had the potential to positively influence others. Blaming the victim only further stigmatizes abuse.

Ramban says this story teaches the praise of Dina – לספר בשבחה – in that she remained true to her values as a daughter of Israel. I would add that Dina is also to be praised for giving us her story to raise awareness about abuse, and to talk to our children about healthy relationships. Shabbat Shalom – Karen Miller Jackson

Toldot: Rivka’s Moral Clarity

Leave a comment

There is a moral dilemma in Parshat Toldot: Why was it okay for Yacov and Rivka to deceive an older and recently blinded Yitzchak, in order to ensure Yacov received the blessings?! 

When Yitzchak ages and his eyes grow dimmed he decides it is time to give the brachot to his favored son, Esau. The commentaries see deeper meaning in his blindness being mentioned at this point in the narrative. One of Rashi’s explanations is that Yitzchak went blind from the smoke of his daughter-in-laws’ idol worshipping incense. This interpretation is based on the narrative juxtaposition of Yitzchak’s blindness with Esau taking Canaanite wives, bringing bitterness to his parents. The weakness in this interpretation is expressed by the midrash Tanhuma — why then did Rivka not go blind as well?! 

Sforno, takes a different approach and views Yitzchak’s blindness as a result of his turning a blind eye and not protesting Esau’s numerous faults and transgressions over the years. Sforno compares Yitzchak to Eli the kohen in the book of Samuel who refuses to see his sons’ inappropriate behavior. This position supports the idea that Yitzchak’s spiritual blindness did not begin in his old age, but earlier. When the Torah says that Yitzchak loved Esau because ציד בפיו, there was “hunting in his mouth,” the midrash comments – he would entrap and deceive Yitzchak with the words which came out of his mouth. Similarly, Rashi concludes that Yitzchak was made blind to set the stage for Yacov to take the brachot he rightly deserved, initiated by Rivka, who could see clearly regarding Esau and Yacov. 

The commentaries learn from Yitzchak’s blindness: ignoring and rewarding bad character traits has consequences. Rivka had moral clarity and could see who was deserving of the brachot. Shabbat Shalom and Chodesh tov!

Chayei Sarah: What is your Be’er?

Leave a comment

Parshat Chayei Sarah begins with the passing of Sarah. This tragedy, following the akedah, must have left Yitzchak feeling drained and broken. Perhaps this explains Yitzchak’s passivity in finding his match. How then did Yitzchak find strength and resilience?

Numerous significant events in Yitzchak’s life take place by a be’er – a well. In the first scene, Yitzchak is not present but his proxy Eliezer has come to Aram Nahariyim to find Yitzchak a wife. Eliezer stops at the “be’er ha-mayim,” where the women draw water and where Eliezer prays to God for guidance and finds Rivka. The midrash points out that the well is the meeting place of various biblical couples, representing potential for new life and hopefulness. 

Next, when Rivka travels to Abraham’s home she encounters Yitzchak who had just returned from a place called “Be’er Le-chai Ro’i.” This is also where previously Hagar goes with Ishmael when they were banished and where Hagar prays to God for protection. Noting this, the midrash teaches that Yitzchak was there to bring back Hagar (aka Ketura) to Abraham after Sarah’s death. Here too, the well represents matchmaking and renewal, healing and resilience.

Wells appear again later, when Yitzchak re-digs the wells of Abraham which had been stopped up by the Philistines. The Sefat Emet interprets these wells as representing spiritual sustenance which the avot brought to the world. So Yitzchak, having renewed himself then had the ability to provide inspiration for others. 

Be’er is referred to by Song of Songs as a “well of living waters.” Yitzchak renewed his life and spiritual strength at the be’er, providing a model for us to find our our own metaphoric “wells” —  sources of renewed energy and strength, so we can grow in kedusha and chesed. Shabbat Shalom