NASÓ_NÚMEROS IV,21 – VII

Uno de los temas destacados en los capítulos bíblicos se refiere al Nazir, la persona que toma la decisión de abstenerse de comer uvas y de tomar vino, promete no cortarse el pelo y de evitar cualquier contacto con un difunto. (El estado de Nazir tiene validez por treinta días, a menos que se haya especificado un lapso diferente). Nos encontramos, probablemente, con la decisión personal de privarse de algunos de los placeres de este mundo porque se considera que éstos conducen a comportamientos indeseables. En efecto, dado que un capítulo anterior se refiere el proceso de investigación de una mujer cuyo esposo sospecha que comete adulterio, nuestros Jajamim concluyen que la ley del Nazir es mencionada de inmediato, porque el abuso del vino también puede traer como consecuencia la licencia sexual.

El nazir posiblemente considera que algunos disfrutes son ilícitos o que es demasiado débil para poder gozar de estos placeres, sin comprometer su integridad moral y religiosa. Este concepto es típico de numerosas religiones y se admite igualmente que privarse de algunos gustos es bien visto por los dioses. Según el comentarista Ibn Ezra los seres humanos somos esclavos de nuestras pasiones, y el auténtico rey es aquel que se libera del yugo de las pasiones. Abstenerse de lo mundano puede considerarse, también, como un castigo autoimpuesto por los pecados cometidos.

En una Braitá, que es un texto rabínico no incluido en la Mishná, nos encontramos con una diferencia de opiniones acerca de nuestro tema. Rabí Eliézer Hakapar hace referencia al hecho de que la Torá exige que el Nazir ofrezca un sacrificio al término de su período de abstención y por lo tanto lo califica de pecador; mientras que Rabí Elazar lo considera un virtuoso, apoyándose también en otra expresión de la Torá. Esta diferencia refleja la tensión existente dentro del judaísmo respecto a los placeres de este mundo. Por un lado, estamos conscientes de que debemos ponerles freno a nuestros apetitos, tal como lo expresara el citado Ibn Ezra y, por otro lado, nuestra tradición enseña que quien ha visto algo que parece ser placentero y se abstiene de disfrutarlo, será responsable de su acción.

Hay quienes ven en nuestras leyes de Kashrut, por ejemplo, un sistema de reglamentos que tienen como objetivo la limitación del libre goce del placer. Se considera que el propósito de estas normas es el de fortalecer los mecanismos del auto dominio del ser humano a fin de que no ceda, en su impotencia, a sus deseos instintivos. Tenemos, por un lado, entonces, la frágil voluntad del humano que tiene que ser moldeada y restringida y, por otro lado, un mundo creado por el Ser Supremo que es toda bondad y por lo tanto también toda su creación debe serla. (En efecto, el hombre también es parte de la creación Divina y de acuerdo con el argumento anterior debe ser igualmente bueno). 

La dialéctica de nuestro argumento tiende a ser resuelta señalando que tanto la naturaleza como el ser humano son potencialmente buenos. Las Mitsvot son el instrumento que encaminan los instintos y las inclinaciones de ese hombre hacia la bondad y la nobleza, hacia el bien y el altruismo.

En el Tanaj nos encontramos con dos Nezirim. En ambos casos, son las madres las que hacen la promesa de que su hijo, aún por nacer, será dedicado al culto, será un Nazir. Los dos personajes bíblicos se convierten, involuntariamente, en Nezirim. (Posiblemente, Avshalom, que se abstenía de cortarse el pelo, pueda ser considerado el tercer Nazir). El primero de ellos, que ha sido el sujeto de numerosas obras literarias, es Shimshón, que figura de manera destacada en el enfrentamiento de nuestros antepasados con los Filisteos. En el relato bíblico Shimshón es un digno líder de su pueblo mientras cumple con su condición de Nazir. En cambio, su entrega a los placeres en los brazos de la bella Delila, rompe con su condición de Nazir, hecho simbolizado por el corte de sus cabellos. Shimshón, en el fondo, es una figura trágica, porque posee una extraordinaria fuerza física, que pudo haber sido decisiva en la confrontación con los Filisteos. Lamentablemente, sus descomunales poderes no estaban acompañados de la fortaleza espiritual capaz de resistir a los encantos de Delila. 

Tal vez nos encontramos frente a una lección importante. Primero, la victoria del pueblo no puede depender exclusivamente de las acciones de un solo hombre. Segundo, la abstención en sí, en el mejor de los casos, es un factor positivo pasajero. La condición de Nazir puede tener provecho y ser útil sólo transitoriamente para orientar el carácter de una persona. Pero no puede ser la base de la salvación de un pueblo. Es claro que quien funge como líder de una sociedad, tiene que limitar sus apetitos y deseos personales. Pero, también debe tener una clara visión y propósitos definidos, sagacidad y perspicacia para dirigir los destinos de una nación. En el fondo de todo, Nazir es una manifestación de voluntad, auto restricción y limitación, pero esto no puede considerarse como un aporte decisivo para la creatividad y el desarrollo.

El segundo personaje bíblico que es un Nazir, es el profeta Shmuel. Esta vez estamos frente a un líder espiritual y político que dejó estampada su personalidad dominante en la historia de la formación de nuestro pueblo. Shmuel está claro en sus propósitos y comprende a cabalidad su sagrada misión de liderazgo moral. Shmuel accede al deseo del pueblo de establecer una monarquía ungiendo al primer rey Shaúl. Pero, al mismo tiempo, insiste que esta monarquía debe estar sujeta al “Rey Supremo”, a las ordenanzas y a la obediencia de la palabra de Dios. Y en efecto, cuando Shaúl,en su enfrentamiento con Amalek, desobedecelas instrucciones recibidas, Shmuel le vaticina el fin de su reino. La monarquía de Israel tendrá un nuevo tronco desde ese momento en adelante, que será el que perdure, (aunque en el tiempo de los Jashmonaim se interrumpe esta dinastía, hecho que origina una importante disputa para la época) hasta la era mesiánica y que se centra en la figura del joven héroe David.

El Talmud reflexiona que la tradición es muy severa con Shaúl y, en contraste, considera que la simpatía hacia David es excesiva. A este último se le perdonan numerosos errores, mientras que a Shaúl en la primera oportunidad se le retira el apoyo como resultado de su desobediencia. Esto es paralelo al hecho de que solemos ser tolerantes y pacientes con nuestros familiares cercanos, mientras que reaccionamos violentamente frente a las transgresiones de ajenos. ¿Por qué se castiga a Shaúl mientras que David es perdonadovarias veces, a la vez que se le asegura que sus descendientes obtendrán la corona real para siempre? ¿Y la mayoría no reaccionamos en forma similar? 

Hay personas que nos caen simpáticas y estamos dispuestos a disculpar sus fallas, al mismo tiempo que somos implacables con otros. El carismático joven David le había devuelto el orgullo al pueblo al derribar con una piedra al gigantesco Goliat. En cambio, Shaúl era un hombre depresivo y melancólico que aparentemente no gozaba del cariño de las multitudes.

Harav Yosef Dov Haleví Soloveitchik mi maestro, sugiere que las faltas del rey David corresponden a debilidades humanas para las cuales la Torá ofrece arrepentimiento y expiación. La falta de Shaúl, en cambio, está relacionada con el ejercicio de la monarquía. Rambam enumera las obligaciones de un rey, entre las cuales están la defensa del país y la de sus habitantes. El error de Shaúl tenía que ver con estas responsabilidades de liderazgo real, para la defensa del interés nacional y, por lo tanto, su falta es inexcusable. Los errores de David, aunque muchos y graves, provienen de su fragilidad como hombre. El error de Shaúl radica en el desempeño de su función de monarca, o sea en la esencia de su función de líder y, por lo tanto, es imperdonable.

Durante los años de la existencia del Beit HaMikdash, la secta de los Isiim, que son los Esenios, aparentemente practicó cierto ascetismo y seguramente no fueron los únicos en hacerlo en aquella época. Los Jajamim no se inclinaron a exhortar las bondades de abstenerse de los placeres, aunque sí señalaron que el exceso de goce resulta nocivo. Tal vez, uno de los motivos principales para la opinión de nuestros Jajamim, sea que las personas que practican la abstinencia y que son muy severas consigo mismas, tienden a ser poco generosas en sus relaciones con sus semejantes. La persona que considera que la abstinencia en el goce de cualquier placer es el comportamiento correcto, no puede responder con criterio de amplitud a las necesidades de otros. 

Volvemos al Shevil HaZahav, al delicado balance que se requiere para poder gozar de lo material sin comprometer el valor de lo espiritual. Es tarea individual y personal de cada uno, encontrar ese delicado equilibrio entre las cosas y las ideas, entre poseer y ser. Una vida que se rige por las Mitsvot, es el marco por excelencia que nuestra tradición ofrece para cumplir la tarea.

MITSVÁ: ORDENANZA DE LA TORÁ EN ESTA PARASHÁ

CONTIENE 7 MITSVOT POSITIVAS Y 11 PROHIBICIONES

1. 362.Números 5:2 Enviar al individuo ritualmente impuro fuera del campo de la Presencia Divina
2. 363.Números 5:3 El individuo ritualmente impuro no debe entrar al Templo
3. 364.Números 5:6 Confesar el pecado
4. 365.Números 5:15 Cumplir las leyes de sotá (esposa sospechada de cometer infidelidad)
5. 366.Números 5:15 No incluir aceite en la ofrenda de la sotá
6. 367.Números 5:15 No incluir especies en la ofrenda de la sotá
7. 368.Números 6:3 El nazir no debe beber vino u otra bebida fuerte derivada de uvas
8. 369.Números 6:3 El nazir no debe consumir uvas frescas
9. 370.Números 6:3 El nazir no debe consumir pasas
10. 371.Números 6:4 El nazir no debe consumir la semilla de la uva
11. 372.Números 6:4 El nazir no debe consumir la corteza de la uva
12. 373.Números 6:5 El nazir no debe afeitar su cabello
13. 374.Números 6:5 Permitir que el cabello del nazir crezca largo
14. 375.Números 6:6 El nazir no debe entrar en el recinto donde yace un cadáver
15. 376.Números 6:7 El nazir no debe adquirir impureza ritual a través de un cadáver o de cualquier otra fuente de impureza ritual
16. 377.Números 6:13 Afeitar el pelo del nazir y traer su ofrenda (en la terminación del período de su promesa de nazir, o si adquiere impureza ritual)
17. 378.Números 6:23 Recitar la bendición de los Kohanim
18. 379.Números 7:9 La tribu de Leví debe cargar el Arón HaKódesh, Arca Sagrado sobre los hombros

1. We live in an imperfect world and, therefore, although perfection must be attempted, we know in advance that it is an unattainable horizon. And that is civilization, the route that leads to unattainable perfectibility.
2. Every government limits freedom. Puts a brake on free will to choose in all areas, but something is received in return.
3. Taxes are a kind of “legal penalty” imposed by a government in exchange for personal security that offers freedom of travel without fear, enjoyment of services that require the cooperation of society: water, energy, internet, etc.
4. Living in a democracy requires the payment of freedom fees, and conflicts arise, on many occasions, when the delicate balance between government and personal freedom is affected.
5. After a prolonged period of tranquility, the questioning of this balance arises, and one of the parties chooses to cross borders and promotes a period of uncertainty that leads to confrontation.
6. Venezuela and other societies are examples of this. They fell into disarray and chaos for not ensuring that balance between government and society and ended a dictatorship whose components impede any future negotiation of change.
7. The Jew has a DNA that rejects conformity, forever questioning. To live in society, he must surrender some of his natural tendencies for rebellion and freedom. The Talmud is the best example of nonconformity because it questions everything, as a means to arrive at the correct path.
8. The four recent elections in Israel are a manifestation of this rebellion against the government, a rebellion that is suddenly affected by an external danger that will lead to the formation of a stable government.
9. These days, for various reasons, perhaps to show the Palestinian Authority that Hamas has its own real initiatives that respond to the most intimate wishes of the Palestinians: the elimination of Israel and who probably would have won the election that did not take place indeed because of that same fear. Or perhaps to challenge or test the extent of the new American government’s loyalty to Israel, Hamas considered it appropriate to launch an attack with thousands of rockets aimed at the entire geographical extent of the State of Israel. Showing this time, a war capacity not seen before.
10. It was a surprise and shocking action that manifested preparation and daring on the part of Hamas, but that thanks to the “Iron Dome” did not cause a major disaster in Israel, but at the same time, it showed that they possess greater bellicose skills.
11. What is the source of the funds to pay for these missiles? Obviously, the financial aid Gaza receives for social purposes is diverted to build tunnels to attack civilian targets in Israel, and to pay for rockets.
12. Where do these longer-range rockets come from? It is doubtful they are manufactured in Gaza.
13. They are probably supplied by Iran, and maybe Turkey.
14. If this is verified, the conflict may become larger.
15. The immediate question is: how will Israel respond? Will Israel abide by the sure-to-come immediate calls for a ceasefire? This is certainly being discussed at the highest spheres of the state because there is no doubt that Israel has the means to ensure any possibility that Gaza continues sending missiles, but the civilian costs would be enormous, more than Israel can morally contemplate.
16. What’s going to happen? An agreement will be reached that “prolongs the agony” for two or three more years when we will face the same thing, or worse.
17. Or maybe, this time Israel will try to destroy completely Gaza’s military structure, physically eliminate the criminal Hamas leadership that sends missiles to civilian targets all over Israel and hide in tunnels built under hospitals.
18. In the meantime, what are the consequences of what happened these days?
19. Netanyahu has been strengthened because at a dangerous time it is not advisable to change drivers or leaders.
20. Any Israeli government that includes a “Palestinian Knesset group” is discarded.
21. An additional nail has been hammered into the notion of 2 parallel states: one Jewish and one Arab.
22. The experiment with Gaza should have shown that, without the control of the Israeli army, that region could rule itself, with normality. That theory vanishes.
23. Any agreement between Israel and the Palestinians must go through stages in which Israel gradually withdraws from governing the Palestinians. Gaza is a demonstration that, for now, is not an advisable route.
24. The confrontation between Israeli Palestinians and Israeli Jews, a most disturbing development, reveals that despite the benefits and rights that Israeli Palestinians have within Israel, resentment and hatred are stronger than the possibility of developing a life of fulfillment (health, education, housing) that Israel offers, without distinction, to all its citizens.
25. The Israeli right is strengthened and the left that had lately lost ground will continue that path.
26. A step backward has been taken towards lasting peace with the Palestinians.
27. The “Abraham Accords” demonstrated that Israel can build a common agenda with the Arab people who want to insert themselves into modernity, and the latest events reinforce this path.
28. But change with the Palestinians is possible.
29. We must start with education. Palestinians must stop showing the Israeli as an enemy, perhaps to begin with, describe him as an adversary, and eventually as a neighbor who has his own, however different, cultural, and historical parameters. That’s the message that new generations must receive. Otherwise, we perpetuate confrontation, unnecessary bloodshed.
30. The term “martyr” must be erased from the Palestinian vocabulary and the world of terror must be ideologically and socially rejected.
31. Palestinians can and must use Israel’s progress for their individual and collective benefit and, thereby, create a better future for themselves and their descendants.

BEMIDBAR_NUMBERS I – IV,20

At the beginning of the fourth book of the Torah, God orders a census. Rashí reminds us that this is the third time a counting of the Hebrews will be made. A census of the people was taken the first time when they left Egypt. (The aforementioned figure of six hundred thousand adults, not counting children and women, was the cause of a controversy with Ben Gurion who argued that the figure was greatly exaggerated. On a recent visit to Havana, Fidel Castro also questioned this issue). After the episode of the Egel HaZahav, the “golden calf” our ancestors built when Moshe took excessive time to descend Mount Sinai, a census was also taken. And the census of our chapters coincides with the construction of the Mishkan, the desert Tabernacle dedicated to divine worship.

From the beginning of our appearance as a people on the pages of History we were told that we are few in numbers. In other chapters we are described as Hameat mikol haamim, the people with the smallest number of individuals. Therefore, in our national formative period we are taught to value quality, to appreciate individual merit. Everyone has to contribute to the development and add to the well-being of the group. Membership and identification follow Lemishpechotam, according to family origin. And over time it was translated into national characteristics.

At present we are witnessing the wear and tear of these origins, manifested by the lack of cohesion in the family nucleus. In Jewish tradition, family ties remain central and perhaps this is an additional reason to select episodes of the Torah about Avraham’s conjugal life for the biblical reading of Rosh HaShanah, the beginning of a new year and a very solemn day in our calendar.

The enumeration of the different families and the number of their members also includes the tribe of Levi that will not inherit lands after the conquest of Canaan. Levi’s descendants will haveto dedicate their lives to service, education, and worship. Aharon, the Kohen Gadol, had four children, but two of them, Nadav and Avihu, died in a strange episode. Aharon’s reaction to tragedy is sharp and enigmatic, but at the same time very sobering and deserves examination and reflection.

Previous chapters include Aharon’s reaction, by the expression Vayidom, asilence of resignation. Possible responses to disaster and death are varied. There are those who respond violently and rebelliously to the punishment imposed on an innocent son. And where do we find a father who doesn’t consider his son innocent? Who could then have criticized Aharon, inthis case, for questioning Divine justice?

The Talmud relates that two sons of Rabbi Meir died on Shabbat. His wife Beruria hid the tragedy from him. At the end of the holy day, Beruria asked her husband the following question. A few years ago, someone commissioned us to keep a treasure for him. Since it had been a long time without it being claimed, we came to consider that the treasure was really ours. But today the owner came to claim what he entrusted. What should I have done? questioned Beruria. Rabbi Meir’s response was immediate and unequivocal. You should have returned the treasure, he said. Beruria then took her husband to the chamber where the bodies of the two deceased sons lay. Years ago, Beruria said, God entrusted us with these two treasures and today He came to claim them.

The rationalization of Beruria can be categorized as a kind of Tsiduk HaDin, a testimony to Divine Justice. The low profile of Aharon’s reaction, on the other hand, does not necessarily have to be regarded as a spontaneous or thoughtless acceptance of the severe verdict. Shetikah kehoda´ah dami, silence is a demonstration of consent, when there is an alternative that can negate the situation. But when human beings are unable to alter the course of events, silence can also be interpreted in different ways. 

Personally, I find in the silence of Aharon, as the seed of a serious critique of celestial failure. It is an active and violent silence, which hides repressed anger and fury. It is a silence of resignation, because of the helplessness of the human being in his encounter with the Supreme Being. It is an act of protest when faced with the intrinsic inequality between the participants in the tournament of life. It is a reaction similar to that of a Talmid Chacham in a concentration camp who refused to eat. I don’t want to eat because I don’t want to recitea Berachah, a blessing of thanks to God. I don’t know the proper language to express a claim against God, but I am not willing to justify His concealment and absence in the most tragic moment in the history of our people.

The death of a son forces us to discuss our role as parents. Aharon probably questioned his effectiveness as a role or teacher for his children?  He could escape the feeling of guilt for what happened, for not having anticipated it or prevented it. Aharon’s silence probably manifests his questions and doubts about the relationship he had with his children.

Question: Why isn’t leadership hereditary? Any response has to take into account the fact that the person who devotes the bulk of their attention and interest to the well-being of the community generally neglects the needs, ignores the anxieties and concerns of those closest to him. The Vayidom of Aharon is a silent turning to his own inner self in order to examine his probable failure in fulfilling paternal responsibilities.

The Vayidom of rebellion and initial protest for the tragedy gives way, eventually, to the Vayidom of resignation, and the Vayidom of recognizing the limitations of the human intellect to understand the Tsiduk HaDin, theinfinite and absolute correctness of Divine Justice. On the cusp of a leadership trajectory and its power, Vayidom is the reassessment of an inflated human self-evaluation, an exaggerated self-esteem, when faced with the sudden death of a child.

Zushe was on the deathbed and his disciples noticed his sadness near despair. You have always taught us that we must gather in joy with the Creator, said those around him. After all the Mitsvot you fulfilled in your life, surely a privileged place awaits you in the Olam HaEmet, the “world of absolute truth”, his disciples claimed. But Zushe replied that his fear was not because he had not been able to reach the holiness of Patriarch Avraham or any other of the spiritual giants who left their personality imprinted on our spiritual character. Zushe’s concernwas that he felt that he had not been consistent with his own abilities, that he had not realized his own potential.

In the truly momentous moments of life, Vayidom is a recognition of having failed to live up to our potential. Vayidom forces us to admit the limited and reduced scope of our thinking to Sheelot HaNetsach, the questions whose answers belong to the realm of eternity, beyond our human and mortal perspective.

Nadav and Avihu’s death opens a new chapter in Aharon’s life. From now on he will probably be accompanied by doubt, an indispensable characteristic for leadership that must evaluate alternatives constantly. The promise of a Hereafter that promises eternal peace serves as limited comfort for the fate of the souls of the deceased children. The surviving parents must renounce part of the “joie de vivre”, of full taste for the delight of living and progressively take refuge, increasingly, in  Vayidom, the silence that really is a partial evasion to face the tragic reality of death. 

BEMIDBAR_ NÚMEROS I – IV,20

Dios ordena un censo al comienzo del cuarto libro de la Torá. Rashí nos hace recordar que esta es la tercera vez que se hace una cuenta. Por primera vez, se toma un censo del pueblo a la salida de Egipto. (La cifra mencionada de seiscientos mil adultos, sin contar niños y mujeres, fue motivo de una controversia con Ben Gurion que sostenía que la cifra era muy exagerada. En reciente visita a La Habana, Fidel Castro también cuestionó este número). Después del episodio del Éguel HaZahav, que es el becerro de oro que nuestros antepasados construyeron cuando Moshé tardó en descender del Monte Sinaí, también se hizo un censo. Y el censo de nuestros capítulos coincide con la construcción del Mishkán, que es el tabernáculo del desierto dedicado al culto Divino.

Desde el comienzo de nuestra aparición como pueblo en el escenario de la historia se nos dice que somos pocos en número. En otros capítulos se nos califica como Hameat mikol haamim, el pueblo con el número más reducido de habitantes. Por tanto, en nuestro período formativo nacional se nos enseña a valorar la calidad, a apreciar el mérito individual. Cada uno tiene que dar su aporte al desarrollo y contribuir al bienestar del grupo. La afiliación y la identificación se efectúa Lemishpejotam, de acuerdo con el origen familiar probablemente, todos los pueblos de la antigüedad tienen raíces familiares y tribales; con el tiempo adquieren características nacionales. 

Pero en los tiempos actuales estamos presenciando el desgaste de esos orígenes, lo que se presenta como una falta de cohesión en el núcleo familiar. En la tradición judía los lazos familiares continúan siendo centrales y tal vez sea esta una razón adicional para seleccionar episodios de la Torá sobre la vida conyugal de Avraham para la lectura bíblica de Rosh HaShaná, que es un día muy solemne en nuestro calendario.

La enumeración de las diferentes familias y del número de sus integrantes, incluye también a la tribu de Leví que no heredará tierras después de la conquista de Canaán. Los descendientes de Leví tienen que dedicar sus vidas al servicio del culto. Aharón que era el Kohén Gadol, tenía cuatro hijos, pero dos de ellos, Nadav y Avihú, mueren en un extraño episodio. La reacción de Aharón frente a la tragedia es cortante y enigmática, pero al mismo tiempo es aleccionadora y merece nuestra reflexión.

En capítulos anteriores se recoge la reacción de Aharón con la palabra Vayidom, un silencio resignado. Las posibles respuestas frente al desastre y a la muerte suelen ser variadas. Hay quienes responden con violencia y rebeldía frente al castigo impuesto a un hijo inocente. ¿Y dónde encontrar un padre que no considere inocente a su hijo? ¿Quién hubiera podido, entonces, criticar a Aharón, en este caso, por su posible cuestionamiento de la justicia Divina?

El Talmud relata que dos hijos de Rabí Meir fallecieron en el transcurso de un día Shabat. Su esposa Beruria le ocultó lo ocurrido. Al término del día sagrado, Beruria le planteó la siguiente pregunta a su esposo. Hace unos años, alguien nos encomendó guardarle un tesoro. Dado que había pasado mucho tiempo sin reclamárnoslo, llegamos a considerar que el tesoro era realmente nuestro. Pero hoy vino el dueño a reclamar su encomienda. ¿Qué debí hacer? cuestionó Beruria. La respuesta de Rabí Meir fue inmediata e inequívoca. Debiste devolver el tesoro, afirmó. Entonces Beruria introdujo a su esposo a la recámara donde yacían los cuerpos de los dos hijos fallecidos. Años atrás, dijo Beruria, Dios nos encomendó estos dos tesoros y hoy vino a reclamarlos.

La racionalización de Beruria se puede catalogar como un Tsiduk haDín que es un testimonio de la Justicia Divina. El bajo perfil de la reacción de Aharón, en cambio, no tiene que considerarse necesariamente como una aceptación espontánea e irreflexiva del severo veredicto. Shetiká kehodaá dami, el silencio es una demostración de consentimiento, cuando existe una alternativa contraria que puede negar la situación. Pero cuando el ser humano se ve imposibilitado de alterar el curso de los hechos, el silencio también puede interpretarse de diferentes maneras. 

Personalmente, encuentro en el silencio de Aharón la semilla de una seria crítica al fallo celestial. Es un silencio activo y violento, que oculta ira y furia reprimidas. Es un silencio de resignación, debido a la impotencia del ser humano para enfrentarse al Ser supremo. Es una protesta por la desigualdad intrínseca existente entre los participantes en el torneo de la vida. Es una reacción similar a la del Talmid Jajam en un campo de concentración que rehusó comer. No quiero comer porque no quiero recitar una Berajá, una bendición de agradecimiento a Dios exclamó. No conocía un lenguaje adecuado para cuestionar y reclamarle a Dios, pero tampoco estaba dispuesto a justificar Su ocultación y Su ausencia en los momentos más trágicos de la historia de nuestro pueblo.

La muerte de un hijo nos obliga a analizar nuestro rol como padres. ¿Podía acaso Aharón dejar de cuestionarse acerca del papel que había desempeñado como maestro y como modelo para sus hijos? ¿Dónde y en qué residía su falla como padre?  No podía fácilmente, librarse del fuerte sentimiento de culpa por lo acontecido, por no haberlo anticipado para prevenirla. El silencio de Aharón manifiesta, tal vez, su indeclinable decisión de hacerse un profundo cuestionamiento acerca de la relación con sus hijos.

Pregunta: ¿por qué no es el liderazgo hereditario? Cualquier respuesta tiene que tomar en consideración el hecho de que la persona que dedica el grueso de su atención y de su interés al bienestar de la comunidad, generalmente desatiende las necesidades, desconoce las angustias e ignora las inquietudes de sus familiares cercanos. El Vayidom de Aharón es un silencioso retraerse a su propio yo y un contraerse en su fuero interno con el propósito de hacer ese examen sobre el alcance de quien probablemente no cumplió con sus responsabilidades como padre.

El Vayidom de rebeldía y de protesta inicial por la tragedia sufrida da curso, eventualmente, al Vayidom de resignación y al Vayidom del reconocimiento de las limitaciones del intelecto humano para comprender el Tsiduk haDín, lo infinito y absolutamente correcto de la Justicia Divina. En la cúspide de una trayectoria de liderazgo y el poder que éste supone, Vayidom constituye la necesaria redimensión de una estatura humana inflada y de una exagerada auto estima frente a la incomprensión por la súbita muerte de un hijo.

Zushe se encontraba en el lecho de muerte y sus discípulos notaron su tristeza próxima a la desesperación. Siempre nos has enseñado que hay que reunirse en alegría con el Creador, dijeron los que estaban a su alrededor. Después de todas las Mitsvot que cumpliste en esta vida, seguramente te espera un lugar privilegiado en el Olam HaEmet, que es el mundo de la verdad absoluta, alegaron sus discípulos. Pero Zushe respondió que su temor no era porque se le iba a exigir el no haber igualado al Patriarca Avraham o a cualquier otro de los gigantes espirituales que dejaron impresa su personalidad sobre nuestro carácter espiritual. La preocupación de Zushe se centraba en que sentía que no había sido consecuente con sus propias habilidades, que no había realizado su propio potencial. 

En los momentos realmente trascendentales de la vida, Vayidom es un reconocimiento de haber fallado en nuestro potencial. Vayidom nos obliga a admitir lo limitado y lo reducido del alcance de nuestro pensamiento frente a Sheelot HaNétsaj, las preguntas cuyas respuestas están en una eternidad que está más allá de nuestra perspectiva humana y mortal.

La muerte de Nadav y Avihú abre un nuevo capítulo en la vida de Aharón. De ahora en adelante lo acompañará probablemente la duda y pierde algo de la seguridad en sí mismo, que es indispensable para el liderazgo y da cabida a numerosos cuestionamientos. La promesa de un Más Allá que envuelve a los allí residentes en una paz eterna sirve de consuelo limitado por el destino de las almas de los hijos fallecidos. Pero los padres sobrevivientes renuncian a parte de la “joie de vivre”, del deseo y gusto por la vida y se refugian progresivamente, cada vez más, en Vayidom, el silencio que realmente es la evasión y la decisión de no enfrentar la trágica realidad de la muerte.

BEHAR_ LEVITICUS XXV – XXVI,2 and BECHUKOTAI -LEVITICUS XXVI, 3 – XX VII

The title of our chapter refers to Mount Sinai where Moshe received specific instructions about the law of Shemitah, the obligatory rest of the land every seven years. The Chachamim raise the question: why was this law selected, in particular, so that it deserved to be commented on in Sinai itself? The answer is that, in reality, all laws were analyzed in their different details at that historical time and the Law of Shemitah , therefore, is used, only as an example.

It is clear that there are numerousadditional Mitsvot that were not stated in Sinai. We have a huge number of Mitsvot deRabanan, laws that were promulgated by our sages in later times which were obviously absent in Sinai. The Chachamim were also obligated, according to the circumstances of the time, to refine and moderate the instructions of the Torah in order to remain faithful to what they considered to be the spirit of the Law. For example, the Torah prohibits the collection and payment of interest. In an agricultural society, the fulfillment of this ordinance is very feasible. 

However, in a commercial society, and even more so in our industrial, or post-industrial society, money becomes a commodity, an element that has its own value. Today, for example, we talk about the cost of money. Those who suffer are the least fortunate, because loans are denied to them. Therefore, the Chachamim instituted the Héter Iska, a legal document that makes the lender a kind of investor. Thus, the collection of interest becomes dividends of an investment. For some, it is only an artifice that avoids the sanction of the Law. 

For others, it is the result of the ingenuity of the scholars, which on the one hand facilitates loans to the needy, but which, at the same time, compels us to be aware of the basic prohibition of oppressing others indiscriminately. The same fact that we have to resort to Hether Iska serves to remind us that in its absence we would be violating a law of the Torah.

The ignition of the lights of Hanukkah can be considered as the prototype of a Mitsvah instituted by the Chachamim. The events that Hanukkah celebrates occurred centuries after the Torah was received in Sinai. Therefore, we can ask, How is it possible to recite before turning on these lights “Asher kideshanu bemitsvotav vetsivanu…?” Was it God who ordered us to turn on these lights for a period of eight days? According to the opinion of our sages, the future instructions of the Chachamim were symbolically ordained on Mount Sinai. The Torah is the source of the authority of our sages. Thus, the historical moment of Sinai is transformed into a continuous revelation of the Divine Will through the legal interpretations and decisions of the Chachamim in any period of time.

Just as God is the author of the Torah, He also created the human intellect, who will interpret these Holy Scriptures in the future. Moreover, the Talmud in the treatise Bava Metsia recounts a dispute between God on the one hand and the Celestial Court on the other, referring to a question of Tum’a, which is ritual impurity. According to the Almighty, there is no ritual contamination in the situation in question; according to the Celestial Court, there is. The case was brought before Raba bar Nachmani who was very studious on these issues, according to the text of the Talmud cited. It is clear that it makes no sense to instruct God about His Law.  He, God, is always right about the correct interpretation of His Will.

However, the teaching that we can derive from our episode is the insistence of the Talmud   that the Torah was given to humans so that it is the latter who interpret it according to certain standards. The principle Lo bashamayim hi, affirmsthat once the Torah was delivered on Mount Sinai, it ceased to be heavenly property. Now it is man who has the possibility and obligation to study it, interpret it and deepen its teachings.

Does the Torah also give the Chachamim the authority to radically change the Law? This is a question that does not have an easy or simple answer. Sometimes, for example, taking into account the fact that fish sellers took advantage of the eve of Pesach to unduly speculate on prices, the village rabbi forbade eating fish on that holiday. And indeed, the person who disobeyed him would be breaking the Law. We have received reports of concentration camps in the Nazi era testifying that a certain rabbi ordered those detained to eat on Yom Kippur given the serious condition of malnutrition that jeopardized their lives.

When the Chafets Chayim was informed that the lives of members of a company of Jewish soldiers in Siberia were in danger because they had nothing to eat and the cold was very severe, he replied that they could eat Chazir, pig, which was the only food available (ober nit shmochken di bainer, without sucking their fingers). Our sages based their verdict on the Pasuk   of Tehilim that reads: Et laasot laShem heferu Toratecha, “If it is time to do something for the Lord, one can even break the Law”.

Can a rabbi, or a teacher of our Law, contradict another rabbi’s decision? The Mará deAtra, the master of the place has the last word on a legal issue. However, a Beit Din, which is a Rabbinical Court, or a Talmid Chacham, asage who can document the validity of an opposing opinion, citing sources authorized for this purpose, could annul the original decision. Who decides which Beit Din has greater authority? There are certain basic principles. 

We generally consider previous generations to be more knowledgeable about the Law, perhaps because they were closer to the beginning when the Torah was given. For example, the Amoraim who are the masters of the Gemara, which contains the discussions of the academies, cannot question the opinion of Tanaim, the masters of the Mishnah, and who belong to a previous period in the composition of the Talmud. When facing a dispute between sages of the same generation, we follow several rules. Perhaps the most important of these is that we follow the opinion of the majority, according to the principle of the Torah, Acharei rabim lehatot.

The Talmud in the aforementioned treatise of Bava Metsia records that Rabbi Eliezer, who by his mercy had powers to alter the course of nature, invoked his ability to impose his point of view on the Chachamim, the sages of that time. The Chachamim refused to follow Rabbi Eliézer’s decision, even after hearing a Batkol, a heavenly voice that sided with Rabbi Eliezer in this dispute. They argued Lo bashamayim hi, the Law is no longer in the heavenly heights. Now it is we, according to the instructions of this Torah, who, as a majority, have the decision in our hands.

The Talmud establishes a hierarchy with regard to the Chachamim, noting that the decisions of some take precedence over those of others. Sometimes a conclusion cannot be reached, and the final decision is allowed to remain in Teiku, on hold. Notwithstanding, reality is that in each generation certain Talmidei Chachamim emerge as the greatest of scholars whose decisions are universally respected. The late Rabbi Moshe Feinstein of New York City was one of those exceptional personalities.

There are no defined parameters for achieving an intellectual position that deserves respect for all. Rabbi Moshe Feinstein’s numerous rabbinical decisions were published and were almost never refuted by other scholars. Thus he became the Posek, the person whose opinions were requested from the most diverse and distant Jewish communities and whose decisions are a reason for study in the different Yeshivot, the academies that are dedicated, exclusively, to the study of traditional Jewish sources.

MITSVAH: TORAH ORDINANCE IN THIS PARASHAH

CONTAINS 7 POSITIVE MITSVOT AND 17 PROHIBITIONS

1. 326.Leviticus 25:4 Do not work the earth during the Sabbath year
2. 327.Leviticus 25:4 Doing no work with trees in the Sabbath year
3. 328.Leviticus 25:5 Do not harvest what grows spontaneously in the Sabbath year
4. 329.Leviticus 25:5 Do not harvest the fruit of the tree in the Sabbath year in the way it is harvested each year
5. 330.Leviticus 25:8 Count 7 cycles of 7 years
6. 331.Leviticus 25:9, 10 Sounding the Shofar on Yom Kippur in the Jubilee Year
7. 332.Leviticus 25:9, 10 Sanctify the Jubilee Year
8. 333.Leviticus 25:11 Do not work the land in the Jubilee year
9. 334.Leviticus 25:5 Do not harvest what grows spontaneously in the Jubilee year
10. 335.Leviticus 25:11 Do not harvest the fruit of trees in the Jubilee year in the way that is harvested each year
11. 336.Leviticus 25:14 Doing justice between seller and buyer
12. 337.Leviticus 25:14 Do not cheat on buying and selling
13. 338.Leviticus 25:17 Do not verbally oppress a Jew
14. 339.Leviticus 25:23 Do not sell land on the Land of Israel permanently
15. 340.Leviticus 25:24 Return the land in the Land of Israel to its original owners in the Jubilee year
16. 341.Leviticus 25:29 Redeem a inherited property in a city in the year (from its sale)
17. 342.Leviticus 25:34 Do not alter the empty lands around the cities or camps of the Levites
18. 343.Leviticus 25:37 Do not bear interest when lending to a Jew
19. 344.Leviticus 25:39 Do not force a Hebrew slave to do demeaning work like a Canaanite slave
20. 345.Leviticus 25:42 Don’t sell a Hebrew slave at auction
21. 346.Leviticus 25:43 Do not force a Hebrew slave to do forced labor
22. 347.Leviticus 25:43 Permanently maintain a Canaanite slave
23. 348.Leviticus 25:53 Not allowing a Hebrew slave to be forced to work extremely by his non-Jewish owner 
24. 349.Leviticus 26:1 Do not prostrate on an engraved or sculpted stone, even in the veneration of God

BECHUKOTAI

LEVITICUS XXVI, 3 – XX VII

MORAL RESPONSIBILITY AND LUCIDITY

The outstanding part of our chapters, which will be repeated in an enlarged way in Ki Tavo, in the fifth book of the Torah, is knownas the Tochachah, the exhortation and warning not to deviate from the path of the Mitsvot. The Torah is very clear in its initial affirmation of our weekly reading, Im bechukotai telechu…, “If in My Laws ye walk and fulfill My precepts I will bring you rain in its time, and the earth shall give its product, and the tree of the field shall bear fruit.” 

The goodness of the earth is, as quoted, the result of people’s behavior and actions. The land is not capricious and does not require sortileges or witchcraft for fertility. The abundance of fruits is the result of a function of human obedience to laws. In parallel, punishments and misfortunes are the consequence of disobedience and rebellion. Veim lo tishmeú Li…, “But if ye shall not listen unto me … I will cast terror upon you… and my face shall turn against you … and ye shall flee without anyone chasing you.”

In the vision of the Torah, nature is not capricious, and the world is not governed by chance. (Einstein claimed that he could not conceive of God playing dice with the universe). There is an order and a why of things. It is man’s moral action that determines the course of events and the obligatory reaction of nature. In the time of Noach it had already been pointed out Vatishachet haarets, that the earth itself had become corrupted, including every living creature that inhabited it. The flood was the consequence of universal corruption. In our day we can conclude in fact, that man has the means to make nature more productive. At the same time, we are aware that we have nuclear means to completely destroy it and make it useless for future generations because of radioactive contamination.

With this in mind, we can assume that the external enemy is a consequence of internal weakness. Just as the human body is under constant threat of microbes, bacteria and viruses that are ready to take advantage of some fragility in our immune system, so society and nature are under constant stalking that can materialize in a hecatombe by simple carelessness or by moral weakness. The prophet Yeshayahu had warned, Meharsayich umacharivayich mimech yetseu,“those who seek to destroy you and those who will plunder you will come out of you”. The true enemy is within us and we are, individually and personally, responsible for the evils that befall us.

Some argue that Medinat Israel’s delicate political situation can be resolved only with the determined solidarity and unification of purpose of the entire Jewish people. At the same time, the most terrible consequences can occur in the absence of this indispensable concertation of efforts. Norman Podhoretz, the editor of COMMENTARY in his alarming essay, ISRAEL: A LAMENTATION FROM THE FUTURE, warns of similar developments that led to the destruction of the state in the past. His call is aimed, in particular, at the role we play, because of the lack of clarity of purpose and because there is no firm decision to unite, something that should have been unconditional with reference to the existence of the State. 

Our loyalty is affected, in part, by the Intifada and the problems of conscience that a fight against women and children arouses. The leaders of the Intifada, probably forthe purpose of earning the goodwill of the world, send women and children to throw stones at soldiers. And by producing sympathy for what they consider to be the right of the Palestinians, by allowing it to establish an PLO-led Palestine, the effective result would compromise Israel’s security including possibly even its existence.

Of course, the reasoning on which the cited essay is based does not enjoy universal approval. A strong controversy has been built around this thesis, which is being debated with vehemence and passion. The argument is controversial, but its approach is traditional because it looks for the causes of the gravity of the situation in our own environment.

From a certain angle, this is an optimistic stance because it affirms that human beings have the potential and vigor to overcome difficulties. The Tochachah (that in synagogues of Hasidic practice does not constitute a regular Aliyah, since no parishioners are called to its reading), contains also, in a certain way, the germ of the Nechamah consolation. Because the Tochachah is not a statement of hopelessness and inevitability. There are balms and solutions to our afflictions. Means and remedies can be difficult, costly and bitter, but they exist and are within reach. 

According to Podhoretz’s thesis, the results are not certain, even with the alleged unconditional support for Israel. In the grimmest of cases, however, it would avoid future remorse and deep depression as a result of not having acted in due course, based on our capabilities.

The Tochachah of our reading is interrupted by the encouraging mention of Vezchjarti et berit Yaacov, “and I will remember My covenant with Yaacov”. Even in the moment of darkness and Hester Panim, the apparent absence of the Shechinah, the Divine presence, the memory of our patriarchs has presence and validity. The lesson that follows is that, despite our deviations and oversights, the example of the forefathers of our tradition and faith remains in force. Although temporarily blocked and hidden, diffuse and imprecisions, the examples of Chesed of Avraham, of his readiness to sacrifice Yitschak, and the dedication to study of Yaacov, remain as a heritage.

Perhaps this is one additional manifestation of one inflated self-esteem. But the implication is that even in our mistakes and sins, we continue to be the spiritual descendants and disciples of these, the first iconoclasts and social revolutionaries. Men ken nit opshatsen a yidishe kishke, affirms the popular saying, which means that the great morality of the Jewish interior spirit cannot be be underestimated because of its deep roots in our intimate personal and human composition, or DNA.

Our obsessive concern about introspection should not lead us to neglect the multiplicity of surrounding external factors. For example, the Nazi phenomenon, so humiliating to all mankind, cannot be analyzed, seeking to attribute its roots to the behaviour of Germany’s Jewish community. We are witnessing today, the reappearance of anti-Semitism organized in various countries. It would be childish, naive and irresponsible to ignore the strong anti-jewish ingredient in the infamous United Nations resolution equating Zionism with racism. (A few years later, this resolution was overturned). 

In post-war Poland we witness a resurgence of anti-Semitism based on the memory of the Jewish presence in the country. It is a kind of historical anti-Semitism, because the great Jewish mass has perished, was assassinated, and most survivors have emigrated. In Italy these days, manifestations of anti-Semitism appear in places where Jews don’t reside. In Europe, in general, anti-Jewish sentiment is growing. Isn’t the blind hatred of contemporary Islam toward Israel an expression of its basic anti-Semitism? The war against Israel is not a confrontation against the Zionist movement exclusively. It is tainted with antisemitic attitudes and hatred.

We are faced with a confrontation of global dimensions against Judaism, against the Jewish people as a whole in many countries. Do those who commit terrorist attacks know how to distinguish between Jews from the diaspora and Israelis? In the last analysis, the Jewish people in Israel and those who are still in the Golah, together, are the guarantors of our survival, to ensure the prophetic promise of Netsach Israel lo yeshaker, the undeniable eternity of Israel.

MITSVAH: TORAH ORDINANCE IN THIS PARASHAH

CONTAINS 7 POSITIVE MITSVOT AND 5 PROHIBITIONS

1. 350. Leviticus 27:2 Whoever promises to donate the esteemed value of a man must give the value written in the Torah
2. 351. Leviticus 27:10 Do not substitute consecrated animals or sacred offerings
3. 352.Leviticus 27:10 If a consecrated animal were replaced by another animal, both are consecrated
4. 353. Leviticus 27:11, 12 Whoever promises the value of an animal must give the value that the Kohen assigns  
5. 354. Leviticus 27:14 Whoever promises the value of a house must give the value that the Kohen assigns plus an additional fifth
6. 355. Leviticus 27:16 Whoever promises the value of a field must give the value that the Torah assigns  
7. 356. Leviticus 27:26 Do not replace consecrated animals of one kind with another
8. 357.Leviticus 27:28 If one promises by way of Cherem part of his property, it will be given to the Kohanim
9. 358. Leviticus 27:28 Land under Cherem should not be sold, it should be delivered to the Kohanim
10. 359. Leviticus 27:28 Land under Cherem should not be redeemed
11. 360. Leviticus 27:32 The tithe of Kasher animals must be delivered annually
12. 361. Leviticus 27:33 The tithe of animals should not be sold, it must be consumed in Jerusalem