Dunking Rachael: My Shavuot Contribution

Tuesday, May 18, 2010

My Shavuot Contribution

My conservative Rabbi sent out the following notice:

"For this year´s Tikun L´Eyl Shavuot the theme will be, "My Most Favorite Torah Portion or Torah Story." I´m recruiting volunteers to speak at our Shavuot Torah Study Session on this topic."

This Is My Contribution

Brief Overview

Korach stages a rebellion against mosha, accusing him of a power grab. He and his entourage are swallowed up by the earth. Others are burnt to ash. The people protest, and a plague ensues. staffs are submitted by all the tribes, only Aaron's blossoms; proving that he is G d's chosen. The Israelites are instructed about the various presents due to the priests and Levites.

Why this Parsha, this story?

From the first time I heard it read, remember that is only three year ago, this story has remained for me one the most dynamic, confusing and difficult stories of the torah. The issue of the complete and total annihilation of Korach and everyone and everything associated with him is for me the major example of the wrathful deity taking it out on the innocent. I remember sitting in synagogue on that Saturday and turning to Robert, my husband, and saying babies and dogs too?

Thus starts my musings about Torah, and this parsha in particular. If taken literally with only the torah as a reference , this is a devastating story who’s message to the modern ear is one of repression “DO NOT question authority" and “everything is preordained.”

On first glance Korach’s statement, his blasphemy:

"The entire community is holy, and G-d is within them; why do you raise yourselves over the congregation of G-d?"

sounds somewhat progressiv, almost democratic. It is only in the response attributed to Mosha in the parsha that we get a glimpse that something else might be afoot.
Mosha’s response "Is it not enough for you that the G-d of Israel has distinguished you from the community of Israel, that you also desire the priesthood?"

Yet from a purely torah interpretation of the events there are no other hard and fast facts given. The next place to go is the vast amount of commentary and Midrashim on this parsha.
The paradox of korach appears time and again in the various accounts of the mutiny. Korach comes across a champion of equality, railing against a "class system" that categorizes levels of holiness within the community. Yet, in the same breath, he contends that he is the more worthy candidate for the High Priesthood. He is both described in the most negative terms, but surprisingly also in positive terms.

To confuse this even more a large portion of the Midrashim, particularly Midrash Hagadol, focuses on creating an entire moralistic back story for the behaviors alluded to in the actual torah portion.

Briefly, this back story consists of a compare and contrast between two woman, the wife of Korach, and the wife of a once mentioned conspirator Ohn ben Pellet. This is a technique seen over and over again in the various texts books and torah. The wife of Korach fueling his greed and ambition and the wife of Ohn Ben Pellet who dragged" him out of danger and saved his life, by giving him strong drink to make her husband sleep and by sitting at the entrance of the tent with her daughter, each with uncovered hair to keep the messenger from getting him to join in.

Although I found these commentaries interesting and compelling none of them truly go to the heart of my issue, the total destruction of innocence, babies and dogs.

Therefore I am compelled to take on this story more in the realm of metaphor and parable. I see this story as the eternal tension between two distinct paradigms.

This tension was described by a modern commentary as follows:
Whether Korach spoke out of ego, or because he proposed a new communal and religious structure for which the people weren't remotely ready -- Korach erred, and the earth swallowed him up. The resulting communal furor plagued the community, yielding grave casualties. What ended the plague was Moses and Aaron's willingness to step up and to smooth things over, to facilitate forgiveness for everyone. Only then did the staff, symbol of power-over, flower and bear fruit. Only when those in positions of leadership are able to rise above the conflicts of the community can leadership reach its fullest potential and flower-forth something remarkable and new. Thusly the tension between the two forces the emergence of a new third paridghm.

Psychologically speaking The tension between change and status quo is an on going for most humans and it is inherent in most relationship and in our spiritual communities as well.
From the more spiritual stand point I offer the following in conclusion
Later in the book of Numbers we read “B’nai Korach lo maytu” “The children of Korach did not die,” concretely this could mean they did not die in the great disaster that ended their father’s rebellion. Yet In many of the midrashirm and commentaries there is a more metaphoric suggestion made that this means that in every generation there are people who are ready to assume autonomy because they believe that they are as close to God as they need to be.

We live in a state of constant tension between listening to the voice of God and answering our own inner conscience sometimes it is the same, yet sometimes the interpretations of our leaders diverge from our own. There are no easy answers or simple solutions. We continue to struggle with this tensions of status quo vs change in Jewish life and in our lives in general.

1 comment:

Karen Zampa Katz said...: ok.....?; June 4, 2010 at 8:48 AM

Post a Comment

Beit Din test Question #22 "If you were to join the Jewish people......."

22) If you were to join the Jewish people, what considerations would guide you to that decision? How did your course help you to recognize some meaningful ideas to Judaism? Are there some things you have learned in the course that you find difficult to accept into your life?

I have been a thinker and a seeker for most of my life. I have explored many faiths, been involved in and have a keen interest in philosophy and psychology. I was raised in an Irish/Italian Catholic home. I lived as a Buddhist/Unitarian Universalist for most of my adult life and previously was married for 20 years to a Jewish man who did not practice his faith of origin. At the birth of my child, now 19, I sought to learn as much as I could about Judaism in order to expose this child to the faith of part of her ancestors. So I come to this new point in my life with all my experiences, knowledge and aspirations.

But the question remains how did I come to consider conversion? It is though love that the door of conversion was opened. I fell in love with a Jewish man who participates in his religion, yet he did not require me to convert, pressure me, or in any way attempt to persuade or force me. This exploration of faith was of my choosing, my volition, nurtured by love.

Clearly I am not dogmatically tied to my faith of origin, seeing that the religious expressions which dominated my adult life have been mostly non-theistic. The major change/challenge for me is in the consideration/acceptance of a theistic understanding of existence. Through explorations with my sponsoring Rabbi, reading, (lots of reading!) and the Hillel class I have come to an understanding of the divine, a place of relationship with a theistic point of view that resonates within me.

To help to articulate this I refer to the work of existentialist thinker and Jewish educator Franz Rosenzweig.

“The function of religion, according to Rosenzweig, is not to erect theological systems or establish universal truths, but to lead to experience of God, starting from one's own personal existence. He "commends 'the Pharisees of the Talmud and the saints of the Church' for knowing that 'man's understanding extends only so far as his doing.' Religious observance is, in effect, the doing of one's religious convictions; the two cannot be separated."
“(Time Magizine Monday, Jan. 01, 1951 , http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,814185,00.html)

For Rosenzweig the written word was to be less important than the living exchange, for it is in the doing that the relationship to God will manifest. This idea blends well with my own mindfulness practices. These practices express that it is in the awareness of the moment, the only moment we truly have, where peace and divinity can be experienced.
Through my answers on this exam, my participation in the class and my meetings with my sponsoring Rabbi, I believe I clearly present that I am coming to know, and hopefully I am beginning to understand the meaningful ideas in relationship to Judaism. Clearly there is so much to learn, and experience.

I am most taken by the direct experience of the divine associated with taking on the laws and practices of this ancient faith. I have aspirations to practice in this tradition, but once again they can be best articulated through Rosenzweig:
“Rosenzweig’s approach was subjective also in connection with the mitzvot, Jewish observances. He did think that he would one day become a fully observant Jew, but believed in the gradual approach in which the observances slowly made their impact by “ringing a bell” for him. Typical of this approach is Rosenzweig’s answer to someone who asked him whether he wore tefillin [phylacteries]: “Not yet,” he replied.”
(My Jewish Learning.com http://www.myjewishlearning.com/history_community/Modern/IntellectualTO/Rosenzweig.htm)

Like the bell of mindfulness practice, the mitzvot, the mindfulness practice of Judaism, will take time to incorporated and to resonate within. Like the ringing of the mindfulness bell, or the sounding of the Shofar, the act of doing Judaic practices pierces the daily, the mundane and hopefully will help to awaken me to an even richer and more connective relationship with the Jewish people and the divine.