In פרק ה, we see tremendous development with ירושלים. Not only is she speaking in the collective instead of the individual, but she's just asking to restore her relationship with Hashem - she just wants to go back to what they used to have. In comparison to פרק א, it seems like a totally different person! In פרק א, we see someone who is mourning, upset, individualistic, and focused on the betrayal of their enemies. But in פרק ה, we see a relaxed, collective, collected, and a focus on the loss of their relationship with G-d.
We see a change in the מקונן's description of ירושלים -- it goes from a description of events in terms of that they sinned, but not realizing to a description of events in terms of they sinned, but they're realizing. It's paralleling development of Jerusalem from an objective perspective. Also, we see a change in ירושלים personified as an individual to being personified as a community. She starts off as a selfish individual with no comfort, to being so angry that he can't talk, and then to them realizing we sinned and G-d won't destroy the community and he wants a relationship again. Also there's a similar transformation with the גבר - he goes from an individual to a member of the community.
The chiastic structure of the ספר illustrates the two separate responses to tragedy and alienation from G-d. The first is the childish response "I want to understand the world" - this response is found in ב and ד. He thinks G-d's unjust. We just don't know though, there's something beyond us. It's unsatisfying, but whatever. The world is run by a system I don't get. The second is the "everything is good -relationship with G-d. - found in א and ה. It's a more grown-up, reflective perspective. She's saying, we sinned and we deserve it - do your thing G-d!
I think it's really appropriate to read איכה on ט באב. We're mourning over the clarity that we once had, our strong relationship with G-d. We're mourning over a time when we didn't feel alone and like we had to have blind faith. It teaches us how to respond to tragedy and how to connect with G-d even though he doesn't respond to us.
It also really helps us today, in the modern world. It seems like we're so so distant from the times of the Tanach and like they were so much better than us and we can't relate to them. But really, they struggled then also. They had the same questions as us, yet they still found a way to live through it. They learned to live with their questions. So too, we have to learn to accept that we don't know everything and live with our questions and connect to G-d.
Friday, February 28, 2014
פרק ד
There are 2 sections of this פרק.
In the first, א–י, we see how the precious children of ציון used to be golden, but now what has become of them? The people are at fault - they've gone from glorious to cruel, from wealthy to hunting in the garbage. ירושלים's no longer blaming G-d. She says that the sins of her people are even greater than the sins of סדום - she's acknowledging that ירושלים deserved to be destroyed like סדום, but it wasn't.
In the second section, יא–כב, the מקונן is pointing out the flawed leaders and the sins of the people as well. The leaders failed them - now they're blind and טמא. G-d punished them because they sinned - not for no reason. We turned to nations who betrayed us. Our punishment is almost over - but the enemies are going to be punished.
As we learned, this פרק matches up with פרק ב. The first section of this פרק matches up with the second section of פרק ב. The conditions are the same in both - people are starving, there are bad conditions, and the women are being immoral. But in the first half of ד, we see that there's a recognition that the conditions are because of the people's sins; whereas in the second half of ב, they were blaming G-d.
Additionally, the second section of this פרק matches up with the first section of ד. In both they talk about the anger, but in פרק ד they acknowledge that there's a reason for this anger, as opposed to ב where they thought there was no reason for it.
פרק ד adds a lot that wasn't included in ב - they're finally realizing that it's because the people sinned. It's going back over everything that happened before, just with a new perspective. This continues along the progression that we've seen unfolding: shock, anger, blame, examine/evaluate, acceptance, move on. Right now we're in the evaluate and acceptance part.
It's interesting because we've seen the whole ספר so far that ירושלים is really unwilling to admit that anything is her fault, and is very stuck on the fact that G-d is angry and evil (and even seems little bit crazy). But now she's finally changing her mind.
In the first, א–י, we see how the precious children of ציון used to be golden, but now what has become of them? The people are at fault - they've gone from glorious to cruel, from wealthy to hunting in the garbage. ירושלים's no longer blaming G-d. She says that the sins of her people are even greater than the sins of סדום - she's acknowledging that ירושלים deserved to be destroyed like סדום, but it wasn't.
In the second section, יא–כב, the מקונן is pointing out the flawed leaders and the sins of the people as well. The leaders failed them - now they're blind and טמא. G-d punished them because they sinned - not for no reason. We turned to nations who betrayed us. Our punishment is almost over - but the enemies are going to be punished.
As we learned, this פרק matches up with פרק ב. The first section of this פרק matches up with the second section of פרק ב. The conditions are the same in both - people are starving, there are bad conditions, and the women are being immoral. But in the first half of ד, we see that there's a recognition that the conditions are because of the people's sins; whereas in the second half of ב, they were blaming G-d.
Additionally, the second section of this פרק matches up with the first section of ד. In both they talk about the anger, but in פרק ד they acknowledge that there's a reason for this anger, as opposed to ב where they thought there was no reason for it.
פרק ד adds a lot that wasn't included in ב - they're finally realizing that it's because the people sinned. It's going back over everything that happened before, just with a new perspective. This continues along the progression that we've seen unfolding: shock, anger, blame, examine/evaluate, acceptance, move on. Right now we're in the evaluate and acceptance part.
It's interesting because we've seen the whole ספר so far that ירושלים is really unwilling to admit that anything is her fault, and is very stuck on the fact that G-d is angry and evil (and even seems little bit crazy). But now she's finally changing her mind.
פרק ג: An Individual's Response to Trauma
In פרק ג, we have the epicenter of the entire book. So, פרק ג clearly has a pretty important message for us, lets see what it is.
It starts of talking about this גבר. Who is the גבר? There are a few answers: Rashi says that it's ירמיהו giving a first person account of the destruction. The גבר uses similar words that ירמיהו has used to describe himself. The Ibn Ezra says that it's the universal man - any man and every man. It's coming to teach us how people react to trauma. I think either one really makes sense, but I like the Ibn Ezras idea because we're always told that the Torah relates to our lives, yet we rarely see that this is true. The idea of a universal man, that could really be any of us, makes it seem more relatable.
The first section, פסוקים א–כ, portrays the גבר as a complete individualist. He's totally self-absorbed, and it's all about him. He thinks that everything is happening to him arbitrarily and it's totally random. His affliction indicates the arbitrariness in the world. But he starts to evolve - he starts to realize he's being targeted, and it's not totally arbitrary. It's here that he accidentally says G-d's name - he's reminded of G-d and the floodgates open up. He's starting to remember that there is a G-d...
In the second section, פסוקים כא–לט, the גבר realizes that if G-d does the bad things, then he also does the good things. He realizes that the relationship is mendable. Once he remembers that there are characteristics of G-d that are good he realizes he can reconnect as well. He's starting to get his hope back. He realizes that sometimes people have to suffer and that it can be good. Through this we can recognize that everything comes from G-d. It takes him 39 פסוקים to realize that the destruction could've happened because of his sins.
In the third section, פסוקים מ–סו, we see the transformed man. His perspective/mentality has totally changed, even though the situation's the same. He's going back over what happened - but in a different context - he's saying "I get it, you're merciful, not evil." He switches to we - he rejoins the community and refers to the ברית between G-d and the people - that they would never be destroyed. He's telling everyone - let's do תשובה! He's saying that G-d was angry and destructive, but it was because we sinned, we deserved the destruction! He's asking G-d to be merciful even though we don't deserve it. He really wants the relationship with G-d and he asks Him to destroy his enemies as well.
The message is that we don't always see G-d's presence. Especially nowadays, it's really hard to find G-d in our busy, 21st century lives. We daven to him, but he doesn't really respond. It's difficult to have a relationship without Him responding, but we still do it. Also - it tells us something about תשובה - we deserve pain and suffering if we sin, but we can always repent and try to reconnect with G-d. Even though he doesn't answer, things always get better after a tragedy - isn't that a sign that He is there, listening to us?
It starts of talking about this גבר. Who is the גבר? There are a few answers: Rashi says that it's ירמיהו giving a first person account of the destruction. The גבר uses similar words that ירמיהו has used to describe himself. The Ibn Ezra says that it's the universal man - any man and every man. It's coming to teach us how people react to trauma. I think either one really makes sense, but I like the Ibn Ezras idea because we're always told that the Torah relates to our lives, yet we rarely see that this is true. The idea of a universal man, that could really be any of us, makes it seem more relatable.
The first section, פסוקים א–כ, portrays the גבר as a complete individualist. He's totally self-absorbed, and it's all about him. He thinks that everything is happening to him arbitrarily and it's totally random. His affliction indicates the arbitrariness in the world. But he starts to evolve - he starts to realize he's being targeted, and it's not totally arbitrary. It's here that he accidentally says G-d's name - he's reminded of G-d and the floodgates open up. He's starting to remember that there is a G-d...
In the second section, פסוקים כא–לט, the גבר realizes that if G-d does the bad things, then he also does the good things. He realizes that the relationship is mendable. Once he remembers that there are characteristics of G-d that are good he realizes he can reconnect as well. He's starting to get his hope back. He realizes that sometimes people have to suffer and that it can be good. Through this we can recognize that everything comes from G-d. It takes him 39 פסוקים to realize that the destruction could've happened because of his sins.
In the third section, פסוקים מ–סו, we see the transformed man. His perspective/mentality has totally changed, even though the situation's the same. He's going back over what happened - but in a different context - he's saying "I get it, you're merciful, not evil." He switches to we - he rejoins the community and refers to the ברית between G-d and the people - that they would never be destroyed. He's telling everyone - let's do תשובה! He's saying that G-d was angry and destructive, but it was because we sinned, we deserved the destruction! He's asking G-d to be merciful even though we don't deserve it. He really wants the relationship with G-d and he asks Him to destroy his enemies as well.
The message is that we don't always see G-d's presence. Especially nowadays, it's really hard to find G-d in our busy, 21st century lives. We daven to him, but he doesn't really respond. It's difficult to have a relationship without Him responding, but we still do it. Also - it tells us something about תשובה - we deserve pain and suffering if we sin, but we can always repent and try to reconnect with G-d. Even though he doesn't answer, things always get better after a tragedy - isn't that a sign that He is there, listening to us?
Thursday, February 27, 2014
We Just Do Our Thing
Hi,
I hope everyone is having a rather lovely evening.
Even though I was just in school when we started talking about Esther, I already like it. Unlike Kohelet and Eicha, Esther is more of a story. The only part that I was in class for was when we talked abiut what we already knew about the Megillah and we did not actually start it so I will do the best I can with the blogpost.
My excitement in class when we started talking about Esther was really extreme. The reason why I was so happy because we were talking about Xerxes and the Persian Empire. One may ask," What is so exciting about learning about Xerxes and the Persian Empire in Megillot?"
And I will give you an answer.
Earlier in the year I was sitting in Dr. Kennon's lovely history class while talking about Persia. We talked about a few rulers including Cyrus the Great, Cambyses 2, Darius the Great, and last, Xerxes.
The reason why I was so excited in class was because I looked at the back of our packet and saw familiar names that I had previously learned in World History with Dr. Kennon. Now I am learning it in a new perspective with Mrs. Perl.
I think that history is an interesting thing. I think it is especially interesting when you figure out where the Jews take place in it. I would have never, ever, ever thought that Darius the Great or Xerxes had any connection with the Jews.
The amazing thing in history is that the Jews are always around whether we notice it or not. It is truly a beautiful thing to learn about civilizations that were so incredibly successful but ended up declining. Think about it. Whether you know it or not, the Jews always play a role in history. We have been there from the start and will be there forever. Learning about how the Jews were around in various instances in history that you'd never expect makes me even more proud to be a Jew. We always are involved and although some may knock us down, we always rebuild ourselves up. It is just our thing :)
Esther From a Historical Perspective: What Went Wrong?
In this week's Megillot class, we kicked off Megillat Esther. Woot-woot! Anywho, we began with studying the chronology of events, beginning with Yirmiyahu's prophecies, and ending with the conclusion of the building of the second Beit Hamikdash. Sounds dandy. So, now the question is, well, where does Megillat Esther take place in the course of history? Today's your lucky day, because we made a super-convenient timeline!
In 608 BCE, Nebuchadnezzar assumed power as part of the mighty Babylonian empire (only mighty for 70 years, I might add). This happened in the fourth year of Yehoyakim, king of Yehudah. Yirmiyahu reminded the Jews that the ensuing exile and punishment is because of their actions and them not listening to Hashem. Then, in 597 BCE, Galut Yehoyachin occurred, and the officers were exiled into Babylonia. Eleven years later (586 BCE), the Beit Hamikdash was destroyed and the remainder of the people were exiled. This is the time when Megillat Eicha is written. Forty-eight years of exile (538 BCE), and the Jews were given permission to return under the authority of Cyrus, king of Persia. The Jews were also given the opportunity to rebuild the Beit Hamikdash. This marks the end of the empire of Babylonia and the conclusion of Yirmiyahu's prophecy of 70 years. But, guess what? That's not the end. Surprise!
520 BCE marked the second year of Daryavesh's rule. Hashem came to Zecharia, who along with Chagai, encouraged the rebuilding of the Beit Hamikdash. Chagai even told the Jews that the Beit Hamikdash had the potential to be even better than the first-it would be a place of "shalom," peace. Zechariah indicated that G-d wanted to return to the people and "dwell in Yerushalayim" (the Beit Hamikdash). Hashem would return the Jews from exile to Israel, where they would be His nation and He would be their G-d. Furthermore, an "Ish Yehudi" (perhaps Mordechai) would gather the dispersed to come back to Yerushalayim. However, many Jews responded to the opportunity to rebuild the Beit Hamikdash by remaining in Bavel. In Yerushalayim, those who had returned were part of a growing internal conflict, and the building of the Beit Hamikdash halted. However, in the sixth year of Daryavesh, the Beit Hamikdash was completed. But that's not all! In the seventh year of Artachshasta (Daryavesh) sent Ezra to the land of Israel. Upon his arrival, he witnessed rampant intermarriage and assimilation.
That's a lot of history, folks. 480ish is when the Purim story starts, but from this information, a question arises. If already in 538 BCE the Jews were allowed to return, what are they doing in Shushan, not Yerushalayim??? The people should have jumped for joy at the opportunity to rebuild the Beit Hamikdash they were longing to see its glory again! But, as we saw throughout the years, they didn't. Why?! Dun, dun, dun.
On another note, looking at Megillat Esther from this perspective was incredibly interesting, and the way the sources wove together to create a chain of events was super-cool to see play out. As for my questions in the previous paragraph, have any ideas?
520 BCE marked the second year of Daryavesh's rule. Hashem came to Zecharia, who along with Chagai, encouraged the rebuilding of the Beit Hamikdash. Chagai even told the Jews that the Beit Hamikdash had the potential to be even better than the first-it would be a place of "shalom," peace. Zechariah indicated that G-d wanted to return to the people and "dwell in Yerushalayim" (the Beit Hamikdash). Hashem would return the Jews from exile to Israel, where they would be His nation and He would be their G-d. Furthermore, an "Ish Yehudi" (perhaps Mordechai) would gather the dispersed to come back to Yerushalayim. However, many Jews responded to the opportunity to rebuild the Beit Hamikdash by remaining in Bavel. In Yerushalayim, those who had returned were part of a growing internal conflict, and the building of the Beit Hamikdash halted. However, in the sixth year of Daryavesh, the Beit Hamikdash was completed. But that's not all! In the seventh year of Artachshasta (Daryavesh) sent Ezra to the land of Israel. Upon his arrival, he witnessed rampant intermarriage and assimilation.
That's a lot of history, folks. 480ish is when the Purim story starts, but from this information, a question arises. If already in 538 BCE the Jews were allowed to return, what are they doing in Shushan, not Yerushalayim??? The people should have jumped for joy at the opportunity to rebuild the Beit Hamikdash they were longing to see its glory again! But, as we saw throughout the years, they didn't. Why?! Dun, dun, dun.
On another note, looking at Megillat Esther from this perspective was incredibly interesting, and the way the sources wove together to create a chain of events was super-cool to see play out. As for my questions in the previous paragraph, have any ideas?
Wednesday, February 26, 2014
Ester, A New Perspective
I will start off my post by asking all of you to be upstanding citizens and spell Ester like that and not like "Esther". The "h" is unnecessary and evil, and, furthermore, is not present in my middle name which is spelled "Ester" with no h.
Up until now we have read books that have been pretty unfamiliar to us. I'll speak for myself when I say that I hardly even knew that Kohelet existed before this class (and I think that many of you probably feel the same way). I vaguely remember my mom coming home one Sukkot and saying, "Wow, Racheli. Kohelet is so powerful," or something like that, but otherwise... completely clueless. As for Eicha, I read it for the first time this summer on Tisha B'av, and I didn't really read all of it then because it kind've disturbed me. Too much scary-isms, baby-eatings, and what-nots. So mostly I just sat there and listened until it was over. Right. So, like I said, the two books that we read previously were almost completely foreign to us. This made it easy to dive into them with eager eyes and open ears. Everything we learned was new and interesting. Even though we had our hunches for how the Sefarim would end, we were still surprised by all the twists and turns in each sefer. We questioned things we didn't understand and allowed ourselves to become frustrated with some of the material. All in all, it was awesome, wasn't it?
So here's the problem: we've all already heard of Megillat Ester. We've been told the story since we were young and acting it out in kindergarten. Most of us go to megillah reading every year and skim over the text at least one of the two readings every year (let's face it- it's more boring if you don't follow along with the story). We have all these preconceived notions about Ester.. how are we supposed to view it from an open perspective? How are we supposed to forget about the midrashim that have been taught to us as facts since first grade? I don't know. I don't have the answers. It's going to be very difficult, I think. But I'm excited to see what Mrs. Perl does with this megillah. I am certain that by the time we are finished, we will see Ester in a different way somehow... but I'm not quite sure how exactly yet.
What do you guys think? Do you agree with me and think that it will be difficult reading this sefer with new eyes? Or do you think you're ready to throw away all old ideas and take in Ester from a fresh perspective? Can you even separate midrash from fiction in this story?
I thought I'd share this because I thought it was too funny.
Tuesday, February 18, 2014
What happens now?
What happens now when a city is destroyed? We've been talking for a while about how Yerushalayim went through the stages of trauma with the sadness, anger, depression, epiphany, reevaluation, and being ready to move on. Thing is, that was something that happened because the people sinned. There were religious connotations to every step they went through in the process.
Do people nowadays do something similar? In places like Haiti after the earthquake in 2010 or the tsunami in Japan last year, did people think that they were going something wrong? I can imagine them going through the sadness, anger, and depression, but if there was nothing they did wrong, and therefore nothing for them to change, what epiphany and reevaluation would they have gone through? How would they have been able to move on?
Story in Ivrit
I was thinking about my personal thoughts and reflections on פרק ב (when it's all angry and accusatory towards G-d), and it reminded me of a story I read in Ivrit (either this year or last year), and I wanted to see what other people thought about it.
It does make sense that once you snap out of the shock when something bad happens, that you go to anger and accusations. You’re confused and scared, and you have no idea what’s going on. I don’t think that it would be acceptable behavior under normal circumstances, but here, I think it’s justified, at least to a point.
It kind of reminds me of a story we read in Ivrit class (last year, I think) about a Rabbi telling his students to go see what the poor, simple tailor did to “celebrate” Yom Kippur. When they went, they saw the tailor taking out 2 books: one huge and one very small. He took the small book and said, “G-d, written here are all the things my family and I have done against you this year,” then he picked up the huge book, “and written here are all the things You have done against my family and me. If we want to weigh it out, really, You should owe me, but I’ll make a deal with You. If you forgive my family and me for what we have done against You, we will forgive You for what You have done against us.”
When we talked about the story in class, we decided that should any of us try something like that, it would be considered complete chutzpah. Because the tailor didn’t know any other way to connect to G-d, it was okay for him to do it that way, and even good enough that the Rabbi sent his students to see it. I’m basically trying to say that because this was the point that ירושלים was at, and because she didn’t know any different and/or had no other way to do so, I think that it was okay for her to act the way she did here at this point in her development.
It does make sense that once you snap out of the shock when something bad happens, that you go to anger and accusations. You’re confused and scared, and you have no idea what’s going on. I don’t think that it would be acceptable behavior under normal circumstances, but here, I think it’s justified, at least to a point.
It kind of reminds me of a story we read in Ivrit class (last year, I think) about a Rabbi telling his students to go see what the poor, simple tailor did to “celebrate” Yom Kippur. When they went, they saw the tailor taking out 2 books: one huge and one very small. He took the small book and said, “G-d, written here are all the things my family and I have done against you this year,” then he picked up the huge book, “and written here are all the things You have done against my family and me. If we want to weigh it out, really, You should owe me, but I’ll make a deal with You. If you forgive my family and me for what we have done against You, we will forgive You for what You have done against us.”
When we talked about the story in class, we decided that should any of us try something like that, it would be considered complete chutzpah. Because the tailor didn’t know any other way to connect to G-d, it was okay for him to do it that way, and even good enough that the Rabbi sent his students to see it. I’m basically trying to say that because this was the point that ירושלים was at, and because she didn’t know any different and/or had no other way to do so, I think that it was okay for her to act the way she did here at this point in her development.
In the first half of Perek 4 it tells us that G-d was very angry. G-d was so angry that he allowed enemies to attack. Other nations could not believe this. In the second half it blames the leaders and says that the destruction was caused because of the leader's sins.
It goes on to say something very interesting. In Pasuk 14 it says that the people walk blindly through the streets. What it is actually trying to say is not that the people were actually blind, but they could not see what that they were listening to false prophets. It also goes more in depth about why Yerushalyim was destroyed. When things went wrong or they were having trouble with something, they would not turn to G-d for help. Even worse, they would turn to other nations for help.
It also talks about the gruesome mothers who ate their children, which was also mentioned in Perek 2. The Perek ends off being a little bit hopeful. It says that the punishment of the people is almost finished and that the people who attacked them, are going to be punished now.
It goes on to say something very interesting. In Pasuk 14 it says that the people walk blindly through the streets. What it is actually trying to say is not that the people were actually blind, but they could not see what that they were listening to false prophets. It also goes more in depth about why Yerushalyim was destroyed. When things went wrong or they were having trouble with something, they would not turn to G-d for help. Even worse, they would turn to other nations for help.
It also talks about the gruesome mothers who ate their children, which was also mentioned in Perek 2. The Perek ends off being a little bit hopeful. It says that the punishment of the people is almost finished and that the people who attacked them, are going to be punished now.
Monday, February 17, 2014
The Horrors of Hester Panim
Since I still have not finished Aicha and have not discussed the major ideas and lessons we take away from this depressing sefer, I'll share what I have taken away from the 3 and a half perakim I have learned so far.
Back when I was in class, we talked a lot about Hester Panim. During the destruction, both the Gever and Yerushalayim are angry with G-d. He will not listen to them. He is shutting out their prayers. There is no one to guide them, the pain and destruction seems arbitrary, and there is no escape from the suffering. Basically, life is pretty bad at this point. G-d is of no help to them and they can't understand why. After some soul searching, they both realize that they have sinned and this is all punishment for what they have done. Both Yerushalayim and the Gever see that there is still hope for their relationship with G-d and begin trying to reconnect with Him. The never restates his experiences at the end of perk gimmel, but this time accepts responsibility for what he did and wants G-d to be merciful. He begs G-d to end the hester panim and punish his enemies. Even Yerushalayim comes back to G-d after the Mekonan tells her to cry out to Him. They both want that relationship back that has been lost to them since G-d began hiding His face.
When we think of Hester Panim today, we commonly associate it with the Holocaust. One of the main theories of why the Holocaust occurred is because the Jews were sinning so G-d hid His face from us and allowed the world to continue on without His influence. He did not help us and that is why the Germans were able to do what they did. If you believe in that cause, then you can see how we should truly appreciate what G-d does for us everyday. If without His help and guidance, we would be vulnerable to that type of horror, then it must be that G-d does incredible things for us everyday without us even realizing it. Thats why it's so important that we daven and thank Him and maintain a close relationship with Him.
In Aicha, G-d does the same thing to the Jews. They had sinned excessively so G-d responded with Hester Panim. During the Hester Panim period, the Jews' enemies attacked, the Beit Hamikdash was destroyed, and mothers were forced to resort to eating their own children. This is what happens when G-d is not watching over us and protecting us. The Gever and Yerushalyim see this and beg for G-d to end the Hester Panim and return to the people. They want to have a relationship with Him because they can now see how much He did for them before He turned away. Now that He is no longer helping and protecting them because of the sins they committed, they are suffering.
What I learn from all of this is that G-d makes small miracles for us everyday. He is constantly protecting us and guiding us through our everyday lives. When He turns away, we have trouble just surviving. We need to understand this so we have reason to thank G-d everyday in our tefillot and do what we can to keep a close relationship with Him so He never has a reason to hide His face from us again.
Back when I was in class, we talked a lot about Hester Panim. During the destruction, both the Gever and Yerushalayim are angry with G-d. He will not listen to them. He is shutting out their prayers. There is no one to guide them, the pain and destruction seems arbitrary, and there is no escape from the suffering. Basically, life is pretty bad at this point. G-d is of no help to them and they can't understand why. After some soul searching, they both realize that they have sinned and this is all punishment for what they have done. Both Yerushalayim and the Gever see that there is still hope for their relationship with G-d and begin trying to reconnect with Him. The never restates his experiences at the end of perk gimmel, but this time accepts responsibility for what he did and wants G-d to be merciful. He begs G-d to end the hester panim and punish his enemies. Even Yerushalayim comes back to G-d after the Mekonan tells her to cry out to Him. They both want that relationship back that has been lost to them since G-d began hiding His face.
When we think of Hester Panim today, we commonly associate it with the Holocaust. One of the main theories of why the Holocaust occurred is because the Jews were sinning so G-d hid His face from us and allowed the world to continue on without His influence. He did not help us and that is why the Germans were able to do what they did. If you believe in that cause, then you can see how we should truly appreciate what G-d does for us everyday. If without His help and guidance, we would be vulnerable to that type of horror, then it must be that G-d does incredible things for us everyday without us even realizing it. Thats why it's so important that we daven and thank Him and maintain a close relationship with Him.
In Aicha, G-d does the same thing to the Jews. They had sinned excessively so G-d responded with Hester Panim. During the Hester Panim period, the Jews' enemies attacked, the Beit Hamikdash was destroyed, and mothers were forced to resort to eating their own children. This is what happens when G-d is not watching over us and protecting us. The Gever and Yerushalyim see this and beg for G-d to end the Hester Panim and return to the people. They want to have a relationship with Him because they can now see how much He did for them before He turned away. Now that He is no longer helping and protecting them because of the sins they committed, they are suffering.
What I learn from all of this is that G-d makes small miracles for us everyday. He is constantly protecting us and guiding us through our everyday lives. When He turns away, we have trouble just surviving. We need to understand this so we have reason to thank G-d everyday in our tefillot and do what we can to keep a close relationship with Him so He never has a reason to hide His face from us again.
Foreshadowing From the Very First
I was going through my notes to do my איכה assessment and I realized something:
There has been foreshadowing since the very first פסוק that ירושלים has lost her connection with 'ה and that she will eventually want to get it back. It's pretty obvious that this would be true even without explicitly pointing it out, but the פסוקים do.
Pasuk Alef says "..עָם הָיְתָה כְּאַלְמָנָה רַבָּתִי בַגּוֹיִם..."- "... [she] is like a widow. She that was great among the nations..." We said that in Judaism, it’s like ‘ה is married to the Jewish people. ירושלים is like a widow in the sense the G-d is no longer connected to her, even though she is not actually a widow. It’s foreshadowing for the time later on when ירושלים will be ready to re-establish her connection with ‘ה- the one she has lost, but will desperately want to get back.
There has been foreshadowing since the very first פסוק that ירושלים has lost her connection with 'ה and that she will eventually want to get it back. It's pretty obvious that this would be true even without explicitly pointing it out, but the פסוקים do.
Pasuk Alef says "..עָם הָיְתָה כְּאַלְמָנָה רַבָּתִי בַגּוֹיִם..."- "... [she] is like a widow. She that was great among the nations..." We said that in Judaism, it’s like ‘ה is married to the Jewish people. ירושלים is like a widow in the sense the G-d is no longer connected to her, even though she is not actually a widow. It’s foreshadowing for the time later on when ירושלים will be ready to re-establish her connection with ‘ה- the one she has lost, but will desperately want to get back.
Sunday, February 16, 2014
"In The Blink of an Eye"
Let's take a step back and look at how much we have accomplished in our class already. We learned about Shlomo and his role as Kohelet. He found the meaning of life in a contemplation that was composed of 12 chapters. Kohelet taught us that if we recognize that God is all-knowing and all-powerful, we can have a very meaningful life. We learn that there is something that higher than us, and when He gives us a gift, we don't throw it away because it was taken advantage of. A few weeks ago, we started the second book in Megillot, Eicha. Eicha is a sad book because it reminisces on the destruction of our dear city, Jerusalem in 5 short chapters. We started and finished it "in the blink of an eye."
I think that we can learn something about this phrase in the context of these two books. Kohelet talks about finding the meaning of life, but it starts out with Shlomo's dream in Givon, when he asked God for the ability to judge fairly between right and wrong. Because Shlomo asked for these wise things, Hashem gave him much more which included money, prosperity, and respect from the world around him. When Shlomo acquired all of these things, he wasted them and that is what led him to search for the meaning in life. After he lost everything, everything around him became "hevel." How long did it take Shlomo to lose all of his riches? He lost them in "the blink of an eye." From this we have to learn that when we are given gifts, either from God or a person around us, we must handle them well, not take advantage of them, and not let them disappear like Shlomo's did "in the blink of an eye."
Eicha was a "blink of an eye" in and of itself. It is so short, and I think we can learn a lot from the fact that the book itself is physically short, and the destruction and sadness described within the book. Why did the destruction come about in the first place, is the first question that we must ask ourselves? It came about because of the people's sins. The leaders (including Shlomo) influenced the people with his sins, which caused the people to sin beyond belief. I can't even count how many times in Tanach, B'nei Yisrael are told that if they sin they will be IMMEDIATELY punished. When the Jews sinned, they were given a warning by Yirmiyahu, but they didn't listen causing Hashem to go ahead with his original plan and punish the people. Once the people sinned, they and Jerusalem were punished "in the blink of an eye." We are explained the immense sadness of Jerusalem (as a people) in the book of Eicha. It is so short though. Jerusalem was destroyed in the blink of an eye, and from this we can learn that if we sin as the people back then did, destruction to us could come "in the blink of an eye."
How do you think these two books relate to this phrase? Do you agree or disagree with what I said? Do you think we will be able to apply this concept in the next three books of Megillot that we are going to learn?
It takes more than just one step.
This week we learned what seems to be the epilogue of Eicha. I love the way ירמיהו ends the megillah. I think it is a great way to finish expressing his feelings. He exclaims that G0d has punished them and rejected their prayers and has made his point. So why does he continue to punish?
G0d is seen as a father figure to us. When a parent punishes their child, they punish, but they do not hold grudges. They punish, teach them the lesson, and then get on with loving their child the same way they did before he did wrong. Why would you continue punishing them if they get what they did wrong and have nothing else to learn.
Yes, the Jews did admit that what they did was wrong. But maybe, they still have more to learn about their sins. Taking responsibility is just one step to fixing your mistake. Understanding what you can do the next time to avoid sinning again is a step closer to G0d's forgiveness. This I think was what the Jews lacked in their progress for being forgotten.
This is a wonderful lesson that we can try to incorporate into our lives. It is easy to recognize all of the sins we do. But it is harder to prevent them for next time. We need to be productive, so that we do not sin again.
G0d is seen as a father figure to us. When a parent punishes their child, they punish, but they do not hold grudges. They punish, teach them the lesson, and then get on with loving their child the same way they did before he did wrong. Why would you continue punishing them if they get what they did wrong and have nothing else to learn.
Yes, the Jews did admit that what they did was wrong. But maybe, they still have more to learn about their sins. Taking responsibility is just one step to fixing your mistake. Understanding what you can do the next time to avoid sinning again is a step closer to G0d's forgiveness. This I think was what the Jews lacked in their progress for being forgotten.
This is a wonderful lesson that we can try to incorporate into our lives. It is easy to recognize all of the sins we do. But it is harder to prevent them for next time. We need to be productive, so that we do not sin again.
5 Things Happened on Tisha B'av
Jamie has my notes, so I decided to turn to my handy-dandy Bronfman source-book to look for something related to Tisha B'av. On the subject of Bronfman, before I go into my central post, I would like to share with you all how I spent my past Tisha B'av. Here's an excerpt from my journal I wrote on July 16, 2013 (Tisha B'av):
"...we went to a place overlooking the old city and read Eicha. It's kind of crazy how I've never gone and heard Eicha before... It seems like a pretty interesting book. Before reading Eicha we had a discussion about history v. memory and about 5 different ways of looking at Tisha B'av. It was a pretty neat discussion. .."
Okay, so that wasn't too insightful. I don't really remember the whole conversation exactly, but it was all about what matters more: what actually happened or how we remember what happened? What do you think? Eicha isn't a historical recounting of what happening. It's all about Yerushalayim's reaction to what happened. Seeing as how Eicha is the text we read every Tisha B'av, does that mean that it matters more how we feel about what happens? From a psychological perspective, I would also make the argument that one's appraisal of a situation is more forceful than the event itself. Thoughts? Another cool thing to note about Tisha B'av this summer is that Jews who hadn't even heard of Tisha B'av before- better yet fasted on it- were mixed together with Jews who had been fasting since they were young and fasted that year for the first time. One of the messages of Eicha is that we have a stronger voice when we speak as one, large, connected community. Looking back, I realize the significance of a pluralistic group of Jewish youth celebrating Tisha Ba'av together and reading Eicha on the grass overlooking to kotel. This is Tisha B'av as it should be. Anyways, I digress..
Maimonides, in the Mishne Torah halacha gimel, states that there are 5 things that happened on Tisha B'av. First, this was when "it was decreed upon Israel in the desert that they would not enter the Land." Then the Temple was destroyed on this date twice. 4- This was the date that the large city of Betar, in which there were thousands of Israelites, was captured by the romans ("and there was great sorrow like the destruction of the Temple"). Lastly, on that very day, "the evil Tornosrofos ploughed up the Tmeple and its surrounding area in order to fulfill the verse, 'and Zion will be ploughed as a field.'" Why are so many bad things happening on this ill-fated date? We're not supposed to believe in 'cursed dates' (I think...), but this sure does seemed like a doomed date, don't you think? Do you think there is added significance to Tisha B'av that so many different things happened on this one date?
For me, Tisha B'av is as much about looking towards the future as it is reflecting about the past. The past is done, and there's nothing more we can do about it. Are we really mourning the loss of the Temple on Tisha B'av? Or are we thinking about our past mistakes as a nation and wondering how we will be better this time around? How do you make your Tisha B'av meaningful?
Friday, February 14, 2014
This week we learned about ירושלים's collective plea involving the community. She complains about all the corruption that she sees. She provides a couple examples to express her desperation. She says "We are pursued on our necks; we toil but it does not remain with us." We work so hard, but we don't obtain the benefits that come with it. She is implying that this is how G0d is punishing her.
This sounds extremely familiar to me. It reminds me of the Amal who has a very similar philosophy. He says that there is no benefit in working because in the end we die, and we don't bring any of it with us. Therefore, we don't have any benefits that come with all of our backbreaking work. We are like slaves.
What is the point in all our toil if we don't get the benefits? This type of attitude, I feel, is a very selfish one. If they thought about other people, they would know that their work affects the future people that are going to come into the world. When someone participates positively in the world, they are making the world a better place for someone else. Isn't this worth all of the work that we do? Making the world better for the next generation is a great thing.
This sounds extremely familiar to me. It reminds me of the Amal who has a very similar philosophy. He says that there is no benefit in working because in the end we die, and we don't bring any of it with us. Therefore, we don't have any benefits that come with all of our backbreaking work. We are like slaves.
What is the point in all our toil if we don't get the benefits? This type of attitude, I feel, is a very selfish one. If they thought about other people, they would know that their work affects the future people that are going to come into the world. When someone participates positively in the world, they are making the world a better place for someone else. Isn't this worth all of the work that we do? Making the world better for the next generation is a great thing.
Why Tisha B'Av?
This week, we finally finished Eicha. It's been a shorter journey than the journey we went on for Kohelet, but it also proved to be quite meaningful. We talked at length about the chiastic structure of the sefer, or the fact that perakim א and ה correspond and perakim ב and ד correspond, leaving perek ג at the epicenter of the sefer. We also talked about how the מקונן and ירושלים go through their own responses to the tragedy. Perek ג is unique in that it is told from the point of view of the גבר, or the universal man. We've talked at length about what this might mean. In the end, I think we agreed he is the archetypical man whose response to trauma is a process that every person who moves on after a tragedy must go through. By the end of perek ה, the גבר and ירושלים all gained a renewed perspective and desired to come back to G-d and for G-d to return to them. We also talked about why we read this sefer on Tisha B'Av and why people are actually crying on that day. We said that we're crying because of the lost relationship and reading this sefer at that time gives us hope and motivation to work on restoring the relationship.
Now that the Sefer's over, I feel like I can reasonably reflect on everything that's been thought here. The process and the steps that people must take to overcome tragedy are difficult, but in the end, you come out with a new perspective and a path forward. That's a somewhat removed explanation though. In the specific case of Yerushalaim, the people went through a horrible destruction because of their sins. Once they came to terms with their own sin and the fact that G-d also brings forth the good things in life, they were able to ask -- as a community -- for G-d to return to them so that the relationship could be restored.
When we talked about the Gever, we talked about how he was the individual person, not a community. When we talked about Yerushalaim for the first few perakim, we said that she was also an individual. When Yerushalaim realized that the problem was bigger than herself, she transformed into the communal Yerushalaim. At that point, she was able to ask G-d to return to the people because G-d promised never to destroy Am Yisrael again. This makes sense in the context of the generation that lived during the time of the Churban. Now, I'd like to suggest that the communal Yerushalaim applies to all Jews, regardless of time or place (post-Churban).
This past summer, while I was on NCSY GIVE, we were taken to the Kotel to daven mincha on Tisha B'Av. I'd heard some talk about how some summer programs don't bring their kids to the Kotel because it turns into a major social scene. Throughout the day of Tisha B'Av, I attended many unsettling and saddening programs about all of the horrible things that had happened on that day in history. Then, as soon as the announcement came through that we were going to the Kotel, I felt a jolt of energy. After nearly a day of fasting, I was suddenly energetic and extremely happy. Happy on Tisha B'Av -- what? When we got to the Kotel, actually before we even approached the Kotel itself, it felt like we were actually going to the Beit Hamikdash. The plaza was completely filled with Jews of all different varieties. Those who were there will understand the power of thousands of voices singing Zemiros as Tisha B'Av was ending. Yes, there was a lot of socializing happening, but the spiritual power of being in that place at that time was truly incredible. At that moment, I felt like Am Yisrael, all of us, were taking steps towards returning to G-d, just as Yerushalaim had wished. Of course, the ideal relationship with G-d isn't dependent on a place or a building. However, that inspirational moment really showed me that there is hope for us to restore our relationship with G-d to what it was in Gan Eden.
Now that the Sefer's over, I feel like I can reasonably reflect on everything that's been thought here. The process and the steps that people must take to overcome tragedy are difficult, but in the end, you come out with a new perspective and a path forward. That's a somewhat removed explanation though. In the specific case of Yerushalaim, the people went through a horrible destruction because of their sins. Once they came to terms with their own sin and the fact that G-d also brings forth the good things in life, they were able to ask -- as a community -- for G-d to return to them so that the relationship could be restored.
When we talked about the Gever, we talked about how he was the individual person, not a community. When we talked about Yerushalaim for the first few perakim, we said that she was also an individual. When Yerushalaim realized that the problem was bigger than herself, she transformed into the communal Yerushalaim. At that point, she was able to ask G-d to return to the people because G-d promised never to destroy Am Yisrael again. This makes sense in the context of the generation that lived during the time of the Churban. Now, I'd like to suggest that the communal Yerushalaim applies to all Jews, regardless of time or place (post-Churban).
This past summer, while I was on NCSY GIVE, we were taken to the Kotel to daven mincha on Tisha B'Av. I'd heard some talk about how some summer programs don't bring their kids to the Kotel because it turns into a major social scene. Throughout the day of Tisha B'Av, I attended many unsettling and saddening programs about all of the horrible things that had happened on that day in history. Then, as soon as the announcement came through that we were going to the Kotel, I felt a jolt of energy. After nearly a day of fasting, I was suddenly energetic and extremely happy. Happy on Tisha B'Av -- what? When we got to the Kotel, actually before we even approached the Kotel itself, it felt like we were actually going to the Beit Hamikdash. The plaza was completely filled with Jews of all different varieties. Those who were there will understand the power of thousands of voices singing Zemiros as Tisha B'Av was ending. Yes, there was a lot of socializing happening, but the spiritual power of being in that place at that time was truly incredible. At that moment, I felt like Am Yisrael, all of us, were taking steps towards returning to G-d, just as Yerushalaim had wished. Of course, the ideal relationship with G-d isn't dependent on a place or a building. However, that inspirational moment really showed me that there is hope for us to restore our relationship with G-d to what it was in Gan Eden.
To Am Yisrael: Cry no more.
Thursday, February 13, 2014
Yerushalyaim: A Changed Perspective
My friends, we have finished Eicha. Ya-hoo! I thought I would discuss the last perek, Perek 5, and try to compare some of the ideas within Eicha to the modern world; so, let's begin. In Perek 5, the collective Yerushalayim is speaking, which shows that even during "hester panim" G-d still pays attention to the community. Yerushalyaim begins by pleading with G-d to look at US, thus embarking on step one towards reconnecting with G-d as a community. Then, she creates a "laundry list" of what occurred. There is no land, no houses, the children are orphans, there is a need to pay for natural resources, we are like servants, and we are paying for the sins of our fathers. We are starving, the women and maidens are afflicted, and the elders aren't at the gates. But you know why it happened? Because WE sinned. Yerushalayim comes to the recognition that she has sinned.
In section two (17-22), the epilogue is composed. "We were crying, Yerushalayim says, "Har Tzion was desolate, the Beit Hamikdash was destroyed, and the relationship with Hashem is gone." Can we mend our relationship? Maybe start over? Yerushalayim is upset because her relationship with G-d is no longer visible, but she is cool, calm, and collective about it, moving on from the emotional role she took in Perek Aleph. And this translates into why we read Eicha on Tisha B'av, because we are losing our relationship with Hashem.
Since we have been referring/comparing Hashem and Yerushalyaim to parent and child, I thought this quote by beloved author J.K. Rowling was most suiting for the occasion. “There is an expiry date on blaming your parents for steering you in the wrong direction; the moment you are old enough to take the wheel, responsibility lies with you.” Up until the end of the Sefer (beginning with Perek 4), Yerushalyaim blamed Hashem for everything that she had endured. It kind of reminded me of the ambivalent attachment we learned about in AP Psychology. When Hashem tried to get the people to repent so many times, Yerushalayim ignored Him, and rejected the second chance that was presented to her in the clearest of manners. However, when Hashem hid His face in what is known as "hester panim," Yerushalyaim exhibited extreme signs of distress.
However, in Perek 4, Yerushalayim realizes that her suffering was a result of her sins; she needed to stop accusing G-d. Therefore, she was able to embark on a transformational journey with a whole new perspective, as she's willing to accept the blame for her actions. In Perek 5, she realizes she needs the connection between her and Hashem to be repaired, as she feels extremely lonely. Yerushalyaim did what we often do, took her connection to Hashem for granted. And like us, she didn't realize she missed something until it was taken from her. It seems that Yerushalyaim has lost the opportunity for an instant connection; she needs to work to deserve it, and this means accepting the fact that she sinned and beginning the process of repentance.
Even though Eicha was somewhat of a more dismal Sefer, I think it really conveyed many powerful lessons regarding our relationship with G-d that can really be translated into our modern life. What do you think was the most important message found in Eicha?
Wednesday, February 12, 2014
A New Perspective
In perek 4, we hear about the whole destruction in a new perspective. In the past few perakim, we heard about the destruction in an angry way. G-d was angry at the leaders, the people sinned, the enemies betrayed, Yerushalaim is angry with G-d. it was all about pain and destruction and anger. It was a rant on the destruction about how horrible G-d is and how He just released His wrath on the people. So far we have gone through the sadness, the anger and blame, the depression, finally the re-evaluation of the event, and now we are going to get to the new perspective.
In the first section of this perek, 1-10, it compares the before and after of the situation of the people. He starts off by saying the children used to be such golden people and now, look at them and see what they have become. The people who were once glorious are now cruel because the mothers are not feeding their children and they used to be so rich and now they are hunting in the garbage looking for food that they can eat. The narrator does mention the sins of the people. He says that the sins are even greater than the sins of the people in Sedom were. He recognizes that the causes of the starving children are all because of the sins. Things have become so bad to where the hands of the women who had once been so merciful, are now boiling their children to eat. The difference in the description of the starving children now is that he realizes that this is all happening because of the people sinning.
In the next section, 11-22, it talks about G-d's anger. This part of the perek starts strong in describing G-d's anger. it says that G-d's anger was great. People didn't believe that another nation could come and attack Yerushalaim. The sins of the leaders is what caused G-d to have to let the enemies come and attack. People are described as blind people who stumble through the streets. Other nations are calling them impure. The Kohanim allow the people to come into the Beit Hamikdash even when they are spiritually impure. The Neviim were supposed to be helping them see, but they were being false prophets who were not getting them to see. They were looking to other nations instead of G-d. The nations that they looked to for help, attacked them.
The narrator finishes up this section in a very odd way. He ends this section off with a sign of hope, that maybe it will get better in the future. In this section the narrator says Bat Zion's punishment for sin is drawing to an end and the enemies sins will soon be recognized. This gives hope that it will get better and the enemies will be punished. Many times in the other perakim there is a call out for G-d to punish the enemies and for this destruction to end.
Perek 2 and 4 are very similar in the way that they describe the destruction, but also very different in their view of the destruction. In perek 4 there is a whole new perspective. The perspective is that everything that has happened is all because of the people and the leaders sinning. I think that finally since it was realized and fully said that it is understood that this is all happening because of G-d gave him the hope. I think that maybe the reason he is finally saying that the enemies will soon be punished is because of this new found hope. I think that all he needed was to show that he truly knows that it was his sins that are causing this and to reach out to G-d for the help that will get G-d to answer him and help by punishing the enemies too.
In the first section of this perek, 1-10, it compares the before and after of the situation of the people. He starts off by saying the children used to be such golden people and now, look at them and see what they have become. The people who were once glorious are now cruel because the mothers are not feeding their children and they used to be so rich and now they are hunting in the garbage looking for food that they can eat. The narrator does mention the sins of the people. He says that the sins are even greater than the sins of the people in Sedom were. He recognizes that the causes of the starving children are all because of the sins. Things have become so bad to where the hands of the women who had once been so merciful, are now boiling their children to eat. The difference in the description of the starving children now is that he realizes that this is all happening because of the people sinning.
In the next section, 11-22, it talks about G-d's anger. This part of the perek starts strong in describing G-d's anger. it says that G-d's anger was great. People didn't believe that another nation could come and attack Yerushalaim. The sins of the leaders is what caused G-d to have to let the enemies come and attack. People are described as blind people who stumble through the streets. Other nations are calling them impure. The Kohanim allow the people to come into the Beit Hamikdash even when they are spiritually impure. The Neviim were supposed to be helping them see, but they were being false prophets who were not getting them to see. They were looking to other nations instead of G-d. The nations that they looked to for help, attacked them.
The narrator finishes up this section in a very odd way. He ends this section off with a sign of hope, that maybe it will get better in the future. In this section the narrator says Bat Zion's punishment for sin is drawing to an end and the enemies sins will soon be recognized. This gives hope that it will get better and the enemies will be punished. Many times in the other perakim there is a call out for G-d to punish the enemies and for this destruction to end.
Perek 2 and 4 are very similar in the way that they describe the destruction, but also very different in their view of the destruction. In perek 4 there is a whole new perspective. The perspective is that everything that has happened is all because of the people and the leaders sinning. I think that finally since it was realized and fully said that it is understood that this is all happening because of G-d gave him the hope. I think that maybe the reason he is finally saying that the enemies will soon be punished is because of this new found hope. I think that all he needed was to show that he truly knows that it was his sins that are causing this and to reach out to G-d for the help that will get G-d to answer him and help by punishing the enemies too.
Perek gimmel
IN the beginning of this perek, he is having trouble with all of the difficulties he is going through. As he continues through this hard journey he keeps on having a bad and frustrating time. He thinks about how Hashem is doing this on purpose or for some specific reason. He keeps on going through this adventure and is starting to give up and not try anymore. Later he goes on and thinks that G-d is actually just trying to help and strengthen the relationship between them. He now thinks that G-d is trying to help this relationship and they will become closer.
Monday, February 10, 2014
Going back to Kohelet for a minute...
Going back to Kohelet for a minute because I just had to throw this out there:
I was watching Youtube videos and found a series called "World's Strictest Parents" in which rebellious British teens go to different places around the world to spend a week with a family and, hopefully, change their outlook on life.
Anyway, I was amazed and also kinda taken aback by the attitudes and perspectives most of the kids have at the beginning. They're all about partying and getting drunk and/or high, most of them have dropped out of school, and one girl even said something along the lines of "I don't tend to think about the future. What if I die tomorrow? Just live for now."
It made me think of the נהנה once he became a hardcore hedonist. I wasn't surprised so much by the fact that people do have this viewpoint on life as I was by the fact that so many had it. We kept saying when we were working on Kohelet that most of the world is a mixture of the נהנה and the חכם, but I didn't quite realize how much that is... It's really hard to wrap my head around!
I was watching Youtube videos and found a series called "World's Strictest Parents" in which rebellious British teens go to different places around the world to spend a week with a family and, hopefully, change their outlook on life.
Anyway, I was amazed and also kinda taken aback by the attitudes and perspectives most of the kids have at the beginning. They're all about partying and getting drunk and/or high, most of them have dropped out of school, and one girl even said something along the lines of "I don't tend to think about the future. What if I die tomorrow? Just live for now."
It made me think of the נהנה once he became a hardcore hedonist. I wasn't surprised so much by the fact that people do have this viewpoint on life as I was by the fact that so many had it. We kept saying when we were working on Kohelet that most of the world is a mixture of the נהנה and the חכם, but I didn't quite realize how much that is... It's really hard to wrap my head around!
lalalalallalalal I'm bad at titles
In Perek 2, the blame was on G-d. G-d was portrayed as being cruel, unjust, and irrational for destroying Yerushalayim, the Beit Hamikdash, and especially the people. In Perek 4, the Gever seems to be calming down considerably and taking a look at the bigger picture.
He begins to realize that in reality, the people were to blame. He understands that the sins of the people are what caused G-d to destroy and punish. He even states that the sins of the people were worse than the sins of the people of Sodom. He says that the prophets and the priests were the ones who led the people astray and the Kohanim were the ones who failed to do their jobs as religious leaders and caused the people to become impure.
In the end, the Gever mentions how they turned toward their enemies for help but they instead attacked them. The last two pessukim end off with a glimmer of hope: the punishment of the people will end and the enemies who attacked them will be punished one day. This leaves me with a question. How can the enemies who attacked truly be held accountable for attacking? Wasn't it just G-d's method of punishing the people?
This starts to get into the whole free will debate. Are the attacking nations responsible for their actions? Or is it simply G-d using these nations as a means of carrying out his punishment?
Thoughts, friends? Hit me!
He begins to realize that in reality, the people were to blame. He understands that the sins of the people are what caused G-d to destroy and punish. He even states that the sins of the people were worse than the sins of the people of Sodom. He says that the prophets and the priests were the ones who led the people astray and the Kohanim were the ones who failed to do their jobs as religious leaders and caused the people to become impure.
In the end, the Gever mentions how they turned toward their enemies for help but they instead attacked them. The last two pessukim end off with a glimmer of hope: the punishment of the people will end and the enemies who attacked them will be punished one day. This leaves me with a question. How can the enemies who attacked truly be held accountable for attacking? Wasn't it just G-d's method of punishing the people?
This starts to get into the whole free will debate. Are the attacking nations responsible for their actions? Or is it simply G-d using these nations as a means of carrying out his punishment?
Thoughts, friends? Hit me!
In this past week the people are sinning because of the prophets. The mothers and everyone were being very disturbing which led to some tragic moments. These moments were so disturbing that the mother's physically ate the children. These people have turned to bad and have transformed the way of living. Everything is disturbing and the environment is not pleasant. We go on and as the people sin it is because of anger. This brings us to a conclusion that this is out of control and everything ids going downhill. This story is very similar to situations including strikes, debates, and problems. When one of these situations occurs it has a pattern of usually ending in fighting, strikes , or even destruction.
Sunday, February 9, 2014
What happened so far.
In Perek א we see that their is sadness, and loneliness. In Perek ב there is anger, and blame on G-d. In
Perek Gimmel their is blame on the people. Now in Perek Daled we see that G-d is very angry about something. In Pasuk יג It says that the priests and the prophets caused the people to sin. G-d's anger is justified.
The mother's are now cruel, because they are with holding food from their children Since their so poor.
The people used to to be wealthy and are now living in poverty. Shows how immoral and poor they become.
The Perek ends off with a glimmer of hope, and the punishment of the people has finished and the enemies who attacked will one day be punished.
The similarities of Perek ד and Perek ב
Perek ב and Perek ד are very similar.
In Perek ב, It's all about blaming G-d. It implies that the anger is unjust and is misdirected. In Perek ד it recognizes that the people were to blame. The first section of Perek ד compared to the second half of Perek ב are similar because they both talk about her children. In pasuk ג the mother's become cruel, just like in perek ב, when the yirushalim says that G-d was angry, and let them become unhuman. The children are in the streets hungry clinging to their mothers.
The second section of Perek ד compared to the first half of perek ב are similar because G-d allowed her to be destroyed, because he was angry and caused that to happen. It also talks about the false vision of her prophets, how the other nations mock her.
In perek ד The yirushaliam was destroyed because of her sins and in Perek ב they didn't add that.
The themes that can be found in both prakim is that it's describing the hunger. It's also describing the exile and the destruction of the nation. G-d was angry so he caused this all.
In perek ב the blame is all on G-d, and in pasuk ו of Perek ד, the realization is that it's because the sins of the people that were worse then the people of סדם.
Breaking News: Bieber Deported for Haughtiness
This week we hopped on the road of perek daled in Eicha and learned about how people are finally coming to terms with the fact they sinned, and that is why God destroyed them and Yerushalayim. While it great that B'nei Yisrael has realized their destruction come from their sins, I want to focus on the aspect of the leaders causing them to sin the first place.
Though the people did sin on their own and it was between them and God in the end, the leaders were the ones who became corrupt and influenced them to sin in the first place. They were placing bamot and idols in the Beit HaMikdash, worshipping avodah zara, and oppressing their people as a whole. The leaders were the core source of the people's in, and that shows us that no matter how famous or powerful someone is, they are not always the best to lead a people.
I would like to take a step back from Eicha specifically, and focus on one specific celebrity in our society today who started off as innocent leaders and role models, but have now ended up in a pit of trouble.
The first is Justin Bieber. I remember the days when I worshipped the Bieber. He was role model for coming musicians and showed the general public that you don't have to come from a previously famous family to succeed and become and role model for people around the world. Once Bieber, acquired all the women, wealth, and influence, he went downhill and got haughty. In recent news, Bieber was deported back to Canada.
We must be careful of how we handle our power and the influence it has on our leadership skills and abilities. We must not act like the leaders back then and Justin Bieber now.
Though the people did sin on their own and it was between them and God in the end, the leaders were the ones who became corrupt and influenced them to sin in the first place. They were placing bamot and idols in the Beit HaMikdash, worshipping avodah zara, and oppressing their people as a whole. The leaders were the core source of the people's in, and that shows us that no matter how famous or powerful someone is, they are not always the best to lead a people.
I would like to take a step back from Eicha specifically, and focus on one specific celebrity in our society today who started off as innocent leaders and role models, but have now ended up in a pit of trouble.
The first is Justin Bieber. I remember the days when I worshipped the Bieber. He was role model for coming musicians and showed the general public that you don't have to come from a previously famous family to succeed and become and role model for people around the world. Once Bieber, acquired all the women, wealth, and influence, he went downhill and got haughty. In recent news, Bieber was deported back to Canada.
We must be careful of how we handle our power and the influence it has on our leadership skills and abilities. We must not act like the leaders back then and Justin Bieber now.
This past week, we learned (in Perek Daled) that G-d was very angry and then explains the rational explanation for the anger. It says the sins of the prophets and priests caused the people to sin. The mothers became cruel and immoral. They people who were used to living in wealth are now living in poverty. There is a glimmer of hope.
We then compared Perek Daled with Perek Bet. They both talk about the pain of the children and how they are being eaten by their mothers. This is because of the poverty which they also both discuss. In Perek Bet, it says that this is because of G-d, whose anger is unjust and irrational. In Perek Daled, it says that it is because of the people's sins so the anger was justified.
We then compared Perek Daled with Perek Bet. They both talk about the pain of the children and how they are being eaten by their mothers. This is because of the poverty which they also both discuss. In Perek Bet, it says that this is because of G-d, whose anger is unjust and irrational. In Perek Daled, it says that it is because of the people's sins so the anger was justified.
"Hakuna Matata"
This past week, we learned the last bit Perek ג and made some substantial headway in Perek ד. As we learned more about the Gever and his epiphany, we emphasized the point that the Gever can represent the universal man and the cycle that the Gever goes through is the universal cycle of response to trauma. In order to move on, you have to get a new perspective on what's happened and reassess everything. We see this in Eicha: once the Gever comes to terms with the fact that the sin has happened because he sinned, he can move on. In the Perek ד, the מקונן and ירושלים attempt to do the same.
There's one quote from the Lion King that instantly came to mind when we learned this in class. If you know well or have been around me when I'm really stressed or frazzled, you might have heard me say this before.
There's one quote from the Lion King that instantly came to mind when we learned this in class. If you know well or have been around me when I'm really stressed or frazzled, you might have heard me say this before.
"Put your past in your behind." - Timone
So this line is good for laughs for the kids. That's definitely a big part of it. It's also a pretty absurd statement. What Timone is trying to tell Simba here is that he has to put his past behind him. In essence, Timone is trying to help Simba gain a new perspective on why and how his father was killed. Now that he has this new perspective, he can move on and enjoy life with Timone and Pumba. Yes, I understand that this is totally fictitious and that it's unreasonable to think that the solution to a trauma/tragedy is to go live with Timone and Pumba is a bug-filled "Hakuna Matata" paradise.
Let's go back to that point: Hakuna Matata. Isn't that the ultimate goal here? Once we have that epiphany and re-evaluate everything, we can move on. But no worries? In my opinion, this is the ultimate goal in dealing with a tragedy. Once you move on, you don't worry about the past anymore; you just take what you learned and keep on living.
What do you guys think? Is "Hakuna Matata" possible, plausible, or ideal?
For your viewing pleasure, here's the song.
Take the Blame
It is crazy to me that we are almost done with Eicha. We are already in Perek 4, and although the Megillah is not that long, I have already seen some major development throughout the Megillah. In class we constantly talk about the stages a person faces after they experience trauma. Although I am not going to go into each stage they go through after a hardship, the general idea is that at first they are usually stuck and as time goes on they learn how to cope, but before they learn to do so, they go through anger, blame, sorrow, etc. Once they are done with all of that, then they continue to develop. The reason why I am talking about this is because the characters of Eicha experience each step and I have seen them develop so far.
In this perek, unclear who the speaker is, either the Mekonen or Yerushalayim starts to develop a little further. In perek daled passuk vuv, we see the development take place.
ו. וַיִּגְדַּל עֲוֹן בַּת עַמִּי מֵחַטַּאת סְדֹם הַהֲפוּכָה כְמוֹ רָגַע וְלֹא חָלוּ בָהּ יָדָיִם
" The iniquity of my people is greater than the sin of Sodom, which was overthrown as in a moment, and no hands fell on her."
This shows the change of thought in the speaker. They start to see that the destruction was brought because the sins of the people. The people's sins were bigger than the sins of the people in Sidom.
In Perek bet G-d is blamed for the destruction, but two perekim later, we see that the viewpoint has changed. Not holding G-d responsible for the suffering, he or she sees it is the people's fault.
To me, I see the sense of transformation in the character. I think it really relates to the stages one faces after they experience trauma like I talked about in the beginning of my blogpost. I also see this as a sense of growing up and maturing.
The beginning of the perek speaks to me personally. When I was younger, and I still do now sometimes but I am trying to work on it, when certain situations would happen I would not stand up and take the blame. Maybe I was too scared or maybe I did not think I was responsible for it. As I get older, I am seeing that it is important to take responsibility for your actions and to see the bigger picture. As an example, let's say I get grounded. Instead of blaming my mother for grounding me and being cruel, I realize that I need to own up to my mistakes and realize that it is my responsibility. (This is a fake example.) What I am trying to explain is that just like I have seen the speaker developing, as we are getting older, many of us are learning how to cope with situations on our own too with different veiwpoints. Starting off Eicha, G-d was blamed for the destruction. As time moved on, and the speaker developed, and did not just blame G-d. To wrap up, I thought this quote was very fitting in regard to how a person acts after trauma and how they start to take responsibility for their actions after they mature.
" Your life is the fruit of your own doing. You have no one to blame but yourself."
It Wasn't Me
This week in Megillot we finished up Perek ג and moved on to Perek ד. In the last section of Perek ג, we discussed our final evaluations of the Gever. We found that the Gever changes from speaking as an individual to speaking in plural. It seems he is re-engaging himself in society after a period of depressing isolation. Before, he has been a self-absorbed individual. Now, he ready to rejoin the community- he says, "Let us repent for our misdeeds! You didn't forgive, You didn't treat us with mercy, You were justified in punishing us because we sinned. We appealing to Your mercy and we are asking you to accept our prayers and repentance."
In the last few pasukim of Perek ג, the Gever seems to be discussing his suffering again. However, this time, he goes through his suffering realizing that it was because of his sins, and not because of G-d. He understands that G-d hid His face (הסתר פנים) and it was justified. This can show us that G-d doesn't show His face in exile, but we still need to keep on going while recognizing that G-d does both good and bad.
After finishing Perek ג, we began to discuss Perek ד. We talked about it in comparison with Perek ב, seeing how the descriptions of the children, the starvation, and the situations that caused the people to be immoral differed in the beginnings of both Perakim. In Perek ב, the narrator put the blame G-d for creating such a horrible situation, while in Perek ד, the narrator recognized that the actions of the people were to blame. In the second part of both Perakim, we looked at how the anger of G-d and the destruction of the leaders was portrayed differently. In Perek ב, there was an implication that G-d's anger was unjust and misdirected towards the leader and the Beis Hamikdash. In Perek ד, the narrator recognizes that G-d's anger came about because of the sins of the leaders and the people, and His anger was justified because of their actions.
Realizing and accepting that you are to blame for something is not an easy thing to do. Most of the time, people avoid confronting the fact that they themselves are the cause of their problems and instead find it much easier to put the blame on others. In the last book of the Percy Jackson series, Percy Jackson and the Last Olympian, written by Rick Riordan, all of the horrors that the main characters have had to endure come to end (for now....there's a whole other series!). Luke Castellan, the boy whose body was taken over by the main bad guy, Kronos, realizes that he is the one who is causing everyone's misery and sacrifices himself. This immediately came to mind when I was learning Perek ד, because in both cases, the main character or narrator recognizes that they are the ones to blame. Hopefully in Eicha the Gever won't end up sacrificing himself, but you get the idea.
Do you think it's easy to accept the blame for something that you either did or didn't do?
In the last few pasukim of Perek ג, the Gever seems to be discussing his suffering again. However, this time, he goes through his suffering realizing that it was because of his sins, and not because of G-d. He understands that G-d hid His face (הסתר פנים) and it was justified. This can show us that G-d doesn't show His face in exile, but we still need to keep on going while recognizing that G-d does both good and bad.
After finishing Perek ג, we began to discuss Perek ד. We talked about it in comparison with Perek ב, seeing how the descriptions of the children, the starvation, and the situations that caused the people to be immoral differed in the beginnings of both Perakim. In Perek ב, the narrator put the blame G-d for creating such a horrible situation, while in Perek ד, the narrator recognized that the actions of the people were to blame. In the second part of both Perakim, we looked at how the anger of G-d and the destruction of the leaders was portrayed differently. In Perek ב, there was an implication that G-d's anger was unjust and misdirected towards the leader and the Beis Hamikdash. In Perek ד, the narrator recognizes that G-d's anger came about because of the sins of the leaders and the people, and His anger was justified because of their actions.
Realizing and accepting that you are to blame for something is not an easy thing to do. Most of the time, people avoid confronting the fact that they themselves are the cause of their problems and instead find it much easier to put the blame on others. In the last book of the Percy Jackson series, Percy Jackson and the Last Olympian, written by Rick Riordan, all of the horrors that the main characters have had to endure come to end (for now....there's a whole other series!). Luke Castellan, the boy whose body was taken over by the main bad guy, Kronos, realizes that he is the one who is causing everyone's misery and sacrifices himself. This immediately came to mind when I was learning Perek ד, because in both cases, the main character or narrator recognizes that they are the ones to blame. Hopefully in Eicha the Gever won't end up sacrificing himself, but you get the idea.
Do you think it's easy to accept the blame for something that you either did or didn't do?
This week, Mrs. Perl made an interesting comment that I had never thought about before. She said that Tesha Beav and Eicha are not only about mourning the destruction of Yerushaliam and the Beit Hamikdash, but also about mourning the loss of having a connection to G-d, because the Beit Hamikdash had everyday miracles in it that would remind us of G-d, and showed that He really does exist. Because we don't have the Beit Hamikdash, we are not only mourning the destruction of a building, but we are mourning the destruction of our connection with G-d.
In last weeks Parsha, Trumah, it talked about the building and placement of the mishkan. In class, we watched a video, that pointed out that not only were the Kalim in the Mishkan set up in a way that it looked like a face, but that each of the Kalim's purposes matches up with the part of the face it seems to be placed on.
- The Ahron Kodesh, which is on top, is meant to be the brain. The Ahron contains the two luchot. The connection to the brain, is that we use our brain to understand and learn the torah.
- The Shulchan is meant to be on of the eyes, because it holds the challot, that are just for show. We look at the challot with our eyes.
- The Menorah is meant to be the other eye, because in order to see everything and to see the challot, we need light.
- The Mizbeach Hazahav is meant to be the nose, because we burn incense on this alter, which gives off a smell.
- The Mizbeach for the animals is meant to be the mouth, because you eat the animal afterwards.
This face of the Mishkan gave us a connection to G-d as well. It allowed us to see "His face" and show us that he really is there.
Because we do not have the everyday miracles in the Beit Hamikdash and the "face of Hashem" in the Mishkan, it is really difficult to feel a connection to a G-d that you have never seen. Although it is not for a while, this Tisha Beav I will not only focus on the destruction of the city of Yerushaliam and the destruction of the Beit Hamikdash, but the absence of a connection between us humans and G-d.
Wednesday, February 5, 2014
The גבר ii
Now it is the גבר's turn to speak. He starts off as a self-absorbed individual with suffering that he does not deserve. Everything is arbitrary. He does not mention G0d straight out in this section because he is in denial about Him after this great tragedy. But there is something wrong because the גבר feels like he is being targeted. So if he is being targeted then life is not arbitrary. G0d is cruel. Finally he mentions G0d explicitly and sort of melts away when he hears himself say His name. A switch in his brain flips, and he analyzes the situation further.
In our schedules we have to remember to always think of Hashem in our daily actions. If we don't, our lives are arbitrary. Everything happens randomly, and we cannot find meaning in our daily lives. When we mention G0d in our lives we can see purpose and reasons behind things that may seem arbitrary at first.
There is a reason things happen to you. You may not always be able to understand what sin you did when you got punished. But like the Yirei Elokim says, "You can never know everything."
There is a reason things happen to you. You may not always be able to understand what sin you did when you got punished. But like the Yirei Elokim says, "You can never know everything."
Tuesday, February 4, 2014
Take Control of Your Faith
Is it just me or did Perek 3 turn out to be a pretty swell perek? At the beginning there (during chavruta time) I wasn't too sure about where thins thing wasgoing. Sure, the language was easier to understand than in the other perakim. Yes, there wasn't a lot of scary, destructive imagery (baruch Hashem). Still, it was odd at first glance! When we were studying it in chavrutot, it seemed like there was this random 'Gever' person who had an unstable relationship with God. My group assumed he spent the beginning part kvetching about how much God hated him and how much he hated God, and then out of the blue he switched his mind and decided to become best friends with God. I didn't see how this was significant to the development of the sefer, and I definitely saw no connection between this perek and my life in general. What was your initial reaction to the Perek?
Aha! Once we began studying in-class, slowly the pieces began meshing together. The Gever is this universal man, and his story of transformation teaches us a valuable lesson for our spiritual lives. He starts off as this self-absorbed dude who's angry because his tefillah is being shut out. He feels as though the world is arbitrary because there is no escaping his terrible affliction. The implication here is that there can't be any God. How could there possibly be a god if I'm suffering so much for no good reason? Oh.. the age old question. Any suggestions are welcome! About 12 pessukim into the perek, he veers away from the 'there's no god' philosophy and ventures into the 'I'm being targeted by God' one. Now there's a God at least, but it's not a very nice God. Actually, it's a very mean God- this god is cruel. As we've mentioned (in class and in blogs), though, once the Gever opens up the whole 'God' thing (as in, he admits there there is a god, albeit an angry one), he begins feeling more complex emotions. (Hey! Women express complex emotions! Maybe it should have been a geveret.. #psych.)
 |
| It's not a Peanuts, but I thought it was funny. |
Now it all starts to open up. First he implies that there is a possibility that his relationship with God is fixable. Then he gets even more logical: he realizes that the good and the bad come from God,and God doesn't punish from spite. The only logical conclusion, then,to explain his sorrows is that he did something wrong. Look how mature our little Gever is getting! He's almost all growed up! Do you believe that most of the times 'bad' happens to you, it is because you did something wrong? Towards the end, the Gever takes a giant step and rejoins the community. He stops talking about 'I' and 'me' and enters into the realm of 'we' and 'us'. He acknowledges the sin and makes it clear that they want to have a relationship with God. In the last section, he goes back to speaking in the singular, but now it's from a different perspective. He's not a lone, angry man anymore. Now he's an amalgamated member of a community. He's tired of whining and complaining in vain, he just wants God to hear his simple request. He knows he doesn't deserve forgiveness- he knows he probably should have a worse punishment- but he would like God to use mercy instead of justice and forgive them. Do you really believe the 'he probably deserved worse' part? Someone wanna explain it is exactly that was so treacherous? Because.. remember how terrible the destruction was?
I know what you all are thinking- Wait a second Rawchelli. Where's the lesson for life? Funny you asked. This Gever fellow teaches us a grand lesson about life in Galut (ya know, the life we live). We don't always see the presence of God (see: Gever at the beginning). Okay, maybe we never see the presence of God obviously at all. Maybe we pray really hard and nothing happens; maybe something bad happened and we're totally devastated. Maybe we feel completely alone and we don't think that there's anything out there. In the last section of this perek, the Gever is fully developed and teaches us that even if we can't see God, we still have to do the right thing. We don't have a Biet Hamigdash or anything of the sort, so it's hard to see God when there's nowhere God can respond from. We need to be proactive, take control of our lives, and do all this perspectifying just like the Gever did. What do you think of this 'independent' method of taking control of your faith? Is it too difficult to apply in real life?
Monday, February 3, 2014
I'm so mad at G-d, but maybe there's hope?
In Perek Gimmel, we are introduced to a new character, the Gever. In the first 17 pesukim of the perek, we are told about mad this Gever is at G-d for the destruction. This Gever blames G-d for all that He did to him, but he never actually mentions G-d's name until the Pasuk 17, where he has a change in heart. It blames G-d releasing all the anger that he had towards G-d and blaming Him for everything that happened without even using G-d's name.
There are three themes in the first 11 pasukim: 1. Darkness, 2. Animal Imagery, and 3. Entrapment/Encirclement. We see the theme of darkness when the Gever explains how he was misled and there was no one to guide him. There was an absence in the relationship with G-d and he has nothing. We see Animal Imagery when he explains that the pain is arbitrary. He says that G-d is a cruel and random G-d and the paain is not connection to any actions in this world. Finally, we see Entrapment/Encirclement when he says he was suffering without any chance of escape.
These 11 pasukim are all about the Gever in a very personal and self-absorbed way. He says that he tries to pray, but his Tefillot were shut out. He only mentions "I" and no "you" or "we". He says that everything that is happening to him is arbitrary. At this point, the gever fails realize that he sinned or the fact that there is a G-d and that is why this is happening to him.
In the next section of pasukim, 12 - 18, The Gever sees himself as the target of G-d and he wonders why G-d is picking on him. He no longer sees himself as like an animal where the pain is arbitrary. There might be a reason that this is happening to him, but he hasn't gotten to that point yet. He sees it as G-d is pointing an arrow towards him and that he is the target. At this point, he says that he has no hope in G-d beccause G-d did all of this to him. This was the first mention of G-d, and that is what causes him to actually think about this situation, there is a G-d.
The next section, 19 - 20, he really recognizes G-d as being there. He recognizes that G-d pulls all the strings, and he will later realize that G-d also pulls the good strings. Before, he had started being completely focused in himself and no one else, but now he is beginning to notice that there is a G-d there too and He is the one that is pulling the strings.
In the next section, 21 - 26, the Gever has a complete change of heart. He is starting to finally realize the good in G-d. He is going to have a conversation with himself and that conversatoin is going to give him hope. As much as he had the horrible experiences, G-d also does the good things. If I hope for G-d - if I recognize He does good things, I will once again have this salvation in the future. The relationship is mendable. The Gever has not said that G-d is amazing. He is only saying, so far, that G-d is merciful. Before he had shut his soul out to G-d, but noe he realizes that he can maybe have hope.
Next section, 27 - 30, is about how the Gever comes to a conclusion that maybe suffering is good. He says that man should accept G-d when they are young, because if you are going to suffer, it is better to suffer when you are young.
The next section 31 - 39, the Gever says that G-d decides wherther there is good or bad in the world, G-d is who decrees everything. He says that even if G-d causes man to suffer, He will still be kind to him. It is His command that decides whether good or evil will come to someone. He also mentions sinning in this section which means that maybe he is coming to the realization that maybe all of this is happening because he had sinned.
So far, we have seen the Gever go from someone who was completely self absorbed, a man that just lashed out his anger towards G-d for all the suffering that He caused to him and he has absolutely no hope to a man that maybe recognizes G-d and maybe he has some hope in G-d and maybe the relationship can be fixed, all the way to a man that really sees that it's G-d who pulls the string and controls what happens in this world and there is a reason that G-d does these things.
There are three themes in the first 11 pasukim: 1. Darkness, 2. Animal Imagery, and 3. Entrapment/Encirclement. We see the theme of darkness when the Gever explains how he was misled and there was no one to guide him. There was an absence in the relationship with G-d and he has nothing. We see Animal Imagery when he explains that the pain is arbitrary. He says that G-d is a cruel and random G-d and the paain is not connection to any actions in this world. Finally, we see Entrapment/Encirclement when he says he was suffering without any chance of escape.
These 11 pasukim are all about the Gever in a very personal and self-absorbed way. He says that he tries to pray, but his Tefillot were shut out. He only mentions "I" and no "you" or "we". He says that everything that is happening to him is arbitrary. At this point, the gever fails realize that he sinned or the fact that there is a G-d and that is why this is happening to him.
In the next section of pasukim, 12 - 18, The Gever sees himself as the target of G-d and he wonders why G-d is picking on him. He no longer sees himself as like an animal where the pain is arbitrary. There might be a reason that this is happening to him, but he hasn't gotten to that point yet. He sees it as G-d is pointing an arrow towards him and that he is the target. At this point, he says that he has no hope in G-d beccause G-d did all of this to him. This was the first mention of G-d, and that is what causes him to actually think about this situation, there is a G-d.
The next section, 19 - 20, he really recognizes G-d as being there. He recognizes that G-d pulls all the strings, and he will later realize that G-d also pulls the good strings. Before, he had started being completely focused in himself and no one else, but now he is beginning to notice that there is a G-d there too and He is the one that is pulling the strings.
In the next section, 21 - 26, the Gever has a complete change of heart. He is starting to finally realize the good in G-d. He is going to have a conversation with himself and that conversatoin is going to give him hope. As much as he had the horrible experiences, G-d also does the good things. If I hope for G-d - if I recognize He does good things, I will once again have this salvation in the future. The relationship is mendable. The Gever has not said that G-d is amazing. He is only saying, so far, that G-d is merciful. Before he had shut his soul out to G-d, but noe he realizes that he can maybe have hope.
Next section, 27 - 30, is about how the Gever comes to a conclusion that maybe suffering is good. He says that man should accept G-d when they are young, because if you are going to suffer, it is better to suffer when you are young.
The next section 31 - 39, the Gever says that G-d decides wherther there is good or bad in the world, G-d is who decrees everything. He says that even if G-d causes man to suffer, He will still be kind to him. It is His command that decides whether good or evil will come to someone. He also mentions sinning in this section which means that maybe he is coming to the realization that maybe all of this is happening because he had sinned.
So far, we have seen the Gever go from someone who was completely self absorbed, a man that just lashed out his anger towards G-d for all the suffering that He caused to him and he has absolutely no hope to a man that maybe recognizes G-d and maybe he has some hope in G-d and maybe the relationship can be fixed, all the way to a man that really sees that it's G-d who pulls the string and controls what happens in this world and there is a reason that G-d does these things.
#TransformationTuesday
This guy goes through a major transformation in perek gimmel. He starts off angry and says that everything that happens is arbitrary. There is chaos and nothing he has done could have caused all of this destruction and pain. He then realizes that G-d did to him on purpose. He is the target. After saying G-d's name, he begins to realize that it is possible for him to mend his relationship with G-d. After all, if the bad stuff comes from G-d, the good stuff must come from Him too. He realizes that G-d is not spiteful and He is just punishing him for sinning. Then, all of a sudden, we're looking at the exact same situation that he was in in the beginning of the perek. Before, he concluded that it was all arbitrary and there might not even be a G-d. Now, he looks at everything and tells the people to do Teshuva. He begs G-d to be remorseful and does everything he can to have a relationship with G-d. What happened? How did this whole transformation take place? Well, the way I see it, there were two main factors that had a huge affect on the Gever's transformation.
The first is community. In the first 39 pasukim, the Gever only said "I." He was self-absorbed and saw everything from his point of view. Then, in pasuk 40, he makes a change. He starts saying "we" and "us." He rejoins the community and asks them to look inside themselves, at their actions, and come back to G-d. We see how much power the community has. G-d made a Brit with all of Bnei Yisrael and said that we would never be obliterated. The community has the ability to speak to G-d in a way that the individual cannot. When the Jewish community is united, amazing things can happen. Back then it might have been asking G-d to be remorseful and stop the Hester Panim. Today, we see the Jewish community do incredible things all the time. We band together when a Jewish teenager goes missing in Boston, we all come together to raise money for Jews in need all over the world, and when someone is sick in a community, everyone works together to take care of them and make sure that they have everything they need. Community is a very powerful thing and in the Gever's case, it was a huge component in his transformation.
The second factor is his perspective on the situation. Of course we're talking about perspective--this is a Mrs. Perl class. Anyway, when the Gever first looked at the situation back in the first 11 pasukim, all he could see was chaos and arbitrary punishments. Now he has remembered G-d and recognizes that G-d brings the good to the world as well as the bad. He has accepted responsibility for his sins and sees that his enemies are the ones attacking him and G-d is only punishing him for his sins (as He said he would in Devarim). He is still in the same situation in pasuk 48. There is still pain and destruction and chaos. However, his perspective on the situation has changed. He now sees that this is all a result of his sins. It is still possible for his relationship with G-d to be fixed. He begins to cry out to G-d and ask Him to be merciful even though they deserve these punishments. He asks G-d to stop the Hester Panim and have a relationship with him. This is all a result of his change in perspective--he is now able to see the situation clearly and understands why this is all happening and realizes that he must mend his relationship with G-d.
The first is community. In the first 39 pasukim, the Gever only said "I." He was self-absorbed and saw everything from his point of view. Then, in pasuk 40, he makes a change. He starts saying "we" and "us." He rejoins the community and asks them to look inside themselves, at their actions, and come back to G-d. We see how much power the community has. G-d made a Brit with all of Bnei Yisrael and said that we would never be obliterated. The community has the ability to speak to G-d in a way that the individual cannot. When the Jewish community is united, amazing things can happen. Back then it might have been asking G-d to be remorseful and stop the Hester Panim. Today, we see the Jewish community do incredible things all the time. We band together when a Jewish teenager goes missing in Boston, we all come together to raise money for Jews in need all over the world, and when someone is sick in a community, everyone works together to take care of them and make sure that they have everything they need. Community is a very powerful thing and in the Gever's case, it was a huge component in his transformation.
The second factor is his perspective on the situation. Of course we're talking about perspective--this is a Mrs. Perl class. Anyway, when the Gever first looked at the situation back in the first 11 pasukim, all he could see was chaos and arbitrary punishments. Now he has remembered G-d and recognizes that G-d brings the good to the world as well as the bad. He has accepted responsibility for his sins and sees that his enemies are the ones attacking him and G-d is only punishing him for his sins (as He said he would in Devarim). He is still in the same situation in pasuk 48. There is still pain and destruction and chaos. However, his perspective on the situation has changed. He now sees that this is all a result of his sins. It is still possible for his relationship with G-d to be fixed. He begins to cry out to G-d and ask Him to be merciful even though they deserve these punishments. He asks G-d to stop the Hester Panim and have a relationship with him. This is all a result of his change in perspective--he is now able to see the situation clearly and understands why this is all happening and realizes that he must mend his relationship with G-d.
Sunday, February 2, 2014
The Power of "Hi"
For the first third of Perek 3, the Gever could not be angrier. The gever is certainly angry, and there's definitely someone to blame for all this... but the Gever doesn't actually say who. There's a lot about how he was misled into the darkness and how everything is random. There's a lot about himself- about "I", the individual. But there's nothing about God.
God is finally mentioned in passuk 18 when the Gever says, "Gone is my life, and my expectations from the Lord." The second that he singles out God- the second that he makes it clear that it's not all randomness- is when he starts to think a little more rationally and put some of the pieces together. Before he wasn't mentioning God's name because it hurt. He didn't even want to think about God. He knew that if he even said God then memories of God would come flooding back: the good and the bad. He only wanted to focus on the bad at the beginning. Once he says God's name, the floodgates open up, and he can't help but think about the broader context of things. God has destroyed, but God also does chessed.
The Gever is Olivia and God is President Fitz. They always get in dumb fights and then he calls... and it's all like "hi", and then she remember how much she love him. It's all very cheesy and annoying, but it's also eerily similar to this Perek.
Have you ever been so mad at someone that you didn't even want to say their name? Once you said their name, did anything change?
I think the Gever is singing the blues. He's hurt but all he really wants is to know that God's going to be there for him again after what just happened. What do you guys think?
Who is this mysterious Gever?
In Megilliot class this week, in perek Gimeel we heard about this very strange character the Gever. The Gever is described as a self absorbed character, who is in pain and is suffering. The Gever is angry and so he is blaming G-d for everything. Were not sure if we know exactly who this "Gever" character is. There are these two different aspects of the Gever. The first one is Rashi and the second one is the Ibn Ezra. Rashi is saying that it's yirmiyahu who wrote the book of Kohelet, because he uses phrases that yirmiahu wrote, and he experienced it. The second interpretation, is the Ibn Ezra, who represents every man.
There are different sections in perek Gimmel. The sections are:
א-יא- Feels like a very trapped, walled up, stuck, depressed and a chaotic place.
יב-יח- The Gever seems like he is caught up in everything, and his conclusion is that he is done with G-d.
יט-יכ- The Gever is remembering all of the pain that his soul suffered.
כא-לט- Hashem has the ability to act with Chessed, and mercey- Be merciful
What am I about to say that will give me reward- Sense of hope
Hashem is good to those who hope in him, and have faith in him, G-d can be good.
כז-ל- The Gever is thinking that maybe it is good to suffer. If it is deserved.
לא-לט- G-d doesn't afflict man to be spiteful or cruel. G-d does bad things to man, when man sins.
There are different sections in perek Gimmel. The sections are:
א-יא- Feels like a very trapped, walled up, stuck, depressed and a chaotic place.
יב-יח- The Gever seems like he is caught up in everything, and his conclusion is that he is done with G-d.
יט-יכ- The Gever is remembering all of the pain that his soul suffered.
כא-לט- Hashem has the ability to act with Chessed, and mercey- Be merciful
What am I about to say that will give me reward- Sense of hope
Hashem is good to those who hope in him, and have faith in him, G-d can be good.
כז-ל- The Gever is thinking that maybe it is good to suffer. If it is deserved.
לא-לט- G-d doesn't afflict man to be spiteful or cruel. G-d does bad things to man, when man sins.
When we first took a look at Perek Gimmel, we thought that the Gevar was bipolar. When we take a closer look, we see that he is just going through the response to trauma phases (shock, sadness, anger, blame, re-evaluate). In the beginning he talked about being entrapped, encircled, and walled up. He seems a little self absorbed (this was done to ME). We can see that he is in the stuck or depressed phase. He then realizes that God must have done this for a reason and he is a cruel God. The Gevar is now angry. He is also blaming God and gives up hope. He then recognizes that God is not all bad, and starts to think that he can repair his relationship with God. He is re-evaluating his life. As you take a look a the Gevar's phases you can pick apart and see when he thinks each thing, and how he is feeling. If you think about it, you can do this in your own life as well, and really see how you have changed.
The Gever?
This week in class we learned Perek Gimmel of Eicha, and we met a mysterious new character named the Gever. Who is the gever fellow we asked ourselves? While sitting here this morning to trying to figure out what to blog about, the song by Lev Tahor popped into my head. You know the one that goes, ברוך הגבר אשר יבתח ה. This songs literally translates to, Blessed is the Gever. Maybe this song can help us figure out who the Gever is?
In class we learned two different approaches, one given by the Ibn Ezra, and one given by Rashi. Rashi says that the Gever is Yirmiyahu, the author of Eicha, while the Ibn Ezra says that the Gever is a collective voice of B'nei Yisrael responding to the recent tragedy. While these explanations are nice, and very well could be right, I would like to explore the meaning of "Gever" before we jump to any conclusions.
The work Gever in Hebrew literally means man. Of course the explanations above could could be accurate, but I don't think that either are completely right because if we put the whole statement together we get, "Blessed is the man who trusts in G-d." At this time, no one in Israel was trusting in G-d because he had just destroyed the Beit HaMikdash and all of their lives.
After exploring the meaning of Gever, I am left stuck as to who the man who is trusting in G-d is? My one guess would be it is G-d in disguise trying to set an example for B'nei Yisrael of a man who would trust Hashem. But, if I did have to choose an approach given by one of the commentators, I would chose Rashi, because the Pasuk from the song is found in the book of Yirmiyahu. WHO DO YOU THINK THE GEVER IS AND WHY?
In class we learned two different approaches, one given by the Ibn Ezra, and one given by Rashi. Rashi says that the Gever is Yirmiyahu, the author of Eicha, while the Ibn Ezra says that the Gever is a collective voice of B'nei Yisrael responding to the recent tragedy. While these explanations are nice, and very well could be right, I would like to explore the meaning of "Gever" before we jump to any conclusions.
The work Gever in Hebrew literally means man. Of course the explanations above could could be accurate, but I don't think that either are completely right because if we put the whole statement together we get, "Blessed is the man who trusts in G-d." At this time, no one in Israel was trusting in G-d because he had just destroyed the Beit HaMikdash and all of their lives.
After exploring the meaning of Gever, I am left stuck as to who the man who is trusting in G-d is? My one guess would be it is G-d in disguise trying to set an example for B'nei Yisrael of a man who would trust Hashem. But, if I did have to choose an approach given by one of the commentators, I would chose Rashi, because the Pasuk from the song is found in the book of Yirmiyahu. WHO DO YOU THINK THE GEVER IS AND WHY?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)