The institution of Mother’s Day is predicated on the fact that one good turn deserves another; that mothers, as a general group, bequeath certain gifts to their children, for which they deserve gifts in return. These gifts of mothers are universally acknowledged and acclaimed, but in reality are little understood. Let us, therefore, this morning, attempt to appreciate and evaluate mother’s gifts to her children, and let that appreciation be this pulpit’s gift to all mothers.

(1) Lag Baomer, like all other Jewish holidays, has many facets to it, it is interwoven with many historic events, numerous sacred traditions and a host of colorful observances. (2) But the one that is usually overlooked in Lag Baomer has specifically to do with the Kabbalah, with Jewish Mysticism, which to the average Jew remains the most thoroughly misunderstood stream of creative Jewish Thought. Today, when scholars of all shades of opinion have begun to take a second look and appreciate the sweep and the grandeur of Kabbalah, the laity – by and large – still think of it as something terribly mysterious or a magical abracadabra. Whatever may be the case, Kabbalah is a part of our Jewish lives, whether we know it or not. It has been incorporated into our traditions, into many expressions and above all into our prayers, and hence it shapes our thinking as Jews in many untold ways. And Lag Baomer is the day of the calendar devoted to Kabbalah. 3.The source book of all the great Kabbalistic teachings is the Zohar –”Book of Splendor” – which tradition ascribes to R. Shimon Bar Yochai and which contains his teachings. And in the Zohar, we read that on the day R. Shimon Bar Yochai died, he called his students in and imparted to them the great secrets and traditions of the Kabbalah. The manner in which he imparted those teachings is indicative of the character of the Kabbalah, the personality of our sages, and is, as well, a message of terrific import for us here today. And that day, when he died and taught, was the 33rd day of the Omer – Lag Baomer. So that Tomorrow is the “Yahrzeit” of R. Shimon Bar Yochai as well as the anniversary of his teaching. 4.In the Zohar ח”ג רפ”ז ע”ב, we read (using Hebrew transl.) B’oso yom she’rabba shimon amad le’histalek min ha’olam, בההיא יומא דר”ש  בעא לאסתלקא עלמא. On the Day R. Shimon was to die, he was preparing himself for the event, and his many colleagues and disciples came in to see him – ve’habayis haya malei, והוה מילא ביתא an…

Since last Independence Day, a major change has come over the situation for Israel: it has lost the goodwill of the great powers. Before only the Arabs damned her, now no one has any love for her. This ninth birthday finds the United States and Russia both appeasing the Arabs and opposing the Israelis. Israel’s very existence has been called into question, and she has been called upon to justify her very survival as well as her attack on Egypt.Israel has now been called every name under the diplomatic sun. Aggressor, war-maker, offensive. And an argument repeated often enough can affect even the strongest partisans and make them over into opponents. Our Rabbis of the Midrash tell us that God showed Moses Dor dor v’dorshav and also the leaders of each generation, its prophets, its wise men, and so on. This means that he showed him the kohanim of the future who would remain spiritually bnei Aharon. But, also included in this vision, though less known, were each generation and its gazlanim, and its chomsanim. And we wonder: are these too kohanim bnei aharon? And the answer is: no. It is not that the descendants of Aaron will be robbers and thieves, but, the meaning is, that despite their being the preachers and leaders and prophets and wise men of every generation, they will be called robbers and thieves… as though God said to Moses: they still are to Me, despite all the names so unjustly applied to them by others, kohanim bnei Aharon. And so when we find that Russia calls Israel an aggressor, the United States calls her and unjust intruder, and India calls her a thief, we open the Bible and the Midrash, and we find that God tells us that those whom others call, in their generations, both robbers and thieves, remain the “priests, the children of Aaron,” the priests of all nations and the kingdom of holy people.Why is Israel right? Why do they remain the “priests, the children of Aaron?” What is the underlying principle of Israel’s claim to Statehood, its justification…

After offering a detailed list of the high standards of the kehunah, after enumerating the lofty ideals to which the kohen is expected to aspire and which we expect him to attain, our Sidra adds one last verse of instruction which indicates a disappointing lack of confidence in the Kohanim. Consider the "build-up" – and then the anti-climax. Le-nefesh lo yitana b’amav. The priests are to be dedicated to life and refrain from any contact with death. Lo yikrchu karchah be-rosham. They are to emulate none of the pagan rites of priesthood for they are kohanim to the One G-d. The Torah legislates special marriage restrictions upon the kohanim, for they are to be so elevated in their marital life as to be a model worthy of emulation by others. Le-lechem Elokecha hu makriv. They officiate at the solemn services as dignitaries in the Temple of the G-d of Israel. His entire character, his whole career of dedication and devotedness is to be revered -- kadosh yihyeh lakh. What a build-up for a mere mortal!But then, in conclusion, comes a statement which brings the kohen down from his high perch with a stunning suddenness: if the daughter of such a kohen leads an immoral life, becomes a loose woman, she desecrates her father and must be put to death. From the man who has attained holiness -- to fathering a woman of ill-repute! Be dedicated to life, keep away from paganisms, elevate your marriage, minister at the altar, be holy -- and don't raise degenerate children! This verse, as our Sages were wont to say, cries out: interpret me!I suggest that what our Torah meant to teach with this sudden switch is an idea as relevant and important today as it was three thousand years ago. It meant to warn us against inheriting a great tradition and neglecting it; against wasting talent and misusing courage and plundering potentialities; against reaching the summit and letting our foot slip and plunging into the great abyss; against being a Kohen, a descendant of Aaron, and still ending fa…

In an important essay published not too long ago, Dr. Samuel Belkin, President of the Yeshiva University, presented a creative insight into the understanding of the commandments of the Torah. There is a great literature on taamei ha-mitzvot, the reasons for the commandments. What Dr. Belkin has proposed is a fundamental distinction between the “Reason” for a mitzvah and the “Purpose” of the commandment. The reason is historical, it is something about which man may speculate and conjecture; but ultimately it is known with certainty only to G-d Himself. Actually, the reason for legislating a mitzvah does not make too much difference; it is of little consequence to man. What is of importance, however, is the Purpose of the mitzvah. Here man must always ask himself: what is it the Torah wants me to accomplish as a result of performing this mitzvah? The Reason for a mitzvah remains the same through all eternity, although it may always remain unknown to man. The Purpose may change from generation to generation, from culture to culture, from society to society. While the Reason is divine, the Purpose is human – and, therefore, while all of us observe the same mitzvot in the same manner, each observance may mean something subtly different for each individual person. Hence, while it may be fruitless to inquire into the Reason for a mitzvah, it is most worthwhile to investigate the Purpose of the Mitzvot.It is in this spirit that we may ask a fundamental question about the teachings of this morning’s Sidra. And that is, what is the purpose of the institution of Kehunah, the hereditary Priesthood, for modern Jews living in a free and democratic society? Centuries ago, in the days of the Temple, the Kohen was a most important functionary in the religious life of the country. It was he who officiated at the sacrificial rites in the Temple. He was supported by an elaborate system of tithes, and so forth. Today, the Kohanim, descendants of Aaron, the brother of Moses, are disting…

There are many ways of classifying the mitzvot of the Torah. The most popular one is to divide them into two categories: those for which the reason is apparent, and which we would think of even without a specific command in the Torah; and those for which there is no obvious reason, and which we perform only because God willed it. In the Talmud, these two classes are known as hukim and mishpatim. Saadia refers to them by the name of shimiyot and sikhliyot. The rational commandments are almost all ethical in nature. They include such mitzvot as charity, love of neighbor, prohibition of stealing, and so forth. The second category is the ritual law: these include tefillin, shofar, kashrut, and so on.It is in reference to these two categories, the ritual and the ethical commandments, that a great Talmudist who died about 40 years ago, Rabbi Meir Simhah of Dvinsk, in his Meshekh Hokhmah, has made a profound observation that is of great significance to all of us.As we read the Torah, especially the portions of last week and this week, we notice the recurrence of such phrases as Ani Hashem, “I am the Lord,” or Ani Hashem Elokechem, “I am the Lord your God.” Rabbi Meir Simhah points out that this phrase usually follows the ritual commandments. The Torah means to tell us that although we may not understand the reason for the observance of this individual commandment, although we would never think of performing this kind of act on our own, nevertheless we must follow this precept because Ani Hashem, “I am the Lord,” and as our Creator He may command us to do even that which is beyond our comprehension and understanding. The words “I am the Lord” are, in effect, the authority behind the commands. They are what authenticate the mitzvot. When man begins to question the Torah, when he begins to doubt whether he is obligated to observe that which his mind cannot grasp, then the Torah reminds him that there is a God in the world, and that faith and love and reverence for God requir…

Our Sidra of this morning opens with the commandment to the Kohen that he not defile himself by contact with the corpse of any person save his closest relatives. These include: father, mother, son, daughter, brother, and unmarried sister. Before these, however, appears one category which presents a problem. The Torah expresses this as she’ero ha-karov elav, which most English translations render as “his kin who is nearest to him.” This would indicate that this expression is but an introduction to the detailed list of relatives that follows. However, our tradition had declared that she’ero zu ishto, the word she’er refers to one’s wife who, therefore, is the first instance of a relative to whom a Kohen may, indeed must, defile himself in order to accord her her last honor.The question, however, is: why did the Torah not say directly and explicitly that the Kohen may defile himself for his wife? Why this peculiar idiom? And if indeed she’er does mean a wife, why is it in the masculine form (ha-karov elav)?The answer offered by “Keli Yakar” – and anticipated by RaSHBaM in his commentary to the Talmud – is rather prosaic; in fact, so prosaic as to be almost banal. Yet, it says something to us of great significance. She’er means a wife because, he tells us, the word originally means – food, as in the Biblical expression she’erah kesutah v’onatah.But why does the Torah use the word she’er for wife, when it means food? And the answer that is offered is, because it is she who prepares her husband’s food for him!What a disappointing and pedestrian answer! But what he means is clearly more than the reduction of the role of the wife to chief cook and bottle washer. On the contrary, the reference to a man’s she’er, his wife, as ha-karov elav, as one who is close to him, indicates that the wife’s occupation as she’er somehow attains a significance that makes her exceedingly close to her husband, closer than any two beings can otherwise be to each other.In support of this answer…

In our last sermon on Jewish Mothers, we discussed motherhood as the supremely creative act of humankind, and the attendant concepts of kedushah and tum’ah. Today we shall deal with more contemporary problems, especially with the partial displacement of the classical role of the Jewish Mother by a competing type of matron and, concomitantly, a growing literature subjecting the image of the Jewish Mother, heretofore sacrosanct, to criticism – sometimes funny, sometimes vulgar, always withering. I confess to a certain apprehension in proceeding with this sermon, for two reasons.

There is so much happening this week that invites comment from the pulpit – Watergate, the travels of Secretary Kissinger in the Middle East, and the conference of Jewish Women's Lib organizations, to name but a few of these urgent events. But I prefer to take vacation from such burning, relevant issues and, instead, to "talk Torah," untimely though that may be. I refer to the commandment at the beginning of this week's Sidra, which forbids the kohanim (members of the priesthood) to "defile themselves" by contact with the dead. The Torah permits them, however, to attend to the interment of their closest relatives, seven in number. I have always been bothered by this Biblical prohibition for kohanim to have any contact with a corpse. After all, Judaism regards this as hessed shel emet, and therefore a very noble mitzvah – why, therefore, should a Kohen, whose life should ideally be dedicated to the service of God, be denied such a spiritual opportunity? It has been suggested that the reason the Torah forbids the kohanim to have contact with the dead is specifically to protest against the culture of Egypt, from which our people came, in which the priests were so involved with the dead that they were in effect the professional religious undertaking class. But that answer does not satisfy me. Perhaps the Egyptians overdid it, but that is no reason for us to overreact and go to the opposite extreme. Furthermore, whatever the reason may be that he is forbidden to have contact with the dead, why was an exception made in the case of the kohen’s immediate family? And, if kohanim should indeed be prohibited to touch a corpse, why does not the same prohibition devolve on the female kohanim? One more question: why is the commandment given specifically to ha-kohanim benei Aaron, "the priests, the sons of Aaron?" Surely we all know that the kohanim are the descendants of Aaron! I suggest that the last question can be used to answer the others. If we want to understand the Tora…

Sidra ends with the story as significant as it is strange, and as genuinely meaningful as it is, apparently irrelevant; the story of the blasphemy. Rabbis speculate who he was. More important, why, what were his motivations? They offer a number of opinions, of which we shall dwell on two. ר׳ לוי אמר מעולמו יצא? מהיכן יצא, יצא בן אישה ישראלית. Came from "his own world," an alien milieu, a non-Israelite context in society, and therefore could not appreciate the Jewish sensitivity to reverence for God. The second opinion is that he wanted to settle in Israel because that is where his mother came from, but the tribe refused because his father was not a member of that tribe (his father was a non-Jew). The suit was brought before the court of Moses, which found in favor of the Tribe of Dan. He felt unwanted, dispossessed, no place in the camp of Israel.At first blush, the explanations are as fanciful as the story is strange. Yet — neither fanciful nor strange. For, the tale of blasphemy is a recurrent curse, one that plagues us this very day. Of course, in the modern world blasphemy is rare. I have not been called to any emergency meetings about the plague of blasphemy, nor woken up at night with such Halakhic questions. Contemporary rebels do not express hostility and discontent by cursing God by name. Instead — they deny the existence of God, and turn their back on the People of Israel. Present form of apathy, alienation, assimilation.I, therefore, take the Biblical story and the Talmudic analysis as a parable or paradigm for all times, including our own.First is: the modern Jew lives in the wider world, which is a world drastically different from that posited by Torah: hedonistic, materialistic, a world where power is abused, a world without God or the image of God. When a person comes out of this world to the world of Jews, he expects to find an alternative — something different, something nobler — and usually what he finds is the same old thing! We have so accultura…