“Hurricane Carol,” which recently swept through New England, left in its wake more than twisted tree trunks, flooded homes, changed landscapes, and human carnage. It also left behind a residue of doubt and perplexity and fear in the hearts and souls of millions of Americans, and particularly those of our state. It jarred us, it frightened us, and it appalled us. The lashing gales, the violent winds, and the furious storm set us thinking and wondering. Primarily, the question that was asked was of a religious nature, and it came from religious-minded people, and it was largely addressed to religious teachers: if ruach se’arah oseh dvaro, as David put it, then why did G-d do this? Why did G-d unleash such fury against us? Why this sudden eruption of peaceful, calm and tranquil nature into a diastrophic and brutal storm? Such senseless destruction cannot possibly have meaning. Does it therefore follow that this world of ours is really an evil place, that senseless evil and cruelty predominate in Life?It is a hard question, but it is a fair one. What kind of answer can students of Torah give? That this proves the predominance of evil, we categorically reject. No, it does not prove that the world is evil. When the Arab philosopher Al Razi came to that conclusion, Maimonides (Guide, Part III, Chapter 12) referred to him in the most unflattering terms. He called his ideas “mad” and “foolish.” It is G-d’s world, and hence a good one. And perhaps we should think that the very infrequency and rarity of such hurricanes, and the frequency of elemental weather proves that Good is the rule and Evil is the exception.But as for the basic question of Why, no one can really give a complete and satisfying answer. Just as scientists have not completely fathomed the physical causes and properties of gales, hurricanes, typhoons, and tornadoes, so are we incapable of understanding their spiritual implications. The weatherman, with all his equipment, was unable to predict Hurricane Carol’…

1. So many times repeat that J'm pertains Man-g-d and man-man relations that forget another imp. part of Torah, stressed in today's Sidra: Man-animal. Perhaps we city dwellers missing part of life, + part of Torah, when we are ignorant of these principles. 2. Thus, in our Sidra: a) לא תחסם שור בדושו (חינוך: – להיות נפשנו נפש יפה... רודפת אחר החסד והחמלה... ובהרגילנו אותה על זה אף על הבהמות שלא נבראו אלא לשמשנו, תקח לה הנפש-רכה בהרגל זה להיטיב אל בניאדם)

השמר בנגע הצרעת לשמר מאוד... זכור את אשר עשה... למרים בדרך בצאתם ממצרים. Torah's economy words – why geographical intro in בדדרך בצאתכם ממצרים? Further: often in תורה, reason מצוות is זכר ליציאת מצרים. With holidays, such as פסח or סוכות – logical. But why other? For instance, this sidra: לקט שכחה פאה: וזכרת כי עבד... and again לא תחבל בגד אלמנה, וזכרת כי עבד היית בארץ מצרים. 3. From שפת אמת: reason all Torah's laws: freedom – not necessarily political song, but spiritual. Torah our Emancip Proclamation

The national and international tragedy reported this summer concerning Thalidomide – a hypnotic drug responsible for the deformities of a large number of babies born here and abroad – is a subject which should be discussed in every quarter and level of society, from government to the press, from medical groups to the parlors of ordinary citizens. And certainly, the pulpit should not refrain from offering what it considers to be the judgment of religion. I refer not only to the significant question of whether it is permissible to destroy a deformed fetus, which should be treated with the utmost gravity and never decided impetuously, but even more to the profound ethical issues involved in the circumstances which made possible the use of this drug in the first place.The Torah tells us, in the portion we read this morning, ki tivneh bayit chadash, if you build or acquire a new home, then v’asita maakeh le’gagekha ve’lo tasim damim be’vetekha, “thou shalt make a parapet for thy roof, that thou bring not blood upon thy house, if any man falls from there.”It is accepted in our rabbinic tradition that this is a broad biblical category which includes every manner of public protection and safety precaution. For instance, included in the mitzvah of maakeh is the law that a man may not keep a sulam reo’a, a weak ladder in his possession, or that he may not maintain an uncovered ditch in his yard, lest someone by accident use the ladder or fall in the ditch and sustain serious injury. These, too, are included in the law of maakeh or the parapet about the roof. It may come as a surprise to some to learn that regulations which in the modern world ordinarily are reserved for the municipality are included in the realm of religion. But this indeed is the nature of Halakhah, that it covers all aspects of life, and therefore, it contains as well an ethics of safety.And indeed it must be so, for it is the logical continuation of the whole biblical philosophy of man. If, as Judaism tea…

One of the noblest precepts we learn from today’s Torah Reading is that of midot and mishkalot, the commandment to observe meticulous honesty in our weights and measures. Lo yihyeh lekha even va-even, gedolah u-ketanah – you shall not have diverse weights, a large one (for selling) and a small one (for buying); even shelemah va-tzedek yihyeh lekha, you shall have just and perfect weights, and just and perfect measures. Our Rabbis rightly emphasized this mitzvah, for it is a foundation of an honorable and decent life, preventing society from being transformed into an economic jungle in which every man tries to devour his neighbor. Yet in reading some of the remarks of our Sages, it occurs to us that perhaps they overstated the case. Thus the Talmud (B.B. 88b) records that R. Levi said, kasheh onshan shel midot yoter me-onshan shel arayot – the punishment for false measures is more severe than that for immorality.Is not this an exaggeration? Do the Rabbis really mean that the small shopkeeper who occasionally puts his thumb on the scale is a worse scoundrel than the adulterer who allows his unbridled passions to destroy the peace, happiness, and integrity of an entire family?The Congress recently exposed a reprehensible situation in our country. National manufacturers and distributors have been reaping millions of dollars by misleading advertisements, dishonest packaging, and other assaults on the pocketbook of the innocent American consumer. It is the practice of false midot u-mishkalot on an immense scale, and there is no question but that it reflects poorly on all of our society. Yet can anyone question but that is a far less dreadful situation than the rot and corruption of immorality and prostitution that has been revealed in the very highest circles of British society?And even if one should be inclined to view economic crimes as more damning than immorality and unchastity, why choose the comparatively mild misdemeanour of false weights? Why not, for instance, s…

Last week’s Sidra, Shoftim, dealt primarily with society and government; therefore at the very beginning we are told that we are to install judges and police administration be’khol she’arekha, “in all thy gates,” i.e., in your cities. Today’s Sidra, Ki Tetzei, deals primarily with family and home; and therefore at the very beginning we are told ve’havetah el tokh betekha, “you shall bring her into thy home.” The first deals with city, the second with home.One would expect, therefore, that the treatment be radically different in each case: that Shoftim be expressed in the form of laws, while Ki Tetzei be presented in the idiom of moral advice. Shoftim, which deals with government, should be a portion abounding in rigorous and exacting standards of justice, while Ki Tetzei should contain mostly preachments on love and tenderness and gentleness. After all, government and society are based on the principle of mora, of fear of authority and respect for the rights of others. Otherwise, anarchy prevails. Thus did the Rabbis teach: ilmalei moraah ish et havero hayyim be’la’o, if not for this principle of respect for authority, people would swallow each other up alive. That is why society and government require the institution of law and the principle of justice: tzeddek tzeddek tirdof, “justice, justice shalt thou pursue.” But family and home are built on love and affection and friendship, and hence one would expect that law as such be at a minimum.Yet, surprisingly, that is not so. In both portions we find a very large number of mitzvot and dinim. Ki Tetzei, indeed, is full of prosaic laws. How can we explain that this Sidra – and this is characteristic of all of Torah – presents its doctrine of marriage and family life in legal form, full of commandments and prohibitions, of laws and duties? How can the modern mentality understand that these laws referring to family life should constitute as much as one fourth of the entire “Shulhan Arukh,” the code of Jewish law?First, …

This morning’s Sidra offers us a number of characteristic gems of genuine Jewish compassion. One of these laws, which constitutes a sublime example of Biblical righteousness, reads: Lo tateh mishpat ger yatom, ve’lo takhbol begged almanah (Deut. 24:17), “You shall not pervert the cause of the stranger and the orphan, and you shall not take the widow’s garment as pledge.” We are, of course, forbidden to commit an injustice even against the secure and the wealthy, but we are doubly warned against exploiting those who are naturally defenseless, such as the stranger or the fatherless. In addition, Jewish compassion is such that we must not hurt the widow. Therefore, we must not compound her social and domestic anguish, whether she be rich or poor, by adding the humiliation of taking her garment as a pledge. (According to most authorities, this refers to taking a pledge from her when she defaults on a loan; according to Maimonides, we must not extract a pledge from the widow even at the time of making the loan.) This verse forms one of the most attractive aspects of Biblical morality.The problem arises in the reason that the Torah offers for this law: ve’zakharta ki eved hayita be’mitzrayim, “and you shall remember that you were a slave in Egypt, and the Lord your God redeemed you therefrom, therefore do I command you to do this thing” (Deut. 24:18). This is more than a reason for a specific injunction or law. It constitutes a philosophy of social relations – or, if you will, a Jewish theology of righteousness and compassion. And here lies a grave problem indeed. For the psychology of identifying with the suffering and the wretched does not stand up under scrutiny as a sufficient ethical theory.What the Torah tells us is that acts of righteousness should be motivated by identification with the victim of misfortune, by searching our own experience and discovering therein similar suffering, so that we might be able to sympathize with the person who is now subject to miser…

The question of the individual versus society, especially that of the rights of the individual as they come in conflict with the demands of society for security, is an extremely complex one. Yet, it is urgent that it always be restudied, lest the extremists of either side upset the delicate balance between them, a balance on which democracy, culture, civilization, and religion all depend. If we be permitted to simplify for the purpose of clarification, the problem can best be defined by the extremes. On the one side we have absolutists and collectivists of all shades. They are the ones who maintain that the rights of the community must prevail over those of the individual, whether the collectivity is that of the state (as in Fascism) or the proletariat (as in Communism) or the church or any other group. The individual is relatively, or even absolutely, insignificant. Their claims for society, whether of country or class or church, are totalitarian. On the other side, are the anarchists and romanticists and others who hold that the individual human being is the sole value, and in fact, the sole source of value. They look upon society as negative, or as inhibiting, and destructive. They follow the Rousseauan theory that man innately is a noble savage who is corrupted by society. This is a point of view which leads, ultimately, to anarchy and chaos as a way for the individual to establish his own right and individuality. Libertarians and humanists certainly do not go all the way to this extreme, but they generally favor the rights of individual men over those of the community or the collective.Most recently, an important thinker in this country has attempted to upset this balance on the basis of his own psychological and philosophical theory. Professor B.F. Skinner, known to the reading public as the author of Walden Two and professor of psychology in Harvard University, has published excerpts of his forthcoming book, entitled Beyond Freedom and Dignity. In this book,…

With dull regularity, almost every two weeks, we are informed by newspapers, magazines, and journals that the family is finished. New social structures are emerging from our contemporary chaos which will replace the family and make it obsolete. Many avant-garde sociologists, echoing variations on the theme of Portnoy’s complaint, not only predict the dissolution of the family, but welcome it warmly and even urge it. The idea of the end of the family issues from a variety of sources. Most important among them are the radical counter-culture, with its rejection of all restraints in the name of an absolute individual autonomy and freedom; the exaggerated individualism endemic to Western Protestantism, albeit in a distorted form; and the militant homosexuals. This past winter or spring, the New York Times Book Review carried the pronouncement of such one priestess of pederasty that the family is an oppressive institution, and that this form of tyranny must be overthrown.It is my thesis that this not true, that this assessment of the end of the family is a propagandist exaggeration which Issues from ideological reasons, and that we must not permit it to become true -- for ideological along with other reasons.Almost a thousand years ago, one of the greatest Jews of all ages, Sa’adia Gaon, taught that the rational basis of the entire biblical moral code was the protection of the family. Family and morality are intertwined in the life of the Jewish people.Of course there are problems of the family in modem times. I need not repeat all the sorry statistics about the divorce rate and the frequency of unhappiness in marriage, and the obvious fact that many more young people nowadays are delaying or rejecting marriage. But fashion is not the final word, and style is too ephemeral to be accepted as the permanent state of things. Furthermore to destroy the institution of the family because it raises problems is like throwing out the baby with the bath water, or killing the patie…

Memory and forgetfulness are subjects for study by psychologists, neurologists, and cyberneticians. It is for them to learn and explain the “how” of these processes, the mechanisms, the dynamics. But these themes are also the substance of spiritual life. Many commandments of the Torah refer to remembering and forgetting. We are commanded to remember, amongst other things: the Sabbath; the day we left the Land of Egypt; what the Lord did to Miriam – and, thus, the teaching that no one is infallible; how angered the Lord in the desert – and, therefore, to be aware of our own penchant for ingratitude. Similarly, there are commandments concerning forgetfulness. Most prominent is the commandment of Shikchah – that if one has harvested his field and forgotten a corner, he must not return to it but leave that forgotten corner for the poor. Even more paradoxical is a commandment to forget (although it is not worded explicitly in that manner). We must forget grudges, insults, hurt; lo tikom ve’lo titor, “you shall not take revenge, you shall not bear a grudge.” Forgetfulness is even considered a blessing.The Talmud teaches us: gezerah al ha-met sheyishtakeach min ha-lev, “it is ordained that the dead be forgotten from the heart.” R. Bachya has pointed out that this is a great blessing, for if man were always to remember the dead, he soon would be laden with such grief that he could not survive emotionally or spiritually.But most often, and most usual, forgetfulness is regarded as an evil, as a sin. Thus, the Rabbis taught Ha-shokheach davar echad mi-mishnato maaleh alav ha-katuv ke’ilu mitchayev be’nafsho – if one forgets a single item from his studies, Scripture considers it as if he were guilty with his life.And, of course, the source of all these commandments is the concluding portion of our Sidra: Zakhor et asher asah lekha Amalek… Lo tishkach. Remember what Amalek, that barbaric and savage tribe, did to you… you shall not forget.But this commandment not to forget is pr…