A. Significance of the Book: 1. Literary – one of the rare legacies of the human race, Job aims at the heart of the reader. The elements of tragedy, pain and sorrow move through the melancholy lines with rhythmic ease. George Foote Moore calls it “one of the greatest poetical works of the world’s literature.” Tennyson: “Great as the summer midnight, as the world with its seas and stars. There is nothing written, I think, in the Bible or out of it, of equal merit.” Despite the difficult syntax and rare words in the Book, few can resist the combined emotional and esthetic onslaught of its literary attack. 2. Philosophical – the Book is primarily the study of Man's encounter with Evil. Even more than the emotional consequences are the philosophical or theological ones. It therefore aims at the mind of the reader. How shall Job reconcile G-d’s Justice with His seeming Injustice? Why is the pious man the one to suffer, while the wicked prosper? The discussions between Job and his friends lead us to one of the most profound researches into the nature of Evil. Its results have been the source material for all great thinkers since. 3. Religious – the Book of Job aims at the soul too. Whereas the philosophical material is concentrated in the center of the Book, with its debates and rebuttals, the religious interest is in the prologue and epilogue, where the matters of Faith, the Greatness of G-d and the Smallness of Man are discussed. The Book records the vindication of the unorthodox against the accepted beliefs. Job was not always popular with our Rabbis, but nevertheless the High Priest used to read it in the Temple on Kol Nidre night, and the Prophet Ezekiel, himself a Priest, mentions Job, with Noah, as prototypes of great Zaddikim. B. The Story of Job and Organization of the Book: 1. The Prologue – the Book of Job has a Faustian touch to it. As in Faust, the Devil, or Satan, is a protagonist in the play – for that is what Job seems to be, a play or drama which centers…

The recent hurricanes, which swept through New England left in their wake more than twisted tree-trunks, flooded homes, changed landscapes and human carnage. They 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. They jarred us, frightened us, appalled us. The lashing gales and violent winds and furious storms 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 relgious teachers. The question was: if , "the stormy wind fulfills His word”, as David put it, then why did G-d do this? Thy did G-d unleash such fury against us? Aby 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 Qa-A is a purposeless and meaningless place, that senseless evil and cruelty predominate in A life?It is a hard question, but it is a fair one. ־That kind of answer can students of Torah give? We categorically reject the contention that this proves the predominance of evil. When the Arab philosopher Al Razi came to that conclusion, Maimonides (Guide, Part HI, Chapter 12) referred to him in most unflattering terms. He called his ideas "mad" and ״foolish". It is G-d’3 world, and hence an essentially good one. And perhaps we should think of the very infrequency and rarity of such hurricanes, and conclude that the comparative frequency of clement weather proves that Good is the Rule and Evil the exception.But as for the basic question of "Why?", no one can give a really complete and satisfyin answer. Just as scientists have not completely fathomed the physical causes and properties gales, hurricanes, typhoons and tornadoes, so are we incapable of completely understanding their spiritual implications. The weatherman, with all his expensive …

At the very outset, we must limit the question that we have posed as the theme of this sermon. Our question is not why the hurricanes occur. First, we do not even know the physical causes of hurricanes, despite our weather satellite, certainly we cannot know the spiritual reasons. Secondly, "why” is a fruitless question. It sounds more like a complaint that a quest for informationץ In one of the moving psalms of King David, he cries out Eli, Eli, lamah azavtani -״my God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” Rabbi Samson Raphael Hersh offers a comment on this verse that is most relevant to our theme - and, in fact, pertinent to all our lives at any occasion or crisis, ne directs our attention to the fact that the world for "why," lamah is in the Masoretic Text, recorded as having the accent on the second rather than on the first syllable. It is not LAmah, but laMAH. The first form of that word, LAmah, is indeed, the word "why." It is a Plaintive demand for information and explanation. But the version laMAH means not "why" but "wherefore". It is not a demand that God explain his reasons for visiting suffering upon us, but rather a prayer to God to teach us what to do with our suffering, what lessons to learn from it, what good to derive from these experiences. So, each of us, when faced with crisis, trouble, difficulties, or problems - must ask ourselves "wherefore?" rather than turning plaintively to God and demanding of Him, "why?"

In this season of the asking of questions, allow me to present to you two questions which are really one. They have no doubt occurred to many of us, and have possibly been asked of us by others who are not of our faith. The first question concerns certain statements in the Haggadah. The Seder is, after all, a lovely, glowing experience. Freedom is celebrated amongst family and friends, with food and symbols abounding. We are happy and at home. Why, in such a pleasant atmosphere, introduce the harsh and jarring note of the Shefokh Chamatekha, the passage where we implore Almighty G-d to pour out His wrath upon the nations that know Him not and upon the kingdoms that have not called upon His Name? Is it not better to concentrate upon freedom for the oppressed than upon punishment for the oppressor? And why, on this lovely evening when parents and children are united in pleasant Jewish comradeship, must we magnify the makkot received by the ancient Egyptians? Is it not enough that they received ten plagues? What do we stand to gain by gloating over their inglorious end of fifty or a hundred or a hundred and fifty plagues?The second question, related to the first, is one that we are called upon to discuss on more than one occasion, especially during this season. It concerns an ancient prejudice of the Western gentile world. A comparison is made between the two faiths, Judaism and that of the majority in our country, and our religion is made to appear in a most unfavorable light. They believe in Love, we believe in Vengeance. Their G-d is merciful, ours is harsh and demanding. We are primitive, they are civilized. Our spiritual growth has been stunted; theirs has long ago surpassed ours. And for proof, they point to the Seder ritual, the Shefokh Chamatekha, and the proliferation of the makkot. What have we to say to this?First, it is pure ignorance that prevents one from noticing the Jewish emphasis on the theme of love – ignorance sometimes compounded by prejudice. Whe…

One of the greatest and most powerful ideals in all of Judaism is Kiddush Hashem, and its obverse, Hillul Hashem. This concept is based on the idea that man’s mission in the world is to represent God, that his duty is to enhance the Name or “reputation” of God, and his greatest crime is to desecrate the Name, or in some way diminish the Divine “reputation.” Whether and to what extent man commits Kiddush Hashem or Hillul Hashem depends upon his act, his own identity, and the nature of the people before whom he acts. Thus, for instance, a man who is identified strongly as a Jew who commits an immoral or unethical act before non-Jews is clearly guilty of the vilest form of Hillul Hashem. Conversely, one such who performs an act of moral heroism or self-sacrifice has performed the noblest act of Kiddush Hashem. In general, therefore, any act which brings credit to Torah, Israel, the Jewish tradition, or God – is an act of sanctification of the Name; and conversely, any deed which brings these into disrepute is an act of desecration of the Name. According to the Prophet Ezekiel, it is not only man who can and does perform either of these two polar concepts, but also – God. Our people was born under the shadow of a promise – the promise granted by God to our founding father, Abraham, that in the long run all will be well with us, that He will be with us, and that we will prosper and return to our own land. Whenever the people of the world see that Israel prospers, that God is with us, that that ancient promise is vindicated, then they come to acknowledge God, grudgingly or ungrudgingly, consciously or unconsciously. But if they see that Israel suffers in exile, that it is alone and hopeless, then they consider that promise a sham, the entire tradition a fraud, and the belief, the historic belief, of Israel nothing more than an empty shell. Thus, as long as Israel suffered friendlessly and hopelessly, the great thinkers and historians of the Western world dismissed all of…

Rabbi Lamm explores what we can learn from the experience of enduring tragedy.

Dear Rabbi Lamm, I would very much like one day, to discuss the contents of this letter with you. There is no immediacy to this request, the dilemma has been around for centuries. Respectfully, [redacted]. Dear Master of the Universe, It is not a very humble gesture on my part to address this letter to you; please forgive me. Don’t worry, I’m not trying to elevate myself to peaks where I do not belong. This letter will never be published. It will not be included in my memoirs. Since you alone know the contents of my memoirs I decided to break formal boundries and address my thoughts to you. This is not a form of prayer, my pen is incapable of prayer. I am merely expressing my thoughts, and you are looking over my shoulder, that is all. It is easier for me to compose my thoughts to another being other than myself. I decided to choose you, the eternal being. Dear G-d, please excuse my familiar tone.Lord of this great universe, I must ask you a personal question – Do you value life? You have been around for awhile, maybe once in a while you loose grasp of perspective. What do a few lives mean to you? In the millions of years that you have been around, possibly the few years that people suffer here and there can be paralleled to a healthy man receiving a small scratch.If you sometimes loose perspective about the importance of a small scratch, I can forgive you. A sense of perspective is sometimes hard to keep. I can forgive you for these past and future mistakes. What upsets me is that you are not supposed to make mistakes. Have my teachers misguided me to believe you are perfect? Whatever you do is for the best. What is best? I have been taught that in the scheme of the universe, you alone know what is best, Please do not find me irreverant to you or my teachers, but something is amiss in this explanation.Maybe it is for the best that my grandmother is suffering to an inexplicable degree while she slowly disintegrates, dying of cancer. In the scheme of the world it is…

Dear Uncle Norman, I received your letter and thank you for answering. Over the weekend I read over some of your sermons you sent. I specifically enjoyed the one about – "Till a hundred & twenty." Today however we received a most interesting piece of work – a letter from Shelley to "The Master of Universe" and you answer בשמו. It really קלע למטרה, and I have a few more question בנדון.1) How come G-d doesn't stop the suffering at a certain point & make it well again? Why can't He make the condition better to show His greatness & to לחזק the person's sick parent or relative or friend and he prays to G-d constantly (הרי זוהי המטרה) and even has a נצוץ של תקוה, and the end this sick person dies –הרי שבסופו של דבר, אמונתו של אדם נקטעת באיזשהו מקום. האדם סמך על הקב"ה שיעזר, התפלל בתמידות וסופו שלא נתקבלו תפילתיו. והוא אמנם אמר ומודה שהכל לטובה אך סך הכל זהו דבר שקשה מאד להבין בעצם מיואש זה ובמקום מסוים הוא מאד מאובזם וזה עלול בהחלט לערער את האמונה. אם כך אז הוא התקרב למשך התקופה שסמל ואחר כך מתרחק שוב מהקב"ה, או באופן קיצוני יותר.2) Why על חשבון the sick person? Why does he have to be sick & die if G-d wants to לקרב the other people to him? Does he get repayed בעולם הבא?Anyway, those are my questions for now. I would appreciate if you'd answer them when you have some time.Israel is beautiful obviously. There is "יריד שבוע הספר העברי" now and of course I spotted your book on one of the counters.Last night, ל"ג בעמר, the whole country was lit up with מדורות, even Shelli and Mommy made one. I went out to the Chasidic Festival and has a great time. Today, however, we just stayed home.Okay, that all for now. להשתמע!Wish you were all here.Bye, Love,YaelP.S. I notice that I should've written in Hebrew. It would've been more מובן & in only one language.

Suffering has no answer, only questions. Everything depends – as the neo-Kantians said – on the way you phrase the question. The challenge to God of suffering must be properly wielded. It is an old Jewish tradition that the question must be turned back on ourselves: guilt that is not pathological but induces moral regeneration. But – so much? The Holocaust too? The attitude can be overdone.There is a reverse attitude: the challenge is flung at God, as it were: Abraham, Rabbis on Job say: An insult, a scandal and blasphemy — that was all right for a Moses, or an Abraham or a Berditchever -- or the victims of the Holocaust themselves. But the problem is that all the bystanders, and those who were born after the Holocaust, also ask such questions. There is an element of self-righteousness about the person who, living in an economy of affluence, and never pious, asks, how can I believe in God after Auschwitz?There is something simply phony about the attitude. I remain unimpressed by the obese, cigar-chomping philosopher who excuses all his failings by blaming God for suffering of the Holocaust. Too much of what is written in our contemporary literature, and that passes on the lecture podium is no more than preposterous posturing.What then? They must be both simultaneously. Midrash says: So, one question without the other is invalid• To challenge and blame only man and the victim is insensitive; only God is — arrogant and silly. When we combine both questions, as Moses did, then we are asking the great question from the point of proper balance.

My thesis that Hester Panim (on the national level) removes or at least dulls the one-to-one correspondence of Reward and Punishment, has been criticized on the grounds that it goes against various texts which speak clearly of such a correspondence in the realm of distributive justice. Certain things must be made clear. For one, the difference I alluded to between individual and national Reward and Punishment. Second, even on the individual level, while it is true that ish be’heto yumat, nevertheless this is a general principle of theodicy, justifying G-d's decree, but not quite allowing man to pin-point the sin and thus blame the victim. If it were so, how could we ever eulogize the dead, including the greatest Zaddik, whereas according to this thesis we should berate him and try to figure out which sin it is that he is being punished for. This is a little more than reminiscent of the friends of Job and their point of view, which was rejected by the Almighty.Third, and most important: A study of Avot reveals many passages which speak of a clear relationship between sin and punishment. Nevertheless, there is a contrary statement, the famous one by R. Yannai, that ein be'yadenu lo mi'shalvat ha- resha'im ve'lo mi-yesurei ha1tzaddikim. According to this latter opinion, every attempt to sketch with any clarity the relationship between Sin and Punishment is doomed to failure.Finally, the efforts by the Sages to identify such a relationship between sin and punishment must not be seen as an endeavor to uncover the secrets of the Most High, but rather to accept the mystery as impenetrable and nevertheless seek to convert suffering—both the suffering of the righteous and the anguish of religious man trying to understand the eternal enigma of suffering—into something constructive, something creative. (Compare S. R. Hirsch’s comment on lamah azavtani.) In other words, the effort by the Sages is one of leading from yisurim to teshuvah, by encouraging the sufferer to enhance h…