Lekh Lekha

The parsha for last week is Lekh Lekha (לן לן) which essentially narrates the departure of Avram from 'Ur to Charan and then to K'naan (Canaan). Well the name implies the meaning of 'Get Out!' (though not that harsh but close...). I have jotted down several important points pertaining to this Parsha, the earlier part that is, because of the apparent blurriness I encountered when I studied the text. Subsequently, I think that this is a charitable thing to do i.e. helping others in their studies.

Before Departure

A lot of scholars address the problem of mentioning the death of Terach even before he passed away. This took place in Genesis 11.32 when the verse explicitly state the death of Terach in Charan. He live for 205 years and when Avram left his father's presence in Charan, Terach was 145 years old but why the mentioning of his death so soon? Rashi, as always, have his say.

According to the great commentator, he told us that,

'The idolaters are considered dead even though they are still alive and the righteous are considered alive even though they had passed away,'

What a profound statement. Rashi, earlier, explained that the mentioning of the death of Avram's Father prematurely is to 'conceal' the fact that Avram left his father during his Golden Age lest others will say that Avram left his father when he needed care the most i.e. during his old days.

However, in my opinion, things look quite differently (bear in my mind, it is my opinion again..)

It seems to me that the sudden mentioning of the death of Terach in Charan is due to the verse Gen 12.1. The continuity of the verses (from the end of Parsha Noach to Parsha Lekh Lekha) seems to be abrupt and it gave an impression that 'things are not going the way they should'. Why I say so? If you follow the narrative closely, you will see that HaShem Did Not Tell Terach, Avram and Lot to left for the Land of K'naan. They travelled at their own initiative to the land; this is what we get from Gen 11.31. However, at the beginning of Chapter 12, one sees that it is under HaShem's Command that Avram left his father's house. This seems odd and contradictory to the whole understanding but a close examination of the text will shed some light.

Firstly, the sudden mentioning of the death of Terach in Charan can only means one thing. Terach did not sojourn with Avram to the land of K'naan and he settled in Charan for the next 60 years after Avram's departure.

Secondly, the verse from Gen 12.1 read thus:

'Now HaShem said unto Abram: 'Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father's house, unto the land that I will show thee'

Notice the sentence 'Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father's house'. This obviously implies that Avram have to get out from his home country (Ur), from his kindreds, and from his father's (which is in Charan).

The conclusion is at the end of the eleventh chapter of Genesis, it is solely by Terach's initiative that they wanted to move away to the land of K'naan and after some predicament, did not proceed further than Charan. However, after HaShem'S Intervention, it is apparent that this has become a commandment to leave his station to a new land where HaShem will Show him. If this is not the case, why will HaShem mentioned two places at the same time? The sentence seems to me as though as Avram can no longer go back to Ur, his kindreds, and his father's house.

One commentator gave the reason for their expulsion from Ur. The behaviour of Avram since he is a youth is very apparent to us. A well-known midrash states that he broke all the idols his father sold and blame it to the biggest idols. Well, with this behaviour at hand, I do not feel strange that they will be expelled. This is the reason why G-d Chooses Avram and Avram discovered G-d even though HaShem Have Not Revealed Himself to Avram yet.

Dividing HaShem? Heaven Forbid!!!

T"G

Yom Shevi'i Shalom,

There are a lot of speculations on whether the idea of pluralism originated from Jewish Scripture or Pagan's sources. As I am not a scholar, I am not going to do an in-depth analysis of this matter but to 'blog' about it. Well, this is what bloggers do, write something that originate from your mind.

The problem with dividing HaShem is that, this is going against the very foundation of the whole universe, as you will see later. This is as nonsense as attributing to HaShem various attributes (as noted by Rabbi Moshe ben Maimon in his Dalalat al-Hairin). Puzzling indeed is his commentary and is not the Ten Sephiroth a division of the Godhead (Heaven Forbid!)?

Not at all as you see, all of the above are only valid if we divide HaShem into Ten Attributes in accordance to the Ten Sephiroth. This is to say that G-d consists of Love, Strength, Crown, etc. However, this is idolatrous. Why? As Rabbi Moshe ben Maimon argued, how do we divide an Infinite HaShem? The most famous of all argument is that, how does One become truly Omnipotent if there is actually Ten-in-one? Ask yourself one very simple question; suppose we have ten 'partitions' of HaShem Coexisting together (Heaven Forbid!) and actually there is Ten in One, how do we fit in the picture, in the realm of non-physicality, that we can partition this and that saying 'X occupies the same SPACE as B or C occupies more SPACE than D?' No we can't because space does not exist in a realm of non-physicality. Only a physical being can feel and occupies space. This is the properties of matter and HaShem is no matter!

So what are the Ten Sephiroth? Honestly, I do not truly understand it as I am not yet a Gentile Qabalist. I am just a common Noachide with a very limited knowledge of HaShem. According to Rabbi Moshe ben Maimon, there is only one way to describe HaShem in 'division' without actually dividing Him i.e. through action. We know that HaShem Possesses Mercy and He, also, Possesses Justice and Strength. These are the basis of the Ten Sephiroth or the Partzufim, where G-d is described (not divided) by His Action because Action will not affect the True Essence of HaShem and by doing so, eliminate the possibility of ascribing anything less than equivalent to the Almighty.

There is another one that I think the most important of all. One excruciatingly important point; there is no other existence that is real besides HaShem. A very similar saying indeed for the Buddhist. Buddha mentioned this before that 'Everything is only an illusion' but he missed by one point i.e. everything is an illusion Created by G-d. There is no real existence beyond Him. This point coincides with the Torah as the Torah reiterates that G-d Created us out of Nothing. Basically, we are no more better than 'nothing' and G-d is the Only True Existence!

Well, it might be really scary now if you don't get me. Think of it this way; does HaShem Have a body? No He Doesn't! The reason is thus, physicality is a limiting factor. G-d is Omnipotent and by this, there is actually no more we can argue with. We live inside HaShem and HaShem Desires to Dwell among His Creation. G-d is Love because we know that G-d Creates this world because He Loves us and He Desires to do Good.

May The Mashiach Arrive Speedily in Our Day!

Dating Dilemma

Well, if I am not mistaken, there is actually no Noachide's ruling concerning dating partners. Apart from the prohibition of not touching the member of the opposite sex (except necessary contacts such as a gentle tap on the shoulder) needlessly, there is no law to absolutely govern or secure the relationship between dating couples.

It is sad to say that as a Noachide whose friend is suffering the same fate, I could not have helped him to solve his predicaments and dilemmas.

In my opinion, two dating and courting person (of the opposite sex of course) are actually emotionally committed to each other and already has vowed (albeit metaphorically) to be together through their best of ability. It seems to me that this prohibition of taking someone's date fall under the category of theft. However, bear in mind that I have none halachic grounding in this topic whatsoever.

It is theft as it is wrong for someone to just take an individual away from a relationship. Suppose that a couple is committed to each other, the two parties have became an "item" of each other's possession. Dating suppose to be a trial period of a couple to attempt to be together, to know each other better and if things do not work out because of certain reasons, a healthy parting should be encouraged.

However, the intervention of a third person in a relationship is harmful and unfair to both parties as this violates the Spirit of the Seven Laws, which forms a person to be a morally upright individual even when the Sanhedrin can't punish that person for such and such behaviour.

Why is it harmful? Let me explain in a plain and simple form.

Firstly, a couple almost always swore with their heart to be with each other forever (there is where you get those I'll love you forever messages all over the trees in the garden.). When a vow is made, you can't break them even though you did not swear with the name of HaShem or in front of a court. Fulfilling a vow is a Grace unto HaShem.

Secondly, when you are committed emotionally, you are hoping that your partner will do the same to you. Expectation will arise and emotional attachment will developed. If someone enters the relationship, it will cause anguish in the party who losses and undue guilt upon the person that left the relationship along with the courtier.

Thirdly, even if they do not proclaim their endless love towards each other, a third person act of 'taking away someone' from a relationship is unjustifiably selfish and has committed the prohibition of theft. There is no need for a marriage contract to feel attached to someone as emotional tie will work out a lot of magic. Inasmuch as you love your car, books, or your favourite computers what's more if that is your date! He/she is a human for goodness' sake!

Fourthly, aside from all theft and stuff. How do you want people to treat you? If you obtain your partner by 'stealing' from others, will you want your partner to be stolen by someone as 'skillful' as you? Treat others how you want them to treat you. This is the essence of the Torah, “Do not do unto your neighbour what you won't do unto yourself. This is the whole Torah, the rest is only commentaries. Go and study it” as Rabbi Hillel the Elder puts it eloquently. If everyone in this world only do what he/she suppose to do and not more, the world will be a much better state than it is now.

Fifthly, it is not a question of whether you are observing a commandment or not. Inasmuch as masturbation did not violate any Torah Law, the Talmudic sages put it nicely as “the hand who reaches below the navel should be chopped off”. However, the Sanhedrin cannot execute punishment upon a person who masturbates. This teaches us one thing, to keep the spirit of the Sheva Mitzvot alive, there is more to the commandments. I remember a sage putting it this way: “you can observe all the 613 (7 for us) commandments of the Torah and still be a freak!” (not that harsh but it is almost synonymous).

The story of Yaakov and Rachel is almost as inconceivable. If Yaakov has not committed to her emotionally, will he works for another seven years for Laban just to obtain her? It is not easy for someone to do such things but it worth a million if one be true to their heart and do what is right.

However, if a relationship has reached a level when everything is seems to be heading to a dead end or maybe you are just too different with your lover, perhaps you should consider a peaceful separation. He or she might be for someone else and not you.

In cases where you think that you want to start with another person while you are in troubled commitment, think again. Have you know that person well enough? Is he/she really the one for you? It might mean that you are only confused with yourself, with finding yourself a substitute love. This is very unhealthy.

If you are really confronted by a lot of unsurmountable troubles while you are dating, it is worthwhile to consider a breakup. After you are sure you can't commit yourself anymore, sit down, relax, and talk of all the troubles with your partner. After breaking up, give yourself sometime before committing in a new relationship. Only remember the happy thought and forget the sad ones...

This is truly my thought. However, love between two person is really not an easy task. True love takes 'knowledge' while infatuation takes 'face value'. Make sure you know how to love before you commit and if you must hurt he/she because of your mistake, do so to set them free.

I experienced this before and I hope I can shed some light on this topic. It is not easy for me to overcome the feeling of rejection but eventually, this previous relationship really taught me something extremely valuable. Love is love, it is just that simple...

Mistranslated Verse

"For a child is begotten to us, a son will be given to us and the authority is upon his shoulder; Called, his name, by The Wondrous Advisor, The Mighty G-d and The Eternal Father, "The Prince of Peace". Yeshayahu 9:5"

Lately I have been studying this verse after listening to Handel's Messiah. It is a work of great momentum and enthusiasm. The above verse was quoted according to the KJV Bible in the Handel's Messiah. I seen some problem in the sentence as the original Hebrew read somewhat like my rendering above. The rendering in the KJV bible read thus:

"For unto us a child is born , unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder : and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. Isaiah 9:6"

There is arguable translation however, the second sentence which describe the name of the Prince can be both as the sentence implying the meaning do not have a proper structure. However, Orthodox Judaism has always identify the verse with the former.

This verse states the greatness of Hezekiah, the righteous king after Ahaz (for Ahaz is evil). Hezekiah's throne name is as mentioned and through him, the eternal Throne of David will be established. This is also a two-fold verse foretelling what the Mashiach should do when he came. This is, also, the summary for the chapter 9 of Yeshayahu and it offers a reconciliation to the Yerushalamites after the reign of the terrible king, Ahaz.