Friday, March 23, 2012

Parasha VaYikra

Making Mistakes

Our parasha for this week, Vayikra, deals with the types of sacrifices that may be brought to the Tabernacle.  The first three sacrifices are the olah offering, the meal offering and the peace offering. These are voluntary offerings, brought by an individual who wants to elevate themselves spiritually.  The next offering discussed is called the Chatat, or Sin Offering. This sacrifice is not a voluntary sacrifice. Rather, it is to be brought by someone who has made an unintentional mistake, and needs to atone for it.  Now, some people would like to skip these chapters of Leviticus entirely, feeling that they have little relevance to life today.  In fact, one of my colleagues once had a pulpit in a congregation where they read the Two Books of Moses – they would begin in Genesis and read through the Book of Exodus in one year, and then return to Genesis again!  But, I think we can learn a great deal by reading and studying the Book of Leviticus.

One thing we learn from this chapter about sacrifices for unintentional mistakes is that in the Biblical view, everyone has the potential to make a mistake.  The section starts out describing the sacrifice a priest must make for an unintentional mistake.  It then describes the ritual for an entire community that makes a mistake. Then, it goes on to describe the ritual should a chieftain should make a mistake.  Finally, it describes what sacrifice a common person should bring if they unwittingly make a mistake.  No matter if one is a holy religious figure, a political figure, or a member of the general populace, the Torah reminds us that anyone, even an entire community, is capable of making a mistake. Just as important is the fact that mistakes can be forgiven. Honest mistakes are a part of life.

I read about an experiment recently that demonstrated how averse to making mistakes we are. A psychologist divided a class of fifth graders into two groups, and gave them a test.  One group was told they did really well on the test, and were praised for being "very smart".  The other group was told they did poorly on a test, but were told they "tried really hard."  Next, they were given a choice of two tasks. One task was very simple to accomplish, and the other much more difficult.  Which group of the two, do you think, tended to choose the more difficult task – the one that was told they did well and was praised for being "very smart" or the one that was told they did poorly but "tried really hard"?

Ninety percent of the children who were told they "tried really hard" chose the more difficult task, but only half of the children praised for being "very smart" chose the more difficult task.  The authors hypothesized that children in the "very smart" group were less willing to risk their reputation by failing in the more difficult task.  They played it safe because they did not want to make mistakes, which perhaps could have impacted their self esteem, or, how they thought they looked in the eyes of the experimenter.  They did not want to disappoint themselves, or the people who were important to them. In trying to avoid mistakes, they stayed away from the riskier, more challenging but perhaps more rewarding venture. 

This experiment helped me understand two of my best friends in high school. One was labeled "a genius" when he was in the sixth grade, based on his high IQ scores. We all knew he was "a genius" because his mother bragged about it to everyone. Another was a friend who was in our group, but never was in advanced classes.  He made the honor roll on occasion, and missed it other times.  We all knew he was persistent and a hard worker, but far from a star student.  My "genius" friend had high SAT scores and got into an elite university. My other friend had average SAT scores and went to a state college.  My genius friend dropped out of college because it wasn't challenging enough for him, he said. He has worked in the same low level job for the past 30 years, still hoping to write the Great American Novel that will make his name. Perhaps he will, who knows!  My other friend went to law school and occupies a corner office at a prestigious law firm in New York City.

I suspect that my "genius" friend found college quite challenging and could not tolerate the idea that he was making mistakes in exams and papers for the first time in his life.  He had always gotten perfect scores without trying very hard at all.  My other friend made mistakes all of the time, but was able to learn from them and progress in his life.  He learned that if one was not very good at something, one could get better.  He knew that making mistakes was not the end of the world.  People didn't expect him to light the world on fire, and that gave him a certain amount of freedom to try and fail and try again.

The Russian composer Igor Stravinsky once said, "I have learned throughout my life as a composer chiefly through my mistakes and pursuits of false assumptions, not by my exposure to founts of wisdom and knowledge."  We need not fear making mistakes – as long, that is, as we can recognize them, atone for them, and don't keep making the same mistake over and over. Too many people refuse to recognize that they have made a mistake, and, out of stubborn pride, compound their mistake and make it worse.

As the Torah teaches us by giving so many verses over to the subject of atonement for unwitting mistakes, mistakes are an ever-present part of our lives.  Without taking the risk to make a mistake, we would all stay in the exact same place in our lives, never venturing beyond our comfort level, never moving beyond what we had already mastered, never innovating, always being stuck in what we know works.  Every mistake has a blessing hidden inside of it. The question is – can we recognize the mistake, and seize the blessing?

Shabbat Shalom

 

 

 

 

 

 



--
Rabbi Marc D. Rudolph
Congregation Beth Shalom
Naperville, Illinois

Friday, March 16, 2012

Parasha Vayakhel-Pekudai

 What is our "Fair Share" ?
This week in our Torah reading we come to the conclusion of the Book of Exodus and the conclusion of the account of the building of the Mishkan, or Tabernacle in English, the portable sanctuary that the Israelites built in the desert.  We have been reading about this for many weeks now in our Shabbat morning services. In the early weeks we read of the plans that G-d gives Moses for the Mishkan, for its furnishings, and for the dress for the priests who will minister in the Tabernacle.  These past weeks we read about the actual building of the Tablernacle. In comparing the two – the architectural and design plans and the carrying out of those plans, we discover that the builders of the Tabernacle carried out those plans exactly!

We also learn something about the people who actually work on the construction of all of this. A man named Bezalel is in charge of the overall work, along with another man named Oholiab, who seems to be second in command of the project.  The Torah tells us that G-d has endowed them with wisdom and insight to carry out all that G-d has commanded.  Anyone among the people who is inspired to work on the construction is allowed to do so, under their supervision. The Torah tells us that all of the Israelites contribute to the building of the Tabernacle. Then the Torah immediately adds, "They – [the laborers] - continued to bring voluntary gifts each morning."

The question is -- why does the Torah single out the gifts of the laborers? Aren't they included when the Torah tells us that all of the Israelites contributed to the building of the Tabernacle?  Rabbi Shlomo Kluger, one of the leading European Torah scholars of the 19th century, explains this with a story:

"The daughter of the Rebbe Zusha was engaged. The Rebbe's wife, mother of the bride, went to the seamstress to order a beautiful gown for her daughter. Four or five weeks later, the Rebbetzin went back to the seamstress to pick up the gown for the bride. However, she returned home without the gown. The Rebbe asked her what happened. She related that she in fact picked up the gown but that as she was leaving the store, she noticed that the seamstress was crying.

 "The Rebbetzin inquired why she was crying and the seamstress told her 'It is because I also have a daughter who is a Bride. I wish I could afford such a gown for my own daughter.' The Rebbetzin explained to her husband, 'I told her on the spot -- You keep the gown!' Reb Zusha was overjoyed that his wife fulfilled the mitzvah of providing for the needs of a poor bride in such a noble fashion.

 "But then he asked his Rebbetzin, 'Did you pay her for the gown?' Reb Zusha's wife was incredulous at the question. 'What do you mean did I pay her for the gown? I gave her the gown! Must I pay her for the gown on top of that as well?'

 "'Indeed you must!' Reb Zusha told his wife.  'After all, she did work for you for five weeks, so you must pay her for the gown.' The Rebbetzin told her husband that he was right and she returned and paid the seamstress for the gown that she had just 'given' her."

Just like the Rebbetizin, the workers on the Mishkan could have said to Moses, "What do you mean I should give a contribution toward the building of the Tabernacle?  I am working on it – Must I contribute to the Tabernacle on top of that?" Therefore, the Torah goes out of its way to make certain we understand that the workers themselves contributed to the building of the Tabernacle, OVER and ABOVE their contribution of labor.  We have many fine examples of that ethos in our congregation, people who contribute their time, energy, and labor while also contributing financially to the synagogue.  Such was the Jewish way in the time of Moses – and so it is today.

Shabbat Shalom



--
Rabbi Marc D. Rudolph
Congregation Beth Shalom
Naperville, Illinois

Friday, March 9, 2012

Parasha Ki Tissah


And oftentimes excusing of a fault
Doth make the fault the worse by the excuse.
~William Shakespeare
 
In this week's Parasha, Ki Tissa, the Israelites, under the guidance of Aaron, build a golden calf.  When confronted by Moses as to how he could allow the people to engage in such behavior, Aaron makes… excuses.  First, he blames the people themselves. "You know," he tells Moses, "that this people, they are bent on evil."  Then Aaron seems to evade responsibility: "I said to them, 'Who has gold?' They removed it and gave it to me." Finally, he claims that he did not take an active role in creating the Golden Calf – "I threw it into the fire, and this calf emerged!"  One commentator[1] notes that in claiming he did not actively fashion the golden calf Aaron implies divine approval!   Would it not have been better had he owned up to the part that he in fact played in the incident?

 

Perhaps Aaron would have been better served by saying something like this:

 

I will not put myself into a position where I have to defend myself, to state my side of the story. There's no side. There's only one side, which is the lack of judgment on my part. That's really all I have to say. I have no excuse….. I intend to mend the bridges that I've burned and help rebuild the bridge if I need to all by myself.  

 

These were, in fact, the very words Steve Smith, the great wide receiver of the Carolina Panthers, used in addressing a fight he got into with a teammate at a routine practice session. Smith broke the teammate's nose and was suspended for two games.[2] 

 

We human beings tend to go easy on ourselves. We rationalize our actions and behaviors to put them in the best possible light. We more easily shift the blame to others instead of squarely facing ourselves. That is why Steve Smith's words are so refreshing, especially for a professional athlete. We read about so many great athletes who are self centered and evade responsibility whenever they could. (Think Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens ……) Here is an athlete who says, "I did it and there are no excuses for my behavior. I caused damage to myself and to my relationships with others, and I now have some work to do to repair that damage."

 

The Modern Hebrew poet Judah Leib Gordon wrote, "We have a bat's eye for our own faults, and an eagle's eye for the faults of others."  Just as we can be too easy judging ourselves, we can be too harsh in our judgment of others. Perhaps this is why our sages teach in Pirke Avot, "Judge everyone l'khaf zekhut – in the scale of merit."   With respect to Aaron, our sages teach by example. In his commentary on the incident of the Golden Calf, Rashi tries to put Aaron's behavior in the best possible light by delving into the possible hidden motivations for Aaron's behavior.

 

In our own lives, as well, we should cultivate a charitable disposition toward judging the behavior of others.  Rabbi Jack Riemer notes that often we make "judgments without knowing enough facts, or without the sympathy and the empathy that we ought to show toward other human beings."[3]

 

May we learn to judge others as kindly and compassionately as we judge ourselves.


 



[1] Etz Hayim Torah and Commentary,  New York, The Rabbinical Assembly p. 534 (note)

[2] John Kador, Effective Apology San Francisco, Berrett-Koehler, 2009  p.75

[3] Joseph Telushkin, You Shall Be Holy, Volume 1 New York, Bell Tower, p. 74


--
Rabbi Marc D. Rudolph
Congregation Beth Shalom
Naperville, Illinois