The last disagreement between Rabbi Levi Bar Hama and Rabbi Hanina in the middle of the page is over the meaning of "Har HaMoriah." Rabbi Levi Bar Hama states that the name "Har HaMoriah" comes from "yod resh hey," because that is where Torah emanates from. Rashi and Tosafot explain that he is think Har HaMoriah is referring to Jerusalem and has in mind the famous verse "ki mitzion tetze Torah." Rabbi Hanina argues that the name has to do with fear (yod resh aleph) and it is so named because the idolatrous nation were fearful when Israel received the Torah. Rashi and Tosafot cite a tradition that perhaps Rabbi Hanina thought that Har HaMoriah was Mt Sinai, and not Jerusalem, which seems to jive better with his interpretation.
Either way, here we seem to have a disagreement of what Torah is about. Is it about teaching Torah to the world or is it about inspiring fear in those who do not believe in Torah? Are we in the business of spreading the love or scaring people? The answer, I think, is both. All you need is not love, there also needs to be a sense of yirat shamayim. This reminded me of a comment from Yevamot 79a that was cited in Kushner's commentary in the Etz Hayyim for last week's parasha. On Gen 18:19, where God makes explicit his promise to Abraham right before bringing him into the Sodom and Amora conversation, Kushner quotes from the Talmud: "The descendants of Abraham are characterized by three traits: a capacity for kindness, a sense of shame, and a commitment to doing what is right." We seem to be all over traits one and three, at least homiletically, but what about a "sense of shame"? This stems from a sense of yirat hashem, which we don't talk about too much. Love certainly is a powerful emotion, but so is fear. Both of them hold human relationships together, and we can't have one without the other for God as well.
On a lighter note, the last sugiya on the page lists the qualifications for a shaliah tzibbur -- do you think they teach that in cantorial school?
Monday, October 29, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I hadn't read this post when I wrote my last comment about shame, but I think you're comment really sharpens the question. What do we do with shame in a culture that seems to feel none? How do we think about something like embarassment when there seems to be nearly nothing that anyone feels the need to be embarassed about? (What if I just spelled embarassed wrong? Akward.) In any case, I do think we should wonder how we should employ that third characteristic. I am not sure, however, that we really have fear down either. I think love might be what we are best at. No fear or shame though...no real religion, it seems to me.
Oh...and no.
Post a Comment