B"H
While I'm doing a short midrash this week, there's lots of other interesting ones in the full collection here, including a very cool story about Onkelos and his uncle which I may get around to dealing with another time...;-)
1) Midrash Tanchuma on Mishpatim, Chapter 2
ואלה המשפטים. זה שאמר הכתוב, מלך במשפט יעמיד ארץ, ואיש תרומות יהרסנה (משלי כט ד).
מלכה של תורה, במשפט שהוא עושה, מעמיד את הארץ. ואיש תרומות יהרסנה. אם
משים אדם עצמו כתרומה הזו שמושלכת בזויות הבית ואומר מה לי בטורח הצבור, מה
לי בדיניהם, מה לי לשמוע קולם, שלום עליך נפשי, הרי זה מחריב את העולם.
הוי, ואיש תרומות יהרסנה. מעשה ברבי אסי, כשהיה מסתלק מן העולם, נכנס בן
אחותו אצלו, מצאו בוכה. אמר לו, רבי, מפני מה אתה בוכה. יש תורה שלא למדת
ולימדת, הרי תלמידיך יושבים לפניך. יש גמילות חסדים שלא עשית. ועל כל מדות
שהיו בך, היית מתרחק מן הדינין, ולא נתת רשות על עצמך להתמנות על צרכי
צבור. אמר לו, בני, עליה אני בוכה, שמא אתן דין וחשבון על שהייתי יכול
לעשות דיניהם של ישראל. הוי, ואיש תרומות יהרסנה:
Skeleton
Surprisingly (given the predominance of halachic content in parshat Mishpatim), there are many midrashim to pick from this week. However, I'm keeping it short and simple due to other commitments...
The second chapter of this week's Midrash Tanchuma is based on a pasuk from Mishlei (29:4) 'melech b'mishpat ya'amid aretz, v'ish trumot yehersenah' (JPS translation: 'By justice a King sustains the land, but a fraudulent man tears it down'). However, in contrast to this translation the midrash itself makes connection between 'ish trumot' and 'terumah' - the tithe separated from one's crops which belongs to the Kohahim - to interpret 'ish trumot' as a person who separates himself/herself from the community, its laws and judgments.
Initially the midrash's interpretation appears simple - the ish trumot is described as someone who, when confronted with conflicts and the resulting dinim within the community, asks 'mah li?' (what is it to me?) 'shalom alayich nafshi' (there is peace upon my soul) - implying that as long one is personally content there is no need to concern oneself with anyone else's problems or with communal rules/judgments. But this is a dangerous attitude - linking back to the original source text from Mishlei, the midrash condemns just such a person as 'destroying the world'.
So far this sounds familiar - after all, throughout Jewish ethics runs the core principle that we are all responsible for each other, that 'kol yisrael averim zeh ba'zeh'. Given this, it makes sense that someone who separates himself/herself from communal affairs in the way described above is seen as a destructive force - after all, if everyone only acted out of self-interest without any sense of communal responsibility, we would quickly become a highly unjust society.
However, the midrash then goes on to tell the story of Rabbi Asi who, facing death, is found weeping by his nephew. We are told through this nephew that Rabbi Asi has been a great Torah scholar and teacher with many students, and that he has done many acts of chesed (lovingkindness) - all highly respected attributes which also show an engagement with the community around him. He certainly does not appear to be the ish trumot initially described above who is only concerned for his own welfare and not for the wider community. So why the tears?
Rabbi Asi's nephew also poses this question - but in doing so, reveals the answer itself. He points out that Rabbi Asi, despite all his middot/attributes, has distanced himself from judging cases and refused to be appointed over matters concerning the tzibur or community. It turns out that it is precisely this that Rabbi Asi is grieved over on his deathbed, as he anticipates that after death he may have justify himself for not making judgments within the Jewish community.
How might Rabbi Asi's example affect our understanding of the ish trumot? Well, we can see that the way one is involved in the community through e.g. education or chesed is very different from one's involvement through sitting in judgment. If someone is a great teacher or does a lot of charitable work, who is going to say a bad word about them? By contrast, to make a judgment between two disputing parties means that there is inherently a risk that one party (usually the losing one) may come to think negatively of the judge in the case. In some cases, it is also very hard to judge fairly between the two sides and the judge can end up having to make difficult decisions which may not be universally seen as 'just', even if they are in accordance with the letter of the law.
To be a judge and involve oneself in communal disputes is therefore a demanding role which does not always result in either inner peace or praise from others - and yet, according to this understanding of the midrash one who refuses to play this role when he/she is suited to it and therefore distances himself from the community is seen as ultimately destroying any chance of a just society. While we should certainly avoid being like the first ish trumot who is only concerned for his own happiness, we can also see that being truly involved in society means that we should not merely seek the 'quiet life' and separate ourselves from conflict if we are able to bring justice to our community.
Shavua tov!
RPT
The second chapter of this week's Midrash Tanchuma is based on a pasuk from Mishlei (29:4) 'melech b'mishpat ya'amid aretz, v'ish trumot yehersenah' (JPS translation: 'By justice a King sustains the land, but a fraudulent man tears it down'). However, in contrast to this translation the midrash itself makes connection between 'ish trumot' and 'terumah' - the tithe separated from one's crops which belongs to the Kohahim - to interpret 'ish trumot' as a person who separates himself/herself from the community, its laws and judgments.
Initially the midrash's interpretation appears simple - the ish trumot is described as someone who, when confronted with conflicts and the resulting dinim within the community, asks 'mah li?' (what is it to me?) 'shalom alayich nafshi' (there is peace upon my soul) - implying that as long one is personally content there is no need to concern oneself with anyone else's problems or with communal rules/judgments. But this is a dangerous attitude - linking back to the original source text from Mishlei, the midrash condemns just such a person as 'destroying the world'.
So far this sounds familiar - after all, throughout Jewish ethics runs the core principle that we are all responsible for each other, that 'kol yisrael averim zeh ba'zeh'. Given this, it makes sense that someone who separates himself/herself from communal affairs in the way described above is seen as a destructive force - after all, if everyone only acted out of self-interest without any sense of communal responsibility, we would quickly become a highly unjust society.
However, the midrash then goes on to tell the story of Rabbi Asi who, facing death, is found weeping by his nephew. We are told through this nephew that Rabbi Asi has been a great Torah scholar and teacher with many students, and that he has done many acts of chesed (lovingkindness) - all highly respected attributes which also show an engagement with the community around him. He certainly does not appear to be the ish trumot initially described above who is only concerned for his own welfare and not for the wider community. So why the tears?
Rabbi Asi's nephew also poses this question - but in doing so, reveals the answer itself. He points out that Rabbi Asi, despite all his middot/attributes, has distanced himself from judging cases and refused to be appointed over matters concerning the tzibur or community. It turns out that it is precisely this that Rabbi Asi is grieved over on his deathbed, as he anticipates that after death he may have justify himself for not making judgments within the Jewish community.
How might Rabbi Asi's example affect our understanding of the ish trumot? Well, we can see that the way one is involved in the community through e.g. education or chesed is very different from one's involvement through sitting in judgment. If someone is a great teacher or does a lot of charitable work, who is going to say a bad word about them? By contrast, to make a judgment between two disputing parties means that there is inherently a risk that one party (usually the losing one) may come to think negatively of the judge in the case. In some cases, it is also very hard to judge fairly between the two sides and the judge can end up having to make difficult decisions which may not be universally seen as 'just', even if they are in accordance with the letter of the law.
To be a judge and involve oneself in communal disputes is therefore a demanding role which does not always result in either inner peace or praise from others - and yet, according to this understanding of the midrash one who refuses to play this role when he/she is suited to it and therefore distances himself from the community is seen as ultimately destroying any chance of a just society. While we should certainly avoid being like the first ish trumot who is only concerned for his own happiness, we can also see that being truly involved in society means that we should not merely seek the 'quiet life' and separate ourselves from conflict if we are able to bring justice to our community.
Shavua tov!
RPT
No comments:
Post a Comment