[net.religion.jewish] Parashat Terumah, Purim, and the net.

bds@homxa.UUCP (B.STERMAN) (02/24/85)

This past week we read parashat Terumah. There is an  interesting
medrash  there  that  is  relevant  to  the  current time of year
(Purim) and to the current tone of the net postings. If I may.


" Another view, 'Take for me a portion', this  is  what  is  said
'choose  a  name  rather  than  riches'. Choose the name of Moshe
rather than the  riches  of  Korach...,choose  the  name  Pinchas
rather  than  the  riches  of Zimri..., choose the name Mordechai
rather than the name Haman "

There are a number of difficulties arising from this Medrash. Why
of  all  the  stories  in Tanach, are these three chosen? What do
they have in common, and what is the medrash trying  to  tell  us
about  them?  Also,  the  Medrash  is  usually  troubled  by some
literary obscurity in the text, so what does this all have to  do
with 'viyikchu li terumeh'?

In each of these cases, Moshe vs Korach, Pinchas  vs  Zimri,  and
Mordechai  vs  Haman,  the  hero  is  placed  in  a dubious moral
situation  where  an  objective  viewer  might  justifiably  side
against  the hero.  Korach's objection to the political structure
of the desert society was perhaps  a  valid  one.  His  call  for
social  reform "madua titnaseu al kehal hashem", was not entirely
irrational. In fact, when Korach  pointed  out  that  Moshe,  who
assumed  office  without  election,  might have been motivated by
personal ambition rather than concern for  the  community,  Moshe
could  only  respond  in one way. "vayipol moshe al panav". 'God,
you know my motives and that is all that matters.'

Pinchas as well, committed a heinous offense. How  dare  he  take
the  law  into  his  own  hands and execute his personal brand of
justice? The Medrash explains that the Sanhedrin wanted  to  kill
him  for  his  deeds.  "vayaamod  pinchas vayephallel". In such a
situation Pinchas' only recourse was to turn to God for  strength
in   the  knowledge  that  at  least  his  acts  were  ultimately
justified. God's judgement alone is important.

The  story  of  Mordechai  also  reflects  this  type  of   moral
dialectic.   His  stubborn determination in refusing to honor the
king's official resulted in  the  threatened  extinction  of  the
Persian  Jewish  community.   Were  I to find myself in a similar
predicament, my response would probably be to bow down and accept
the  responsibility  for  my actions, and commit a personal crime
against God, that the rest of the nation might survive.  This  is
perhaps  the  reason  why  I  am  not  the  hero in any Meggilah.
Mordechai understood the need to  uphold  a  higher  standard  of
morality   and   be   consistent   despite   the   ramifications.
Nonetheless, between the time of Haman's decree to slaughter  the
Jews  and  its  eventual  revocation, Mordechai's conscience must
have been brutally pained. "umordechai yada et kol  asher  naasah
vayilbash  sak  vaefer". His solace, if any came, from his belief
that God knew and understood.

Judaism  feels  that  a  name  is  more  significant  than   does
Shakespeare.  The  name  reflects  one's  essence,  one's core. A
change of name in  the  bible  signifies  that  the  individual's
fundamental personality is altered. God's name is holy because it
somehow expresses what God is, and so He is referred to simply as
'The  Name'.  Psychologically,  a  person responds on a different
level to his name than he does to  anything  else.  Say  fire  to
someone  asleep and they will barely role over, but whisper their
name and they will probably respond.

Wealth, on the other hand, is an external, and heavily  bound  up
in  the  way others perceive you. It is an artificial determinant
of value. The Medrash is  trying  to  explain  that  it  is  more
important  to  be  true  to  what  you  are  than to let temporal
variables  influence  your  priorities.  The  stories  of  Moshe,
Mordechai,  and  Pinchas are all examples of people who were able
to see beyond the transient, and act on principles that came from
deep inside. The villains, despite their claims of lofty motives,
prove upon closer  examination  to  be  nothing  more  than  self
serving   rationalizers   devoted   to   their   own   interests.
Unfortunately, sometimes only God sees the difference.

There is one word in  the  text  "veyikchu  li  teruma"  that  is
awkward.  'Take  for me a portion'. The word "li" is superfluous.
From the context we  realize  that  the  donations  are  for  the
sanctuary  which  is ultimately for God. The Medrash is sensitive
to this and is therefore moved to explain that  when  one  gives,
God  is not concerned with how much or what he gives. All that is
important is that it be given

One of the most important things in  Judaism  is  the  notion  of
'ahavat yisroel'. This time of year especially, unity is crucial.
It is impossible to approach pesach and the season where thoughts
turn  to hopes of redemption, if we are busy infighting. The past
few weeks, reading the net has been like watching the  Democratic
convention.

The point I would like to make is that none of us know  what  the
point  is.   Maybe  the  determination  of  one's religious worth
should be left up to God.  We all have our own ideas, and  that's
good, but too many times we engage in personal condemnation based
on those views. It appears to me, that if the readers and writers
of  the  net  are not homogeneous in there opinions, they are, at
least, sincere. So let's keep that in mind.

Chag sameach - a very happy purim to all.

Baruch     ihnp4!homxa!bds