The news of the death of Rabbi David Hartman, zichrono livracha, may his memory be for a blessing, is sad news indeed and I wish to extend condolences to the family and to the students of this great teacher.

I am not going to go to great lengths to write words of tribute to Rabbi Hartman because many words have been and will be written by those who knew him more closely. I will simply explain why the loss of this Orthodox Rabbi strikes so many of us so deeply.

Rabbi Hartman was an orthodox Jew. Yet, he understood the limits of halacha, Jewish law. He realized that Jewish observance  without a sense of common decency, without spirituality and vision was meaningless, in fact dangerous. And, he recognized as so few it seems do today that there are many paths to Judaism, many paths to Torah and that those outside of “Orthodoxy” have so much to contribute to our people and to Torah.

His determination to seek  a way to observe Jewish law while remaining an active participant in this world rather than to use it as a means to distance ourselves from the world; a way to encourage a vision of a greater Jewish people and a greater world rather than for Jewish law to be used as a province of the elite few; a way to stand by principles of faith and obligation while encouraging those from different streams of Judaism to act according to their conscience and faith while deepening their study of Torah is his greatest legacy.

I spent two weeks at the Hartman Institute in 2005 studying Torah with Rabbi Hartman, his son Rabbi Donniel Hartman and the faculty of the Institute. It was an unforgettable two weeks and I look forward to participating in such a program in the future. The work that the Hartman Institute continues to do in so many areas, including the Engaging Israel project which we participated in at Beth Israel last year will continue to add to Rabbi Hartman’s legacy.

I ask all of you to take the time to read the obituaries and tributes which will appear in the days ahead in Jewish media throughout the world. We have lost a treasure at a time when we so deeply need the vision that Rabbi Hartman provided. May all of his students continue to advance his work and may our people grow in Torah, in kindness, in respect for each other and commitment to a better world.

Now that football season is over (actually it ended for me during the 3rd quarter of the AFC championship game), it’s time to think about baseball. What better time of year for the baseball fan? Every team is in first place. You close your eyes and imagine green grass and warm sun. And, for me, I think of the few days Avi and I spent at spring training a few years ago- one of the best trips I have ever taken. (A bit of advice, if you want to go to spring training and your team opens its training facilities to the public, plan your trip for the last days before the exhibition games start- walking around the Red Sox training camp while the players were practicing was one of the biggest thrills of my life).

But, when the talk turns to baseball, there are some questions which are bound to cause disagreement: whether so and so should be in the hall of fame, whether the game is better today than 30 years ago, whether the designated hitter “experiment” should be abandoned? All of these and many others have started their share of arguments over the years. But, the one that really gets people agitated is: “What’s your favorite baseball movie?”

I love that question because unlike most questions that start with: “What’s your favorite…”, I have an unequivocal answer for this one. No hemming and hawing, no “well, it depends on whether…”, I have an absolute favorite baseball movie and since the day I saw it for the first time in 1992, I never have wavered. It isn’t The Natural, it isn’t Field of Dreams, it isn’t Bull Durham and it isn’t the Bad News Bears or any one of the others. My far and away favorite baseball movie of all time is A League of Their Own.

In fact, I would rank that movie among my 10 favorites of all time. Directed by Penny Marshall with a tremendous cast which included Tom Hanks, Madonna, Geena Davis, Garry Marshall, Rosie O’Donnell, and Jon Lovitz, the film is based on the “All American Girls Professional Baseball League” which began during World War II and continued for a few year after. The movie is heartwarming, poignant, funny and, best of all, it really is about baseball.

This morning, I read an obituary for a woman named Lavonne Paire Davis who died on Saturday. She was a star in the league and was a consultant to Penny Marshall for the film. Just reading her obit made me want to go back and watch the movie again.

I’m not a movie reviewer but I have never seen a movie which captured the heart and soul of the game I love and placed it in a context that was believable and real as this film did. If you’ve never seen it, I defy you to try to watch the “world series” scenes without finding them as exciting as any world series game in recent years and I defy you to try to watch the final scene in the movie without a tear.

I’ve become somewhat frustrated with baseball over the last few years (except for 2004 and 2007 of course) because the games have grown interminably long, the whole steroids business is horribly upsetting and free agency and salaries are of course ridiculously out of control. So, I look for opportunities to find the “pure” game I love with the characters and the situations which have made baseball the American pastime. I have found it in many places including, and most clearly, in Penny Marshall’s film. If you haven’t seen it, a cold, snowy winter day is the best time to watch it. If you have seen it, go watch it again and it will prove that Tom Hanks’ great line was wrong. There is crying in baseball.

The elections in Israel provided a surprise, unexpected according to most polls. While Prime Minister Netanyahu’s party did win the most seats and his party and those to the right of his earned a majority, it was a much slimmer majority than most predicted. Thus, in accordance with the system of government in Israel, the Prime Minister will be given the first chance at forming a government. He has a stark choice to make. Although there are many different analyses of what he could or could not do, the editorial in today’s Forward.com lays out the choices in rather stark terms and echoes some of what I wrote yesterday. The editorial can be found at http://forward.com/articles/169771/bibis-deciding-vote/

President Obama’s inaugural address was a remarkable speech. It was uplifting and courageous and sent a clear message of his vision for this country. I found his concentration on the concept of equality to be stirring and full of promise and his extension of that concept to gay and lesbian Americans was surprisingly frank and I was deeply moved and I am deeply grateful for his position.

I know that many in this country will not agree with the specifics of President Obama’s statements. That is their prerogative. That is what it means to live in a democracy. But, it is also the prerogative of the person elected president to set the course that he or she views as proper for the nation and, even if there could be debate about the specifics, I would hope that the vast majority of Americans would agree in principle with the values he stressed: equality, responsibility and an unwavering search for peace even as we take on the responsibility of protecting our nation and our values.

As we celebrated one ritual of democracy yesterday with the inauguration, Israelis today are celebrating another ritual of democracy. Election Day in Israel has come after a long and some have said boring or uninspiring campaign as leaders are elected to shape the future of the Jewish State.

If the polls are correct, the government will be led once again by Prime Minister Netanyahu and, presuming he can form a government and it seems clear he will be able to do so, it will be a government formed from the “right of center” parties, perhaps bringing the country further to the “right” than in the past. This will be a government which, if pre-election speeches are any indication, will support the current settlements and create new ones and, while continuing to speak about peace negotiations, will not consider the current climate the appropriate time to enter into such negotiations claiming that there is no partner for peace. Perhaps, and this remains to be seen, the government will state that it has come to the conclusion that many, sadly, have come to, that a “two state solution” is impossible. It would then be forced to articulate its vision for an alternative solution (and I have yet to hear an alternative which is reasonable) or opt for a continued status quo which is harmful, in my opinion, to both sides.

But, when the government is elected, it will be by the will of the people. And, as I said above about our country, those who are elected have that right to articulate the vision, both in general and in specific for the nation. Most will agree, some will not. But, the will of the people will be reflected in their decisions.

This places many American Jews who love Israel but who oppose in the strongest terms the continued occupation in a difficult situation. On the one hand, we have no right to criticize Israelis for their choices. And, keeping in mind, that they are the people who face the ramifications of their political decisions much more directly than we do and that it is their lives and the lives of their children which are one the line, one could say that it is not our place to question.

On the other hand, as a Jewish state which seeks the support and concern of Jews (and others) around the world, what do we do if the values expressed by the Israeli public are not those we share? Do we continue to speak our minds hoping to give strength to those in Israel who see things the way many of us do? Or do we realize that this is the choice Israelis have made and we must support the decisions of the current government? Or, do we disengage completely from Israel and admit that the gulf between our values has grown too large?

I will opt for the first option. We can not disengage ourselves and give up on the cherished and critical relationship between Diaspora Jews and Israel. But, we can not simply stand by if we think the direction of the country is misguided. While we can’t vote in Israeli elections, we can continue respectfully and fairly to speak about the  values we feel are important in our congregations, work to support those in Israel who share our vision and we can, in appropriate, positive, constructive and cautious ways, encourage our government, where appropriate, to continue to urge Israelis and Palestinians toward a path of compromise and reconciliation. That is the path I hope that those of us who are dismayed by the predicted results of the election in Israel will take.

May the coming years see peace and strength in Israel and in our nation.

We have a wonderful tradition at Beth Israel called Sweatshirt Shabbat. Once a year, during the middle of winter, we encourage people to wear sweatshirts to shul and to join in a special kiddush featuring Cholent, Shabbat stews. This Shabbat was Sweatshirt Shabbat and even though the day was unseasonably warm, it was a great day.

Each year, I pick a special sweatshirt for the occasion- often cheering on my beloved New England Patriots- but this year I needed something new. So, after seeing a great tv commercial for the upcoming “prequel” to one of my favorite movies of all time: Monsters Inc., I came to shul with a ‘Monsters University” sweatshirt, bought just for this special moment. The shirt featured the trademark single eye in the middle and I wore it proudly.

I was absolutely stunned by the numbers of people who looked at my shirt with not the slightest hint of recognition and after I explained it continued to stare at me without any appreciation for this work of cinematic achievement.

How could this be?

So, the purpose of this simple blog posting is to implore you. If you have never seen Monsters Inc., forget about seeing any of the current great movies (you have to see Lincoln but it can wait), and find Monsters Inc. at the theater in 3d if you can still find or get it on demand or on the internet or whatever and watch it as soon as you can. I guarantee you will find the story absolutely captivating and the humor of the highest quality. And, if you have seen it and loved it, please respond to this blog and restore my faith in the current state of cultural appreciation.

Shavua Tov!

 

I have many musical favorites and I go through periods when I find myself particularly drawn to the music of one or another of those favorites. Sometimes, it’s my mood that dictates my choice. But, often just hearing one song from a favorite musician reminds me how much I miss hearing his or her songs and I begin to play them over and over again.

It happened to me a few days ago. Ellen and I were traveling in Northern Michigan just after Christmas and as we walked down a very quiet Front St in Traverse City seeing the faded Christmas decorations, feeling the cold wind, a melody and lyrics suddenly jumped into my mind. A sad, sad holiday song with a glimmer of hope that “it doesn’t have to be that way”:

Snowy nights and Christmas lights

Icy windowpanes

Make me wish that we could be Together again
And the windy winter avenues

Just don’t seem the same

And the Christmas carols sound like blues

But the choir is not to blame

I hope many of you recognize these words and will immediately run to your cd cabinet or itunes or youtube and listen to the beautiful melody and one of the sweetest, expressive voices that country rock or folk rock or whatever you might want to call it has ever produced. The timing of my rediscovery of his music was  ironic for, had he lived, Jim Croce would be 70 years old today, January 10. His tragic death in a plane crash in 1973 was such a t loss and 40 years later, his music still is among my favorites.

Unlike Harry Chapin, Lennon and McCartney or Jim Steinman (who wrote many of MeatLoaf’s songs), I don’t think I’ve ever quoted Jim Croce in a sermon (although I might try it this week). I don’t know that his words inspire the kind of spiritual thoughts that the others I mentioned do for me. But, his gentle expressive voice and the emotionally charged lyrics have stood the test of time.

If all you’ve heard of Jim Croce’s music is Bad Bad Leroy Brown or Time in A Bottle or I’ve Got a Name or Operator, (all fine songs), you owe it to yourself to find some of the others: Alabama Rain, One Less Set of Footsteps, Lover’s Cross (my favorite), his beautiful version of Old Man River  and, of course, It Doesn’t Have to Be That Way.

So many of songs have a melancholy character to them, of love lost, of disappointment, of reminiscence and each of them in their own way is so beautiful.

In one of those moments that just seem to be “beshert” (meant to be), on the day after we wandered down Front Street and the Jim Croce Christmas song came to my mind, Ellen and I were in a gallery in Suttons Bay, Michigan when suddenly the sound of “Lover’s Cross” filled the room. But, it wasn’t Jim Croce singing. I didn’t like the version quite as much but it was the first time I had heard the song sung by anyone else. I did a bit of searching on the internet and found the version I had heard. In fact, it was recorded by Jim’s son, A J Croce. Suddenly, I appreciated once again the power that music has to span years and lives.

I wonder what direction Jim Croce’s music would have taken. Maybe I would have liked his “later songs”, maybe not. But, some would have loved them even more while many of us (most likely including me) would have just kept singing the old songs over. Sadly, new songs were not to be. But those of us who love his music can listen with great appreciation for his enormous talent shared for much too brief a time.

Although it really doesn’t matter in terms of my appreciation for the man and his music, and I didn’t know this until a few days ago, Jim Croce converted to Judaism and is buried in a Jewish Cemetery. So, it seems particularly appropriate to say that his music keeps him bitzror hahayim, in the bond of life, as we play and sing his beautiful songs. May his memory- and his music-be for a blessing.

Most of the posts that I have written for this blog fall into one of two categories. I am either writing about current events or some aspect of nostalgia for the 60s and 70s, the era I grew up in. I’ll continue with those posts in the months ahead but I also want, occasionally, to use this blog as an opportunity to share some of my favorite traditional Jewish texts. I’ll begin by sharing a text I plan to teach my 5th grade class in Mishna this coming week.

The Mishna in Baba Kamma chapter 3, mishna 8 discusses the question of where the responsibility lies when there is a collision between two people on the street resulting in damages to an item being carried by one of the individuals. The Mishna begins by saying: If one is walking with a jug and another with a wooden plank and the two objects collide, there is no obligation for either party to pay damages since everyone has the right to walk on the street.

However, the Mishna then presents another situation. Let’s imagine that the person with the plank is in the front and the person with the jug is behind him, if the jug is broken by the plank, the person carrying the plank is exempt from any blame since he was walking in the front. This applies unless that person suddenly stops without giving warning to the person behind him carrying the jug. If that happens, the person carrying the plank is responsible for paying damages. However, if the person carrying the plank said: “stop”, and the person carrying the jug still bumped into him, the person carrying the plank is not responsible because he tried to prevent the accident with a warning.

Then the Mishna gives the opposite example. Say the person carrying the jug is walking in the front. If the person carrying the plank  bumps the plank into the jug and breaks it,  the person carrying the plank is responsible since he could have prevented the accident. If however, the person carrying the jug were to suddenly stop, the person carrying the plank behind him would not be responsible unless the person carrying the jug said: “Stop” in which case there is liability since he tried to prevent the accident with a warning.

When I teach this class, I always begin the class by showing the kids the youtube video of the old 1980’s Reese’s Peanut Butter Cup commercials in which two people bump into each other, one carrying chocolate the other peanut butter. (See, I got some nostalgia in anyway). But, this is a very serious discussion.

Think about the responsibility for a car accident in which one car rear ends the one in front. In general, it would be considered the fault of the person in the rear car. But, what if the driver of the front car made a sudden unjustified stop, who then becomes responsible? And, how do brake lights figure into the discussion. Is this the equivalent of saying; “stop!” which places the responsibility back upon the rear car?

The important message for the kids and for all of us is that when we walk (or drive) down the street, we have to recognize the equal rights of the person on the street with us. We also have to realize that when we walk down the street with a fragile object, we have the responsibility to make sure that we are taking the proper precautions to insure that we get home safely. We also have the responsibility when we are walking with a dangerous object that we are taking the proper precautions to insure we don’t cause any damage. The Mishna understood the complexity of the situation and tried to set up a structure by which we can determine responsibility. But, at the same time, the Mishna would have urged us to go “lifnim mishurat hadin”, beyond the letter of the law by taking extra precautions to protect ourselves and others as well.

Back to nostalgia next week. For now, think about how these scenarios might in fact apply to situations in our own lives.

I am looking forward to tomorrow morning. I teach the  5th grade class at the Hebrew Day School in Ann Arbor for one hour each Friday morning and tomorrow I plan to teach one of my favorite stories from Jewish tradition.

The class is in Mishna and we’ve been talking about the Jewish calendar over the past few weeks and studying the sections of the Mishna in Masechet Rosh Hodesh which deal with the sighting of the New Moon marking the beginning of the new month. The Mishna discusses in detail the process by which witnesses would come to Jerusalem to testify that they had seen the new moon. If the testimony was accepted, the new month was declared.

The Mishna goes on to tell this wonderful story:

Rabban Gamliel, the head of the Rabbinic court, was approached by two witnesses who claimed they saw the new moon at one point but then subsequently did not see it. Rabban Gamliel, who was apparently somewhat lenient in his acceptance of testimony accepted their statement as proof that the New Moon had arrived. Rabbi Dosa ben Herkanas scoffed at this and rejected their testimony and Rabbi Yehoshua, a prominent Rabbi, agreed with his hesitation.

There now was a serious problem among the Jewish people. There could be only one calendar if the people were to be united. So, Rabban Gamliel needed to put a stop to this disagreement. So,  he ordered Rabbi Yehoshua to come to him on the day that Rabbi Yehoshua thought was Yom Kippur carrying his walking stick and money with him (I always add in teaching this story to kids that he probably told him to eat an apple as well), all things which are forbidden on Yom Kippur in order to prove that Rabban Gamliel’s calendar was correct.

Rabbi Yehoshua is stuck in a bad situation. He seeks the advice of other Rabbis and Rabbi Akiva says to him that he must accept Rabban Gamliel’s decision or else we would always question the decisions made by any Rabbinic Court.

So, Rabbi Yehoshua, reluctantly perhaps, gives in and goes to Rabban Gamliel with his walking stick and money in his hand on the day that Yom Kippur would have fallen if his calendar was accepted.

And, here is the beautiful part of the story.

As he comes to him, Rabban Gamliel stands up,  kisses Rabbi Yehoshua and says to him: Bo bishalom, come in peace, my teacher and my student. My teacher in wisdom and my student in that you accepted my words.

Once he had made his decision it was impossible for Rabban Gamliel to admit he was wrong. Perhaps he learned to make better decisions in the future. But, at this moment, he had to go along with what he had begun. Rabbi Yehoshua got very good advice from Rabbi Akiva: avoid the confrontation, accept the decision.

This is a story about the way Jewish law works and how important both authority and sensitivity are to the process of making halachic decisions. Rabban Gamliel had to do what he did but he did it in the gentlest way possible, publicly thanking his student for accepting his word and avoiding the temptation to humiliate him, acknowledging that he had learned something very important from him. What did he learn from him? I’ll leave that for you to decide.

Come in peace my teacher and my student. I love that last line because I, like any teacher, have learned so much from my students and that really comes first.

I wonder what I’ll learn from my students tomorrow morning.

May God bless all school children and all students everywhere.

 

In this era of instant and constant communication, we rush to fill the silence with words.

But, this time, I can’t find sufficient words.

Instead, I will just offer a prayer that the families of the children and teachers who were killed will find some comfort and some peace in the months and years to come.
May those children who survived the massacre be granted the ability to trust in the world again.

And, May we, in this nation, find the courage to confront the horror of this terrible moment in our history and make wise decisions to address the issue of guns and violence, the needs of those who suffer from mental illness and the right that we and our children have to live our lives in safety.

May  we never forget.

I know that one of the purposes of a blog is to get something out in cyberspace as quickly as possible. And, sometimes I write blog posts in a few minutes, press “publish” and get on with my life.

But, I’ve been working on this particular posting for two or three weeks now and still am not sure that I have come up with just the right words to say.

In the weeks since the conflict in Gaza, there have been many debates in many different media between knowledgeable, respectable members of the Jewish community in which people who proudly call themselves Zionists and who have demonstrated concern for the State of Israel have been called naive at best, traitors at worst, for continuing to believe in the possibility of the two state solution.

It is unclear to me precisely what has changed over the past few months that would have caused this development. After all, the government of Israel still professes a belief in the two state solution, even as it claims that there is no partner for negotiations. Yes, the past few days have seen a recurrence of rhetoric from Hamas leaders claiming to seek the destruction of Israel. But, that has always been their claim and despite that claim, Israel continued to claim that it would seek negotiations with the Palestinian Authority regarding the future of the West Bank.

I find these accusations of disloyalty or naivete to be unfair and feel that they present, for all of us, a very serious challenge.

First, let me say without question that I take Hamas at their word. I believe that there are many within the Palestinian people who do desire the destruction of Israel. I do not believe that a peace settlement would immediately silence those voices. I would like to believe that a peace settlement would strengthen those with a more moderate view towards Israel and clearly many in Israel feel the same way.

But, the decision by Israel to proceed with settlement expansion in the “E1 area” between Jerusalem and Ma’aleh Adumim and within East Jerusalem itself, is so terribly troubling. These two plans, especially at this moment, would appear to signify a major roadblock towards the possibility of a viable Palestinian state and to any compromise concerning the Palestinian neighborhoods of Jerusalem. Certainly the “1967 borders- or cease fire lines- with land swaps” would presume that Maaleh Adumim would remain in Israel and that would require some kind of creative solution which would not cut off a future Palestinian state from Jerusalem or have a state which is essentially bisected by Israeli territory. But, it would appear that such building plans sends the wrong message at the wrong time (as Rabbi Donniel Hartman of the Hartman Institute discussed in his latest posting which you can find through the website at hartman.org.il, it is entitled “Red Light Green Light”).

If it is true that Israel has given up on the 2 state solution, I would ask the following question: what then is the vision that Israel would like leaders of the American Jewish community to put before American Jews? What will the future of the State of Israel be? Will Israel annex the West Bank and either expel all non-Jews (God forbid) or deny citizenship (God forbid)? Or, will Israel say, the vision is maintaining the status quo. Well, for thirty years as a Rabbi, I have been struggling with the fact that the status quo is unacceptable. While I don’t question for a moment that the Palestinians have undermined the peace process many times, I believe Israel’s latest decisions have done the same at a time when it seems the possibilities of a negotiated settlement are dimming. I would not expect Israel to sign a peace agreement if it believed it would seriously weaken its security. But, I do expect Israel to continue to hope for peace and, in the context of the past few weeks, I believe those of us who tell our congregants that as Jews, we continue to believe that the future can be better than the present should be honored, rather than disparaged and mocked.

I do not believe that those of us who dare to talk about hopes for peace and who expressed heartbreaking sadness at deepening conflicts are being traitors or are necessarily being naive. I believe that it is part of our life as Jews to hope, to continue to believe in a better time. No, it will not be easy and yes, we need to listen to voices within Israel who face the threats more directly than we do. But, I believe we can’t give up on these dreams and these hopes.