This week's Torah reading covers the Sabbatical year, during which crops may not be sown, and the Jubilee year, in which property reverts to its original owner and loans are forgiven. It's not the greatest economic system in the world, and had to be modified by rabbinical decree -- hence the term "Tikkun Olam," which doesn't actually mean "social justice" (see below). But it enshrines the idea of some kind of environmental stewardship.
https://www.commentary.org/articles/hillel-halkin/how-not-to-repair-the-world/
Similarly, the rules about loan forgiveness are part of a broader set of commandments about how to save someone from destitution, and about the limits of how hard labor can be for a worker. The Torah provides a social safety net and stipulates minimal working conditions. These are not to be enforced by the state, but by religious sanction. Effectively, they are to be enforced among the members of society themselves, as an expression of their piety and their mutual concern.
This week’s portion launches the great story of Abraham, who is told to leave everything of his life behind — except his immediate family — and to leave for “the Land that I shall show you.”
There’s something interesting in the fact that Abraham is told to leave his father’s house, as if breaking away from his father’s life — but his father, in fact, began the journey, moving from Ur to Haran (in last week’s portion). His father set a positive example — why should Abraham leave him?
Some obvious answers suggest themselves — adulthood, needing to make one’s own choices, his father not going far enough, etc.
But I think there is another answer. Abraham (known for the moment as Abram) needs to establish his own household. This is not just about making one’s own choice, but really about choosing one’s own starting point. It’s starting over.
Sometimes we start over in fundamental ways even if much that surrounds us remains the same. Sometimes the journey we have to ...
The story of Noah is familiar; the details, less so.
Noah is often seen as an ambivalent figure. He was righteous -- but only for his generation. What was his deficiency?
One answer suggests itself: knowing that the world was about to be flooded, he built an Ark for the animals and for his own family -- but did not try to save anyone else or to convince them to repent and change their ways (the prophet Jonah, later, would share that reluctance).
Abraham, later, would set himself apart by arguing with God -- with the Lord Himself! -- against the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, saying that they should be saved if there were enough righteous people to be found (there were not).
Still, Noah was good enough -- and sometimes, that really is sufficient to save the world. We don't need heroes every time -- just ordinary decency.
Hi all -- as I noted last month, I'm going to be closing down my Locals page, at least for tips and subscriptions -- I may keep the page up and the posts as well, but I'm no longer going to be accepting any kind of payment.
Look for cancelation in the very near future. Thank you for your support!
