EXOD878 See [[EXOD667]] Exodus 22:21 you SACKS 112-3

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

EXOD887 In the case of bal tashhit [the prohibition against destroying fruit-bearing trees (Deut. 20:19-20)… [which] the sages understood [] very broadly as including any act of needless destruction… there is an obvious fit with much else in Jewish law and thought. The Torah is concerned with what we would nowadays call "sustainability." This is particularly true of the three commands ordaining period rest: Shabbat, the Sabbatical year, and the Jubilee year. On Shabbat all agricultural work is forbidden "so that your ox and your donkey may rest" [this verse]. It sets a limit to our intervention in and the pursuit of economic growth. We become conscious that we are creations, not just creators. The earth is not ours but God's.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

EXOD930 The construction of the Sanctuary was fundamentally important because it gave the Israelites the chance to give back to God. Later decisors of Jewish law recognized that giving is an integral part of human dignity when they made the remarkable ruling that even a poor person completely dependent on charity is still obliged to give charity (Rambam, Mishneh Torah, Kilkhot Shekalim 1:1; Hilkhot Matnot Aniyim 7:5). To be in a situation where you can only receive, but not give, is to lack human dignity. The Mishkan became the home of the Divine Presence because God specified that it be built only out of voluntary contributions. Giving creates a gracious society by enabling each of us to make our contribution to the public good. That is why the building of the Sanctuary was the cure for the sin of the Golden Calf. The people that only received but could not give was trapped in dependency and lack of self-respect. God allowed people to come close to Him, and He to them, by giving them the chance to give. That is why a society based on rights, not responsibilities, based on what we claim from -- not what we give to-- others, will always eventually go wrong. It is why the most important gift a parent can give a child is a chance to give back. The etymology of the word teruma hints at this. It means, not simply a contribution, but literally something "raised up." When we give, it is not just our contribution but we who are raised up. We survive by what we are given, but we achieve dignity by what we give

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

EXOD938 This is the first time in the Torah that we hear the verb SH-KH-N, meaning "to dwell," in relation to God. As a noun it means literally "a neighbor." From this is derived the key word in postbiblical Judaism, Shekhina, meaning God's immanence as opposed to His transcendence, God-as-One-who-is-close, the daring idea of God as a near neighbor. In terms of the theology of the Torah, the very idea of a Mishkan, a sanctuary or Temple, a physical "home" for "God's glory," is deeply paradoxical. God is beyond space. As King Solomon said at the inauguration of the First Temple, "Behold, the heavens and the heavens of the heavens cannot encompass you, how much less this house?" (I Kings 8:27). Or as Isaiah said in God's name: "The heavens are My throne and the earth My footstool. What house shall you build for Me, where can My resting place be?" (Is. 66:1). The answer, as the Jewish mystics emphasized, is that God does not live in a building but rather in the hearts of the builders: "Let them make for Me a Sanctuary and I will dwell among them" [this verse] - "among them," not "in it." How, though, does this happen? What human act causes the Divine Presence to live within the camp, the community? The answer is the name of this parasha, Teruma, meaning, a gift, a contribution.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

EXOD992 What Moses had to do after the Golden Calf was Vayak'hel--turn the Israelites into a kehilla, a community. He did this in the obvious sense of restoring order. When Moses came down the mountain and saw the Calf, the Torah says the people were parua, meaning "wild," "disorderly," "chaotic," "unruly," "tumultuous." He "saw that the people were running wild and that Aaron had let them get out of control and so become a laughing stock to their enemies" [this verse]. They were not a community but a crowd. He did it in a more fundamental sense as we see in the rest of the parasha. He began by reminding the people of the laws of Shabbat. Then he instructed them to build the Mishkan, the Sanctuary, as a symbolic home for God. Why these two commands rather than any others? Because Shabbat and the Mishkan are the two most powerful ways of building community. The best way of turning a diverse, disconnected group into a team is to get them to build something together.[See Jonathan Sacks, The Home We Build Together (London: Continuum, 2007)]. Hence the Mishkan. The best way of strengthening relationships it is set aside dedicated time when we focus not on the pursuit of individual self-interest but on the things we share, by praying together, studying Torah together, and celebrating together -- in other words, Shabbat. Shabbat and the Mishkan were the two great community-building experiences of the Israelites in the desert. More than this: in Judaism, community is essential to the spiritual life. Our holiest prayers require a minyan. When we celebrate or mourn we do so as a community. Even when we confess, we do so together.... In Judaism, it is as a community that we come before God. For us the key relationship is not I-Thou, but We-Thou. Yayak'hel is thus no ordinary episode in the history of Israel. It marks the essential insight to emerge from the crisis of the Golden Calf. We find God in community. We develop virtue, strength of character, and a commitment to the common good in community. Community is local. It is society with a human face. It is not government. It is not the people we pay to look after the welfare of others. It is the work we do ourselves, together. Community is the antidote to individualism on the one hand and overreliance on the state on the other. Darwin understood its importance to human flourishing. Tocqueville saw its role in protecting democratic freedom. Robert Putnam has documented its value in sustaining social capital and the common good. And it began in this parasha, when Moses turned an unruly mob into a kehilla, a community.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

EXOD1001 See [[EXOD76]] Exodus 4:1 believe SACKS 338-9

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

EXOD1002 See [[EXOD333]] Exodus 19:6 nation SACKS 127-8

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

EXOD1008 … the sages [] knew that, in their words, adam bahul al mamono -- people do strange, hasty, ill-considered, and irrational things when money is at stake (Shabbat 117b). Financial gain can be a huge temptation, leading us to acts that harm others and ultimately ourselves. So when it comes to financial matters, especially when public funds are involved, there must be no room for temptation, for space for doubt as to whether it has been used for the purpose for which it was donated. There must be scrupulous auditing and transparency. Without this there is moral hazard: the maximum of temptation combined with the maximum of opportunity. Hence the parasha of Pekudei, with its detailed account of how the donations to the building of the Mishkan were used [Exodus 38:21]. The passage goes on to list the exact amounts of gold, silver, and bronze collected, and the purposes to which it was put. Why did Moses do this? A midrash suggests the answer: "People criticized Moses. They used to say to one another, "Look at that neck. Look at those legs. Moses is eating and drinking what belongs to us. All that he has belongs to us." The other would reply: "A man who is in charge of the work of the Sanctuary-what do you expect? That he should not get rich?" As soon as he heard this, Moses replied, "By your life, as soon as the Sanctuary is complete, I will make a full reckoning with you." (Tanhuma (Buber), Pekudei 4). (Continued at [[NUM214]] Numbers 15:16 taken SACKS 146)

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

EXOD1016 See [[EXOD73]] Exodus 3:14 "I" SACKS 7

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

EXOD1041 There is, on the face of it, a fundamental contradiction in the Torah. On the one hand we hear, in the passage known as the Thirteen Attributes of Mercy, the following words: [this verse]. The implication is clear. Children suffer for the sins of their parents. On the other hand we read in Parashat Ki Tetzeh: "Parents are not to be put to death for their children, nor children put to death for their parents; each will die for their own sin" (Deut. 24:16) ... There is an obvious resolution. The first statement refers to Divine justice, "at the hands of Heaven." The second, in Deuteronomy, refers to human justice as administered in a court of law. How can mere mortals decide the extent to which one person's crime was induced by the influence of others? Clearly the judicial process must limit itself to the observable facts. The person who committed the crime is guilty. Those who may have shaped his character are not.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT