Subject: Lookjed Digest 71

Date: Mon, 14 Jun 1999 17:15:43 +0300

From: Shalom Berger <lookjed@mail.biu.ac.il>

Reply-To: lookjed list <LOOKJED@VM.BIU.AC.IL>

Organization: “Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel <http://www.biu.ac.il>”

To: Multiple recipients of list LOOKJED <LOOKJED@VM.BIU.AC.IL>

Topics in this issue:

Date: Fri, 11 Jun 1999 14:32:44 PDT

From: yitzchak jacobs <ravyitz@hotmail.com>

To: lookjed@VM.BIU.AC.IL

Joel Wolowesky asks for a source for Rav Hirsch’s comment that:

“Our sages, who never objected to draw attention to the small and great mistakes in the history of our great forefathers, ... point out that the striking contrast in the grandchildren of Abraham may have been due, not so much to a difference in their temperaments as to mistakes in the way they were brought up.... Had Isaac and Rebecca studied Esav’s nature and character early enough and asked themselves how can even an Esav ... be won over to the service of God,... who can say what a different aspect of the whole history of the ages might have been presented.”

It is not clear to me what part of that statement is being attributed to Hazal, and what is Rav Hirsch’s own . Although I am not familiar with the specific Ya’akov/Esav example, the Avot are upbraided by Meforshim when their behavior is inappropriate. Perhaps the most famous example is the Ramban on Breishit 15:6, who argues that Sarai and Avram sinned in banishing Hagar from their home. The Radak points out that this is the Torah’s way of teaching us to avoid Middot Raot.

While I believe that such an approach is appropriate for students who have gained a sense of the greatness of the Avot, for less mature students, teaching that the Avot were fallible is problematic, even if the idea is to learn a lesson from them.

Date: Thu, 10 Jun 1999 22:51:25 -0400

From: chaimkoso@juno.com

To: LOOKJED@VM.BIU.AC.IL

According to Chassidus, Yitzchak knew what Eisav was about. His intent in giving B’rachot to Eisav was to help bring him closer to Torah. Eisav’s potential in serving Hashem was greater than Ya’akov’s, and this is what attracted Yitzchok to him.

Date: Fri, 11 Jun 1999 00:29:06 EDT

From: EKBHP@aol.com

To: LOOKJED@VM.BIU.AC.IL

I too agree that a Central Board of Education of any kind would hinder the efficiency of private, focused, mission-driven schools such as ours.

Our school has undertaken and ambitious and intensive curriculum renewal initiative. We have been very fortunate to have had the guidance of the Lookstein Center during these past two years in this endeavor. In addition we have used other expert resources from different locations in the US, from whom we gained valuable help. Our teachers as well are very dedicated and committed to this process. After 2 years of meetings, in-service training, training in Israel through the Lookstein Center and actually implementing and testing some of the ideas that have resulted from all this effort, the teachers are now in the process of actually putting down the enriched curriculum to paper in a formal manner.

As educators, you all know the amount of time and manpower it takes to coordinate such a worthwhile task. I’m sure there are many schools such as ours that find themselves in this same position and would welcome the opportunity to hear about foundations that would be interested in supporting such schools. With a focused curriculum the issue of time limitations should be greatly alleviated and the learning significantly enhanced.

Date: Thu, 10 Jun 1999 18:58:55 -0400 (EDT)

From: Shalom Carmy <carmy@ymail.yu.edu>

To: lookjed list <LOOKJED@VM.BIU.AC.IL>

Jeremiah Unterman cites Amos 8:9 as the earliest example of the eclipse being a curse. But note that Rambam and others interpret the image as figurative rather than literal (See Moreh Nevukhim 2:29 & Radak to Amos.)

Radak holds that the imagery in Joel 3 does, in fact, refer to popular belief. But note again that the popularity of a belief does not make it the Torah’s teaching.

It is much more difficult to explain statements is Hazal as metaphorical.

From: “Barry Levy” <blevy@WILSON.Lan.McGill.CA>

To: LOOKJED@VM.BIU.AC.IL

Date: Mon, 14 Jun 1999 08:34:53 EST

In response to the discussion about critical evaluation of derashot...

As soon as students can understand the following (definitely during elementary school) , I encourage their teachers to approach the study of Bible under four headings. TEXT, TEXTURE, CONTEXT, and PRETEXT.

TEXT refers to questions about what the text is (yes, I mean that) and what it says. What it definitively means or intends to convey is really somewhat beyond my ability to determine, but we all try. In truth, I am sometimes more comfortable making claims about what a text does not say - and given the popularity of manipulating it beyond what seems reasonable, there is much opportunity to do that - than what it does. In fact, real and imagined ambiguities are found in every verse, and it is only through serious training in how to differentiate between them and how to appreciate the global interpretative strategies of individual commentators that one can ever hope to make the student into an intelligent reader of the Bible text and its classical interpretations.

TEXTURE refers to the text’s literary qualities and the discussions of them.

CONTEXT refers to the historical and cultural background of the text - what some call the relevant aspects of Ancient Near Eastern Studies, archaeology, history, and the like.

PRETEXT is the use of the text for things not seemingly intended as the texts’ original purposes.

Once categorized this way, all areas of Bible study become the subject of critical analysis. The text itself can be evaluated in the context of ancient history to see where it may interpret reality rather than simply describe it; and surely the three other areas are opened up for similar discussion. I cannot tell you if preachers are likely to accept that their creative responses are more likely than not to be called PRETEXT, but if one is to examine this material intelligently and systematically in the context of Bible study, I see little choice. The only other alternative is to ignore it, and the results of having this last strategy in place for too long, coupled with the sad fact that many people are exposed to the Bible primarily as it is preached not taught, is that many devoted shul goers cannot differentiate between what a text says and what anyone tells them it says. Not only does this create friction between the divine and human messages to which we are exposed in the name of Judaism, it prevents serious appreciation of the very starting point for thousands of years of rabbinic derashot and of the creative genius behind them.

The Lookjed List is a project of The Rabbi Joseph H. Lookstein Center for Jewish Education in the Diaspora, Bar Ilan University.

To subscribe or to post a message, please write us at:

lookjed@vm.biu.ac.il

Information regarding other Lookstein Center programs may be obtained by

writing to: feldme@mail.biu.ac.il