Purim Booklet Feb 21utzedek.org › ULT PUBLICATIONS › Purim Ve-Nahafoch_Hu.pdfPurim’s narra8 ve and prac8 ces touch on many compelling issues of our 8 me, which the 8 meless wisdom

Ve-Nahafoch Hu:Making Your Way

Through anUpside-Down

World

created by

Uri L’Tzedek Orthodox Social Justice

An Uri L’Tzedek Publication 2

3

4

5

6 - 7

8

14 - 15

13

20

26 - 28

9 - 10

16 - 19

21 - 25

29

45 - 47

48

35 - 36

40

32 - 33

41 - 44

34

37 - 39

30 - 31

11 - 13

Introduction F!"# U!$ L’T%&'&(

Editor’s Preface J")*+, S-*.,!/%

Contributors

! e Con in Consumerism: A Quest into Ourselves A#,0', G&12

Ethical Consumption: A New Ritual for Mishloach Manot t D,)$ F!+-*/&!

! e Null Curriculum of Purim D,0$&1 H&1'

Persian Spring: Understanding Politics in Megillat Esther A3$ G,!&1$-(

A Nicaraguan Purim J&))& R,2$0".$/%

! e Orphan Queen D&0, W&$))

: A Reconsideration of Ethics J")*+, S-*.,!/%

Purim and Alcohol Consumption J")*+, S-*.,!/%

Purim: ! e Importance of Democracy R,22$ S*#+14 Y,0(1".$/%

“Loving the Torah More ! an God” R,22$ A!$ W&$))

Vashti and the Crown: Domestic Violence in the Jewish Community J")*+, S-*.,!/%

Hanging Haman L,+!, B&!5&!

In Praise of Storytelling E1$)*&3, G"1'2&!5

Charity and Compassion G,3$ B!".0

! e Opportunities and Dangers of Self-Ridicule W$11$,# F!$&'#,0

Table Fellowship T,1$, C"//!&11

Partnership Building and the Mitzvah of h Mishloach Manot E#$14 W$0"5!,'

Paying the Price of Civilization: Purim and Taxes A!$ H,!/

Shushan Shangri-La G$1,* K1&/&0$(

Reading is Praise: Connecting the Articles to the Megillah h I0'&6

Table of Contents

An Uri L’Tzedek Publication

No holiday exposes the fragility of our existence quite like Purim. Megillat Esther, the sefer that provides its story and rinforms the meaning of its observance, is the only book of the Torah in which the name of God does not appear. The void le7 by the absence of God’s mighty providence is le7 open. Instead, we encounter a world in which Jewish survival is con8 ngent on nothing but the desires of a sybarite, the machina8 ons of a narcissist, and ul8 mately the cast of lots. Luck and not merit seemto be the moral universe of the megillah.

But then, a reversal! Haman’s wickedness is held accountable. The virtue of Mordechai is rewarded; the moral universe isrealigned to more familiar coordinates; the teachings of the prophet Yechezkel reemerge, “The righteousness of the righteousshall be accounted to him alone, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be accounted to him alone.” (Ezekiel 18:20) Thebacchanalian feast of Achashverosh is elevated into the Purim se’udah with its focus on the reciprocity of gi7 -giving. Money, inpursuit of which tyrants will allow genocide, is redeemed through matanot le’evyonim, the sharing of wealth with the poor. UriL’Tzedek Publica8 ons’ current o9 ering,Ve-Nahafoch Hu: Making Your Way Through an Upside-Down World, gives voice to these twists and reversals, these moments of doubt and possibili8 es for jus8 ce.

In the last four years, Uri L’Tzedek has directly reached over 20,000 individuals in the 200 programs that it has sponsoredor co-sponsored na8 onwide. This number includes programming at over thirty universi8 es, impac8 ng an es8 mated third of allAmerican Orthodox university students. Through their associa8 on with Uri L’Tzedek, par8 cipants have studied what Maimonidesthought of micro- nance, lent over twenty thousand dollars in micro-loans, advocated for the Tav HaYosher, and lobbied forprogressive legisla8 on. We have invested signi cant resources in over one hundred and 7 y emerging leaders who serve as Uri L’Tzedek fellows, interns, commi: ee heads, and Tav HaYosher compliance o; cers. The passion and grassroots ac8 vism of ourcommunity has successfully created social change across North America.

Ve-Nahafoch Hu: Making Your Way Through an Upside-Down World is Uri L’Tzedek’s third publica8 on that integrates socialdjus8 ce themes into the rhythm of the Jewish year. Like the Food and Jus! ce Haggadah Supplementandt Mah Ani? Self Re ec! onand Social Ac! on for the High Holidays, this supplement incorporates ac8 on steps that suggest speci c ac8 ons that the reader scan take to move from learning to doing.

We are proud to thank Bikkurim: An Incubator for New Jewish Ideas and Joshua Venture Group for nancially suppor8 ngthis project. The commitment to Jewish innova8 on and social entrepreneurship displayed by the sta9 , board, and funders of these organiza8 ons has been essen8 al to Uri L’Tzedek’s growth. We would also like to thank the hundreds of individuals as well as the Jewish founda8 ons that support Uri L’Tzedek’s cri8 cal work. A lis8 ng of the founda8 ons and organiza8 ons that supportus appear in the back of this booklet.

Joshua Schwartz served as the editor-in-chief of Ve-Nahafoch Hu: Making Your Way Through an Upside-Down World. Wewould like to thank him for his hard work, verbal acuity, and deep Jewish learning. Hillary Levison, Uri L’Tzedek’s skilled Associate Director of Opera8 ons, returned as the managing editor of this publica8 on. Her dedica8 on to all aspects of its edi8 ng andproduc8 on of this project are very much appreciated. Aliza Weiss created the innova8 ve design and aesthe8 c tone for Ve-Nahafoch Hu: Making Your Way Through an Upside-Down World that integrates the leading themes of the publica8 on with the dcelebratory colors of the holiday. We would also like to thank the Uri L’Tzedek Board of Directors. As we con8 nue to grow, theyhave been a deep reservoir of guidance and advice.

We would especially like to thank the contributors of Ve-Nahafoch Hu: Making Your Way Through an Upside-Down World,who volunteered their 8 me, ethical insight, and religious imagina8 on to this project. Many of them are emerging leaders in the Orthodox social jus8 ce movement and we appreciate their 8 me and commitment in making Uri L’Tzedek’s vision a reality.

If you would like to further explore a thought or an idea in Ve-Nahafoch Hu: Making Your Way Through an Upside-DownWorld or if you would like to join Uri L’Tzedek in its important work, please contact us! You can nd us on the web at www.utzedek.org or email us at [email protected].

Finally, we would like to wish you all a joyous Purim.

Introduction from Uri L’Tzedek

3

Ari Hart Rabbi Shmuly Yanklowitz Rabbi Ari WeissCo-Founder, Uri L’Tzedek Founder and President, Uri L’Tzedek Director, Uri L’Tzedek


Wouldn’t it be odd to take Purim seriously?

A7 er all, this is a holiday on which one is commanded to be blisteringly happy, so jubilant that one is liable to makea fool out of oneself. Whether socially-lubricated or not, one is s8 ll called on to become so blissfully joyous that onecannot discern the di9 erence between cursing the enemy and blessing the hero. Halacha obligates one to a: endpar8 es. Most people observe Purim by wearing costumes, going to carnivals, and ea8 ng triangularly shaped bakedgoods. This is not the “solemn day of convoca8 on” of our great-great-great-great-great (etc.) grandparents.

However, Purim is a day of celebra8 on that takes itself seriously, that recognizes the radical power of joy.

The miraculous turnabout of (Esther 9:1) possesses its radical power precisely due to the poten8 alcatastrophe that almost befell our people. The dialec8 cal logic of the reversal teaches us that Purim’s euphoric joycorrelates to its profundity. The rubber band snaps back hardest when it is stretched to its breaking point. We as apeople had to approach the very precipice of existence to be able to touch the ecsta8 c joy of life.

There is an especially Purim-esque irony to the fact that it is precisely on the wackiest day of the Jewish year thatwe have the most mitzvot speci cally devoted to giving to others, speci cally, to give money to the poor, send gi7 stto friends, and share in each others’ fes8 ve meals. The celebra8 on one experiences on Purim is not ego8 s8 cal self-indulgence. Rather, one is full of so much joy that one cannot help but give to others. One is over- owing. Rambamand the Mechaber both agree that when one gives on Purim, one should not keep track of how much one distributesrbut rather simply give. (MT Hil. Megillah u-Chanukah 2:16, SA OH 294:2) The Maharil even says that the rst thing onedoes as one enters the holiday is to give (SA OH 294:1).

The celebra8 ng and rejoicing of Purim is not something that just happens. Rejoicing on Purim is something that weare commanded to do. The joy one experiences is the joy that one is meant to be experiencing. However, the heightsof our joy do not pierce the atmosphere of the holy life Judaism provides. Just because something is silly or ridiculousdoes not mean that it cannot also be holy. Taking Purim seriously is the commitment to take the contours of our livesseriously, even in extremes, perhaps especially in such cases.

We at Uri L’Tzedek are overjoyed to present to you a collec8 on of re ec8 ons on the ecsta8 c gravitas of this mostparadoxical of days. Purim’s narra8 ve and prac8 ces touch on many compelling issues of our 8 me, which the 8 melesswisdom of Torah can help us illuminate, and our featured writers have taken up just such a task. Included herein arediscussions of the death penalty, consumerism, theories of ethics and responsibility, alcoholism, poverty and economicinjus8 ce, structures of poli8 cal organiza8 on, and taxes.

Central to the observance of Purim is the reading of the megillah, a prac8 ce so essen8 al we make sure to do it twice,both in the evening and in the following morning. The ar8 cles below have been ordered as commentaries-of-sorts toverses from the megillah, which are displayed above the ar8 cle as a textual anchor. Addi8 onally, at the back, we haveincluded an index to assist in such hermeneu8 cal naviga8 on. We hope that you use this collec8 on as a companion toyour contempla8 on of Esther’s famous iggeret (le: er), helping to bring social jus8 ce thinking to your Torah study.t

Speaking of social jus8 ce and redemp8 on, we would be remiss to restrain these discussions to theory alone. Manyof the included pieces are prompted to give one tools to further one’s own considera8 on of such important topics, orto facilitate one’s ability to take these words of Torah and bring them into the real world, which we can hopefully helpto make a more ideal world.

Mordechai’s triumph is sealed when he goes out into the city, and the Jews react with exulta8 on and joy. (Esther9:15-16) Redemp8 on was sealed when he went out. Our joy on Purim is also directed radially outward, radicallytowards others. Our happiness brims over with generosity. I truly hope that the words printed here will inspire you allto take your own Torah out into “every province and every city...” (Esther 9:17)

Joshua SchwartzEditor-in-Chief, Ve-Nahafoch Hu

Editor’s Preface


L,+!, B&!5&! is a Midwestern transplant living in NewYork and is currently a third year law student at FordhamUniversity. She spent her last two summers working withimmigrant vic8 ms of domes8 c violence and tra; cking,refugees, and immigrant detainees, in New York City andin Tel Aviv.

G,3!$&1 B!".0 is a sophomore at Yeshiva Universitymajoring in English. Originally from Maryland, he spentlast year studying at Yeshivat Ma’ale Gilboa.

T,1$, C"//!&11 F+!1&$/&! has an MA in Biblical and Talmudic Interpreta8 on from Yeshiva University. Sheteaches in the Yesodot Program at the Drisha Ins8 tute forJewish Educa8 on and lives in Washington Heights with herhusband Ma: hew and newborn son Yehuda.

W$11$,# F!$&'#,0 is the director of the Duker/EisenfeldBeit Midrash at JTS and an adjunct instructor of Talmudand Rabbinics there and at the Academy of Jewish Religion.He holds an SB in Computer Science from MIT and an MAin Talmud from JTS, and has studied at The Conserva8 veYeshiva, The Pardes Kollel, and Yeshivat Chovevei Torah.

D,)$ F!+-*/&! is the Director of Tav HaYosher engagementfor Uri L’Tzedek and is in her nal year at the MacaulayHonors College at Queens College (CUNY), comple8 ng adegree in Media and Urban Studies. Dasi looks forward tousing her spiritual leadership skills to harness the power of faith-based communi8 es in crea8 ng meaningful change.

A3$ G,!&1$-( graduated from the University of Chicagoin 2010 and is currently in his second year as a fellow atYeshivat Hadar. As part of the educa8 onal fellowship atthe Yeshiva, Avi teaches Jewish Studies part 8 me at BeitRabban.

A#,0', G&12 is an Innovator’s Circle Fellow, at YeshivaUniversity’s Center for the Jewish Future. She is currentlyexploring student’s crea8 on of interac8 ve museumexhibits as a mode for experien8 al Jewish educa8 on.

E1$)*&3, G"1'2&!5 hails from Sea: le and works as the Assistant Editor of Zion Square. She enjoys waterskiing,free speech, and Torah.

A!$ H,!/ is a founder of Uri L’Tzedek. A frequent contributorto the Hu" ngton Post, Jerusalem Post, Haaretz magazine,and more, he was recently selected by the Jewish Weekas one of the 36 “forward-thinking young people who arehelping to remake the Jewish community.”

D,0$&1 H&1' is a doctoral candidate in Jewish educa8 on atJTS, a Wexner Graduate Fellow, and the coordinator of the

Educators’ Track at Yeshivat Chovevei Torah. Before movingto New York, Daniel served as the director of studentac8 vi8 es at TanenbaumCHAT and as a senior memberof the educa8 onal sta9 at Brandeis’ o; ce of high schoolprograms. You can follow Daniel on twi: er @danielmheld,read his monthly column on educa8 on in the CanadianJewish News and reach him at [email protected].

G$1,* K1&/&0$( is the Congrega8 onal Scholar atCongrega8 on Kehilath Jeshurun and a Talmud Instructorat the Ramaz Upper School. She is one of The JewishWeek’s 36 under 36 and is a recipient of The Covenant Founda8 on’s inaugural Pomegranate Prize for emergingJewish educators. Gilah engages Jewish text in herteaching, wri8 ng and advocacy for social jus8 ce causes.

J&))& R,2$0".$/% is a junior at the University of Maryland, majoring in Environmental Science and Policy. Hispassions lie at the intersec8 on of educa8 on, social jus8 ceand Judaism. In his free 8 me he can be found cooking,gardening, or playing music.

J")*+, S-*.,!/% graduated summa cum laude fromthe joint program between Columbia University and theJewish Theological Seminary in 2008. Following university,Joshua was a fellow in the advanced kollel program atlMachon Pardes in Jerusalem. Currently, Joshua is studyingfor a doctorate in Jewish Studies focusing in Kabbalah andHasidism from New York University.

R,22$ A!$ W&$)) is the Director of Uri L’Tzedek. Rabbi Weiss received his rabbinical ordina8 on from YCT RabbinicalSchool in June 2007; he was selected as a Joshua VentureGroup fellow, a pres8 gious honor bestowed upon Jewishleaders that show par8 cular promise for social change andsocial entrepreneurship.

D&0, W&$)) received a BA in Religious Studies from NewYork University and an MA in Theology from HarvardDivinity School. She is currently on the faculty of YeshivatHadar (www.mechonhadar.org).

E#$14 W$0"5!,' is a senior in the Double Degree Programbetween Barnard College and the Jewish TheologicalSeminary. She has been ac8 vely involved in variouscapaci8 es at Columbia/Barnard Hillel and currently servesas the volunteer coordinator for the Tav HaYosher.

R,22$ S*#+14 Y,0(1".$/% is the Founder and President of Uri L’Tzedek, Director of Jewish Life & the Senior JewishEducator at the UCLA Hillel, and a sixth year PhD candidatein Moral Psychology & Epistemology at Columbia University. Rav Shmuly’s book Jewish Ethics & Social Jus! ce: A Guidefor the 21st Century is now available on amazon.com.y

Contributors


Our rst glimpse into the Purimstory is telling. Filled to the brim

with every possible hedonis8 c de-light and fancy- we arrive at the tail end of an 180 day party for dignitar-ies, armies, and princes capped bya seven day feast for all membersof the land. Achashverosh, rulerof 127 provinces, is at the helm of this lavish display of riches and “thesplendorous beauty of his majesty.”(Esther 1:4) No expense was spared.Dazzling marble pillars and oors,furniture adorned in gold and silver,endless drink, and servants to ful llwhatever guests desired.

Whereas we might look askance atthe waste and frivolity these par8 esencouraged, or perhaps a wis< ullonging or excitement, Achashvero-sh evinces a familiar need to pres-ent ourselves well, an inner prideoutwardly manifested via physicaldisplay. Achashverosh held a beau-ty pageant to gauge who his nextwife would be. The nega8 ve meansto which this culture manipulatedpeople shows how stressing physi-cal appearance creates unrealizablegoals of wealth and power. Today,shows like “The Bachelor” mimicthat spousal selec8 on processes. Itgoes deeper than reality television.Material items o7 en fuel an insa8 a-ble impulse.

Take the term “retail therapy.” Astudy presented at the Society forSocial and Personality PsychologyConference (“Misery is Not Miser-ly”, Cynthia E. Cryder, et al) positsthat the “yay me, focusing on me”factor consumerism creates is whatalleviates sadness. We purchase more things to raise ourselves up.One new shirt begets the desirefor another. Averah goreret av-erah, one wrongdoing leads to an-

other wrongdoing (Pirkei Avot 4:2).I could say the same for myself andgooey chocolate chip cookies. Justone measly por8 on doesn’t seemenough. Some8 mes I turn into theCookie Monster, guzzling cookie af-ter cookie. We all have this inside us;how it manifests is up to us. Whendo we cross the line into material-ism or even glu: ony? When doeshaving more cease to add apprecia-bly to human sa8 sfac8 on?

Our measuring of the Gross Do-mes8 c Product (GDP) counts fam-ily breakdown and disease as eco-nomic boons. A divorce means twohouses and lawyer fees, and dis-eases leads to hospital fees, all of which add up to produc8 vity for oureconomy. What do these measure-ments re ect about our values asa society? Robert F. Kennedy in anaddress to the University of Kansasin 1968 re ected on this system of measurement, “Too much and toolong, we seem to have surrenderedcommunity excellence and commu-nity values in the mere accumula-8 on of material things. Our grossna8 onal product ... if we shouldjudge America by that - counts airpollu8 on and cigare: e adver8 sing,and ambulances to clear our high-ways of carnage. It counts speciallocks for our doors and the jails forthose who break them. It countsthe destruc8 on of our redwoodsand the loss of our natural wonderin chao8 c sprawl.”

Since Shushan 8 mes, our earningshave increased, material goods arecheaper than ever before, and wehave far surpassed Achashveroshtechnologically. These changes haveskyrocketed our consump8 on to un-imaginable levels. From the 1950’son, the world’s intake of meat,

steel, wood, copper and energy hasdoubled, car ownership has qua-drupled, plas8 c use has increased 5fold, and air travel mul8 plied by 328 mes (sta8 s8 cs published in Ameri-can Forests, 1991).

Our religion holds the values of integrity of character, good work,strong friendship and family rela-8 onships, and community in highregard. We work to be be: er indi-viduals and a stronger collec8 ve.These are social, psychological, andspiritual needs that can only be at-tained with care, e9 ort and 8 me.In discussing the shortcomings of GDP as an indicator of our na8 on’sprogress, Robert Kennedy highlight-ed what is fundamentally missingfrom this measurement, ci8 ng edu-ca8 onal pro ciency, good health,our courage, wit, and strength of our marriages. The values Kennedyputs forth as important indicators of America’s economic state are some-what incalculable and suggest an al-terna8 ve to consumer spending. It’sinteres8 ng to note that a numberof alterna8 ves to GDP have beensuggested: the Index of SustainableEconomic Welfare, which factors inboth pollu8 on and income distri-bu8 on, and the Genuine ProgressIndicator, which tries to determineif economic growth has improveda country’s welfare. Alterna8 ve ef-forts try to supplement or supplanttradi8 onal income-based measureswith happiness-based measures.These include the Happy PlanetIndex, a Gross Na8 onal Happinessmeasure and work on Na8 onalWell-Being Accounts.”

Drawing back the curtain of ourPurim texts for a moment, we un-earth a tremendous emphasis of the traits men8 oned above. The

! e Con in Consumerism: A Quest into Ourselvesby A#,0', G&12

“…the king made a feast unto all the people” [1:5]


Vilna Gaon, in his interpreta8 on of the megillah, calls our a: en8 on tothe passage “V’ Kabel Hayehudim...la’asot,” and the Jews took to do”that which they had begun.” (Esther9:23) The Vilna Gaon points out thegramma8 cal inaccuracy of this sen-tence as “V’Kabel” is singular while ”Hayehudim is plural. What do wemake of this? The Vilna Gaon goeson to teach, “that the Jews acted asone,” in complete solidarity (PerushHaGra on Esther 9:23).

We see Esther’s explicit acknowl-edgement of this collec8 ve powerwhen she asks Mordechai to: “Go,gather all the Jews of Shushan andfast for me” (4:16 ). Why couldn’tMordechai merely tell the Jews tofast? Why did they need to be gath-ered? Esther, too, saw deliverance

from their dire situa8 on only whenAm Yisrael was brought together, “as one na8 on, with one heart”. Even(especially!) during 8 mes of despair,we see the power of the collec8 ve,where each voice heard in unison,bringing about social change.

“He (Mordechai) instructed themto observe them as days of feas8 ngand gladness, and sending delica-cies to one another, and gi7 s to thepoor.” (Esther 9:22) Consider thesebasic mitzvot of Purim; they are all tac8 vi8 es that foster the traits of fellowship and giving. Especially in8 mes of gladness we are command-ed to consider those less fortunate.We are compelled to think abouta friendship we may have let goastray or a recent argument we mayhave had, and to reach out and give

that person mishloach manot. Thinkabout it: Purim helps create a senseof common iden8 ty and commu-nity. As a whole and as individualswe cul8 vate deeper sources of ful- llment. This Purim, let us cul8 vatea deeper awareness of our personalmeasures of success, and celebratethem together.

“Purim helps create a sense of common identity and community”

In the weeks before Purim, the ko-sher supermarkets in Queens are

packed with anxious shoppers. Inprepara8 on for both the lavish Pu-rim feast and the distribu8 on of mishloach manot (Purim Baskets),tshoppers pile carts high with bo: lesof wine, bakery hamantaschen, andother goodies. The fact that a Jew-ish fes8 val features an abundance of food is not unique—but Purim is setapart in that in addi8 on to a feast,we prepare packages of food to giveas gi7 s, a prac8 ce instated in the8 me of the megillah. This prac8 ce was originally intended to ensurethat everyone had enough food forthe Purim feast and to foster a gen-eral spirit of love and friendship.

In some communi8 es, however,the original meaning of the prac8 ce has been buried under the impor-tance the basket’s lavishness. I re-member si= ng at my dining roomtable as a li: le girl, si7 ing throughthe mishloach manot as they came tin, gasping in delight if the box had an interes8 ng theme or was lledwith fancy tru> es. When it was asimple brown bag with Chewy Bars

and a ripe fruit, I groaned and set itaside. As I grew older and becamemore engaged in social jus8 ce is-sues, I became less enchanted withthe compe8 8 ve and materialis8 c“keeping up with the Klein’s” natureof mishloach manot.

Since making these packages isactually a huge industry aroundPurim-8 me, I believe our commu-nity can make a huge di9 erenceby making the decision to thememishloach manot baskets to supporttethical consump8 on prac8 ces thisyear. Unfortunately, it’s not possiblein today’s world to buy food that iscompletely con ict free. Instead of spending a great deal to make yourmishloach manot super kitschy or fancy, however, spend that extrabuck to make a basket containing notonly local, fair-trade and organic fare(though that too is generally a goodidea); but one containing goods thattakes the worker’s welfare into con-sidera8 on. Food workers in boththe distribu8 on and restaurant in-dustry are o7 en denied some of the most basic workplace rights,and wage the7 and discrimina8 on

are not uncommon. It is importantto know that this does not excludekosher establishments. Uri L’Tzedekand the Brandworkers union havebeen struggling for over a year anda half to pressure Flaum Appe8 zing,a kosher appe8 zing plant, to pay acourt-ordered sum to their workers.Meanwhile, though an increasinglylarge number of kosher ea8 ng es-tablishments have signed on to theTav HaYosher, many restaurant andsupermarket owners s8 ll neglect topay su; cient wages (or any wage),pay over8 me or provide a safe anddiscrimina8 on free working environ-ment.

This year, make sure that theworkers at the kosher bakery youbuy your hamantaschen are being paid at least minimum wage. Askthe cashier at your supermarkethow they’re treated. Check to seeif the place you shop is Tav-cer8 - ed. Make your Purim baskets withgoods that are not produced or dis-tributed through the exploita8 on of food chain workers. If you’re havinga hard 8 me nding those products,its 8 me to start organizing for change.

Ethical Consumption: A New Ritual for Mishloach Manot


by D,)$ F!+-*/&!

F"#$%&# R&'("#)&'Tav HaYosher: Launched by Uri L’Tzedek, the Tav HaYosher is a local, grassroots initiative to bring workers, restaurant owners andcommunity members together to create just workplaces in kosher restaurants. Check out www.isupportthetav.com for a list of Tav certi* ed

y g gy g g

eating establishments.yy

Food Chain Worker’s Alliance: ! e Food Chain Workers Alliance is a coalition of worker-based organizations whose members plant, harvest, process, pack, transport, prepare, serve, and sell food, organizing to improve wages and working conditions for all workers along

g pg p

the food chain. http://foodchainworkers.org/?page_id=480p p p p pp p p p p

! e Color of Food: Check out this link for a broad survey of the food system, to map out the race, gender and class of workers along thesupply chain. http://www.arc.org/content/view/2229/136/

yy

Brandworkers/Focus on the Food Chain: Empowering Food Distribution Workers to Rise Out of Sweatshop Conditions-check out their amazing work. http://www.brandworkers.org/node/12

p gg

Restaurant Opportunities Center of New York: ! rough a combination of worker organizing and empowerment, litigation, and publicpressure, ROC-NY wins back unpaid wages and discrimination claims for restaurant workers as well as important changes in the industry,

pppp g g g p g pg g g p g p

such as vacations, paid sick days, mandated breaks, and more. http://rocny.org/what-we-do/workplace-justicep p g pp g p

N&+$ S$&,'• Make sure your favorite restaurant or supermarket has the Tav HaYosher or that they are being paid and treated fairly• Advocate for a fair minimum wage in your state• Educate your community about workers in the food chain through a discussion at the Shabbat table with your guests, an email on yourtlistserve or a speech at

yyshul

yy

• Bring workers from a kosher eating establishment to speak at your campus or your child’s school about their experience in the industry• Build a meaningful relationship with a food establishment worker and learn from their experience - Invite them for Shabbat lunch and tshare the possibility of building a just world over delicious food!

g pg p

“…and it was wri: en in the book of the chronicles before the king.” [2:23]

“Purim is a holiday rich in educational potential to engage the young, but, perhaps more profoundly to challenge older celebrants with deep questions

of ethics and morality.”


Purim is an educator’s dream. The megillah o9 ers a compel-

ling narra8 ve, which can be taughtthrough plays, puppet shows, andtext study. Like a good Western,the lines are clearly drawn betweenthe heroes and villains, enablingchildren to cheer and scowl at theappropriate junctures. The customsand rituals of the holiday – dress-ing up, gregging greggers, bakinghamentashen, delivering mishloachmanot, giving matanot l’evyonim,ea8 ng a purim seudah, etc. – areboth engaging and deeply rooted inthe messages of the holiday. Unlikeother rituals such as shaking the lu-

lav and v etrog or shlugging kaparot,which require both cajoling to main-tain a child’s a: en8 on and a round-about allegorical explana8 on toimbue it with meaning, tradi8 onalcelebra8 ons of Purim cap8 vate thechild’s a: en8 on and bespeak theunderlying themes of the megillahand the holiday.

With the educators’ job madesimple, it is no wonder that Purimhas evolved into a pediatric holiday.I use this term in two senses. First,it is a holiday centered on children.We ogle over children’s costumes,we permit noise in the synagoguethat would be frowned upon duringthe year, we dole out candy, and wehave Purim carnivals and other fes-8 vi8 es speci cally for children. Chil-

dren are at the center of any Purimcelebra8 on, demonstrated by thefact that most synagogues do notrun separate children’s services dur-ing megillah reading as they wouldon other holidays. On Purim, thesynagogue becomes the children’sservice.

This pediatric approach to Purimalso manifests in our teaching of theholiday. In many respects, our anal-yses of the megillah and the mes-sages of Purim are stuck in an un-derdeveloped, elementary phase,rarely seeing the light of fresh, nu-anced and cri8 cal adult analysis. Alltoo o7 en we allow the narra8 ve of

Mordechai and Esther to stagnate inthe narrow se= ng of Shushan with-out considering its implica8 ons forour contemporary ethical study, orquerying the characters, their ac-8 ons and decisions. It is comfort-able to read the megillah as a storythat happened ‘there and then’, do-ing so, however, limits its applicabil-ity to our own context and narrowsthe ques8 ons we ask and lessonswe learn from the story.

In pedagogical terms, we don’tspiral the curriculum of Purim. Aspiraled curriculum revisits earlierthemes and learning as a basis forbuilding more complex understand-ings and analyses. A spiraled mathcurriculum may teach addi8 on oneyear and review that material the

next while adding on the relatedcomplexity of mul8 plica8 on. Next,the class will review mul8 plica-8 on and add on division. Each les-son spirals back to earlier learning in order to sca9 old more complexstudy. Jerome Bruner, a renownedpsychologist who made signi cantcontribu8 ons to the eld of educa-8 on, states, “A curriculum as it de-velops should revisit this basic ideasrepeatedly, building upon them un-8 l the student has grasped the fullformal apparatus that goes withthem” (1960, p. 13). In teachingPurim, all too o7 en, we succeed inrevisi8 ng the basic ideas and rituals

– the narra8 ve of the megillah, the reasons for our observances, thegregging of greggers and the giving of mishloach manot – but we ne-tglect to build upon these basic ideasand rituals with new frameworksfor interpreta8 on and new meaningfor our tradi8 ons. We don’t use ourpervious readings of the megillah asa star8 ng point to delve into deeperunderstandings of the complex ethi-cal issues that both require the rstpass and demand cri8 cal a: en8 on.

A pediatric curriculum, circlingback to the same star8 ng pointrather than spiraling and growing, iscomfortable. It avoids many of thepointed ques8 ons of ethics and mo-rality that other authors in this vol-ume have aptly raised. At the same

! e Null Curriculum of Purimby D,0$&1 H&1'


8 me, however, it should leave theadult learner unsa8 s ed.

In instances when we do departfrom the megillah narra8 ve, the themes o7 en seem to be designedmore towards engagement thancri8 cal analysis. As an observer of high school curriculum and peda-gogy, I have seen countless classes,shiurim, lectures, and ac8 vi8 es fo-cused on the meaning of ad de-loyada, exploring ques8 ons such as,Are we required to drink? Permit-ted to drink? And if so, how much?While a study of alcohol consump-8 on and abuse, and the parametersar8 culated in rabbinic texts is bothengaging for teens and importantto discuss, when this represents theouter limit of our teaching of Purim,we miss the boat on the depth of the megillah’s poten8 al as a corner-stone text for teaching complex is-sues.

Permit me to introduce threeother curricular terms: “Taught”,“Learned” and “Null” curriculum.The taught curriculum is the lessonsand material that a teacher teaches.The learned curriculum is what stu-dents internalize from the taughtcurriculum. It comes as no surprisethat there is a gap between thesetwo curricula. Larry Cuban, an im-portant observer of the Americaneduca8 onal system, states, “Thegap between what is taught andwhat is learned—both intendedand unintended—is large” (Cuban,1992, p. 223).

This gap between taught andlearned curricula is further com-pounded by the null curriculum.Elliot Eisner, a proponent of cri8 calpedagogy, states, “What childrendon’t learn is as important as whatthey do learn. What the curriculum

neglects is as important as what itteaches.” This is the kind of curricu-lum which he terms “null”. Eisnersuggests that what teachers chooseto leave out of the curriculum sendsa covert message about what is tobe valued (Eisner, 1994, p. 96-97).

The null curriculum of Purim iscomprised of many of the issuesaddressed in this volume: domes-8 c violence, sex tra; cking, poverty,exile, iden8 ty and assimila8 on, con-sumerism, genocide, and the deathpenalty. Issues central to the megil-lah and central to the messages of the holiday, but topics that are le7 out of the curriculum of Purim. Bycircumven8 ng the teaching of theseissues, we create a null curricu-lum that sends profound messagesabout communal foci and priori8 es.

What might a spiraled curriculumaimed at transparently in address-ing the null curriculum look like?At the youngest ages it would lookmuch the same as it currently does,we would con8 nue to teach the nar-ra8 ve of the megillah through plays,puppet shows and text study. Wewould con8 nue to do classroomexchanges of mishloach manot andthave our children drop coins in thepushka for matanot l’evyonim. As children progress through elemen-tary school, and are able to movefrom habitua8 on to reasoned de-cisions, we would begin to unpackthe underlying values of these tradi-8 ons; exploring the ways we relateto and remember evil, teaching howto have a caring rela8 onship withneighbors, and recognizing our ob-liga8 ons to the poor.

By adolescence and emergingadulthood, when learners are ableto interpret text in the context of the world around them and in re-

la8 on to their own lives, we willcircle back, once again, to the Pu-rim story, building upon our earlierteaching by adding layers of com-plexity. The educator may beginto raise ques8 ons about the treat-ment of women – Achashverosh’swanton treatment of Vash8 and thecompe8 8 on for a new queen; ques-8 ons about consumerism and nan-cial inequality demonstrated in theking’s feasts, palaces, garments andhorses; about Esther’s assimila8 oninto the palace culture and her re8 -cence to reveal her Jewish roots; orabout the Jews’ request to con8 nuethe genocide of their enemies, evena7 er the threat against them hadbeen ameliorated.

Purim is a holiday rich in edu-ca8 onal poten8 al to engage theyoung, but, perhaps more pro-foundly to challenge older cele-brants with deep ques8 ons of eth-ics and morality. My hope is thatby spiraling to build upon pediatricnarra8 ves and celebra8 ons, we canbegin to addresses the issues thatcurrently cons8 tute the null curricu-lum of Purim.

“There is a certain people…” [3:8]


Says R. Abba bar Kahana: The re-moval of the ring is greater than

the exhorta8 on of all 48 prophetsand 7 prophetesses.” (BT Megillah14a)

This rather cryp8 c pronounce-ment refers to the agonizing mo-ment in the third chapter of Megil-lat Esther, wherein Haman entreatsKing Achashverosh to sign o9 on hisevil plot to kill all of the Jews. Withindi9 erence leavened by royal pow-er, the king o9 ers his signet ring tothe wicked villain and instructs himto do as he wishes. This moment towhich R. Abba bar Kahana drawsour a: en8 on is a minuscule gesturethat symbolizes a seismic shi7 in thebalance of power. Imperial authori-ty colludes shamelessly with sel sh,barbaric interests. What is it thatmakes this moment so important,and what does it accomplish thatthe prophets cannot?

On the way to answering thisques8 on, I present another: Whydoes King Achashverosh close theBook of Esther by imposing a trib-ute on the people of his empire?This is not disconnected from themovement of the rest of the nar-ra8 ve, nor purely an asser8 on of kingly power. Rather, it is the epi-logic resolu8 on to a crisis that hasbeen plaguing the empire for mostof the book. I want to suggest thatthe story of this crisis can be told interms of the troubles inherent to anempire in decline.

Our rst hint to this problem iso9 ered by Haman in his proposalof genocide. We know that Hamanhad a personal vende: a, which hetransmuted with sociopathic easeinto a bloodthirsty hatred for anen8 re people, but how was it sosimple for him to make his grudge

a real imperial decree? Upon closeinspec8 on, he actually did have astrategy for appealing to the inter-ests of empire. Haman’s plot wasat its face a personal vende: a, butmore than that, it was a scheme forgenera8 ng revenue for a thirsty em-pire. His plot was so nearly success-ful because he understood how tojus8 fy the exploita8 on of marginal-ized peoples for economic ends ina period of general decline. Notecarefully what he says upon ap-proaching the emperor:

! ere is one people, scattered anddispersed amongst the other peoples inall the satrapies of your empire. ! eirlaws are di- erent from all other peoples,nor do they do the laws of the king. Itdoes not pay for the king to let them be.If it please the king, let it be written thatthey be destroyed, and I will measure10,000 silver talents, by way of thosewho do the work, to be brought tothe king’s treasury. (Esther 3:8-9)

Ten thousand talents of silver isa tremendous amount of money.Herodotus records the annual in-come of the Persian empire in the8 me of Darius as 14,560 silver tal-ents (The Histories 3:95). Allowingfor the poten8 al unreliability of thisreport, it s8 ll gives us a good senseof the magnitude of this amount of money. I do not think it is plausibleto suggest that Haman is trying tobribe the emperor with money fromhis personal funds. Rather, I think heis framing the plot as a strategy forextrac8 ng close to a year’s worth of imperial funds. How? By plunderingJewish property from throughoutthe en8 re empire. The plunderinghe suggests is not just random ra-pacity—it is a comprehensive meth-od of engorging the palace treasury!

In the empires of an8 quity, themajority of the royal monetary in-come came from taxing conqueredregions. Ci8 zens of the empiregenerally expected to live tax free,though they would o9 er annualgi7 s of their wealth to the emperor(Graeber). When the Persian em-pire was on the rise, it would take ina considerable por8 on of its incomeby plundering newly conquered ter-ritories. If, has been suggested bysome historians, the Persian em-pire was in decline in the 8 me of Achashverosh, then it makes sensethat the royal advisors were cas8 ngabout for new strategies to extendthe trajectory of their economy.

So, Haman is in e9 ect proposinga radical new strategy for crea8 nggrowth—internal plunder! This iswhy he precedes his proposal bycas8 ng the Jews as a people whohave no social 8 es to the peoplearound them, as a people who arenot construc8 ve members of theempire (Rashi remarkably com-ments that Haman’s words, “theydo not do the laws of the king,”means truthfully that the Jews donot pay taxes!).

This economic basis for the de-struc8 on and plunder of the Jewsis what leads the king to balk whenEsther and Mordechai ask him toannul the genocidal decree. Thereis no going back on the word of theking, especially when it forms thebackbone of his economic plan. In-stead, Mordechai suggests a backupslaughter, so that there will at leastbe some kind of plunder to expandthe king’s co9 ers. Unfortunately,the Jewish marauders (not as in-vested in the empire’s success) donot comply with this s8 pula8 on of the decree—though it speci cally

Persian Spring: Understanding Politics in Megillat Estherby A3$ G,!&1$-(

“

“! at is, where all the e- orts of the prophets to bring about moral circumspection and reform had failed, this moment * nally succeeded.”


mandates plunder, the Jews ab-stain. This is an a9 ront to the king’sscheming, and again leaves himscrambling for revenue.

Hence the mysterious tribute thatthe emperor levies upon his peopleat the end of the book: The king isforced to resolve his economic prob-lems by resor8 ng to an internal tax.

This is the solu8 on he might havetried at rst, had he been forced toadhere to a poli8 cal process withany measure of accountability. In-stead, because of the corrup8 on of insider in uence, the empire comesto the brink of moral catastrophe.

This is the meaning of the Tal-mud’s teaching which stands as theepitaph to this piece, that the re-moval of the ring that was greaterthan all prophecies. When KingAchashverosh handed the signetring to his wicked advisor, that wasthe mechanism by which an individ-ual’s zealous hatred became iden8 -cal with the interests of empire. Butwhat makes this moment greaterthan all of the prophe8 c exhorta-8 ons? Rashi explains that it led thepeople to fas8 ng and repentance.That is, where all the e9 orts of theprophets to bring about moral cir-cumspec8 on and reform had failed,this moment nally succeeded. Theirony of this is that Esther is onebook of few in the bible where thewoes of the Jewish people are notexplicitly connected to their mis-deeds. By a plain reading of the

book, their repentance and fas8 nghas no direct connec8 on to the nar-ra8 ve of danger and redemp8 on.

This reading is part of a compre-hensive rabbinic project of workingout the story of Esther in theologicalterms. They read past the conspicu-ous secularism of the book into itshidden higher workings, seeking the

imprint of God’s hand where it is noteasily found. This story, like all of ourother stories, is actually about ourrela8 onship with God and the reso-lu8 on of sin and distance throughrepentance and fas8 ng.

This reading of the book is a: rac-8 ve even if you do not share its the-ology, if only because it broadensthe scope of the story to include theac8 ons of the en8 re Jewish peopleas relevant. A secular reading runsthe danger of limi8 ng its relevanceto the power plays between fourvery important people, while every-one else in the empire waits impo-tently. But, as R. Abba bar Kahanasuggests, a prophe8 c-theologicalreading is not the only valid rabbinicunderstanding. By re-secularizingthe theological reading, we can seethat fas8 ng is not only a theurgicstrategy—it is also a poli8 cally ef-fec8 ve mass symbolic ac8 on. In thisway, the Book of Esther has a num-ber of lessons to teach us aboutthe possibili8 es of collec8 ve ac8 oneven in a highly insular and corruptpoli8 cal environment.

Mordechai was a man who was

very aware of the impact of his ac-8 ons as a public gure and an openJew. His immediate response to theimperial decree was to take con-spicuous public ac8 on. He took tothe city square and enacted a rite of mourning.

By doing so, he made the plightof the Jews a ma: er of public dis-

course. He demonstrated simply inorder to be visible, to prevent thedecree from sinking out of view andbeing carried out as a proceduralma: er. As with other e9 ec8 ve pub-lic ac8 ons, he played o9 the quietsympathies of the general populace(“The city Shushan was perplexed,”Esther 3:15), knowing that thosesympathies would not indepen-dently lead to some kind of civil dis-obedience. Persia was not a wildlyan8 -semi8 c society, but it was law-abiding, and there was no recoursefor appeal against the decrees of themonarchy. What Mordechai and theJews had to do, therefore, was tostay present in the public conscious-ness for the eleven months prior tothe enactment of the decree. Thuswhen Esther is planning her owninterven8 on she encourages Mor-dechai to stage a three-day ac8 on,What was Esther’s climac8 c disclo-sure—I am one of them!—withoutthe resounding sound of the Jewsoutside the palace gates? A wholepopular campaign undergirded here9 ort. Esther spoke with the voiceof the people, a right she earnedthrough her sharing in their su9 er-


ing, in their plight. Conversely, none of those popular e9 orts for recogni-8 on would have borne fruit if a sym-pathe8 c leader had not had a placein the imperial court. The Jewishpeople needed to work together.

The an8 -prophe8 c poli8 cs of Me-gillat Esther hinges on the connec-r8 on between an understanding of its logic of power and the resul8 ngcoordinated e9 ort to undo corrup-8 on. If the prophet, as usually un-derstood, is the voice of uncompro-mising moral outrage, the megillahworks within a more subtle frame-

work that allows certain poli8 cal re-ali8 es to come into relief. It allowsus to develop an understanding of the connec8 ons between a peopleand its leaders. Crucially, the Jewishcampaign against Haman could onlysucceed because his plot relied onthe economic interests of the em-pire, not on the will of the Persianpeople. A campaign of mass ac8 oncould never have taken root with-out this disjunc8 on between an em-pire’s interests and its people’s.

In our present moment we havecome to realize that people are nei-

ther iden8 ed with nor paralyzedby their poli8 cal leaders. Rather,each have speci c responsibili8 estowards the other, and moments of in uence and pressure on them. Fartoo o7 en, en8 8 es that are close topower act as though these avenuesdo not exist. Megillat Esther is a dra-rma8 c demonstra8 on of how theycan be successfully understood andu8 lized for change.

Just think: What could we do, if we do it together?

My Spanish is not very good, andmy Hebrew is even worse. Last

year, listening to my friend chantMegillat Esther in the Nicaraguan rairport was really an experience.Unable to nd a quiet corner in thehumid Managuan airport, we pulledchairs together near a baggage car-ousel. The three groups of studentsfrom di9 erent universi8 es gatheredto hear the retelling of the Purimstory. Our audience grew from stu-dents—hours away to se= ng o9 fora week of service, learning, and soulsearching with the American JewishWorld Service — to Nicaraguan by-standers, intrigued by the unfamiliartune and foreign words. So o7 en isthis situa8 on allegorical to commonprac8 ces in social jus8 ce— a groupof foreigners hop o9 a plane, takeover a space, and begin to imparttheir culture and tradi8 on withoutregard for those who they are thereto help. Fortunately, these confusedobservers had the courage to speak

up and ask ques8 ons. Through bro-ken Spanish, I was able to tell thesegentlemen the story of the Jewishtriumph over evil.

Days later, I was sharing storiesin the semi-constructed kitchenfor agricultural training with mynew friend Sergio. A former soviettrained commando, Sergio had beento war and recalled losing eightypercent of his soldiers in the Nicara-guan revolu8 on. He was a modernday Mordechai, devoted to standingup to an oppressive government forthe be: erment of his people. A7 erseeing the horrors of war, Sergionow devotes his life to peace and topreserving his country’s freedom bygrassroots change.

I have always felt deeply ambiva-lent with the ending of the Purimstory, especially the descent intoanarchy described at the of the me-gillah. Fortunately, I, like those lis-tening to the megillah in the airport,

found the courage to ask Sergiowhat he thought of Americans. Itwas a di; cult ques8 on knowing thehistory of United States meddlingin Nicaragua’s sovereignty. Sergiosimply responded, “A7 er talkingwith your group, I’m learning that Idon’t hate you.” Forgiveness comesthrough slow steps, challenging con-versa8 ons, and the courage to askhard ques8 ons. It is 8 me to movebeyond the ending of the megillahby taking a di9 erent stance againstour advisories. We must live withcompassion and courage, with loveand understanding, with the abil-ity to forge new bonds through thehard work of forgiveness.

A Nicaraguan Purimby J&))& R,2$0".$/%

“And who knows, if it is not for a moment like this that you a: ained royal status?” [4:14]


In the fourth chapter of Megillat Esther, the 8 me arrives for Estherr

to reveal her true iden8 ty and tosave her people. Yet Esther is afraidto approach the king without an ex-plicit invita8 on explaining that “anyman or woman who approaches theking in his inner courtyard withoutbeing called has just one law- to beput to death” (4:11).

Mordechai responds as follows:“Do not imagine that you, of allthe Jews, will escape to the king’shouse. For if you remain silent atthis moment, relief and deliverancewill arise for the Jews from anotherplace, and you and your father’shouse will be destroyed. And whoknows, if it is not for a moment likethis that you a: ained royal status?”(4:13-14)

Mordechai’s response to Estherseems unnecessarily pointed and ac-cusatory. He appears to assume theabsolute worst about Esther’s mo-8 ves. He paints her as scheming tohide silently in the palace, protect-ed by her posi8 on of power, whileher fellow Jews die at the hands of her husband and his armies. Esther,however, has merely stated that sheis unable to approach the king rightnow. She hesitates because she issubject to the law prohibi8 ng herappearance without having been in-vited, not because she is planning tohide out in the palace forever! Mor-dechai himself does not disregardthe royal laws of decorum; becauseit is illegal, he does not enter thegates of the palace wearing sack-cloth (4:2). Furthermore, it seemsuncharacteris8 c that Mordechaiwould be so harsh with Esther. Mor-dechai, a7 er all, adopted Esther andraised her as his own child. Whenshe married, he would pace around

the palace gates, so that he couldbe constantly apprised of her wel-fare (2, 11). It was he, in fact, whohad instructed Esther not to tell herhusband where she came from, andthe verse that describes Esther’s si-lence states explicitly, “Esther didnot tell of her na8 on or heritage forMordechai had instructed her notto tell” (2:10). When Esther refusesto plead with the king she is merelyresponding that she thinks it wiseto con8 nue following Mordechai’sini8 al advice. The lack of generos-ity with which Mordechai reads Es-ther’s response is astounding.

If Mordechai intends to mo8 vateEsther to act through his words, theapproach is strange. First, his mes-sage is contradictory. He tells Estherthat relief and deliverance will cometo the Jews from another place. Thisimplies that Esther’s involvement isnot essen8 al to the salva8 on of theJews. He then says that she, as thequeen, is uniquely situated to helpthem. Well, which one is it? Doesshe have to use her posi8 on of in u-ence or not? If not, why should shedreveal her iden8 ty? The Jews willbe saved whether or not she getsinvolved! Second, in the process of telling her that she cannot escapein the house of the king Mordechaimen8 ons that if she does not speakup she and her father’s house willbe the only ones destroyed. Weknow from the beginning of the me-gillah that Esther is an orphan, “she has no father or mother” (2:2). Whywould Mordechai men8 on Esther’sdead family here? Just to twist theknife?!

In Esther Rabbah (6:7) we encoun-ter a midrash that may help us readMordechai’s reac8 on more gener-ously:

R’ Berachiya said in the name of R’Levi- God said to Israel: You cried andsaid, “we have become orphans with nofather” (Eichah 5:3) By your life! Eventhe future redeemer that I will appointfor you in [Persia and] Media will nothave a father or a mother, as it says “Forshe did not have a father and mother”(Esther 2:2).

Reading Mordechai’s statement inlight of this midrash, we see that Es-ther’s having grown up as an orphanis essen8 al to her becoming the onewho saves the Jewish people. Aclose reading of these verses yieldsthat Esther’s advantage as queen isnot the main thrust of Mordechai’sargument; this comes to him al-most as an a7 erthought, “And whoknows, if it is not for a moment likethis that you a: ained royal status?”Rather Mordechai’s focus is thatEsther should step up and speakout because otherwise she and herfamily will be destroyed. Readingwith the midrash, we can suggest that, “you and your family will bedestroyed” is not a reference tothe physical destruc8 on of Esther’sfamily in the past nor to the deathof Esther herself in the future, butrather that if she does not speak,her having been an orphan will notserve its larger, cosmic purpose of preparing Esther to be the savior of her people.

We o7 en feel that there is a directcorrela8 on between a person’s priv-ilege and his/her responsibility to bea leader, a healer, a giver, and a sav-ior. Mordechai’s approach to Estherteaches us that the opposite is true.Esther is both an orphan, the low-est rung on the ladder of privilege,and the queen of 127 provinces.When Mordechai wants to call on

! e Orphan Queenby D&0, W&$))


her to iden8 fy with her people hefocuses primarily on her vulnerabil-ity, her history of being alone and inneed, and not on her current statustas queen. This teaches us that whatenables us to be sensi8 ve to thesu9 ering of others is to really knowwhat it means to su9 er. The call of the hungry is only heard and under-stood by those who know hungerthemselves. When we feel calledupon to serve and to save we shouldnot view the responsibility as fallingon the shoulders of those wealthieror more fortunate than we are. Weshould recognize that our ability toextend ourselves comes only froma place of deep knowledge and em-pathy; from proximity to need, notdistance from want.

In another passage from Esther Rabbah we see Esther calling uponher status as an orphan in praying

to God before she goes in to meetAchashverosh:

“She prayed and she said: Hashem,God of Israel who has controlledfrom primordial days and created theworld. Please help your maid as I haveremained an orphan without a motherand father and am like a poor womanwho begs from door to door. Similarly I am begging for your mercy fromwindow to window in the house of Achashverosh…You, father of orphans,please stand to the right of this orphanwho has relied on your kindness and setme in mercy before this man for I amafraid of him. And reduce him, for youare the one who reduces the haughty”(8:7).

Not only does Esther refer to her-self as an orphan in this prayer, butshe also calls on God as the Fatherof Orphans to listen to her in herdistress. Perhaps it is because Es-

ther herself does not have a fatherthat she is in a unique posi8 on toask for mercy from God as a father.

Esther triumphs when she revealsto her husband, the king, that sheis not exclusively his queen, but sheis also one of the lowly and invis-ible people whom Achashveroshdid not think twice about destroy-ing. Her strength comes from point-ing out to Achashverosh that underthe crown of his queen, and behindthe mask of his wife was an orphan.And therefore under his crown too,sits an ordinary man, capable of andcalled to mercy.

“We should recognize that our ability to extend ourselves comes only from a place of deep knowledge and empathy; from proximity to need,

not distance from want.”

“…come this day unto the banquet that I have prepared…” [5:4]


Given my being a young man in his roaring twen8 es, one could

expect my favorite halachah for Pu-rim to have something to do witheighty proof whiskey and a crite-rion grounded solely in quan8 ty.Instead, my favored point of Jewishlaw resides in an astounding glossby R’ Moshe Isserles, the great 16thcentury Ashkenazic scholar, namely,that, on Purim Jews are allowed towear kilayim de-rabbanan. Pre: yradical, if you ask me. The Remawrites,

And regarding the custom of donning masks on Purim and a man wearing women’s clothing, and a womanwearing the clothing of a man, there isno prohibition in this matter, since it isnot intended for anything other thancelebration (in the holiday) alone, andsimilarly in the wearing of rabbinically forbidden mixed substances (kilayimde-rabbanan). Some say there is a prohibition, but the custom follows the* rst (permissive) opinion. Additionally,one person grabbing from another in a joyous manner, (the commandmentof) “Do not steal” does not obtain,and this is the way (it is appropriate forus) to behave as long as nothing that issimply not done occurs, due to social(lit. civil) welfare. (Shulchan Aruch,Orach Hayyim 296:8)m

The prohibi8 on to make use of mixed substances is found in Levi8 -cus 19:19 and Deuteronomy 22:5,9-11, in which the Torah forbidsmixing wool and linen (shatnez), interbreeding di9 erent species of animals, and plan8 ng di9 erent spe-cies of seeds together. Bewilderinglaws such as these are o7 en thesite of controversy regarding howfar human inves8 gators can comein understanding them. Famousscholars such as Rashi insist thatsuch laws are chukot legamrei, laws with no ra8 onale; they are strictlydecrees issued by the transcendentKing, whose Will we cannot discern.Even so, we can s8 ll relate to howthese mitzvot structure the realitytin which we are embedded. Indeed,this is perhaps the central modal-ity which occurs in the general dis-course of halachah, to separate, to dis8 nguish, to mark and maintaindi9 erence. Especially in the case of a chok, one would imagine for there to be even less room for exibility,since there is no reasoning by whichone can make a case for leniency.But the Rema makes the bold deci-sion to carve out permissive space.How can he jus8 fy himself in theface of the decree of the King?

Despite our inability to suss outwhys and wherefores of the law of shatnez, we can associate it with acertain mode of existence, as notedabove, that of separa8 on and di9 er-ence. This is the precise mode of re-ality which Purim seeks to overturn.The banner cry of Purim is

(Esther 9:1), “and the oppositeoccurred!” Purim is the holiday of reversals, as typi ed in the miracu-lous upset that characterized thecoup of the Persian Jews over thegenocidal machina8 ons of the wick-

ed Haman. The Queen boldly risksher life, but her reward is manifold.Ve-nahafoch hu. Mordechai rides in royal nery, and Haman hangsfrom gallows he himself designed.Ve-nahafoch hu. The purported vic-8 ms are found to be the victors. Ve-nahafoch hu.

The Russian literary cri8 c MikhailBakh8 n de nes the carnivalesqueas a literary form that liberatesand subverts one’s presump8 onsthrough comedy and chaos. Thisis precisely the modus operandiof Purim. While the most obviousexample of the carnival today is re-signed to the children’s fair put onby one’s synagogue on the Sundaypreceding or following the holidayitself, the logic of Purim is trulystructured along the lines of thecarnival. When we recite the wordsve-nahafoch hu, we commit our-selves to (for one day at least) livingin an upside down world, a worldin which we simply cannot rely onthe ways things usually are. In thisworld, conven8 on exists to be sub-verted, to be reversed. Men wearwomen’s clothing, and the oppo-site. Always the opposite. And theopposite of the opposite. This is theday on which boundaries becomeblurred.

So how to understand this quibbleof a heter (dispensa8 on) issued byrthis great sage, that one is allowedto wear kilayim de-rabbanan on Purim? In a sense, this heter signi-r es the blurring of boundaries onthis most carnivalesque of days,the subversion of the status quo.On this day alone Jews are allowedto (gasp!) mix. Yes, on the face of it, this kind of admixture is almostmeaningless. A7 er all, what kind of signi cance would such a border-

: A Reconsideration of Ethicsby J")*+, S-*.,!/%

,"

.

)"":( ) , ,:(

“Our inherent interdependence and interconnectedness teach us that our welfare is bound up one in another. We care for the other as

we care for ourselves.”


line an8 -nomian nomian prac8 cetruly have? What real revolu8 onaryimpact does wearing a shirt madeof wool and hemp (for example)possess?

In a spiritual life engendered by alife structured by halachah, the im-

port of a prac8 ce is less its externalreverbera8 ons but rather what itinculcates within and how it struc-tures one’s own lived experience.Even the smallest, most nigglingheter induces within us a certainrmode of freedom, the permissionto subvert the status quo, perhapseven more so because it is hardlyno8 ceable to the outside eye, pro-viding for one an opening whichleads down a path par8 cular to thatindividual.

I suppose we cannot pass throughthis discussion without giving men-8 on to that most (in)famous of cus-toms. The Mechaber, in the Shul-chan Aruch, writes, “A person mustdrink (lit. celebrate) so much on Pu-rim un8 l one does not know (

) the di9 erence between ‘cursedis Haman’ and ‘blessed is Morde-chai.’” (OH 295:2, ci8 ng BT Megil-lah 7b). One is supposed to a: aina mode of being in which one thingand its opposite become indis8 n-guishable. What has become radi-cally reversed is our very mode of living – ve-nahafoch hu. This is the

derech simchah (“manner of rejoic-ing”) referred to by the Rema, sincethe law in the Shulchan Aruch liter-ally instructs us to become so happythat we cannot make such conven-8 onal dis8 nc8 ons. Of course, themost common manner of a: aining

such a state is with liquor, but theessence of the ma: er is to realizesuch a euphoric state. The Beiur Halachah on this very se’if eluci-fdates how halachah could allow for such ecsta8 c behavior, such asdrinking to excess. He explains thatdrinking is an appropriate mode of behavior on this day since the mira-cle which happened in the megillahitself occurred by means of a feast!That is to say, our miraculous rever-sal was only possible through thelubrica8 on and uidity of drunken-ness, of Purim consciousness.1

The character of such a celebra-tory comportment is one of blurrymispercep8 on and accordant gen-erosity. Joy is overwhelming andinduces one to share it with others.Hence, it is no surprise that duringPurim, the boundaries between in-dividuals begin to elide as well. TheRema begins his gloss by referringto the prac8 ce on Purim to wearmasks. On this holiday, we are notrestricted to who we have believedwe must be. We are not our fac8 c-ity; we are sheer possibility. Themask blurs who we feel we have to

be and slides us into a freer future.We realize that we have becomeanother. Perhaps the most strikingelement of the Rema’s statement iswhen he declares that ma: ers of the7 which come to pass throughcelebra8 on are forgiven with no li-

ability. Private property bespeaksthe security of the individual. Onecannot take my things because theyare mine; others have no claims onthem. But on Purim, the lines be-tween us blur, and what is properto one can be claimed by another.There was simply no crime, sincethe mode of rejoicing o9 ers to an-other that which is one’s own.

Tradi8 onally, in Western philoso-phy, as typi ed by the metaphysicsof G. W. F. Hegel, reality is structuredthrough opposi8 on, most strikinglythrough Self and Other. The telos of Hegel’s philosophical program is thea: aining of the Absolute, in whichthe Self looks into the Other and re-alizes that only through the Othercan one become Self. The two areinextricably bound up one in an/other, allowing for the realiza8 on of true subjec8 vity. The Self can onlybecome through the Other. Under-standably, the ethical philosophy of Emmanuel Levinas protested boldlyagainst this privileging of the Self.To Levinas, the Other must neverbecome instrumental to the Self.Rather, the Self must recognize the


radical alterity, the absolute di9 er-ence (whereas Hegel’s Absolute wasa collapse into the Same) betweenthe Self and the Other.

Purim, however, presents us withan alterna8 ve model, one whichteaches us a new way of understand-ing ethics. While Levinas sought tocri8 cize Hegelian metaphysics for itstotalitarian tendencies, his philoso-phy results in its own deconstruc-8 on. For Levinas, the purpose of maintaining the Other’s absolutealterity is to ensure that the Self didnot co-opt the Other as one’s ownmeans, re-conceiving the Other asan aspect of oneself. However, toiden8 fy the Other in such radicallyabsolute terms ends up as yet an-other projec8 on emana8 ng fromthe Self. There remains no way toactually relate. The problem re-sides in this radical di9 eren8 a8 on.Luckily, as we have been discussingabove, Purim is designed to dealwith this very problem.

The func8 on of the customs of Purim is to blur the boundariesbetween oneself and an/other, toshow that the human condi8 on isnot one of radical separa8 on butrather of interrela8 on and coexis-tence. Mar8 n Buber, in his classicI and Thou, wrote, “Whoever saysYou does not have something forhis object… where You is said thereis no something. You has no bor-ders… he stands in rela8 on.” (trans.Kaufmann, p. 55) To address an/other is not to have the subject-object rela8 on described by Hegel(and, in his own way, Levinas) butrather to emerge together. Buberfamously writes in his opening pagethat one cannot u: er the word “I”without also speaking its pair. TheSelf does not come into its own

on its own but rather one can onlybe with an/other. Ve-nahafoch hu – and the opposite became whatis. The Self must par8 cipate in theOther, for only that is the ground of existence.

One is not separate from theOther. We cannot so easily dis8 n-guish between our selves (perhapsthis is why we put on masks). Indiscussing the con uence of Purimand the Sabbath, the 20th centurySlonimer Rebbe comments on Exo-dus 25:8, “Make me a sanctuary,and I will dwell amidst you ( ).” He writes, “This is a command-ment impinging on every Jew, tomake one’s body a dwelling place( ) = ng for the possession of the Shechinah in one’s very being,as the Chachamim interpret... be-tocham signifying in each and every one.” (Ne! vot Shalom, Purim, p. 74)While the contextual reading of theverse would see the word betochammeaning in the presence of the com-munity, the Slonimer Rebbe, follow-ing a long mys8 cal tradi8 on, ar8 cu-lates a more strict rendering, suchthat the word means, literally, “inyou,” in your very being. One couldread this mode of mys8 cal spiritual-ity in an atomis8 c mode, in whichevery individual by their lonesomebecomes a = ng residence for G?d.However, such a rendering wouldfracture G?d’s being into similarlyatomis8 c fragments, an assuredlyunacceptable result for the Jewishpeople, those who pledge fealtytwice daily to the one G?d. Rather,for each of us to be = ng residenc-es for the Shechinah, we must all bebound up together in that Divine su-perstructure. As the Divine inhereswithin us, we are all inherently in-volved one with an/other.

Since ethics has tradi8 onally beenbased in these absolute dis8 nc-8 ons, between Self and Other aswell as right and wrong, one caneasily imagine a protest to this al-terna8 ve ethical thinking. If livingin Purim consciousness allows oneto take liber8 es with an/other, sincethe boundaries between Self andOther are blurred (e.g. not having topay back what is appropriated whenone was celebra8 ng, in the Rema),how can we ensure that this modeof inter-rela8 on does not devolveinto anarchic chaos? If the linesbetween Self and Other are elided,then are we not sliding into the fas-cist fantasy of the Hegelian Absoluteonce more? Thankfully, the Rema,in his understanding of the mat-ter, a: empted to ensure that thiswould not be the case. One is notpermi: ed to steal; the lines are notabsolutely erased. Rather, to trulylive out the radical vision of Purim isfor a people to agree that one is dis-posed towards another. We forgiveslight trespasses, since we are allbound up one in an/other, a: empt-ing to accomplish something holytogether. Yom Kippurim is o7 eninterpreted as being Yom Ke-Purim(cf. M Taanit 4:8), a day that is likePurim. Perhaps their interrela8 onalso extends in the opposite man-ner (ve-nahafoch hu), in that just like on Yom Kippur, on Purim we arecommi: ed to forgiving each other.And we must s8 ll make sure thatwe are not ac8 ng lo ke-hogen, in anabsolutely unacceptable manner, asis the case with all rela8 onships of trust and consent – we must respecteach others boundaries, despitetheir uid nature on such a day. Thefreedom of uidity is not a licensefor taking liberty with an/other. Inother words, the Rema only allows


one to don kilayim de-rabbanan,not de-oraysa.

We conclude by responding toone nal and essen8 al cri8 quethat would (and should!) be posedagainst this model of ethics: If Pu-rim’s ethics is grounded in this ec-sta8 c modality, in which the linesbetween the Self and Other areblurred, how can we ensure thatthe Other is s8 ll cared for, if the Oth-er cannot be strictly dis8 nguished?The solu8 on to this kashya is the rub of Purim’s ethics: our inherentinterdependence and interconnect-edness teach us that our welfare isbound up one in another. We carefor the other as we care for our-selves. This is not banal ego8 sm.One’s care for oneself is the groundof caring for others. If we are con-8 nuously consumed with our ownneed for care, then how can wetruly be present with and for an/other? The security self-care bringsis the founda8 on, the sure groundon which we stand when we extend

a helping hand to an/other. Threemajor mitzvot of Purim involve giv-ting to others or sharing of one’sown. Mishloach manot possess tthe dynamics of mutuality; one ex-changes gi7 s with another, and areciprocal rela8 onship is formed.The se’udah in which one is com-manded to partake is an opening of one’s homes to others, of sharingone’s food, one’s space, and one’s8 me. Matanot le’evyonim presentus with a problem, for the giving re-la8 onship is unilateral, which wouldseem to reinstan8 ate the divisionbetween Self and Other throughthe disparity of power. Rambam’sexplica8 on of this mitzvah shows usthe answer. He writes, “One doesnot pay a: en8 on ( ) in giv-ing money to the poor, but ratherone gives to each and every out-stretched hand.” (Mishneh Torah, Sefer Zemanim, Hil. Megillah/Han-nukkah 2:16) One loses oneself in one’s giving. One expends oneself without self-consciousness. One

merely gives, one becomes a puregiver, a quality of the Divine, thatwhich has transcended need. AsMaimonides imparts, “Whoever gladdens the heart of the unfortu-nate becomes likened to the Shechi-nah.” (MT Sefer Zemanim, Hilchot Megillah uChanukah 2:17)

1 Here I want to note that the ikkar of the rma: er is not the drinking but rather the at-tainment of what I am calling “Purim con-sciousness.” There are di9 erent opinions onthe ma: er in halachic literature, with greatscsuch as Maimonides and the aforemen-8 oned Rema ruling that one need not be-come overly intoxicated but rather one maygo to sleep (see MT Sefer Zemanim, Hilchot Megillah uChanukah 2:15 and SA OH 295:2respec8 vely). To sleep perchance to dreamwould also achieve a similar e9 ect, sincethe consciousness one possesses in a dreamstate is characterized by the same quality of uidity as that of Purim.

“We need to manifest compassion for those who have been overcome by the self-destructive aspects of their nature, as it could honestly be any one of us.”


( ) between ‘cursed is Ha-man’ and ‘blessed is Mordechai.’”(BT Megillah 7b) This kind of ex-treme statement jars the Jewishear. Is not our religion one whichstresses the golden mean? Doesnot Rambam teach us that the bestpath to follow is one of modera8 on,understanding that as the correctmeaning of the mitzvah to “walk inHis ways?” (Deuteronomy 28:9, cf.MT Hilchot Deot 1:5-6, Shemoneh Perakim) How could Judaism truly call on us to behave in excess, es-pecially with such a dangerous sub-stance?

As has been explained elsewherein this journal, the spiritual idea pro-pounded in this teaching resonateswith radical reverbera8 ons, and itis precisely its radical nature thatteaches us that it is not somethingwe can take for granted. To focuson the drinking itself is to miss thepoint en8 rely. As noted in the pre-vious essay, the drinking is a meanstowards a: aining a new kind of consciousness, more uid and ex-ible than the mindset of the day-to-day. However, as we know from ourown experience, drinking excessiveamounts of alcohol can just as welllead one to intensify the darker cor-ners of our personality. Our owntradi8 on is deeply aware of the dan-gerous and even frightening con-sequences of consuming alcohol.Chapter one of our very own me-gillah shows the foolish king allow-ing his inebria8 on to make unfairdemands of his wife, causing publicembarrassment. Noah’s post-dilu-vian drinking leads him into a com-promising posi8 on with his sons.

Famously, Masechet Megillah in-structs us that on this most joy-

ous of holidays, one must “celebrateon Purim un8 l one cannot discern

(Genesis 9:20-23) In a condemningstatement, Ibn Ezra declaims, “Mosttransgressions are caused by wine.Wine destroys thinking and Avodat Hashem.” (Ibn Ezra on Numbers 6:2)

All of the afore-cited sources areto elucidate Judaism’s recogni8 onof the possible nega8 ve e9 ects of al-cohol. Unfortunately, the way thesetexts treat the problem of excessivedrinking is to frame it as one’s incor-rect choice. As we know today, alco-holism is not a series of bad choicesbut rather is a serious disease. TheTalmud teaches us that our yetzer ha-ra gains upon us each and everyday, and we are only saved by G-d’sgrace (BT Sukkah 52a). We need tomanifest compassion for those whohave been overcome by the self-destruc8 ve aspects of their nature,as it could honestly be any one of us. Alcoholism a> icts ten to 7 eenpercent of the Jewish community inAmerica. Alcoholism is not a condi-8 on which a9 ects only the poor anddisenfranchised, since around half of those 10-15% are themselvesin the tax brackets of $50,000 ormore. The American Jewish com-munity perceives itself as being en-

lightened and cultured, ignoring theall-too-real plights which plague ourcommunity, like any other commu-nity in this broken world. It is a sin-cere responsibility that we turn anhonest eye on ourselves, recogniz-ing and valida8 ng the areas in ourcommunity which need healing anda: en8 on.

Purim is a 8 me when, tragically,the forest is missed for the trees,and drinking is pushed on youngpeople, who are made to think thatit is the drinking that is essen8 al tothe holiday’s joy, rather than thecelebratory consciousness it en-genders. These more vulnerablemembers of our community are nottaught about the posi8 on of theRema or Rambam, who teach thatone is merely supposed to consumeenough to nod o9 , not to throw up.We have a communal responsibilityto ensure that those for whom it isnot the right course of ac8 on to u8 -lize inebria8 ng beverages have a se-cure and validated space within ourcommunity, that we root out thepernicious e9 ects of peer pressure,no ma: er where it lurks.

Purim and Alcohol Consumptionby J")*+, S-*.,!/%

F"#$%&# R&'("#)&'• Jewish Alcoholics, Chemically Dependent Persons, and Signi* cant Others - http://www.jacsweb.org/• R’ Avraham Twerski, M.D. On Judaism and alcoholism - http://www.myjewishlearning.com/practices/Ethics/Our_Bodies/Health_and_Healing/Smoking_Alcohol_and_Drugs/Alcoholics_Anonymous.shtml• R’ Shmuly Yanklowitz on kiddush clubs and excessive drinking - http://www.thejewishweek.com/features/street_torah/kiddush_clubs_destructive_force• On the luring of young Jews on college campuses with alcohol - http://www.thejewishweek.com/features/hammerman_ethics/shots_shabbat

“If I have found favor in the sight of the king…” [5:8]


One year ago, Libyan dictatorMuammar el-Qadda ’s troops

were marching toward Benghazi,the uno; cial capital of the Libyanrebels. Qadda was calling the reb-els “rats,” and a 10,000-person mas-sacre seemed inevitable. But on Pu-rim itself, in Libya (historically partof the Persian Empire), NATO madethe decision to intervene, saving thepro-democracy rebels. “Nahafochhu”—the opposite of the tyrant’s plan occurred. Fortunately, Purimhas been a bad 8 me for tyrants inmodern as well as ancient 8 mes.

Yet strangely there are s8 ll somerabbis that ques8 on whether de-mocracy is the best alterna8 ve totyranny. Rabbi Elyakim Levanon of Elon Moreh in Israel recently said,“Rabbis aren’t bound by democra-cy’s restric8 ons.” He stated that thedemocra8 c process “distorts real-ity,” because it creates a false mid-dle ground of compromise. To RabbiLevanon, this is why rabbis are com-mi: ed to the uncompromising “ab-solute truth” of Torah, and are notcommi: ed to democracy.

In the Book of Esther, we learnthat the lives of tens of thousandsof Jews were at risk in the PersianEmpire because the whims of KingAchashverosh and his minister Ha-man almost led to our destruc8 on.What we learn from the megillahis the danger of unchecked power,as in any system of absolute dicta-torship the welfare of the masses issubject to the whims of one person.A dictatorship may appear to workout on occasion. Achashverosh’spredecessor, Cyrus the Great, wasa virtuous leader for his 8 me, al-lowing the Jews to return to Israel,among other displaced peopleswho were returned to their lands.

However, because the Persian em-peror was considered the prime de-ity, allegiance to the capable Cyruswas then transferred to his succes-sor, the capricious Achashverosh.Together with the malicious Haman,Achashverosh emerges in the Purimstory as an unchecked power thatalmost led to our destruc8 on. In thelong run, dictatorship never works,because the masses are subject tothe whims of a few. There is no goodalterna8 ve to a responsible democ-racy.

Contrary to Rabbi Levanon’smodel—that we cannot supportdemocracy since we must only becommi: ed to an “absolute truth”—is the talmudic model, which dem-onstrates a discourse of argument,diversity, and collabora8 on.

In the democra8 c process of the Talmud, the rabbis held a verystrong belief in the value of dissent-ing opinions. The Mishnah asks,“Why do we men8 on an individualview along with the majority (ac-cepted posi8 on) unnecessarily?”One answer is, “That if a rst personsays, ‘so I have a tradi8 on,’ a secondwill say to him, ‘You ( rst person)heard it as the opinion of so-and-so(an earlier third person)’” (M Eduyot1:6). The posi8 on will be eliminatedbased upon his historical dismissal.However, there is another reasongiven: “That a court may approvean individual view and rely on him”(M Eduyot 1:5). The rst explana-8 on suggests that we preserve mi-nority posi8 ons to set a precedentfor their complete rejec8 on in thefuture. However, the other opinionsuggests that we preserve minor-ity posi8 ons in order that futuregenera8 ons can be aware of themand rely on them. The la: er opin-

ion suggests a talmudic democra8 cprocess, as the majority posi8 on ischosen but the minority posi8 on iss8 ll of great value.

S8 ll another talmudic posi8 onsuggests that the unaccepted mi-nority posi8 on is also true: “Theseposi8 ons and those posi8 ons are(both) the words of the living G-d.”(BT Eruvin 13b) Yet even morethan valuing truth, the rabbis valuepeace. In a cosmic ba: le betweenshalom (peace) and emet (truth),tpeace struck truth down to theearth (Bereishit Rabba). The rabbisteach via metaphor that the valueof peace usually trumps the valueof truth.

Rav Kook explained that a societyof peace is only possible when thefounda8 on is one of argument. Mo-ses was the greatest leader, yet evenhe did not rule alone; he appointeda Council of 70 that evolved into theSanhedrin—with its spirit of argu-menta8 on, representa8 ves from ev-ery city, and local as well as na8 onalcouncils—which was eventually in-strumental for the Talmud. Thereis an ethos of democracy and rep-resenta8 ve government underlyingthe founda8 ons of Talmud. Whiledictators can carry out massacreson a whim, the Jewish idea is thatone execu8 on in 70 years evinces a“bloody court.” Only where there iscollec8 ve engagement in policy canthere be a strong enough founda-8 on for the good and just society.

Purim: ! e Importance of Democracyby R,22$ S*#+14 Y,0(1".$/%

“Only where there is collective engagement in policy can there be a strong enough foundation for the good and just society.”


Majoritarianism, Economic In-equality, & Republicanism

Democracy has deep roots; how-ever, the modern secular version of democracy has some liabili8 es. Oneprimary danger is majoritarianism,where all decisions are made bya majority, regardless of its e9 ecton people. Thus, in a majoritariansystem, major laws can pass evenif only 51% support a law and 49%strenuously object, without regardfor whose rights may be infringed.Minori8 es (such as the Tamils in SriLanka, the Catholics in Northern Is-land, and the secularists and Chris-8 ans in Egypt) would be par8 cularlyvulnerable in this type of system.

The poli8 cal scien8 st Arendt Li-jphart o9 ers a blistering cri8 queof majoritarianism. He distrusts“straigh< orward majority rule inwhich both majority and minoritywould simply promise to behavemoderately,” adding: “This is aprimi8 ve solu8 on to ethnic tensionsand extremism, and it is naive to ex-pect minori8 es condemned to per-manent opposi8 on to remain loyal,moderate, and construc8 ve.”1

Instead, Lijphart advocates for“consocia8 onalism” to provide uni-versal par8 cipa8 on within a society.In heterogeneous socie8 es, it is es-sen8 al for 1) power to be shared and2) group autonomy: “Power sharingdenotes the par8 cipa8 on of repre-senta8 ves of all signi cant commu-nal groups in poli8 cal decision mak-

ing, especially at the execu8 ve level;group autonomy means that thesegroups have authority to run theirown internal a9 airs, especially inthe areas of educa8 on and culture.”These two core principles comprise“consocia8 onal” democracy. Thetalmudic system, as we have seen,shows respect for minority opinionsthrough procedural legi8 macy (le-gal respect) and through treasuringthese minority opinions (a= tudinalrespect), and is not merely dismis-sive. Conversely, democracy todayruns a risk of majoritarianism.

It might be a stretch to say the tal-mudic model is consocia8 onal. How-ever, the Talmud de nitely takessteps away from majoritarianismand toward consocia8 onalism. Theidea of procedural legi8 macy, with“par8 cipa8 on of representa8 ves of all signi cant communal groups,” ishinted at in the Talmud’s require-ment to include minority opinions.This inclusion ensures that majori-8 es cannot simply ignore minori8 esforever. Second, the idea of repre-senta8 on by one’s “own communi-ty” is suggested in the Sanhedrin’s

inclusion of a representa8 ve fromeach community. The point is thatgood inten8 ons are not enough;to believe that inten8 ons are su; -cient is “naive.” Rather, respect forminori8 es must be ins8 tu8 onalized(albeit in their own way) in conso-cia8 onalism and the Talmud.

To be sure, the Torah demandsthat we reject perversions of jus-8 ce even within a democracy: “Donot be a follower of the majority forevil; and do not respond to a griev-ance by yielding to the majority topervert (the law)” (Exodus 23:2). We must engage in civil disobediencewhen society goes astray; however,society ul8 mately must have proce-dural legi8 macy and the rule of law,as espoused by the founda8 onalsocial theorist Max Weber’s secularconcept of ra8 onal legal authority.In a commentary on the previousBiblical verse, the rabbis promotesome level of conformity to themajority (where the majority rulesby procedural legi8 macy): “Followthe majority! If the majority rules‘impure,’ it is impure; if the major-ity rule ‘pure,’ it is pure” (MidrashPsalms 12). Civil disobedience, onthe other hand, is a protest againstthe seemingly unfair and arbitrarymeasures that lack procedural legit-imacy. Civil disobedience has deepJewish roots from Abraham protest-ing G-d’s decision to destroy Sodomto the civil rights and Soviet Jewrymovements.

On an individual level, freedomis a: ained through spiritual means(Pirkei Avot 6:2), but on a collec8 velevel, freedom is a: ained throughpoli8 cal compromise. While thepersonal religious realm is one of ideals, the public poli8 cal realm isone of pragma8 cs, where the per-fect is the enemy of the good. Prag-


ma8 sm and compromise are neces-sary to ensure that things get done.The Midrash teaches that there isthe heavenly Jerusalem (an ideal of ideals) and the earthly Jerusalem(embedded in messy di; cult discus-sions). Being a modern Jew requiresthat we balance our most idealis8 ccommitments with the need to cre-ate change in a complex, ambigu-ous world. We must always remaincommi: ed to procedural legi8 ma-cy, because the ideals we hold mustbe enacted in a valid manner, withcomplica8 ons and compromise.

Democracy is not perfect, but itis the best model we have for navi-ga8 ng a messy human society inmodern 8 mes. The right to live withfreedom is rooted in the Torah it-self: “Thou shall proclaim libertythroughout the land to all the in-habitants thereof” (Levi8 cus 25:10).This passage concerns the yovel laws (jubilee year). However, whiledemocracy ensures that everyonehas equal civil and poli8 cal rights,it makes no assurance for economicrights, and economic inequality re-sults. Thus, everyone can vote andrun for o; ce, but they are not con-s8 tu8 onally guaranteed an eco-nomic livelihood to support theirfamilies. To ensure such a guaran-tee, something else is needed: gov-ernment health care, soup kitchens,and other social services. The Torahhas this unity: “liberty” refers notonly to poli8 cal liberty, but also toeconomic liberty from landlessnessand indebtedness.

Columbia University Professor Alfred Stepan, a leading poli8 calscien8 st on democra8 za8 on, hascontrasted “democra8 c transi8 on”with “democra8 c consolida8 on.”Democra8 c transi8 on involves the

replacement of dictatorship witha polity that ful lls all formal char-acteris8 cs of democracy (“free andcontested elec8 ons”). But a7 erdemocra8 c transi8 on, democra8 cconsolida8 on is s8 ll necessary to en-sure that democracies are “the onlygame in town.” Once democra8 cconsolida8 on has occurred, “thebehavior of the newly elected gov-ernment that has emerged from thedemocra8 c transi8 on is no longerdominated by the problem of howto avoid democra8 c breakdown.”

Stepan lists “economic society”as one necessary suppor8 ng condi-8 on for democra8 c consolida8 on:“Modern consolidated democra-cies require a set of socio-poli8 callycra7 ed and accepted norms, ins8 tu-8 ons and regula8 ons—what we call‘economic society’—that mediatebetween the state and the market.”He goes on to say that “even thebest of markets experience ‘marketfailures’ that must be corrected if the market is to func8 on well. Noless an advocate of the ‘invisiblehand’ than Adam Smith acknowl-edged that the state is necessary toperform certain func8 ons.”

Professor Stepan then quotesSmith’s asser8 on that governmenthas “the duty of protec8 ng, as faras possible, every member of soci-ety from the injus8 ce or oppressionof every other member of it, or theduty of establishing an exact admin-istra8 on of jus8 ce.” Here we seeStepan echoing the Torah’s doublemeaning of “proclaiming freedom.”For example, the crea8 on of a per-manent and hereditary slave under-class inhibits democra8 c consoli-da8 on, even if some slaves mightachieve a skilled job, or if selec8 veemancipa8 on is possible. While

freedom in its formal characteris8 csmight refer only to poli8 cal liber-8 es, freedom can only be “consoli-dated” with economic liber8 es (or“economic society”) as well. Theyovel laws can count as part of the lgovernmental consolida8 on of eco-nomic society, in that they “pro-tect...every member of society frominjus8 ce.”

From a Jewish perspec8 ve, weknow that even more than grant-ing rights, the Torah gives us obli-ga8 ons. Maintaining a free and justsociety is not easy and requires thee9 ort of all. In addi8 on, even whenthe democracy is not in a Jewishstate, we are called upon to supportthe government: “Seek the peace of the city to which I have exiled youand pray for it to G-d, for throughits peace will you have peace”(Jeremiah 29:7). Furthermore, thestate protects us: Rabbi Chanina,the deputy high priest says, “Prayfor the welfare of the government,because if people did not fear it, aperson would swallow one’s fellowalive” (Pirkei Avot 3:2). This is whywe are bound by the laws of theland via Shmuel’s mandate of “dina d’malchuta dina,” the law of the country is law (BT Bava Kama 113a).

This is another important cri-8 que of democracy: republican-ism. It is not enough for everyoneto vote for policies that speci callybene t them. There must also besome spirit of patrio8 sm and com-munity, as in John F. Kennedy’s “Asknot what your country can do foryyou—ask what you can do for yourcountry.” The great Harvard Profes-sor John Rawls taught the “Veil of Ignorance,” in which a hypothe8 calci8 zenry votes on the laws in theirsociety, without knowing wheret


they will be in society—rich, poor,strong, weak, etc. This forces peo-ple to consider the general good in-stead of their own speci c interests.Along these lines, Adam Smith citesthe government’s “duty of erect-ing and maintaining certain publicworks and public ins8 tu8 ons whichit can never be in the interest of anyindividual, or small number of indi-viduals, to erect and maintain; be-cause the pro t could never repaythe expense to any individual orsmall number of individuals, thoughit may frequently do much morethan repay it to a great society.”

When Adam Smith writes of thegovernment’s duty to erect publicworks, ins8 tu8 ons and other lawsthat would never be in the interest(or ability) of a single individual, healso is asking something of the gov-ernment and its ci8 zens. He is askingfor the government and the peopleto not only vote by considering theirindividual interests, but to researchthe issues, become informed ci8 -zens, and do what is best for thepolity. As the ins8 tu8 on of yovel did in ancient 8 mes, so we shoulddo today. While Judaism does havea no8 on of representa8 on (shaliach adam k’moto), the appointee is s8 llexpected to be knowledgeable andaccountable.

Unlike Smith, some capitalisteconomists such as Milton Fried-man have cri8 cized democracyon the grounds of e; ciency. Theyclaim that voters are irra8 onal andunknowledgeable, and make thegovernment and country less e; -cient through their vo8 ng pa: erns.This cri8 cism dates back to the ear-liest democracies. In the Republic,Plato cri8 ques democracy throughthe narra8 on of Socrates, as “a

charming form of government, fullof variety and disorder, and dispens-ing a sort of equality to equals andunequaled alike.” A more recentcri8 cism is that democracy does notprovide adequate poli8 cal stability,since power shi7 s so frequently.More cynical cri8 cs claim that de-mocracy is merely an illusory façademasking an elite oligarchy.

On a more posi8 ve note, one of the greatest endorsements of de-mocracy is exercising our freedomto vote at all possible opportuni-8 es. Rabbi Moshe Feinstein, in ale: er wri: en in 1984, explainedthat all American Jews must vote,since we must express our hakarat hatov (gra8 tude) to the leaders of vthe great na8 on we reside in. RabbiKaminetsky dismissed those whodoubt the impact of their individualvote, no8 ng that recent elec8 onshave been decided by just a fewhundred votes. “Therefore, I urgeall members of our community toful ll their obliga8 on to vote forthose who strengthen our na8 on—whether materially or spiritually.”

Rabbi Ahron Soloveichik wentfurther in explaining our commit-ments to rights and obliga8 ons toensure that we pursue jus8 ce forall in society. “While contemporarycivil law has evolved from the To-rah (from the mishpa! m, in which humanity is in the ‘image of G-d’),the Torah maintains a core dis8 nc-8 on from civil law: whereas modernjurisprudence is completely and ex-clusively grounded in human rights,Torah jurisprudence is addi8 onallyfounded upon the pillar of du8 es. Interms of human rights, tzedek andkmishpat are used together (Psalms t89:15). Thus, we do not in ict an in-jury on others because it would vio-

late their human rights. Their rightscome rst, and from this comes ourduty to not harm others. This is auniversal duty: When one delvesinto the halachah, one can readilysee that the Torah does not make adis8 nc8 on between Jews and non-Jews within the realm of mishpatand tzedek…. A Jew should alwaysiden8 fy with the cause of defendingthe aggrieved, whatsoever the ag-grieved may be, just as the conceptof tzedek is to be applied uniformlykto all humans regardless of race orcreed.”

Democracy today is far from per-fect. The three main challengesaddressed here are majoritarian-ism, economic inequality, and re-publicanism. The talmudic tradi8 onhelps to alleviate these problemsand should be looked to for its wis-dom on these ma: ers. The rst cri-8 que, majoritarianism (mob rule), isaddressed by the talmudic respectfor minority opinions and the Torahrequirement for procedural legi8 -macy. The second cri8 que, econom-ic inequality, is addressed by theTorah’s recogni8 on that liberty haspoli8 cal and economic elements.The third cri8 que, republicanism, isaddressed by the Torah’s sense of du8 es in addi8 on to rights.

Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik ex-plains that all people are equallya part of redeeming the world inwhat he uniquely coined “Judaicdemocracy.” He points out that weall can serve G-d in our own way:“Every person possesses somethingunique, by virtue which he di9 ersfrom the thou, making him or her ir-replaceable and indispensable – theinner worth of a one-8 mely, unique,never-to-be-duplicated existence,which can and must serve God by


self-involvement in the drama of re-demp8 on on all levels.”

Thus, the core value of collec-8 ve freedom is Judaic democracy,which compels us to grant all indi-viduals equal opportunity to createchange in society. While commu-nism, notorious for restric8 ng indi-vidual opportunity, did not succeed,there are s8 ll many other govern-ment models that are an8 the8 calto the spirit of Judaic democracy.This Purim, as we re ect upon thedangers and pains the Jewish peo-ple have undergone over centuries while living in totalitarian regimes, let us remember that hundreds of millions of people are s8 ll not freetoday--and that they may have anopportunity to expand their free-doms. Concomitant to our searchfor personal spiritual libera8 on, we must advocate for the physical free-dom of all others. What is at stake in

our ac8 vism to bring freedom to allpeople around the world is nothingless than the dignity of humanity.

The world has undergone tre-mendous changes since last spring.Mubarak went down, Tunisia hasfallen, Yemen is in turmoil, and He-zbollah is embroiled with instabilityin Lebanon and Syria. This past yearmay actually have been one of thegreat revolu8 onary years in mod-ern history. Poli8 cal commenta-tors have reached back to the 1848revolu8 ons to draw comparisons,and Time named “The protester” the person of the year. Major pro-tests occurred not only in the ArabWorld, but also in parts of Europe,the United States, Asia and Africa.No one could have expected thatglobal governments would havechanged in the ways they have.There is an opportunity for Jewstoday to unequivocally call for the

freedom of all people and the aboli-8 on of totalitarian regimes. Living ina democracy requires all to engagein collec8 ve ma: ers and to educateourselves to the most pressing con-temporary issues beyond our paro-chial sphere. Further, we can look toour core Jewish values to educate uson the moral values needed in everydemocracy to value every person inaddi8 on to the system itself.

This Purim, as we learn about thedangers of tyranny, may we learn toconvert our gra8 tude for living inmodern democracy into ac8 on thathelps to make others free.

1 Arendt Lijphart, “The Case for Power Shar-ing,” in Electoral Systems and Democracy,Eds. Larry Jay Diamond and Marc F. Pla: ner(Bal8 more: JHU Press, 2006) 44.


“On that night, the King could not sleep...” [6:1]

“At this moment a choice needs to be made: do we surrender, or do we dig deeper into our Jewish conscience and * ght for the yosher and tov, for the

virtuous and ethical in the world?”

TThe plot of the TT megillah, as un-derstood by chazal, is familiar

enough. The Jews are exiled, en-emies conspire to destroy us, Goddelivers us from their hands. Thismovement, from crisis to salva8 on,turns and returns throughout Jew-ish history. It was par8 cularly evi-dent to the Jews of Germany in the1930’s. Rabbi Joachim Prinz of Ber-lin wrote a7 er one megillah reading in the mid-thir8 es that:

When Haman’s plot was announced,it bore a strange resemblance to Hitler’splot to wipe out the Jewish people...! en the turning point came. Hamanwas... exposed to disgrace and death.Never had I heard such applause in a synagogue when the names of the tensons of Haman were read, describing their hanging from the gallows. Every time we read “Haman” the people heardHitler, and the noise was deafening”(quoted in Elliot Horowitz, “! e Riteto Be Reckless: On the Perpetrationand Interpretation of Purim Violence,”Poetics Today 15:1, p. 43).

The con8 ngencies of lived historyunfortunately divert from the neatscripted arc of sacred history and itsresolu8 on does not always concludewith salva8 on. During the years of the Shoah, Providence hid its faceand Haman/Hitler succeeded in thegenocide of the Jewish people. Thesu9 ering of Jews in those horribleyears led to the theological ques-8 ons raised by the absence of God.In his short postwar essay, “Lovingthe Torah More Than God,” Emman-uel Levinas’s challenges the possi-

bility of nding meaning in su9 eringyet a; rms the importance of TorahJudaism in the face of evil.

A brief biographical word aboutEmmanuel Levinas. Levinas wasborn in 1906 in Lithuania. As ayoung man he traveled to Paris andthen Germany to study with thegreat philosophers of the day, spe-ci cally Edmund Husserl and Mar8 nHeigegger. At the onset of the sec-ond war, Levinas was dra7 ed intothe French army as an interpreter,captured by the German army, andwas sent to a prisoner of war campfor the remainder of the war. Hiswife and two young children werehidden in Paris. The majority of hisfamily, including his parents and sib-lings, were murdered by the Nazisin their na8 ve country of Lithuania.A7 er the war, Levinas returned toParis and developed his originalphilosophy, characterized by itsinsistence on “Ethics as a First Phi-losophy,” with an intensity that hasbeen described by his interlocutor,Jacques Derrida, as a “wave crash-ing on a beach: always the ‘same’wave returning and repea8 ng itsmovement with a deeper instance”(quoted in Richard Bernstein, Radi-cal Evil, p. 166).

“Loving the Torah More ThanGod” was rst given as a radio talkon April 25, 1955 and published inDi" cult Freedoms (a collec8 on of essays on Jewish subjects). It waspresented as a commentary on ZviKolitz’s short story Yossel Rakover Speaks to God. To call it a story,

however, does not contain its truth.For Levinas the text

Is both beautiful and real – as real asonly * ction can be…! e text presents itself as a document written during thetlast few hours of the of the Warsaw Ghetto resistance. ! us the narratorwitnessed all the horrors and underatrocious circumstances lost his young children. He is the last survivor of thisfamily and in his remaining few hourshe o- ers us his * nal thoughts. It is, of course, a literary * ction; but a * ctionin which every one of us who survivedthe war recognizes his own life inastonishment.

Here, like in the megillah, Jews are faced with death because of their Jewishness. Unlike the megillah, no miraculous reversal happens. In-stead of ve-nahafoch hu, Yossel will be murdered like millions others.The horrors of the war led Levinasto pose the ul8 mate ques8 on of theodicy:

What can this su- ering of theinnocents mean? Is it not proof of a world without God, where only manmeasures Good and Evil? ! e simplestand most common answer would beatheism. ! is is also the sanest reactionfor all those for whom previously a fairly primary sort of God had dishedout prizes, in. icted punishment orpardoned sins – a God who, in Hisgoodness, treated men like children.But with what lesser demon or strangemagician have you therefore * lled yourheaven, you who claim that it is empty?And why, under an empty sky, do

“Loving the Torah More Than God”by R,22$ A!$ W&$))


you continue to hope for a good andsensible world?

Leit din v’leit dayan! There is nei-ther judge nor judgment! Elisha benAvuyah had it right when he apos-tated if, as he assumed, the only cri-terion through which we can judgeGod is simple reward and punish-ment. Yet, is it possible that God ismore complex then the naïve re-ligious believer believes? Can weknow God with certainty, yet allowfor su9 ering? Levinas con8 nues:

! e certainty of God is something Yossel, son of Yossel experiences witha new force, beneath an empty sky.For if he is so alone, it is in order totake upon his shoulders the whole of God’s responsibilities. ! e path thatleads to the one God must walked inpart without God. True monotheismis duty bound to answer the legitimatedemands of atheism. ! e adult’s Godis revealed precisely through the void of the child’s heaven. ! is is the momentwhen God retires from the world andhides His face. In the words of Yosselben Yossel: ‘He has handed men over totheir savage instincts…And since theseinstincts rule the world, it is natural thatthose who preserve a sense of divinity and purity should be the * rst victims of this rule.’

! e God who hides His face is not,I believe, a theological abstraction ora poetic image. It is the moment inwhich the just individual can * nd nohelp. No institution will protect him.! e consolation of divine presence tobe found in infantile religious feeling isequally denied him, and the individualcan prevail only through its conscience,which necessarily involves su- ering.! is is the speci* cally Jewish sense of su- ering that at no stage assume thevalue of a mystical atonement for the

sins of the world. ! e condition of the victims in a disordered world –thatis to say, in a world where good doesnot triumph – is that of su- ering.! is condition reveals a God Whorenounces all aids to manifestation, andappeals instead to the full maturity of the responsible man.

But this God Who hides His face andabandons the just man to a justice thathas no sense of triumph, this distantGod, comes from within. ! e intimacy coincides in one’s conscience with thepride of being a Jew, and of belonging clearly, simply and historically to theJewish people: ‘To be a Jew means...to swim eternally against the * lthy,criminal tide of man… I am happy tobelong to the most unhappy people onearth, from whom the Torah representsall that is most lofty and beautiful inlaw and morality.’ ! e intimacy of thestrong God is won through a terribleordeal. By belonging to the su- ering Jewish people, the distant God becomesmy God: ‘now I know that you are really ymy God, for you could not be the Godof those whose actions represent themost horrible expression of a militantabsence of God. ! e su- ering of thejust man for a justice has not triumphis physically lived out as Judaism. ! ehistorical and physical Israel becomesonce again a religious category.

Su9 ering comes not from God; ina disenchanted world, the truly re-ligious individual accepts that weare alone. At this moment a choiceneeds to be made: do we surrender,or do we dig deeper into our Jewishconscience and ght for the yosherand tov, for the virtuous and ethi-cal in the world? For Levinas, thechoice is obvious: we swim againstthe 8 de of evil and injus8 ce; we takeon the work of God especially whenGod is no longer present. This is not

to claim that we no longer have arela8 onship with God. As Levinascon8 nues:

! e God Who hides His face and is recognized as being present andintimate… is this really possible?...Here I believe we see the speci* c faceof Judaism: the link between God andman is not an emotional communionthat takes place within the love of a Godincarnate, but a spiritual or intellectualrelationship which takes place throughan education in the Torah. It is precisely a word, not incarnate, from Godthat ensures a living God among us.Con* dence in a God Who is not mademanifest through any worldly authority can rely only on internal evidence andthe values of an education. To thecredit of Judaism, there is nothing blind about this. ! is accounts forthe monologue’s closing remark, inwhich Yossel ben Yossel echoes thewhole of the Torah: ‘I love him, but Ilove even more his Torah… And even if I were deceived by him and becamedisillusioned, I should neverthelessobserve the precepts of the Torah.’ Isthis blasphemy? At the very least, itis a protection against the madness of a direct contact with the Sacred that isunmediated by reason. But above allit is a con* dence that does not rely onthe triumph of any institution, it is theinternal evidence of a morality suppliedby the Torah. ! is di/ cult path, bothin spirit and in truth, and it cannot bepre* gured.

Man’s real humanity and gentle nature enter into the world with theharsh words of an exacting God.Spirituality is o- ered up not througha tangible substance, but throughabsence. God is real and concrete notthrough incarnation but though Law,and His greatness is not inspired by Hissacred mystery. His greatness does not

27


provoke fear and trembling, but * lls uswith high thoughts. To hide one’s faceso as to demand the superhuman of man, to create a man who can approachGod and speak to Him without alwaysbeing in His debt – that is a truly divinemark of greatness! After all, someonein credit is, par excellence, a person whoepossesses faith, but is equally someonewho is nor resigned to the debtor’srefusal. Our monologue begins andends with this refusal of resignation.Man can have con* dence in an absentGod and also be an adult who can judgehis own sense of weakness. ! e heroicsituation in which he places himself gives the world value and equally putis in danger. Nurtured by a faith this isproduced by the Torah, he reproachesGod for inordinate Greatness andexcessive demands. He will love Him inspite of all God’s attempts to discoursesuch over.

By insis8 ng upon the primacy of the laws of the Torah as the link be-tween the human and the Divine,Levinas’s thought is self-consciouslyaware that it borders on the he-re8 cal. Yet, as Levinas points outin other wri8 ngs, it is “in the HolyArk from which the voice of God isheard by Moses, there are only thetables of the Law” (Emanuel Levi-

nas, “A Religion For Adults,” Di" cult Freedoms, p. 17). The thought thatknowledge of God is synonymouswith the ac8 ons of God serves asthe backbone of Rambam’s discus-sion of God’s a: ributes in his Guide of the Perplexed. Far from being he-re8 cal then, Levinas’s thought haslong been intertwined with Jewishthinking about God. As Levinas putsit elsewhere: “To know God is toknow what must be done. (Levinas,Di" cult Freedoms, 17).

But, Levinas con8 nues, there arelimits to the absence of God. Aworld without the Divine and with-out jus8 ce, is a world not worth liv-ing in. Levinas concludes:

But ‘do not bend the bow too far,’cries Yossel ben Yossel. ! e religious lifecan end only in this heroic situation.God must show His face, justice andpower must join just institutions mustreign on earth. But only the man whohas recognized the hidden God candemand that He show Himself. ! evigorous dialectic establishes an equality between God and man at the very heartof their disproportion.

! is is a long way from a warmand almost tangible communion withthe Divine and from the desperate

pride of the atheist. It is a completeand austere humanism, linked to a di/ cult adoration! And conversely,it is an adoration that coincides withthe exaltation of man! A personal andunique God is not something revealedlike an image in a dark room! ! e textsI have just commented upon show how ethics and principles install a personalrelationship worth of the name. Loving the Torah even more then God meansprecisely having access to a personalGod against Whom one may rebel —that is to say, for Whom one may die.

It is the con dence that we aloneare responsible for infusing theworld with the work of God instead of God that allows for a post-d ShoahJewish life. In a world that cannotbe assured of the salva8 on of Godas God did those thousands of yearsago in Shushan, su9 ering has lost itsfoci as a possible source of mean-ing. Instead, we must iden8 fy whatour response to su9 ering can be; wemust follow the mitzvot of the Torah tin gh8 ng su9 ering and oppression; we must love the Torah more than God.


Megillat Esther opens with a jar-rring scene of spousal abuse. King

Achashverosh, the ruler of the PersianEmpire, is hos8 ng a frenzied banquetin his lavish halls. Only the nestvi: les are served, and only the nestwine is dra7 ed. No expense is spared.All of this ne food and drink goes tothe king’s head, and, from this stateof delirious inebria8 on, Achashveroshdemands, “to bring Queen Vash8 be-fore the king with the royal crown, toshow her beauty to the people andprinces, since she was beau8 ful tolook at.” (Esther 1:11)

While this scene is presented in acomedic fashion, the demand KingAchashverosh makes of his wife isdeadly serious and completely un-just. Thankfully, Vash8 refuses to sat-isfy the king’s inequitable command(1:12), but she su9 ers for advoca8 ngfor her independence, since the kingand his ministers expel her from thepalace (1:19). Why are the royal per-sonages so threatened by Vash8 ’s re-bellion? They view it as challengingtheir patriarchal system of control,in which men can use their authority

to take advantage of their wives. In the aforecited verse, Achashverosh makes sure to underscore his crown, the symbol of his authority, which he understands as gran8 ng him the power to make use and dispose of his wife’s body. The closing verse of the chapter is haun8 ng, as the king issues a royal edict (a means of sovereignty the Jews of Persia would soon learn to fear) with the explicit purpose of ex-panding men’s authority in the home, pu= ng their wives at a more intense level of risk.

The contemporary Jewish commu-nity has an image of itself in which the trials and tribula8 ons which plague the general public have no real trac-8 on in our world. We look at the be-havior of that inconsiderate, thought-less king and we laugh. We do not see ourselves in his idio8 c example.

However, a report found in the Na-8 onal Online Resource Center on Vio-lence Against Women (h: p://vawnet.org) reveals that domes8 c violence is reported in the Jewish community at the same rate as every other com-

munity in America (15%-25%). Asof 2009, there are 75 extant Jewishdomes8 c violence organiza8 ons andover 250 Jewish domes8 c violenceprograms across the United States,all ac8 ve, all providing services to theAmerican Jewish community.

Generally speaking, Jews tend tosee their men as eydel (gentle), asbeing intellectual, considerate, andvirtuous. But, strictly speaking, thisis a lovely depic8 on of an upstandingmasculinity, one which we cannot letblind us to the messy reality beforeus. Of course, not all instances of do-mes8 c violence are perpetrated bymen, but the overwhelming major-ity are. Even one instance of domes-8 c violence is already one too many.The Jewish principle of shalom bayitis not one we can assume but rather one we must consciously work to-ward each and every day. We must work to make sure that the days of every member of our community, of our family, can turn “from sorrow to gladness, and from mourning into cel-ebra8 on...” (Esther 9:22)

Vashti and the Crown: Domestic Violence in the Jewish Communityby J")*+, S-*.,!/%

F"#$%&# R&'("#)&'• Uri L’Tzedek’s Domestic Violence Campaign - http://www.utzedek.org/takeaction/campaigns/dv.html• National Online Resource Center on Violence Against Women - http://www.vawnet.org/• CHANA: Counseling, Helpline & Aid Network for Abused Women, A Jewish Response to Domestic Violence - http://www.associated.org/page.aspx?id=110470&page=5• Jewish Women International’s domestic violence training - http://www.jwi.org/Page.aspx?pid=1276• Jewish Women International’s 2009 report, “! e State of Domestic Violence in the Jewish Community” - http://www.jwi.org/Document.Doc?id=142• Jewish Family Services – CHAI: A Jewish Community Response to Domestic Abuse - http://jewishfamilyservice.org/services/domestic-violence• “Do Jewish Men Really Do ! at?: Domestic Violence in the Jewish Community” - http://sanfrancisco.ujcfedweb.org/page.aspx?id=12584• “Purim, drinking, and consent: ! e Jewish community’s role in preventing sexual violence” - http://jwa.org/blog/purim-drinking-and-consent-jewish-communitys-role-in-preventing-sexual-violence

N&+$ S$&,'• ! e Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) is in need of re-authorization in congress this year. Contact your senators and representativestelling them to re-authorize this bill without delay. See here for more information: http://www.utzedek.org/takeaction/campaigns/dv.html.• Find out if there is a Jewish domestic violence protection organization in your community. Consider volunteering. Make sure people in your community know about it. - See this report for resources: http://jewishfamilyservice.org/resources/* les/DomesticViolenceResources.pdf• Talk to your rabbi about their views regarding this topic. Inquire about their procedure when someone calls with domestic violence related concerns. Encourage your rabbi to speak about domestic violence and how to prevent it in sermons.

“So they hanged Haman on the gallows that he had prepared for Mordechai…” [7:10]


In my very rst week of law school,my criminal law professor pro-

posed the following hypothe8 cal:Imagine you are a judge, there aretwo convicted criminals in front of you, and you must decide their re-spec8 ve sentences. The rst manhas been convicted of robbery forthe 7 eenth 8 me. He has been inand out of jail since high school,and this 8 me he was caught stealingelectronics from a storefront. Hehas never used a weapon or threat-ened violence, but he has also neverbeen out of jail for more than sixmonths without recidiva8 ng. Thesecond man has a clean record un-8 l now and has been studying at apres8 gious university. He grew upwith an abusive father who regu-larly beat his mother, and when he came home from school to visit, hefound his mother with a black eyeand an arm in a sling. In response tothe violence done to his mother, hekilled his father. He was convicted of murder in the rst degree.

If you subscribe to a u8 litarianethic, you may recognize the sec-ond man’s case as an instance inwhich harsh punishment might notbe warranted. The only real reasonfor a u8 litarian to punish the sec-ond man harshly is to avoid otherpeople hearing about such a lightsentence given to a murderer – animportant purpose of punishmentis to deter future criminal ac8 vi-8 es. He was defending his mother,albeit indirectly. He might not meritthe lengthy sentence that murder inthe rst degree carries. In fact, youmight even want to punish the rstman more harshly, since he is liableto con8 nue his string of crimes, anda harsher sentence will keep him o9 the streets.

However, if you are a retribu8 v-ist, you believe that punishmentmatches the moral wrongness of the crime. Killing one’s own father,not in the heat of a struggle but ina calculated manner, is one of theworst crimes possible. It has nocomparison to non-violent the7 of property. How could we live in ajust society when murderers are notpunished to the highest degree?

At the end of the Purim story,the culmina8 on of the Jews’ victo-ry over the evil Haman is his beinghung from the very same gallowsthat he built for Mordechai. Leav-ing aside, a Biblical impera8 ve to killAmalek, what is the purpose of Ha-man’s death here? Which of the twomain social purposes for punishingany wrongdoer cover this situa8 on?Did Haman’s death serve a u8 litar-ian mo8 ve, such as incapacita8 on,deterrence, or rehabilita8 on; or didit work toward a deontological mo-8 ve, condemning and punishing themoral wrong that he perpetrated?

Obviously capital punishmentcannot be rehabilita8 ve, but therewere s8 ll other u8 litarian forces atwork. Haman’s death could be seenas serving as a deterrent. Imme-diately following the execu8 on of Haman (Esther 8:5-11), Esther con-vinced the king to issue decrees rul-ing that anyone who would a: emptto ful ll Haman’s murderous planswould meet resistance supportedby the royal mandate, as proven bythe death of Haman. However, aswe know from the remainder of themegillah, Haman’s homicidal alliesremained in country, and the Jewswere forced to defend themselves.

In terms of the moral wrong heperpetrated, Haman’s crime was at-tempted genocide. If it succeeded,

it would be among the most evilcrimes in the history of humankind.On the other hand, it was only at-tempted. Most retribu8 vists wouldagree that criminals that don’t suc-ceed have done less damage to so-ciety and are less culpable and de-serving of punishment. In modernday criminal jus8 ce, even notoriouswar criminals such as Radislav Krs8 ?,who commanded the Yugoslav Peo-ple’s Army during the Srebrenicamassacre and was convicted by theInterna8 onal Criminal Tribunal forthe former Yugoslavia for genocide,are usually given long prison sen-tences rather than capital punish-ment. Not only was Haman hangedfor his crimes, but his ten sons’ bod-ies were as well.

Capital punishment was a stan-dard penalty for many crimes inancient civiliza8 on, but in Jewishlaw, it was limited by requirementsof eye witnesses, warnings of theconsequences of crimes, and thestandard that even in judicial execu-8 ons, the body should not be mu-8 lated or destroyed. Postmortemhangings are men8 oned in the Tal-mud, as only being acceptable a7 erstoning for the crimes of blasphemyand idolatry (BT Sanhedrin 45b). Inthe Jewish tradi8 on, even when acriminal is convicted and sentencedto death, his body is hung only forone day. Even though these lawsexist on the books, and death pen-al8 es were certainly carried out inJewish courts, the Talmud says thata court which applied the deathpenalty more frequently than oncein seven years (by some opinions,seventy) was considered to be a“bloodthirsty court.” It was also farmore acceptable to acquit a possi-bly guilty defendant and err on theside of cau8 on rather than to put

Hanging Hamanby L,+!, B&!5&!

“Imagine you are a judge, there are two convicted criminals in front of you, and you must decide their respective sentences.”


a possibly innocent defendant todeath.

So where does that leave Hamanand his sons? A: empted crimes,even extremely severe ones, werenever considered to be deserving of capital punishment. The treatmentof Haman and his sons’ bodies wasan excep8 onal case, one which didnot align with the projec8 on of ajust society constructed by the Rab-bis. Regarding the pain of a criminalsu9 ering on the gallows, the Talmudteaches,

R’ Meir says, “When a human is inpain, what does the Shechinah say (as it hwere)? ‘My head hurts, my limb hurts!’If the Omnipresent su- ers over thespilt blood of the wicked, all the moreso for the blood of the righteous! (MSanhedrin 6:5)

The vision for the ideal world, theworld performed by the God’s verypresence, is a world in which eventhe criminal, the sole type of personwhose pain is just, is deserving of di-vine pathos. This cry of God forcesus to never sit well with our usesof violence, even when deployedthrough legal means. Kal va-Chom-er when we are forced to act out-side the law and use violence in themost immediate way, as a means of self-defense.

Although the ability of the Jewsto turn around the 14th and 15thof Adar from a decree of certaindestruc8 on to a decisive victory of self-defense, hanging Haman andhis sons once they were no longera threat leaves, to our eyes, an im-pression of brutality and unneces-sary gruesomeness. As Jews re-read the story of Purim again thisyear, and every year, perhaps it is8 me to take some 8 me to think sen-si8 vely about the way the Jews of Persia celebrated their victory, andcontemplate how we can move to-wards the future, one in which thatdivine cry rings out, echoing withevery drop of spilled blood.

“The copy of the wri8 ng… was to be published unto all the peoples…” [8:13]


Most Jewish holidays celebrateGod’s miraculous interven8 on

in history – God took us out withan outstretched hand, God gave usthe Torah, God sheltered us in thewild – and we chant words of praisecalled Hallel. But on Purim we cel-ebrate miraculous circumstanceswithout the explicit name of God,which peculiarly never appears inthe megillah. Instead of words of praise, we read a story about civicduty. In fact, we read it twice – butnever sing Hallel. And then – inex-plicably – we go out and give gi7 s tothe poor and break bread with ourneighbors.

In his mul8 -volume work, thePachad Yitzchak, Rav Hutner com-poses a thesis on Purim and praise.He takes up the ques8 on of theTalmud in Masechet Megillah 14a:“Why don’t we say Hallel onlPurim?” The explana8 on of the Ge-mara is a single unequivocal phrase:“Kriyatah zo hee Hilulah,” literally“Its reading is its praise.” In otherwords, through the reading of themegillah a person ful lls the obli-ga8 on to praise God and is not re-quired to say Hallel.

Rav Hutner writes that the Ge-mara’s answer (“Kriyata zo hee Hi-lulah”) is striking – it implies thatpraise of God might not involveever u: ering God’s name. The Ge-mara’s answer then begs the ques-8 on: What does it mean to praiseGod with Hallel through reading the lmegillah. What does it mean that,although a miracle has occurred,we are unable to iden8 fy Divine ele-ments of it by name?

The no8 on that the personal storyof Esther itself is Hallel points to a ldeep religious belief that is rarely ar-8 culated. It is the belief that a story

can compel us to ac8 on, and thatthat ac8 on can func8 on as praise of God. This is what it means to praiseGod without saying his name – wecan act, and our ac8 ons (qua ac-8 ons) are praise of God.

The story of the megillah itself teaches us this – the book is aboutac8 on. It is the story of Esther sav-ing her community, of standingagainst discrimina8 on, for pu= ngher life on the line for others. It isa victorious story, yet despite – orperhaps because of – the victory,we share what we have with others.We give money to the poor, gi7 s of food to our friends, and share mealswith our fellows. At every turn, thestory-Hallel of the l megillah sings to us of ac8 on.

Rav Hutner highlights the ideathat it is the nature of the circum-stances determines the form of theholiday’s Hallel. Were the miracle a“nes nigleh” “revealed miracle,” the Hallel should re ect that. It should lbe “revealed” and the name of Godsung out in the synagogue. How-ever, if the circumstances are suchthat we are celebra8 ng is a “nes nis-tar,” or “a hidden miracle,” as it is in rthe case of Purim, the Hallel should lbe cast of the same mold, donethrough a concealed praise – thereading of a story.

The megillah does not replace Hallel, but rather it is a type of Hal-lel itself. l Hallel, then, contains twomeanings. The rst is the familiar– it is the set of Psalms we say onvarious holidays when we see theDivine nger poin8 ng to revealedmiraculous circumstance. The sec-ond – the Hallel of Purim – is a hid-lden praise, a praise of where we, acommunity of human beings, arethe ones poin8 ng out the astonish-

ing, the improbable, and the fantas-8 c. It is in this mode of nes nistar that we are the most mo8 vated, themost inspired and the most movedto act.

In the Book of Esther, we hear thestory of an individual who heroicallytook on a system larger than theythought possible. When we com-pare the story (the Hallel) of Esther and compare it to the story of theworker who demanded his right toa fair wage, the parallels are clear.Both stories must galvanize us. Likethe megillah, the stories of workerswho are able, unafraid, to stand upfor his or her rights are the praise of God without u: ering the name of God.

There is an occasional sec8 on of the New York Times en8 tled “TheNeediest Cases Fund.” The columnappears as a headline but is taggedwith an emblem iden8 fying it as astory of an individual or family whobene ted from one of the sevenorganiza8 ons that the New York Times supports through the Needi-est Cases Fund. Remarkably, thisyear marks the one hundred and rst anniversary of this. The tradi-8 on began on Christmas Day 1911,when the then publisher of the New York Times, Adolph S. Ochs went for a walk a7 er a large turkey dinnerand encountered a homeless manon the street. According to legend,he struck up a conversa8 on withthe man. He heard his story. Andhe took him into work with him, sethim up with a job, and the New York Times Neediest Cases Fund was born.

The stories that the New York Times runs in these sec8 ons are sto-ries of overcoming hardship: drugaddicts who become responsible

In Praise of Storytellingby E1$)*&3, G"1'2&!5

“! e megillah does not replace Hallel, but rather it is a type of Hallel itself.”


munity, seniors who nd access toemergency medical systems – theseare moving stories. They are per-sonal, they are direct, and they senda message of Hallel; they send the message that we can make a di9 er-ence by rst believing in the nes nis-tar and then ac8 ng on it.

An acquaintance of mine works atthe Urban Assembly School for Lawand Jus8 ce, a high school in Brook-lyn. As part of a program to com-memorate the 100th anniversary of the Neediest Cases Fund, Urban As-sembly was chosen to pair up withBrooklyn Community Services, oneof the organiza8 ons funded andhighlighted by Neediest Cases. BCSis an organiza8 on that, according totheir website, works on “buildingBrooklyn by strengthening families,helping children and youth reach

their full poten8 al, and support-ing adults in leading produc8 ve,ful lling lives.” One of the variousservices BCS o9 ers (job-readiness,childcare) is support for adults withmental illness. Last year, Urban As-sembly’s 10th grade Brotherhoodprogram (described as “kind of like[a single-gender] homeroom witha curriculum”) paired up with oneof BCS’s “Clubhouses” for adultswith mental illness. Through thispartnership they embarked on anini8 a8 ve they called “Story SharesProject” where the young menfrom the high school interviewed– and recorded – the folks in theBCS mental-health program. Theresults were a great many powerfulstories, intergenera8 onal dialogue,and—a megillah. They put together an audio-visual project of the inter-views and an event to celebrate the

project’s success and the New York Times covered the story on Febru-ary 5, 2012.

The paradigm of Purim is the paradigm of social ac8 on as Hallel.The students at Urban Assemblyunderstand this. The Rabbis whocommanded us to read the megil-lah twice on the holiday knew this.And we all know this. We all know that stories move us. We know thatthey compel us. We know that we don’t need to sing the name of Godfor what we do to be consideredpraise. In the modern-day megillahof our lives we understand the an-swer of the Gemara: “hillulah zo heekriyata”– praise of God is the story.


Mar Ukba was a renownedscholar. Every day, on his way

home from the Beit Midrash, he wouldslip four zuzim under the door of a poor mman who lived in the neighborhood.One day, the poor man thought, “I willgo and see who is being so gracious tome.” On that very day, it happened thatMar Ukba was late in returning fromthe Beit Midrash, and his wife came by to see what was keeping him. On theway home, Mar Ukba, accompaniedby his wife, stopped by the poor man’shouse, as usual, and stooped to slip thezuzim under the door. At that moment,the poor man opened the door to greetthem. Mar Ukba and his wife . ed, andhid in an oven from which the coalshad just been swept. Mar Ukba’s feetwere burning, but his wife said: liftyour feet and put them on mine. MarUkba became upset [because his wifewas clearly the recipient of a miracleand he was not]. But his wife said tohim: [I have merited this miracle]because I am usually at home, and my gifts are immediate and direct [becauseI give directly to those who come to thedoor while you give money in a moreindirect way]. (BT Ketubot 67b)

In this Talmudic story, we are pre-sented with two models of giving.Mar Ukba gives anonymously. MarUkva’s anonymous wife gives face-to-face. The former’s giving appearsto be mo8 vated by a fear of the“shame of poverty,” that is, the hu-milia8 on of depending on someoneelse for one’s individual needs. Mrs.Ukba’s charity is empathe8 c andperson-speci c; she interacts withthose who come to her door andgives them what they need.

In order to make sure that MarUkva can remain an incognito bene-factor, they eventually nd them-selves in a furnace. Mar Ukba’s feet

begin to burn while Mrs. Ukba be-comes worthy of divine protec8 on.This suggests a aw in Mar Ukba’sanonymous giving. From this shorttale, let us try to understand MarUkba’s mistake.

Mar Ukba’s distance from thosehe gives charity to leaves him blindto the emo8 onal registers of thepoor. Anonymous benefactors likeMar Ukba and anonymous giving of-ten lead to rigid, and at 8 me ine9 ec-tual solu8 ons to poverty. Four zuz (the amount of Mar Ukba’s charity)does not respond to the par8 cular-ity of the recipient. The anonymityof money suggests detachment andperhaps a degree of apathy; as if tosay, take your money – but I have noneed of crea8 ng a rela8 onship withyou; I am not responding to yourneeds at all. Perhaps we can evengo further: it is not only Mar Ukba’sconcern for shaming the poor thatkeeps his giving anonymous. Rath-er, it is Mar Ukba himself who feelsthis shame, and it is that feelingwhich keeps him from building rela-8 onships with those in need.

One of the major mitzvot of Purimtis matanot le’evyonim- giving gi7 sto the poor. Each person is obligatedto contribute the equivalent of twomeals to someone in need. The sto-ry of Mar Ukba and his wife suggeststhat we must emphasize, if not sym-pathize, with those in need (MT Hil. Megillah ve-Chanukah 2:16). Like Mar Ukba’s wife, we must respondto poverty through solidarity, eveniden8 ca8 on, as well as under-standing, and kindheartedness, butnever shame. It suggests that giv-ing anonymously and the anonym-ity of money are only an ini8 al levelof giving but are not ideal ways of giving assistance. It instructs us thattzedekah and matanot le’evyoniom should be performed in a personal,sincere, and face-to-face manner.By ac8 ng in the manner of MarUkba’s wife we can limit su9 ering,forge connec8 ons between therich and the poor and help “build aworld of compassion” (Olam Chesed Yibaneh).

Charity and Compassion

N&+$ S$&,'• ! ere are tens of organizations that we can donate to, but instead of giving $18, why not buy $18 worth of food and give them to a person in need?• Instead of giving a dollar or some change to a homeless man or woman, try to keep granola bars in your purse or bag and share them with people in need.• Go one step further: ask the recipient of your charity their name and a question about themselves.• Volunteer at a food bank, soup kitchen, or homeless shelter. Better yet – open a homeless shelter at your shul or synagogue.

F"#$%&# R&'("#)&'• Mazon, A Jewish Response to Hunger (www.mazon.org), a leader in * ghting hunger in theJewish community.• Jewish Council on Urban A- airs “Judaism and Urban Poverty Program” - http://www.jcua.org/site/PageServer?pagename=what_mobilize_JUP_2009• On * ghting poverty in Judaism - http://www.myjewishlearning.com/practices/Ethics/Caring_For_Others/Social_Welfare/Fighting_Poverty.shtml

by G,3$ B!".0

“And the opposite became what was…” [9:1]


Reversals expected and unexpect-ed characterize Megillat Esther.

In the climac8 c moment – the sav-ing of an en8 re people from geno-cide – the story gives voice to thiscentral theme: “ve-nahafokh hu” – “and it was reversed/overturned!”(Esther 9:1) Unsurprisingly, thistheme is also played out in a num-ber of Purim prac8 ces which em-body or create experiences of re-versal. What is shocking, however,is that this disrup8 on is directedat venerable Jewish prac8 ces1 andcentral cultural ins8 tu8 ons.2 A brief analysis of a few of these prac8 ceswill help reveal the bene ts – andthe dangers – of mocking ourselves.

One such venerable prac8 ce isthat of the Purim shpiel, the co-medic play drama8 zing either thePurim story, some other Biblicalor midrashic narra8 ve, or another ccrea8 ve story.3 The societal, psy-chological, and didac8 c bene ts of drama and comedy are well-knownand well-accepted, but R. MenasheKlein (1924-2011) challenges allof these in a harshly-worded re-sponsum (Shu”t Mishneh Halakhot 3:148). A7 er blas8 ng non-Purimshows as a waste of valuable To-rah 8 me (bi# ul Torah), he goes onto classify such plays (possibly evenwhen performed on Purim itself) asviola8 ng the prohibi8 on on singingverses from Shir Ha-Shirim (whichhe treats as a general prohibi8 on onsinging verses from Tana”kh) andimita8 ng non-Jewish prac8 ces. Ina telling line he responds directlyto the argument that drama haspedagogical value, expressing hor-ror at the no8 on of turning Torahinto a joke. R. Klein fears the possi-bility that this form of humor mightundermine the cultural centralityof Torah, and the seriousness with

which it ought be taken at all 8 mes.4

Another of these self-mockingprac8 ces is the rav shel Purim (or:rav la-Purim). A custom whose ori-gins remain mysterious,5 it involveschoosing a yeshivah student who can emulate the style and manner-isms of the rosh yeshivah and de-liver mocking “divrei Torah” in his mode, even, at least in Volozhin,in the presence of the rosh yeshi-vah himself. Here the humorouscri8 que is directed not at Judaism’scentral texts, but at its central rep-resenta8 ve gure. Unsurprisingly,and perhaps even more predictablythan in the case of the Purim shpiel,various rabbinic leaders reactedharshly to this form of playfulness.R. Ovadiyah Yosef (b. 1920) con-demns the prac8 ce as a viola8 on of the prohibi8 ons against degradingTorah scholars, involvement withlashon ha-ra, as well as public em-barrassment if done in the presenceof the imitated gure himself. Here,too, a key line reveals his fundamen-tal concern: “Therefore, G-d forbidcon8 nuing this custom, especially in the world of the holy yeshivot,who[se members] must serve asdis! nguished exemplars of love of Torah, its honor, and its awesome-ness.” (emphasis mine) That is, R.Ovadiyah is distraught over the con-sequences of people seeing thosewho are most involved in the studyof Torah mocking it and its leaders.Even in the joyous context of Purimcelebra8 ons, he worries that peoplewill be exposed to the dark side of mockery – genuine anger – plan8 ngin them the nihilis8 c seed that per-haps Torah isn’t par8 cularly valu-able a7 er all.6

Rav Klein and Rav Ovadiyah’s con-cerns are re ected in an important

work by the contemporary Ameri-can ironist philosopher RichardRorty (1931-2007). In his Achiev-ing Our Country, Rorty worries thatsince the 1960s, the progressive le7 in the United States has becomeconsumed with the sinful ac8 onsof the country, leaving them bere7 of the sort of pride in their coun-try’s highest ideals that is needed toform the basis of a poli8 cal program.Rorty observes that an obsessionwith self-mockery and self-disgustundermines the emo8 onal a: ach-ment needed to bring about change(pp. 3-11). In a vision in which To-rah and its teachers are home to theJewish people’s highest aspira8 ons,denigra8 ng Torah, Rav Klein and RavOvadiyah fear, might similarly leavethe Jews bere7 of the source of their inspira8 on and values.

However, joy, humor, and evenridicule are necessary elements of crea8 ng healthy community, and of exposing societal ills and absurdi-8 es. Ridicule turned outwards, to-wards one’s poli8 cal opponents, is apotent weapon for achieving one’saims (Saul Alinsky, Rules for Radi-cals, p. 75, 128 and h: p://www.progress.org/2003/alinsky13.htm).It also has the posi8 ve side e9 ect of energizing one’s own community,through the playfulness of the tac-8 cs themselves and through seeingthe absurdity of their opponents ex-posed in sharp relief.

Ben Shepard, a community orga-nizer, observes: “Poli8 cal humor’sstrength stems from its subversivecharacter, which represents theworld in a comic mirror, distort-ing the powers that be by turningthem upside down. In so doing,these jokes elevate the bo: om endof the social hierarchy while debas-

! e Opportunities and Dangers of Self-Ridiculeby W$11$,# F!$&'#,0

“Purim is the Jewish community’s yearly opportunity to view itself through this topsy-turvy lens, simultaneously reinvigorating itself and, through

humor, pointing out internal inconsistencies and arbitrariness.”


ing the top. Along the road, thistopsy-turvy lens o9 ers a glimpseof the arbitrariness of business asusual.” (“The Use of Joyfulness asa Community Organizing Strategy,”Peace & Change 30, no. 4 (2005): 446) The redemp8 ve necessity of the “topsy-turvy lens” is recognizedin a gemara (BT Pesahim 50a; BTBava Batra 10b) rela8 ng Yosef b. R.Yehoshua (b. Levi)’s coma-inducedvision of a world in which the ma-terially wealthy of this world are“underneath”, while the currentlyimpoverished are “above,” callingsuch a world “topsy-turvy” – olamhafukh. His father corrects him,calling it a vision of a “clari ed” or“choice” world – olam barur. In this gemara, the need to upend the ex-is8 ng social order is not limited tothose outside one’s community, butopens the door for self-cri8 que aswell.

Purim is the Jewish community’syearly opportunity to view itself through this topsy-turvy lens, simul-taneously reinvigora8 ng itself and,through humor, poin8 ng out inter-nal inconsistencies and arbitrari-ness. Taking seriously the concernsof R. Klein, R. Ovadya Yosef, andRichard Rorty means doing so froma place of love and self-respect,but the long-standing existence of the Purim shpiel and the l rav Purimtes8 fy to the deeply-rooted com-munal need for this opportunity.The day a7 er Purim we can return,refreshed, to venera8 ng our ritu-als, our leaders, and our Torah, and

con8 nue working to bring the olamhafukh/barur, the perfected “topsy-rturvy” world, into reality.

1 A small example is a custom recorded byR. Shelomo Luria (Maharshal, 1510-1574,Poland) to eat chicken cooked or served withalmond milk on Purim (Yam Shel Shelomo8:52). The purpose of the custom is clearlyto poke fun at the normal restric8 on on con-suming meat with milk, crea8 ng a concreteexperience of overturning or “viola8 ng” thenorm. Apparently made nervous by the an-8 nomian thrust of this prac8 ce, Maharshalforbids it unless shelled almonds are placedin and/or near the dish as a visual reminderthat the milk is not actually animal milk – as8 pula8 on that eviscerates the an8 nomianimpulse underlying the prac8 ce! His young-er contemporary, R. Moshe Isserles (Rema,1525-1572, Poland), however, rejects Ma-harshal’s stringency, permi= ng the consump-8 on of chicken (and perhaps even beef) withalmond milk without any need for a visualreminder as to the true iden8 ty of the milk(Torat Hatat 62:8, cited in Peri Megadim Si7 eiKohen Yoreh Deah 87:6). Rema, apparently,was untroubled by the an8 nomian-feelingprac8 ce, and perhaps even saw some valuein feeling a once-a-year “release” from thenorma8 ve prac8 ce. Moreover, it is crucial tonote that this prac8 ce is not really an8 nomi-an at all – rather, it gently pokes at the normfrom within it, which only serves to furtherreinforce the importance of the basic normitself.2 Adding to the shock is the fact that whilemockery directed at external foes is rela8 velycommon place (see, e.g., Elisha mocking theprophets of Ba`al in I Kings 18:27 and Godmocking enemy na8 ons in Psalms 59:9), or-dinary mockery is condemned in fairly harshterms. See, e.g., Psalms 1:1, which admon-ishes against fraternizing with mockers, plac-

ing them, via poe8 c parallel, in the same cat-egory as the wicked and sinners:

3 The form of the Purim shpiel o7 en apedlcontemporaneous drama8 c forms, some-thing which con8 nues to this day with Pu-rim shpiels o7 en featuring take-o9 s of showtunes and the like. For a brief overview of itshistory, see: Zohar Hanegbi, “Minhagei Purim beHalakhah uv-Emunah,” in Daniel Sperber,Minhagei Yisrael, v. 6 (Jerusalem: Mossad Ha-lrav Kook, 1998), pp. 201-202.4 This is not to say that R. Klein has no senseof humor. He begins his responsum with aself-conscious bit of Purim Torah, demon-stra8 ng an awareness and apprecia8 on forhumor in some form in some circumstances.5 Alter Deroyanov, “Rav laPurim,” in Sefer haMoadim, ed. Yom-Tov Levinsky, v. 6 (Tel-Aviv: The Dvir Co Ltd & The Oneg Shabbat(Ohel Shem) Soc, 1955), p. 189, claims theprac8 ce as having been in uenced by theearly Catholic church, without providing anyevidence of how or when it entered the Jew-ish community. Hanegbi, pp. 202-203, relieson his analysis; the earliest evidence she pro-vides is an 18th century megillah illustra8 on and a descrip8 on from 1778.6 J. William Whedbee, The Bible and the Comic Vision (Minneapolis: Fortress Press,2002), 9: “Comedy perennially takes up armsagainst the forces that s8 e life and laughter,though even here its barbed arrows generallyonly s8 ng, not kill. If sa8 re fails to move on tothe genuinely restora8 ve and celebra8 ve, itis ques8 onable whether it s8 ll remains in thedomain of comedy.” Rav Ovadiyah even citesa case where the barbed arrows of the rav shel purim in fact do kill: “I saw wri: en that the great R. Shimon Sofer, author of ResponsaMikhtav Sofer, son of the great Hatam Sofer,died from extreme anguish due to the insults ung at him by the rav purim.”

“…they should make them days of feas8 ng and gladness…” [9:22]

“To make that celebration even more meaningful, we should take the joyous feasting and raise it to the next level, to a level where our

feasting is really for the sake of Heaven.”


The Gemara in Masechet Me-gillah (12a) asks the ques8 on:

why did the Jews of Mordechaiand Esther’s genera8 on poten8 allydeserve destruc8 on? The answergiven by the students of Rabbi Shi-mon bar Yocahi is that the Jews of Shushan deserved destruc8 on atthat 8 me because “they bene tedfrom the feast of that wicked man,”referring to Achashverosh’s feast inthe rst chapter of Megillat Esther. Achashverosh’s sumptuous feast,as described in the megillah, wasone of “royal wine in abundance…for so the king had established forevery o; cer of his house to do ac-cording to each man’s pleasure”

(Esther 1:7-8). One of the primarycharacteris8 cs of Achashverosh’sparty, at least according to the ba-sic biblical text, was its hedonis8 cnature. Alcohol was free- owingand each and every guest at theparty was free to drink as much ashe pleased. According to this opin-ion in the Talmud, Jewish par8 cipa-8 on in this feast was condemnedand resulted in the near-disaster of the Purim story. Although drinkingwine is obviously an important partof some Jewish rituals, this is notthe only rabbinic source which dis-cusses the problems that come of too much drinking (for example, seeBT Sandhedrin 70a-7b). The Bibleitself also seems to disapprove of the over-use of alcohol, as is evidentfrom the story of Noah and Ham(Genesis), and from such verses as

Proverbs 23:29-30, which blames“tarrying at wine” for “conten8 ons,”“ravings,” and “wounds withoutcause.” In placing the blame for theJewish people’s near destruc8 on inthe hands of par8 cipa8 on in a feastof wine, Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai’sstudents tap into a broader biblicaland rabbinic awareness of the phys-ical and spiritual dangers inherent inthe overuse of alcohol.

Given this background, it seemsvery strange that Purim has becomea holiday in which excessive drink-ing would be allowed, or even en-couraged. Nevertheless, earlier inMasechet Megillah (7b), Rava sug-

gests that there is actually an ob-liga8 on to drink on Purim - “one isobligated to drink [or to be happythrough wine] on Purim un8 l hecannot tell the di9 erence (ad de-lo yada) between ‘cursed be Ha-man’ and ‘blessed be Mordechai.’”Before we address the ques8 on of how poskim deal with Rava’s state-ment, we should contemplate whyRava would think that there is anobliga8 on to drink on Purim. Drink-ing appears to be an aspect of theobliga8 on to feast on Purim, the ori-gin of which comes from the ninthchapter of the megillah – “as thedays on which the Jews gained relief from their enemies, and the monthwhich had been turned about forthem from one of sorrow to glad-ness, and from mourning to fes8 val,to observe them as days of feas8 ng

and gladness, and sending delica-cies to one another, and gi7 s tothe poor” (Esther 9:22). The daysof Purim are supposed to be “daysof feas8 ng and gladness,” and ac-cording to Rava it would seem thatdrinking wine is included in in theobliga8 on of “feas8 ng and glad-ness.” This, by itself, is not surpris-ing; wine is included in many Jewishrituals to bring a fes8 ve and celebra-tory air to the occasion. If Rava hadstated that there was an obliga8 onto say a blessing over wine on Purimlike on other holidays, it would bemore than understandable. Rava,however, goes further than that,and seems to suggest that there

is an obliga8 on not only to have abit of wine on Purim, but to drink aseemingly substan8 al amount – un-8 l one cannot tell the di9 erence be-tween cursing Haman and blessingMordechai.

But if, as we concluded above, therabbinic tradi8 on views such drink-ing as inherently problema8 c, andspeci cally suggests that one rea-son the Jews were almost destroyedin the Purim story was because of their par8 cipa8 on in this drinking,why would any type of drunkennesswould be encouraged on Purim? Itseems to go against the whole na-ture of what Purim should be about!Rabbi Israel Meir Kagan, in his com-mentary on the Shulchan Aruch known as the Beiur Halacha (695:1), comments based on the Eliyahu

Table Fellowshipby T,1$, C"//!&11


Rabbah, that despite the fact thatdrunkenness can be so problema8 c,it is encouraged on Purim becausethe Purim miracle speci cally beganwith feas8 ng and drunkenness andended with feas8 ng and drunken-ness (since Haman’s downfall oc-curs at Esther’s feast) and thereforewe celebrate by drinking more thanusual. Adding on to this idea, per-haps the very theme of “ve-nahafo-ch hu” (Esther 9:1), the idea that ev-erything was turned on its head onPurim, would indicate that perhapswe should celebrate in a similarmanner that as our enemies would,that our enemies’ celebra8 on hasbecome our celebra8 on. However,perhaps it would be even more inkeeping with the theme of “ve-na-hafoch hu,” if we not only co-optedour enemies’ celebra8 on into ourown, but we took the lavish feas8 ngthat Haman and Achashverosh didand infused it with our own mean-ing and values.

In fact, the discussions of theposkim about how to apply Rava’sstatement that one is obligated todrink on Purim re ect the posi8 onthat, in the vast majority of instanc-es, drunkenness runs counter to ourJewish values. Many poskim note a story in the Gemara itself which em-phasizes the dangers of Rava’s ap-proach. The Gemara, immediately following Rava’s statement, tells astory about Rabbah, who gets drunkat his Purim feast and ends up killingR’ Zeira, who, in the end, is miracu-lously revived. The next year, Rab-bah invites R’ Zeira to join him forthe Purim feast and R’ Zeira politelydeclines on the basis that one can’talways depend on a miracle. Thisstory, in quite an extreme fashion,warns us of the poten8 al dangers of excessive drinking. Some Rishonim,

such as the Ba’al Ha-Me’or and therRan, go even further and suggestthat this story is meant to rejectthe statement of Rava, and to ar-gue that there is no such obliga8 onto drink on Purim. Other Rishonim,such as the Rambam, assume thatwhat the Gemara means by drink-ing un8 l one does not know thedi9 erence between “cursed be Ha-man” and “blessed be Mordechai”means that one should drink un8 lthey are mildly intoxicated and fallasleep (see also Aruch Ha-Shulchan695:3). The Orchot Chayim (Lawsof Purim 38), as quoted by the BeitYosef , takes a similar approach andsuggests that excessive intoxica8 onis problema8 c and will likely leadto sin and that one merely shoulddrink slightly more than one usu-ally does, as a means of celebra8 on.While some of the Rishonim, such as the Rosh and Rif, later followedby the Shulchan Aruch, simply quote Rava’s statement verba8 m, whichwould indicate that Rava’s state-ment is accepted as halacha, a largenumber of Rishonim limit, re-read or reject Rava’s statement. Even if one accepts the Shulchan Aruch’ssimple quota8 on of Rava, some of the commentaries on the Shulchan Aruch con8 nue to insist that theShulchan Aruch (along with Rava) are promo8 ng a much more limitedform of fes8 ve drinking. Regard-less of exactly which approach onetakes, there is an obvious discom-fort among poskim about Rava’sformula for drinking on Purim, and aserious a: empt to clarify that whiledrinking might be a part of Purim, itdoes not mean that one should goover the top.

Another interes8 ng and impor-tant approach that I would like todiscuss is that of the Rema, who, af-

ter quo8 ng some of the more com-promising approaches discussedabove, comments “one can [drink] alot or a li: le, as long as one intendsone’s heart towards Heaven” (Shul-chan Aruch 695:2). Essen8 ally, theRema makes the point that thereare many poten8 ally proper ap-proaches to take towards the hala-chic ques8 on of drinking on Purim, cbut that the most important thing isthat whatever one does, one mustdo it with the appropriate mindset.If one is capable of drinking with theright inten8 ons, without that drink-ing leading to any physically, hala-chically, or legally problema8 c con-sequences, then ge= ng drunk onPurim could theore8 cally enhanceone’s Purim experience. However, Iwould argue that in the vast major-ity of circumstances, it is di; cult toget drunk on Purim while also main-taining this sense of ac8 ng for thesake of heaven. How many of us,as commi: ed religious Jews, haveunfortunately been in situa8 ons onPurim where we’ve seen a friend,an acquaintance, or even just somefellow Purim enthusiasts we see onthe street do something embarrass-ing, improper or even dangerous intheir a: empt to ful ll the conceptof “ad de-lo yada” in the extreme. One of the more trauma8 zing Jew-ish holiday experiences of my life,when I was just eighteen years old,was seeing the inappropriate waysome otherwise “religious” peopleacted in the streets of Jerusalem,supposedly in the name of the mitz-vah of Purim. The very nature of alcohol, in removing people’s in-hibi8 ons, has the poten8 al to turnour hearts away from heaven ratherthan towards it.

Addi8 onally of course, over recentyears, there have been problems in


some communi8 es with teenagedrinking on Purim, and numerousJewish youth groups and organiza-8 ons have had to explicitly comeout against drinking for the sake of the holiday. I do not feel the needto add my voice to the mul8 tude of Orthodox Jewish voices who haveboth come out against illegal teen-age drinking and who have empha-sized the very real dangers of takingthis concept of drinking “ad de-lo yada” to the extreme. However,what I want to add, is that even inspeaking to adults who are awareand mindful of the dangers of drink-ing (and obviously legally permi: edto drink), it is important to recog-nize what the goal of drinking onPurim is supposed to be. If the goalof drinking on Purim is supposed toget across the theme of “ve-nahafo-ch hu,” the miraculous and shock-ing switching of posi8 ons between

the Jews and their enemies, thenperhaps we want to celebrate bytaking on the celebratory mannersof our enemies in the Purim story.However, to make that celebra8 oneven more meaningful, we shouldtake the joyous feas8 ng and raiseit to the next level, to a level whereour feas8 ng is really for the sake of Heaven.

What might this look like? Imag-ine an in8 mate group of friendsand/or family celebra8 ng a Purimfeast together, discussing the Purimstory, singing songs, sharing wordsof Torah, some serious and contem-pla8 ve, some silly and whimsical.Depending on the group, alcoholmight or might not be part of thecelebra8 on, but if it is, each mem-ber of the group is looking out forthe others, making sure that theyaren’t drinking too much, and mak-

ing sure that the meal stays withinthe proper Purim spirit. The fo-cus of the meal is on our rela8 on-ships, on ac8 ng kindly, on ndingjoy within ourselves and others, onTorah, and of course, a healthy doseof Purim humor. This year, insteadof being punished for “bene 8 ngfrom the feast of that wicked man,”let us be rewarded through a feast-ing which really brings out the bestwithin us. This year, let us make Pu-rim feasts where the primary focusof our feast is not drinking but rath-er other important values of thisholiday, such as community, care forthe poor, and our rela8 onships withfriends and family. As the Remawrites, the most important thing toremember at our Purim se’udah is that our hearts always be directedtowards Heaven, and perhaps as apart of that, towards each other.


Hey Emily, how’s school?” the ca-shier at a popular kosher restau-

rant used to ask me. No, I wasn’ta regular with a signature orderalready wai8 ng on the counter. Infact, I only came in every couple of months. Nevertheless, whenever Iwalked through the door, notebookin hand, Tav HaYosher Compliance O; cer badge around my neck, sheand I had a lot more to talk aboutthan her paycheck. Like me, thisyoung woman was a sophomorein college, balancing classes andextracurricular ac8 vi8 es, deba8 ngwhether to study abroad, and work-ing a part-8 me job. However, herposi8 on as a cashier at a restaurantcer8 ed by the Tav HaYosher put usin an interes8 ng situa8 on, wheremy ac8 vism involved securingy herrights. This meant that at somepoint in our formerly casual conver-sa8 on, I would ask her how muchshe was paid in the past week, howmany hours she had worked, and aseries of other ques8 ons that don’t

normally pass one-sidedly betweenfriends. In my compliance visitswith her, and all the more so withworkers who were more di9 erentfrom me, I aimed to deconstructthe misleading dynamic of “ac8 v-ist” and “bene ciary” and cul8 vatepartnerships of equals.

Long a7 er my friend the cashierhad le7 her job and own o9 toParis for the semester, Dasi Fruchterand I were hard at work crea8 ng aCompliance O; cer training curricu-lum that would drive this messagehome. It was Dasi who suggestedthat conveying the proper approachto restaurant workers was as impor-tant as teaching interview skills andstate labor laws. This translated to acomponent of the training in whichvolunteers contrast the terms “part-nership” and “helping,” as well asthe terms “jus8 ce” and “charity.”Through this discussion, they devel-op a model for rela8 ng to workerswhich emphasizes partnership and

cultural sensi8 vity.Chapter 9 of Megillat Esther

presents two mitzvot that were in-ts8 tuted for the holiday of Purim:mishloach manot and t matanot l’evyonim. Whereas the mitzvah of matanot l’evyonim exempli es the idea of charitable giving, mishloachmanot is an exchange of gi7 s of tfood between friends or neighbors, which more closely resembles an act of partnership building. Each has its place in the context of the chag and in the world at large. The Tav Ha-Yosher strives to forge partnerships between workers, owners, and con-sumers, in which all par8 es play a role in suppor8 ng ethical condi8 ons in kosher restaurants. As such, we encourage volunteers to model their interac8 ons with workers and restaurant owners a7 er the mitzvahof mishloach manot, viewing themas allies in the e9 ort to bring jus8 ce to the kosher food industry.

Partnership Building and the Mitzvah of Mishloach Manotby E#$14 W$0"5!,'

N&+$ S$&,'! e Tav HaYosher depends on trained volunteers who conduct regular compliancevisits with all Tav HaYosher certi* ed restaurants. Email [email protected] to getinvolved.Do you want restaurants in your area to be certi* ed with the Tav HaYosher? Getyour grassroots movement started by attending a Partnership Building Training.For more information, email [email protected].

F"#$%&# R&'("#)&'To learn more about the Tav HaYosher, visit www.isupportthetav.com or http://www.utzedek.org/tavhayosher.html

“

“And the king Achashverosh laid a tax on the land…” [10:1]

“If a community were to create new taxes, how should they be created? What sources could they turn to, and what values would they use?”


The concluding chapter of Megil-lat Esther is three verses long.r

Two of them, expectedly, celebratethe triumphs of Esther, Mordechaiand the Jewish people. The othersays the following: “And the kingAchashverosh laid a tax upon theland, and upon the isles of the sea.”(Esther 10:1)

At rst glance, this seems like thestrangest capstone for our trium-phant story. What do taxes have todo with Esther’s megillah, and why are taxes, with all their di; cult con-nota8 ons, included in the megillah’scoda?

Supreme Court Jus8 ce OliverWendell Holmes, Jr. famously wrotethat taxes are “the price of civiliza-8 on.” Judaism recognizes them asmore. More than a price, they are ameans of civiliza8 on, and their cre-a8 on and collec8 on reveals a tre-mendous amount about a society’spriori8 es and values.

Upon closer inspec8 on, the care-ful reader will nd at least ve8 mes where taxes arise in the me-gillah, a story focused on societyand its discontents. The rst 8 methey appear is during our opening:the story opens with a scene of tre-mendous government spending by

Achashverosh’s empire, built upontribute from popula8 ons searchingfor a protec8 on from an uncertainworld and a ckle king. The glut-tony in the opening verses is even

more distressing when one consid-ers how much money was probablysqueezed from common and peopleby the King’s tax collectors, to bewasted on a drunken bash by theprivileged few.

The second appearance of taxes inthe megillah is when the ckle kinglowers taxes, according to Rashi, inEsther 3:8 in order to a: er andwoo the queen:

. - in order to honor herhe lowered the taxes.

Third, one can read Haman’s o9 erof 10,000 kikurs to pay for his planto destroy the Jews as a way for Ha-man to o9 set half-shekel tax theJewish people would pay over theirlives (Bakh, commen8 ng on Tosafot,BT Megillah 16a).

Fourth, we see taxes used forgood. In 4:16, Esther demands aspiritual tax from the Jewish com-munity of fast and prayer.

And our 7 h nal tax, the onecited at the beginning of this ar8 cle,is ambiguous. How are we to under-stand “And the king Achashveroshlaid a tax upon the land?”

Before delving into the sources, aquick primer on di9 erent types of taxes:

Capita tax (also known as a poll taxor head tax) - a set amount that istaxed on every individual in a com-munity, regardless of income.

Flat tax - A percentage based taxthat is applied to all, regardless of wealth. Both the capita tax and the at tax are commonly referred to as“regressive” taxes, since it imposesa greater burden on the poor thanon the wealthy.

Progressive tax - A tax that takes alarger percentage from the wealthythan it does from the poor.

To ar8 culate a Jewish concep8 onof taxes, we must begin with the To-rah. The Torah lays out several formsof taxes. Terumah was levied to sup-port the communal ins8 tu8 on of the Temple at a level of between1/40th, 1/50th or 1/60th of totalproduce, depending on the gener-osity of the payer. Ma’aser rishon, a tenth taken a7 er Terumah was tak-en, was given to support the land-less Levi’im in their service educat-ing and serving the Jewish people.Other taxes included ma’aser shei-ni, a tax on produce that had to be brought to the capital, Jerusalem,and ma’aser ani, a ten percent taxthat went exclusively to the poor. Inaddi8 on to these at taxes, the To-rah also requires all ci8 zens to paythe machatzit hashekel tax. This per lcapita tax was used ini8 ally to per-form a census (Shemot 30:11-15).

These taxes, however, are xedand legislated by the Torah. Mostare not applicable to communi8 estoday. If a community were to cre-ate new taxes, how should they be

Paying the Price of Civilization: Purim and Taxesby A!$ H,!/


created? What sources could theyturn to, and what values would theyuse?

The Gemara, in Bava Batra 7b, dis-cusses building a wall that will pro-tect the community from thievesand robbers. Should those whoare closest to the wall, and wouldtherefore the most, pay the most?Should all the residents pay an equalamount regardless of their proxim-ity to the wall? Or should those whohave more pay more, even if theymight least?

R. Eleazar inquired of R. Yochanan:When these communal taxes arelevied, are they levied by the person[where every person would pay thesame amount]? He replied: It islevied according to means; and Eleazarmy son, * x this ruling * rmly in yourmind. According to another version,R. Eleazar asked R. Yochanan whetherthe impost was levied in proportion tothe proximity of the resident’s house tothe wall or to his means. He replied:In proportion to the proximity of hishouse to the wall; and you, Eleazar my son, * x this ruling * rmly in your mind.(BT Bava Batra 7b)

It is clear that, whatever the rul-ing, it was important to R. Yochan-an that his son understand and in-ternalize it; how taxes are levied isa cri8 cal ma: er. But the mul8 plegirsa’ot (versions) of R. Yochanan’st

statement leave the reader unsure.What is the priority?

The Rambam makes it clear whichversion he views as primary inHilchot Shechainim, the sec8 on of the Mishneh Torah trea8 ng the lawsof neighbors, 6:4

When they asses a tax to build a wall,they asses according to kiruv batim,[proximity of the house to the wall,which assumes more bene* t]. Whoeveris closer pays more.

With this Rambam alone, the Jew-ish tax ethic seems pre: y clear. Wehold like the second statement of Rav Yochanan; taxes should be as-sessed by use with those who ben-e t more from public goods (in hal-achic language, c kiruv ba! m) paying more.

Rabbeinu Tam, however, is notcontent with the Rambam’s read.

Commen8 ng on the second half of the sugya, the same as the Ram-bam, Tosafot writes,

! e poor who are close to the wallgive more than the poor who are far,and the wealthy who are close givemore than the wealthy who are far.However, the wealthy who are far givemore than the poor who are close, sincethe wealthy are also assessed by theirwealth [in addition to their proximity].

A hierarchy of values emerges. Inbuilding a communal wall, responsi-bility falls as follows:

• Wealthy who bene t more• Wealthy who bene t less• Poor who bene t more• Poor who bene t less

In building a wall, Rabbeinu Tamis proposing a hybrid system, whereboth bene t from the public goodand rela8 ve wealth should in u-ence the amount one pays in taxes.But this hybrid system turns out tobe the excep8 on, not the rule! In hiscommentary on the sugya, Tosfatcites a sugya from Bava Kama:

Our rabbis taught: a band of merchants that was traveling in thedesert and a group of robbers threatenedthem, we assess [the ransom] according to wealth (mamon) [where the wealthy would pay more than the poor] andnot according to head (nefashot) [where tteveryone would pay the same]. But if they hired a guide to walk in front of them, we asses per capita (nefashot).tt(BT Bava Kama 116b)

Tosafot notes out that the di9 er-ence between these two cases isthat in the rst, we do not assumethat the kidnappers would kill thegroup of merchants; their desire ispurely for their property. There isno life or death threat, so we assessaccording to wealth/mamon. In thesecond case, there is a life or death threat: without the guide, the group would be lost in the desert and die. In that case we assess by capita/ne-fashot. The dis8 nc8 on between tax-es that are levied for life and deathpurposes and those that are not ispicked up by the Mordechai:

:

, ,

? :

, , . , : ,

, ? : ,

, .

- "

.

" :

-

,

-


The Mordechai picks up on To-safot’s dis8 nc8 on, wri8 ng:

Everything that does not have a element of life and death is assessedexclusively by wealth / mamon. (Mordechai on BT Bava Batra, §474-9)

The Rosh, Tur (103, Choshen Mish-pat), and Pitchei Teshuva con8 nuein this vein, wri8 ng that taxes forservices and goods like water, com-munal ritual needs, sifrei Torah, and more are assessed only accordingto wealth. In the case of the wall,however, the Tur writes that thereis an element of life and death aswell. That is why the wall is a hybridcase of both assessing according towealth and capita.

We can now esh out a fuller Jew-ish tax ethic: taxing according tocapita in ma: ers of life and death,taxing according to a mixture of bene t and wealth if it is not whollyclear (like our case with the wall),and taxing according only by wealth.It seems as if a majority of taxablecauses fall into the third category -individual bene t from the serviceprovided plays no role in how muchone should pay for that service.

The twen8 eth century posek, the Tzitz Eliezer, (Shu”t Tzitz Eliezer,2:22) takes the Jewish tax ethic astep further.

“What approach to taxes does the Torahobligate? Is it a progressive approach, wherewe tax according to the level of wealth, or

is it uniform, meaning that every residentpays the same tax rate regardless of poverty or wealth.” perspective on taxes?

Using the above cited sources,among others, the Tzitz Eliezer con-cludes almost all taxes are assessedprogressively. He lists water, roadrepair, lights, hospitals, social ser-vices, nursing homes and more astaxes that are assessed by mamon,which means in his words, progresi-vit. It is fascina8 ng to note that theTzitz Eliezer here has con dently as-serted that assessing according tomamon does not only mean that the rich pay more than the poor. Af-ter all, in a at tax people with moremoney will pay more, since 10% of alot is more than 10% of a li: le. Forthe Tzitz Eliezer, almost all commu-nal taxes are assessed by progres-sive means - the wealthy payingmore, both in sum and in percent-age, than the poor.

What about taxa8 on by capitain life or death or situa8 ons? Thisseems like a strange value. A7 er all,wouldn’t we want to raise as muchmoney as possible in life or deathsitua8 ons, ensuring that whatevercommunal good or ransom that isdesperately needed is able to bebuilt? Perhaps a di9 erent ethic isat play here - when it comes to sav-ing lives, we do not want to com-municate that some lives are worthmore than others. Just as with thehalf-shekel tax, each life is worththe same amount. However, we rec-ognize that this may not generateenough to pay for the good. Thatis where the hybrid model of Rab-beinu Tam comes into play: we needto be able to raise necessary fundsto save lives, so we do half the taxl’ mamon, but we do so in a waythat acknowledges that each life is

worth saving, the other half of thetax l’ nefashot.

What modern implica8 ons mightthis have for the Jewish communitytoday? Let us explore, for example,those who send their children toprivate school and do not wish topay taxes for schools their childrendo not use. Should they be able toopt out of taxes that go to publiceduca8 on? Should they advocatefor lower educa8 on tax rates ingeneral since their segment of thecommunity does not bene t fromthose services? As we saw from oursources, there is li: le Jewish ethi-cal or halachic ground to stand on cto advocate these posi8 ons. Theamount of individual bene t froma public good (kiruv ba! m) is only taken into account for tax rates invery speci c situa8 ons involving lifeor death considera8 ons. Otherwisewe asses one’s responsibility to con-tribute to the communal needs ac-cording to one’s wealth (govin l’ mamon). Distressing stories heardfrom municipali8 es where Ortho-dox Jews move in, take control of the school board, and slash budgetsof public school ins8 tu8 ons shouldbe recognized as against this Jewishtax ethic.

In addi8 on, looking at the Ameri-can tax system, we might be struckhow some parts of our tax codefunc8 on opposite the halachicmodel. As we saw from the gema-ra, Rabbeinu Tam, the Mordechai,and the Tzitz Eliezer, in the halachicsystem the wealthy are taxed moreaccording to their wealth. Recently,Warren Bu9 et, the world renownedinvestor, reported that he was pay-ing a lower tax percentage on hisbillions of dollars (16.5%) than hismiddle class o; ce workers (%25).

.

.

.


Bu9 et writes:“Since 1992, the I.R.S. has com-

piled data from the returns of the400 Americans repor8 ng the largestincome. In 1992, the top 400 hadaggregate taxable income of $16.9billion and paid federal taxes of 29.2percent on that sum. In 2008, theaggregate income of the highest400 had soared to $90.9 billion — astaggering $227.4 million on aver-age — but the rate paid had fallento 21.5 percent.”

Do halachic values compel us tocwork change? As an Orthodox Jew,I believe the answer is yes. As RavSoloveitchik wrote in Halachic Man: “The halachah is not herme8 cally

enclosed within the con nes of cultsanctuaries, but penetrates intoevery nook and cranny of life. Themarketplace, the street, the fac-tory, the house, the mee8 ng place,the banquet hall, all cons8 tute thebackdrop for the religious life.”

Perhaps the reason why the me-gillah ends with “And the king Achashverosh laid a tax upon theland” is indeed, to end with a noteof celebra8 on. At the end of thiscomplicated economic saga, we nally see a fair and just tax fromthis most foolish of kings. Perhaps,a7 er encountering the wisdom andrighteousness of Mordechai and Es-ther, two Jews who were not afraid

to bring their deepest Jewish valuesand commitments into the publicsphere, King Achashverosh levied atax whose purpose was not to pun-ish, privilege unfairly, score poli8 calpoints, or destroy. Rather, the kinglevied a tax that was equal and fair,across land and sea, and truly in theinterests of all the people of the em-pire. And that, truly, was somethingto celebrate.

“…speaking peace to all his people” [10:3]


Megillat Esther is a magni centrtale of Jewish triumph. It tells

of sca: ered and disparate Jews liv-ing in exile and of the evil villain whoplots to annihilate them. Through aseries of twists and turns, the Jewsare saved, prevail over their en-emies and unite in celebra8 on. Tobe sure, this is the quintessen8 alstory of “all’s well that ends well” ina Shushan Shangri-La. Things seemtoo good to be true, especially con-sidering there is not even a men-8 on of God’s name. Everything tsin place a tad too well, thanks toEsther and Mordechai, who are al-ways in the right place at the right8 me.

Our suspension of belief is height-ened as the megillah’s plot devel-ops. The Scrolls suggests it is normalto select queens through na8 on-wide beauty pageants, that a le-gal system would not allow for theemenda8 on of laws, and that lotsare drawn to decide domes8 c pol-icy. Not to say the least of Achash-verosh’s insomnia-induced perusalof the kingdom’s chronicles, whichmen8 on Mordechai at coinciden-tally the most cri8 cal of moments.Haman learns that it is not he whomAchashverosh would like to honor,but in fact precisely the one whohe, Haman, has been conspiring tomurder.

The megillah sensa8 onal contentdoes not exist in a vacuum. A closeexamina8 on of the scroll revealsthat its form is as equally unbeliev-able. Everything is exaggerated: animmoveable feast las8 ng one hun-dred and eighty days, an extrememakeover extending for twelvemonths and a gruesome gallows 7 y cubits steep. These fantas8 calelements, and others, of both con-

tent and form, have led scholars toclassify Esther as a carnivalesquecomedy, replete with the requi-site vulgari8 es and hilari8 es, veilediden8 8 es and hidden conspiracies.

Thus, the megillah mirrors and engages the very condi8 ons of itsown crea8 on. It tells a tale of unbe-lievable salva8 on through unimagi-nable means, innova8 ng in turn,a carnival holiday of exaggeratedcelebra8 on and excessive revelry.The comedy that is the megillah al-lows us to take pause from realityand imagine a paradise where Jewsare empowered, controlling of theirdes8 nies and even live in peacewith one another. Purim, like themegillah, is an oasis in 8 me pushingus to retreat from reality and loseourselves partying, before life’s so-briety sets in once again.

But, what kind of a message isthis? Does the megillah merely con-vey the actuality that there is noparadise here on earth? Does Purimteach that happy endings are theexclusive realm of the carnival andcomedy?

The text of Megillat Esther is dy-rnamic. Not only is it inten8 onallywri: en as a comedy. It is also pur-posefully composed to allude to, in-deed to converse with, other booksin Scripture. Esther is uniquely richin terms of intertextuality, the no-8 on that no text is sta8 c but is inin nite dialogue with other texts.The midrash picks up on a numberof these connec8 ons, tying Megillat Esther to no small number of bibli-rcal heroes: among them, Jacob andJoseph, Saul and David. These liter-ary and thema8 c connec8 ons pul-sate through the megillah.

Let us focus on but one of these

intertextual instances, that of Jo-seph. The thema8 c parallels are im-mediately apparent: a Jew, exiled,maintaining a concealed iden8 ty,is promoted to high rank in a pow-erful foreign empire and uses thisnewfound in uence to secure theJewish future. In case we mightmiss this connec8 on, Mordechai isiden8 ed in our megillah as a Ben-jaminite, of the extended family of Joseph. These thema8 c parallels,coupled with lexical connec8 ons aswell, lead our rabbinic sages to drawmany a comparison between the Jo-seph saga and the story of Esther.

Sifre de-Aggadita, a medieval mi-drash on Esther, goes so far as tosuggest that Haman’s planned eth-nic cleansing is actually a punish-ment for the sale of Joseph: “Godsaid to the tribes, ‘You sold Josephyour brother at a 8 me of ea8 ngand drinking’ as it is says [‘And theysat to eat bread’ (Gen. 37:25)], onthis account, Achashverosh will sellyour children at a 8 me of ea8 ngand drinking, as it is wri: en ‘andthe king and Haman sat to drink.’”According to this Midrash, the ri7 between Joseph and his brothersreverberates for genera8 ons, and itis only nally reconciled in the me-gillah through the rabbinic no8 on of midah ke-neged midah, measure for measure.

It is not surprising that the Mi-drash links these events. A7 er all,Haman describes the Jews as “amechad mefuzar u-mefurad bein ha-amim –a certain people sca: eredand dispersed among the otherpeoples.” (Esther 3:8) This tensionand overt fracture among the Jewsis hardly new. In fact, it goes all theway back to that rst ssure be-tween the Children of Israel, when

Shushan Shangri-Laby G$1,* K1&/&0$(

“Striving towards ethical engagement built upon giving in both word and practice is neither in heaven nor beyond the sea, it is within our reach.”


fraternity turns to near-fratricide,and siblings sell one of their owninto slavery. However, by the end of the megillah, the Jews are uni edand victorious. It is a grandiose sal-va8 on, redemp8 on par excellenceand the resolu8 on of a genera8 ons-old rivalry.

No doubt the rabbinic exegetesof this midrash are capitalizing onthe megillah’s spirit of unbeliev-able endings, making it the locusof another impossible resolu8 on,that of Joseph and his brothers. If this was the full picture, however,the authors of the megillah and its rabbinic interpreters would be leav-ing us with an unachievable image,a mere paradise in 8 me, so distantfrom our own lives and reality. Like

a party reveler, we are le7 leavingthe carnival that is the megillah highand happy only to wake up the nextmorning hung-over and bloated bythe heavy weight of reality.

A subtle message lurks beneaththe surface of the megillah. It is a simple step in the direc8 on of all’swell that ends well, a party-favorprescrip8 on for bringing a fragmentof the fun back home, a bit of blissto earth. For this prize, we must re-turn to Joseph in Genesis.

How is it that tensions escalate sointensely, that brothers are actuallyable to sell their own brother? Whatgoes awry? The text provides uswith background. Jacob favors Jo-seph and Joseph is a ta: letale and a

dreamer. There is one more clue, of-ten overlooked that the text sendsour way: “ve-lo yakhlu dab’ro le-shalom,” (Genesis 37:4) the broth-ers are unable speak a peaceful orkind word to Joseph. Their inabilityto communicate is crucial to the re-la8 onship’s breakdown.

But why is communica8 on key totheir rela8 onship? What is it aboutlanguage that makes it the mediumthrough which Scripture describesthe hatred that the brothers harbortowards Joseph? Language is abouta rela8 onship. Communica8 on re-quires not merely a mouth to speak,but also an ear to listen. This is pre-cisely why Ludwig Wi: genstein ar-gues that there is no such thing as aprivate language, a theory Emman-

uel Levinas develops further.Ethics as rst philosophy is Levi-

nas’ philosophy and is expressedthrough the epiphany of the face-of-the-other, which places in niteethical responsibility upon our shoulders. It is not the image of theother’s face that obligates us, somuch as the face’s verbal poten8 al;that it is the beginning of language,the genesis of rela8 onships. Why islanguage integral to rela8 onshipsand by extension ethical obliga-8 on? Language, argues Levinas, “isinseparable from giving, for it opensreserves from which the hand thatgives draws without being able todissimulate anything.”1 Speaking is giving; it is turning towards the oth-

er. Thus, in describing what leadsbrothers to sell their own brother,it is cri8 cal that Scripture alludes totheir inability to speak e9 ec8 velytowards Joseph. This problem of speech signi es the core ma: er athand, which is their profound in-ability to turn towards Joseph withethical responsibility, to speak withsincerity, to give.

This fraternal ssure is nallyeased genera8 ons later in the me-gillah. Not, however, through the Midrash’s just deserts of midah ke-neged midah, but rather througha very subtle intertextual allusion,which links the Joseph story point-edly to the nal verse of the me-gillah. Mordechai is described as “ve-doveir shalom le-khol zaro,”

someone who is engaged in thespeaking of kind words to all. Themegillah’s authors inten8 onally em-ploy the same phrase Scripture usesin describing the brothers’ inabilityto speak with Joseph. Mordechai,unlike the brothers, is able to be acommunicator, an agent of ethi-cal behavior towards all people, tospeak with sincerity, to give.

Ethical responsibility is the mes-sage beneath the megillah’s car-nivalesque commo8 on. Paradisebeyond the party doors is elusive.However, striving towards ethicalengagement built upon giving inboth word and prac8 ce is neitherin heaven nor beyond the sea, it iswithin our reach. Indeed, this de-


scrip8 on of Mordechai is the mostbelievable part of the en8 re megil-lah; we are capable of living up toour ethical responsibility, if only weturn towards the face of the other.

The rst step towards this is en-shrined in the megillah’s instruc8 ons for Purim: “u-mishloah manot ish le-reiehu, u-matanot la-evyonim,” (Es-ther 9:22) it is a day of o9 ering deli-cacies to one another and gi7 s tothe poor. Mordechai is able to movebeyond himself, to give of himself,which is described through his abil-ity to speak kindly with all people. We are similarly called upon to step beyond ourselves and turn towardsthe face of the other, which calls outat all 8 mes.

It is di; cult to face the sobering

e9 ects of reality. Injus8 ce prolifer-ates. Our unemployed friend, theunderpaid Chinese iPhone worker,the elderly couple who cannot af-ford to pay for medical care, thesex-slave in Thailand, the wrong-fully imprisoned, the millions of American children with unequaleduca8 on, the alienated co-workerone cubicle over and the poli8 caldissident in Syria. It is easy and con-venient to blind ourselves from thisbrokenness or throw our hands-upin surrender, knowing that we can-not right every wrong.

Megillat Esther’s comedic veneer rrand carnivalesque thrill remind usthat there is no respite from re-sponsibility. Through Mordechai’sbehavior and Purim’s prescrip8 ons,

however, the megillah pushes us to face the sobering reality. While par-adise is an illusion that begins andends at the party doors, there is agreat deal we can and must do touphold jus8 ce here on earth. Appre-cia8 ng the humanity in others andupholding our in nite responsibilitytowards them, is not only possible,it is necessary. Giving to others,through word and deed, is the rst,necessary and decisive step towardstas8 ng a li: le bit of that ShushanShangri-La.

1 Lévinas, Emmanuel. Otherwise than Be-ing, Or, Beyond Essence. Pi: sburgh, PA: Duquesne UP, 2009, 184.


Esther 1:5 “…the king made a feast unto all the people” pg. 6-7

Esther 2:23 “…and it was wri: en in the book of the chronicles before the king.” pg. 9-10

Esther 3:8 “There is a certain people…” pg. 11-13

Esther 4:14 “And who knows, if it is not for a moment like this that you a: ained royal status?” pg.14-15

Esther 5:4 “…come this day unto the banquet that I have prepared…” pg.16-19

Esther 5:8 “If I have found favor in the sight of the king…” pg. 21-25

Esther 6:1 “On that night, the King could not sleep...” pg. 26-28

Esther 7:10 “So they hanged Haman on the gallows that he had prepared for Mordechai…” pg. 30-31

Esther 8:13 “The copy of the wri8 ng… was to be published unto all the peoples…” pg. 32-33

Esther 9:1 “And the opposite became what was…” pg. 35-36

Esther 9:22 “…they should make them days of feas8 ng and gladness…” pg. 37-39

Esther 10:1 “And the king Achashverosh laid a tax on the land…” pg. 41-44

Esther 10:3 “…speaking peace to all his people” pg. 45-47

Reading is Praise: Connecting the Articles to the MegillahI0'&6


There are three criteria that a restaurant must provide its workers in order to qualify for the Tav HaYosher. All criteria are derived strictly from US, state, and local law.

1. The right to fair pay.2. The right to fair 8 me. 3. The right to a safe work environment.

N,/$"0.$'&, !"#$ 95 $#%&'($')&% *,3& 2&&0 ,.,!'&' /*& T,3 H,Y")*&!!

T*&!& ,!& #,04 .,4) 4"+ -,0 5&/ $03"13&' .$/* T,3 H,Y")*&!!

• Become a Compliance O; cer: The Tav HaYosher depends on trained volunteers who conduct regular compliance visits with allTav HaYosher-cer8 ed restaurants.• Advocate: Pick up the phone and call your local kosher restaurant. Ask for the owner or manager, and in a suppor8 ve, encouragingway, let them know you would like them to carry the Tav. This method of consumer ac8 vism has been very e9 ec8 ve.• Educate: Tell your shul, school, friends, rela8 ves, whomever about the Tav! Give a drasha, write a blog post, send an email, helpus get the message out!• Donate: We do not charge restaurants for the Tav. That means we rely on donors like you to keep this work sustainable. Whetherit’s $10 or $10,000, every gi7 is crucial.

For more information, please send an e-mail to: [email protected]

L,+0-*&' 24 U$* L’T+#,#-, /*& T'" H'Y!%.#$ $) , 1"-,1, 5!,))!""/) $0$/$,/$3& /" 2!$05 ."!(&!), !&)/,+!,0/ ".0&!), ,0' -"##+0$/4#&#2&!) /"5&/*&! /" -!&,/& @+)/ ."!(A1,-&) $0 (")*&! !&)/,+!,0/).

E0,(1&# $%& L&23&#' (4 T(0(##(1For the last four years, Uri L’Tzedek has created programs that have affected change in the Orthodox community. Help us create change just like you read

about in the Ve-Nahafoch Hu: Making Your Way Through an Upside-Down World by supporting one of our impactful programs.

Sponsorship Options• $36 Educa/ onal Materials

Crea8 ng customized source sheets for educa8 onal programs.

• $72 Tav HaYosher cer/ ca/ onInsuring con8 nued compliance at one restaurant.

• $180 Sponsor a “Midnight Run”Delivering food packages to the homeless.

• $250 Sponsor a Tav HaYosher Compliance O0 cerTraining and ongoing support for one compliance o; cer.

• $360 Sponsor a Social Jus/ ce Beit Midrash SessionProgramming and Marke8 ng costs associate with program.

• $500 Sponsor a day of learning at a schoolEngaging Jewish students in social jus8 ce and Halacha.

• $1,000 Sponsor a Summer FellowEmpowering future social jus8 ce ac8 vists.

• $1,800 Support the Flaum’s CampaignPartnering with oppressed workers to ght for their rights.

• $2,500 Launch Seeds of the FuturePromo8 ng student involvement in the developing world.

• $5,000 Expand Programming to LA,CADeveloping Uri L’Tzedek’s presence on the West Coast.

Please make checks payable to FJC and indicate Uri L’Tzedek in the memo line.

Uri L’Tzedek Orthodox Social Jus8 ce 25 Broadway, 17th Floor New York, NY 10004


Cover Art designed by A1$%, W&$))

The cover design of Ve-Nahafoch Hu: Making Your Way Through an Upside-Down World is inspired by themes of power and jus8 ce framed within the com-partmentalized story of Purim. The leading gures, Queen Esther and King Achashverosh, are presented in a re ected composi8 on, highligh8 ng the duality of their roles. Queen Esther holds a sword and King Achashverosh a scepter, each represen8 ng their al-ternate forms of leadership, jus8 ce and power in the story of Purim. The composi8 on references the whimsy and fes8 vi8 es of Purim through its allusion to playing cards and games of chance, a key element in our story. The color pale: e of playful holiday cheer is reinforced with the duality of light and dark, or good and evil, separa8 ng our two gures. Finally, the overall illustra8 on is fragmented into a series of small individual shapes, similar to a stained glass window, that together unite to form our composed cover illustra8 on. Similarly, the story of Purim is one of many seemingly separate pieces that ul8 mately come together to highlight a story of triumph and strength of the Jewish people.

Ve-Nahafoch Hu:Making Your Way

Through anUpside-Down

World

created by

Uri L’Tzedek Orthodox Social Justice


URI L’TZEDEK 2012 SUMMER FELLOWSHIP PROGRAM

The Uri L’Tzedek Summer Fellowship is a transformative leadership program that combines innovative social activism with leadership development and Torah.

This fellowship has made me believe that I can make change, that I can do something. I never had that feeling before.

The purpose of the Summer Fellowship is to train the next generation of Orthodox leaders with the skills necessary to change the world. We also believe that social change is an intensely moral and spiritual endeavor; to change society you must !rst change yourself, wrote the Mussarist Rabbi Israel Salanter. In addition to activism and trainings, seminars and re"ective conversations by leading Orthodox thinkers during the Summer Fellowship focus on the religious dimensions of social change.

Fellows are selected from universities across the country for an intensive six week Summer Fellowship, located at Uri L’Tzedek’s New York and Los Angeles branches. Fellows devote their time to activism, leadership training, and social justice Torah seminars.

LEADERSHIP TRAINING:Throughout the Summer Fellowship, fellows will participate in classes that focus on leadership growth. Trainings will focus on developing key leaderships skills including community organizing, social media advocacy, op-ed writing skills, fundraising, and social entrepreneurship.

SOCIAL JUSTICE TORAH:

Seminars led by leading rabbis and thinkers

in the Orthodox community will explore topics

including the Obligation to Give, The Philosophy

Animating Jewish Social Justice, Workers Rights

in Chazal. Fellows participate in daily personal

reflection and conversation in order to

internalize the meaning of activism. internalize the

ACTIVISM:The main focus of the Summer Fellowship is working on the Tav HaYosher, Uri L’Tzedek’s ethical seal for kosher restaurants. Fellows will expand the Tav HaYosher through advo-cacy, partnership building with restaurant owners, and creating innovative marketing strategies to promote the Tav HaYosher.

This full-time, 6-week program runs from June 22nd-August 3rd and includes two weekend experiences. To apply visit the ULT website. For more info please contact David Bookbinder at [email protected].

The cost of the fellowship is $1,000. Full scholarships are available. scholarshi

p $ ,available. ips are

Editor-in-ChiefSeries Editor Rabbi Ari Weiss

Managing Editor Hillary LevisonDesign and Layout Aliza Weiss

Creative Consultant Creative Consultant Ari Hart

Documents

Purim Booklet Feb 21utzedek.org › ULT PUBLICATIONS › Purim Ve-Nahafoch_Hu.pdfPurim’s narra8 ve and prac8 ces touch on many compelling issues of our 8 me, which the 8 meless wisdom