Podcasts about rabbinic

The Golem of Prague is one of the most famous monsters in Jewish folklore: a silent giant shaped from clay, awakened by sacred Hebrew letters, and ordered to defend Prague's Jewish community. But did Rabbi Judah Loew - the Maharal of Prague - really create a supernatural protector, and could the golem's body still be hidden in the attic of the Old-New Synagogue? This pre-Halloween Terrifying & True investigation traces the golem legend from Psalm 139 and the Babylonian Talmud to Sefer Yetzirah, medieval Jewish mysticism, the older golem of Chelm, and the famous Prague story. We separate documented religious tradition from later folklore, literary invention, and horror imagery while preserving the eerie question at the center: what happens when human beings create power without judgment? Long before the golem became a stone-faced monster in movies, games, and Halloween culture, it was an unfinished human form - a body close enough to life to become unsettling. Rabbinic texts describe a created man who cannot speak. Medieval traditions connect artificial creation with combinations of the twenty-two Hebrew letters and the 231 gates. Early modern stories place the runaway servant not in Prague, but in Chelm, where a creature built to obey grows too large for its maker to control. The episode then enters the Old-New Synagogue and the legend of Rabbi Loew. The historical Maharal was a major Jewish thinker who met Emperor Rudolf II, but no surviving writing from the rabbi, his disciples, or contemporary Prague chronicles records a clay guardian. The Prague connection emerged through nineteenth-century literature, while Yudl Rosenberg's 1909 book decisively shaped the now-familiar story of Yossele, the golem created to defeat blood libels - false antisemitic accusations that had caused real persecution and violence - and protect a threatened community. As Halloween season approaches, this deep dive explores why the golem remains one of folklore's most powerful supernatural legends - and why it is more than a simple monster story. It is a tale of antisemitic persecution, communal fear, sacred language, obedience, artificial life, and the terrifying responsibility of a creator. From Prague's locked attic and rumors of a Nazi intruder to Paul Wegener's silent-film monster and modern comparisons with robots and artificial intelligence, the golem keeps receiving new commands. Inside this episode:The meaning of golem in Psalm 139, rabbinic tradition, and the story of Rava's silent created manSefer Yetzirah, sacred Hebrew letters, medieval Jewish mysticism, and the corrected 231 gatesThe older golem of Chelm and the changing traditions of emet, met, and the removable shemRabbi Judah Loew, Emperor Rudolf II, the Old-New Synagogue, and the real history of Jewish PragueYudl Rosenberg's 1909 literary hoax and the protector created to fight false blood-libel accusationsThe synagogue attic, the Nazi-intruder rumor, Paul Wegener's film, classic monsters, robots, and AIWas the Golem of Prague an ancient protector waiting in a synagogue attic - or a modern legend assembled from sacred texts, persecution, folklore, and the human fear of creations that obey too well? We're telling that story tonight.

Last week we heard the process for handling harm within the community. This week we hear how far the forgiveness extends. Peter asks the question we all quietly want to ask — is there a limit? — and Jesus answers by rejecting the whole counting frame, then tells one of the hardest parables in the Gospels.Track One brings us the crossing of the Red Sea and, at the preacher's choice, either Psalm 114 or the Songs of Moses and Miriam that celebrated the crossing. Track Two brings us Joseph forgiving his brothers — a fitting Old Testament companion to the Gospel, and one of the most extraordinary reconciliation scenes in the Bible — paired with Psalm 103's picture of a mercy as wide as the distance between east and west.The Epistle continues Paul's practical instructions, this time on judging one another over matters of conscience: welcome those who are weak in faith, do not despise those whose consciences differ from yours, and remember that we all give an account to the same Lord.For preachers continuing a series: the Matthew 18 arc closes here. Next week brings the parable of the workers in the vineyard — a shift to the question of God's generosity toward those who came late. The Gospel keeps exposing our secret bookkeeping.The ReadingsExodus 14:19–31First Reading (Track One) — Crossing the Red SeaSummaryIsrael is trapped between Pharaoh's army and the sea. The pillar of cloud that has been leading them moves behind them, becoming a barrier between the Egyptians and the Israelites. Moses stretches out his hand; the Lord drives back the sea by a strong east wind all night, and the waters divide. Israel walks through on dry ground. Pharaoh's chariots pursue them. In the morning watch, God throws the Egyptians into panic; the wheels of their chariots clog. Moses stretches out his hand again; the waters return; the Egyptian army is drowned. Israel sees the great work the Lord has done and believes.Photo by Miguel Lindo on UnsplashKey Ideas for Preaching* The pillar that led Israel now stands between them and their pursuers. God's presence is not just a light for the road ahead; it can also be a wall between us and what pursues us. Where in your congregation might people need to hear that God's presence protects as well as leads?* The sea is parted by wind and by night — a whole night of what must have looked like slow, uncertain divine work. Deliverance in this text takes time. What might your sermon do with a God whose deliverance is not always instantaneous?* The text names the Egyptians' death honestly. This is not a story of pure joy for anyone who reads it carefully. How might your sermon hold together the reality of God's deliverance and the sober fact that it came at cost to others?Significant Cautions* The drowning of the Egyptians has been used triumphally in ways that make God's people cheer at the death of enemies. Rabbinic tradition teaches that God rebuked the angels for singing when the Egyptians drowned. Christian preaching should honor that restraint.* Do not press the Red Sea as a metaphor for whatever escape your people are hoping for. The text is doing specific historical and theological work; it is not a general promise about deliverance from difficulty.Psalm 114The Psalm (Track One, primary option) — When Israel Went Out from EgyptSummaryA short psalm celebrating the exodus. The sea saw and fled. The Jordan turned back. The mountains skipped like rams. The whole earth is called to tremble at the presence of the Lord.Key Ideas for Preaching* The psalm imagines the whole creation reacting to God's deliverance — the sea, the Jordan, the mountains. The natural world has skin in the game. What might your sermon do with a picture of deliverance that includes creation, not just people?* The closing line — “tremble, O earth, at the presence of the Lord” — is a call, not a threat. The trembling is reverence, not fear. Where has your congregation confused reverence with terror?Significant Cautions* The vivid poetry (“mountains skipped like rams”) is imagination, not physics. Do not preach a literalist reading that flattens the psalm's exuberance.Exodus 15:1b–11, 20–21The Psalm (Track One, alternative option) — The Songs of Moses and MiriamSummaryA song celebrating the crossing. Moses and the Israelites sing that the Lord has triumphed gloriously — the horse and rider thrown into the sea. The song rehearses God's mighty acts against Pharaoh. Then Miriam, named as a prophet, and the women take up tambourines and sing back the refrain: sing to the Lord, for he has triumphed gloriously.Key Ideas for Preaching* The song is answered by Miriam and the women, dancing with tambourines. The tradition of women's celebration is worth honoring in a church that has too often silenced it. What might it mean to preach a Miriam-shaped moment in your congregation this week?* The song is exuberant, martial, and specific. It names Pharaoh's death by name. Later Jewish tradition will pull back from too much celebration of enemies' death. What does it look like to sing the song faithfully in the modern moment, honoring the joy of the delivered without the cruelty of the triumphant?Significant Cautions* The song's celebration of enemies' destruction has been used to bless violent triumphalism in Christian history. Handle with care.Genesis 50:15–21First Reading (Track Two) — Joseph Forgives His BrothersSummaryJacob has died, and Joseph's brothers are afraid. They imagine that Joseph has only been kind to them because their father was alive, and that now he will finally take revenge for what they did to him. They send a message pleading for forgiveness, claiming their father commanded it before he died. Joseph weeps. When they come to him and offer themselves as his slaves, he refuses. “Am I in the place of God?” he says. “Even though you intended to do harm to me, God intended it for good, in order to preserve a numerous people, as he is doing today.” And he speaks kindly to them and promises to provide for them and their little ones.Key Ideas for Preaching* Joseph's brothers cannot believe they are forgiven. They construct a story about their father commanding it — as if forgiveness requires a legal warrant. Joseph's tears seem to be for the fact that they still cannot receive what he has been giving them for years. Where in your congregation are people still constructing stories to make forgiveness legally binding, when what has been offered is grace?* “Am I in the place of God?” That is Joseph's own restraint — the recognition that judgment is not his to hand out. What does it look like to preach a restraint like Joseph's in a culture that keeps insisting we get to keep score?* “You intended it for harm; God intended it for good” is Joseph's theological interpretation of his own suffering. It is his to offer, not ours to impose. Where has this line been forced on people whose harm has not yet been redeemed, and how might Joseph's own timing correct the church's misuse?Significant Cautions* “God intended it for good” should not be handed to suffering people as an explanation. Joseph earned that meaning through decades of hardship. No one else has to earn a lecture on it.* The brothers' fear is real, and Joseph does not dismiss it. Do not preach forgiveness in a way that skips over the wounder's guilt or the wounded's ongoing work.Psalm 103:(1–7), 8–13The Psalm (Track Two) — As Far as East Is from WestSummaryOne of the tenderest psalms in the psalter. Bless the Lord, O my soul. The Lord forgives your iniquity, heals your diseases, redeems your life from the Pit, crowns you with steadfast love. The Lord is merciful and gracious, slow to anger, abounding in steadfast love. God does not deal with us according to our sins. As far as the east is from the west, so far God removes our transgressions from us. As a parent has compassion for their children, so the Lord has compassion for those who fear him.Key Ideas for Preaching* The images the psalmist reaches for are specific: as far as east is from west, as high as heavens above the earth, as a parent has compassion. Each is stretched to the breaking point of comparison. Where in your congregation has God's mercy been imagined as measured, when the psalm imagines it as immeasurable?* “God does not deal with us according to our sins.” Read alongside the Gospel's parable of the unforgiving servant, that sentence reframes the question. God is not scorekeeping. Where in your congregation are people still keeping score of their own failures with a strictness God has already refused?* The psalm opens and closes with “bless the Lord, O my soul.” Blessing is what the psalmist owes God for what God has done — not obligation, blessing. What might your sermon do to help a congregation practice the specific spiritual movement of blessing God for mercy already received?Significant Cautions* “The Lord has compassion for those who fear him” has been used to make God's mercy conditional. Read in context, “fear of the Lord” here is closer to reverence than to terror, and the whole psalm's argument is about mercy that outstrips deserving.Romans 14:1–12The Epistle — Do Not Judge One AnotherSummaryPaul writes to a community with real conflict over matters of conscience — some think one day is more sacred than another; some eat meat and others eat only vegetables. His instruction is striking. Welcome those who are weak in faith, but not for the purpose of quarreling over opinions. Do not judge those who eat what you do not; do not despise those who abstain from what you enjoy. Each is responsible to the Lord for their own conscience. We do not live to ourselves; we do not die to ourselves. We belong to the Lord. And each of us will give an account of ourselves — to God, not to each other.Key Ideas for Preaching* Paul takes for granted that the community will contain people whose consciences produce different answers to real questions. He does not try to force uniformity. He calls for mutual welcome. Where in your congregation has uniformity been mistaken for unity?* “Who are you to pass judgment on servants of another?” That is Paul's blunt question. The person you are judging does not answer to you. They answer to the same Lord you do. What does it look like to preach humility about our own judgments without collapsing into “anything goes”?* “None of us lives to ourselves, and none of us dies to ourselves… we are the Lord's.” Paul is describing a form of life in which our lives are not primarily our own possessions to defend but our Lord's to steward. Where in your congregation has ownership language crept in where stewardship language belonged?Significant Cautions* “Welcome the weak in faith” language has been used condescendingly to describe people whose convictions differ from ours. Paul is not endorsing that condescension. Handle the language carefully.* Paul's instruction is not “anything goes.” He is describing matters of conscience where the community must make room for difference. Do not stretch this to bless behaviors Paul elsewhere addresses directly.Matthew 18:21–35The Gospel — The Unforgiving ServantSummaryPeter asks Jesus how many times he should forgive a member of the church who sins against him — as many as seven times? Jesus answers: not seven times, but seventy-seven times. Then he tells a parable. A king wants to settle accounts with his servants. One is brought who owes him ten thousand talents — an unimaginable sum. The servant cannot pay. The king orders him and his family sold, but the servant falls to his knees and begs for patience. Out of pity, the king forgives the whole debt. The same servant then finds a fellow servant who owes him a hundred denarii — a small sum by comparison. He seizes the fellow servant by the throat and demands payment. When his fellow servant begs for patience, he refuses and throws him in prison. Other servants report this to the king, who summons the first servant. “You wicked servant! I forgave you all that debt because you pleaded with me. Should you not have had mercy on your fellow servant, as I had mercy on you?” In anger, the king hands him over to be tortured until he pays. Jesus concludes: so my heavenly Father will also do to every one of you, if you do not forgive your brother or sister from your heart.Key Ideas for Preaching* Peter thinks seven times is generous. In rabbinic tradition, three times was the standard; seven doubles that and adds one. Peter is proud of himself for the offer. Jesus's answer — seventy-seven times — is not a math problem. It is a rejection of the whole counting frame. Where in your congregation has forgiveness been imagined as a limited resource?* The amounts in the parable are extraordinary. Ten thousand talents was more money than the whole Roman Empire could tax in a year. A hundred denarii was about a hundred days' wages for a laborer. Jesus is making a specific and shocking point: the difference between what God has forgiven us and what we are being asked to forgive each other is a difference of galaxies. What might your sermon do to make that scale actually felt?* The parable does not soften the judgment at the end. The unforgiving servant is handed over. Jesus makes the application explicit. This is one of the hardest lines in Jesus's teaching. How does your sermon hold together the graciousness of the forgiveness and the seriousness of the warning without collapsing either?* The passage does not require us to reconcile with people who continue to harm us, or to stay in relationships where forgiveness has been offered but the harm has not stopped. Forgiveness and reconciliation are not the same thing. What might your sermon say to those in the room who have been taught that Christian forgiveness required them to endure ongoing harm?Significant Cautions* “Forgive from your heart” has been used to tell abused people that their inability to feel forgiveness meant their faith was inadequate. That is a grievous misuse. Forgiveness is a decision to release the debt; it is not always accompanied by warm feelings, especially early on.* The parable's judgment is severe. Do not use it as a threat against people who are struggling to forgive. Jesus's audience is the disciples, not the wounded.* “Seventy-seven times” is not a literal cap. Do not preach as if seventy-eight would be too many.* The parable should not be used to pressure people into premature reconciliation with abusers, in families or elsewhere. Forgiveness is possible; renewed relationship requires actual repentance and often protection.Thematic ConnectionsThe Gospel is the natural center — the continuation and close of the Matthew 18 arc on community life. Last week the process for handling harm; this week the extent of the forgiveness. Peter asks the question we all want to ask, and Jesus rejects the frame.On Track One, the crossing of the Red Sea gives us God's dramatic deliverance. It is a different kind of freedom than the Gospel names — freedom from enemies rather than freedom from the debts we hold against each other. But both texts are about God doing something we could not do for ourselves, and asking us to trust it.On Track Two, Joseph's forgiveness of his brothers pairs directly with the Gospel. Joseph forgives brothers who cannot believe they are forgiven. He refuses to be their judge. He points them, instead, to the God whose intentions have run through the whole story.Romans 14 sits inside the day as a reminder that the same principle applies within the community as much as it does to those who have wounded us. Do not judge. Do not despise. Welcome. The one you are judging belongs to the Lord, not to you.Psalm 103's picture of God's mercy — as far as east from west, as high as heavens from earth — is the theological ground under all of it. God does not deal with us according to our sins. We are asked, especially on Track Two, to hand out mercy the way we have received it.For preachers continuing a series: the Matthew 18 arc closes here. Next week (Proper 20) brings the parable of the workers in the vineyard — a shift to the question of God's generosity toward those who came late. The Gospel keeps exposing our secret bookkeeping. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit lectionarypro.substack.com/subscribe

``Finishing the Story - Parables of Jesus Part 1: One Firm Foundation By Louie Marsh, 9-6-2026   Parables (short illustrative stories teaching a moral, ethical, or spiritual lesson, often through comparison or analogy) are extremely old—at least around 4,000–4,500 years, with roots in oral tradition that are almost certainly older.   They overlap heavily with fables (especially animal ones with morals) in ancient sources. The Hebrew term mashal (often translated as "parable," "proverb," or "comparison") covered a range of short, memorable didactic forms. Similar short narrative wisdom literature appears independently across cultures, but the earliest written examples come from ancient Mesopotamia.   Earliest known examples   The oldest attested tradition is Sumerian (southern Mesopotamia). Short fables and parable-like pieces appear in proverb collections on clay tablets, mainly from the Old Babylonian period (roughly 1900–1600 BC), used in scribal schools. These preserve material that scholars trace back into the third millennium BC (and earlier oral tradition). Scholars have identified dozens of Aesopic-style Sumerian fables and parables among the proverb collections (over 100 in some counts), featuring animals like the fox, dog, lion, or elephant acting with human traits to illustrate lessons about greed, folly, ambition, or social order.   In the Hebrew Bible, early narrative meshalim include Jotham's story of the trees seeking a king (Judges 9, often called the first biblical parable or fable, and Nathan's parable of the ewe lamb told to King David (2 Samuel 12).   Rabbinic use of parables (Hebrew mashal, plural meshalim) as a formal teaching and exegetical tool developed primarily in the late Second Temple and early post-Temple periods (roughly 1st–2nd centuries AD), becoming highly standardized and widespread from roughly 1st–6th centuries AD). Their use remains popular today, especially in traditional Orthodox, Hasidic, and educational contexts.   Q: - Why title this "Finishing the Story?" Because while Jesus finished tell these stories over 2000 years ago they aren't finished in your life and my life until apply them.   1) The most vital step in building a firm foundation – OBEDIENCE.   "46"Why do you call me 'Lord, Lord,' and not do what I tell you? 47Everyone who comes to me and hears my words and does them, I will show you what he is like: (Luke 6:46–47, ESV)   "24"Everyone then who hears these words of mine and does them…  (Matthew 7:24a, ESV)   · Jesus was almost always focused on APPLICATION.   2) God calls me to BUILD a life rooted in Jesus.   48he is like a man building a house, who dug deep and laid the foundation on the rock. And when a flood arose, the stream broke against that house and could not shake it, because it had been well built.  (Luke 6:48, ESV)   will be like a wise man who built his house on the rock. 25And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat on that house, but it did not fall, because it had been founded on the rock. (Matthew 7:24b-25, ESV)   "18And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." (Matthew 16:18, ESV)   Building is….   · HARD WORK.   ·  Takes TIME.   · Follows a wise PLAN.   · Will inevitably be TESTED by trials & tribulations.   3) Failure to build on Christ has bad CONSEQUENCES.   49But the one who hears and does not do them is like a man who built a house on the ground without a foundation. When the stream broke against it, immediately it fell, and the ruin of that house was great."" (Luke 6:49, ESV)   26And everyone who hears these words of mine and does not do them will be like a foolish man who built his house on the sand. 27And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell, and great was the fall of it."" (Matthew 7:26-27, ESV)   · If I want to stand strong in life's storms, I a strong GOSPEL foundation.   4) The key to all this is acknowledge the AUTHORITY of Jesus. "28And when Jesus finished these sayings, the crowds were astonished at his teaching, 29for he was teaching them as one who had authority, and not as their scribes." (Matthew 7:28–29, ESV) 

Ask a first-century rabbi if biblical prophecy had ceased, and he'd say yes. Ask him if God still spoke, and he'd tell you about the Bat Kol.ABOUT THIS EPISODE:Josh, Michael and Michael explore the biblical case that prophecy operates at more than one level of authority. Scripture itself is uniquely inspired, infallible, and authoritative, while other genuine prophetic revelation can still occur without becoming Scripture. To explore this more, we turn to rabbinic Judaism and the fascinating concept of the Bat Kol.Bat Kol means "daughter of a voice." It's rabbinic Judaism's term for a diminished echo of prophecy that kept showing up long after the age of the biblical prophets. This historical evidence suggests that the idea of genuine, non-canonical revelation was not foreign to ancient Jewish thought and may provide important historical support for the continuity view of prophecy. Subscribe to The Remnant Radio newsletter and receive our FREE introduction to spiritual gifts eBook. Plus, get access to: discounts, news about upcoming shows, courses and conferences - and more. Subscribe now at TheRemnantRadio.com.Support the showABOUT THE REMNANT RADIO: The Remnant Radio exists to equip believers who are hungry for the radical middle of both Word and Spirit. Subscribe for twice-weekly content on theology, church history and the gifts of the Spirit.

Welcome to a Jewish History Uncensored with Dr. Marc Shapiro. This season we are covering the story of Dr. Shapiro's most recent book–a collection of letters from some of the great Rabbinic figures of our day. The correspondences between Dr. Shapiro and these luminaries cover a wide array of fascinating topics. This is episode 46.For more information visit torahinmotion.org/podcastsTo support more thoughtful Jewish content like this, visit torahinmotion.org/donateBuy the book here: https://www.ebay.com/itm/372750487550

"A Kashmiri Muslim Dried Fruit Salesman; A Bahai Patient in Springfield, MA; A Jewish (Hi)story of Mauritius: The Tales of Meaning and Meandering From a Rabbinic Sabbatical" Rabbi Adam Kligfeld's Shabbat Lunch & Learn at Temple Beth Am, Los Angeles, August 22, 2026. (Zoom)

Torah Class - Parshat Ki Tetze: A Tradition of Ahavat YisraelHow the debates between the Pharisees and the Sadducees reveal the compassion and human dignity at the foundationof Rabbinic law.

The Rebbe explains that every mitzvah, whether from the Torah or Rabbinic origin, is important for every Jew. He clarifies that what appear as compromises in Torah, like Prozbul or selling chametz, are integral parts of Torah itself, not true compromises. https://www.torahrecordings.com/rebbe/igroskodesh/017/012/6478

Remembering and Forgetting: Disease, Cause, and Cure We continue with the topic of remembering and forgetting vis-à-vis Tisha B'Av and Rosh Hashanah. Now, we have to ask ourselves: how do I know if I am forgetting God? I might look like I am doing fine. If forgetting God is the disease, how do I diagnose it? The Beit HaLevi explains that the symptom of forgetting God is fear . If you are afraid, it means you have forgotten God. He brings a pasuk in Yeshayahu: "Mi at vatirei..." ("Who are you that you should fear...")—and then it says that you forgot Hashem. Hashem is not on your mind. What does that mean? This connects back to a warning in the Torah: "Lo tira" —when you go out to war, do not be afraid. Rabbeinu Yonah notes that this applies not only when going to war, but to any challenging situation that comes your way. Do not be afraid. You might ask: How can you expect me not to be afraid? That feels impossible. What does the Torah say right after that instruction? Remember what Hashem did at Yetzias Mitzrayim (the Exodus from Egypt). To give a mashal (parable): Imagine a man walking down a dangerous road. I remember during COVID walking down Ocean Parkway when a group of motorcyclists and bicyclists came by during a "defund the police" rally. There I was, wearing my kippah , walking down Ocean Parkway, and I got scared. Now, hold on. Imagine I were inside a large tank wearing a bulletproof vest, with a cannon in front of me. Would I be afraid? Of course not. So why would someone in that situation be afraid? Only because they forgot they were inside a tank! If you remember you are in a tank, you are not afraid. We all have a tank. That tank is Hakadosh Baruch Hu protecting us: השם צלך על יד ימינך ( "Hashem is your shade at your right hand." ) כי אתה השם מחסי ( "For You, Hashem, are my refuge, my protection." ) As we say in Zichronot : "L'chol hachosim bo" —to all those who find refuge in Him. We have a place of refuge. Think of historical figures or despots—like Noriega in Panama—who ran into an embassy for protection because, by international law, enemies couldn't touch them there. An embassy is a refuge. God is our refuge. But when I forget that I am inside that refuge, I become afraid. Thus, the symptom of the disease of forgetting God is fear. The Causes: Arrogance and Desire The next thing we need to understand is the cause of the disease. There are two causes: Arrogance ( Ga'avah ) Desire ( Ta'avah ) It is interesting to note that right after Tisha B'Av, in Parashat Va'etchanan , the Torah discusses forgetting God due to desire . In Parashat Ekev , it discusses forgetting God due to arrogance . What does it mean to forget God due to desire? The Torah warns that you will enter a land full of wealth—houses you didn't build, vineyards you didn't plant, and so on. You will become steeped in physical desire, and as a result, you will forget God. That is what the Sforno explains. The first mention of forgetting God in Parashat Va'etchanan is rooted in desire ( Ta'avah ). We see this same concept connected to the Churban Beit HaMikdash (Destruction of the Temple). Why did the Churban happen? The verse indicates that people were drinking wine, listening to music, and ואל פועל השם לא הביטו —they did not pay attention to the handiwork of God. If you ignore the handiwork of God and focus solely on self-indulgence, it causes you to forget Him. The Chida notes that this means they did not bless Him; Berachot are the cure for forgetting God, as we will see. So now we have three parts: The Symptom: Fear. The Causes: Arrogance and Desire. The Cure: Birkat HaMazon , Berachot , and keeping God on your mind. Regarding cause number one ( Ta'avah ): וישמן ישורון ויבעט ( "Yeshurun grew fat and kicked" ). When a person is full, they become totally self-absorbed and forget God. The Gemara says that a lion roars only when it is full. We all know that when you are running on empty—when you are hungry—you become humble. That is why we fast on Yom Kippur. Fasting brings humility. If you enter a day with a full stomach, you are not humble; but by the end of the fast, at Neilah , you are humble because you haven't eaten. The second cause—arrogance—is also very interesting to analyze. In Parashat Ekev , the scenario is different: you didn't enter a place with pre-built houses; you built the houses yourself. This refers to the second generation entering Eretz Yisrael . Interestingly, in modern America, the dynamic is often flipped: The First Generation came with nothing, worked hard, and built themselves up. Their main challenge is arrogance ( "I am a self-made man; I built this wealth" —like a Holocaust survivor who becomes a billionaire). The Second Generation is born into wealth. They didn't make a dollar themselves, so their main challenge is usually not arrogance, but desire . Because they don't have to struggle, they grow up with fancy houses, luxury cars, and expensive vacations. They are born into wealth and can easily become spoiled. Regardless, arrogance is born from success: "I made my money; I made my life." The Torah warns: ורם לבבך —your heart will become haughty from success— ושכחת —and you will forget. Arrogance and desire are the two root causes of this spiritual disease. The Antidote: Berachot The antidote provided by the Torah is: ואכלת ושבעת וברכת — "You shall eat, be satisfied, and bless." Otherwise, pen —lest you go down the path of forgetting God. The Meshech Chochmah raises a fascinating question on this verse ( V'achalta v'savata u'verachta ). The Gemara points out a contrast in halachah : For food , the biblical obligation ( d'Oraita ) to make a blessing comes after eating. For Torah study , the biblical obligation to make a blessing comes before learning. Why are they flipped? Why don't we biblically recite a beracha before eating or after learning? The Meshech Chochmah answers that the purpose of making a beracha after eating is not merely to say thank you. If it were only about expressing gratitude, as the Gemara implies, you ought to thank God even more when you are hungry and about to eat! If someone passes you a glass of water when you are dying of thirst, you say thank you right away—not just after you finish drinking. Instead, the beracha comes after eating because that is when you have just consumed physical food. After eating, a person becomes full, satisfied, and susceptible to arrogance and indulge in desire. Therefore, Birkat HaMazon acts as an immediate antidote administered after exposure to the risk. Think of it like a poison and its antidote: if someone is exposed to a poison, they must take the antidote immediately afterward, or the poison will kill them. The potential poison of desire and arrogance after a meal receives its immediate antidote through the post-meal beracha . When it comes to studying Torah, the dynamic is reversed. Before you start learning, you are not yet connected; you might approach the study with the wrong motivations or mindset. Therefore, you make a beracha beforehand to set the right intention. This explains why the Churban came about: על שלא ברכו בתורה תחילה —because they did not make a beracha over the Torah first . They lacked the right intentions. They failed to realize that learning is meant to connect them directly to God, and as a result, the Shechinah departed. The beracha must precede learning to anchor the experience. After learning, you are already connected and focused, so a biblical beracha afterwards isn't required in the same way. (Of course, Rabbinically, we now recite blessings both before eating and after learning as well). To summarize: With eating , the vulnerability to Ga'avah and Ta'avah occurs afterwards , when you are full. With learning , the vulnerability to wrong intentions occurs beforehand . Thus, Berachot serve as the system designed to cure the disease of forgetting by forcing us to remember. Conclusion: The 100 Blessings Finally, it is known that there are 98 curses listed in the Tochecha read before Rosh Hashanah. In truth, there are 100, because the text also includes unwritten misfortunes, accounting for two more. Our Sages teach that these 100 curses correspond to the 100 blessings ( Me'ah Berachot ) we are meant to recite every day. Within these 100 daily blessings, 98 are Rabbinic and 2 are Biblical ( Birkat HaMazon and Birkat HaTorah , according to many opinions). What protects us from the 100 curses are the 100 blessings: 98 Rabbinic blessings offset the 98 explicit curses, while the 2 primary Biblical mitzvot of blessing offset the 2 hidden curses. The antidote to the disease of forgetting—which brought about the curses—is the daily discipline of Berachot . A similar concept appears regarding Sheva Berachot : Seven blessings recited twice a day (at two meals) over seven days equals 49 x 2 = 98 blessings . Add the two initial blessings at the wedding itself ( Chatan v'Kallah ), and you reach 100 blessings . Those 100 Berachot shield the new couple, welcoming them into a beautiful world of continually remembering God. In summary: we have identified the disease (forgetting God), the symptom (fear), the causes (arrogance and desire), and the ultimate cure ( Berachot and mindfulness).

In this study we will take a look at the women within the Bible. We will look at each one of them and see how their story influences our lives today.As we continue our study in this fantastic insight of the Women of the Bible, this morning we shall finish Miriam the sister of Moses.Miriam (rebellion) – Moses Sister – A ProphetessMiriam was the older sister of Moses, and it was she who watched over him when he was placed in a basket on the River Nile. She went on to become a leader of the Hebrews when they escaped from Egypt and went in search of the Promised Land.Miriam is best known for helping to deliver Moses at the Nile River and leading the Hebrew women in singing, dancing, and playing drums after crossing the Red Sea. Later, she and her brother Aaron challenge the actions and authority of Moses. She understands leadership to embrace diverse voices, female and male. But the price of speaking out is severe; Yahweh punishes her, after which she never speaks, nor is she spoken to. Centuries later, prophecy remembers her as the equal of Moses and Aaron in representing Yahweh before the people, and as the inaugurator of a performance and composition tradition of song, drums, and dances in Israel.                Miriam, the prophetess, the sister of Aaron (Exod. 15:20.), is the first of her order mentioned in the Word of Yahweh. While Yahweh never ordained a woman to be priest, nor do we read of women as bishops or pastors in the New Testament, the vocation of "prophetess" is common to both dispensations. Hannah (1Sam. 1:2) was practically a prophetess, and so was Huldah, to whom King Josiah went in his time of perplexity. Deborah (Judges 4:5) was a prophetess (2Kings 22:14), and there were also false prophetesses, such as Noadiah (Neh. 6:14), as well as false prophets.                Yahweh's order in the family is not according to earthly birthright. Speaking of the leaders of His people Israel, He says: "I sent before thee Moses, Aaron, and Miriam." (Micah 6:4.) All these children of Amram were of the prophet order. Miriam was the eldest, Moses the youngest; yet Moses is first mentioned, because he knew his Yahweh more fully than either his brother or his sister. Aaron, his elder brother, ranks next, and Miriam, the eldest of the three, ranks last.Miriam was a leader of the Hebrew people during the Exodus, the great founding event of Judaism. The episodes we have about her are disjointed and probably only represent a fraction of the stories originally told in the oral tradition of the Hebrew people.  The story of Miriam contains four different episodes:   1 Miriam saved her brother Moses, Exodus 2:1-10. This well-known story shows that the survival of the leader of the Exodus, Moses, depended on the courage and ingenuity of one young woman, his sister Miriam.   2 The song of Miriam, Exodus 15:20-21. This fragment of the Song of Miriam is one of the oldest poetic couplets in the Old Testament. It is an example of a literary genre devoted to celebrating military victories with triumphal poems.  3 Miriam's ordeal, Numbers 12. This story is about the authority of established law. Moses was the great lawgiver of the Hebrew people Moses' legislation formed the basis of Hebrew life. The story acknowledged that Miriam and Aaron were both popular leaders, but the Law, represented by Moses, bound them.  4 Miriam's death, Numbers 20:1-2. Miriam died in a waterless place in the wilderness, but Yahweh subsequently caused water to appear there.  In this study we finish up with #3 Miriam's ordeal and complete the study with Miriam's death While they were at Hazeroth, Miriam and Aaron spoke against Moses because of the Cushite woman whom he had married (for he had indeed married a Cushite woman); and they said, 'Has Yahweh spoken only through Moses? Has he not spoken through us also?' And Yahweh heard it. Now the man Moses was very humble, more so than anyone else on the face of the earth.Yahweh knows when we criticize and snip at each other. No matter our position in the church, we have to remember that all of Yahweh's children are special to Him. In fact, today, we can be even closer to Yahweh than Moses was the one who stood face to face with Yahweh. Our Yahweh now lives inside of us, for we are the temple of the Holy Spirit. How then can we not be afraid to speak against another of Yahweh's servants, His child? If we do so, we may very anger Yahweh and cause Him to depart from us.Numbers 12:10: Suddenly Miriam became leprous, as white as snow = Leprosy was a disease where the body rotted and decayed. It was considered a “walking death” – and Miriam had an advanced case of leprosy (white as snow) instantly. At this moment, Yahweh caused her body to reflect her heart.Leprous = First occurance is in Exodus 4:6. Nine (Denotes Finality of judgment. It is 3x3, the product of Divine completeness. The number nine, or its factors or multiples, is seen in all cases when judgment is the subject.)so afflicted: Exo. 4:6. Num. 12:10. 2Kings 5:1, 2Kings 5:27; 7:3; 15:5. (2Chron. 26:20). Matthew 8:2; 26:6. Luke 17:12. (Nine cases, 21 individuals.)By the way 21 in the Biblical Number for Divine Completion as regardsSpiritual Perfection, Many times, I have read that Yahweh punished Miriam by making her leprous. There is a big debate on whether Yahweh did this or not. Let's read the verse again. Yahweh was angry and left in verse 9 and here in verse 10 we read of the cloud departing, and Miriam was leprous. No where are we told Yahweh made Miriam leprous or even that Yahweh punished Miriam with leprosy. Yahweh went away. There is protection under the shadow of Yahweh's wing, but when we leave that protection or by our actions cause Yahweh to withdraw we lose that protection.11           Oh my lord! Please do not lay this sin on us = Aaron called Moses his master (my lord), and he attributed to Moses the power to strike Miriam with leprosy. Aaron also confessed his previous criticism as foolish and sinful (we have done foolishly…we have sinned).13           So Moses cried out to Yahweh = This was the first word spoken by Moses in this chapter. He had not spoken the entire time he was accused, leaving it up to Yahweh to answer his critics.14           Let her be shut out of the camp seven days, and afterward she may be received again = Yahweh did heal Miriam. If she were still a leper, she would not have been allowed to remain in the camp of Israel, and she was received again. Yet, Yahweh allowed her to live with the outward display of her inward heart for seven days – and allowed the whole nation to know it.Miriam's question 'has Yahweh indeed spoken only through Moses?' was a profound one.  It asked   How do we know what Yahweh wants? What ways does Yahweh speak to us? Who has authority over us? These questions are universal, asked by people of every place and era.Numbers 20:2 The people stayed in Kadesh (sanctuary); and Miriam died there and was buried there = Miriam died in Kadesh. Through the years of wandering in the wilderness, Israel came now to Kadesh. This is probably another place named Kadesh but presented to remind us of the failure of faith at the Kadesh of Numbers 13:26.Miriam, with her brothers Moses and Aaron, led the Hebrew people throughout the forty years when they reverted to the nomadic life, searching meanwhile for a land where they could settle.  The life they led was hard, and they must often have yearned for the stability and settled life they had left back in Egypt. Water was always scarce, the food supply was unreliable, and the physical living conditions were rigorous. Eventually these conditions took their toll on Miriam, and she died.  'The Israelites, the whole congregation, came into the wilderness of Zin in the first month, and the people stayed in Kadesh. Miriam died there, and was buried there.'  Water, the symbol of life, had played quite a large part in Miriam's life. She saved her brother from the water; she led the song of victory after the parting of the Red Sea; she died in a waterless place. Immediately after her death, Yahweh gave abundant water to the people, in the form of a spring. Unlike most women in the Bible, Miriam is never called wife or mother. She has neither husband nor children. Jewish traditions, however, cannot tolerate her status as single. The historian Josephus deems Hur the husband of Miriam (Antiquities 3.54; see Exod 17:10–12). Rabbinic sources give her Caleb for a husband and Hur for a son (but compare 1 Chr 2:19). Join me as we go Chapter by Chapter, Verse by Verse, Unraveling the Words of Yahweh!Have any questions? Feel free to email me; keitner2024@outlook.com

Rav Elchanan Wasserman's Chakirah: Does Chazal Uproot the Mitzvah—or Does It Still Exist?When Chazal tell us to refrain from fulfilling a Torah mitzvah through שב ואל תעשה, what exactly are they accomplishing?Did they actually remove the Torah obligation, leaving no mitzvah to perform? Or does the mitzvah remain fully intact, with Chazal merely instructing us not to fulfill it in that particular circumstance?This profound chakirah of Rav Elchanan Wasserman (Kovetz He'aros, Siman 69) reshapes the way we understand the authority of Chazal and the relationship between Torah law and Rabbinic enactments. Through classic examples such as shofar, lulav, and tzitzis, we'll uncover a fundamental machlokes that has far-reaching implications throughout Shas.A deep, elegant lomdus that changes the way you'll think about "יש כח ביד חכמים לעקור דבר מן התורה בשב ואל תעשה."

In Beyond Hope: Rabbinic Eschatology of Late Antiquity in Comparative Perspective (Oxford UP, 2026) Jenny Labendz addresses distinct patterns within rabbinic eschatology that have been overlooked in scholarship and in Jewish thought. Contrary to what is usually expected of eschatology, this book demonstrates that the rabbis held a sustained eschatology of irresolution. While the rabbis occasionally waxed poetic along the lines of a perfected new world in the eschaton, a vast store of rabbinic texts depicts a deeply imperfect eschaton. This is the profound difference between rabbinic and early Christian eschatology.Despite its differences from the Christian doctrine of perfection, rabbinic eschatology aligns neatly with a different Christian concept, namely inaugurated eschatology. The eschaton is not only be hoped for in the future, but can be attained in the present. The best of all possible worlds has not yet been entirely actualized, but it has been inaugurated, in the rabbinic view by the exodus from slavery in Egypt, the revelation of the Torah at Sinai, and the construction of the Tabernacle in the wilderness. This is a paradigm shift for thinking about rabbinic eschatology, which rejects the dogmas and binaries that generations of scholars have taken for granted. In this new book, Jenny Labendz explores the relationship between this world and the best possible world, the limits of that best possible world, and asks a crucially grounding question--what are we talking about when we're talking about the end of the world? Interviewee: Jenny R. Labendz received her PhD from the Jewish Theological Seminary in 2010 and was Associate Professor of Religious Studies at St. Francis College until 2025. She is also the author of Socratic Torah: Non-Jews in Rabbinic Intellectual Culture, published by Oxford University Press in 2013. Host: Schneur Zalman Newfield is an Associate Professor of Sociology and Jewish Studies at Hunter College, City University of New York, and the author of Brooklyn Odyssey: My Journey out of Hasidism and Degrees of Separation: Identity Formation While Leaving Ultra-Orthodox Judaism. Visit him online at ZalmanNewfield.com. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

In Beyond Hope: Rabbinic Eschatology of Late Antiquity in Comparative Perspective (Oxford UP, 2026) Jenny Labendz addresses distinct patterns within rabbinic eschatology that have been overlooked in scholarship and in Jewish thought. Contrary to what is usually expected of eschatology, this book demonstrates that the rabbis held a sustained eschatology of irresolution. While the rabbis occasionally waxed poetic along the lines of a perfected new world in the eschaton, a vast store of rabbinic texts depicts a deeply imperfect eschaton. This is the profound difference between rabbinic and early Christian eschatology.Despite its differences from the Christian doctrine of perfection, rabbinic eschatology aligns neatly with a different Christian concept, namely inaugurated eschatology. The eschaton is not only be hoped for in the future, but can be attained in the present. The best of all possible worlds has not yet been entirely actualized, but it has been inaugurated, in the rabbinic view by the exodus from slavery in Egypt, the revelation of the Torah at Sinai, and the construction of the Tabernacle in the wilderness. This is a paradigm shift for thinking about rabbinic eschatology, which rejects the dogmas and binaries that generations of scholars have taken for granted. In this new book, Jenny Labendz explores the relationship between this world and the best possible world, the limits of that best possible world, and asks a crucially grounding question--what are we talking about when we're talking about the end of the world? Interviewee: Jenny R. Labendz received her PhD from the Jewish Theological Seminary in 2010 and was Associate Professor of Religious Studies at St. Francis College until 2025. She is also the author of Socratic Torah: Non-Jews in Rabbinic Intellectual Culture, published by Oxford University Press in 2013. Host: Schneur Zalman Newfield is an Associate Professor of Sociology and Jewish Studies at Hunter College, City University of New York, and the author of Brooklyn Odyssey: My Journey out of Hasidism and Degrees of Separation: Identity Formation While Leaving Ultra-Orthodox Judaism. Visit him online at ZalmanNewfield.com. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/jewish-studies

In Beyond Hope: Rabbinic Eschatology of Late Antiquity in Comparative Perspective (Oxford UP, 2026) Jenny Labendz addresses distinct patterns within rabbinic eschatology that have been overlooked in scholarship and in Jewish thought. Contrary to what is usually expected of eschatology, this book demonstrates that the rabbis held a sustained eschatology of irresolution. While the rabbis occasionally waxed poetic along the lines of a perfected new world in the eschaton, a vast store of rabbinic texts depicts a deeply imperfect eschaton. This is the profound difference between rabbinic and early Christian eschatology.Despite its differences from the Christian doctrine of perfection, rabbinic eschatology aligns neatly with a different Christian concept, namely inaugurated eschatology. The eschaton is not only be hoped for in the future, but can be attained in the present. The best of all possible worlds has not yet been entirely actualized, but it has been inaugurated, in the rabbinic view by the exodus from slavery in Egypt, the revelation of the Torah at Sinai, and the construction of the Tabernacle in the wilderness. This is a paradigm shift for thinking about rabbinic eschatology, which rejects the dogmas and binaries that generations of scholars have taken for granted. In this new book, Jenny Labendz explores the relationship between this world and the best possible world, the limits of that best possible world, and asks a crucially grounding question--what are we talking about when we're talking about the end of the world? Interviewee: Jenny R. Labendz received her PhD from the Jewish Theological Seminary in 2010 and was Associate Professor of Religious Studies at St. Francis College until 2025. She is also the author of Socratic Torah: Non-Jews in Rabbinic Intellectual Culture, published by Oxford University Press in 2013. Host: Schneur Zalman Newfield is an Associate Professor of Sociology and Jewish Studies at Hunter College, City University of New York, and the author of Brooklyn Odyssey: My Journey out of Hasidism and Degrees of Separation: Identity Formation While Leaving Ultra-Orthodox Judaism. Visit him online at ZalmanNewfield.com. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/religion

In Beyond Hope: Rabbinic Eschatology of Late Antiquity in Comparative Perspective (Oxford UP, 2026) Jenny Labendz addresses distinct patterns within rabbinic eschatology that have been overlooked in scholarship and in Jewish thought. Contrary to what is usually expected of eschatology, this book demonstrates that the rabbis held a sustained eschatology of irresolution. While the rabbis occasionally waxed poetic along the lines of a perfected new world in the eschaton, a vast store of rabbinic texts depicts a deeply imperfect eschaton. This is the profound difference between rabbinic and early Christian eschatology.Despite its differences from the Christian doctrine of perfection, rabbinic eschatology aligns neatly with a different Christian concept, namely inaugurated eschatology. The eschaton is not only be hoped for in the future, but can be attained in the present. The best of all possible worlds has not yet been entirely actualized, but it has been inaugurated, in the rabbinic view by the exodus from slavery in Egypt, the revelation of the Torah at Sinai, and the construction of the Tabernacle in the wilderness. This is a paradigm shift for thinking about rabbinic eschatology, which rejects the dogmas and binaries that generations of scholars have taken for granted. In this new book, Jenny Labendz explores the relationship between this world and the best possible world, the limits of that best possible world, and asks a crucially grounding question--what are we talking about when we're talking about the end of the world? Interviewee: Jenny R. Labendz received her PhD from the Jewish Theological Seminary in 2010 and was Associate Professor of Religious Studies at St. Francis College until 2025. She is also the author of Socratic Torah: Non-Jews in Rabbinic Intellectual Culture, published by Oxford University Press in 2013. Host: Schneur Zalman Newfield is an Associate Professor of Sociology and Jewish Studies at Hunter College, City University of New York, and the author of Brooklyn Odyssey: My Journey out of Hasidism and Degrees of Separation: Identity Formation While Leaving Ultra-Orthodox Judaism. Visit him online at ZalmanNewfield.com. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/biblical-studies

In Beyond Hope: Rabbinic Eschatology of Late Antiquity in Comparative Perspective (Oxford UP, 2026) Jenny Labendz addresses distinct patterns within rabbinic eschatology that have been overlooked in scholarship and in Jewish thought. Contrary to what is usually expected of eschatology, this book demonstrates that the rabbis held a sustained eschatology of irresolution. While the rabbis occasionally waxed poetic along the lines of a perfected new world in the eschaton, a vast store of rabbinic texts depicts a deeply imperfect eschaton. This is the profound difference between rabbinic and early Christian eschatology.Despite its differences from the Christian doctrine of perfection, rabbinic eschatology aligns neatly with a different Christian concept, namely inaugurated eschatology. The eschaton is not only be hoped for in the future, but can be attained in the present. The best of all possible worlds has not yet been entirely actualized, but it has been inaugurated, in the rabbinic view by the exodus from slavery in Egypt, the revelation of the Torah at Sinai, and the construction of the Tabernacle in the wilderness. This is a paradigm shift for thinking about rabbinic eschatology, which rejects the dogmas and binaries that generations of scholars have taken for granted. In this new book, Jenny Labendz explores the relationship between this world and the best possible world, the limits of that best possible world, and asks a crucially grounding question--what are we talking about when we're talking about the end of the world? Interviewee: Jenny R. Labendz received her PhD from the Jewish Theological Seminary in 2010 and was Associate Professor of Religious Studies at St. Francis College until 2025. She is also the author of Socratic Torah: Non-Jews in Rabbinic Intellectual Culture, published by Oxford University Press in 2013. Host: Schneur Zalman Newfield is an Associate Professor of Sociology and Jewish Studies at Hunter College, City University of New York, and the author of Brooklyn Odyssey: My Journey out of Hasidism and Degrees of Separation: Identity Formation While Leaving Ultra-Orthodox Judaism. Visit him online at ZalmanNewfield.com. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/christian-studies

In this episode, Loraine Enlow chats with Pilar Rivett about Rivett's research on ninth-century baptismal and exorcistic rites and Jewish–Christian relations under Charlemagne and Louis the Pious. Their conversation challenges scholarly assumptions about a decline in the culture of diasporic Judaism in the Latin West in pre-Rabbinic times (4th–9th centuries). Instead, they argue in favor of a Latin Jewish textual tradition.For more information, visit www.multiculturalmiddleages.com.

The book of Deuteronomy has begun, and our people are as numerous as the stars in the sky. But Moses cries out, “Eikhah!” The famous heart-broken “how” that foreshadows the tragedies of Tisha B'Av. What mournful message does Moses see in the stars? And what, instead, can we learn from the dust?

The Rebbe's secretary encourages a student to pursue both teacher certification and rabbinic ordination, emphasizing the importance of official credentials for effective influence in Jewish education. He notes that such qualifications enhance respect and opportunities to spread Judaism. https://www.torahrecordings.com/rebbe/igroskodesh/017/010/6405

Do gentiles have to follow Rabbinic decrees? What is the law of the "dangling limb"?

There are different types of rabbinic legislation, but all of them are designed to raise our consciousness of Yirat Shamayim.Source Sheet

Welcome to a Jewish History Uncensored with Dr. Marc Shapiro. This season we are covering the story of Dr. Shapiro's most recent book–a collection of letters from some of the great Rabbinic figures of our day. The correspondences between Dr. Shapiro and these luminaries cover a wide array of fascinating topics. This is episode 44.For more information visit torahinmotion.org/podcastsTo support more thoughtful Jewish content like this, visit torahinmotion.org/donateBuy the book here: https://www.ebay.com/itm/372750487550

The letter clarifies that the Alter Rebbe did not intend to rule on whether prayer is a Torah or Rabbinic commandment, but rather to correct those who justify hurried prayer by claiming it is only Rabbinic. The focus is on the error of rushing through prayer. https://www.torahrecordings.com/rebbe/igroskodesh/012/007/4225

The Rebbe addresses whether Torah-observant Jews may join rabbinic organizations that include Reform or Conservative representatives. He explains this is not just about organizational participation, but a fundamental issue affecting the Jewish public's relationship to core Torah principles. https://www.torahrecordings.com/rebbe/igroskodesh/012/006/4162

Now that faith in Yeshua has come, believers are no longer under the 611 Laws of the Torah (Maimonides, a Jewish philosopher and Rabbinic scholar reinterpreted two of the laws to give 613). So, what do we as believers do with the Ten Commandments. If a person breaks one of the 611 commands, for example, eating ham, he/she is a law breaker guilty of breaking ALL the laws even the ten commandments although the ten commandments mentioning about ham. How can that be. The Law is one unit, not three as people have separated them. The Law for the believer in Yeshua has been rendered inoperative and according to Hebrew 8:13 is obsolete.

Welcome to a Jewish History Uncensored with Dr. Marc Shapiro. This season we are covering the story of Dr. Shapiro's most recent book–a collection of letters from some of the great Rabbinic figures of our day. The correspondences between Dr. Shapiro and these luminaries cover a wide array of fascinating topics. This is episode 44.For more information visit torahinmotion.org/podcastsTo support more thoughtful Jewish content like this, visit torahinmotion.org/donateBuy the book here: https://www.ebay.com/itm/372750487550

A cat or a weasel (chulda) renders a bird a treifa through clawing (derisa), whereas only a cat can do so for small cattle such as young goats and lambs. Other predatory birds besides those explicitly listed in the Mishna can also render other birds a treifa by clawing, but only when targeting birds smaller than themselves, while a hawk (netz) can do so even to birds of its own size. According to an alternate version, ordinary predatory birds can claw birds of their own size or smaller, whereas the hawk can even render birds larger than itself a treifa. Furthermore, two conflicting versions are presented regarding Rav Kahana's ruling in the name of Rav Shimi bar Ashi concerning foxes, debating whether or not they possess the capacity to render animals a treifa through clawing. Abaye limits the laws of derisa to the predator's front legs, specifying that it must be executed specifically with a claw and not with teeth, must be done with intent, and must occur while the prey is still alive. In a case where a lion was found among oxen and a dislodged claw was subsequently discovered on the back of one of the oxen, Rabba bar Rav Huna ruled in the name of Rav that there is no concern for derisa. He reasoned that while most lions do claw, their claws do not generally detach in the process; thus, it is more probable that the ox rubbed against a wall and accidentally picked up a nail embedded there. The Gemara initially rejects this argument, countering that while oxen frequently rub against walls, nails rarely stick to their backs in this manner, and since the lion remains a viable source, one should rule stringently. Ultimately, the Gemara concludes that because the logic can support either side, the ox retains its presumptive status of permissibility; as a matter of pure doubt, Rav remains consistent with his opinion stated elsewhere that we rule leniently in cases of uncertain clawing. Abaye restricts this leniency, clarifying that it only applies when an actual claw is found embedded rather than a mere mark, when the claw is moist rather than dry, and when there are only one, two, or three claws scattered at random rather than two or three found in a distinct row. Rav and Shmuel disagree on whether to rule leniently or stringently in cases of doubt regarding derisa. While both agree to rule leniently in certain scenarios, they dispute a case where a lion entered among oxen and the lion remained silent while the oxen were found bellowing in distress. Ameimar ruled stringently in accordance with Shmuel, either because he rejected Rav's view or because he believed Rav ultimately retracted his opinion, a shift suggested by a practical incident that occurred. Although several difficulties are raised regarding the specific details of that incident, they are successfully resolved. Rav Ashi similarly ruled leniently in a case of doubt. If there is a doubt as to whether an animal was clawed, the Gemara rules that one may inspect the internal areas of the carcass to see if redness has formed from the venom; if no redness is present, the animal is permitted. This testing method was originally stated by the sons of Rabbi Chiya, though Rav Yosef pointed out that Shmuel himself had already articulated this principle. This discussion leads the Gemara to a series of inquiries - some regarding the laws of clawing and others concerning unrelated laws of treifot - all of which were concisely resolved by an authority who declared that each question had already been answered by a prior Rabbinic statement.

A cat or a weasel (chulda) renders a bird a treifa through clawing (derisa), whereas only a cat can do so for small cattle such as young goats and lambs. Other predatory birds besides those explicitly listed in the Mishna can also render other birds a treifa by clawing, but only when targeting birds smaller than themselves, while a hawk (netz) can do so even to birds of its own size. According to an alternate version, ordinary predatory birds can claw birds of their own size or smaller, whereas the hawk can even render birds larger than itself a treifa. Furthermore, two conflicting versions are presented regarding Rav Kahana's ruling in the name of Rav Shimi bar Ashi concerning foxes, debating whether or not they possess the capacity to render animals a treifa through clawing. Abaye limits the laws of derisa to the predator's front legs, specifying that it must be executed specifically with a claw and not with teeth, must be done with intent, and must occur while the prey is still alive. In a case where a lion was found among oxen and a dislodged claw was subsequently discovered on the back of one of the oxen, Rabba bar Rav Huna ruled in the name of Rav that there is no concern for derisa. He reasoned that while most lions do claw, their claws do not generally detach in the process; thus, it is more probable that the ox rubbed against a wall and accidentally picked up a nail embedded there. The Gemara initially rejects this argument, countering that while oxen frequently rub against walls, nails rarely stick to their backs in this manner, and since the lion remains a viable source, one should rule stringently. Ultimately, the Gemara concludes that because the logic can support either side, the ox retains its presumptive status of permissibility; as a matter of pure doubt, Rav remains consistent with his opinion stated elsewhere that we rule leniently in cases of uncertain clawing. Abaye restricts this leniency, clarifying that it only applies when an actual claw is found embedded rather than a mere mark, when the claw is moist rather than dry, and when there are only one, two, or three claws scattered at random rather than two or three found in a distinct row. Rav and Shmuel disagree on whether to rule leniently or stringently in cases of doubt regarding derisa. While both agree to rule leniently in certain scenarios, they dispute a case where a lion entered among oxen and the lion remained silent while the oxen were found bellowing in distress. Ameimar ruled stringently in accordance with Shmuel, either because he rejected Rav's view or because he believed Rav ultimately retracted his opinion, a shift suggested by a practical incident that occurred. Although several difficulties are raised regarding the specific details of that incident, they are successfully resolved. Rav Ashi similarly ruled leniently in a case of doubt. If there is a doubt as to whether an animal was clawed, the Gemara rules that one may inspect the internal areas of the carcass to see if redness has formed from the venom; if no redness is present, the animal is permitted. This testing method was originally stated by the sons of Rabbi Chiya, though Rav Yosef pointed out that Shmuel himself had already articulated this principle. This discussion leads the Gemara to a series of inquiries - some regarding the laws of clawing and others concerning unrelated laws of treifot - all of which were concisely resolved by an authority who declared that each question had already been answered by a prior Rabbinic statement.

With the world becoming more fast-paced and information so readily available, how do you know when you can look up a halachic question yourself and when it is necessary to call a Rav?No need to wonder any longer! Enjoy this insightful two-part series on how to navigate this modern dilemma.This Week -Part Two: Discussion with Mrs. Esther Piekarski & Conclusion with Mrs. Bayla Blumstein

Danya Ruttenberg is a rabbi, writer, and activist who has been on the front-lines fighting for reproductive justice, through Jewish lenses, for many years. She joins Lex and Rena Yehuda for a conversation about abortion, the framework of bodily  autonomy, and how we might best conceptualize what it means to relate to these issues Jewishly. This episode is the 4th in an ongoing mini-series of Judaism Unbound episodes exploring Judaism through the framework of bodily autonomy. Access full shownotes for this episode via this link. If you're enjoying Judaism Unbound, please help us keep things going with a one-time or monthly tax-deductible donation -- support Judaism Unbound by clicking here! --------------Apply for the UnYeshiva's Certificate Program for Unbound Judaism by heading to www.judaismunbound.com/certificate! The final deadline to submit your application is June 14th.

Mindy Schaper is a unique personality. Not only did she volunteer a kidney to save the life of a young man whom she did not know, but she also volunteered as a surrogate mother, carrying the child of an Orthodox couple full-term … and she did this twice! So now you understand the title of this podcast. Mindy Schaper grew up Chassidic in Boro Park, Brooklyn and now identifies as Modern Orthodox. She is a writer and marketing project manager, with degrees in psychology, English and Judaic Studies She helped to found and run Project Makom, an organization that supports people transitioning out of or re‑orienting from the Haredi world and often seeking a place in the Modern Orthodox world. Her video about being an Orthodox Jewish surrogate ("Being an Orthodox Jewish (and Married!) Surrogate" explores the intersection of modern family-building and traditional Halacha. It highlights the profound cultural and religious considerations required, including navigating Kosher dietary laws during embryo transfers and receiving specific Rabbinic guidance on fertility treatments. Here is a LINK to the video. In our post-interview segment, we share results from our recent survey on the issue of how and why Modern / Centrist Orthodox and Haredi identify and define themselves. The findings are in our new study "Issues of the Day: Orthodox Jewish Community Views on Key Current Issues," which also covers: Our strengths and top challenges; Top issues that we need to better understand; Dialogue and relationships with non-orthodox Jews and with non-Jews; and an Update on modern / centrist orthodox attitudes toward women in shul leadership. Click HERE to access the full report; and click HERE to access all of the Orthodox community research.

With the world becoming more fast-paced and information so readily available, how do you know when you can look up a halachic question yourself and when it is necessary to call a Rav?No need to wonder any longer! Enjoy this insightful two-part series on how to navigate this modern dilemma.This Week -Part One: Rabbi Tuvia Kasimov

Welcome to a Jewish History Uncensored with Dr. Marc Shapiro. This season we are covering the story of Dr. Shapiro's most recent book–a collection of letters from some of the great Rabbinic figures of our day. The correspondences between Dr. Shapiro and these luminaries cover a wide array of fascinating topics. This is episode 43.For more information visit torahinmotion.org/podcastsTo support more thoughtful Jewish content like this, visit torahinmotion.org/donateBuy the book here: https://www.ebay.com/itm/372750487550

(2) James Tabor investigates the mysterious name "Pantera" (or Panta) found in early rabbinic sources, which refer to Jesus as "Yeshua bin Pantera." He explores historical evidence to determine if this was a family name or a specific individual, noting a Roman soldier's tombstone found in Germany belonging to Julius Abdes Pantera. While later critics used the name to suggest Mary was seduced by a soldier, Tabor posits a different historical possibility: Panteramay have been a Jewish youth and relative known to Mary's family who was later impressed into Roman military service.1492

Rabbi Chiya bar Abba recounts a discussion between Rabbi Ami and Rabbi Yochanan regarding the legal weight of a minor's intent. In the first version, the question is whether a minor's thoughts alone are significant. Rabbi Ami argues it is obvious they are not, citing a Mishna in Kelim 17:15. Rabbi Yochanan clarifies that the doubt applies when a minor's action reasonably demonstrates their intent, but not completely - such as moving an animal to the northern part of the Temple courtyard, the specific area for slaughtering burnt offerings. Rabbi Ami challenges this, noting that Rabbi Yochanan himself previously ruled in the context of ritual impurity that a minor's action is significant when the minor's intent is reasonably clear from the action. Rabbi Yochanan responds that his question was whether such actions are valid by Torah law or only by Rabbinic decree; the matter remains unresolved. Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak offers a different version of the discussion, focusing on whether a minor's actions are effective. This version concludes with Rabbi Yochanan distinguishing between three categories: actions with clear intent, actions with reasonably clear, but not completely clear intent, and intent without any accompanying action. Shmuel asks Rav Huna for the biblical source disqualifying sacrifices that were slaughtered without the specific intent to perform a slaughter (mitasek). The Mishna rules that meat slaughtered by a non-Jew is considered neveila (a carcass) and imparts impurity by carrying (masa). Rabbi Yochanan and Rabbi Ami draw different inferences from this. Rabbi Yochanan suggests the Mishna follows the Sages (against Rabbi Eliezer) in assuming that gentiles do not automatically slaughter for idolatrous purposes; if they did, the meat would be forbidden even for benefit. Rabbi Ami infers that the slaughter of a heretic (min), one who is a devout idol worshipped is strictly forbidden for any benefit, a position supported by a braita. The Gemara explains that we generally do not fear a gentile will slaughter for idolatry because they are typically not devout in their practice. However, a min is considered deeply dedicated to their worship, and their slaughter is presumed to be for an idol. Rav Nachman distinguishes between Jewish heretics and gentile heretics, showing more leniency toward the latter, though the Gemara clarifies this applies specifically to accepting their sacrifices. The shechita of one who slaughters in the dark or a blind person is accepted.

Welcome to a Jewish History Uncensored with Dr. Marc Shapiro. This season we are covering the story of Dr. Shapiro's most recent book–a collection of letters from some of the great Rabbinic figures of our day. The correspondences between Dr. Shapiro and these luminaries cover a wide array of fascinating topics. This is episode 42.For more information visit torahinmotion.org/podcastsTo support more thoughtful Jewish content like this, visit torahinmotion.org/donateBuy the book here: https://www.ebay.com/itm/372750487550

Rabbi Chiya bar Abba recounts a discussion between Rabbi Ami and Rabbi Yochanan regarding the legal weight of a minor's intent. In the first version, the question is whether a minor's thoughts alone are significant. Rabbi Ami argues it is obvious they are not, citing a Mishna in Kelim 17:15. Rabbi Yochanan clarifies that the doubt applies when a minor's action reasonably demonstrates their intent, but not completely - such as moving an animal to the northern part of the Temple courtyard, the specific area for slaughtering burnt offerings. Rabbi Ami challenges this, noting that Rabbi Yochanan himself previously ruled in the context of ritual impurity that a minor's action is significant when the minor's intent is reasonably clear from the action. Rabbi Yochanan responds that his question was whether such actions are valid by Torah law or only by Rabbinic decree; the matter remains unresolved. Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak offers a different version of the discussion, focusing on whether a minor's actions are effective. This version concludes with Rabbi Yochanan distinguishing between three categories: actions with clear intent, actions with reasonably clear, but not completely clear intent, and intent without any accompanying action. Shmuel asks Rav Huna for the biblical source disqualifying sacrifices that were slaughtered without the specific intent to perform a slaughter (mitasek). The Mishna rules that meat slaughtered by a non-Jew is considered neveila (a carcass) and imparts impurity by carrying (masa). Rabbi Yochanan and Rabbi Ami draw different inferences from this. Rabbi Yochanan suggests the Mishna follows the Sages (against Rabbi Eliezer) in assuming that gentiles do not automatically slaughter for idolatrous purposes; if they did, the meat would be forbidden even for benefit. Rabbi Ami infers that the slaughter of a heretic (min), one who is a devout idol worshipped is strictly forbidden for any benefit, a position supported by a braita. The Gemara explains that we generally do not fear a gentile will slaughter for idolatry because they are typically not devout in their practice. However, a min is considered deeply dedicated to their worship, and their slaughter is presumed to be for an idol. Rav Nachman distinguishes between Jewish heretics and gentile heretics, showing more leniency toward the latter, though the Gemara clarifies this applies specifically to accepting their sacrifices. The shechita of one who slaughters in the dark or a blind person is accepted.

In this episode of Hebrew Voices #244 - Daring To Be Different: Part 1, Nehemia brings on Tanakh-only teacher Israel Horowitz to discuss how ancient superstitions became the basis for Rabbinic laws, why arguments based on majority rule contradict the … Continue reading → The post Hebrew Voices #244 – Daring To Be Different: Part 1 appeared first on Nehemia's Wall.

The Gemara in Menachos 68b discusses a question Rav Tarfon asked in the Beis Midrash: why is a korban brought before the Omer passul while one brought before the shtei halechem, while not allowed, is kasher. After Yehuda bar Nechemia gave the correct answer, with a big smile, Rabbi Akiva told Yehuda that he'd be shocked if he would live out the year. And he didn't.This Shiur is a mix of Halacha and Hashkafa. First it analyzes the difference between a Korban brought before the Omer and one brought before the shtei halechem. Then it analyzes the story of Rabbi Akiva and Yehuda Ben Nechemia, and explains why he was deserving of death.

Sermon by Rabbinic Intern Rebecca Thau, “Show Love to Your Neighbor” April 24, 2026

Welcome to a Jewish History Uncensored with Dr. Marc Shapiro. This season we are covering the story of Dr. Shapiro's most recent book–a collection of letters from some of the great Rabbinic figures of our day. The correspondences between Dr. Shapiro and these luminaries cover a wide array of fascinating topics. This is episode 41.For more information visit torahinmotion.org/podcastsTo support more thoughtful Jewish content like this, visit torahinmotion.org/donateBuy the book here: https://www.ebay.com/itm/372750487550

Watch the Sneak Peek of this Support Team Study - A United Future: The New Messianic Generation - Part 2, where Nehemia continues his discussion with 20-year-old Messianic Bible teacher Max Bonilla about debating both Rabbinic and Christian positions, the … Continue reading → The post SNEAK PEEK! STS – A United Future: The New Messianic Generation – Part 2 appeared first on Nehemia's Wall.

The Shulhan Aruch, the authoritative code of Halacha, begins with the following instruction: "Yitgaber Ka'ari La'amod Ba'boker La'abodat Bor'o" – "One shall strengthen himself like a lion to arise in the morning for the service of his Creator." The fact that this Halacha opens the Shulhan Aruch shows us that waking early in the morning is a fundamental part of our religious responsibilities. In fact, this quality is what impressed Bilam when he attempted to place a curse upon Beneh Yisrael, compelling him to bless them, instead, as he exclaimed, "Hen Am Ke'labi Yakum" – "Behold, a nation that rises like a lion" (Bamidbar 23:24). Rashi explains this as a reference to the way Beneh Yisrael rise in the morning and immediately "pounce" to perform Misvot, putting on Tallit and Tefillin, and praying. Indeed, Rashi (Shemot 19:3) brings from the Midrash that each time Moshe Rabbenu climbed to the top of Mount Sinai, he did so early in the morning – "Kol Aliyotav Be'hashkama Hayu." Some explain this to mean that every spiritual "ascent" requires "Hashkama" – rising early. The path to spiritual greatness begins with waking up early in the morning. Abraham Abinu is likewise described on several occasions as rising early in the morning, because this is how he became great – by beginning his day early. Rav Eliyahu Lopian (1876-1970) was known for rising early every morning. When he was asked about this practice, he said that when he leaves this world, and will stand before the Heavenly Tribunal, he will be judged regarding his compliance with the Shulhan Aruch. He wanted to at least "pass" the first question – whether he complied with the Shulhan Aruch's very first ruling, that one should make an effort to get up early in the morning. If a businessman scheduled an early morning meeting with a prospective customer, and the potential deal was worth a million dollars, there is no question that he would be up at the crack of dawn and arrive early so he could be fully prepared with his sales pitch. The money at stake motivates the businessman to arise early. If we knew that the Misvot we perform each morning are worth many times more than any amount of money, bringing us eternal rewards, we would never think to sleep late. We would eagerly get out of bed and rush to perform the Misvot energetically and enthusiastically, as early as we could. People want to stay in bed and sleep late only if they don't have anything to wake up for. Once we acknowledge the inestimable value and worth of each and every Misva, we realize how much we have to do, and we then excitedly get out of bed early in the morning to get started. Rising early is also a crucial component of our ongoing struggle against the Yeser Ha'ra (evil inclination). The Sha'reh Tefila comments that just as when an army goes out to war, the first battle is the most important one because it sets the tempo and momentum for the rest of the war, our first battle with the Yeser Ha'ra each day similarly sets the tone for the rest of the daily "war" against it. The Yeser Ha'ra tries to convince us to remain in bed, and if we win this struggle and get up early, then we are in a better position to emerge victorious in our subsequent struggles with the Yeser Ha'ra throughout the day. Waking up early, then, helps us overcome all spiritual challenges that we encounter. The Hida (Rav Haim Yosef David Azulai, 1724-1806) cites his grandfather, the Hesed Le'Abraham (Rav Abraham Azulai, Hebron, d. 1643), as finding an allusion to this concept in the Gemara's famous teaching, "Ha'ba Le'horgecha, Hashkem Le'horgo" – "He who comes to kill you, arise to kill him." On the simple level, this means that one is allowed to kill a person who seeks to kill him. On a deeper level, however, "He who comes to kill you" refers to the Yeser Ha'ra, which seeks to spiritually kill us by leading us to sin. The Gemara teaches us, "Hashkem Le'horgo" – that we should arise early in the morning in order to defeat the Yeser Ha'ra. The way we eliminate our evil inclination is by waking early. This is alluded to also in G-d's pronouncement to the snake after it lured Adam and Hava to sin in Gan Eden: "Hu Yeshufcha Rosh, Ve'ata Teshufenu Akeb" (Bereshit 3:15). Literally, this means that human beings will kill the snake by stomping on its head, whereas the snake can strike the human being only by biting its foot. Additionally, however, "Hu Yeshufcha Rosh" means that the way we defeat the Yeser Ha'ra – which is symbolized by the snake – is through "Rosh," by waking up at the "head," or beginning, of the day. Conversely, the snake can defeat a person through "Akeb," the "heel," by convincing him to oversleep and get a late start to the day. The Torah says that when Abraham Abinu set out to fulfill the command of Akedat Yishak, he arose early in the morning and saddled his donkey ("Va'yashkem Abraham Ba'boker Va'yahavosh Et Hamoro" – Bereshit 22:3). The word "Hamor" ("donkey") is often interpreted as an allusion to "Homriyut," physicality, the animalistic tendencies within every person. Abraham succeeded in "saddling" and restraining his physical qualities by rising early in the morning. The Midrash comments that this donkey was the same donkey on which Moshe Rabbenu rode when he journeyed from Midyan to Egypt, and Mashiah will ride this same donkey when it arrives to redeem the Jewish People. The deeper meaning of the Midrash is that all great Sadikim – like Moshe Rabbenu and Mashiah – succeed in overcoming their physical tendencies by rising early in the morning, like Abraham Abinu did. The Ben Ish Hai (Rav Yosef Haim of Baghdad, 1833-1909), in Parashat Vayishlah, writes that the first half of the night – from nightfall to midnight – is called "Layil," whereas the period from midnight until sunrise is called "Layla" – the word "Layil" with the letter Heh added. This letter Heh signifies a higher level, indicating that this is a time of great spiritual potential. Accordingly, the Ben Ish Hai writes, the great Sadikim would go to sleep right at nightfall and then rise at Hasot to learn Torah until the early morning. The Ben Ish Hai notes that the letters of the word "Layla" (Lamed, Yod, Lamed, Heh) are the first letters of the words "Ha'ba Le'horgecha Yashkim Le'horgo" – alluding to the aforementioned teaching that the way we defeat and eliminate the Yeser Ha'ra is by rising early, and being awake during the "Layla," the second part of the night. Although nowadays we are not able to keep to this schedule, nevertheless, this demonstrates for us the importance of rising early in the morning. The Sages teach, "Kol Hat'halot Kashot" – "All beginnings are difficult," which means simply that any new undertaking is difficult at the outset, when a person gets started. However, Rav Haim Palachi (Turkey, 1788-1868) explained that this refers to the morning, the beginning of the day. Getting out of bed in the morning is difficult, but this is a challenge we must all work to overcome. Another reason to start the day early is that whenever we begin something new, it is critically important to start strong, as this builds a sturdy foundation for the rest of the undertaking. If the foundation of a structure is done improperly, the rest of the building will not be safe. Likewise, the beginning of any new project must be strong and sturdy for it to succeed. The Jewish Nation has succeeded because we are built on the strong foundation of our Abot (patriarchs) and Imahot (matriarchs), righteous men and women who laid the spiritual groundwork for Am Yisrael. This is true also of a new day – the stronger we start our day, the more likely we are to have an accomplished and successful day. We find numerous examples of this concept in our sources. Elisha Ben Abuya was an outstanding scholar, a Tanna, and the mentor of the great Rabbi Meir, but he ultimately lost his way and became a heretic, committing grievous sins such as desecrating Shabbat and even Yom Kippur. Different stories are told to explain how and why Elisha Ben Abuya abandoned the path of Torah observance. One story, told in the Talmud Yerushalmi, is that when he was a young child, his father showed him the great Sages of Israel, how their Torah study brought the fire of the Shechina into the home, and he said, "If you learn Torah, you can do amazing things like these Rabbis!" Since as a youngster Elisha was taught the message that he should learn Torah for self-serving motives, and not out of a sincere desire to serve Hashem, his educational foundations were shaky, and this allowed him to be led astray as an adult. Likewise, the Midrash comments that Noah was sharply reprimanded for planting a vineyard right after exiting the ark following the flood. As he set out to rebuild the earth, he should have begun with something more significant and meaningful than producing wine. The process was started on the wrong foot, as it were, on faulty foundations, and so Noah was criticized. This idea has also been developed in the context of the Hanukah story. As we know, the Gemara tells that the Hashmonaim, after driving the Greeks from Jerusalem, found only a small jug of pure oil with which to kindle the Menorah in the Bet Ha'mikdash, and this small quantity of oil miraculously sufficed for eight nights. The Peneh Yehoshua (Rav Yaakob Yehoshua Falk, Germany, 1680-1756) raises the question of why the Hashmonaim did not rely on the Halacha which permits performing the service in the Mikdash in a state of impurity if the entire nation is in such a state ("Tum'a Hutra Be'sibur"). After the Greeks had defiled the Bet Ha'mikdash, this leniency was certainly relevant and applicable, seemingly obviating the need to use specifically pure oil. The Peneh Yehoshua answered that the Hashmonaim did not wish to rely on Halachic leniencies as they inaugurated the Bet Ha'mikdash anew. They were now beginning a new chapter, restoring the service in the Bet Ha'mikdash after many years during which it could not be performed, and so they found it necessary to perform the service at the very highest standards, in order to set the tone for the years to come. They therefore refused to rely on the leniency of kindling the Menorah with impure oil. King Shlomo teaches in Kohelet (2:14), "He'hacham Enav Be'rosho" – "The wise man, his eyes are upon his head." The plain meaning of this verse is that a wise person looks at the potential outcome of his actions, and assesses potential risks before acting. Additionally, however, this verse has been understood to mean that a wise person focuses on the "head," on the beginning of his day, to ensure to start the day the right way, as this impacts the rest of the day. It is told that when Rav Shmuel Salant (1816-1909), the renowned Rabbi of Jerusalem, grew old, he decided to bring a Rabbi from Europe to assume his position, and the Rabbi chosen was the Aderet (Rav Eliyahu David Rabinowitz-Teomim, 1843-1905). Immediately upon the Aderet's arrival, Rav Salant brought him to officiate at a wedding to show the community their new leader. The Aderet was weary from the long, grueling trip, and so when the time came to recite the Beracha over the wine under the Huppa, he mistakenly recited "She'ha'kol" instead of "Ha'gefen." He immediately corrected himself, and recited "Ha'gefen." Afterward, people spoke about the Aderet with disdain, charging that he was ignorant of Halacha. It is well-known that although the proper blessing over wine is, of course, "Ha'gefen," one who mistakenly recited "She'ha'kol" over wine has fulfilled his obligation and does not then recite "Ha'gefen." There were those who claimed that the Aderet was unfit to serve as a Rabbinic leader, as he was unfamiliar with this simple Halacha. The Aderet explained that he certainly knew this Halacha, but he nevertheless recited "Ha'gefen" because he was reciting the blessing over the wine not only for himself, but also on behalf of the Hatan (groom), who was standing under the Huppa with his bride, prepared to begin their new life together. This new beginning, the Aderet explained, could not be built on a shaky foundation, using Halachic leniencies. It was important for the proper Beracha to be recited, even if the wrong Beracha would normally suffice after the fact, so that the marriage would begin on a strong foundation. While as a practical matter, one could question this line of reasoning, the basic concept is an important one – whenever we start something new, we must strive to begin as strongly as possible. We must therefore try hard to begin each day the right way, by waking early in the morning with energy and enthusiasm, ready to serve our Creator.

Source Sheet here: https://ikar.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/The-Song-and-The-Star.pdf Judaism greets our most powerful experiences of salvation and redemption with song and music. Using the lens of Franz Rosenzweig's Star of Redemption, we find music not only passively accompanying our experiences of the Divine, but also actively attuning us toward justice, bringing redemption to others and joy to God.

Welcome to Day 2824 of Wisdom-Trek. Thank you for joining me. This is Guthrie Chamberlain, Your Guide to Wisdom. Day 2824 – Great Deeds, Strong Faith, Big God – Luke 5:12-26   Putnam Church Message – 02/22/2026 Luke's Account of the Good News - “Great Deeds, Strong Faith, Big God.”    Last week, we continued our study of the ministry of Jesus Christ with a message titled “What It's Like to Fish With Jesus,” where we learned that fishing with Jesus looks nothing like fishing alone. Today, we continue with the thirteenth message in Luke's narrative of the Good News of Jesus Christ in a message titled “Great Deeds, Strong Faith, Big God.” Our Core verses for this week are Luke 5:12-26, found on page 1598 of your Pew Bibles. Follow along as I read. SCRIPTURE READING — Luke 5:12-26 (NIV)  Jesus Heals a Man With Leprosy 12 While Jesus was in one of the towns, a man came along who was covered with leprosy.[a] When he saw Jesus, he fell with his face to the ground and begged him, “Lord, if you are willing, you can make me clean.” 13 Jesus reached out his hand and touched the man. “I am willing,” he said. “Be clean!” And immediately the leprosy left him. 14 Then Jesus ordered him, “Don't tell anyone, but go, show yourself to the priest and offer the sacrifices that Moses commanded for your cleansing, as a testimony to them.” 15 Yet the news about him spread all the more, so that crowds of people came to hear him and to be healed of their sicknesses. 16 But Jesus often withdrew to lonely places and prayed. Jesus Forgives and Heals a Paralyzed Man 17 One day Jesus was teaching, and Pharisees and teachers of the law were sitting there. They had come from every village of Galilee and from Judea and Jerusalem. And the power of the Lord was with Jesus to heal the sick. 18 Some men came carrying a paralyzed man on a mat and tried to take him into the house to lay him before Jesus. 19 When they could not find a way to do this because of the crowd, they went up on the roof and lowered him on his mat through the tiles into the middle of the crowd, right in front of Jesus. 20 When Jesus saw their faith, he said, “Friend, your sins are forgiven.” 21 The Pharisees and the teachers of the law began thinking to themselves, “Who is this fellow who speaks blasphemy? Who can forgive sins but God alone?” 22 Jesus knew what they were thinking and asked, “Why are you thinking these things in your hearts? 23 Which is easier: to say, ‘Your sins are forgiven,' or to say, ‘Get up and walk'? 24 But I want you to know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins.” So he said to the paralyzed man, “I tell you, get up, take your mat and go home.” 25 Immediately he stood up in front of them, took what he had been lying on and went home praising God. 26 Everyone was amazed and gave praise to God. They were filled with awe and said, “We have seen remarkable things today.” Opening Prayer Father, we come before You aware that our vision of You is often too small. We confess that we shrink You down to the size of our schedules, our worries, and our expectations. Enlarge our vision today. Open our eyes to see Your authority, Your compassion, and Your power to forgive. Give us strong faith in a big God. Through Christ our Lord, Amen. When God Gets Too Small And it happens so subtly. / Israel had done it. / The Pharisees had done it. Even sincere believers can do it. By the time of Tiberius Caesar, Herod Antipas, Pontius Pilate, Annas, and Caiaphas, God had been reduced to a cosmic scorekeeper — tallying good deeds, deducting points for bad behavior, enforcing Sabbath rules, inspecting hand-washing rituals, policing technicalities. God had become predictable. / Manageable. / Containable. / Small. And then Jesus walked into their world — and suddenly God began growing again. Luke 5:12–26 is not merely about miracles. / It is about vision. / It is about authority. /It is about discovering that God is far bigger than we imagined. Today we see: • A great deed • Strong faith • A very big God And the question Luke leaves hanging over the entire scene is this: Will our vision of God expand… or will we shrink Him back down? Main Point One: A Big God Touches the Untouchable (Luke 5:12–16) Let's begin with the leper. Luke tells us: “In one of the villages, Jesus met a man with an advanced case of leprosy…” (Luke 5:12, NLT) Not a mild case. / Not a recent diagnosis. / “Advanced Case or Covered” — literally full of it. In the ancient world, leprosy was not just a medical condition. / It was social death. / It was religious exclusion. / It was isolation. Leviticus 13 required the leper to live outside the camp. / To cry out “Unclean!” / To avoid contact. |Imagine the loneliness. / Imagine the silence. / Imagine the years without touch. / He had likely not felt a human hand in years. And then he sees Jesus. And he falls on his face and says: “Lord, if You are willing, You can heal me and make me clean.” (12) Notice what he does not say. / He does not question Jesus' ability. / He questions His willingness. / Ability wasn't the problem. / Acceptance was. And perhaps that's where some of us live. / We don't doubt that God can. / We wonder if He will. / Or if He wants to. / Or if we are worth touching. And then Luke records something breathtaking. “Jesus reached out and touched him.” / He touched him!  / Jesus could have spoken the word from across the street. / He healed from miles away in John 4. / He commanded demons with a phrase. / But here — He touches. Why? Because the miracle was not only physical. / It was relational. / The leper didn't just need cleansing. / He needed restoration. / He needed to feel accepted. / And in that moment, God got bigger. / The Pharisees saw uncleanness. / Jesus saw a man. Ancient Perspective In Jewish thought, leprosy symbolized sin. / It was visible corruption. / Outward manifestation of inward decay. / When Miriam was struck with leprosy (Numbers 12), it was associated with rebellion. / When Naaman was cleansed (2 Kings 5), it was seen as divine mercy. Rabbinic tradition even said curing leprosy was as difficult as raising the dead. / In other words, this was beyond human ability. / Which is exactly where Jesus operates. Object Lesson — Hold up a glove. Without a hand inside, it is lifeless. / Shapeless. Useless. / But when a hand enters it — suddenly it moves, grasps, functions. The leper's life was like that glove. / Empty. / Isolated. / Untouchable. Until God entered his story. / The difference was not in the glove. / It was in the hand. Modern Analogy There are “lepers” today. / Not with skin disease. / But with stigma. / Addiction. Failure. / Public scandal. / Divorce. / Depression. / Bankruptcy. / Shame. Society and even some churches say: Keep your distance.  Jesus says:  Come here. Hebrews 4:15 reminds us: “We do not have a high priest who...