Recap for 28 Lyyar, 5776 (Parsha Bechukotai and Torah v'Derech Eretz)

This Shabbos we discussed material on the topic of Torah v’Derech Eretz, from the book Sha’arei Talmud Torah, by Leo Levy.  We discussed parsha Bechukotai, including commentary from Rav Yeager.   This Shabbos we welcome back Yaki and Bryan Itkowitz.  David Schlesinger led discussion.

We discussed how Derech Eretz means the “ways of the world”, and refers to the physical world, and how the world works – from the secular point of view.  We discussed how Torah v’Derech Eretz fits into a modern orthodox life, in which we believe that Torah is most important, however we engage in the physical world as a way to apply spirituality, and also to make sure we make enough of a living to pay for necessities such as food, clothing, and housing.

David spoke about Dr. Leo Levy, who was a colleague of David’s dad, Dr. Rav George Schlesinger.   Yehuda "Leo" Levy was a physicist who believed in the teaching and training of professionals in the work force in parallel to Torah study.  In 1981 Dr. Levy published his book, Sha’arei Talmud Torah, which we discussed at our Kiddush.

We discussed from the book, the idea that we should only engage in work that is purely physical, to the point that we earn enough to take care of our basic needs, such as food, shelter, clothing, etc. etc.  Then we should expend the remainder of our energy engaged in Torah study.  We discussed that sometimes what we do for a living may give us great opportunity to apply spirituality, so it is not always so clear cut.  There is also practical applications, in that it may not be possible to vary how many hours we work per week, especially if we work for an employer who expects us to put in a set number of hours.

We discussed that the most optimal situation in life, is that of a balance between working for a living and Torah study.   We discussed why either extreme is not ideal.  For example, there is a tendency as we get further and further away from Mt. Sinai to forget about Torah and simply engage in physicality.  David shared how his Dad would say getting further and further away from Torah, is like music going from Mozart to that of pop artist such as Michael Jackson.  This is not good because over time we can lose touch with why Hashem created physicality, which is to apply spirituality.  I 

On the other hand, we discussed how the other extreme is not optimal either.  If we stop working, it is hard to engage in Torah study because we are constantly worried about how we will get enough money to buy our next meal.  However, we discussed that as a community we may decide to certain members will engage full time in Torah study, and then we make sure to provide for their needs.

Rob gave a Dvar Torah, about the infinite value of human life, and how this applies to Jewish law.  Rob also shared about how Judaism views the value of the human body.  Rob shared that the most amazing creation of Hashem is the human body.  We often see beauty in nature, but 

we should also see it in our own bodies.

This Shabbos we discussed parsha Bechukotai, including commentary from Rav Yeager.  In the parsha we are presented again with the opportunity to accept or reject the Torah and make or not make an agreement with Hashem.  In this agreement, it is laid out what will happen if we do our best to follow Hashem’s commandments, and what will happen if we do not.  We discussed that in order to be valid, consequences that are conditional must include the converse as well.

We discussed how at Mt. Sinai we were “infants”, and did not have the capability to go over the pros and cons of accepting the Torah, so we were pretty much forced to do so.  Later on at the time of parsha Bechukotai, we had “grown up” to the point that we could appreciate more mature reasons for accepting the Torah, and this time Hashem wanted us to know more of the details.

Finally, Brett mentioned that Hashem only gives us what we can handle.  I am not sure this is true, but it certainly helps to believe things can be handled and Hashem is with us.

This is a summary of what we discussed.  No halachic rulings are intended or should be inferred.