A thought about parshat Pinchas:
Jewish tradition teaches that Pinchas has been reincarnated as Elijah the Prophet, aka the Angel of the Circumcission, who attends all jewish baby boys on the day of their bris.
I thought that perhaps the very name of 'Pinchas' might hint at that. In Hebrew, פנחס which might be spelled with or without letter yod, can be understood as two words ''Pen Chas'', פן חס
which literally means ''lest he has mercy''.
Talmud teaches that those who err in being (inappropriatelly) merciful in situation where strict justice is required will err by being inappropriatelly CRUEL when mercy is called for.
As his parshat teaches, Pinchas had the foresight to stop the moral corruption and the literal spread of the plague, by being ''cruel'' when strict judgement was called for~ he struck the publicly sinning Zimri ben Salu.
Pinchas' failure to be 'cruel' would result in a lot greater 'cruelty' of the plague being spread among Israel. Hence the name ''Pinchas'' understood as פן חס
''lest he be merciful'' is uniquely appropriate.
Talmudic advice is that if someone has unhealthy penchant for blood, he should channel it PRODUCTIVELLY in permitted manner and become a mohel, a butcher or a doctor, etc.
Hence Pinches' ''rebirth'' as Elijah the angel attending boys' circumcission might be said to channel his 'lack of mercy' into perpetual attending of Brit Milahs!
Perhaps we might learn a lesson from the names of Zimri ben Salu as well, as he was ''prunned'' (-zemer)(cut off) before his time, rather than being able to bring Hashem glory.
His Midianite consort too has a telling name, Kozbi bat Tzur literally means ''liar daughter of enemy''....
Saturday, July 7, 2018
Thursday, July 5, 2018
Judaism vs Hinduism & Buddhism
•Hinduism-Buddhism vs. Judaism•
Depending on whose interpretation we follow, Hinduism can be seen as mono- or POLY-theism.
Hinduism isn't as structured as Judaism- there is no hierarchy of ''written'' vs. rabbinically transmitted laws.
In Hinduism all is loosely transmitted orally from some unnamed sages from the past, and has been gradually comitted into writing. But Hindu scriptures aren't clearly ''divine'' and there is no clear theology about the nature of divinity and its relationship to the world.
♦There certainly exists thousands of 'deities' in Hinduism; however not everyone accepts them as 'gods'.
✡☯ The Brahmanism school of Hinduism (or at least its BRANCH)- accepts the judaic concept of infinite benevolent Creator who sustains our universe.
Both Brahmanism and Judaism accepts the concept of 'samsara' and 'karma', the belief that out deeds shape the path of our soul in the world to come.
The cycle of rebirth in Judaism is called ''gilgul neshamot'' (cycling of the souls). Buddhist/Hindu tradition calls it ''samsara''. The deeds which shape our cycle are called ''karma''.
Soul, ''neshama'' or ''nefesh'' in Hebrew, is called ''atman'' in hindu/buddhist tradition.
★From my studies and my conversations with various buddhists, there is great disagreement in Buddhism about the nature and existence of a Creator or human soul.
I couldnt get a clear answer how is a cycle of rebirth possible if there is no immortal soul. No buddhist was able to explain that.
(I guess it might be compared to Xtian concept of trinity- nobody can make it sound logical, no matter how hard they try)
Since 'samsara' in buddhism means that the ''atman'' (soul) becomes karmically lowered or elevated, depending on our deeds, it is difficult to accept that Buddhism doesnt accept the existence of Creator who draws close to goodness and repels evil.
Buddhists just answer that they ''don't focus on the 'Source', but on the ''true objective reality'' of the present. True pragmatists 😐
★Buddhists are very divided and unclear HOW we are karmically reborn if there is no soul. And how exactly does the universe ''know'' who should be reborn on which level.
Another issue I have with buddhism is the FOCUS and PURPOSE of their meditations. If there is nothing 'permanent' in the universe, what exactly is being 'reborn'?
And if everything is ''illusive'' and ''impermanent'', why waste time in meditation, sitting on our tuches? If the present is all we have, why not enjoy life to the fullest?
Yet Buddhists insist on living the ''right'' life (dharma) and on avoiding violence (ahimsa).....🙄
I know i'm simplyfiing a very old and complex school of thought here, but I'm trying to focus on certain core issues, as I see them.
★Why would the ''universe'' care how karmically correct our actions are, if there is no god/s?
Therefore the Hindu Brahmanistic approach seems to me as a religious Torah Jew, most congruent with Judaism.
What doesbJudaism add to the Brahmanist school of thought, in my view, is: a clarity of purpose, and clearly defined laws: what exactly G-od expects from us, and how to achieve it.
♠Buddhism suggests we live a ''right'' ''nonviolent'' life. Yet they don't go into details how to reconcile unavoidable moral dilemas and ''forks on the road''.
While there are many conflicting opinions in judaism as well, at least there is a certainty of the Source of the Divine word, and there is a clear distinction about the nature of written Torah and of rabbinical interpretation or precaution.
°°°°°°
in my opinion, in christianity there is similiar nebulous disagreement and confusion about the nature of the scriptures, and the purpose of the law....
Depending on whose interpretation we follow, Hinduism can be seen as mono- or POLY-theism.
Hinduism isn't as structured as Judaism- there is no hierarchy of ''written'' vs. rabbinically transmitted laws.
In Hinduism all is loosely transmitted orally from some unnamed sages from the past, and has been gradually comitted into writing. But Hindu scriptures aren't clearly ''divine'' and there is no clear theology about the nature of divinity and its relationship to the world.
♦There certainly exists thousands of 'deities' in Hinduism; however not everyone accepts them as 'gods'.
✡☯ The Brahmanism school of Hinduism (or at least its BRANCH)- accepts the judaic concept of infinite benevolent Creator who sustains our universe.
Both Brahmanism and Judaism accepts the concept of 'samsara' and 'karma', the belief that out deeds shape the path of our soul in the world to come.
The cycle of rebirth in Judaism is called ''gilgul neshamot'' (cycling of the souls). Buddhist/Hindu tradition calls it ''samsara''. The deeds which shape our cycle are called ''karma''.
Soul, ''neshama'' or ''nefesh'' in Hebrew, is called ''atman'' in hindu/buddhist tradition.
★From my studies and my conversations with various buddhists, there is great disagreement in Buddhism about the nature and existence of a Creator or human soul.
I couldnt get a clear answer how is a cycle of rebirth possible if there is no immortal soul. No buddhist was able to explain that.
(I guess it might be compared to Xtian concept of trinity- nobody can make it sound logical, no matter how hard they try)
Since 'samsara' in buddhism means that the ''atman'' (soul) becomes karmically lowered or elevated, depending on our deeds, it is difficult to accept that Buddhism doesnt accept the existence of Creator who draws close to goodness and repels evil.
Buddhists just answer that they ''don't focus on the 'Source', but on the ''true objective reality'' of the present. True pragmatists 😐
★Buddhists are very divided and unclear HOW we are karmically reborn if there is no soul. And how exactly does the universe ''know'' who should be reborn on which level.
Another issue I have with buddhism is the FOCUS and PURPOSE of their meditations. If there is nothing 'permanent' in the universe, what exactly is being 'reborn'?
And if everything is ''illusive'' and ''impermanent'', why waste time in meditation, sitting on our tuches? If the present is all we have, why not enjoy life to the fullest?
Yet Buddhists insist on living the ''right'' life (dharma) and on avoiding violence (ahimsa).....🙄
I know i'm simplyfiing a very old and complex school of thought here, but I'm trying to focus on certain core issues, as I see them.
★Why would the ''universe'' care how karmically correct our actions are, if there is no god/s?
Therefore the Hindu Brahmanistic approach seems to me as a religious Torah Jew, most congruent with Judaism.
What doesbJudaism add to the Brahmanist school of thought, in my view, is: a clarity of purpose, and clearly defined laws: what exactly G-od expects from us, and how to achieve it.
♠Buddhism suggests we live a ''right'' ''nonviolent'' life. Yet they don't go into details how to reconcile unavoidable moral dilemas and ''forks on the road''.
While there are many conflicting opinions in judaism as well, at least there is a certainty of the Source of the Divine word, and there is a clear distinction about the nature of written Torah and of rabbinical interpretation or precaution.
°°°°°°
in my opinion, in christianity there is similiar nebulous disagreement and confusion about the nature of the scriptures, and the purpose of the law....
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)