Special סליחות Program

Last night at Midway Jewish Center we commenced the practice of daily recitation of special prayers of repentance.  We began the evening with the viewing of the movie Outsourced.  I found this movie to be incredible when I first saw it only a few months ago but did not know what the deeper Jewish meaning was.  The next morning I realized that it could be a great way to examine our relationships in the framework of Martin Buber’s I:Thou/I:It rubric as found in his book I and Thou.  Here is my outline for the teaching:

Outline of Outsourced סליחות Program

1. Your computer is broken and you pick up your phone to dial the manufacturer of your computer. As you sit and wait for the answer, you hear the familiar ringing of the telephone. What goes on in your mind at that moment?
1. Are you thinking about what is happening in the place where the other side is ringing?
2. Are you making notes about what you hope to achieve with the phone call?
3. Are you getting disappointed that your computer is no longer malfunctioning at the moment?
4. Perhaps you are guessing where the voice on the other end of the phone is sitting?
5. Regardless the reality is that when we make such calls, we are not interested in getting to know somebody else.
1. This is a call for a utility, not for a metaphysical relationship.
2. You are calling only to achieve something: a working computer.
1. I once had a problem with a computer and so I called the manufacturer and the once on the other end (clearly from India) instructed me to format my hard-drive (erase everything). The anger I had for that person was immense. I created this image in my head of incompetence, I continuously was raging about how this person knew nothing.
1. This was for a good reason: I didn’t know him, and he did not know me
2. I only needed him to perform a task for me: get my computer working better. Without that, this interaction had no point.
6. With all of this in mind, we will begin our film. Keep these relationships in mind through the film.
1. Look for good paradigms of good relationships. And of bad relationships.
2. After the movie: “You saved my life.” “No, you saved mine.”
1. Discussion questions:
1. What was the most positive of relationships in the movie?
2. What was the most negative relationship in the movie?
3. What was the point at which Todd changed?
4. What is our “third eye” in regards to relationships?
2. Buber:
1. Martin Buber, a great Jewish philosopher in his greatest book, I and Thou, explains that humans have two ways of relating with the world:
1. I : It relationships
1. This is a relationship where the other person is a means to an end.
2. Utilitarian
3. At least one person is using the other side, but both could be using one another
4. The person is always “other,” from the opposite person or thing.
5. It is the same way that we relate to physical objects
1. We use them to derive benefit from them, and that is all. We contribute little to them.
6. The interactions with these relationships are called experiences, probably because of the usury implied by such a term.
1. In experiences people collect data, analyze it, classifies it and theorizes about it.
2. I : Though relationships
1. These are the relationships where both sides are communicating, and neither is the “other.”
2. We have commonality
3. We both feel a sense of gain and not just beneficial gain, but gaining and sense of appreciation.
4. These are not utilitarian, these are meaningful and thoughtful.
1. The other is not seen as a means to an end, but an end in and of itself.
5. The interactions in these are called encounters
1. We enter into a relationship with the Thou in these, and thus both the I and the Thou are transformed by this relationship.
2. We can apply this to God as well.
1. The goal is to have I:Thou relationships with God, but we often relegate such interactions to the realm of usury. Where is God when we are not desperate? Where are we when we do not “need” God immediately?
1. Read arguments for coming to shul or belonging to a community, it is all about when the need arises.
2. How can we assure we encounter God and not just experience?
3. At this time of the year we need to look at ourselves and our relationships, both בין אדם לחבירו and בין אדם למקום. How are we doing? How can we do better?
1. Are we the corporation?
2. Are we Todd and Puro, or Todd and Asha?
3. How are we doing?

 

I also put together some סליחות resources for people to use over the coming weeks… Here they are:

Some resources to examine our relationships with...

סליחות 5770

משנה מסכת סנהדרין פרק ד משנה ה

משנה. כיצד מאיימין את העדים? על עידי נפשות, היו מכניסין אותן ומאיימין עליהן: שמא תאמרו מאומד ומשמועה, עד מפי עד, ומפי אדם נאמן. שמא אי אתם יודעין שסופנו לבדוק אתכם בדרישה ובחקירה. הוו יודעין שלא כדיני ממונות דיני נפשות. דיני ממונות ־ אדם נותן ממון ומתכפר לו, דיני נפשות ־ דמו ודם זרעותיו תלויין בו עד סוף העולם, שכן מצינו בקין שהרג את אחיו, שנאמר (בראשית ד׳) דמי אחיך צעקים, אינו אומר דם אחיך אלא דמי אחיך ־ דמו ודם זרעותיו. דבר אחר: דמי אחיך ־ שהיה דמו מושלך על העצים ועל האבנים. לפיכך נברא אדם יחידי, ללמדך שכל המאבד נפש אחת מישראל ־ מעלה עליו הכתוב כאילו איבד עולם מלא, וכל המקיים נפש אחת מישראל ־ מעלה עליו הכתוב כאילו קיים עולם מלא. ומפני שלום הבריות, שלא יאמר אדם לחבירו אבא גדול מאביך, ושלא יהו המינים אומרים: הרבה רשויות בשמים. ולהגיד גדולתו של הקדוש ברוך הוא, שאדם טובע כמה מטבעות בחותם אחד ־ כולן דומין זה לזה, ומלך מלכי המלכים הקדוש ברוך הוא טבע כל אדם בחותמו של אדם הראשון ־ ואין אחד מהן דומה לחבירו. לפיכך כל אחד ואחד חייב לומר: בשבילי נברא העולם. ושמא תאמרו מה לנו ולצרה הזאת? והלא כבר נאמר (ויקרא ה׳) והוא עד או ראה או ידע אם לוא יגיד וגו׳. ושמא תאמרו: מה לנו לחוב בדמו של זה? והלא כבר נאמר (משלי י״א) באבד רשעים רנה.

Mishnah. How were the witnesses inspired with awe? Witnesses in capital charges were brought in and intimidated [thus]: perhaps what ye say is based only on conjecture, or hearsay, or is evidence from the mouth of another witness, or even from the mouth of a trustworthy person: perhaps ye are unaware that ultimately we shall scrutinize your evidence by cross examination and inquiry? Know then that capital cases are not like monetary cases. In civil suits, one can make monetary restitution and thereby effect his atonement; but in capital cases he is held responsible for his blood [sc. The accused] and the blood of his [potential] descendants until the end of time, for thus we find in the case of Cain, who killed his brother, that it is written: the bloods of thy brother cry unto me: not the blood of thy brother, but the bloods of thy brother, is said — i.e., his blood and the blood of his [potential] descendants. (alternatively, the bloods of thy brother, teaches that his blood was splashed over trees and stones.) For this reason was man created alone, to teach thee that whosoever destroys a single soul of Israel, scripture imputes [guilt] to him as though he had destroyed a complete world; and whosoever preserves a single soul of Israel, scripture ascribes [merit] to him as though he had preserved a complete world. Furthermore, [he was created alone] for the sake of peace among men, that one might not say to his fellow, ‘my father was greater than yours, and that the minim might not say, there are many ruling powers in heaven; again, to proclaim the greatness of the holy one, blessed be he: for if a man strikes many coins from one mould, they all resemble one another, but the supreme king of kings, the holy one, blessed be he, fashioned every man in the stamp op the first man, and yet not one of them resembles his fellow. Therefore every single person is obliged to say: the world was created for my sake. Perhaps ye will say: why should we incur this anxiety? [know then:] is it not already written, and he being a witness, whether he hath seen or known, if he do not utter it? And should ye say: why should we bear guilt for the blood of this [man]: — surely, however, it is said, when the wicked perish, there is joy!

Listen... Really Listen

As a young scholar, Martin Buber (1878-1965), author of I and Thou, the classic philosophic work on the importance of dialogue and communication, was hard at work editing a mystical text when his doorbell rang. An anxious and distraught young man asked if he could speak with Buber, who invited the man inside and answered the questions he asked. But, as he later confided, he was anxious to return to his work, and "I didn't try to answer the questions he didn't ask."

A short time later, Buber learned that the man had died, apparently a suicide. "Later... not long after, I learned from one of his friends that he had come to see me not casually, but borne by destiny, not for a chat but for a decision." The meeting's unhappy aftermath changed Buber forever. From then on, he concluded, encounters with people must take precedence over scholarship and mystical speculation.

Today, and throughout the week, when somebody seeks you out in person or over the telephone, listen. While he or she is speaking, stay focused; don't let your mind wander to other subjects, or to personal concerns.

Listen—really listen.

(Source: The Book of Jewish Values: A day by day guide to ethical living, by Rabbi Joseph Telushkin)

Do You Love Me???

The Chasidic rebbe Moshe Leib of Sassoz (1745-1807), claimed to have learned the meaning of love from a peasant who was sitting near him in a tavern. "He was sitting in an inn along with other peasants, drinking. For a long time he was as silent as all the rest, but when he was moved by the wine, he asked one of the men seated beside him, “Tell me, do you love me or don't you love me?” The other replied, “I love you very much.” But the first peasant replied, “You say that you love me, but you do not know what I need. If you really loved me, you would know.” The other had not a word to say to this, and the peasant who had put the question fell silent again. But I understood. To know the needs of men and to bear the burden of their sorrow, that is the true love of men. "

(as retold by Martin Buber)