Woody Allen on Faith, Fortune Tellers and New York By DAVE ITZKOFF
See comments for article.
1. Anne has impressed me over the years as being a person of substance, thoughtfulness and true spirituality. Check out her latest post - pictures of our planet included.

It's almost six complete years since I started this blog. It's almost fifteen full years that I've been working at the same place. It's almost a year since mom died.
A pretty well known medrash explains the connection between the end of VaYeira and the start of Chayei Sarah: Satan appeared to Sarah and told her that Avraham brought Yitzchak to be sacrificed. Before he reached the story's end, she died of shock. There is another, lesser-known version of the same medrash in which Yitzchak himself comes and tells Sarah what happened, and she dies from the shock.
..
In the storyline that has Yitzchak appearing before Sarah, we must wonder what caused Sarah’s fatal shock. Aviva Zornberg suggests that according to this account of the Medrash, what affected Sarah was a sudden confrontation with the stark realization of the fragility of our lives. In this telling of the tale, Sarah realizes that "were it not for the angel" Yitzchak would have been killed. According to this approach the connection between Akeidat Yitzchak and Sarah’s passing is the precariousness of life. Yitzchak's close call with death overwhelmed Sarah with such an unbearable existential angst that it took her life..
Many of us know of other human beings that were here one second and gone the next. Deep down, we also all know that every second we breathe could be our last one. A lesson of the Akeida is the message that the physical world in which we exist is temporal in nature. Yitzchak's near death experience, that so shocked Sarah, serves as a reminder to us that we lack ultimate control over our lives. May we all be blessed to utilize our awareness of the delicate nature of life as a motivation to do teshuva and to constantly grow in our closeness to G-d.
Today while waiting for the bus outside of work, a young Latino American fellow who had walked over from the community college a mile away (and it turns out, lives a few blocks away from me) asked me about where the bus stops. I was reminded of Nechama's example in class, which she used to explain what pshat - simple meaning of words means. She said that if two people are standing for a while at a bus stop and one turns to the other and says, "It sure is hot, isn't it?" and the other one answers yes, then he's misunderstood the question. We talked. And it was good.
It is hard to be judged at such a young age- before you have gained real life experience. OTOH, he has enough money that this won't prevent him from living his life the way that he wants to.
As my friend Rabbi Jon Gross likes to tell people I like reading bios of stars. I like strong voices, clear characters. And I like humor. I read Newhart's book cover to cover, same with Steve Martin and Paul Shaffer. I've tried a lot of fiction that I couldn't make it through. Since I read the Al Jaffee book I haven't had a great relationship with a book. Maybe I should keep seeking and reading non-fiction as it seems to work for me. Do what works? Really?

Breishit 17: 9-15
Shoppers were waiting in line at the supermarket. Suddenly a young man with only one item hurriedly tried to pay for it. "You don't mind if I just pay for this one can of dog food do you?" he asked the woman at the head of the line.
By Rabbi Neil Fleischmann
“God said to Avram:
Lech lecha - go forth from your land,
and from your birthplace,
and from your father’s house
to the land which I will show you.”
[Gen. 12:1]
Lech Lechah, G-d said
Why is Avram (not yet re-named Avraham) told that he must leave country, birthplace, and his father’s home to get to God’s land? The order seems backwards. When heading out, a person first leaves home, and then community and finally country. This question was posed early on by the Ramban.
In light of the ecological approach to social work, as described by John T. Pardeck, the meaning is clear. Abraham was to work his way through the concentric circles that influenced him in life. He had to travel through the worlds that enveloped him. The world that most tightly wraps itself around us is the world of family. Our city of birth affects us greatly, but not as much as our home environment. Finally, we are affected by our country’s general environment. God advises Abraham to deal with these influences in the order progressing from what affected him least strongly to that which affected him the most. Only after sifting through these worlds could he arrive at the
Through letting go of attachments that are more distant we are able to let go of what is closest to our hearts. It is not simply that one circle is harder to leave than the other, but that each realm must be conquered before one can undertake the next quest. Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch points out that the three places Abraham is told to leave are followed in the Torah’s cantillation by an etnachtah — a pause. As he puts it, “This indicates that ‘lech lecha’ is an independent command concluding with the last of the three places he must exit.” As Aviva Zornberg writes, “The imperative of transformation is the driving force of ‘lech lecha.’"
The Sfat Emet and the Zohar explain that Abraham’s mission was to travel through the layers that separated him from his real self.
Abraham was told to go to a place that is described as “the land that God will show you.” This can also mean the land in which God will show Himself to Abraham, the place where Abraham would reach his spiritual peak. Each place that’s listed is described as a separate place he had to leave. Rather than grouping “country, birthplace, home,” the Torah goes out of its way to place an “and” between each place: “Go out of your land and out of your birthplace and out of your father’s home.” This indicates that what is commanded here is a spiritual leaving with separate and distinct stages. Abraham was, according to most opinions, told to leave his birthplace when he was no longer physically situated in the place where he was born. He started the journey before God commanded him, but he had to start out again to re-birth himself and complete the trip for the sake of Heaven.
The Sfat Emet says that the call of lech lecha, to become oneself, is a call that went out to the entire world, but not everyone was tuned into the frequency. Though it was there for all to hear, only one person heard God’s voice. The fact that Abraham heard the call is what singled him out, and this provides the introduction to who he was. This explains why there is no back-story provided about Abraham as there is for others, such as Adam and Moshe. His hearing God’s urgent cry of lech lecha provides the entire introduction that we need about who this man was.
May we all be blessed — in the spirit of maaseh avot siman lebanim, “the actions of the fathers pave the way for the children” — to fulfill our imperative of lech lecha, to go to ourselves, to become our selves, and to arrive in the
Hunger confounds us
Brings back man’s first mistake
Eating the wrong food
Pain is in your head
But when the head is what hurts
It gets confusing
We beseech G-d to "sound the great shofar toward our redemption."
If a friend woke me in the middle of the night and asked me to share a Dvar Torah on Parshat Noach, I’d probably come out with the one about whether or not Noach would have been an even greater tzadik, or not such a tzadik at all if he'd lived in Avraham’s generation. This is also an easy and popular route for a pulpit rabbi to take: Step One – Read pasuk aloud, Step Two – Read Rashi aloud, Step Three – Pause meaningfully, Step Four - Connect with current events.
The pivot of this famous Rashi on Noach is the word “bedorotav.” Noach was referred to as a tzadik in his generation. In addressing this curious description, the rabbis go in two directions. One approach says that he was a tzadik in his generation, because he was the most righteous man in unrighteous times, but if he’d have lived at the same time as a righteous man such as Avraham, he’d have paled in comparison. The medrash presents an analogy of a small coin that is valuable compared to lesser coins, but put next to a currency of greater worth it becomes inconsequential. The other take is that if Noach acted nobly in a lowly generation how much more so would he have shined as a hero had he lived in the same time as an Avraham. The medrash compares this to a girl that was born into brothels and rises above the immorality that surrounds her.
The problem with the discussion about what Noach would have been like in Avraham’s generation is that the two men were alive at the same time. If you do the math that’s given in the Torah itself it becomes clear that Avraham and Noach overlapped for 58 years (easy to remember because it’s the gematriah of Noach).
Why does the Medrash cited by Rashi say that Noach and Avraham were not in the same generation? This is, in fact, based on the text of the Torah. Right after the flood the Torah states that Noach dies. He lived for three and a half more centuries! The text is teaching us that Noach was not involved in society, and thus even though he was technically alive, he was not considered as living in the same generation as Avraham. Though he was technically alive, Noach was all but buried.
The positive and negative views of Noach each base themselves on the same word bedorotav. This reflects the idea that Noach’s greatest positive and negative qualities stemmed from the same source. This fits with the commentary of the Ran (Breishit 6:9-12) who takes the common conception of Noach as a “Tzadik in Peltz” – someone who kept solely to himself and turns it on its head. The Ran says that Noach’s generation was so far-gone that he did the right thing. He explains that the secret of Noach’s righteousness is revealed to us in the words “et haElokim hithalech Noach – Noach walked with G-d.” The word “et” connotes a direct connection to G-d, while implying a total separation from the people of his time. The fact that this behavior is described immediately following the statement that Noach was righteous and pure teaches us that the method through which he achieved righteousness and purity during his life before the mabul.
After the flood Noach continued using the same modus operandi that he employed beforehand. A new approach was called for at this time. Because he separated himself from society in the era following the flood Noach was unable to help others during this time of his life. Furthermore, this time around his approach sadly led Noach to his own decline in status. After the flood there was a chance for a new beginning but this new start called for outreach. Instead of relating with others Noach cocooned, just as he had done before the flood. What was strength became weakness.
It is often the case that people use one approach to survive at one stage of their lives. But later in life they need to move on from this approach and have trouble doing so. What leads to success at one time can lead to failure in another context. A therapist friend tells me that therapy is often about getting someone to halt a behavior that once saved his or her life, but is now restricting them from moving forward in life. For example if someone – G-d forbid – was abused when they were young they may learn to protect themselves by being very private. However when they enter the broader world of relationships, community, and work they need to learn to trust people and not be so secretive.
May we all be blessed to cultivate our strengths at the various stages of our lives.
May we all be blessed to cultivate our appropriate strengths and not allow them to morph into fatal flaws.
(The essence of this piece is based on the thought of Rabbi Yitzchak Twersky)
7:03 PM - I am not a Jim Carrey fan, nor a Batman fan. Yet a scene in which he plays a villain and gives his speech and then turns to the camera and pans, "Was that too over the top? I can never tell." That resonates because with this blog I wonder am I too open? - I can never tell.