My second sermon in Elgin. August 25, 2012

Today I stand before you and I am tired. Not because of the usual reasons you might think. Not starting a new job or not having internet until yesterday or not finding the fish for dinner last night at the first store or having the moving truck come and still not finding the sheets for the master bedroom. No I stand before you today having wrestled and worried all week about what I could say to you that would be cogent about the week’s events. This was a hard week for women everywhere and a hard week for me personally. This will be a hard sermon for some.

Today’s portion is one of my favorites. There is so much that is important to me. It also happens to be my daughter’s Bat Mitzvah portion. It includes the rules for establishing fair courts, which is the actual basis for the law that some of you practice and one of my favorite verses. Tzedek, Tzedek tirdorf. Justice, Justice shall you pursue. It also includes the rules for making war—when it is necessary. But we don’t read either of those sections this morning on a triennial selection.

Today’s paraha is sandwiched between those two big ideas. Is also about justice. It is part of Moses’s farewell address while he is preparing the Israelites to enter the land of Israel without him. He is continuing his teaching about values and ethics and what matters to the Israelites most as they set up a Utopian society, a G-dly society. We too are at a transition moment full of preparing as we get ready to enter the new year.

Today’s parsha deals with setting up sanctuary cities where an individual can flee if being pursued by a blood avenger so that the matter can be straightened out by the courts. Death penalty was only enacted in cases of intentional murder—and in fact was rarely if ever enacted. That is also a topic for another day.

Today’s parsha also talks about the need for two witnesses to testify so that no one is convicted on the basis of false testimony. If someone does testifies falsely, that person is to receive the same punishment that the accused would have received if convicted on this testimony.

It is in this context that this parsha reiterates the concept of an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth that we first learned about in Exodus 21. This verse has been quoted and misquoted for generations.

The sages, including Rambam and Rashi, taught that an eye for an eye does not mean that one would lose an eye for injuring an eye. Instead they consistently teach that the intent here was to establish monetary damages. The value of an eye for an eye. The value of a tooth for a tooth. This was actually a limit to the damages that an injured party was entitled to. The value of an eye and no more. The value of a tooth and no more. The value of a single life and no more. Now putting a value on that life, I will leave to people like Ken Feinberg who had the horrible task of trying to figure out how to distribute the 911 Victim’s Compensation Fund or people like our own Paul who deal with these issues at the appellate level all day every day.

Some people argued that the rabbis’ interpretation directly contradicted the plain meaning of the Torah verse. Doesn’t the text mean that if a person loses an eye than he gets to take out the eye of the person who did it? Or if a person is killed, his family gets to kill the murderer? Ibn Ezra the Spanish commentator at the end of the 11th century uses this verse to teach us that we need to agree with the rabbi’s interpretation. “IF we do not trust the Sages interpretation, we will be unable to understand the Torah’s demands. Just as we received the written Torah from our ancestors, so did we receive its oral interpretation. The two are inseparable.” Interesting teaching coming after last week’s Torah portion when Moses taught that nothing was supposed to be added or subtracted and very important for this congregation to keep in mind—Judaism has always been in flux. It has always been evolving. It continues to do so. It is our job to find the modern meaning and relevance sometimes hidden in the text.

For me then, perhaps the most interesting learning from this verse was the idea that it is from this very verse that the Sages derived the ruling that a fetus is not a full-fledged human being and that the life of the mother takes precedence over the life of the fetus. (Mishnah Oholot 7:6)

While I don’t want to turn this into a political speech, Judaism allows abortion, because our definition of when life begins is different. Judaism teaches that a fetus is not a human until halfway out the birth canal. Life does not begin at conception. So Mishnah Ohalot from the second century teaches us that it the woman’s labor becomes life threatening, the one to be born is dismembered…for her life comes before. Rambam added to this in the 12th century saying that abortion is permissible for it is like an assailant pursuing her in order to kill her. (Mishenh Torah)

In the late 11th century we were taught by Rashi that “As long as it did not come out into the world, it is not called a living thing and it is permissible to take its life in order to save its mother. Once the head has come forth, it may not he harmed because it is considered born.

The physical life of the mother is not the only reason that abortion is allowed for Jews. In Sh’eilat Yavetz, Rabbi Jacob Emden ruled that “Even if the mother’s life is not in jeopardy, but only so as to save her from an evil associated with it that would cause her great pain…I hereby state my humble opinion that it is permitted perhaps even worthy of being regarded as a mitzvah.”

Like the Israelites I stand here today before you as a witness and a voice. This has been a hard week for women. It has been a hard week for me personally. I cannot ignore the news of the day. That is about pursuing justice. There has been lots of rhetoric around legitimate and illegitimate rape. It has been painful to read some of the discussion. The statistics don’t lie. One in four women in this country is sexually assaulted or experiences domestic violence in their life times. The numbers are the same for the Jewish community. That means there are probably people in this room who are survivors.

In 1983 I was trained as a rape and domestic violence counselor and served on hotlines. I wrote part of my rabbinic thesis on this topic and most recently served on the Boston Jewish Domestic Violence Coalition. Let me be clear. There is no such thing as legitimate and illegitimate rape. Rape is rape. Our bodies don’t distinguish not can our bodies prevent pregnancy in the case of rape. The rhetoric on TV, on the radio and social media has been very painful to read, maybe even for some of us in this very room, maybe even someone sitting next to you. For some women as Eve Ensler pointed out on Huffington Post, it can be a form of re-rape since it can be so triggering.

This is beyond politics. . is not a Republican or a Democratic issue. It is a Jewish issue. It is a Jewish issue in this country when our politicians presume that they understand religion and what we believe, that they know what the Bible says and speak for all of us. When you interviewed me I was asked an abortion question. I have just outlined when and how abortion is permissible in Judaism. It should not be the first choice. It should only be done with much consideration and counsel. But it is permissible, in cases to preserve the mother’s life, or if the birth would cause the woman pain—that includes emotional pain which could include rape. It is a very serious decision, not to be made lightly. It would not be my first choice, but I would fight to preserve that right so that those who need it can have access to appropriate medical care.. I am pleased that this congregation supports the Crisis Center so ably run by our own Maureen. I am pleased that we have the Shalva posters in our bathrooms. I am saddened that we need to. And even more saddened that some of them are missing all of their tear off sheets, suggesting that maybe someone here has that problem. If you need to talk to someone come find me.

And I stand here today to give voice to another issue. In the very week where we talk about pursuing justice, at the very same time I was standing on this very bimah in my tallit that I earned with ordination, other women were being arrested in Israel for wearing theirs. The Ha’aretz article covering these arrests was entitled “Be a Woman and Shut Up”. I am sorry. I cannot shut up. Not on this topic. I have supported Women of the Wall since its inception in 1983. The video of Israeli police arresting other Israeli women who want to daven and express their Judaism is shocking. It is shocking and it is sad and troubling. They were detained for nearly 24 hours, prohibited from coming in contact with the Western Wall for 50 days—throughout the High Holidays and charged with being a danger to the public peace. If convicted, they could serve a half year in jail. For practicing their Judaism. Remember, I said earlier that Judaism has been constantly evolving. Wearing Talitot is not new. In fact in the Talmud women wore tallitot and tefilin. Rashi’s daughters wore tefilin. Something, in my opinion has gone terribly, terribly wrong in someone’s interpretation of the Torah and the Talmud. It is our job to speak up loudly, clearly and firmly and say we disagree, to pursue justice.

It was a very hard week. Today I stand here and am a witness and a voice for people who may feel they have no voice. We are continuing to prepare for the high holidays, preparing to enter the new year. Join with me and speak up so that no woman and no man has to live in fear. Ken yehi ratzon.