Rabbijn Dr. Nathan Lopes Cardozo (1946) werd geboren in Amsterdam en woont sinds 1977 in Israël. Als kind van een Portugees-Joodse vader en een niet-Joodse moeder heeft hij een lange weg afgelegd. Op zijn 16e is hij ‘uitgekomen’ (Joods geworden) bij Chacham Salomon Rodrigues Pereira. Jaren later haalde hij zijn rabbijnentitel aan de orthodoxe Gateshead Yeshiva. In Jeruzalem richtte hij de David Cardozo Academy op en geeft lezingen in Israel en het buitenland voor Joden en niet Joden. Hij is de auteur van 15 boeken. De laatste twee: “Jewish Law as Rebellion. A Plea for Religious Authenticity and Halachic Courage” (Urim Publications, 2018) en “Cardozo on the Parasha, Bereshit” (Kasva Press, 2019),het eerste van 7 delen op de Tora en de feestdagen. Rabbijn Lopes Cardozo neemt in zijn geschriften geen blad voor de mond en zijn ideeën worden in de velerlei media fel bediscussieerd.
For hundreds of years, we Jews have followed the custom of completing the yearly Torah reading in the synagogue on the day of Simchat Torah, only to immediately begin all over again. Why the rush? There is nearly no time to contemplate what one has read the previous year! What is the point of reading something which, for lack of time, cannot even sink in? What, in fact, is the meaning of this annually repeated reading, which is nothing but superficial?
There is indeed a need to learn Torah in depth; no doubt this is included in the commandment to study Torah. It should result in discovering the many possibilities for understanding the text. But this method of study also poses a danger. It could easily result in stagnation of the text. When a text is studied in a particular way and repeated several times to allow it to sink in, what can result is a dogmatic understanding of it. One keeps repeating a specific interpretation, which consequently imprisons the mind and blocks receptivity to totally new ideas and opinions. Once this happens, the essential nature of the Torah is lost. The possibility of chidush (novelty) – of looking into the same text with completely different eyes – is crucial. The call for new interpretations, and not just repeating what we or others have said, is fundamental to genuine Torah learning. Surely, one needs the background to know how to accomplish this, and only proper study can guarantee an authentic new elucidation and insight; but without novelty, Judaism will be unable to survive.
Rabbi Eliezer Ashkenazi (1513-1586) – disciple of Rabbi Yosef Karo (1488-1575), author of the Shulchan Aruch – makes this point extremely clear:
Indeed, this great wisdom is often forgotten in certain religious circles (2). The quick reading of the Torah is to prevent the text from settling in our minds in a particular fashion. It functions as a first reading in the sense that it has the impact of something totally new. Often, a first encounter is the most exciting one. It keeps all possibilities open; nothing has yet been fixed or determined. As when one is struck by a lightning bolt, man is suddenly enlightened by an overwhelming understanding that may override all his earlier insights. Getting used to a text often means killing it. Familiarity breeds contempt.
This, then, could be the purpose of the quick Torah reading in a synagogue. It is not conventional Torah learning, but rather somewhat of a wake-up call. It functions therapeutically in that man is shocked by the text before he even has a chance to get used to its deeper content. And although he has read it for many years, the fact that the story appears again an entire year later, and no earlier, gives him a chance to forget it and then rediscover it as never before. In this way, it remains fresh and continues to amaze the reader with its multiple possibilities and its grand image. This is the true joy of Simchat Torah’s rush.
(1) Sefer Ma’asei Hashem: Sha’ar Ma’aseh Torah, Parashat Balak (Jerusalem: Merkaz HaSefer, 2005).
(2) See the controversy about Rabbi Yosef Dov Soloveitchik’s most original Chamesh Drashot (translated into English under the title The Rav Speaks: Five Addresses on Israel, History, and the Jewish People), Jerusalem: Tal Orot Institute, 1983/5743, in which Rabbi Eliezer Menachem Shach, former head of the Ponevezh Yeshiva in Bnei Berak, severely criticizes Rabbi Soloveitchik for devising “from his own mind [ideas] that were not handed down to us from earlier generations” (Letters and Articles, vol. 4, pp. 35-40). Compare this with Rabbi Soloveitchik’s statement: “Halakhic man is a man who longs to create, to bring into being something new, something original. The study of Torah, by definition, means gleaning new, creative insights…” (Halakhic Man. Philadelphia, PA: The Jewish Publication Society of America, 1983, p. 99). Still, even Rabbi Soloveitchik often deviated from this very notion. See, for example, Rabbi Dr. David Hartman’s severe critique of Rabbi Soloveitchik’s understanding of novelty and its limitations, in The God Who Hates Lies: Confronting & Rethinking Jewish Tradition (Woodstock, VT: Jewish Lights Pub, 2011).