Sukkot and Simchat Torah

Sukkot and Simchat Torah are adjoining holidays – only eight days apart – but are very different. Still, in their own special way, both are among my favorite holidays. In the short space we have here today, I want to dedicate a word to each.

Sukkot – In “the words of Kohelet”

Growing up in Israel, I always loved the holiday of Sukkot. Kids are free to spend the night at the Sukkah, without their parents (!), and we always enjoyed waiting for the Ushpizin – those special, honored guests that may visit us, among them Elijah the Prophet (though he never showed up). Later in life, I grew to love the holiday for different reasons: First, I loved the idea that our forefathers were nomads, living in tents in the desert, reminding us that, at least for a few days every year, it would be nice to spend the night at a 1,000-star hotel… Second, I loved the idea that what seems to us fixed and unshakable – our homes, our fortresses – can (and should) be replaced by temporary, and very unstable alternatives. I still think this is a great thought exercise – think of all the things you deem unshakable, and then consider some alternatives. You’ll be surprised at the results. And finally, from a religious standpoint, I loved the idea that the Mitzvah is completed upon entering the Sukkah – at which point, holiness is completely surrounding you. So, while other Mitzvot are completed in many other ways, here, by contrast, the mere entering suffices. I loved it.

But today I want to talk, for a short minute, about the book of Kohelet, which is called in English for no apparent reason Ecclesiastes (perhaps so no one would be able to pronounce it correctly, or, more likely, to remind us that one possible (but not very likely) interpretation of the Hebrew word Kohelet relates to assemblies [In ancient Greek states, “ecclesia” meant a political assembly of citizens; in Hebrew, “Ka’hal” may be interpreted as “assembly,” while Kohelet as “person who gathers an assembly.” But this is, as I suggested, not very likely.]).

On Kohelet and Doubt

We read this special book (or, more precisely, Megilah) on Sukkot’s Saturday. I will not dwell here on the reasons why then of all days, but I would like to mention the serious debate that took place on whether this book is "religious enough" to be properly included in the biblical canon. And why, you may ask, as Kohelet is so widely considered to contain some of the most sublime illuminations of the human thought? Why would a book written by “the wisest of all men,” King Solomon, Son of David, would not be suited to be included in the canon? (recall that two other books allegedly authored by him – The Song of Songs, and Proverbs – are both well within the 24-book collection). Well, the answer goes, the Book that begins with the famous words “Vanity of vanities, said Kohelet, vanity of vanities, all is vanity” (Ecc. 1:2), is not “religious enough” in that it raises doubts. And doubts don't bode well with religious teachings. Or so goes the argument.

I urge you to read the text for yourself – there are few like it in all of history -- and then make your own informed decision on whether it truly represents doubt. (For those who seek closure, turn to the last verse in the book. Ecc. 12:14.) To me, it is always humbling to see how little has changed since the time this book was written – at the very least, couple of thousand years ago; and how well an observant philosopher may capture the essence of mankind, regardless of the era in which he lived. I also love to come back, year after year, to Chapter 3 – which open with “To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven” – and find pleasure in observing how one great text may affect another (Shakespeare’s As You Like It). And finally, I always enjoy reading that, at the end of all ends, “there is nothing new under the sun.” (Ecc. 1:9).

But what about the Doubt? Suppose the text does reflect some doubt - doubt in the existence of God; doubt in the ability (or even the efficiency) of living the life a believer. Is the existence of such doubt enough of a reason to remove the book from the collection? Is Kohelet’s text truly less “religious" than, say, the story of Abraham who was willing to murder his own beloved son on God’s command?

One answer is that we tend to remove doubt from the table whenever we are not fully convinced ourselves in the truthfulness of the proposition. For example, no totalitarian regime in history ever tolerated dissenting opinions, precisely for that reason. According to this line of thought, removing Kohelet from the collection would be wrong, as we are fully convinced in our love of and belief in God.

The other answer, which I much prefer, is told by Father Flynn, (a fictional charismatic religious and spiritual leader played by the mercurial Philip Seymour Hoffman in the 2008 movie “Doubt”) to his audience, worshipers on a Sunday Mass: “Doubt can be a bond as powerful as and sustaining as certainty.” Think about that during the coming weekend. (For those who saw the film, think also of the response by Sister Beauvier, played by Meryl Streep: Was she right?)

Simchat Torah

The term Simchat Torah means, literally, the joy of Torah. More in context, it denotes the joyous occasion of starting to read the Torah anew at the beginning of each year, “from the beginning” (pardon the pun). I find it quite fitting that although all the holidays are collectively called in Hebrew “Smachot” – that is “Simcha” in the plural sense – this is the only holiday that contains “joy” or “happiness” in its actual name. Why, you may ask, is this holiday so special that it merits such "joy"? What is so "joyous" in reading the portions of the Torah anyway? Well, to that I would not provide an answer today. Let us wait for the end of the cycle, and then I’ll be happy to receive your comments on whether this is, indeed, the most "joyous" of occasions.

And finally, I wanted to say one last word about blogging and the Portion of the Week. It seems to me that very few historical institutions lend themselves to blogging as much as the Portion of the Week. Think about it: a weekly text, requiring the reader to contemplate and write some remarks. Can it be more blog-oriented than that? I enjoy writing this blog very much. I hope you enjoy reading it as well.

Shabbat Shalom and Chag Se’me’ach,

Doron