Reflection's host and hostess, Jonathan Lev and Susan Rona

The Boulder Jewish Community Center held its annual Reflections fundraiser Saturday night at the Omni Interlocken Hotel, and continued its recent string of fundraising successes (and successful parties).  This year’s edition welcomed over 450 people, and raised over $110,000 for the JCC’s current year operating budget.

The event honored Andy and Audrey Franklin as Bright Stars, and Danny and Karli Sherwinter as Rising Stars.

Jonathan Lev, Boulder JCC Executive Director said:

This year’s Reflections highlighted the best of the Boulder Jewish community. The Franklins and the Sherwinters demonstrate the engagement that is driving our community into the future.

“There is momentum building in the Boulder Jewish community. Reflections brought the community together in an extraordinary way…  I am so thankful for the community’s attendance and generosity. This event helps ensure that the Boulder JCC continues to bring together our community and provide excellent programming and services throughout the year.”

Audrey Franklin, Ardee Imerman, and Andy Franklin

Karli and Danny Sherwinter with Wendy Aronson

Here are the BJN slide shows from the event.  There are three; the Cocktail Hour, the Program/Dinner, and the Party.  Enjoy!

Cocktail Hour:

Dinner and Program:

The Party:

Susan Rona and Butch Weaver sign the land transfer papers.

On Thursday, February 2nd, the Boulder Jewish Community Center’s efforts to build a new facility took a major step forward as Susan Rona, representing the JCC, and Butch Weaver, representing the Oreg Foundation, owner of the future site of the new JCC, signed a donor agreement whereby the Oreg Foundation will transfer a roughly ten-acre parcel to the JCC.

The Oreg Foundation (originally the Weaver Family Foundation) purchased a thirty acre parcel at the corner of Cherryvale and Arapahoe over a decade ago, with the intent that Jewish nonprofit agencies could establish a Boulder Jewish Commons on the site. The JCC will be the first organization to do so. The JCC has raised $16,600,000 towards its goal of $18 million to construct its new facility, has finalized its architectural plans, and has worked closely with the Oreg Foundation to work out the details of its future on the Boulder Jewish Commons site. Together, the JCC and the Oreg Foundation have begun to submit the JCC’s plans to the City of Boulder for zoning approvals. The land transfer agreement signed on February 2nd marks another step forward for the project, as the Oreg Foundation formalized its commitment to the JCC.

l-r :Susan Rona, Butch Weaver, Francine Lavin Weaver, and Jonathan Lev

To celebrate, the Oreg Foundation and the JCC held a signing ceremony on the site of the future JCC, complete with a champagne toast. Butch Weaver, President of the Oreg Foundation, was joined by Julie Shaffer, Executive Director of the Foundation, as well as Francine Lavin Weaver, the President of 18 Pomegranates Foundation. Each spoke of the original vision the Weaver Family Foundation had of a Boulder Jewish Commons and of their pleasure at seeing the JCC move forward towards construction. The JCC was represented by Susan Rona, President of the Board, Jonathan Lev, Executive Director, Wendy Aronson, Assistant Executive Director, and several members of the JCC’s Board and staff. “This is an incredible day for the JCC, the Oreg Foundation, the Weaver family, and the entire community,” said Jonathan Lev. “It is a truly historic milestone.”

The JCC and Oreg Foundation will now work with the City of Boulder to seek the necessary approvals and permits for the project. The JCC will break ground after the city and permitting process and is dependent on the City’s timetable for approvals.

For more information about the JCC’s project, please see www.boulderjccbuilding.org

Members of the Boulder JCC staff and Building Committee, Oreg Foundation, and 18 Pomegranates Foundation gather on the future site of the Boulder Jewish Community Center to celebrate this milestone.

The JCC will break ground after the city and permitting process and is dependent on the City’s timetable for approvals.

Updated Editor’s Note: Stan Kreis, a regular BJN contributor, took video of this Limmud Colorado panel with Rabbi Gavriel Goldfeder, Rabbi Marc Soloway, and Rabbi Josh Rose, which we link to below.  BJN appreciates Rabbi Soloway’s introductory remarks as well!

Thanks, Stan!

Editor’s Note: One of the participants at Limmud Colorado “live-blogged” the morning discussion among Rabbi Gavriel Goldfeder, Rabbi Marc Soloway, and Rabbi Josh Rose.

We are certain this is not the last we’ve heard in this engaging discussion. However, we are most appreciative to Chaviva Galatz for her diligence in capturing the discussion.  Check it out on her blog, The Kvetching Editor.

If you haven’t met her yet, learn a little about her in this video from Ignite Chanukah. Thanks, Chaviva!

COLORADO SPRINGS, FEB 1.

When CU first began its Jewish Studies program in 2007, about a dozen students pursued the certificate.  This year, 75 students are enrolled in the certificate program. Provost Russell Moore told the board that no other schools in the Rocky Mountain region offer a Jewish Studies major.

The Jewish Studies Program thanks its donors, students, faculty, administration and staff who worked to make this possible.

More information is available from this Daily Camera article.

It will perhaps then come as a modest surprise to the student of Judaism that the Classical and Hassidic Rabbis held a more complex and nuanced view of sin that paints a less than black and white image and understanding of this religious category. To be clear, the Classical and Hassidic Rabbis as one would imagine did not promote sin; this notoriety would be left to the 17^th century manic- depressive false messiah Shabtai Zvi who developed a pseudo-kabbalistic doctrine of “Redemption through Sin”. In this doctrine, certain sparks of holiness enveloped within evil, due to the primordial mythic shattering of the Divine Vessels, the antecedents of physical creation, could only be redeemed through sin. (see Redemption Through Sin in The Messianic Idea in Judaism by Professor Gershom Scholem) Nevertheless, the classical Rabbis did have some teachings that are sufficiently provocative that they deserve our attention and are required input if we are to understand what a broad Judaic view on the subject encompasses.

The first rabbinic concept we need to acquaint ourselves with is that of a, “Sin for the Sake of Heaven”. The meaning of this rabbinic terminology is — doing something that is clearly wrong (A Sin) but with good intention (For the Sake of Heaven).  The Babylonian Talmud in tractate Nazir 23b explores this concept and quotes Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak as stating that, ”Greater is a Sin done for the Sake of Heaven than a Mitzvah done not for the Sake of Heaven.” This teaching however brings to the surface a different rabbinic teaching, that of Rav who stated that, ”A person should always engage in the study of Torah and the performance of Mitzvot even when they are done not for the Sake of Heaven, for out of their being done not for the Sake of Heaven one will come to do them for the Sake of Heaven.” This counter teaching, which sees insincere Mitzvah observance and Torah study as having greater potential than a Sin for the Sake of Heaven, leads the rabbis of the Talmud to conclude that, ”A Sin for the Sake of Heaven is equal to a Mitzvah done not for the Sake of Heaven.”

In explanation, Sin for the Sake of Heaven has the virtue of pure intent and the liability of a sinful deed. Whereas a Mitzvah done not for the Sake of Heaven has the merit of a virtuous deed but the liability of a deficient intent, albeit one that can ultimately lead to a more sincere intent. It is worth noting that the upward spiritual mobility that the rabbis saw in a Mitzvah done not for the Sake of Heaven did not inspire them to value such an insincere Mitzvah as being of greater spiritual worth than a Sin committed for the Sake of Heaven.

One example that the classical Rabbis see as emblematic of Sinning for the Sake of Heaven is that of the Biblical heroine Yael. When Sisera, commander of the Canaanite army, was defeated in Battle he fled and hid in Yael’s tent. (Judges 4:17) Yael seduced Sisera and engaged in a quite heated evening of adultery. This for the purpose of weakening Sisera in what turned out to be in the Talmudic mind an exceptionally busy evening. (Nazir 23b) Then while Sisera naively slept in utter exhaustion, Yael killed him in her incarnation as a religious fem fatale. (Judges 4:22)

This rabbinic teaching on a Sin for the Sake of Heaven recognizes that sinning may at times be necessary and that if done with sincere intent it has legitimacy. True, it is not what Judaism is pointing to as an ideal, which would be sincere intent coupled with a clear cut virtuous deed, but Sin for the Sake of Heaven is as well not a priori rejected as an option. It is also worth noting that the methodology of studying Torah and doing Mitzvot insincerely with the assumption that they will lead to sincere religious life was not universally accepted and was specifically rejected by 19^th century Polish Hassidic Masters such as Rabbi Simcha Bunim of Przysucha and Rabbi Menachem Mendel of Kotzk when it did not truly motivate the person to raise their level of intention. (see The Quest for Authenticity: The Thought of Reb Simcha Bunim by Rabbi Dr. Michael Rosen z’l pg. 155)

When we further explore classical Rabbinic teachings on sin we also find a vein of both limited accommodation to sin and as well a policy of damage control. The Babylonian Talmud in tractate Kiddushin 40a begins with a teaching of Rabbi Chanina that, ”It is preferable for a person to commit a sin in private and not desecrate the name of Heaven in public.” The Talmud then quotes a teaching of Rabbi Elai the Elder, ”If a person sees that their inclination is overcoming them they should go to a place where they are not known and wear and cover themselves with black clothes and do what their heart desires and not desecrate the name of Heaven in public.“ The Talmud soon clarifies that this teaching is speaking about an individual that is truly unable to contain themselves and thus it is better that the reverberations of the sin be minimal. Here we have a rabbinic teaching that while not condoning sin seeks to work with human frailty in a way that we do not see reflected in Biblical literature. Many classic rabbinic authorities (Rabbeinu Channanel, Ritva, Meiri) presumably astonished by this tolerance for overwhelming impulsivity seek to read this teaching in a way that takes a step back from the accommodation to human eros it represents, but others (Tosafot Toch and Tosafot HaRosh) acknowledge that this indeed is what these rabbis espoused. (see Steinsaltz Iyunim on Kiddushin 40a ad. loc)

We also find a classical rabbinic teaching that sanctions the performing of a minor sin by a more educated and committed Jew (Chaver) so as to avoid a major sin by a less educated and devout fellow (Am Ha’aretz). Some rabbinic authorities define a “Minor Sin” as a violation of Rabbinic Law (Mishne La’Melekh on Hilkhot Terumot 3:17) whereas others see it as permitting even a Biblical violation of lesser stature and weight (Gittin 30b and Tosafot Yevamot 93b s.v. Ela). The source for this teaching is in the Babylonian Talmud tractate Eruvin 32b which records the halakhic view of Rabbi Judah the Prince, ”It is in the interest of a Chaver to commit a minor sin so that an Am Ha’aretz does not commit a major sin.” This view despite the prominence of its author as the compiler of the Mishna does not go unchallenged by no less than his father Rabbi Shimon ben Gamliel. He opines that, “It would be in the interest of a Chaver for an Am Ha’aretz to do a major sin and he not commit even a minor sin.” We have here a profound debate as to what extent if any can a person compromise their own spiritual integrity to serve another’s spiritual integrity.

Lest our imagination run wild, the case in which this principle of Rabbi Judah the Prince emerges is dealing with Biblically mandated tithes where he holds that a Chaver could tithe in a less than appropriate fashion i.e. not in the location of the crop (Minor Sin) in order to prevent the Am Ha’aretz from eating produce (that he provided the Am Ha’aretz) that would go without being tithed at all (Major Sin).  This view of Rabbi Judah the Prince does find itself being utilized in the halakhic responsa literature as a viable halakhic principle well beyond the issue of tithes. (see Rabbi Ovadiah Yosef’s Yabia Omer Part 4 Even Ha’Ezer Siman 4 for one contemporary example within the Ultra-Orthodox Sefardic community)

In this classical rabbinic teaching of Rabbi Judah the Prince we see that our responsibility for our fellow Jew and Jewess may under certain circumstances potentially call those of greater education and devotion to be willing to diminish their own potential conformity to the Halakha in its purist expression in order to mitigate against a greater damage to the religious life of a fellow Jew and Jewess. This could be called by analogy the path of a Halakhic Bhodisattva.

The classical rabbis also recognize what we would define as a lesser of two evils approach in relation to sin where the rabbis would prefer people to sin in ignorance rather than inform them of the wrongdoing and have them transgress willfully — assuming of course this is the probable result. The latter, willful transgression, is seen as the greater wrong and is to be avoided. In rabbinic terminology, ”It is better that they be unintentional sinners and not intentional ones.” (Talmud Bavli Shabbat 148b)

There is as well a willingness on the part of the classical rabbis at times to permit something that ordinarily would be forbidden, or look the other way in order to prevent an individual from transgressing in that matter in its forbidden state! In rabbinic terminology, ”It is better that Israel eat meat from an animal that is on its way to death that is slaughtered [in the halakhic procedure] and they not eat meat from an animal that has already died.”(Talmud Bavli Kiddushin 21b) In explanation, Halakha forbids the consumption of an animal that would die from mortal wounds or specific illnesses even if the animal had been properly slaughtered by a ritual slaughterer. Halakha also forbids eating a Kosher species of animal that died naturally absent ritual slaughter. (Mishne Torah Hilkhot Ma’acholot Assurot 4:1, 4:7-9) What this teaching is informing us is that the classical rabbis felt that eating the meat of an animal that died on its own is a more severe sin than eating the meat of an animal that would die but nevertheless was slaughtered.

The rabbis derive this principle of preferential sin from the Torah’s granting of an Israelite soldier permission in time of war to take even a married Gentile woman captive and essentially convert her and marry her — I will spare you the debate regarding when he is permitted to have sexual relations with her. (Deuteronomy 21:10-14 and Steinsaltz Iyunim of Kiddushin 21A) We will need to bracket the issue at present of the rather belated Geneva Conventions and their relation to Biblical morality and laws pertaining to war. Thus we see that the classical rabbis did not at all times and under all circumstances see the Torah as a zero sum game where either one lives in an ideal manner or not at all and they were even willing in limited circumstances to allow Halakha to be turned into somewhat of a pretzel to help Israel avoid sin. This Talmudic principle and analogous ones like it, for instance, ”It is better that they eat the gravy [of the forbidden fat] and not the forbidden fat itself” were adopted by later rabbinic authorities in concert with other halakhic considerations for leniency to as well permit the otherwise forbidden. (see Responsa of the Rambam Pear Ha’Dor Siman 132 for a case regarding Conversion)

The Babylonian Talmud in tractate Menachot 44a tells a rather wild story that while overtly seems to stress the reward in this world for the Mitzvah of Tzitzit (and Mitzvot in general), on a more subtle level tells us as well something about how the classical rabbis viewed sin in some circumstances. The story goes that there was a wealthy man who was very fastidious about observing the commandment of Tzitzit. Nonetheless, he was highly vulnerable to his libidinal urges and developed an active interest in illicit relations with prostitutes. The man hears of a highly expensive Gentile prostitute in a rather far away locale within the Roman empire and sends her fee of 400 Gold Dinars in advance, perhaps hoping that you get what you pay for. He arrives and is led to an erotic set up of seven beds one on top of the other –the first six of silver and the last of gold, all with fine linens with the prostitute laying naked on the top bed. He disrobes and begins his ascent and the Tzitzit begin to pelt him in the face. It is not clear whether this is meant literally as a magical episode or metaphorically as meaning that they aroused his conscience. He comes down from the ladders connecting the beds and sits down and the woman as well comes down and sits besides him. She is astonished and expresses a desire to know what he found wrong with her. He poignantly shares with her that she is the most beautiful woman he has even seen (apparently this was not his first such visit), it’s just that in this instance his Tzitzit reminded him of his accountability in this world and the next and simply deflated his ardor. The woman demands his name, the name of his city, rabbi and house of study and she bids him goodbye. She then proceeds to divide her possessions and treks to her failed paramour’s hometown and seeks an appointment with his rabbi. She asks to convert and explains the story of what inspired her and her request is granted. The rabbi in his parting words encouraged her to marry the lustful but conscience ridden student and the rabbis observe, ”Those fine linens that she prepared for him illicitly she may now prepare for him with halakhic sanction.”

This is quite a strange story even on a surface level as it is employed to demonstrate the “reward” for the Mitzvot, in this case Tzitzit. The lustful man is rewarded with the ability to now marry and have a permanent, sanctified and more cost-effective relationship with the most beautiful woman he has ever beheld.   For our purposes the relevance of the story points to a rabbinic view that sees the outcome of the intention to sin, and for that matter a lifestyle of sin itself, as having at times a rebound effect where a greater good can result from the trajectory of sin embarked on. In the words of Dr. Claudio Naranjo, a Fourth Way Psychologist quoting a popular wisdom teaching, ”The Devil knows not for whom he works.” (Character and Neurosis: An Integrative View-Introduction) Many people on the spiritual path can relate to the notion that if they had not gone through certain blind alleys, dead ends and misguided life choices they may never have arrived at a place of greater spiritual maturation.  It is sometimes out of our greatest personal darkness that we eventually reveal and experience our greatest light.

Let us now turn our attention to select Hassidic masters within the 19^th century Polish school of Hasidism.

The Babylonian Talmud in tractate Gittin 43a debates the issue of whether a half-freed slave-woman can be betrothed. The sage Rabah is initially inclined to say no and after hearing the reasoning of his colleague Rav Chisdah reverses his opinion and considers himself in error in his original position. He then after quoting a verse in scripture where the Torah is referred to as a stumbling block (Isaiah 3:6) states, ”A man does not establish himself in Torah unless he stumbles in it first.” (Ain Adam Omed Al Divrie Torah Ela Im Ken Nichshal Bahen Techilah). The plain meaning of this rabbinic statement is referring to issuing halakhic rulings in Torah and the inevitable errors of logic and interpretation that are part of the process of learning for a rabbi. When the sage errs and is corrected by his colleagues this advances his learning process. (see Rashi s.v. Ve’Hamchshalah)

In the Hassidic teachings of Rav Tzadok Hakohen of Lublin this teaching takes on a much broader application and he sees this pathway of error and stumbling as being relevant to a person’s struggle for spiritual attainment in Divine Service and understanding of the Torah. He writes, ”That in truth so established the blessed God for by means of a person’s efforts and actions they will attain all the spiritual levels and therefore even though in the beginning this draws one to stumbling, nevertheless by means of this stumbling they reach and establish themselves on the words of the Torah.”(Likutie Ma’amarim Amud 13)

Professor Moshe Idel in his work Kabbalah: New Perspectives describes Hassidism as, ”The Psychologization of Kabbalah” here we have Hassidism as the, ”Psychologization of the Talmud.” What in the Talmud is an observation about the process of issuing Halakhic rulings, in Rav Tzadok’s spiritual hand becomes a guide for the personal journey of the spiritual aspirant. We learn by mistakes, by at times committing sins but if we are sincere these sins teach us and we come to an eventual place of spiritual integrity. Here we see that sin can have a constructive contribution to spiritual development. We need not seek sin out as we are reliable to find it without effort — it is part of the human condition.

We will conclude with what is by far the most radical teaching within the 19th century Polish Hassidic tradition in relation to sin — the notion that sinning can at times be God’s will. Paradoxical as this sounds, as conventionally we would consider sin to be the opposite of God’s will, in the antinomian mind of Rabbi Mordechai Yosef Leiner of Izbica, not so.

In his work Mei Hashiloah redacted by his grandson it states, ”With regards to certain things in the Holy Torah, when it is clear to a person that now is the time for the Lord to work, as Elijah did on Mt. Carmel, then it is necessary to overturn the general principles of the Holy Torah and act only in accord with the understanding [binah] that God infuses to man. Rabbi Nathan says that when the understanding is not present, the person is required to conduct himself in accord with the manifested general rules of the Torah without transgressing the bounds of the Halakha.  Rabbi Nathan further says, when a person’s heart strives after the will of God and he removes from himself all personal attachments, God summons him to do an act which seems to him to transgress the principles of the Torah, heaven forbid. It is concerning this case that Rabbi Nathan said that a person whose heart strives after the Lord and has removed from himself all personal gain can be certain that it will not be counted as a sin, heaven forbid. He can be certain that it was a time for the Lord to work. (All is in the Hands of Heaven: The Teachings of Rabbi Mordechai Yosef Leiner of Izbica by Dr. Morris Fairstein pg. 38)

The Mai Hashiloah does teach elsewhere that this teaching is not intended for casual application and is intended for a ”Holy man”. (Mei Hashiloah, Volume I Parashat Kedoshim s.v. Ish Imo Ve’aviv.) I would also point out that when one considers what we know of the life of Rabbi Mordechai Yosef it would seem that the most radical actions he ever took perhaps in fulfillment of this teaching were to break from the Kotzker rebbe who was his teacher and perhaps to pray one of the three formal prayers at a later time than prescribed by Halakha! So we need to be circumspect in applying this teaching if at all.

By way of explanation of this teaching there is a verse in Psalms 119:126 that reads, ”It is a time to act for God they have made void your Torah.” (Et La’asot La’Hashem Heyfiru Toratecha) in the piece quoted above the author translates the verse, ”It’s a time for the Lord to work…” Regardless, this verse in Psalms was utilized by the classical rabbis to underpin the Torah’s granting emergency powers on a temporal basis to set aside Torah law with the rarest of commandments excluded from this permission. (see the author’s essay Emergency Halakha in the Rabbinic Tradition in Millin Chavivin Rabbinic Journal of Yeshivat Chovevei Torah) Rabbi Moderchai Yosef Leiner is taking a teaching that generally was seen as only to be utilized by Prophets and establishment rabbinic authorities and in general for the collective benefit of Israel, the Torah or a specific Jewish community and is applying it to the spiritual life of a holy man i.e. a true Hasid. The notion that in however limited circumstances in the life of the individual what would by convention be considered a sin is in fact God’s will is a teaching that while certainly invigorating in its radical nature is also deeply concerning in regards to an individual’s ability to make responsible use of it absent the natural human proclivity towards rationalization. I believe this teaching is the appropriate climax of our studies and I will close with some brief remarks that hopefully serve in the capacity of spiritual brakes for those however few who may be in need of them.

The intention of this essay is to share with the student of Judaism a broader understanding of the religious category of sin as related to by the Classical and Hassidic Rabbis. The life process, spiritual journey and human beings are often not simple and it would be a shame for people to have a sense that the rabbis of our tradition saw sin, which as it is has such heavy and today Christian intonations, in black and white terms. These teachings as a whole clearly portray a more nuanced and sophisticated view of sin than what some might have expected.  The depth of thought that these teachings point to hopefully will garner additional respect for the Rabbinic and Hassidic tradition. I feel it only responsible to add that the Rabbinic tradition is more complex that what this brief essay can reflect and in order to gain a fuller understanding of how sin was viewed we would need to attend to other more conservative teachings that seem to go in a different direction. Teachings that require our understanding and potential reconciliation are ones that express concern and rejection of, ”A Mitzvah that comes about through Sin.” (Talmud Bavli Berachot 47b and Succah 30a) and the rhetorical rabbinic question to be answered in the negative ,”Do we say to a person sin so your friend can merit?” (Talmud Bavli Shabbat 4a) It should also be mentioned that the Izbica Hassidic work Mei Hashiloah failed to garner an approbation from a single Hassidic Rebbe of its time. It is the author’s hope that this essay stimulates the reader’s interest in the depths of Rabbinic and Hassidic thought and as King Solomon says, ”If you quest for it as silver and seek it as hidden treasure then you will understand the awe of God and attain knowledge of the Divine.”(Proverbs 2:4-5)

The Friday night Shabbaton begins at 6:30 pm and will include a delicious three course Shabbat dinner. A children’s program will run simultaneously to the meal and presentation.

On Shabbat morning – February 4^th - Rabbi Miller will lead an instructional Shabbat morning services with kabalistic insights and meditations. Services will be followed by a luncheon.

Dinner begins at 6:30 pm lecturer at 7:45 pm. To make a reservation please follow this link or call 303.429.5177. Click here for more info.  Chabad of NW Metro Denver is located in Westminster on 4505 W 112 Ave.

Question: Why is it important for me to know the mystical insights to prayer? I enjoy the social synagogue atmosphere, the rabbi gives a good sermon and the cholent and kiddush is worth the wait. What more could there be to services?
Rabbi Miller: Because we don’t know how to pray, we try to make the Synagogue experience enjoyable with other activities: food, music or a speech. But most of the services are actually about praying so it’s important that we get some direction how to do that. Good, mystically inspired prayer will help you to be more centered, less fragmented and will put you more in touch with your inner self. To pray with devotion may be difficult, but to pray without it is ludicrous.

Question:  The Shabbat program at Chabad will reflect your latest book that you published, a Friday night synagogue prayer book.  What motivated you to begin focusing on prayer after having publishing two very successful works on the Five Books of Moses (the Lifestyle and Gutnick edition among many other books?
Rabbi Miller: People have the false impression that Rabbis and religious people know how to pray, and others do not. In my experience, that’s not true. Almost everybody nowadays is confused when it comes to prayer. The synagogues overemphasize tradition and external behavior and lose touch of the introspective and the metaphysical. Most prayer commentaries do not help much because they read like a history book: When was this prayer introduced? By whom? etc. So I wanted to redress this problem by writing a prayer commentary which is entirely focused on emotional and spiritual insight.

Question: How does your non-religious up-bringing reflect your understanding and appreciation for prayer?
Rabbi Miller: In my childhood I was deeply alienated by the Synagogue experience. I was definitely interested–look, I became a Rabbi in the end—but there was nothing there for me. I relate deeply to why Jews find the Synagogue experience difficult and now I have the knowledge and experience to help alleviate the problem.

Question: Many people don’t care for the synagogue but like to pray privately at home, will your Friday evening presentation offer tools for solo prayer?
Rabbi Miller: Yes, absolutely. Prayer is an art that can only be mastered through repeated practice. Not many people are able to come to the synagogue on a daily basis and it’s important that praying privately is seen as something desirable.

Bonus Question: When I hear suggestions about meditation during prayer I think of some type of voodoo experience. Can you describe briefly what type of prayer meditation you will be suggesting and why you think they are useful?
Rabbi Miller: The Bible describes prayer as a “ladder,” because it’s an experience that you ascend one rung at a time. The Jewish prayer book (siddur) was written to guide you up this ladder, step by step. At each junction, I will offer some guidance as to the type of emotional work you should be doing at this point. I’m also going to convey some the way Kabbalists imagined what is happening spiritually at that point. These ideas are refreshing and mind-expanding. Indirectly, they help to lift us out of the daily rut that we often find ourselves in and help us to foster a broader, more integrated and holistic approach to life.

Rabbi Chaim Miller

Rabbi Chaim Miller is a leading international authority for interpretation of Jewish Bible and mysticism, specifically the Torah-related works of the late Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem Schneerson (1902-1994). His scholarly achievement, at the tender age of 37, is substantiated by the vast dissemination of his works, as well as the acclaim they have won him among his colleagues and in the educational and religious communities in which the works circulate.

Born and raised in London, England, Miller studied at the prestigious Haberdashers’ Aske’s School for Boys. He began to explore the depth of his religion while at England’s Leeds University through extensive reading and personal introspection. Fascinated by Jewish mystical teachings in particular, he took a year off to learn at a Lubavitcher yeshiva. Five years later he was an ordained rabbi practicing in Leeds, running both a synagogue and a yeshiva, and writing in his spare time what would soon become the “Gutnick Chumash.”

In 2004 Rabbi Miller relocated to the United States with the intention of devoting himself almost entirely to the writing and editing of great Jewish liturgy for Kol Menachem. Since this time he has completed the groundbreaking “Kol Menachem Chumash (Gutnick Edition),” the “Slager Edition Haggadah” — the bestselling work in its genre — and two volumes of a landmark series exploring Rambam’s Thirteen Principles of Faith.

Rabbi Miller’s texts are currently used at some of the nation’s top institutions, including New York University and Yeshiva University. In addition, over 1,000 rabbis in the United States use Rabbi Miller’s texts to teach their students and prepare their sermons.

Rabbi Miller’s publications have received the attention of community leaders and various persons of note. In 2008, President George W. Bush sent the “Slager Edition Haggadah” to the troops in Iraq as a representation of the Jewish faith for the United States military. The Haggadah was a recent recipient of the prestigious Benjamin Franklin Award just this past year, and Miller’s “Gutnick Chumash” is on display at the Jewish Children’s Museum in Brooklyn, New York. The popular “Dummies” series published “The Torah for Dummies” in 2008, with author Arthur Kurzweil singling out Rabbi Miller’s “Gutnick Chumash” and proclaiming, “If I could have only one translation on a desert island, it would be this one.”

See also
Torah in Ten 

Kol Menachem 

The Huffington Post  

Jewish tradition encourages us to make every effort to prevent and diminish human suffering. From the Talmud, we learn that, “Whoever destroys a soul, it is considered as if he destroyed an entire world. And whoever saves a life, it is considered as if he saved an entire world.”

In partnership with Congregation Bonai Shalom, Har HaShem will host the Bonfils Blood Donation Drive and new Save a Life Health Fair. The goal is to provide an opportunity to make a blood donation as well as to educate the Jewish Boulder community on organ donation, the bone marrow registry, BRCA/hereditary cancer and ovarian cancer, and recently expanded testing options for Jewish genetic diseases.

Representatives from a variety of organizations will provide materials and answer questions in the North Building Social Hall including Bonfils Colorado Marrow Donor Program, Donor Alliance, American Transplant Foundation, Rachel Greig, a local kidney and pancreas recipient, Colorado Ovarian Cancer Alliance, and Dr. Ellen Elias, a Denver based geneticist at Children’s Hospital with support from the Victor Centers for Jewish Genetic Diseases.

Appointments to donate blood MUST be made in advance. To schedule a time to donate blood, contact Donna Werner at (303) 449-4672 or donna@bw-construction.com.

If not donating blood, there is no registration required to attend the Save a Life Fair to speak with representatives and pick up materials. For information or to volunteer, contact Susan Labowitz at (303) 543-0516 or labovitzs@gmail.com.

Both philanthropic approaches remain important, necessary and effective not only for their nonprofit beneficiaries and society at large but for the businesses that implement them, and have been discussed in prior columns (see “Businesses Have Big Stake in Improving their Communities” from The Denver Post on March 20, 2011).

Increasingly, however, businesses are implementing a third approach to addressing social problems by adding social innovation to their community investment portfolio.

In “Social Innovation, Inc: 5 Strategies for Driving Business Growth Through Social Change,“ (2011), author Jason Saul argues:

To link social change and business outcomes, companies must rethink their approach to social change. This isn’t a matter of retrofitting your existing social contract strategies with better business justifications; it’s about coming up with fresh, innovative strategies that are specifically designed to create business value through social change.”

Social innovation is not traditional corporate philanthropy, or social responsibility, or giving back, or putting values first and profits second. Rather, it is about “innovating creative, market-based solutions that result in high growth, profitable business opportunities.” To accomplish this, Saul explains how businesses can:

• Create revenues through submarket products and services.
• Enter new markets through backdoor channels.
• Build emotional bonds with customers.
• Develop new pipelines for talent.
• Influence policy through reverse lobbying.

To develop strategies to solve social problems, business leaders must first determine in what ways their business might impact, or be impacted by, social issues. Health care, education, hunger, environmental degradation, food deserts, depletion of nonrenewable natural resources, the uninsured and homelessness are just a few of the social problems that businesses impact and that impact businesses, and can be addressed with profitable business innovation.

Then ask where the company’s core competencies can make the biggest difference. In what areas of expertise is the company a market or thought leader? The answers to these preliminary questions will begin to shape the discussion of how to generate profits while making a difference in the world.

Examples of social innovation abound. Coca-Cola Recycling LLC is a for-profit subsidiary seeking to recycle 100 percent of Coke’s beverage packaging and containers in the U.S., lowering its costs of production, reusing nonrenewable resources and reducing litter. Walmart’s $4 prescriptions helped it become one of the largest pharmacies in the country, while saving consumers billions of dollars, and making access to medicine easier and more affordable for the uninsured and patients on Medicaid. Office Max’s “A Day Made Better” campaign provides free school supplies to thousands of classrooms, while boosting market share, revenues and employee engagement. Encana Oil & Gas converts nonprofit and government vehicles to cleaner, less expensive and domestically produced natural gas and partners with community colleges to train mechanics to work on those vehicles.

Encana community investment adviser Joyce Witte observes: “Everyone wins when companies generate business value through social change.”

Architect and sustainability expert William McDonough said, “There are three ways to change the world: change China, change California, or change Walmart.”

Business has unprecedented power, reach, resources and impact on the lives of nearly everyone on the planet. Letting business do what it does best — generating profits through innovation — may be our best hope for creating solutions to the challenges of our time.

This post originally appeared in the Denver Post on Sunday, January 22, 2012 and is posted here with permission by the author.