One such day, he came into the house to do his work. None of the household being there inside,
(ז) וַיְהִי כְּהַיּוֹם הַזֶּה וַיָּבֹא וגו' וְאֵין אִישׁ מֵאַנְשֵׁי הַבַּיִת (בראשית לט, יא), אֶפְשָׁר בֵּיתוֹ שֶׁל אוֹתוֹ הָאִישׁ מִשְׁתַּיֵּר בְּלֹא אִישׁ, רַבִּי יְהוּדָה וְרַבִּי נְחֶמְיָה, רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר יוֹם נִבּוּל שֶׁל נִילוּס הָיָה וְהָלְכוּ הַכֹּל לִרְאוֹת וְהוּא לֹא הָלַךְ. וְרַבִּי נְחֶמְיָה אָמַר יוֹם תֵּיאַטִּירוֹן הָיָה, וְהָלְכוּ הַכֹּל לִרְאוֹתוֹ, וְהוּא לֹא הָלַךְ.
... How is it possible that there was none at home? Rabbi Yehuda said: "It was the day of the Nilus Festival and everybody went to see it and he didn't go". Rabbi Nechemia said: "It was a day of Theatre and everybody went to see it, and he didn't go".
What's the connection between the Nilus Festival and a day of theater?
Why do you think Joseph didn't go?
Why do you think the Rabbi's said the same thing, except changed what people said ("It was the day of _____ and everybody went to see it and he did't go)?
(כב) וַתֹּאמֶר רוּת אַל תִּפְגְּעִי בִי לְעָזְבֵךְ לָשׁוּב מֵאַחֲרָיִךְ (רות א, טז) (...) כֵּיוָן שֶׁשָּׁמְעָה נָעֳמִי כָּךְ הִתְחִילָה סוֹדֶרֶת לָהּ הִלְכוֹת גֵּרִים, אָמְרָה לָהּ בִּתִּי אֵין דַּרְכָּן שֶׁל בְּנוֹת יִשְׂרָאֵל לֵילֵךְ לְבָתֵּי תֵּיאַטְרָאוֹת וּלְבָתֵּי קִרְקָסִיאוֹת שֶׁל גּוֹיִם. אָמְרָה לָהּ, אֶל אֲשֶׁר תֵּלְכִי אֵלֵךְ...
Since she heard this, Naomi began to teach Ruth the basic rules of the converts; she said: "My daughter, it is not the custom of the daughters of Israel to frequent (go to) the theatres and the circuses of the Gentiles". To which Ruth answered: "Wherever you go, I will go." ...
Why is this the first thing Naomi says?
Why does Ruth reply with"wherever you go I will go?"
Theaters are the opposite of studying
הָרֶגֶל אִי בָּעֵי הוּא אָזֵיל לְבָתֵּי טְרַטְסִיָאוֹת וּלְבָתֵּי קִרְקַסְיָאוֹת, וְאִין בָּעֵי הוּא אָזֵיל לְבָתֵּי כְנֵסִיּוֹת וּבָתֵּי מִדְרָשׁוֹת.
His foot, if he wishes, he goes to theaters and circuses; and if he wishes, he goes to synagogues and study halls.
How are theaters the opposite of study halls in your opinon?
How are theaters the opposite of study halls in your life?
(17) Rabbi Abbahu began: “Those who sit at the gate talk about me” (Psalms 69:13) – these are the nations of the world, who sit in theaters and circuses. “I am the subject of songs by ale drinkers” (Psalms 69:13) – after they sit, eat, drink, and become intoxicated, they sit, speak about me, mock me, and say: So that we will not need to eat carobs like the Jews.47We have eaten as much as we like, unlike the Jews who are poor and must eat carobs. Alternatively, this sentence can be translated to mean: We will not be destroyed like the Jews (Matnot Kehuna). They would say to each other: How many years do you want to live? They would say: Like the Shabbat garment of the Jews.48The Jews would wear their Shabbat clothes for many years. The gentiles mocked them for this as well. They would bring the camel into their theaters with its garments on it.49Sackcloth was used both as a covering for camels and as clothes for mourners (Etz Yosef). They would say to each other: Why is this one mourning? They would say: These Jews observe the Sabbatical Year, and they do not have any vegetation, and they eat its thorns, and it is mourning over them.50The Jews eat the camel’s thorns, and the camel is mourning the loss of its food. They would bring the dead into their theater, and its head was shaved. They would say to each other: Why is this one’s head shaved? He would say: These Jews are Shabbat observers, and everything for which they exert themselves all the days of the week, they eat on Shabbat. They do not have wood with which to cook, and they break their beds and cook with them. They sleep on the ground and become covered with dirt, and they smear themselves with oil. Therefore, the oil is expensive.51They cannot afford oil to shampoo their hair, so they shave it.
Another matter: “Those who sit at the gate talk about me” (Psalms 69:13) – these are Israel, who sit in the synagogues and study halls. “I am the subject of songs by ale drinkers” (Psalms 69:13) – after they sit, eat, drink, and become intoxicated at the feast prior to the ninth of Av, they sit and recite elegies, dirges, and Lamentations.
ohr.edu/explore_judaism/ask_the_rabbi/ask_the_rabbi/6648
Dear Rabbi [Yirmiyahu Ullman],
It seems to me that in addition to literature in the form of instructive stories, there is a
fair representation of music and other artistic forms mentioned in the Torah, and
applied in the service of G-d in the Temple, and on other occasions. But it strikes me
that theater doesn’t seem to be mentioned or practiced in ancient, or Orthodox
Judaism, despite the fact there are so many ethical or educational stories, events or
ideas that could be set to the stage. Is this so? And if so, why?
Dear Ian,
I think you are right. Theater hasn’t played a major role in Judaism.
A few obscure, minor examples come to mind, but none occupy center stage.
One example is Yaakov’s dressing up and acting the part of Esav. But this role-play was
hardly play and can’t even be considered a skit. On Purim we find the custom to wear
costumes and mimic the character portrayed, but this can hardly be considered drama. And even the traditional Purim shpiel is at most a skit that is more of a comic spoof than actual theater.
An example of a serious-minded skit with more educational character might be the custom among some Sefardi communities to integrate into the Pesach seder a mini-enactment of the departure from Egypt. Interestingly, it seems that the well-known thinker-kabbalist Ramchal did actually write a few meaningful plays, but if they were performed at all, it was only in a very limited way.
So why has Judaism seemed to close the curtain on theater?
One major reason might be due to repulsion for the idolatrous context and content of ancient Greek plays, coupled with values which were unacceptable to Judaism. But this wouldn’t necessarily preclude Jews from using this art form in a Jewishly educational or uplifting way.
Another possible reason might be Judaism’s general disinclination to personify. Perhaps
“sculpting” a character that appears on stage smacks of making images. Insofar as the play
may enact stories portraying G-d or revered personages, there would certainly be a
reluctance to personify these holy figures.
Conversely, there is a certain reluctance to ascribe a particular, physical form to G-d or these revered ancestors, because doing so diminishes their veneration by quantifying them and thereby limiting our reverence for them.
But either of these concerns wouldn’t preclude using plays to convey stories or messages
which wouldn’t have these problems.
Accordingly, another possible objection to the venue of theater, even for educational
purposes in a way that doesn’t have the problem of physically portraying revered characters, might stem from the idea that doing so limits the quality or depth of the message as originally portrayed in the written Torah source. This may be due to the playwright’s particular interpretation of the message, or the audience’s impression of his expression. This would be akin to the all-too-common phenomenon, “The movie is not as good as the book”.
Additionally, in a tradition where supplementary commentary is so essential to a proper
understanding of the original text, the play might not fully encompass the vast wealth of
commentaries on any given story or teaching, and therefore be inaccurate, misleading or
even untrue to the source.
But both of these concerns could theoretically be allayed by a sensitive and conscientious
study by the playwright of all the relevant sources in order to present a comprehensive and accurate representation of the ideas or events. In any case, they would not seem to preclude using theater at least to present authentic Jewish teachings through the venue of new stories, not directly based on Torah texts.
In cases such as these, perhaps the reluctance to use theater as an educational or
inspirational venue might be due to bitul Torah, meaning diverting oneself from the mitzvah of engaging oneself in active, personal Torah study. This reason would apply even to a play which is very true to the sources, since one should learn the sources himself rather than passively view a theatrical rendition of them. All the more so this reason would seem to apply to a message distinctly divorced from the sources, even if it’s true to Torah.
But arguably, this may not be so different than attending a Torah lecture, where the members of the audience, instead of using their time and mental energies to be personally and actively involved in the traditional format of Torah study, rather passively absorb the Torah message distilled by the rabbi on stage at the podium. Thus, a final possible reluctance to use theater for Torah is that after qualifying its expression based on all the aforementioned objections, there results a fine line between theater for education and theater for recreation. And even though some Torah lectures are also entertaining, the very venue of a lecture or class ensures that it will be entertaining education; while the venue of theater is likely to be, at best, educational entertainment, which could easily devolve into being “purely” entertainment. And entertainment for entertainment’s
sake is discouraged by Judaism.
§ The Gemara relates another story about the righteousness of common people. Rabbi Beroka Ḥoza’a was often found in the market of Bei Lefet, and Elijah the Prophet would often appear to him. [Once,] two brothers came to the marketplace. Elijah said to Rabbi Beroka: These two also have a share in the World-to-Come. Rabbi Beroka went over to the men and said to them: What is your occupation? They said to him: We are jesters, and we cheer up the depressed. Alternatively, when we see two people who have a quarrel between them, we strive to make peace. It is said that for this behavior one enjoys the profits of his actions in this world, and yet his reward is not diminished in the World-to-Come.
1) תנו רבנן ההולך לאיצטדינין ולכרקום וראה שם את הנחשים ואת החברין בוקיון ומוקיון ומוליון ולוליון בלורין סלגורין הרי זה מושב לצים ועליהם הכתוב אומר (תהלים א, א) אשרי האיש אשר לא הלך וגו' כי אם בתורת ה' חפצו הא למדת. שדברים הללו מביאין את האדם לידי ביטול תורה.
2) ורמינהי [הולכין] לאיצטדינין מותר מפני שצווח ומציל ולכרקום מותר מפני ישוב מדינה ובלבד שלא יתחשב עמהם ואם נתחשב עמהם אסור קשיא איצטדינין אאיצטדינין קשיא כרקום אכרקום בשלמא כרקום אכרקום ל"ק כאן במתחשב עמהן כאן בשאין מתחשב עמהן אלא איצטדינין אאיצטדינין קשיא תנאי היא דתניא אין הולכין לאיצטדינין מפני מושב לצים ור' נתן מתיר מפני שני דברים אחד מפני שצווח ומציל ואחד מפני שמעיד עדות אשה להשיאה.
3) תנו רבנן אין הולכין לטרטיאות ולקרקסיאות מפני שמזבלין שם זיבול לעבודת כוכבים דברי ר' מאיר וחכמים אומרים מקום שמזבלין אסור מפני חשד עבודת כוכבים ומקום שאין מזבלין שם אסור מפני מושב לצים מאי בינייהו אמר ר' חנינא מסורא נשא ונתן איכא בינייהו דרש ר' שמעון בן פזי מאי דכתיב אשרי האיש אשר לא הלך בעצת רשעים ובדרך חטאים לא עמד ובמושב לצים לא ישב וכי מאחר שלא הלך היכן עמד ומאחר שלא עמד היכן ישב ומאחר שלא ישב היכן לץ אלא לומר לך שאם הלך סופו לעמוד ואם עמד סופו לישב ואם ישב סופו ללוץ.
4) אמר רב קטינא כל המתלוצץ מזונותיו מתמעטין שנאמר (הושע ז, ה) משך ידו את לוצצים..
5) שמא יאמר אדם הואיל ולא הלכתי לטרטיאות ולקרקסיאות ולא עמדתי בקנגיון אלך ואתגרה בשינה ת"ל ובתורתו יהגה יומם ולילה.
1) The Sages taught: With regard to one who goes to stadiums [le’itztadinin] where people are killed in contests with gladiators or beasts, or to a camp of besiegers [ulkharkom] where different forms of entertainment are provided for the besieging army, and he sees there the acts of the diviners and those who cast spells, or the acts of the clowns known as bukiyon, or mukiyon, or muliyon, or luliyon, or belurin, or salgurin, this is categorized as “the seat of the scornful”; and with regard to such places the verse states: “Happy is the man that has not walked in the council of the wicked, nor stood in the way of sinners, nor sat in the seat of the scornful. But his delight is in the Torah of the Lord” (Psalms 1:1–2). You learn from here that these matters bring a person to dereliction of the study of Torah, since had he not sat in “the seat of the scornful,” he would delight in the study of Torah.
2) And the Gemara raises a contradiction from another baraita: One is permitted to go to stadiums, because he can scream and save the life of a Jew who would otherwise be killed there; and it is permitted to go to a camp of besiegers, because at times one can provide for the public welfare by petitioning the besiegers and saving the residents of the town, provided that he is not counted as one of them; but if he is counted as one of them, it is prohibited. This is difficult, as there is a contradiction between the statement about attending stadiums in the first baraita and the statement about attending stadiums in the second baraita, and is similarly difficult as there is a contradiction between the statement about a camp of besiegers in the first baraita and the statement about a camp of besiegers in the second baraita. The Gemara continues: Granted, the apparent contradiction between one statement about a camp of besiegers and the other statement about a camp of besiegers is not difficult, as here, the first baraita is referring to a case where he is counted as one of them, and there, the second baraita is referring to a case where he is not counted as one of them. But with regard to the contradiction between the ruling about attending stadiums in the first baraita and the ruling about attending stadiums in the second baraita, it is difficult. The Gemara answers: This issue is a dispute between tanna’im, as it is taught in a baraita: One may not go to stadiums, because they are considered “the seat of the scornful.” And Rabbi Natan permits attending stadiums due to two reasons; one is because he can scream and save the life of someone who would otherwise be killed, and the other one is because even if he cannot save the man’s life, he can provide testimony that a woman’s husband died, which will enable her to marry again.
3) The Sages taught: One may not go to theaters [letarteiot] or circuses [ulkirkaseiot] because they sacrifice offerings there to objects of idol worship; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. And the Rabbis say: It is prohibited to go to a place where they sacrifice offerings, due to a suspicion of idol worship, and it is also prohibited to go to a place where they do not sacrifice offerings, due to it being considered “the seat of the scornful.” The Gemara asks: What is the practical difference between the opinion of the Rabbis and that of Rabbi Meir? After all, according to both opinions it is prohibited to attend theaters or circuses. Rabbi Ḥanina of Sura said: The difference between them arises in the case of one who engaged in business there. According to Rabbi Meir, the profits are forbidden as the proceeds of idol worship, as Rabbi Meir maintains that the gentiles certainly worship idols at theaters or circuses. Conversely, according to the Rabbis, the profits are forbidden only if it is established that they worshipped idols there. § Apropos the earlier discussion of the evils of scornfulness, the Gemara cites several statements that criticize such behavior. Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi taught: What is the meaning of that which is written: “Happy is the man that has not walked in the counsel of the wicked, nor stood in the way of sinners, nor sat in the seat of the scornful” (Psalms 1:1)? Since he did not walk in the counsel of the wicked, how could he stand with them? And since he did not stand, how could he sit with them? And since he did not sit with them, how could he have scorned? Since he never joined the company of the wicked, he would have no reason to be involved with them in any manner. Rather, the verse serves to say to you that if he walked with the wicked, he will ultimately stand with them. And if he stood with them, he will ultimately sit in their company, and if he sat, he will ultimately scorn along with them.
4) Rav Ketina says: Concerning anyone who scoffs, his sustenance is lessened, as it is stated: “He stretches out his hand with scorners” (Hosea 7:5), meaning that God withdraws His providence from scoffers and does not provide for them.
So.. Now we know why artists starve! ;-)
5) Lest a person say: Since I did not go to theaters and circuses, and did not stand in bestial contests, I will go and indulge in sleep, the verse states: “And he meditates in His law day and night” (Psalms 1:2). This demonstrates that it is not sufficient simply to avoid transgressions; rather, it is necessary to engage actively in Torah study.
People who are religious but want to do theater
Essay by Yoni Oppenheim
#JewPlay: What is the Future of Jewish Theatre?
14 March 2014
#JewPlay: What is the future of Jewish theater in the United States? In this series, co-
curators David Winitsky, Artistic Director of New York’s Jewish Plays Project and Guy Ben-
Aharon, Producing Artistic Director of Boston’s Israeli Stage, asked Jewish theater
practitioners from major regions of the country what Jewish theater means to them.
The sudden and collective intake of air was not only audible, but also palpable, as the
audience of my classmates gasped when Lilly embraced me in the improv scene. She had
forgotten that she wasn't supposed to touch me. I wasn't going to say anything, as we were
already in character in the middle of the scene, and I didn't want to ruin the scene or
embarrass my classmate. But clearly for the rest of my class, there was a double drama
playing itself out on stage—the drama of the scene, and the drama of a taboo inadvertently
being broken.
My observance of the Jewish Sabbath and specific modesty laws might have seemed
strange at first to my peers and teachers, but they accepted me during my four years at
theater school. As a religiously observant theater artist, I had to find my way not only in
negotiating the intricacies of Jewish law, but also in grappling with the apathy or even
antagonism towards the theater and the arts in general found in Jewish tradition. As I dug
deeper into the traditional Jewish views of theater, questioning it, I discovered a rich and
complicated Jewish theater narrative that went back much further than the Yiddish theater. It
was a unique opportunity to discover my theatrical ancestors and begin articulating my own
aesthetic in a rigorous training program.
Sadly, the openness, acceptance, and accommodation I experienced at conservatory did not
extend itself to the professional theater world and broader theater community that prides
itself on its open mindedness and tolerance of difference. As a theater director and
dramaturg, I have been told by collaborators, "Orthodox people expect the entire world to
work around them" and have been advised to stop being Sabbath-observant if I plan to work
*
in the theater. I have been told repeatedly over the years that “for an Orthodox Jew, you are
pretty open minded,” as if that should be a compliment. Religiously observant actors have it
even more challenging.
It often feels to me as if the theater community, even the Jewish theater community, does not
have a space for religiously observant theater artists. At a moment in history in which religion
and religious observance is playing such a central role in global and domestic affairs, the
mainstream theater is not meaningfully engaging the issues, or artists, who can provide
unique insights into the issues. As it struggles for audiences and for relevance in the larger
cultural conversation, the broader theater scene often ignores the issues of the day and the
artists who may grapple with them in the real world, be they religiously observant Jews,
Muslims, Christians, Hindus, Sikhs, etc. Furthermore, it completely concedes the debate
over the interpretation and ownership of religious values at the exact moment when other
voices need to be heard on the global stage.
One of my favorite quotes from Anne Bogart’s essay on Memory in A Director Prepares,
gives me strength, courage, and energy to continue creating theater and being true to myself
and my religious practice. Bogart describes a friend's frustration and revelation at
Grotowski's workshop in Irvine, CA:
After extreme physical exhaustion, the other participants would access familiar patterns and
codes from their respective indigenous backgrounds. This seemed to give them endless
reservoirs of energy as they began to dance and move in ways that were unique to their
particular cultures, in ancient modes deeply imbedded in their corporeal memories. But for
Wendy, nothing happened. As an American, she could find no deeply ingrained cultural
resources that would help her to get through the endless nights. After a great deal of
frustration and fatigue, and much to her relief, at last she touched upon her Jewish roots and
from that source she unearthed familiar codes of sound and movement deeply rooted in the
Jewish culture. Her body remembered.
My hope for the Jewish theater in particular, and for the broader scene in general, is that
artists dig deeper into their cultural traditions, and that producing theaters create a space for
that. Ultimately the “American experience” will be reflected through a tapestry of specific
cultural experiences, stories, and theatrical forms. It is there that our theater’s endless
“reservoirs of energy” lies. The universal is found by delving into the specifics of a story, of a
culture, of the individual human experience. The more culturally specific a play is, the greater
chance of it touching on universal themes.
In the Jewish theater, in order to find that depth, I believe that Jewish literacy amongst
Jewish artists needs to increase. In my personal experience, many theater artists today may
have a graduate level knowledge of the theater and the talent to match, but their knowledge
of and concern for their own ancient tradition is maybe on an elementary Sunday school
level. It is a tradition with enormous depth and breadth, that has in the past inspired some of
the greatest works of art, and it is theirs to claim as their own. We need to create forums for
artists to tap into that knowledge on their own terms.
Jewish tradition itself can suggest a way forward. The Talmud is the written version of the
Jewish oral tradition. Although it was prohibited to do so, rabbis broke the taboo and began
writing down the conversations, arguments, laws, and folktales, in order to prevent the
tradition from being lost completely. Its study includes the codified texts, as well as
arguments and the millennia of commentary that surround it up to the present day. Though
we understand the Talmud today as a massive corpus of texts, by definition an oral tradition
is a performed tradition. Theater artists can engage in the study of Talmud and other Jewish
texts, add their voices and innate understanding of performance, of human nature, and
theater’s goal of empathy to it. From my experience, artists are deeply inspired by this
engagement. Their work is revitalized by both the form and content of the Talmud. In turn,
the unique perspective they bring to the study of Jewish texts, has a revitalizing force on the
Jewish community. I have seen this first hand at the Drisha Institute for Jewish Education’s
Arts Fellowship, where I have consulted in the past. Drisha, which has been a pioneer in
opening the doors of high level Jewish studies to women, offers female artists of all
disciplines, a funded yearlong program in New York City.
While I am clear-eyed regarding the scheduling and fiscal realities of the theater, I do hope
theaters one day open their doors to religiously observant theater artists. The rare
precedence of casting a Sabbath observant actor exists. In the early 1990s, Cameron
Mackintosh wanted Israeli cantor Dudu Fisher to play Jean Valjean in Les Miserables on
Broadway and the West End, and he hired an understudy for the Friday night and Saturday
matinee performances. Already today, theaters can involve religiously observant artists as
consultants and even dramaturges on Jewish-themed shows.
As a response to the realities of the current state of the theater for religiously observant
theater artists, I co-founded 24/6: A Jewish Theater Company with likeminded artists. 24/6 is
a home for Sabbath-observant artists in New York which is committed to cultivating
innovative theater grounded in a rigorous engagement with Jewish tradition. In addition to
Sabbath observance, 24/6 is respectful of other religious observances of our members
related to the laws of modesty, with each ensemble member deciding their own comfort and
observance level. We have produced our own interpretations of the classics A Doll House
and most recently Uncle Vanya, both filtered through the lens of Jewish holidays and rituals,
in addition to new and devised works.
24/6 launched with a companywide learning of a section of The Sabbath: Its Meaning for
Modern Man by Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel, where he retells and interprets a famous
Talmudic passage. Our first show was of the pieces that were created in response to the
text. Jewish theaters can use that model of inviting a diverse group of artists in their
community—and via video chat, from across the nation and the globe—for an in-depth
Jewish study around an issue or a text as a catalyst to create work. They can include
religiously observant artists in the conversation and the ensuing creative process. My hope
for the future is to build on this foundation, and test out some of the ideas I began exploring a
decade ago in the safety of theater school. How might the rigors of Jewish laws, rituals, and
spiritual practice create their own particular aesthetics? One of freedom within structure.
Universality found in the particular. I hope connecting to the “familiar codes of sound and
movement deeply rooted in the Jewish culture” plays a part in revitalizing the American
theater. I welcome theaters and theater artists in the broader theater landscape to partner
with me and 24/6 in this exploration.
***
*name has been changed
People turning texts into plays
Adapted from II Samuel 11:1-12:25 by David Schwartz
Act 1
Narrator: King David’s army was at war, and David was in Jerusalem. He was strolling on the palace roof when he saw a woman bathing. She was very beautiful.
David: Find out who that is.
(A short while later…)
Messenger: She is Batsheva, the daughter of Eliam, the wife of Uriah the Hittite.
David: Bring her to me.
Narrator: They were intimate. A bit later….
Messenger: Batsheva wants you to know that she’s pregnant.
Act 2
Scene 1
(Setting: The royal palace)
David: Tell General Yoav that I wish to see Uriah the Hittite.
Messenger: Will do!
Narrator: Uriah came and David asked him about Yoav and the troops and about how the war was going.
David: Go down to your house and bathe your feet.
Narrator: When Uriah left the royal palace, a present from the king followed him. But Uriah slept at the entrance of the royal palace, along with the other officers of the king, and did not go down to his house.
Scene 2
(Setting: The royal palace)
Messenger: King David, Uriah did not go down to his house.
King David: Uriah, you just came from a journey; why didn’t you go down to your house?
Uriah: The Ark and Israel and Judah are located at Succot, and my master Yoav and Your Majesty’s men are camped in the open; how can I go home and eat and drink and sleep with my wife? As you live, by your very life, I will not do this!
David: Stay here today also, and tomorrow I will send you off.
Narrator: So Uriah remained in Jerusalem that day. The next day, David summoned him, and he ate and drank with Uriah until he got him drunk, but in the evening Uriah went out to sleep in the same place, with his king’s officers; he did not go down to his home.
Act 3
Scene 1
(Setting: The battlefield)
Narrator: In the morning, David wrote a letter to Yoav, which he sent with Uriah. He wrote in the letter, “Place Uriah in the front line where the fighting is fiercest; then fall back so that he may be killed.” And so it happened.
Yoav: Take this battle report to David. If he asks “Why did you come so close to the city to attack it? Didn’t you know that they would shoot from the wall? Who struck down Avimelech son of Yerubeshet? Was it not a woman who dropped an upper millstone on him from the wall at Teiveitz, from which he died? Why did you come so close to the wall?” Then say “Your servant Uriah the Hittite was among those killed.”
Scene 2
(Setting: The royal palace)
Messenger: Your Majesty, first the men prevailed against us and sallied out against us into the open; then we drove them back up to the entrance to the gate. But the archers shot at your men from the wall and some of Your Majesty’s men fell; your servant Uriah the Hittite also fell.
David: Give Yoav this message: “Do not be distressed about the matter. The sword always takes its toll. Press your attack on the city and destroy it!” Encourage him!
Narrator: When Uriah’s wife heard that her husband Uriah was dead, she lamented over her husband. After the period of mourning was over, David sent and had her brought into his palace; she became his wife and she bore him a son. But the Lord was displeased with what David had done.
Act 4
(Setting: The royal palace)
Narrator: The Lord sent the prophet Nathan to David.
Nathan: There were two men in the same city, one rich and one poor. The rich man had very large flocks and herds, but the poor man had only one little ewe lamb that he had bought. He tended it and it grew up together with him and his children: it used to share his morsel of bread, drink from his cup, and nestle in his bosom; it was like a daughter to him. One day, a traveler came to the rich man, but he was loath to take anything from his own flocks or herds to prepare a meal for the guest who had come to him; so he took the poor man’s lamb and prepared it fro the man who had come to him.
David: (in a rage) As the Lord lives, the man who did this deserves to die! He shall pay for the lamb four times over, because he did such a thing and showed no pity.
Nathan: That man is you! Thus said the Lord, the God of Israel: “It was I who anointed you king over Israel and it was I who rescued you from the hand of Saul. I gave you your master’s house and possession of your master’s wives; and I gave you the House of Israel and Judah; and if that were not enough, I would give you twice as much more. Why then have you flouted the command of the Lord and done what displeases God? You have put Uriah the Hittite to the sword; you took his wife and made her your wife and had him killed by the sword of the Ammonites. Therefore the sword shall never depart from your House — because you spurned Me by taking the wife of Uriah the Hittite and making her your wife.” Thus says the Lord: “I will make a calamity rise against you from within your own house; I will take your wives and give them to another man before your very eyes and he shall sleep with your wives under this very sun. You acted in secret, but I will make this happen in the sight of all Israel and in broad daylight.
David: I stand guilty before the Lord!
Nathan: The Lord has remitted your sin; you shall not die. However, since you have spurned the Lord by this deed, even the child about to be born to you shall die.
Act 5
(Setting: The royal palace)
Narrator: Nathan went home, and the Lord afflicted the child that Uriah’s wife had borne to David, and it became critically ill.
David: God, please heal the child! I’m fasting, I’m sleeping on the ground, I’m trying to show you how repentant I am.
Servants: Get up from the ground, Your Majesty, and partake of food.
David: No
Narrator: On the seventh day, the child died.
Servants: (whispering) We can’t tell David! We spoke to him when the child was alive and he wouldn’t listen to us; how can we tell him that the child is dead? He might do something terrible.
David: I see that you are whispering. Is the child dead?
Servants: Yes.
Narrator: Thereupon David rose from the ground; he bathed and anointed himself, and he changed his clothes. He went into the House of the Lord and prostrated himself. Then he went home and asked for food, which they set before him, and he ate.
Servants: Why have you acted in this manner? While the child was alive you fasted and wept because I thought: “Who knows? The Lord may have pity on me, and the child may live.” But now that he is dead, why should I fast? Can I bring him back again? I shall go to him, but he will never come back to me.
Narrator: David consoled his wife Batsheva. He was intimate with her again; she bore a son and she named him Solomon. The Lord favored him and sent a message through the prophet Nathan that he should also be named Yedidiah.
Some topics that the Rabbi's might be OK with:
- Creation
- Abraham destroying the Idols
- Sippur Yosef
- Pesach
- Each one of the Shoftim
These are just some ideas. There could be more, there could be less. They might not even be OK with anything. I think that they should be OK with some at least.