To Till and to Tend

This piece was originally posted on Jewcy.com.

I go to my closet every morning, push around a lot of hangers and choose what to wear. If a favorite pair of pants is in the wash, no matter: I have another. If this black sweater doesn’t match my pants, or the occasion, or the weather, or my mood, no matter: I have another.

Yet I don’t think of myself as having too much. Good people (the kind I imagine myself to be) don’t have too much. We don’t eat too much or drink too much or spend too much or own too much or use too much.

But there it is: A closetful of plenty. I know I am not alone. America is bursting with too-muchness. So much so that we have to build special buildings just to hold the too-much stuff that won’t fit into our increasingly too-big homes.

So I am left to wonder: How did my closet get this way? If I have a lot now, then a while ago, along the road from Some to Plenty, I must have had Just Enough. When was that? Why didn’t I notice? Why didn’t I stop?

Every time we turn on the TV, surf the web, or read a magazine, the challenge stares us in the face: How much more do we need? In light of this assault, it is hard to know how to measure enough. It sounds like it could be a third grade word problem: If I have Plenty of clothes in my closet, how many would I have to give away to get back to Enough? Yet, the solution lies not in numbers, but in the spirit. It demands that I reconnect with the notion of “full,” and that I cultivate a modest but satisfying measure of Fullness.

If we could turn down our appetite thermostats—if we could become fuller sooner—we would have a head-start on solving environmental degradation. Imagine how much less damaging our lifelong footprints would be if our E-quotient, “Enough quotient,” was modestly set, and if we always stopped when it was full?

It's true that fixing the environment requires energetic research and development to bring us new technologies at an affordable price. But is also requires a renewed awareness of the blessings of sova, satisfaction, satedness, Enoughness (a word that Alice Trillin used). If we "needed" less stuff, if we wanted less stuff, there would be more resources to share and more goods to go around, which would buy more time to discover technological fixes.

Most of all, people would be happier, for we are driven to accumulate too much by a persistent, marketplace-cultivated sense of dissatisfaction in what we still don’t have, and thus what we have not yet become.

The path to Enoughness is satisfaction and pleasure in what we already possess, and who we are. In such a spiritual state, everyone—including the natural world—would win.

With bellies full of delicious breads and cereals, many have put the thoughts of Passover behind them. Yet, there is a tradition called Sefirat HaOmer – counting of the Omer – which counts each of the 50 days leading up to Shavuot.  Though rooted in daily grain offerings, rabbis transformed the Omer into a way to relive the journey from Exodus to the giving of the Torah at Mt. Sinai.

But there is a layer even more ancient.  As my grandfather (one can shep nachas from a grandparent, no?), Rabbi Jacob Milgrom (PhD) taught me years ago, the Omer also measures the passing of dangerous times, when the hot winds called hamsin (Sirocco) could blow in and destroy the season’s crops.  Hamsin is derived from the number 50 - hamishim in Hebrew and hamsun in Arabic.  This period of danger lasted 50 days, mirroring the span between Pesach and Shavuot, days which the people counted in trepidation until the danger passed.

1. Understanding the Might of Nature
The agricultural tradition of the Omer reminds us that nature has powers that are beyond our control.  Now more than ever, one of the greatest threats is the extremes in weather caused by climate change that technology has not yet solved.

2. Appreciating Nature
Shavuot is also called Chag HaBikkurim, festival of the first fruits.  As such, it is customary to adorn the synagogue with flowers and greenery. Growing up, we extended this tradition to our home where, to prepare, my siblings and I would wander in the backyard, clippers in hand, in order to convert our home into a green wonder.

3. Lowering our Carbon Emissions
Lastly, Shavuot lowers the carbon footprint of the Jewish people for two whole days with its culinary tradition – DAIRY!  Though there is no one source for this custom, there are multiple examples for Torah being compared to dairy.  A beautiful text for #2, Deuteronomy 32:13, describes God/Torah nourishing the people in this way: “God nursed (the way a mother nurses a baby) on honey from the rock.” Torah nourished the people of Israel; Torah is like divine milk. On Shavuot we not only study Torah, but eat it, too!

We would like to reconnect Shavuot with its agricultural and environmental traditions – if your community has found ways to do just that, please share the program and/or story here by commenting below.

Today is the 9^th Day, 1 week and 2 days of the Omer

Some links for Omer Study
Jewish Reconstructionist Federation’s Omer Tikkun Olam Text Study
Religious Action Center’s Social Justice Guide for Shavuot
MyJewishLearning.com Omer Section
Counting the Omer: A Tool for Nature Consciousness, Canfei Nesharim
United Synagogue – Making Each Day Count

Two weeks ago, the President announced a "momentous" global warming initiative, which essentially validated the status quo for the next two decades. As I wrote last week, this proposal misses the mark. I was not alone. As the New York Times reports, "critics — including environmentalists, scientists and lawmakers — said the effort was too little, too late." And the President's critics were not restricted to the United States. Although the President timed his remarks to kick-off a round of international climate discussions in Paris, the Agence France Press announced that those present at the meeting were universally "dismayed by the tenor" of the President's remarks. And Germany decried the speech as "a step backward."

On Capitol Hill, Representative Jay Inslee (D-Wash) dismissed the President's remarks as a "can't-do plan for a can-do people." His concern prompted Representative Inslee, along with Representative Ed Markey (D-Mass) and Henry Waxman (D-Cal) to declare four essential Principles for Global Warming Legislation. These leaders on climate change policy don't simply want to stabilize emissions in 2025 – they propose substantial reductions (15-20% of US emissions by 2020; 80% reductions by 2050). In particular, they ask the United States to introduce legislation to:

1) Reduce emissions to avoid dangerous global warming;
2) Transition America to a clean energy economy;
3) Recognize and minimize any economic impacts from global warming legislation; and
4) Aid communities and ecosystems vulnerable to harm from global warming.

I applaud Reps. Inslee, Markee and Waxman for stepping forward. Their declaration alone won't reduce US emissions. But hopefully, it will create the needed momentum to get a bill introduced in the House. If enough Members join the Principles, it will send an important message to the Committee on Energy and Commerce and to the President that the American public believes climate change is real and demands that the US respond.

Click here to read the COEJL Action Alert and urge your Representative to support the Global Warming Principles. And tell them that these Principles are just a starting point -- it's time to move beyond simply talking about climate change and to introduce legislation that makes a difference.

COEJL was part of the Jewish community's celebration of Earth Day.  Check out the post in the NJDC blog.

I opened my inbox today to a flood of emails. Yesterday, President Bush issued a much- anticipated "global warming initiative" – but the big climate "splash," left many angry in his wake. The spokeswomen for the White House claimed the President's plan would "lay the groundwork" for the next Administration by providing a "realistic intermediate goal" for US reductions. Yet, far from "laying the groundwork" for future reductions, the President's proposal has torn away at the foundation of the tremendous efforts of those on Capitol Hill and around the nation to respond to climate change.

The President's "realistic" intermediate goal is only "realistic" because it requires virtually no action whatsoever. He hopes to halt US emissions – from the electric utility sector alone – by 2025. Yet, according to the Energy Blog, the Administration announced last week that US emissions had already fallen by 1% last year. Admittedly, this was likely a one-year blip, which can be attributed to high gas prices and mild temperatures, which reduced the need for heating and cooling – but it certainly underscores the inadequacy of the President's proposal.

In fact, the Administration proposal flies in the face of scientific reality. Last year, the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change declared that emissions from industrialized nations must peak by 2015 – and decline by 20% by 2025. They won a Nobel Prize for this pronouncement. Yet, the Bush proposal does not require any reductions in that time frame. In fact, the "proposal" doesn't require reductions at all. It merely asks for voluntary commitments. The President insists this approach is necessary to avoid an unnecessary strain on the US economy. Yet, as Environmental Defense explains, simply delaying US reductions until 2014 (from 2012) would double necessary reductions (and associated costs) for the decade to come. And, as I wrote in my March 25^th post, the US Environmental Protection Agency has found that the key climate change legislation being considered by the Senate could be implemented without significant harm to the US economy.

Ironically, the Administration claims that its plan will "inform" the Senate-scheduled debate on climate change legislation. But the Senate does not need the President's assistance. To the contrary, the Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act provides for US emissions to fall by roughly 2% per year beginning in 2012, leading to 25% emission reductions by 2025 and 60-70% reductions by 2050. Reductions that will come from every sector of the economy. Bush's plan – to continue the status quo for nearly two decades – can hardly be seen as "informing" the debate.

More than two thousand years ago, Rabbi Hillel challenged, "If not now, when?" Today, Bush declared that we would begin to answer that question in 2025. But that answer is inadequate. Climate change is real. And the time for action is now.

[Visit The Jewish Week to read my op ed on the Bush climate initiative]

[To read more about the need for US leadership on climate change, visit my December 26 post: Play Ball, US Needs to Join the Team.]

 

 

 

This week I could not have been in a better time or place. Spring has sprung in New York City and it is beautiful, beautiful beyond my imagination.  Daffodils, tulips, magnolias, even ornamental cherries are out in full bloom, turning the bare parks and streets (yes, many of our streets have flowering flora) into public havens.

I have been taking walks every chance I could - Wednesday in Byrant Park, Thursday in the Carl Schurz Park, Shabbat in Central Park, and today in Madison Square Park.  But the best part about each stroll was that we (my walking buddy of the  day and I) were never alone.  The parks were filled with others who craved outdoor space, fresh air and sights of spring.

Hundreds of years ago people did not lack greenery or nature - urban sprawl hadn’t yet been invented.  Still, rabbis understood that no matter how close nature is “out there,” cities need a bit of it “in here."

“It is forbidden to live in a city that does not have a garden or greenery." - Mishna Kiddushin 4:12

As I have referenced before, I do my best to connect with life sustaining earth, even as I live three floors from it.  Having potted gardens and backyards are wonderful for personal pleasure, but this text goes beyond.  It requires us to live in a city with a garden, not a home.  This week reminded me why.  In a city of 8 million people, I went to the parks and immediately became part of an intimate community.  Each park, a unique community, all sharing a time and place among the natural beauty.

I just returned from Israel where I spent the week with family and friends, absorbing the realities of a Jewish state. Some aspects of a Jewish state elicited a guffaw (see articles on Mikvah ladies and chametz), but some I found to be insightful, meaningful and even useful. For now, I will focus on the commandment of shmita,which is taking place this year, 5768. Leviticus 25:3-4 explains the mitzvah of shmita.

Six years you may sow your field, and six years you may prune your vineyard and gather in the yield. But in the seventh year the land shall have a sabbath of complete rest, a sabbath of the Lord: you shall not sow your field or prune your vineyard.

Torah doesn’t talk science, but in this case, the spiritual tradition is right on target. The text continues with the ramifications of fulfilling and ignoring the law. If you fulfill: “then shall the land make up for its sabbath years (26:34).” But, “the land shall be forsaken of (those Israelites who did not practice shmita), making up for its sabbath years by being desolate of them (26:43).” This isn’t just God having fun with random laws.

Scientifically speaking, when one plot of land is used in the same fashion, year after year, the soil becomes depleted of its nutrients. Eventually, crop yields weaken until the land is so depleted that it must be deserted.* On the opposite end, when a farmer allows land to lay fallow, nutrient balance is naturally restored, allowing for endless use and production.

Science and Torah take it one step further. Though the owner is not allowed to work the land, the naturally growing fruit remains available to people, wild animals and livestock. By allowing animals in the fields, they naturally fertilize it (think feces), enabling greater yields.

Michael Pollan, author of Omnivore’s Dilemma, spotlights a modern farmer who, by using methods similar to those demanded in Leviticus, manages a model sustainable farm.

It’s rare when Jewish law and modern science lead to a uniform conclusion - hopefully we’ll eventually get the message.

* Today, many farmers “solve” this problem with intense (oil-based) fertilization, an energy-intensive endeavor that, due to chemical run-off, is the source of a whole range of other environmental problems.

The sustainable farming vision of the Torah is still alive:
Jewish Farm School
Adamah, The Jewish Environmental Fellowship

I'm in a very good mood right now. Those of you who regularly read my posts, may know that this is not always the case. But tonight was a very good night. For one, it was Dolly Parton night on American Idol. And I love Dolly Parton. (I've been to Dollywood three times.) But Dolly alone does not account for my delight. Tonight was also the inaugural night of the Al Gore "We" campaign. So, between renditions of Dolly Parton songs (and even a song by the diva herself), I viewed an extraordinary commercial about the need for US action on climate change.

Al Gore launched a three-year, commercial-scale climate change campaign tonight. The plan, which will feature television, print, radio and online advertising has been hailed by the Washington Post as "one of the most ambitious and costly public advocacy campaigns in U.S. history." The goal is to engage 10-million climate activists. The civil rights movement boasted 5 million. Significantly, Gore has dedicated all of the proceeds from "An Inconvenient Truth" and his share of the Nobel Peace Prize (among other things) to help fund the $300-million, three-year campaign. Talk about putting your money where your mouth is.

The debut commercial is powerful. It challenges: "We didn't wait for someone else to guarantee civil rights or put a man on the moon. And we can't wait for someone else to solve the global climate crisis." As I wrote here and here, I couldn't agree more.

Gore's campaign couldn't come at a better time. The U.S. Senate is poised to consider federal climate change legislation in June. Yet, as I wrote in my post last week, far too many of our political leaders lack the courage to acknowledge the need for aggressive action. No one wants to be held responsible for voting for legislation that may increase electric prices in their jurisdiction or make it more expensive for their constituents to continue fueling their SUVs. And our Senators don't know that we're willing to accept these comparatively minor inconveniences. And, the sad truth is, many Americans aren't. Yet, Gore's campaign promises to speak to the masses – to persuade across political boundaries – about the importance of action. By reaching out to the captive viewers of prime time television, Gore will mobilize America – and, in turn, empower our leadership. Because the "inconvenient truth" is that we are all going to have to make sacrifices to solve climate change.

Please click here to join his campaign – and tell the world that We can solve the climate crisis.