This week's Torah Gems were prepared by
Adam Solomon
Shabbat Parshat Tazria-Metzora
Rosh Chodesh Iyar
In this week's parasha, Tazria-Metzora, there is an in depth discussion of the phenomenon of tzora'at. Tzora'at is sometimes erroneously translated as leprosy, though it is clear that it is not the same disease as Hanson's disease. Tzora'at was viewed as a loss of life-force, and it is interesting to compare actions a sufferer was to take with those of mourning. Someone afflicted with tzora'at tore his clothing and was supposed to cover his face up to his mustache. Today Jewish mourners tear their clothing. Covering one's face in the manner described was also a Jewish mourning practice in the past.
One action that someone afflicted with tzora'at was supposed to observe was calling out "impure, impure" as they walked down the road. Rashi, the prolific French medieval commentator, notes that in Torat Kohanim it says this is done to warn others of the sufferer's impure state. Then why is there the repetition of the word "impure"? Sometimes when a repition like this occurs in the Torah it is done for emphasis. Other times, it means there are two meanings implied.
Rabbi Moshe Elefant of the OU mentioned one possibility during a daf yomi lesson. One of the two repitions of the word "impure" is indeed to warn people of the sufferer's impure state, the other repitition, though, is a request for people to daven for a complete and speedy healing of the person with tzora'at.
Traditionally, it is understood that one of the causes of tzora'at is the sin of lashon ha'ra. By asking for (and hopefully receiving), other people's compassion perhaps the sufferer of tzora'at is repairing damage that lashon ha'ra causes the community. I think the Torah is also saying that it is more important to give compassion to the sick rather than blaming them for their illness. How often when someone has a disease like lung cancer are we quick to ask that first question "did they smoke" rather than offering our hope for a refuah shleymah? Specifically, we'd be engaging in lashon ha'ra in that instance - it might be true, but it doesn't matter. What's required from us when someone is suffering is our compassion and prayers. Trying to understand why bad things happen is an understandable impulse, but it not necessarily a constructive or helpful one.
When Cantor Michelle Mason was an intern at KI she pointed out that processes for declaring someone afflicted and cured of tzora'at involved cohenim. Cohenim normally avoided situations when they would be exposed to ritual impurity, because it made them temporarily ineligible to participate in the Temple worship services. Yet, in the case of tzora'at, they were directly commanded to diagnose the affliction and thereby expose themselves to ritual impurity. Cantor Mason posited that the personal involvement of the cohenim was a comfort to someone afflicted with tzora'at.
Since we are supposed to be a nation of priests, I hope that we take inspiration from this week's parasha to offer comfort and prayer for people who are sick.
Friday, April 24, 2009
Shabbat Parshat Shemini
This week's Torah Gems were prepared by
Jodi Hecht
Shabbat Parshat Shemini
Parshat Shemini seems to be divided between the events of the untimely and tragic deaths of Aaron's two eldest sons and Hashem's commandments to Aaron listing the pure and impure animals to eat. It's a little unsettling that these two events are juxtaposed. Perhaps Hashem is sending us a wake up call to pay attention - what follows about the Jewish dietary laws is important. However the placement suggests that the fate of Aaron's sons may befall the Jews if we fail to adhere to Hashem's orders.
Parshat Shemini refers to four categories of animals: land, water, air and insects. Hashem commands that we should only eat land animals that chew their cuds and have split hooves. We may eat only animals from the water that have both fins and scales. The Parshat tells us not to eat birds of prey. Some Talmudic interpretations suggest that eating these foods would give Jewish souls the characteristics of docility and gentleness. Finally we are permitted to eat the six-legged insects that hop. I have always wondered why grasshoppers and locusts are explicitly described in the Torah. Was there ever a custom to eat them in the Jewish community? Are they considered meat or pareve by modern kashrut standards?
It's wonderful to think that with a common set of dietary laws, you could share a meal with a Jew anywhere around the world. One single Jew is connected to a whole community.
This Shabbat may you enjoy your Galiforme soup, roasted Bovine (ruminant ungulate), simmered Salmonidae, chocolate covered Orthoptera, lots of fruits and vegetables and of course leavened Triticum.
Shabbat Shalom.
Jodi Hecht
Shabbat Parshat Shemini
Parshat Shemini seems to be divided between the events of the untimely and tragic deaths of Aaron's two eldest sons and Hashem's commandments to Aaron listing the pure and impure animals to eat. It's a little unsettling that these two events are juxtaposed. Perhaps Hashem is sending us a wake up call to pay attention - what follows about the Jewish dietary laws is important. However the placement suggests that the fate of Aaron's sons may befall the Jews if we fail to adhere to Hashem's orders.
Parshat Shemini refers to four categories of animals: land, water, air and insects. Hashem commands that we should only eat land animals that chew their cuds and have split hooves. We may eat only animals from the water that have both fins and scales. The Parshat tells us not to eat birds of prey. Some Talmudic interpretations suggest that eating these foods would give Jewish souls the characteristics of docility and gentleness. Finally we are permitted to eat the six-legged insects that hop. I have always wondered why grasshoppers and locusts are explicitly described in the Torah. Was there ever a custom to eat them in the Jewish community? Are they considered meat or pareve by modern kashrut standards?
It's wonderful to think that with a common set of dietary laws, you could share a meal with a Jew anywhere around the world. One single Jew is connected to a whole community.
This Shabbat may you enjoy your Galiforme soup, roasted Bovine (ruminant ungulate), simmered Salmonidae, chocolate covered Orthoptera, lots of fruits and vegetables and of course leavened Triticum.
Shabbat Shalom.
Shabbat Chol Hamoed Pesach
This week's Torah Gems were prepared by
Bruce Weinstock
Shabbat Chol Hamoed Pesach
Exodus 33:13-14
"Now, if I have truly gained Your favor, let me know Your ways (d'rachecha) that I may know you and continue in your favor. Consider, too, that this nation is your people.
And He said, 'I will go in the lead and will lighten your burden.' "
The verses above are the second and third verses of the Torah reading done every year for The Sabbath of Passover. The scene occurs shortly after the incident of the Golden Calf. In the prior chapters, G-d has made it clear that despite agreeing to not annihilate the people and have the offspring of Moses be the sole inheritor of the land, all is not forgiven. G-d will no longer lead the people through the wilderness, but will send an angel to show the way. G-d is withdrawing.
Our reading this Shabbat starts with the successful attempt by Moses to have G-d reconsider and have G-d come close again and lead the people through the wilderness.
I was struck by the juxtaposition of two concepts in the same verse. What does Moses knowing G-d's ways have to do with G-d considering "too, that the nation is your people". Further, what was so compelling about Moses' argument?
The Talmud in Brachot 7a discusses the components of effective prayer and examines this line as an example. It explains that by asking to know G-d's ways, Moses is asking the ultimate question about how G-d and the world functions... What is the reason that G-d's ways include a good life for some of the righteous and suffering of some of the righteous while granting suffering to some of the wicked but a good life to some of the wicked. The Talmud continues by offering many conflicting views of G-d's answer.
Among these many answers, Rabbi Meir suggests that G-d gives a non-answer. He tells Moses that G-d's Mercy and Favor are powerful, but unpredictable. We now can see that by eliciting this answer with his skillful question, Moses has given G-d an opening. Moses has in effect said 'Your WAY is at times to grant Mercy when observable indicators call for Justice. Well, "consider, too, that this nation is your people." If any moment calls for asking your Mercy to outweigh your Justice, this one does.'
Another Talmudic master suggests that the influence of a righteous or wicked parent will often challenge the ability of a person to remain true to one's own righteous or wicked nature. The successes or failures to meet these challenges may not be visible to onlookers, but they are powerful in shaping the future and shaping the reward or punishment. Once again, by asking his skillful question, Moses has reminded G-d of the righteousness of the forefathers and consideration of Mercy.
The Etz Chaim Chumash points out the wonderful pun in Moses' request. The word D'rachecha can mean WAY in the highly cosmological sense of the essence of G-d's nature. It can also mean the WAY or physical path through the wilderness.
The Talmud discussion of the influence of family on the righteous and wicked hinted to me of the four children of the Seder. Rabbi Miriam Spitzer suggests an alternative translation to the Haggaddah verse "Kneged arba banim dibra Torah". She notes that the typical translation "the Torah alludes to four children" could alternatively be rendered as "the Torah speaks 'k'neged' AGAINST the notion that there are four children". There is only one. We are all variations on that one child....The Righteous, Wicked, Simple, Unable child." Applying our Torah reading to Rabbi Spitzer's insight, we can see that our Seder traditions reach out to touch all that we are. We address our highly spiritual intellectual selves who want to know everything we can about G-d's WAYS. We simultaneously address our simple physical selves who just need to eat and be shown the correct WAY of what to do.
We can now return to the Talmud master who spoke to the power of the influence of our ancestors. At the Seder, perhaps more strongly than anywhere else, we recognize the influence of immediate family, ancestral family, and the adopted family comprised of those sitting around our tables who help shape our righteousness and our wickedness. At our Seders we and our families will be engaging and rebellious and ask simple questions and simply observe. May we successfully use the powerful influence of our seders to seek out G-d's path. May they help us better find the right opportunities in our lives to encourage mercy to outweigh justice.
Chag Sameach and Shabbat Shalom.
PARASHAT Tzav
This week's Torah Gems were prepared by
Anochi Atoncha
PARASHAT Tzav
Shabbat Hagadol
"Behold, I send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and awesome day of Hashem. And he will cause the hearts of fathers to return to their sons and the hearts of sons to their fathers, lest I come and strike the land with utter destruction." (Malachi 3:23-24)
When we read these verses at the end of the prophetic reading on Shabbat HaGadol, our custom is to repeat the penultimate verse. According to Rashi, we do this to end the reading on a positive note. We do the same when we read the end of Isaiah (on Shabbat Rosh Chodesh), Eichah (on Tisha B'Av), and Kohelet (on Shabbat Chol HaMoed Sukkot.)
We observe a variation of this custom at the public reading of Jonah during Mincha Yom Kippur. At the conclusion of the book we skip to the final verses of Micah, which are far more uplifting than the strange abrupt ending of Jonah.
It would seem self-evident that public readings during holidays should end on an upbeat. But on closer inspection, the reasons for re-reading the penultimate verse are not at all obvious.
Take our verse as an example. First, it is important to note that these words are the last words spoken by a prophet in the Tanakh. These final words prophesy the coming of the Messianic era. And these are the last words of prophecy that we hear before Pesach, the redemption holiday par excellence.
Perhaps the sages felt that 'utter destruction' (cherem) is not exactly the sentiment that we want to take with us to the seder. Under what circumstances does Hashem come and destroy the land, if fathers' and sons' hearts do not turn toward each other, or if Elijah does not come and cause the turnings to happen? It seems to me that if Elijah arranges the meetings, the turning of the hearts will surely follow. Therefore utter destruction is presented only as a grim alternative to utter redemption.
But what about the beginning of the verse? The prophet describes Elijah's mission primarily as a series of reunions between fathers and sons. According to Malachi, reinforcement of family bonds is the proximate cause of the coming of the Messiah. On the eve of Pesach, when families reunite at the seder table, this is a perfectly stunning message. The seeds of Messianic redemption are sown in every home where the door is opened for Elijah.
Anochi Atoncha
PARASHAT Tzav
Shabbat Hagadol
"Behold, I send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and awesome day of Hashem. And he will cause the hearts of fathers to return to their sons and the hearts of sons to their fathers, lest I come and strike the land with utter destruction." (Malachi 3:23-24)
When we read these verses at the end of the prophetic reading on Shabbat HaGadol, our custom is to repeat the penultimate verse. According to Rashi, we do this to end the reading on a positive note. We do the same when we read the end of Isaiah (on Shabbat Rosh Chodesh), Eichah (on Tisha B'Av), and Kohelet (on Shabbat Chol HaMoed Sukkot.)
We observe a variation of this custom at the public reading of Jonah during Mincha Yom Kippur. At the conclusion of the book we skip to the final verses of Micah, which are far more uplifting than the strange abrupt ending of Jonah.
It would seem self-evident that public readings during holidays should end on an upbeat. But on closer inspection, the reasons for re-reading the penultimate verse are not at all obvious.
Take our verse as an example. First, it is important to note that these words are the last words spoken by a prophet in the Tanakh. These final words prophesy the coming of the Messianic era. And these are the last words of prophecy that we hear before Pesach, the redemption holiday par excellence.
Perhaps the sages felt that 'utter destruction' (cherem) is not exactly the sentiment that we want to take with us to the seder. Under what circumstances does Hashem come and destroy the land, if fathers' and sons' hearts do not turn toward each other, or if Elijah does not come and cause the turnings to happen? It seems to me that if Elijah arranges the meetings, the turning of the hearts will surely follow. Therefore utter destruction is presented only as a grim alternative to utter redemption.
But what about the beginning of the verse? The prophet describes Elijah's mission primarily as a series of reunions between fathers and sons. According to Malachi, reinforcement of family bonds is the proximate cause of the coming of the Messiah. On the eve of Pesach, when families reunite at the seder table, this is a perfectly stunning message. The seeds of Messianic redemption are sown in every home where the door is opened for Elijah.
PARASHAT Vayikra
This week's Torah Gems were prepared by
Anochi Atoncha
PARASHAT Vayikra
"If (asher) a ruler sins, and commits one from among all the commandments of Hashem that may not be done - unintentionally - and becomes guilty." (Vayikra 4:22)
Rashi: "If a ruler sins": The word "asher" here is related to "ashrei = fortunately", as if to say fortunate is the generation whose ruler sets his heart to bring an atonement for his unintentional sin. All the more so that he has regrets over his intentional sins.
Our verse appears in the course of a long list of sins and their corresponding offerings. The majority of these begin with the formula "If (im) so-and-so should sin in such-and-such a manner..." Rashi comes to explain the unique substitution of the word "asher" for "im". Rashi's difficulty, according to Concordantzia Chadasha, is that this is the only place in all of Tanakh where asher could be taken to mean "if."
Rashi, citing Torat Kohanim, prefers a homiletical explanation over a grammatical one. He draws attention to the similarity between the words 'asher' and 'ashrei', implying that the Torah hints here as to one deeper meaning of the verse. Rashi often resorts to midrashic or aggadic explanations when a grammatical difficulty cannot be resolved another way.
Whereas homiletic explanations are always welcome, in our case we may have missed an opportunity to explore another deeper meaning of the verse.
Concordanztia Chadasha suggests that that asher here may also mean "in the event that", or "when." Now the verse begins 'When a ruler sins..."
This changes our understanding of the verse as a whole. The Torah is no longer commanding what sacrifice a ruler must bring if he sins, the Torah is commanding what he must do when he sins, as if it is a foregone conclusion that a ruler will sin.
Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. The Torah recognizes that positions of power sets up conditions that cause rulers to sin.
Rashi understands this insight, but he soft-pedals it. Then he adds a further point regarding the relation between rulers and the people. Our verse commands that rulers bring sacrifices for unintentional sins. A ruler who follows such a commandment will surely bring sacrifices for intentional sins. Such a God-fearing ruler will never allow himself to be corrupted by power.
Anochi Atoncha
PARASHAT Vayikra
"If (asher) a ruler sins, and commits one from among all the commandments of Hashem that may not be done - unintentionally - and becomes guilty." (Vayikra 4:22)
Rashi: "If a ruler sins": The word "asher" here is related to "ashrei = fortunately", as if to say fortunate is the generation whose ruler sets his heart to bring an atonement for his unintentional sin. All the more so that he has regrets over his intentional sins.
Our verse appears in the course of a long list of sins and their corresponding offerings. The majority of these begin with the formula "If (im) so-and-so should sin in such-and-such a manner..." Rashi comes to explain the unique substitution of the word "asher" for "im". Rashi's difficulty, according to Concordantzia Chadasha, is that this is the only place in all of Tanakh where asher could be taken to mean "if."
Rashi, citing Torat Kohanim, prefers a homiletical explanation over a grammatical one. He draws attention to the similarity between the words 'asher' and 'ashrei', implying that the Torah hints here as to one deeper meaning of the verse. Rashi often resorts to midrashic or aggadic explanations when a grammatical difficulty cannot be resolved another way.
Whereas homiletic explanations are always welcome, in our case we may have missed an opportunity to explore another deeper meaning of the verse.
Concordanztia Chadasha suggests that that asher here may also mean "in the event that", or "when." Now the verse begins 'When a ruler sins..."
This changes our understanding of the verse as a whole. The Torah is no longer commanding what sacrifice a ruler must bring if he sins, the Torah is commanding what he must do when he sins, as if it is a foregone conclusion that a ruler will sin.
Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. The Torah recognizes that positions of power sets up conditions that cause rulers to sin.
Rashi understands this insight, but he soft-pedals it. Then he adds a further point regarding the relation between rulers and the people. Our verse commands that rulers bring sacrifices for unintentional sins. A ruler who follows such a commandment will surely bring sacrifices for intentional sins. Such a God-fearing ruler will never allow himself to be corrupted by power.
PARASHAT Vayakhel Shabbat Pekude Shabbat Hachodesh
This week's Torah Gems were prepared by
Francine Aaron
PARASHAT Vayakhel
Shabbat Pekude
Shabbat Hachodesh
* Vayikhal starts with work, when it should be done (six days) and when it should not be done (on the seventh, Shabbat). We are commanded two things - to work and to cease from work. Sometimes people forget the first part - to work. The Torah frowns upon laziness.
* The practicality of the Torah is wonderful, and brings on a smile. In chapter 39 sentence 23, in the directions for the hole necessary for the head opening of a robe, we are told to put a binding around the edges of the hole so that it won't tear. Those of us who sew have taken this suggestion and we buy seam binding for this purpose; two sentences later we are told that the hem of the robe should have embroidered pomegranates with a gold bell in between each pomegranate. Just in case we didn't understand, the next sentence describes specifically: bell, pomegranate, bell, pomegranate. That's nice. Very user friendly.
* The work involved in building the tabernacle and the furniture and equipment and robes was truly a labor of love. The word "heart" (lev) is mentioned 12 times: Chapter 35, sentence 5; 10; 21; 22; 25; 26; 29; 34. Chapter 36, sentence 1; and 3 times in sentence 2.
* Those who think that the details of the building of the tabernacle and its equipment are superfluous should try to describe their work desk in words, so that it can be taken apart and reconstructed in the exact way.
* Artists play an important role in these chapters. Bezalel (which means in the shadow of God) is described as being filled with the spirit of God, and is wise of heart, and has wisdom, understanding, and knowledge. Wise of heart - courageous (French - coeur - heart). It takes courage to be an artist, to make choices, and to be confident of one's choice. This is a gift (spirit) of God given to all those who create.
* Vayikhal relates closely to our synagogue Kehillath Israel. The same root "kahal" (congregation; assembly) is in both. Hopefully just as in Vayikhal when the Israelites gave their time, and services, and donations willingly and from the heart, so too may we at Kehillath Israel give willingly of our time and donations to our synagogue and to all good causes, and may we too get to the point where we can say like Moses (36:6) Enough, Enough - we don't need any more.
Francine Aaron
PARASHAT Vayakhel
Shabbat Pekude
Shabbat Hachodesh
* Vayikhal starts with work, when it should be done (six days) and when it should not be done (on the seventh, Shabbat). We are commanded two things - to work and to cease from work. Sometimes people forget the first part - to work. The Torah frowns upon laziness.
* The practicality of the Torah is wonderful, and brings on a smile. In chapter 39 sentence 23, in the directions for the hole necessary for the head opening of a robe, we are told to put a binding around the edges of the hole so that it won't tear. Those of us who sew have taken this suggestion and we buy seam binding for this purpose; two sentences later we are told that the hem of the robe should have embroidered pomegranates with a gold bell in between each pomegranate. Just in case we didn't understand, the next sentence describes specifically: bell, pomegranate, bell, pomegranate. That's nice. Very user friendly.
* The work involved in building the tabernacle and the furniture and equipment and robes was truly a labor of love. The word "heart" (lev) is mentioned 12 times: Chapter 35, sentence 5; 10; 21; 22; 25; 26; 29; 34. Chapter 36, sentence 1; and 3 times in sentence 2.
* Those who think that the details of the building of the tabernacle and its equipment are superfluous should try to describe their work desk in words, so that it can be taken apart and reconstructed in the exact way.
* Artists play an important role in these chapters. Bezalel (which means in the shadow of God) is described as being filled with the spirit of God, and is wise of heart, and has wisdom, understanding, and knowledge. Wise of heart - courageous (French - coeur - heart). It takes courage to be an artist, to make choices, and to be confident of one's choice. This is a gift (spirit) of God given to all those who create.
* Vayikhal relates closely to our synagogue Kehillath Israel. The same root "kahal" (congregation; assembly) is in both. Hopefully just as in Vayikhal when the Israelites gave their time, and services, and donations willingly and from the heart, so too may we at Kehillath Israel give willingly of our time and donations to our synagogue and to all good causes, and may we too get to the point where we can say like Moses (36:6) Enough, Enough - we don't need any more.
PARASHAT Terumah
This week's Torah Gems were prepared by
Francine Aaron
PARASHAT Terumah
Parshat Terumah teaches us the importance of willingly contributing to the construction and maintenance of a place of worship - today it is the synagogue. In sentence 2 of chapter 25 the Torah says specifically that it should be a donation from the heart ("libo" - his heart). The word "terumah" means a contribution and it has in it a smaller word "ram" which means "high" because when one donates, one is raised to a higher level.
In this parsha we are given extremely great details of the dimensions and materials to be used in constructing the sanctuary, the ark, the menorah and all the instruments to be used in performing the various tasks. It is true that the Israelites had to build the items because God commanded them to do so, just as we must obey all of God's commandments simply because we were told to do so, but very often there is a beneficial by-product which we can understand, and in this case the by-product is the very useful one of learning skills which would be necessary when the people would enter Israel. The generation who learned these skills would pass on the knowledge to their children. Carpenters, weavers, embroiderers, goldsmiths, silversmiths, jewelers, artists, sculptors, bakers, furriers, dyers, engravers, tailors, potters, perfumers - these are all arts of a very advanced society, and would give the Israelites a good head start in settling the land. They might also use these skills during their sojourn in the desert to trade with other desert peoples.
And from the detailed instructions which God gives to Moses we can learn a lesson for our lives - that if we must pay such close attention to tangible items - how much more so should we be careful and pay close attention to the actions of our lives - and connect our acts and thoughts to the teachings of the Torah.
Francine Aaron
PARASHAT Terumah
Parshat Terumah teaches us the importance of willingly contributing to the construction and maintenance of a place of worship - today it is the synagogue. In sentence 2 of chapter 25 the Torah says specifically that it should be a donation from the heart ("libo" - his heart). The word "terumah" means a contribution and it has in it a smaller word "ram" which means "high" because when one donates, one is raised to a higher level.
In this parsha we are given extremely great details of the dimensions and materials to be used in constructing the sanctuary, the ark, the menorah and all the instruments to be used in performing the various tasks. It is true that the Israelites had to build the items because God commanded them to do so, just as we must obey all of God's commandments simply because we were told to do so, but very often there is a beneficial by-product which we can understand, and in this case the by-product is the very useful one of learning skills which would be necessary when the people would enter Israel. The generation who learned these skills would pass on the knowledge to their children. Carpenters, weavers, embroiderers, goldsmiths, silversmiths, jewelers, artists, sculptors, bakers, furriers, dyers, engravers, tailors, potters, perfumers - these are all arts of a very advanced society, and would give the Israelites a good head start in settling the land. They might also use these skills during their sojourn in the desert to trade with other desert peoples.
And from the detailed instructions which God gives to Moses we can learn a lesson for our lives - that if we must pay such close attention to tangible items - how much more so should we be careful and pay close attention to the actions of our lives - and connect our acts and thoughts to the teachings of the Torah.
PARASHAT Mishpatim
This week's Torah Gems were prepared by
Anochi Atoncha
PARASHAT Mishpatim
Mishpatim - Dangerous Property
The tradition teaches us that every word of the Torah is chosen deliberately and purposefully. This rule applies even when a word's meaning changes from one verse to the next! In this week's parasha, words based on the root bet-ayin-resh appear in verses Shemot 22:4 and 22:5, but with different significations in each verse. What follows is verse 22:4 with all words translated into English except for those based on the root bet-ayin-resh, for reasons that will become clear further on.
"If a man shall ya-v-er a field or vineyard, or he either lets his bi-y-roh loose, or he oo-v-y-air it in another man's field, from the best of his field and the best of his vineyard shall he pay."
Rashi's interpretation: "ya-v-er, b-i-roh, oo-vi-ayr: these have the sense of 'animal', as in Bemidbar 20:4 ...we and our animals (oo-v-i-ray-nu)"
According to Rashi, a translation of verse 22:4 might sound like this: If a man shall let an animal graze a field or vineyard, or he either lets his animal run loose, or he grazes it in another man's field...
The Talmud provides the source of Rashi's interpretation. Much of the first chapter of Tractate Bava Kamma is derived from our verse. The ox is taken as the paradigmatic "dangerous property" that can damage another man's field or vineyard if not properly supervised.
But this interpretation presents a difficulty: Shemot 22:4 and Bemidbar 20:4 are the only places in Tanakh where bet-ayin-resh is understood to signify 'animal.' Elsewhere, the root usually signifies 'fire', either real or metaphoric. This is the sense of the root in Shemot 22:5:
"If a fire shall go forth and find thorns, and a stack of grain or a standing crop or a field is consumed, the one who kindled (ha-ma-vir) the fire (ha-b-ay-rah) shall make restitution."
Now read verse 22:4 using the more common signification of bet-ayin-resh:
"If a man shall kindle a field or vineyard - whether he sets the fire or allows his fire to burn another man's field - from the best of his field and the best of his vineyard shall he pay."
Why does the tradition hold that bet-ayin-resh means 'animal' when the verse makes sense with the common signification 'fire'?
Perhaps the difficulty could be resolved by tracing the derivation of the root bet-ayin-resh. According to Brown-Driver-Briggs, the earliest Hebrew signification of bet-ayin-resh was 'seek out, collect, glean.' From here significations emerged meaning 'consume' as a fire consumes. Simultaneously, the root branched into significations for animals that seek out and consume in the same unrestrained manner as fire.
Fire and oxen share the characteristic that they go out and destroy crops and vineyards because it is their nature to do so. They both travel to damage, and both must be watched carefully. But fire and oxen differ in that the latter possess ruach chayim (the breath of life) and the former does not. Oxen inadvertently do damage in the process of natural pleasurable activities such as eating and scratching. If the Torah had taught us only fire, and not oxen, we might have thought that we are liable only for damages done by inanimate objects and not by live animals (Bava Kamma 2a.)
In these two verses, the Torah explodes bet-ayin-resh into several pieces, each of which teaches us new insights as to the nature dangerous property. The English translations of verses 22:4 and 22:5 do not permit us to understand the nature of dangerous property as deeply unless we appreciate the Torah's deliberate choice of words based on bet-ayin-resh.
For further consideration:
On the night before Pesach, we perform the Bedikat Chametz, the search for any remaining crumbs of bread in our homes. The prayer we say is translated as follows:
"Blessed are You, Hashem, Sovereign of the universe, Who makes us holy with His mitzvahs, and commands us regarding the destruction (biur, using the root bet-ayin-resh) of chametz."
Why is the Bedikat Chametz sanctified with a blessing over destruction, when the ritual destruction of chametz (not coincidentally, by fire) does not occur until the next day?
Anochi Atoncha
PARASHAT Mishpatim
Mishpatim - Dangerous Property
The tradition teaches us that every word of the Torah is chosen deliberately and purposefully. This rule applies even when a word's meaning changes from one verse to the next! In this week's parasha, words based on the root bet-ayin-resh appear in verses Shemot 22:4 and 22:5, but with different significations in each verse. What follows is verse 22:4 with all words translated into English except for those based on the root bet-ayin-resh, for reasons that will become clear further on.
"If a man shall ya-v-er a field or vineyard, or he either lets his bi-y-roh loose, or he oo-v-y-air it in another man's field, from the best of his field and the best of his vineyard shall he pay."
Rashi's interpretation: "ya-v-er, b-i-roh, oo-vi-ayr: these have the sense of 'animal', as in Bemidbar 20:4 ...we and our animals (oo-v-i-ray-nu)"
According to Rashi, a translation of verse 22:4 might sound like this: If a man shall let an animal graze a field or vineyard, or he either lets his animal run loose, or he grazes it in another man's field...
The Talmud provides the source of Rashi's interpretation. Much of the first chapter of Tractate Bava Kamma is derived from our verse. The ox is taken as the paradigmatic "dangerous property" that can damage another man's field or vineyard if not properly supervised.
But this interpretation presents a difficulty: Shemot 22:4 and Bemidbar 20:4 are the only places in Tanakh where bet-ayin-resh is understood to signify 'animal.' Elsewhere, the root usually signifies 'fire', either real or metaphoric. This is the sense of the root in Shemot 22:5:
"If a fire shall go forth and find thorns, and a stack of grain or a standing crop or a field is consumed, the one who kindled (ha-ma-vir) the fire (ha-b-ay-rah) shall make restitution."
Now read verse 22:4 using the more common signification of bet-ayin-resh:
"If a man shall kindle a field or vineyard - whether he sets the fire or allows his fire to burn another man's field - from the best of his field and the best of his vineyard shall he pay."
Why does the tradition hold that bet-ayin-resh means 'animal' when the verse makes sense with the common signification 'fire'?
Perhaps the difficulty could be resolved by tracing the derivation of the root bet-ayin-resh. According to Brown-Driver-Briggs, the earliest Hebrew signification of bet-ayin-resh was 'seek out, collect, glean.' From here significations emerged meaning 'consume' as a fire consumes. Simultaneously, the root branched into significations for animals that seek out and consume in the same unrestrained manner as fire.
Fire and oxen share the characteristic that they go out and destroy crops and vineyards because it is their nature to do so. They both travel to damage, and both must be watched carefully. But fire and oxen differ in that the latter possess ruach chayim (the breath of life) and the former does not. Oxen inadvertently do damage in the process of natural pleasurable activities such as eating and scratching. If the Torah had taught us only fire, and not oxen, we might have thought that we are liable only for damages done by inanimate objects and not by live animals (Bava Kamma 2a.)
In these two verses, the Torah explodes bet-ayin-resh into several pieces, each of which teaches us new insights as to the nature dangerous property. The English translations of verses 22:4 and 22:5 do not permit us to understand the nature of dangerous property as deeply unless we appreciate the Torah's deliberate choice of words based on bet-ayin-resh.
For further consideration:
On the night before Pesach, we perform the Bedikat Chametz, the search for any remaining crumbs of bread in our homes. The prayer we say is translated as follows:
"Blessed are You, Hashem, Sovereign of the universe, Who makes us holy with His mitzvahs, and commands us regarding the destruction (biur, using the root bet-ayin-resh) of chametz."
Why is the Bedikat Chametz sanctified with a blessing over destruction, when the ritual destruction of chametz (not coincidentally, by fire) does not occur until the next day?
PARASHAT Beshallach
This week's Torah Gems were prepared by
Jodi Hecht
PARASHAT Beshallach
This week in Parshat Beshallach we read that Pharaoh finally agrees to let the Jews out of Egypt. The Jews leave quickly and begin a path to an uncertain but hopefully better future in the Promised Land. However, Pharaoh's mind is changed and he sends his Egyptian army to pursue the Jews. Trapped by the oncoming Egyptian army and the powerful Red Sea, Moses raises his staff and Hashem miraculously the sea splits and the Jews cross safely. In an equally spectacular but now sobering act, Moses lowers his staff and Hashem allows the wall of water to come crashing down destroying the Egyptian army. Deeply grateful to Hashem, Moses and Miriam lead the men and women respectfully in a song of praise.
The Jews have much to praise and be thankful for in this Parshat. In one Chasidic online source Parshat Beshallach is considered Shabbat Shira or the "Song Sabbath". In this Parshat it says that Miriam takes a timbrel (or tambourine) and leads the women in song. There is good reason to be thankful as Hashem is certainly present and active in the lives of these Jews. I am struck however as to why Miriam brought a tambourine with her in the first place. One would have thought this would not be an essential item to bring on this perilous journey. The Parshat describes the Jews distress on the long and arduous voyage through the desert. Within three days they are thirsty and hungry and extremely disheartened. And yet in a succession of miracles, Hashem provides enough "fresh" water, meat and bread in the form of manna and instructs the Jews to rest on the seventh day. Even in the midst of the attacks by Amalek, Hashem protects the Jews.
Perhaps Miriam had some insight that praising Hashem for life itself was necessary. Perhaps Miriam knew that song and particularly voices raised together would lift the spirits of the wandering Jews. Both music and dance can transcend the physical discomforts.
This Shabbat may you take a moment to sing a thanks for your own Jewish lives.
Shabbat Shalom
Jodi Hecht
PARASHAT Beshallach
This week in Parshat Beshallach we read that Pharaoh finally agrees to let the Jews out of Egypt. The Jews leave quickly and begin a path to an uncertain but hopefully better future in the Promised Land. However, Pharaoh's mind is changed and he sends his Egyptian army to pursue the Jews. Trapped by the oncoming Egyptian army and the powerful Red Sea, Moses raises his staff and Hashem miraculously the sea splits and the Jews cross safely. In an equally spectacular but now sobering act, Moses lowers his staff and Hashem allows the wall of water to come crashing down destroying the Egyptian army. Deeply grateful to Hashem, Moses and Miriam lead the men and women respectfully in a song of praise.
The Jews have much to praise and be thankful for in this Parshat. In one Chasidic online source Parshat Beshallach is considered Shabbat Shira or the "Song Sabbath". In this Parshat it says that Miriam takes a timbrel (or tambourine) and leads the women in song. There is good reason to be thankful as Hashem is certainly present and active in the lives of these Jews. I am struck however as to why Miriam brought a tambourine with her in the first place. One would have thought this would not be an essential item to bring on this perilous journey. The Parshat describes the Jews distress on the long and arduous voyage through the desert. Within three days they are thirsty and hungry and extremely disheartened. And yet in a succession of miracles, Hashem provides enough "fresh" water, meat and bread in the form of manna and instructs the Jews to rest on the seventh day. Even in the midst of the attacks by Amalek, Hashem protects the Jews.
Perhaps Miriam had some insight that praising Hashem for life itself was necessary. Perhaps Miriam knew that song and particularly voices raised together would lift the spirits of the wandering Jews. Both music and dance can transcend the physical discomforts.
This Shabbat may you take a moment to sing a thanks for your own Jewish lives.
Shabbat Shalom
PARASHAT Bo
This week's Torah Gems were prepared by
Adam Solomon
PARASHAT Bo
Parashat Bo is our source of laws of Passover. The parasha also recounts the first Passover celebration, even as it was happening. What does it mean that the first Passover festival was celebrated before Exodus actually happened? Why would our ancestors in slavery have to have eaten the symbolic foods of slavery, matza and bitter herbs, while still slaves?
Perhaps the answer lies in the Torah's anticipation of 'the wicked child's' question, "what does this mean to you?" Even before the actual Exodus takes place the foundation was laid for the Passover Seder. The Exodus is a liminal moment - I was going to say that it divided Jewish history, but perhaps it would be better to say that it started Jewish history. Prior to the Exodus we were a family, in Egypt we became a nation, but with the Exodus the Jewish people became independent actors in history.
The vigil of the original Exodus night is to be reenacted - in the era of the Temple in Jerusalem this would also have involved the paschal sacrifice. As Rashi, the prolific French medieval rabbi notes, details regarding this are expanded upon in BT Pesachim. Just as we left Egypt as a group, in Jerusalem the sacrifices were offered in large groups. Three different shifts were admitted to the Temple to do the sacrifice (the only one that non-Cohanim performed). In tractate Pesachim there is an extensive description of the ceremony.
The sacrifices were then roasted whole and eaten by families or groups of people who had signed up to participate together. Additional sacrifices were also prepared so that not only would there be plenty of food, but that the last bite people would eat would be from the paschal offering and that it would be that particular course which satisfied them.
Typically today the Passover Seder is a family affair - even with guests it doesn't seem to have the national flavor that Temple-era Passovers must have had and that the original Exodus certainly did. Of course with KI's community-wide second Seder on Thursday, April 9th, we will have an opportunity to come together in a manner similar to the gatherings described in Pesachim (if you would like to help with this year's second Seder contact the office).
Perhaps by creating the beginnings of the Seder and commanding the eating of symbolic foods, Hashem was giving the Jewish people the tools they would need to educate future generations even before Exodus! These tools anticipated and encouraged the questioning that children raised in freedom would ask.
Adam Solomon
PARASHAT Bo
Parashat Bo is our source of laws of Passover. The parasha also recounts the first Passover celebration, even as it was happening. What does it mean that the first Passover festival was celebrated before Exodus actually happened? Why would our ancestors in slavery have to have eaten the symbolic foods of slavery, matza and bitter herbs, while still slaves?
Perhaps the answer lies in the Torah's anticipation of 'the wicked child's' question, "what does this mean to you?" Even before the actual Exodus takes place the foundation was laid for the Passover Seder. The Exodus is a liminal moment - I was going to say that it divided Jewish history, but perhaps it would be better to say that it started Jewish history. Prior to the Exodus we were a family, in Egypt we became a nation, but with the Exodus the Jewish people became independent actors in history.
The vigil of the original Exodus night is to be reenacted - in the era of the Temple in Jerusalem this would also have involved the paschal sacrifice. As Rashi, the prolific French medieval rabbi notes, details regarding this are expanded upon in BT Pesachim. Just as we left Egypt as a group, in Jerusalem the sacrifices were offered in large groups. Three different shifts were admitted to the Temple to do the sacrifice (the only one that non-Cohanim performed). In tractate Pesachim there is an extensive description of the ceremony.
The sacrifices were then roasted whole and eaten by families or groups of people who had signed up to participate together. Additional sacrifices were also prepared so that not only would there be plenty of food, but that the last bite people would eat would be from the paschal offering and that it would be that particular course which satisfied them.
Typically today the Passover Seder is a family affair - even with guests it doesn't seem to have the national flavor that Temple-era Passovers must have had and that the original Exodus certainly did. Of course with KI's community-wide second Seder on Thursday, April 9th, we will have an opportunity to come together in a manner similar to the gatherings described in Pesachim (if you would like to help with this year's second Seder contact the office).
Perhaps by creating the beginnings of the Seder and commanding the eating of symbolic foods, Hashem was giving the Jewish people the tools they would need to educate future generations even before Exodus! These tools anticipated and encouraged the questioning that children raised in freedom would ask.
PARASHAT Va'era
This week's Torah Gems were prepared by
Anochi Atoncha
PARASHAT Va'era
"I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob with [the name] El-Shaddai, but [with] My name YHWH, I did not become known to them (Shmot 6:2)"
Can the Everlasting change? Or is it that Hashem remains the same; it is we who change?
Rabbi Hamilton taught us this week that Hashem's words to Moses in our pasuk indicate an evolution in Hashem's relationship to Am Yisroel. This is a liberating event, according to Rabbi Hamilton: Just as Hashem's relationship to us evolves, so can we grow and evolve in our relationship to Hashem. In other words, we needn't feel we ought to 'know' Hashem by the same name now as we did when we were children.
But a change in the relationship between Hashem and Am Yisroel doesn't mean that Hashem changes over time: WE DO.
Our relationship with Hashem may be thought of as a rotating orange. As the orange rotates, it maintains a superficial sameness. On closer inspection, however, we may notice subtle changes at the surface.
As an orange in the hand of the philosopher, so are we in Hashem's Hand. We change, rotate, or evolve, but Hashem remains changeless. As we rotate, our relation with respect to the Unmoving necessitates different perspective, even different names.
In Sefer Shmot, when Am Yisroel emerges as a people, Hashem reveals the attribute of mercy, previously unknown to Am Yisroel, who had until recently lived on the other side of the orange.
Anochi Atoncha
PARASHAT Va'era
"I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob with [the name] El-Shaddai, but [with] My name YHWH, I did not become known to them (Shmot 6:2)"
Can the Everlasting change? Or is it that Hashem remains the same; it is we who change?
Rabbi Hamilton taught us this week that Hashem's words to Moses in our pasuk indicate an evolution in Hashem's relationship to Am Yisroel. This is a liberating event, according to Rabbi Hamilton: Just as Hashem's relationship to us evolves, so can we grow and evolve in our relationship to Hashem. In other words, we needn't feel we ought to 'know' Hashem by the same name now as we did when we were children.
But a change in the relationship between Hashem and Am Yisroel doesn't mean that Hashem changes over time: WE DO.
Our relationship with Hashem may be thought of as a rotating orange. As the orange rotates, it maintains a superficial sameness. On closer inspection, however, we may notice subtle changes at the surface.
As an orange in the hand of the philosopher, so are we in Hashem's Hand. We change, rotate, or evolve, but Hashem remains changeless. As we rotate, our relation with respect to the Unmoving necessitates different perspective, even different names.
In Sefer Shmot, when Am Yisroel emerges as a people, Hashem reveals the attribute of mercy, previously unknown to Am Yisroel, who had until recently lived on the other side of the orange.
Parsha Tetzaveh
This week's Torah Gems were prepared by
Larry Sochrin
Parsha Tetzaveh
Children who have little patience for textbooks will happily sit in front of a computer reviewing the same lessons, and that's often true for others who prefer looking at news on a computer screen or iPhone rather than reading a newspaper. There are several interpretations of part of this week's Parsha, Tetzaveh, one of which appeals to the same technologically fascinated people among us, but raises some issues.
In Tetzaveh, G-d gives Moshe directions to create garments for Aaron to wear when officiating as the Kohen Gadol (High Priest). Among those quite colorful but somewhat strange sounding garments is something called a Choshen or Breastplate of Judgment. This has twelve stones mounted on it, each inscribed with the name of one of the tribes.
"Ruby, chrysolithe, beryl... turquoise, sapphire, diamond... ligure, agate, jasper.... emerald, shoham, jade." (28:17-20)
As reported at aish.com, this English rendition is but one of several possible translations of the Hebrew "odem, pitedah, bareket, nofech, sapir, yahalom, leshem, shvo, achlamah, tarshish, shoham, yashpei." It notes that a comprehensive anthology of renditions is presented in "The Living Torah" by Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan (Moznaim 1985).
According to a Midrash (Bamidbar Rabbah 2:7), in addition to the names of the tribes, the stones also contained the words, "Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Shivtei Yeshurun (righteous tribes)," so the Breastplate contained all 22 letters of the Holy Tongue (Talmud).
When in use, the Breastplate held something extra. "And you shall put in the Breastplate of Judgment the Urim and the Tumim." (28:30)
As confusing as this all is, it seemed to have captured the imagination of many. There are homemade and antique versions of the Breastplate of Judgment being sold these days on eBay, at flea markets, by church sisterhoods, and elsewhere.
Commentators have at least three different views of how this worked.
According to Etz Chaim's commentary, the Urim and Tumim may have been the actual mechanism that Aaron used to make decisions, lots he drew or something similar. This may have been the equivalent in biblical times of Aaron reaching into the breastplate and seeing whether he'd drawn the short straw. Many feel that the rocks on the Breastplate were there just to remind Aaron of all the people, and to keep that reminder close to his heart.
One translation has G-d telling Moses that after he puts in the Urim and Tumim, when Aaron goes in before the Lord, he "will hear the judgment of the children of Israel upon his heart continually." So in this case, it appears to be a mechanism to allow Aaron to hear G-d's judgment.
But many others saw the entire setup as a visual display communication device for G-d to use to communicate his decisions to Aaron, possibly the computer of those days.
The Urim and Tumim ("illuminator and verifier") was an inscription of the Name of G-d. Inserted in the folds of the Breastplate, it caused the letters inscribed on its stones to light up in response to queries posed by the community leaders, as it is written (Number 27:21): "And [Joshua] shall stand before Elazar the priest, who shall ask counsel for him after the judgment of the Urim before G-d: by this word shall they go out, and by this word they shall come in, both he, and all the children of Israel with him." This is why it was called the "Breastplate of Judgment," since it decided and determined things for the people. (Rashi; Talmud)
When Aaron needed to judge a situation, some stones would light up on the Breastplate and then he would have to decide how to assemble the letters on those stones. The Urim, parchment with G-d's ineffable name written on it and inserted by Moses each time Aaron needed to judge, would cause the stones to light up, and the Tumim would help Aaron to decide which way to assemble those letters to get the correct judgment. Amazingly, the light bulb was actually not invented until thousands of years later, first by Humphry Davy in 1860, then improved upon by several people including the best known in 1879, Thomas Alva Edison. So if the Breastplate truly worked by having letters on stones light up, the people must have marveled at seeing such a phenomenon, as miraculous as other G-d created miracles in the Torah. But just as many of G-d's other miracles, such as the plagues, relate back to G-d's work at Creation, perhaps we can relate this one to the first day of Creation, when G-d said "Let there be light."
So anyone who might consider the Torah anachronistic should think again. At least one respected interpretation of this week's Parsha makes it truly ahead of its time, with G-d providing a computer or communications aid for Aaron to use thousands of years before such technology would be discovered. Just as computers and cell phone texting devices manage to hold the attention of today's people, especially children, it appears that G-d may have had his own way of capturing the attention of his people, B'nai Yisrael, the children of Israel. Or maybe Parsha Tetzaveh presents a time when G-d just wanted to give everyone a preview of things to come.
Larry Sochrin
Parsha Tetzaveh
Children who have little patience for textbooks will happily sit in front of a computer reviewing the same lessons, and that's often true for others who prefer looking at news on a computer screen or iPhone rather than reading a newspaper. There are several interpretations of part of this week's Parsha, Tetzaveh, one of which appeals to the same technologically fascinated people among us, but raises some issues.
In Tetzaveh, G-d gives Moshe directions to create garments for Aaron to wear when officiating as the Kohen Gadol (High Priest). Among those quite colorful but somewhat strange sounding garments is something called a Choshen or Breastplate of Judgment. This has twelve stones mounted on it, each inscribed with the name of one of the tribes.
"Ruby, chrysolithe, beryl... turquoise, sapphire, diamond... ligure, agate, jasper.... emerald, shoham, jade." (28:17-20)
As reported at aish.com, this English rendition is but one of several possible translations of the Hebrew "odem, pitedah, bareket, nofech, sapir, yahalom, leshem, shvo, achlamah, tarshish, shoham, yashpei." It notes that a comprehensive anthology of renditions is presented in "The Living Torah" by Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan (Moznaim 1985).
According to a Midrash (Bamidbar Rabbah 2:7), in addition to the names of the tribes, the stones also contained the words, "Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Shivtei Yeshurun (righteous tribes)," so the Breastplate contained all 22 letters of the Holy Tongue (Talmud).
When in use, the Breastplate held something extra. "And you shall put in the Breastplate of Judgment the Urim and the Tumim." (28:30)
As confusing as this all is, it seemed to have captured the imagination of many. There are homemade and antique versions of the Breastplate of Judgment being sold these days on eBay, at flea markets, by church sisterhoods, and elsewhere.
Commentators have at least three different views of how this worked.
According to Etz Chaim's commentary, the Urim and Tumim may have been the actual mechanism that Aaron used to make decisions, lots he drew or something similar. This may have been the equivalent in biblical times of Aaron reaching into the breastplate and seeing whether he'd drawn the short straw. Many feel that the rocks on the Breastplate were there just to remind Aaron of all the people, and to keep that reminder close to his heart.
One translation has G-d telling Moses that after he puts in the Urim and Tumim, when Aaron goes in before the Lord, he "will hear the judgment of the children of Israel upon his heart continually." So in this case, it appears to be a mechanism to allow Aaron to hear G-d's judgment.
But many others saw the entire setup as a visual display communication device for G-d to use to communicate his decisions to Aaron, possibly the computer of those days.
The Urim and Tumim ("illuminator and verifier") was an inscription of the Name of G-d. Inserted in the folds of the Breastplate, it caused the letters inscribed on its stones to light up in response to queries posed by the community leaders, as it is written (Number 27:21): "And [Joshua] shall stand before Elazar the priest, who shall ask counsel for him after the judgment of the Urim before G-d: by this word shall they go out, and by this word they shall come in, both he, and all the children of Israel with him." This is why it was called the "Breastplate of Judgment," since it decided and determined things for the people. (Rashi; Talmud)
When Aaron needed to judge a situation, some stones would light up on the Breastplate and then he would have to decide how to assemble the letters on those stones. The Urim, parchment with G-d's ineffable name written on it and inserted by Moses each time Aaron needed to judge, would cause the stones to light up, and the Tumim would help Aaron to decide which way to assemble those letters to get the correct judgment. Amazingly, the light bulb was actually not invented until thousands of years later, first by Humphry Davy in 1860, then improved upon by several people including the best known in 1879, Thomas Alva Edison. So if the Breastplate truly worked by having letters on stones light up, the people must have marveled at seeing such a phenomenon, as miraculous as other G-d created miracles in the Torah. But just as many of G-d's other miracles, such as the plagues, relate back to G-d's work at Creation, perhaps we can relate this one to the first day of Creation, when G-d said "Let there be light."
So anyone who might consider the Torah anachronistic should think again. At least one respected interpretation of this week's Parsha makes it truly ahead of its time, with G-d providing a computer or communications aid for Aaron to use thousands of years before such technology would be discovered. Just as computers and cell phone texting devices manage to hold the attention of today's people, especially children, it appears that G-d may have had his own way of capturing the attention of his people, B'nai Yisrael, the children of Israel. Or maybe Parsha Tetzaveh presents a time when G-d just wanted to give everyone a preview of things to come.
PARASHAT Shemot
PARASHAT Shemot
One of the themes in Parashat Shemot that I find compelling is the role of women in the beginning of the parasha. Pharaoh's underestimation of women leads to Moses' survival and thus to Pharaoh's eventual downfall/the liberation from slavery.
From the start Pharaoh decrees against Jewish men only, seeing the Jewish people in Egypt as a potential military threat/fifth column. Rashi, the prolific French medieval commentator, however says that Pharaoh decreed against the males only because of a prediction by his astrologers predicting Moses' birth. I'm not sure how to square this with the text of the parasha which explicitly states that the Egyptians felt threatened by the possibility of the Israelites allying themselves with foreign attackers.
This decree is subverted by the two midwives, Shifra and Puach. It is interesting that in a section of the parasha with no names given, Shifra and Puach are called out by name. All the major characters go without names at this point (and some will continue to remain nameless, though our Midrashic tradition fills in the gaps). Is it possible that remembering Shifra and Puach by name is a reward itself, aside from the households (i.e., children) given to them by G
-d? Shifra and Puach may not have been Israelite. Were they the first instance of Righteous Gentiles protecting Jews from persecution?
Rashi notes that the Israelite women are compared to animals which do not need midwives to deliver babies. The Israelite women are less than human in Pharaoh's eyes.
Midrash famously has Miriam convincing her father Amram to decide for the Jewish people to continue having children despite Pharaoh's decree. Amram hadn't wanted to bring boys into the world only to have the Egyptians kill them. Miriam protests that Amram has decreed against all children while Pharaoh only decreed against the males.
When Moses is placed in his basket - really an ark, the same word as used for Noach's ark - he's watched over by his sister Miriam. This liminal event - the risky travel of the baby who will bring liberation to the Israelites - is guarded by her.
Closer to home for Pharaoh, he is deceived by his daughter, unnamed in the text, traditionally known as Batya - daughter of HaShem. Batya goes down to the river to bathe. Why? Surely there were baths in her palace. As was noted in my daughter's class at KI Religious School, midrash holds that Batya was rebelling against her father's decree. In protest, was she converting to Judaism and the river was serving as her mikvah? Could it be that Batya was going down to the river to try to rescue a Jewish baby?
Batya then arranges with Miriam to have Yocheved be Moses' wet nurse. Yocheved then raises Moses and doesn't bring him back to Batya until "he matures" (two years old in the midrash).
The infant Moses is protected every step of the way by women. Shifra and Puach protect him and every other Jewish child. Miriam follows him from the riverbank while he is in his ark/basket. Pharaoh's daughter, Batya, adopts him, names him, and gives him back to his biological mother so she can raise him under the guise of being his nurse.
Sometimes finding non
-patriarchal angles on our tradition can be difficult. As the father of two daughters, it is something that I try to bring to the fore when we discuss Torah. It's particularly gratifying to find it so close to the surface in so important a parasha as Shemot.
One of the themes in Parashat Shemot that I find compelling is the role of women in the beginning of the parasha. Pharaoh's underestimation of women leads to Moses' survival and thus to Pharaoh's eventual downfall/the liberation from slavery.
From the start Pharaoh decrees against Jewish men only, seeing the Jewish people in Egypt as a potential military threat/fifth column. Rashi, the prolific French medieval commentator, however says that Pharaoh decreed against the males only because of a prediction by his astrologers predicting Moses' birth. I'm not sure how to square this with the text of the parasha which explicitly states that the Egyptians felt threatened by the possibility of the Israelites allying themselves with foreign attackers.
This decree is subverted by the two midwives, Shifra and Puach. It is interesting that in a section of the parasha with no names given, Shifra and Puach are called out by name. All the major characters go without names at this point (and some will continue to remain nameless, though our Midrashic tradition fills in the gaps). Is it possible that remembering Shifra and Puach by name is a reward itself, aside from the households (i.e., children) given to them by G
-d? Shifra and Puach may not have been Israelite. Were they the first instance of Righteous Gentiles protecting Jews from persecution?
Rashi notes that the Israelite women are compared to animals which do not need midwives to deliver babies. The Israelite women are less than human in Pharaoh's eyes.
Midrash famously has Miriam convincing her father Amram to decide for the Jewish people to continue having children despite Pharaoh's decree. Amram hadn't wanted to bring boys into the world only to have the Egyptians kill them. Miriam protests that Amram has decreed against all children while Pharaoh only decreed against the males.
When Moses is placed in his basket - really an ark, the same word as used for Noach's ark - he's watched over by his sister Miriam. This liminal event - the risky travel of the baby who will bring liberation to the Israelites - is guarded by her.
Closer to home for Pharaoh, he is deceived by his daughter, unnamed in the text, traditionally known as Batya - daughter of HaShem. Batya goes down to the river to bathe. Why? Surely there were baths in her palace. As was noted in my daughter's class at KI Religious School, midrash holds that Batya was rebelling against her father's decree. In protest, was she converting to Judaism and the river was serving as her mikvah? Could it be that Batya was going down to the river to try to rescue a Jewish baby?
Batya then arranges with Miriam to have Yocheved be Moses' wet nurse. Yocheved then raises Moses and doesn't bring him back to Batya until "he matures" (two years old in the midrash).
The infant Moses is protected every step of the way by women. Shifra and Puach protect him and every other Jewish child. Miriam follows him from the riverbank while he is in his ark/basket. Pharaoh's daughter, Batya, adopts him, names him, and gives him back to his biological mother so she can raise him under the guise of being his nurse.
Sometimes finding non
-patriarchal angles on our tradition can be difficult. As the father of two daughters, it is something that I try to bring to the fore when we discuss Torah. It's particularly gratifying to find it so close to the surface in so important a parasha as Shemot.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)