Hebrew Insights into the Weekly Parasha

Hebrew Insights into Parashat Bo –Sh’mot (Exodus) 10 – 13:16

2012-01-26T03:07:00.002-06:00

Hebrew Insights into Parashat Bo –Sh’mot (Exodus) 10 – 13:16

YHVH charges Moshe to "go to Pharaoh," and it is this "going" which our Parasha is named after (although "bo" actually means, "come"). The approximately three and a half chapters of Parashat Bo encompass a number of central themes. The historical narrative, describing the last plagues, some of the Israelites' preparations to leave Egypt and a few of their moves, is interspersed with the themes of redemption, ransom, the Pesach celebration, injunctions to teach future generations, and several teaching tools which are to accompany the nation of Yisrael down the road of time. Thus, at the outset of Yisrael's travels, which ultimately will bring them to the Land of Promise, they are also embarking on a journey to becoming a (special) Nation. And while they had no time to prepare supplies (ref. 12:39), and were carrying almost only that which the Egyptians gave them (ref. 12:33), YHVH was starting to do His own equipping of this nascent nation on its road toward its spiritual destiny.

The educational theme is evident right at the beginning, by the reason given for the "signs" performed in Egypt: "That you may tell in the hearing of your son and your son's son the mighty things I have done…" (10:2). "I have done" here is denoted by the verb "hit'a'lalti," of the root a.l.l (ayin, lamed, lamed). It is a multi-faceted verb the meaning of which depends on context, yet its root also forms one of the words for "infant" or "babe" - "olal," such as used in Psalms 8:2: "Out of the mouth of babes and nursing infants You have ordained strength" (emphasis added). Thus, within YHVH's "doings" – or miraculous performances in Egypt, which the Israelites are to tell their children about - is hidden a word alluding to those very children!

By this time in the narrative, the land of Egypt has experienced a great deal of devastation, with much more to come. The severity of the next plague is such that locusts "shall cover the face [literally "eye"] of the earth, so that no one will be able to see the earth, and they shall eat the residue of what is left, which remains… from the hail…" (v. 5, 15). Here we find a sequel of three synonyms. The repetition serves to heighten the proportions of the catastrophe. The Hebrew reads: "yeter [ha]*pleta [ha]'nish'eret." “Yeter” is that which remains, as is also seen in 12:10, where the lamb is to be eaten in such a way that "you shall let none of it remain until morning" (emphasis added). The term "pleta nish'eret" is also mentioned by Yoseph, when he disclosed his identity to his brothers, saying the following: "And Elohim sent me before you to put a remnant ["she'erit," of the same root as "nish'eret" above] in the land for you and to keep alive for you a great survival ["pleta"] (Gen. 45:7, literal translation, italics added). Thus these words of Yoseph had a prophetic implication; The “remnant” of the children of Yisrael has not only “survived,” it has actually turned into multitudes which resulted in Egypt's soil being left (almost) without residue of remaining life (through the plagues inflicted by the Elohim of this “remnant,” that is Yisrael). Therefore, that which was a means of salvation for the one people, turned into deadly circumstances for the other! The Apostle Shaul (Paul) expresses a similar principle in the following words: "…We are to Elohim the fragrance of Messiah among those who are being saved and among those who are perishing; to the one the aroma of death leading to death, and to the other the aroma of life leading to life" (2nd Cor. 2:15-16).

Paroh's now-exasperated servants complain about Moshe, describing him as a "mokesh" – “snare” (v. 7). However, it is their king, who being a “Godless person,” according to Ee’yov (Job) 34:30, "should not reign, lest the people be ensnared" (emphasis added). Indeed, no sooner were the locusts removed, and Paroh's persistence brought about the ninth plague. Total darkness descended upon his land, and his people were ensnared once more. The darkness was so thick that it could be "ya'mesh," that is, "felt" or "touched" (v. 21. See also Genesis 27:12, re-Ya'acov, who was impersonating his brother and was concerned lest his father should discover his real identity by “touching” his smooth skin). In verse 23 we are struck by the contrast between the total darkness prevailing over Egypt, and the well-lit dwellings of the Israelites, which is also a graphic illustration paralleling the spiritual reality.

It is time now to prepare for the last phase, and for the start of a new one. YHVH declares to Moshe that He is about to strike the final blow on the Egyptians and on their king, a fact which Moshe conveys to the latter. This is followed by instructions for the Pesach lamb, whose smeared blood will single out the homes of the Hebrews, while YHVH strikes the Egyptian homes by killing every firstborn son. Each Hebrew household is to partake of one lamb, or share it with others if the family happens to be too small. The expression used, "according to the number" (12:4), is denoted by a single word - "[beh]mich'sat," rooted in k.s.h (kaf/chaf, samech, samech), meaning "allocate." The root employed for this term is also used for the standard form of the verb to “cover.” Thus, even before an explanation is given for the procedure of choosing, slaughtering and eating the lamb, we have a clue alluding to the lamb which has been ‘allocated’ and designated to be slain from the foundations of the world (ref. Rev. 13:8), and whose blood was given for the covering of sin.

The blood over the Hebrews’ doors enabled YHVH to steer clear of their homes, that is
to pass over is "pasach" - a verb rooted in p.s.ch (pey, samech, chet) and means to “pass" or "skip." Yishayahu (Isaiah) 31:5 says: "Like flying birds, so YHVH of Hosts will protect Jerusalem…He will pass over ["pasach"] and rescue it.” Hence, a lame or limping person is a “piseh’ach” (e.g. 2nd Sam. 9:13; 1Kings 18:21).

We have already noted that this Parasha is 'didactically inclined,' and thus the rest of chapter 12 (v. 14-27) is devoted to instructions pertaining to the future life of the Yisraelites, once planted in their own land. This passage is fraught with distinct words and terms. We already examined the notion of "allocating" in verse 4. In verse 6 we note that the lamb was to be "kept" (from the 10th of the first month, until the 14th), with the verb used being "shamar" (sh.m.r - shin, mem, resh). In verse 17 the Children of Yisrael are instructed "to observe the Feast of Matzot." Again, "observe" is from the root sh.m.r, which is “to keep, or guard”; while in verse 24 they are told, "to observe," literally "keep," what now becomes an ordinance to be practiced upon entering the Land. In the future, the night commemorating the exodus from Egypt will become a "night of solemn observance (or vigil)" - "shimurim" (verse 42), and again in 13:10 …"You shall keep this ordinance in its season from year to year." Being kept from harm by YHVH is what the Israelites are experiencing; thus, those 'kept' and protected are to become ‘keepers' in return.

The lamb was to be slaughtered on the 14th day of the month, "at twilight" (12:6), which is "ben arba'yim.” “Arbayim" is the plural form of “erev” (evening), the all-familiar term we have been discussing over and again. Most interpreters and commentators believe that "between the evenings" (its literal meaning) refers to "twilight." However, since it literally indicates a whole day, i.e. between the evening of the 14th and that of the 15th , there exists a (minority) view that supports the literal meaning of the phrase. The meat was to be eaten with bitter herbs, “maror,” and unleavened bread called "matza," which are thin wafer-like crackers baked without yeast (12:8). The root m.tz.h (mem, tzadi, hey) means “to drain out” to the very last drop of water (e.g. Jud. 6:38), since the leavening agents require liquid in order to be activated. The bitter herbs most likely point to the "bitterness" experienced by the Children of Yisrael in Egypt. Thus, in Sh’mot (Exodus) 1:12 we read: "And they made their lives bitter with hard bondage--in mortar, in brick, and in all manner of service in the field." It should be noted that this section, being instructional for future generations, differs somewhat from the actual experience, as described in the latter part of chapter 12. In contrast to the injunction for the total removal of all leaven, which will bind the Israelites in the future (v. 15, 17-20), we read in verse34 : "So the people took their dough before it was leavened" (italics added). Thus, it appears that in the first Pesach there was leaven in the dough (which did not have enough time to be activated).

In verse 14 we encounter for the first time one of the words for "feast" - "chag" (although in verb form it appeared already in Ex. 5:1). Since the annual reoccurrence of the Feasts makes them "cyclical," it seems that this word is related to the noun "choog" which describes a circle (Job 22:14; Pro. 8:27; Is. 40:22). By its very nature, this word implies not only a (set) time, but also a place - a “circle.” Another such 'multi-dimensional' word is holy "convocation," also appearing here for the first time (v. 16). This "holy convocation" or "assembly," is "mikra kodesh." The root k.r.a (kof, resh, alef) means “to call,” even though the "convocation" - the assembling - is made up of people. The "mikra kodesh" (i.e. the congregation) is designated, therefore, by its calling. But it is also related to a place. In Yishayahu (Isaiah) 4:5, for example, we read: "Then YHVH will create over the whole area of Mount Zion and over "mikra'eh'a" ("her assemblies") a cloud by day…." These “holy convocations” are, of course, to be also special times. The “calling,” then, proves to be the common ‘ingredient’ bonding the people, their place of gathering and the times wherein they are to convene, indicating that Time, Place and People are joined in YHVH's economy. This concept will surface again in future Parashot.

In their Egyptian Pesach, the Israelites were promised that, "the blood shall be a sign for you on the houses... And when I see the blood, I will pass over you" (12:13). This "seeing" (of the blood) brings to mind another "seeing" on the part of YHVH, as was stated by Avraham, who on the road to Mount Moriah responded to his son's inquiry regarding the offering, saying …"YHVH will see (literally) for himself the lamb for the offering" (Gen. 22:8 emphasis added). And although (at that time) it was a ram that was provided, the beginning of the fulfillment of those words is now taking place here in Egypt, later to have a further fulfillment, to an even greater degree, by another Lamb. One more connection to the Lamb of Elohim is found in verse 46, where it says that none of the bones of the lamb are to be broken, an injunction which finds its fulfillment in Yochanan (John) 19:33.

Finally, the Egyptians are persuaded to send off the Israelites. According to verse 33 (of Chapter 12) "they pressed” them to leave. However, "pressed" in this case is from the root "strong" - "chazak" - which makes it a fulfillment of 6:1 …"For with a strong hand [Paroh] will let them go, and with a strong hand he will drive them out of his land." Another fulfillment, this time of 3:22, is taking place here in verses 35-36, when the Egyptians consent to give their former slaves gold, silver and garments, while it says that, "they [the Israelites] spoiled the Egyptians." The "spoiling of the Egyptians" is also in fulfillment of YHVH's promise to Avraham concerning the Egyptian Diaspora, out of which his seed was to "come out with great wealth" (Gen. 15:14). "Spoiled" is "(va)yinatz'lu," of the root n.tz.l (noon, tzadi, lamed), which most frequently means to "survive, save, rescue, or deliver." In fact, it came up in Parashat Sh’mot (5:23) when Moshe complained to YHVH on behalf of his people, saying …"For since I came to Pharaoh to speak in Your name, he has done evil to this people; neither have You delivered Your people at all (italics added)." Now they are not only being "delivered," but are also "procuring" gifts (as the root n.tz.l is used here) from those who had captivated them. The fact that all of these terms are rooted in the same three letters lends an extra emphasis, or 'twist,' to the rescue story and sheds light on the protagonists (YHVH as the "savior," and on those who are being "saved"). The gold and silver will no doubt serve later for the making of the Tabernacle articles. But even beforehand, in Shmot (Exodus) 33:6, where the Israelites remove their jewelry, the verb used is "(va)yitna'tzlu" (again of the root of n.tz.l). The unusual usage of this word highlights the origin of these articles. Finally, Yeshua, too, "divested", "disarmed" or "wrested" the principalities from their powers, after His victory (Col. 2:15).

Upon leaving Egypt, a "mixed multitude" (“erev rav” - literally a "great mixture") goes out with the Sons of Yisrael. Once more, after having looked at “arbayim” (“twilight”) above, we encounter the root e.r.v., for "evening," which is a "mixed" state (12:38), and thus relating to the "multitude."

When the 'time allotment' for their sojourn in Egypt ends, "on this very day" (v. 41), YHVH's people, who had been waiting for so long, are suddenly forced to hurry and leave. We recall the case of Yoseph, who was also made to hurry (out of the pit, Gen. 41:1, 14) when the time ordained for his sufferings had fully expired. In both cases the word used is "miketz" ("at the end of"). When it is time for change, there is not one moment to spare.

The latter part of the Parasha, 13:1-16, is devoted to further instructions. First and foremost among them is the "setting apart" of the firstborn: "…every one who opens the womb among the sons of Israel belongs to me"(13:1), declares YHVH. In verse 15 He elaborates on this, saying that since He "killed all the firstborn in the land of Egypt… therefore [the Israelite are to] sacrifice to YHVH all males that open the womb, but all the firstborn of [their] sons [are to be] redeemed/ransomed." In last week's Parasha we saw how "ransoming" separated the Israelites from the Egyptians (8:19), even before the smiting of Egypt's firstborn. The notion of "ransom" (“p'dut”) becomes even more evident when it is blood which separates the Egyptian firstborn from those of Yisrael's. The ultimate ransom price for purchasing 'Yisrael the Firstborn' thousands of years later was, and still is, Messiah's blood.

Among the "firsts" in this Parasha, there is a first reference to a name of a month - the "month of Aviv" (13:4). The literal meaning of "aviv," which became synonymous with "spring," is a stalk of grain whose ears are still green. This word indicates the very beginning of growth, before the fruit or grain has had time to develop (e.g. Job 8:12, Song of Solomon 6:11), and is perhaps (also) a reflection on the condition of the Nation in formation.

Twice in this portion of instructions we encounter references to the "signs" that are to be on one's hand and forehead (13:9, 16). These "signs" are to be for the purpose of remembering and commemorating the "strong hand with which YHVH brought you/us out of Egypt" (13:9, 16), and, "so that the Torah of YHVH may be in your mouth" (v. 9). In both places the mention of these "signs" is related to the teaching of the generations to come. In keeping with the pedagogical message included in the Parasha, several possible approaches are offered to a variety of future inquirers about the Pesach practices and its teachings. In 12:26-27 we find: "When your children say to you, ‘what does this service mean to you…?’, you shall say, ‘it is the sacrifice to YHVH’s Passover’…" In 13:14, "When in time to come your son asks, saying, 'what is this?' You shall say to him, 'by strength of hand YHVH brought us out of Egypt’…" And in 13:8, "You shall tell your son on that day, saying, 'it is because of this YHVH did for me when I came out of Egypt.’" All three of these are echoed in the traditional Pesach Haggada read on the Passover’s eve ceremony called the Seder. There they are called the “four – since another one is added based on Dvarim (Deuteronomy) 6:20 – questions,” and are asked by the youngest member of the family.

Finally, in order to partake of the Pesach sacrifice, a man was required to be circumcised (ref. 12:48), a fact which connects the Paschal lamb to circumcision. Thus, the Covenant with the Israelites is clearly a renewal of the Covenant already established with Avraham and his descendants. Interestingly, in Parashat Sh'mot chapter 4, YHVH declares that Yisrael is His “firstborn,” and in the same breath tells Moshe that because Par’oh will refuse to let His firstborn go, He will kill his firstborn (4:22,23). It is immediately after this that Zippora, Moshe’s wife, sees the urgent need to circumcise her son and calls him "a groom of blood" (4:24-26). This reinforces the connection of the Paschal lamb's blood to the blood of circumcision.[1] Our "Groom of Blood," Yeshua, who is also the epitome of the Pesach sacrifice, through His Blood, has rendered us the "circumcision who worships Elohim in the Spirit" (Phil. 3:3).

* Ha is the definite article in Hebrew.
[1] The Chumash Shmot With The Commentary Daat Mikrah, Pub. Mossad Harav Kook, Jm.
1991.

Hebrew Insights into Parashat Va’ey’ra – Sh’mot (Exodus) 6:2 – (chapter) 9

2012-01-20T07:26:00.002-06:00

Hebrew Insights into Parashat Va’ey’ra – Sh’mot (Exodus) 6:2 – (chapter) 9
One of Moshe's roles, at the time recorded by our Parasha, was to link the Children of Yisrael with their forefathers, history and destination, but not before establishing (for them and even more so for himself) the identity of their Elohim. This was no easy task! YHVH had already revealed Himself to Moshe in the desert, both in sight and in speech. And while Moshe was trying to negotiate with Par'oh on behalf of the Master of the universe, as well as to 'introduce' Him to his own people, he himself had a hard time grasping the awesome revelation which was unfolding before his eyes. Our Parasha opens up with yet another monologue of Moshe's heavenly Father, displaying great patience with His child, who, at this point, has still not quite adjusted to the dimensions of his newly found destiny and relationship. The opening "I am YHVH," together with the subsequent words, serves as another verbal reminder to Moshe designed to anchor, steady and prepare him for what is ahead - to build up his trust and faith. Last week, upon Moshe's inquiry as to Elohim's Name, YHVH gave him a somewhat elusive answer (3:13,14): “Ehe'ye asher ehe'ye,” adding also, “thus you shall say to the Children of Israel, Ehe'ye has sent me.” These words are (typically) translated: ”I am that I am”; yet if we glance back at verse 12 (of chapter 3), we find that “ehe'ye” means “I will” (as it says there: “I will be with you”). It appears that YHVH was not about to divulge His real (or 'full') Name at that moment. His response, and the tone by which it was conveyed, sounds almost like a (temporary) discharge or dismissal. Thus, paraphrased, it may be read: 'never you mind Moshe…I Am and Will be Who I Am - what is it to you?' (Compare Yeshua's response to Shimon Keifa - Peter - in John 21:22).

Found in the verb “ehe'ye” – I will be - is the very same root contained in the title “YHVH,” in 6:2, which Elohim is now, by His own initiation, revealing to Moshe. This most venerated ‘tetragrammaton’ includes the letters h.v.h (hey, vav, hey), which are tantamount to h.y.h (hey, yod, hey), meaning “to be.”1 "Being" and "present" in Hebrew are of one and the same root. Thus, it would seem, that the tetragrammaton speaks primarily of "being" and of the "present."

Now that Moshe knows that it is YHVH who is addressing him, and that this is His name, he hears Him say something quite surprising and unexpected, namely: “I appeared (literally – I was seen by – va’ey’ra) to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, as El Shaddai, but My name YHVH, I did not make known to them” (v. 3). However, the name YHVH is mentioned in connection with the Patriarchs. In fact, there is evidence of them using this name in addressing Him (e.g. Gen. 15:8). While the Sages discuss this point at length, we will not delve deeply into the subject other than to say that since He revealed Himself to them as “El Shaddai,” the “mighty breasted One,” or by implication the ”Mighty One Who is Sufficient,” it was this aspect of His being with which they must have been most familiar. In the course of His on-going and progressive revelation of Himself, the Elohim of Yisrael is about to demonstrate that He is in control of the present, the One Who Is Present, and truly the One who IS the Present: Yah-hoveh. (Yah, as His name, is used quite a few times, e.g. Ex. 17:16, and in many instances in the Psalms, such as in “hallelu-Yah”.)

The passage, which starts in verse 3 of Chapter 6 and continues all the way to verse 8, constitutes a unique and significant unit, both in content and form. The beginning statement, just referred to, is also found at the end (v. 8), that is, "I am YHVH." In verse 3 reference is made to the Patriarchs, which is repeated just before the end, in verse 8, being a very emphatic pronouncement made by YHVH also in last week’s Parasha regarding His Name (ref. Exodus 3:15,16). The third point in this monologue deals with the Land (v. 4), and is echoed in the beginning of verse 8. Verse 5 talks about the groaning (and therefore sufferings) of the Children of Yisrael, and verse 7 again deals with the same theme. Thus, the four elements mentioned appear both in the first and second half of the passage, although the second time round the order of these themes is reversed.

The central part of this passage stands firmly on its own, as a precious stone set in fine filigree work, that is, surrounded and framed by the four repetitions mentioned above (i.e. the name YHVH, Patriarchs, Land and Sufferings). It reads as follows: “Therefore say to the children of Israel: `I am YHVH, and I will take you out (ve'hotze'ti) from under the burdens of the Egyptians, and I will deliver (ve’hi’tzalti) you out from their bondage, and I will redeem (ve'ga'alti) you with an outstretched arm and with great judgments. And I will take (ve'la'kach'ti) you to me for a people’” (6:6-7 emphases added). Here too there is a ‘foursome,’ this time of four verbs, which describe a process. First comes the "taking out" from one place to another, second is the “deliverance” from the enemy and the rigors of the desert. The third level, “redemption,” is also deliverance, but connotes “judicial ransoming.” The "redeemer" is a “go'el,” which in the Bible is synonymous with a "relative." Therefore the Divine announcement in and of itself renders - pronounces - the Divine Redeemer to be like a blood relative who has the means and willingness to purchase the object of his redemption, and to take it upon himself to recover and restore everything (including that which has been lost) back to its right order, as well as to be an avenger of wrongs (e.g. Lev. 25:26; Num. 5:8; Ruth 3:12, Ruth 4; Josh. 20:5). Finally, the "taking" here is much like the "taking of a wife" in marriage (Gen. 25:20, for example).

When this series of actions is completed “…you shall know that I am YHVH your Elohim” (v. 7). This progressive process evidences that there is only One who can act on every level, with nothing ever being required of the recipients. This IS the grace, “which is not of yourselves [but] it is the gift of Elohim!” (Ephs.2:8). However, for this grace to be appropriated, faith is required and thus we move on to the anticlimactic end: “So Moses spoke thus to the sons of Israel, but they did not listen to Moses on account of their despondency and cruel bondage. "Despondency" is literally “shortness of spirit/breath,” sometimes meaning impatience, while "cruel bondage" is actually “hard labor” (v. 9). And so we see the declaration “I am YHVH." pronounced both at the beginning and end of the passage, as it powerfully denotes His all-encompassing view and position, contrasted with the restricted perspective and vantage point of the sons of Yisrael.

Following this 'introduction' or preamble, the rest of the Parasha mostly details the implementation of the action plan described above. Moshe and his brother Ah'aron are sent to speak to Par'oh (6:11, 29). In this scene Moshe responds twice with “…I am of uncircumcised lips” (vs.12 and 30), obviously trying (once again) to dodge his responsibility by claiming that he is not a fit speaker. But whereas last week we read that he used the expression: “I am not eloquent… but I am slow of speech and of a slow tongue” (4:10), this time he feels the need to press the point even further, since "uncircumcised lips" could also denote uncleanness. YHVH is not 'impressed' and does not take up the issue over this matter with His messenger.

It is the condition of Par'oh's heart that YHVH is about to address, as He says to Moshe”…And I will harden Pharaoh's heart…” (7:3a). The Apostle Shaul (Paul) elaborating on this says: “Therefore He has mercy on whom He will have mercy, and whom He will, He hardens” (Rom. 9:18). Romans 1:18-21 may help us to further understand this idea: “…For the wrath of Elohim is revealed from Heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness, because that which may be known of Elohim is manifest in them, for Elohim has shown it unto them. For from the creation of the world the invisible things of Him are clearly seen, being understood through the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse. For when they knew Elohim, they neither glorified Him as Elohim, nor were thankful, but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened” (italics added). Back to where we left off in Exodus 7:3, the second part of the verse reads, “… and multiply My signs and My wonders in the land of Egypt,” with the result being, “And the Egyptians shall know that I am YHVH when I stretch forth My hand upon Egypt and bring out the Children of Israel from among them” (v. 5 italics added).

One of the last things Moshe is supposed to convey to the king, just prior to inflicting the first plague upon him, his people and his land, is”…Let My people go, that they may serve Me in the wilderness” (7:16). “Serve” here is from the root “work," and thus it says: “va'ya'avduni”. We vividly remember from last week's Parasha the many negative references to work and labor. Here "work" becomes the ”worship” of YHVH, as it is found to be in most other references to worship. The hard working slaves (“avadim”, of the root word, a.v.d) of the Egyptians are about to be liberated and become free to carry out “avodat Elohim” – that is, rendering service unto YHVH.

If YHVH’s name, being attached to the Patriarchs (the Elohim of…), is how YHVH wanted Himself to be known by Yisrael, so as to convey to them that He is in charge of the historical developments, particularly theirs, now His actions show Him to be also in control of all of nature, both animate and inanimate: mankind, beasts and the elements. First to be affected is Egypt's source of water and life, the Nile, which He turns to blood. As a symbol of life and atonement, blood here becomes a deadly substance in the river, which in the second plague is seen swarming with frogs (8:3).

The fourth and fifth plagues are the first not to occur in the vicinity of the Israelites' dwellings, which means that the land of Goshen is free of them. The swarms of insects, as they are called, and the pestilence, are both terms with familiar roots, which we have previously encountered. "Swarms of insects" (and other translated versions) are “a'rov,” and "pestilence" is “dever.” “Arov” (which shares its root, a.r.v., with the root for “erev” – “evening”) means a “mixture,” hence the mixed variety of species. Last week we looked at “midbar” - “desert,” noting that the “dever” (i.e. “pestilence” or “plague”) sometimes "drives" (of the same root, once again) us to the desert. This time it is 'real' pestilence, not the figurative type, which is plaguing the herds and flocks of the Egyptians (ch. 9). “Boils and hail with fire flashing… in the midst of… it” (9:24) are the next two plagues, both of which have no tangible effect on the Israelites, because YHVH made “a division between My people and your people” (8:23). “Division” here is “p'dut,” which actually means “ransom.” It is the ransom which always separates those who are "My people" from those who are Par'oh's. The basic meaning of the Hebrew root [p.d.h] is to achieve the transfer of ownership from one to another through payment of a price or an equivalent substitute.2 More about this idea in next week's Parasha…

1 In Hebrew, the "v" sound (vav) and the "y" sound (yod) are often interchangeable, such as in
the name Chava (Eve), which denotes “life”, although the noun “life” is “chayim”, and to “live”
is “ lich’yot”.
2 Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, Vol. 2, ed. R. Laird Harris, Moody Press,
Chicago, 1980.

Hebrew Insights into Parashat Sh’mot – Sh’mot (Exodus) 1– 6:1

2012-01-10T05:23:00.002-06:00

Hebrew Insights into Parashat Sh’mot – Sh’mot (Exodus) 1– 6:1

The opening verses of this Parasha reiterate what we have just read near the end of the former; namely, the names of the sons of Yisrael who had gone down to Egypt. Compared to the first list (Gen. 46:8-25), this one is more 'basic.' It is these "names" (“sh’mot”), which lend the title to the Parasha, as well as to the whole book. The fruitfulness promised to the Patriarchs is already starting to be evident. "And the children of Israel were fruitful [of the root p.r.h for fruit], and increased [of the root sh.r.tz applied to the animals in Gen. 1:20-21] abundantly, and multiplied - va’yirbu - and became exceeding mighty – va’ya’atzmu; and the land was filled with them” (Ex. 1: 7 italics added). This verse sums up one of the first phases of the Israelites' stay in Egypt, while at the same time also echoing B’resheet (Genesis) 47:27… "So Israel dwelt in the land of Egypt in the land of Goshen; and they took a hold of it - va'ye'ach'zu - and grew and multiplied exceedingly" (italics added). The above-mentioned verb for “increase” – va’yishretzu – is not mentioned in the Genesis 47 scripture, and as we noted, it is generally applied to animals. Is this a hint as to the condition of the Israelites at this point? Last week we noticed how Ya'acov, whereupon bringing up the “land of Yisrael” in the course of blessing Ephraim and Menashe, emphasized "achuzat olam" (48:4), the "everlasting possession," or literally, the “everlasting hold." But while the old Patriarch stressed "holding" or "grasping tightly" on to the Land of Promise, his descendants seemed to be very quick to "take hold" of foreign soil.

According to Nehama Leibowitz[1], by their settling and establishing a foothold in Egypt, the Israelites committed a sin. Thus, their new home turned into a place of exile and bondage, as the Parasha clearly points out. The commentary goes on to say, however, that suffering and exile also produced refining and purification (e.g. Deut. 4:20; Jer. 11:4; Is. 48:10), had an educational value (e.g. Ex. 22:21; 23:9; Duet. 16:11-12), and motivated the humanitarian treatment of others (e.g. Lev. 25:38-43; Duet. 5:14-16). Slavery and bondage demand redemption, and according to the commentary, such a redemption "serves as a spur for a religious duty, imposing on every Israelite the duty to redeem his fellow being from slavery." However, we cannot ignore the clear and somewhat inauspicious prediction given to Avraham during his awesome vision in B’resheet (Genesis) 15, namely, "Your descendants will be strangers in a land that is not theirs, and will serve them, and they will afflict them four hundred years. But in the fourth generation they shall return here, for the iniquity of the Amorites is not yet complete" (vs. 13, 16).

"The iniquity of the Amorites is not yet complete”; “yet” (in the above quote) is "ad heh'na," literally "thus far." In Vayikra (Leviticus) 18: 25 we read: "For the land is defiled; therefore I visit the punishment of its iniquity upon it, and the land vomits out its inhabitants." From the time YHVH made this declaration to Avraham, it took well over 600 years for the Amorites (a generic name for the Canaanite people groups) iniquity to be "sha'lem," “complete.” The 'quota of their iniquity' is only made full when the Children of Yisrael enter the Land of C’na’an, and thus the former are being "vomited out by the land." In this way, the four hundred years of Egyptian exile, and another forty of wandering in the desert were necessary for the completion of Elohim’s objectives for the Israelites, while that time capsule was also instrumental in fulfilling a larger and more global 'judicial plan.' In the Divine economy, nothing is ever meaningless or lost. The Great Economist is very precise, and is sovereign over time, events and the protagonists’ roles therein.

Let us return now to the present situation in Egypt. The rising of the new king "who does not know Joseph" (v. 8) introduces us to a new phase into which Ya'acov's children are being thrust quite unawares. This king identifies the Israelites as a Nation, or People - "am," which may also explain the reference to them in singular person, rather than plural. "The people of the sons of Israel," he calls them, pointing out their multiplication and might. "Rav ve'atzum" are the adjectives used here (v. 9), as in verse 7 above. This multiplicity and might also appear to constitute a threat to himself and to his people, and so he describes this foreign race as being, "more numerous and mightier than us" (v. 9 italics added). It seems that exaggeration and bigotry play no small part in these words, which are used to instigate a plan to solve the “Hebrew problem” (compare the “Jewish problem” in Europe which culminated in Hitler’s “final solution”). Interestingly, at the very end of last week’s Parasha, Yoseph charged his brothers concerning taking his bones back to the land, whenever YHVH would visit (pakod) them (Gen. 50:25). In our Parasha, at the very beginning of the book of Sh’mot (Exodus), we read about the “might” of the People of Yisrael. Both bone and might share the same root of a.tz.m (ayin, tzadi, mem). This root lends itself to several significant words, which we will examine more thoroughly, in Parashat B’ha’a’lot’cha (Lev. 8-12). Suffice it to say here that Yoseph’s bones “multiplied” greatly, in accordance with the promise granted to his sons, although at present this blessing appeared to be causing severe adversity.

Thus, to counter this threat of a population explosion, the king, typically, takes a number of measures, all of which are expressed in verbs denoting suffering, suppression and servitude, found in chapter 1:11-14. First they "set over them" - “sa'rey measeem” - tax collecting princes, to (literally) "afflict them with suffering." However, "the more they afflicted them, the more they multiplied and grew.” The word for "grew" is "yifrotz," of the root p.r.tz. which we examined in Parashat Va’yeshev (Gen. 38:29), where we noted that it meant "to break forth." This caused the Egyptians "to loath" or "abhore" (“va’yakutzu”) them, and in turn they made them do rigorous labor (“va'ya'vidu” - a.v.d. - labor, work; while “eh’ved” is “slave”). "And they made their lives bitter with hard labor in mortar, in brick, and in all manner of work in the field. All their work in which they made them work with rigor" (v. 14 italics added). In verses 13-15 the root a.v.d (ayin, vet, dalet) - work, labor, slave - occurs five times, impressing upon the reader the sense of perpetual toil.

The commentator Benno Jacob [2] observes that the initiators of the acts of ritual enslavement are always mentioned (in their acts of harassment) in the plural, whereas the Israelites are referred to in the singular (in verses 10-12 each reference to the Israelites reads "he"). He goes on to say, "Israel is pictured here as characterless, faceless, bereft of leadership." Interestingly, the Parasha opens with the names of the individuals whose descendants, in just a matter of a few verses, are described as being submerged in a sea of suffering and oblivion (although, as we have said above, the singular person could have also been used because of them being seen as an “am” – a nation, a people).

The only two characters singled out here are the midwives (who are mentioned by name). They were assigned the heinous task of doing away with every Hebrew male newborn. Their defiance of the king's edict (v 17) results in Yisrael becoming even more numerous and mighy – rav and atzum (the same term we looked at above, stemming from the root a.tz.m). These two Elohim-fearing women are a testimony to the full involvement of Yisrael's Elohim with His People, even at a time when the Nation was being forced into conditions of bondage and forgetfulness. However, whereas "am Yisrael" as a whole was occupied with endless and huge building projects for their taskmasters, for the midwives it was their Elohim who established their "batim" – 1:21 literally “homes, houses" and also “families, dynasties” (translated “households”)!

The subjugating process increasingly gathers momentum; taxing (v.11) turns into hard labor (v. 11), then to enslavement (v.13, 14) and to 'limited' infanticide (v. 15-16), which finally becomes an imposition on the entire Egyptian nation, compelling it to engage in a full-blown genocide by exterminating every Hebrew male newborn (v.22). Thus, in its 22 verses, the first chapter of Sh'mot spans and recounts a long and eventful period.

The next chapter reports a sudden development. Nehama Leibowitz comments, "One family, father, mother, and daughter emerge from the gloom of this faceless mass."[3] The anonymity is only gradually broken, though, as the protagonists of this first part of the chapter remain nameless, albeit distinct. The only specific name in this narrative is the name that Par’oh's daughter gives the baby whom she finds. It is to be Moshe, "because I drew him out of the water" (v. 10 emphasis added). And as we observed in Parashat Miketz, this name is probably an Egyptian one, as "mes" or "mesu" in ancient Egyptian mean "child" or "son," [4] yet the Hebrew language adapts to foreign terms by employing puns or a 'play on words' (such as the in the name "Bavel", Gen. 11:9). There is, however, one other instance in Scripture where the root m.sh.h (mem, shin, hey) is used: "He drew me out - yimsheni - of many waters," sings King David (2nd Sam. 22:17; Ps. 18:16), being an apt description of Moshe’s current situation, and of his people’s future situation, when they will be facing a large body of water. The basket that baby Moshe was put in is called "tey'va," the identical word used for Noach's ark! The gigantic structure and the little basket are both havens of safety and protection, out of which deliverance with large-scale ramifications was destined to emerge.

It takes the death of the king (2:23) for the Children of Yisrael to "groan" and "cry out" -"va'yiz'aku" - and “their cry" - "shava'atam" - goes up to Elohim. Notice that here the verb “to cry out” is different from the noun “cry.” In other words, by the time the cry (“za’a’ka”) reaches heaven, it turns into a "sha'v'a" (sh.v.a. shin, vav, ayin), a noun which is "akin to deliverance or salvation" (y.sh.a - yod, shin, ayin) [5]. Thus, the cry already contains within it the response! And so we read that Elohim "heard," "remembered," "looked" (or "saw") and "acknowledged" (v. 24-25).

Chapter 3 elaborates on the meaning of the above verbs, through the person of Moshe and his mission. It is through Moshe that YHVH is about to reveal Himself to His People. Moshe spends time in the desert, "midbar," "tending the flock of Yitro (Jethro), his father-in-law… And he led the flock to the back of the desert, and came to Horeb, the mountain of Elohim” (3:1). "Midbar" is from the root d.v.r (dalet, vet/bet, resh), meaning “speech,” but this root also supplies us with “to drive” (as in “push out”) and “defeat.” It shares the same root with "pestilence" or “plague” and with the Holy of Holies in Solomon's Temple ("dvir"). It seems that when he who is stricken with plague (sin) is driven to the ‘backside’ of the desert, it is there that he hears YHVH’s still small voice speaking, and before long finds himself in the Holy of Holies, with Moshe being a perfect case in point. In 4:10 – 16, the root d.b/v.r. is repeated seven times in various forms such as, “words” and “speaking.”

YHVH reveals Himself to Moshe, talking to Him (typically) in a place of silence and desolation, thus indicating that His Presence and control are not limited by what things (also of the root d.v.r - davar = thing) may look like in the natural. The sea, for example, which will be facing the Israelites in their future escape, will turn into "dry land" which they are destined to cross. Incidentally, this “dryness” or “parched land” is called "charava" (Parashat B'shalach, Ex. 14:21), of the root ch.r.v. The particular desert location referred to here is called “Chorev,” and also stems from the root, ch.r.v (chet, resh, vet), which means “desolation or waste,” forming also the root for "cherev" - “sword” and “churban” – “destruction.” Not surprisingly, in this part of the world, where water is scarce, “dryness” and “destruction” are almost synonymous.

Elohim’s plans for His people may be elicited from some of the terms used here. He declares that He Himself "will go down" to rescue His people from Mitzrayim (Egypt - straits, narrowness, adversity), and "will bring them up" to "a good and broad land" (v. 8). When Moshe is to assemble the elders of Yisrael, he is to convey to them that the Elohim of Avraham, Yitzchak and Ya'acov, literally, "visiting has visited you and that which has been done to you in Egypt" (v. 16). We also noticed above, in Yospeh’s request at the end of the book of B’resheet (Genesis), that he used the same term when he expressed his faith about Elohim visiting His people to take them back to the land. In both these cases "visit" is "pakod," the root being p.k.d (pey, kof, dalet), and means “to visit, attend, muster, appoint[6] count or miss.” This word is also known as "precept" (e.g. Ps. 119:15, 27). Like several of the other words for "commandments" and "laws" this one also has, as is evident here, a different or broader meaning than what is generally perceived - something that we will be taking a closer look at when several of these terms will surface in future Parashot. This verb sums up well YHVH’s multiple plan for His people.

The long discourse that the reluctant Moshe has with YHVH is about to end when YHVH tells him…"Now therefore, go, and I will be with your mouth and teach you what you shall say," (4:12). Similar words are repeated in verse 15, with the promise to instruct him and his brother A’ha’ron (Aaron) as to what they will have to do. It was likewise a totally submissive Yeshua who expressed a similar idea during His earthly ministry, "The son can do nothing by himself, he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does, the son does also" (John 5:19 ref. also 8:28; 12:49; 14:10).

Moshe and A’ha’ron comply and go to see Par’oh. In 5:4 we read: “And the king of Egypt said to them, Moses and Aaron, why do you keep the people from their work? Get to your burdens!” “Keep the people” is “tafri’ou,” from the root p.r.a., (pey, resh ayin), which we looked at in Parashat Miketz (Ge. 41-44:17), where we also noticed its (coincidental?) similarity with the name Par’oh. The meaning of this root, being “unruliness” and “dishevelment” (of hair), is not incompatible with this king’s conduct toward his Hebrew subjects.

We noted above that, because of their lowly state, the Hebrews were referred to in singular person. In 4:22 they are referred to once again in this manner; but this time for an entirely different reason. Here YHVH calls Yisrael "My first born son." Even though by the end of the Parasha the lot of the Israelites is made (temporarily) even worse than it had been before Moshe's audience with Par'oh, the People, who at the beginning of Sh'mot are presented as a forgotten and maltreated mass, are now the object of YHVH's direct intervention. It is therefore with these words that our Parasha ends: "Then YHVH said to Moses, 'Now you shall see what I will do to Pharaoh, for with a strong hand he will let them go, and with a strong hand he will expel them out of his land'" (6:1).

In Parashat Sh’mot we see once again the sovereignty of YHVH over the work and intentions of the enemy. Just like Yoseph, whose destiny the enemy attempted to disrupt, while it was that very scheme which catapulted him into the place that YHVH had for him, so it is with Moshe. The very man, whose command should have brought about this infant’s death, ended being the one in whose palace the infant was protected and groomed for the purpose of leading the Israelites out and away from under his despotic and tyrannical control and dominion.

1 New Studies in Shemot, by Nechama Leibowitz, trans. Aryeh Newman, Eliner Library, Jerusalem, 1995
2 Ibid
3 Ibid
4 The New Brown, Driver, Briggs, Gesenius Hebrew and English Lexicon, ed. Francis Brown, Hendrickson Publishers, Peabody, Mass.
5 Ibid
6 Ibid

[2]

[6]

Parashat Va'yeshev - addtions

2011-12-19T06:17:00.001-06:00

Parashat Va’yeshev does not stop yielding materials for thought, and even though the subject matters that are presented there have been investigated again and again (see Hebrew Insights into Parashat Va’yeshev), there seems to be more wealth to be mined therein, as we found out last Shabbat when we studied it once more.

The Parasha’s account of the conflict between Yoseph and his brothers, in particular the sons of Bilha and Zilpa, is marked by an absence of “shalom”: And his brothers saw that their father loved him more than all his brothers, they hated him and could not speak peaceably to him (37:4 emphasis added). But even though the situation was not resolved, when the brothers went to Shechem to shepherd their father’s flocks, Israel said to Joseph, "Are not your brothers feeding the flock in Shechem? Come, I will send you to them." So he said to him, "Here I am." Then he said to him, "Please go and see if it is well with your brothers with [see the peace of] and well with the flocks [see the peace of], and bring back word to me" (37:13-14 emphases added). Yisrael sought information as to the peace of his sons when they were, supposedly, doing their work in Shechem. Many years earlier, when he returned to the Land after his sojourn in Aram, Shechem was the first location where he found himself. Scripture tells us that… Jacob came safely to the city of Shechem” (33:18). That “safely” is actually “shalem” – which is whole, unharmed (and perhaps ‘in one piece’). Yet even though we would expect this condition of “shalem” to lead to “shalom,” that was not the case. The fallacy of “shalom in Shechem” (or Sh’chem, in Hebrew) was perpetuated when Hamor and Shechem his son, the “lords of the land” who were also involved in the rape of Dina, presented to their compatriots the so-called peaceable offer of Yaacov’s sons: “These men are at peace with us. Therefore let them dwell in the land and trade in it. For indeed the land is large enough for them. Let us take their daughters to us as wives, and let us give them our daughters” (34:21 emphasis added). ‘Sure, if the flesh and greed are gratified, we can all be happy and at peace!’ The all-time guarantee for the ultimate “shalom” in the world is sex, money and position. And when those are not to be had, the spirits of lust, greed and jealousy prevail, as is so well demonstrated in Parashat Va’yeshev.

Well, since the desired “peace in Shechem” did not materialize in any one of those episodes, it is no wonder that the shepherds, aka infamous man-slaughterers, did not lead their flocks to the green and serene pastures of these environs, but continued on. As for Yoseph, he was directed by “a man” to follow them northward, to Dothan. Notice that Yoseph’s informant did not require much information; he already knew who the “brothers” were, and neither was he ignorant as to their whereabouts. Even so today, if we earnestly seek for our brothers, the Man will not withhold any information from us. He will lead us directly to them. It is just a matter of having the ears to hear and the heart to obey.

That Yoseph is the protagonist of our story is not difficult to determine. Scripture, however, continues to stress that fact, not only overtly but also by using subtler means.
In chapters 37 and 38 the verb y.s.f, – to add, to repeat – which is the root of Yoseph’s name, appears four times:
Now Joseph had a dream, and he told it to his brothers; and they hated him even more – va’yosifu (37:5).
And his brothers said to him, "Shall you indeed reign over us? Or shall you indeed have dominion over us?" So they hated him even more - va’yosifu - for his dreams and for his words (37:8).
And she conceived yet again - va’tosef - and bore a son, and called his name Shelah. (38:5a).
So Judah came to the realization and said, "She has been more righteous than I, because I did not give her to Shelah my son." And he never knew – ve’lo yasaf - her again
(38:26 ).
And so, even when the various episodes involve other individuals, named and unnamed,
the Word wants to make sure that the reader is aware of the central role of Yoseph in all of them, although the connection to his person will be made much further down the road (such as with Yehuda’s story in chapter 38 which will pertain to the role of Yoseph much much later).

Yoseph’s immediate destiny is marked by down spiraling, first into a pit and then by being sold to merchants who were on their way… down to Egypt (37:25 emphasis added). However, in the process he was also pulled up (from the pit), being indicative of the fact that each of his downfalls will also mark a ‘lifting up.’

But, in the meantime, the opening verse of chapter 38 says: “Now Joseph had been brought down to Egypt” (emphasis added). This event was taking place simultaneously with Yehuda’s departure from his country, from his family and from his father’s house (cf. Gen. 12:1): “It came to pass at that time that Judah departed [literally, went down] from his brothers” (38:1 emphases added). What is the difference between each of those descends? Yehuda’s guilt and self-condemnation caused him to choose a way out, which led to his spiritual back sliding, whereas Yoseph was brought down not of his own volition. There is a very clear distinction in the respective responses of these two men. The one is moving from bad to worse, without looking for a redemptive opportunity, whereas the other, who was subject to others’ decisions, makes good of every opportunity that comes his way. However, in each of those cases there exists the overriding sovereignty of YHVH, in spite of what may be ‘natural’ inclinations
(e.g. Proverbs 16:9). When Yehuda left his family, he followed his heart’s leaning
– va-yet (meaning “incline” or ‘lean”) and went over to his Adulamite friend Hirah upon whom he was relying for help. Later, when he sees the “harlot,” it says that “he turned – va-yet - to her,” once again following his inclinations and desires. On the other hand, after Yoseph was subject to someone else’s lust, it says of him that YHVH “was with Yoseph and [literally] –va-yet - inclined/turned his mercy/loving kindness/grace [chesed] toward him” (39:21 emphasis added).

Yehuda’s downward journey is accompanied by many mishaps, although every now and then there is evidence of an attempt on his part to do the “right thing.” How typical of guilt, shame and self-condemnation to lead us to try and cover them up by “good works”!
Thus, his sons’ names provide a clue to these feeble attempts. Yehuda named his firstborn “Er,” meaning “awake.” He was hoping that his depression and spiritual slumber could be redeemed by having this firstborn. His second son was called “Onan” – “on” being strength. Isn’t it interesting that Rachel named Binyamin, Ben- Oni, “son of my strength” as his birth depleted all of her strength and brought about her death? As to Yehuda’s third son; the latter was born under strange circumstances: “He was at Chezib when she bore him” (38:5). Who was at Chezib? Was it the newborn, or was it his father? What is Chezib? Is it truly a place, or is it a description of a condition? Chezib means “lie, deception, falsehood.” Is it possible that Shelah was conceived in a lie and deception, and was therefore the son of another man, rather than Yehuda’s? Or was Yehuda away while he was born, causing his wife great grief? One way or another, Shelah’s birth was not a cause of great joy, otherwise why would Scripture take the trouble to record that fact that “he was in chezib” at his birth? Thus, the name Shelah could possibly mean “hers,” if that boy was not Yehuda’s biological son.

When Yehuda’s degeneration reaches its peak, he turns (as we saw above) to a prostitute, with whom he leaves his most precious possessions: signet, cord and staff. Like Easv, who for momentary satisfaction was willing to give up his birthright, Yehuda had given the ‘markers’ of his identity and authority to the one whom he perceived to be a prostitute. Interestingly, when he went looking for her to retrieve his treasures and to cover up his embarrassment and pride ("Let her take them – the objects - for herself, lest we be shamed; 38:23 emphasis added), he used the term “k’desha,” which is a “temple prostitute.” However, that word shares its root with “kadosh” – set apart and holy. That word is repeated 3 times in verses 21 and 22 of chapter 38. Again, a hint as to the true nature of this woman, who turned out to be “kdosha,” holy and “righteous,” as Yehuda himself came to realize (v. 26). Interestingly, at Yehuda’s lowest point of spiritual and moral collapse YHVH intervenes by using what would appear as the very symbol of that lowly condition.

Among the many lessons that Yehuda was taught by Tamar, his daughter in law, he also had to realize that things are not always what they seem, a lesson that he had to apply one more time when many years later he met the ‘mighty Egyptian ruler.’

Hebrew insights into Parashat Ve’zot Habracha – D’varim (Deuteronomy) 33-34

2011-10-06T11:01:00.001-05:00

Hebrew insights into Parashat Ve’zot Habracha – D’varim (Deuteronomy) 33-34

The Torah’s last Parasha, with its prophetic blessings upon the People of Yisrael and the individual tribes, is also the last curtain for Moshe who takes his leave off the stage of history. We have seen the Patriarchs bless their sons before their departure, and now we view Moshe blessing the people whom he had carried in his bosom like a father (sometimes in spite of himself, ref. Num, 11:12) for over forty years.

The opening statement, “ve’zot habracha” (“and this is the blessing”), indicates that the first and more general component of the blessing (33:2-5) is part and parcel of one singular blessing that Moshe delivers as YHVH’s spirit rests upon him. That is to say that the tribes’ blessings are not separate from the word bestowed upon the nation as a whole. The very usage of “b’racha”, singular, implies that YHVH is considering each individual tribe as part of a complete entity.

The glorious and majestic description of the giving of the Torah at Sinai is likened to an epiphany, if you will, of YHVH Himself, denoted by His “coming,” “rising” and “shinning forth” over physical and geographical locations (ref v. 2). An equivalent description, although underscored by a more specific prophecy, found in Chavakuk (Habakkuk) 3:3, will perhaps help us realize that this expose’ of YHVH may not be restricted only to the event which took place at Chorev, as YHVH is not bound to, or limited by Time, even when He intercepts our dimensionally-confined world. Thus, a wider scope of revelation of Yisrael’s Elohim is presented. Interestingly, in “He came with ten thousands of saints” (v. 2), it is not the usual “ba” (“came”), but rather the Aramaic “ata,” evoking the Aramaic “maranatha” – or “maran ata” (Revelation 22:20) - that is, “Master come” or “the Master has come.” The enigmatic meaning of verses 2 and 3 is matched by the very words and syntax used, all of which are difficult and extraordinary, and present a task for the commentators to grapple with. The literal rendering, for example, of “ten thousands of saints,” mentioned in verse 2, is “ten thousands of holiness,” the word there being “kodesh.” Thus, if the text is referring to “ten thousands of saints” or “holy ones,” why are “His holy ones” in the next verse (v. 3) rendered as “k’doshav” (“kadosh” - “holy one”), plain and simple? If in both cases the meaning is “His holy ones,” why are they not identical? Or, is it possible that “ten thousands of holiness” is not a reference to “saints” (or “angels” according to rabbinic interpretation) at all, but is a description of His abode being “abundant in holiness”?

The next expression in the same verse is no less problematic. That which is translated either “firey law” or “flashing lightning” is “eshdat” in Hebrew, being a term that appears nowhere else. If broken in two it is: “e’sh” – fire – and “dat” – meaning “law, edict” or “manner of things.” However, “dat” is found only in Esther, one time in Ezra and in the Aramaic sections of Daniel, making its usage here, at such an early stage, totally doubtful. According to the B.D.B Lexicon “eshdat” was originally “esh yokeh-dat,” that is “burning fire” (with the first two syllables now missing). [1] According to this viewpoint we should read, “On His right (-that is, the right hand side) is a burning fire.”

Verse 3 reads: “Indeed, He loves the people; all thy holy ones are in Thy hand, and they followed in Thy steps, carrying your words.” This presents several problems. It changes mid-sentence from third to second person. “He who loves the nations” or “peoples” is described as “chovev amim.” The root ch.v.v. - love - is also shared by one of the words for “bosom.” Chovav is also one of the names of Moshe’s father-in-law (ref. Num. 10:29). According to Daat Mikra, “even when He expresses love toward all peoples, ‘all His Holy ones’ are Yisrael and they are ‘in Your hand.’” Therefore the change to second person in the second part of the verse denotes YHVH’s closeness to His people. Daat Mikra adds that the rest of the verse should read: “And they will be smitten at Your feet, and receive Your Word,” [2] whereas according to BDB the verb “tuku,” (“smitten”) is of dubious meaning and should therefore be understood as: “will be assembled,” as it is more compatible with the context. [3]

Yisrael’s present and future destiny is defined in the next two verses. Since Moshe is mentioned here in third person, the question arises whether he is speaking of himself, or is the assembly intoning the following: “Moses charged us with Torah, an inheritance for the assembly of Jacob. And there was a king in Jeshurun” [remember last Parasha’s Yeshurun, “the one who has been straightened,” in contradistinction to Ya’acov who is “winding or crooked”?]; when the heads of the people were gathered, the tribes of Israel together” (vs. 4, 5). For the “assembly of Jacob” we have here the unusual form of “kehila” (of the root k.h.l), rather than the frequent “kahal” or “eda.” “Kehila” appears to refer to a more organized form of the congregation, or society, rather than to a random assembly of the multitudes. Thus, when the People of Yisrael is in unison YHVH rules in their midst as a King of a redeemed community whose inheritance is Torah, rendering them no longer a wayward Ya’acov, but a Yeshurun whose paths have been made straight.

At this point Moshe confers on each tribe its respective prophetic blessing.

The first three tribes to receive their blessings are the firstborn Reuven, who in spite of having lost the birthright (ref. 1st Chronicles 5:1, 2), symbolizes here this significant position; Secondly, Yehuda (Judah), who was to receive the kingly position, while Levi is third to be given his blessing and stands for the office of the priesthood. There is no mistake - this is the order of YHVH’s Kingdom: the birthright comes first, ideally consisting of kingship and priesthood. However, in the un-regenerated state the birthright had to be divided up into its two offices (namely the ‘kingly’ and the ‘priestly’), which were only brought together in Yeshua (ref. Zech. 6:13). But when YHVH’s kingdom will be fully manifested on earth, His people will form the long-awaited-for nation of priests (after the order of Malchitzedek) and kings (e.g. ref. 2nd Peter 2:9).

Since Yehuda, according to the blessing (v. 7), was destined to be “brought to his people,” it is apparent that he will be separated from them at some point. This prediction became fact when the ten northern tribes seceded from the united kingdom, as it had existed under Shaul (Saul), David and Shlomo (Solomon) his son, never to have been reunited with Yehuda.

Of Levi it says (v. 9): “who said to his father and to his mother, I have not seen him; and he has not acknowledged his brothers, nor knew his own son, for they have observed Your word and kept Your covenant.” The word for “acknowledge” is “hekir,” also meaning to “recognize” and stems from the root n.ch.r (noon, kaf/chaf, resh) used in “nochri,” “stranger,” and in the verb “hitnaker,” to be “estranged.” This term describes Yoseph’s initial treatment of his brothers in B’resheet (Genesis) 42:7. The Levites, who were also to assume the position of judges, could not be “partial” to anyone, including their own family members, or as the Hebrew has it, they could not “recognize or acknowledge" their relatives, but rather, had to become “estranged” from them. “Estrangement” and “recognition,” although appearing to be contradictory, are in fact not that far apart; at times it takes the former in order to achieve the latter (as was the case with Yoseph and his brothers).

The description enumerating Yoseph’s blessing (vs. 13 – 17) resembles a trail going up and down hills, descending into valleys and underground resources and climbing mountain tops; a journey, which while topographical and geographical, also crosses the boundaries of Time and is ‘intercepted’ by the human element as well as by heavenly bodies, such as the sun and the moon (recalling to mind Yoseph’s dreams). “Meged” - translated “precious - is the leitmotif of this passage, as it is repeated five times within a few verses. Its expanded meaning is “excellence, glory, and gifts of choice” in reference to nature.[4] In verse 15, Yoseph’s hills and mountains are termed “ancient” (“kedem” - “first, initial, primary”), and “everlasting” (the word being “olam,” which also means “futurity”). Both the heavens and the abyss are destined to contribute toward Yoseph’s well being. That which the ground will produce for him on a monthly basis will grow so fast, that it will seem as though “expelled” (‘”the best yield” is “geresh”, g.r.sh, to “expel, force out”) by the earth. On the one hand “he shall push out the peoples” (v. 17). His leadership position, however, is not likened to the prowess of a king or a military leader, nor even to that of a typical priest, but rather to that of the Nazarite (ref. end of v. 16 – “n’zir ehcav”, literally the “nazarite among his brothers” and translated as “the one who was separated from his brothers,” or “a prince among his brothers”). The title used here originates in “nezer,” a “crown or a miter,” which is made up of the nazarite’s uncut hair (as we saw in Parashat Nasso, Num. 6). The “nazarite” - or “nazir”- is one who takes upon himself an oath to abstain from worldly pleasures.

Z’vulun (Zebulun) is told to rejoice in his “going out” (v. 18). In Parashat Ki Tetze (Deut. 21:10) we already noted that “going out” many a time connotes going out to war (ref. 1st Ch. 12:33), and in Z’vulun’s case also going out to sea (ref. Ya’acov’s blessings to his sons, in Gen. 49:13). Yisas’char’s (Issachar) tent dwelling is the antidote to Z’vulun’s “going out,” and refers to homestead and attachment to the land (the tent dwelling here does not seem to suggest a nomadic life style; cf. Jacob’s blessings, Gen. 49:14), and perhaps also to the wisdom and discernment characteristic of this people (ref. 1st Chronicles 12:32). The mutual cooperation between these two neighboring tribes is captured by verse 19. Yisas’char “shall call the peoples to the mountain. There they shall offer sacrifices of righteousness,” while Z’vulun will make provisions of “the bounty of the seas and treasures hidden in the sand.”

Naphtali is “satisfied with favor,” which is “s’vah ratzon” (v. 23), while Asher, who is “favorable in the eyes of his brothers,” is “r’tzooy echav” (v. 24). Both these words emanate from the root r.tz.h., which is to “please, accept, favor.”

In verse 15 we read about the “ancient – kedem – mountains,” while in verse 27 Elohim, who is described as a “dwelling place” (“me’ona”), is called “Elohey kedem,” translated here as “eternal.” Thus, He who always was from the very beginning, is also the One who will ever be and it is He who will enable Yisrael to “dwell alone securely” (v. 28), as He Himself is her dwelling place while “underneath [her] are [His] everlasting arms” (v. 27).

Moshe’s last words constitute an exhilarating exclamation: “Blessed are you, O Israel! Who is like you, O people saved by YHVH, the shield of your help, and who is the sword of your excellency! And your enemies shall be found liars to you, and you shall tread on their high places” (33:29). It is most likely that Moshe himself did not compose the last eight verses of D’varim (chapter 34, or even the entire chapter, consisting of 12 verses). About his body it is said, “He buried him…” (34:6), inferring the direct involvement of the Holy One of Yisrael in the task. And although in Sh’mot (Exodus) 33:20 YHVH said to Moshe: “You cannot see My face. For there no man can see Me and live,” here we read, in verse 10: “And never since has a prophet like Moses arisen in Israel, whom YHVH knew face to face.” Even if not to be taken literally, these words do point to Moshe’s intimate knowledge of the Almighty, since “panim el panim” (“face to face”) implies exposure before someone, as in Hebrew “face” is not only an external image, with the root p.n.h (which we have noted several times in the past) meaning “to turn.” Thus “face” is that which “turns” to look at another. And while “panim” is the “exterior,” or the “surface,” “p’nim” means “inner” (ref. Ezekiel 40:19,23 etc.). Thus “panim” - face - expresses also that which is on the inside. In 2nd Corinthians 3:18 this principle is applied in a powerful way to each individual believer: “We all, with our face having been unveiled, having beheld [‘turned toward’] the glory of YHVH as in a mirror, are being changed [on the inside] into the same image from glory to glory, even as by YHVH, the Spirit” (italics added).

[1] The New Brown, Driver, Briggs, Gesenius Lexicon, Francis Brown Hendrickson. Publishers, Peabody, Mass. 1979
[2] Da’at Mikra, A’ahron Mirski, Rav Cook Inst., Jerusalem, 2001
[3] The New Brown, Driver, Briggs, Gesenius Lexicon
[4] Ibid.

Hebrew Insights into Parashat Ha’azinu – D'varim (Deuteronomy) 32

2011-09-28T00:04:00.002-05:00

Hebrew Insights into Parashat Ha’azinu – D'varim (Deuteronomy) 32

Parashat Ha’azinu, which consists almost in its entirety of the so-called ”Song of Moshe” and called Shirat Ha’azinu in Hebrew, is the crescendo that the Dvarim (Deuteronomy) account has been building up to. It is a recitation which summarizes the Israelites’ history and predicts future situations, and continually revolves around a central pivot - YHVH, as the Almighty and as the loving father of His people. In the past two weeks we pointed out that Shirat Ha’azinu (the Ha’azinu song or poem) was to bear testimony for future generations (ref. 30:19). Last week, and the week before, heaven and earth were also summoned as “witnesses,” as they are, indeed, here too: “Give ear, O heavens, and I will speak; and hear, O earth, the words of my mouth” (italics added). The imperative “ha’azinu” (“listen”) is a derivative of “ozen” – “ear,” and would therefore be best translated “give ear.” You will notice that many of the verses are made up of couplets, where the same point is stated once and then repeated with a slight variation. The first two verses of the poem serve as a good example of this poetic device, which is so typical of biblical poetry:

Give ear, O heavens, and I will speak;
And hear, O earth, the words of my mouth.

My doctrine shall drop as the rain;
My speech shall drop down as the dew,

As the small rain on the tender plant,
And as the showers on the grass;

YHVH’s love and care for Yisrael form the backdrop against which Yisrael’s past and future are respectively described and cast. According to the poem, the people’s relationship with and toward YHVH appears to be a primary cause of the events (past, present and future) which befall them.

Verse 4 exclaims that YHVH is “the Rock whose work is perfect.” The word here for rock is “tzur.” This word is repeated a number of times in our song, and thus we read in verse 13, in reference to YHVH’s benevolence toward Yisrael, “He made him suck … oil out of the flinty rock.” In response, Yeshurun (Jeshurun) – rooted in y.sh.r. “straight,” acts more like a Ya’acov (which is “crookedness”), and “scorned the Rock of their Salvation” (v. 15). Verse 18 reads thus: “You forgot the Rock who birthed you.” The verb used here for “forgot” is “teshi,” of the root n.sh.h (noon, shin, hey), which is also the root for the name Menashe (Manasseh). The imagery of the “rock,” a substance that is not associated with tenderness, much less with motherhood, is juxtaposed with metaphors related to birthing and suckling. This type of unusual imagery is echoed in 1st Corinthians 10:4, where we read: “Our fathers….all drank of the spiritual Rock that followed them, and that Rock was Messiah.”

In verses 30 and 31 there are several more references to “tzur,” while in verse 37 the “rock” is the one in whom “refuge is taken” (“chasayu”, ch.s.h., chet, samech, hey – to “take refuge”), being a more conventional usage of the rock metaphor. Because the idols of the peoples were many a time made of stone, or carved into a rock, “tzur” is also used here in relation to the gods of the pagans (e.g. verse 31), contrasting the term with Yisrael’s Elohim, who is totally detached from the literal substance of the rock.

Other parts of our text appear to highlight different attributes of Elohim, one in particular is found in verse 27. In our reading let us include also verse 26. YHVH says about His treacherous people: “I will make an end of them, I will make their memory cease from among men.” Verse 27: “Were it not that I dreaded the enemy’s provocation, lest their adversaries should misconstrue, lest they should say, ‘our hand is exalted and not YHVH has performed all this’” (italics added). This verse [27] contains a very daring anthropomorphism [personification-humanization of YHVH], “indeed attributing to Him the sentiment of fear, as it were… and has no parallel in the Torah.” In this commentary Nechama Leibowitz includes other instances where Moshe expresses concern over the desecration of YHVH’s name among the nations and concludes: “This concern over desecrating the Divine name… assumes a much more intense and extreme form in our sidra [Parasha]. Here it is the Almighty Himself who is, as it were, “concerned” over the world being misled and diverted from the path leading mankind spiritually forward. He is filled with apprehension lest His name be brought into disrepute instead of sanctified and His sovereignty universally recognized and acknowledged, which is the ultimate goal of all creation.”[1]

“I will make an end of them…” is couched here in a very unique term, which appears nowhere else in the Tanach (O.T.), “af’ey’em.” Several possible interpretations of this term have been extrapolated. Most “have traced its meaning to the word pe’ah – “corner,” others to af (“anger”).” Rashi breaks up the word into its three syllables, and comes up with: “af ey hem,” which is a question that reads as follows: “In anger (“af”, meaning YHVH’s anger), where are they?” Thus implying that YHVH’s anger has reduced them to non-existence.[2] Da’at Mikra offers another interpretation, with the same “pe’ah” – “corner, edge” in mind: “I will not leave of them as much as an edge.”[3]

Another verse that requires some attention is 5 - where it says: “They have corrupted themselves: they are not His sons; it is their blemish; they are a crooked and perverse generation.” And although the Hebrew there is somewhat obscure, according to Da’at Mikra it should read, “His sons’ blemish is theirs” (literal translation), that is to say: “their perversion is of their own making, and therefore they are “lo-banav,” “not-His-sons”. This is similar to what was said of Ephraim “not-My-people” (“Lo-Ami”, Hos. 1:9). [4] In contradistinction, verse 6 names YHVH as “your father, the One who purchases you” – “kone’cha.” Quite often the term “koneh” (k.n.h, kof, noon, hey) – to “buy, or purchase” – is synonymous with redeeming, and lends the latter act its graphic meaning, as the role of the redeemer is primarily to pay for, and buy that which is lost (such as freedom or property). Many years later, in 1st Corinthians 6:20 and 7:23, Shaul (Paul) reminds the redeemed community: “You are bought with a price.” “Kone’cha,” with its similarity to “ken” (a “bird’s nest”), inspired Rashi to suggest that this is a reference to the nest that YHVH is making for Yisrael (see also verse 11).

At this point, starting with verse 6 and through 14, the poem expounds very tenderly on the establishing of the Israelite nation, and on the care and love bestowed on it by its Maker. Of the fact that Yisrael had a major role in global affairs, much before it even came into being, we learn from verse 8: “When the Most High divided to the nations their inheritance, when He separated the sons of Adam, He set the bounds of the people according to the number of the sons of Israel” (italics added). When one takes into consideration the fact that the above separation took place after the Flood, and more particularly that YHVH scattered the people during the Tower of Ba’vel (Babel) era (Gen. 10:25, 11:8), this statement becomes all the more momentous.

A string of verbs, which follow one another in progressive intensity and describe YHVH’s involvement with Yisrael, is introduced in verses 10 & 11. “He found him…He compassed him about … He cared for him…. Like an eagle that stirs up His nest… He hovers… He spreads his wings… He takes him… lifts him….” The “desert land,” the “waste” and the “howling wilderness” mentioned here (v. 10), conjure up in the mind a lost entity wondering around, and thus these verbs appear as the solution and answer to the dire condition of the people. These verbs are replete with activity: “vay’vone’nehu” (root b.n.h, bet/vet, noon, hey), translated “cared,” but in actual fact could relate to “bina” – “wisdom,” and thus may read: “endowed him with wisdom”; or to “hitbonen,” which is to “look closely, watch.” Another possibility is the connection to “boneh,” “build, build up, or edify.” “Guarded him” is a translation of “yitz’renhu,” which is of the root n.tz.r, (noon, tzadi, resh), meaning to “keep, guard, watch, hide, protect.” It is from this root that “netzer,” the “branch” of Yishayahu (Isaiah) 11:1 is derived, and the “watchmen” – “notzrim” – of Yirmiyahu (Jeremiah) 31:6. “Hovers” is particularly interesting, as it is “ye’ra’chef”, of the root r.ch.f (resh, chet, pey/fey), which is found in B’resheet (Genesis) 1:2 (in reference to the Spirit of Elohim). We also recall Parashat Va’era, in Shmot (Exodus) 6:7, 8 where we read YHVH’s promise: “And I will take you…. to the land concerning which I lifted up My hand…” (italics added). In Sh’mot (Exodus) 19:4, we also read YHVH’s address to Yisrael: “I bore you on eagles’ wings and brought you to Myself.” Thus Parashat Ha’azinu echoes promises of the past, transferring them to the present day reality of the Israelite Nation on the threshold of the Promised Land.

Next is the enumeration of the goodness and plenty that Yisrael was endowed with, and with which she shall be blessed in the future (v. 13-14). Verse 15 witnesses a transition, and once again there is an inventory, if you will, of densely listed verbs. Unfortunately not all of them can be translated into verb form in English: “Yeshurun grew fat… kicked… put on weight… became thick… covered in layers… forsook Elohim his maker….” In Hebrew all these are in verb form and follow one another thus: “va’yishman… va’yiv’at… shamanta, avita, kasita, va’yitosh… va’y’na’bel,” almost in stampede fashion. Just as before, where YHVH’s intense activities around His people were depicted in verb form, so too here, the Israelites’ intent on turning away from Him is described in a chain reaction of fast moves.

The excerpt of verses 28-35 presents a controversy, which has been engaging the commentators for generations. Who is the subject of verses 28-29? Is it Yisrael, or is it the enemies? In verse 30, again, who is being chased, is it Yisrael, or the enemies? Verse 36: “For YHVH will bring His people justice; and He shall have compassion on His servants…” seems to indicate that the former section would have referred to the enemy. However, according to 30 and 31, it would appear that Yisrael is the subject of the section: “How shall one chase a thousand, and two put ten thousand to flight, unless their Rock had sold them and YHVH had shut them up? For their rock is not as our Rock, even our enemies themselves being judges.” Who is it that YHVH is “selling”? (Remember verse 6, where He was depicted as the Father and the “buyer”?) Does He not sell that which belongs to Him? And in verse 31, in the references to “their rock” and to “our rock,” is there not a distinction made between Yisrael and the other nations? Verses 37 and 38 present a similar dilemma. Again, is it Yisrael or is it the nations that are the subject of this brief portion? Having just read that YHVH will have compassion on His people, this could possibly refer to the enemies, whose rock and god (the rock being the "god" and not a mere metaphor for strength, unlike the Elohim of Yisrael who is symbolized by the rock, but is not the rock itself) is unable to help them. Conversely, this could also be talking to Yisrael, who had been leaning on false gods whom they trusted to no avail. What do you think?

“And Moses made an end of speaking all these words to all Israel. And he said to them, ‘Set your hearts to all the words which I testify among you today, which you shall command your sons to observe and to do, all the words of this law; For it is not a vain thing for you, because it is your life. And by this word you shall prolong your days in the land where you go over Jordan, there to possess it’” (vs. 45-47 italics added). Thus Moshe seals these most solemn words of the testimonial poem. The words, “for it is not a vain thing for you, because it is your life” are rendered in Hebrew, “for it is not an empty word for you, because…” and here it is possible to read, “He is your life”… ”I am the way, the truth and the Life,” were Yeshua’s words in John 14:6. And just as the words of Shirat Ha’azinu were to bear a testimony, so did the Word-made-flesh (John 1:14) bear a testimony in His very being, “so that all might believe…” (John 1:7).

[1] New Studies in Devarim, Nechama Leibowitz, trans. Aryeh Newman. Eliner
Library, Department for Torah Education and Culture in the Diaspora. Hemed Books
Inc., Brooklyn, N.Y.
[2] Ibid
[3] Da’at Mikra, A’ahron Mirski, Rav Kook Inst., Jerusalem, 2001
[4] Ibid.

Hebrew Insights into Parashot Nitzavim and Va’yelech – D’varim (Deuteronomy)

2011-09-22T10:20:00.002-05:00

Hebrew Insights into Parashot Nitzavim and Va’yelech – D’varim (Deuteronomy)
29:10-ch. 31

This week’s Parashat Nitzavim may be subtitled “The Hebrew People - A Testimony of the Covenant and of the Promises.” Although Nitzavim is translated, "You stand…" - it actually means "standing in position, standing firmly, or taking a stand," the root being y.tz.v (yod, tzadi, bet/vet) and the definition is “set, establish or take a stand.[1] According to Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsh, however, the root is tz.v.v (tzadi, vet, vet), and means “cover while moving.” [2] Embodied in this Parasha (as well as in the next, Parashat Va’yelech), is the definition of the nation as well as the ultimate promise of grace.

Two of the terms, which ‘pop up’ more than once, are the verb "avor" (which we have examined previously) and means “to pass, go through, go over, enter,” and the noun and verb forms of "witness or testimony” ("ed"). The Hebrew people, YHVH’s witnesses, are characterized, as we know, by ‘crossing’ or ‘passing over,’ with different aspects of this action being presented here.

First, the people are standing “in position” or “formation”. Why? "That you may enter ("la'avor") the covenant with YHVH your Elohim, and enter into His oath which YHVH your Elohim is making with you today, in order that He may establish you today as His people and that He may be your Elohim, just as He spoke to you and as He swore to your fathers, to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Now not with you alone am I making this covenant and this oath, but both with those who stand here with us today in the presence of YHVH our Elohim and with those who are not with us here today" (29:12-15). Thus, being Hebrews, means first and foremost to "cross over," with the emphasis being on passing/crossing over into the covenant. Notice also the far reaching aspect of the covenant, to those “not with us today” (29:15), thus pointing to the continuity of the people of Yisrael and to generational unity within the boundaries of the covenant. “Covenant” – “brit” – is of the root b.r.t (bet, resh, tav), meaning to “cut." “Making a covenant” – “karot”- is another verb for “cut” (a tree, for example). Hence, in making the covenant there is a double cutting as it were, which is an emphatic separation, both naturally and spiritually (and signified by the physical circumcision). By the same token, transgression is also a “cutting (again, k.r.t, e.g. Lev. 7:20)… away” from the boundaries prescribed by the covenant.

This covenant, being two-sided, is therefore like a two-edged sword. Abba laid down the conditions, but knowing the infidelity characteristic of His children’s heart, He also built into the covenant the promise of grace. In other words, ultimately it will be Him only who will make possible its fulfillment, as is seen so vividly in 30:3-10. All the verbs that YHVH uses in relationship to Himself, in these eight verses, are in the ‘active causative form,’ denoting that He is both the initiator and the ‘enactor.’ Not only does He take it upon Himself to make it possible for the covenant to be fulfilled by carrying all of our afflictions and sufferings (through His Son), here it also says that "YHVH your Elohim [is He] who will cross (la'avor) ahead of you" (31:3). YHVH is truly the Elohim of the Hebrews! He goes ahead of them by "crossing over" Himself! And indeed, we see Yeshua crossing - “over” – ahead of us, entering within the veil giving us a hope which is sure and steadfast – “yatziv” (ref. Heb. 6:19, 20, Hebrew translation of the Greek, being also of the root y.tz.v., which lends the name to our Parasha). Thus, with a “yatziv” (sure) hope, we are enabled to be “y’tzivim” (steadfast, standing firmly).

In the meantime, this drama of the covenant nation, its unfaithfulness and the grace granted it, is to unfold in front of the entire universe and creation. The testimony – witness -“ed” – is being established by calling upon heaven and earth (ref. 30:19). The Song of Moses (referred to in Parashat Va’yelech 31:21 and presented in chapter 32, and a different version in Ex. 15) is the written record that serves as a witness, as does the Torah too, which is to be kept in the ark in the Holy of Holies (31:26).

The desolate land (29:23-28) also bears witness to the unfaithfulness of the people, both before their own sons' eyes, and in front of the foreigners, as does their banishment from it. All this is with view toward the end that the Hebrew people themselves will become a witness and a testimony nation. "You are my witness, declares YHVH" (Is. 43:10), to the fact that He is the Elohim of Yisrael, the Elohim of creation, and the Elohim of the universe.

The covenant here mentioned was made with us, of this generation (see 29: 14, 15), just as much as it was made with those who lived back then, and therefore we too are "standing in position" today to be a covenant people and a witness to the Elohim of the covenant, the Elohim of Yisrael, the Elohim of the Hebrews - the Elohim of grace.

While Parashat Nitzavim focuses on the “crossing over” of the Hebrew people, the next Parasha, “Va’yelech,” starts with… the “going” of Moshe: “va’yelech Moshe,” that is “and Moses went.” Although the Parasha commences with Moshe’s statement about his approaching death and with instating Yehoshua (Joshua) in his position, the rest of chapter 31 echoes some of what we just read in Parashat Nitzavim. And so “Moshe went and spoke these words to all Israel. And he said to them, I am a hundred twenty years old today. I can no more go out and come in. Also YHVH has said to me, ‘You shall not go over this Jordan’” (31:1, 2 italics added). Notice the elderly leader’s words, “I can no more go out and come in,” which in Hebrew is: “la’tzet ve-lavo” [literally “to go out” and “to come in”). The pervious Parashot, Ki Tetze, “when you go out,” and Ki Tavo,” - “when you come in,” seem to be related to these words of Moshe about “going out to war” (Deut. 21:10), and “coming into the land” (26:1). Thus, paraphrased, Moshe is implying the following: “I am not able to lead you in war, and neither am I able to enter the land with you.” But whereas Moshe will not be accompanying the people, he consoles them again, saying that “YHVH your Elohim will cross before you” – which is once more the familiar “over” (a.v.r – the root of “Hebrew”). “He will destroy these nations before you,” and in addition Yehoshua will also “go – pass, cross - “over” - before you” (v. 3). Verses 6 and 8 summarize all of the above: “YHVH your Elohim is He who goes with you. He will not fail you nor forsake you.” The latter expression is, “lo yar’pecha, ve-lo ya’az’vecha,” “Yar’peh” – translated “fail” - is of the root r. p/f. h (resh, pey/fey, hey), meaning to “become weak, let go, be negligent, or remove.” In Tehilim (Psalms) 46:10 it says, “Be still and know that I am YHVH.” However, in Hebrew it says, “be still and harpu,” which literally means, “let go,”or “become weak.” Because YHVH will not “let go” of His people, they are the ones who must do the “letting go” and become “weak” before Him, and in so doing they will know that He is the Elohim who alone can give them strength. Shaul (Paul) echoes this sentiment when he says: “And He said to me, ‘My grace is sufficient for you, for My power is made perfect in weakness. Most gladly therefore I will rather glory in my weakness, that the power of Messiah may overshadow me” (2ndv Corinthians 12:9 italics added). The next verb (of the above-mentioned expression, “lo yar’pecha ve-lo ya’av’vecha”) is azav (ayin, zayin, bet/vet), and means “leave, abandon or forsake.” It is also used elsewhere in our Parasha, although in a different connotation, as we shall see at once.

And so we read in verses 16 and 17: “And YHVH said to Moses, ‘Behold, you shall sleep with your fathers. And this people shall rise up and go lusting after the gods of the strangers of the land into which they are going, into their midst. And they will forsake Me – ve’azavani - and break My covenant which I made with them. Then My anger shall be kindled against them in that day, and I will forsake them - ve’azavtim…’” (Italics added). Verse 5 reveals to us that there is a condition for being preserved by YHVH: “…do to them [the nations in Cna’an - Canaan) according to all the commandments which I have commanded you,” and not “go lusting after [their] gods,” thereby forsaking the true One.

In the above (v. 16), we also read that in conjunction with following idols: “This people shall rise up…” which is “ve’kam.” In Parashat Nitzavim we read in 29:13: “…that He may establish you today for a people to Himself…” which is literally “that He may raise you up… - hakim.” Thus, it is the very people which YHVH was raising up, that “shall rise up and go lusting after the gods of the strangers…” (italics added). In both the above examples (and in many similar ones throughout the Tanach, some of which we examined very recently), we see the usage of the very same word, or a derivative of the same root, for the purpose of conveying contrasting messages. This method highlights or enhances an idea, and at times adds a touch of irony to the description at hand.

In verse 14, YHVH is commanding Moshe to call on Yehoshua and for both of them to “present” themselves in the Tabernacle; a command which is designated by the imperative
“(ve-hit)yatzvu”, of the root y.tz.v. that we encountered in the previous Parashat “Nitzavim.” In presenting himself, therefore, Yehoshua is to make a “firm stand.” Further connection to Parashat Nitzavim is evident in the concept of “witness” – testimony “ – “ed,” masculine, and “eda,” feminine. In the previous Parasha heaven and earth and life and death were all mentioned as witnesses (30:19). Now the “Song” (which constitutes the next Parasha), the book of the Torah, and heaven and earth (again) are mentioned in the capacity of witnesses. The “Song,” in particular, is mentioned as “testifying as a witness” against the people “when many evils and troubles have found them” (v. 21). “Testifying” is “an’ta” (of the root a.n.h – ayin, noon, hey), meaning to “respond or answer,” as according to verse 19 the “Song” will be, “in the mouths of the Children of Israel.” Thus their own words, when they recite this Song, shall “respond” to their evil actions and become a testimony against them. This brings to mind Parashat Nitzavim’s: “the word is very near you, in your mouth and in your heart, so that you may do it” (30:14 italics added), which is the other side of the same proverbial coin. Another usage of “ta’aneh,” “respond”, in relationship to “witness,” is found in Sh’mot (Exodus) 20:16 and Dvarim (Deuteronomy) 5:20: “You shall not bear – “ta’aneh”- respond” - a false witness against your neighbor.” In view of this, are the things that we say and do but responses, or answers, to a ‘Primary Cause’?

In verses 10 and 11 we read: “And Moses commanded them, saying, ‘at the end of seven years, at the set time of the year of release, in the Feast of Tabernacles, when all Israel has come to appear before YHVH your Elohim in the place which He shall choose, you shall read this law before all Israel in their hearing.’” The word for “read” is “kara” (k.r.a, kof, resh, alef), meaning to "read, recite, call.” At the end of the Parasha, in verse 29, it says: “For I know that after my death you will become utterly corrupt, and turn aside from the way which I have commanded you. And evil will happen to you in the latter end of the days…”. Moshe predicts that “evil” will “happen to you,” which is rendered here ve’karat, and shares the same root as the “kara” (“read”), that we have just looked at. However, as a rule the spelling for “happen,” albeit of the same sound as “read” or “recite,” is different and therefore has another root. Thus, the special rendering and spelling of “happen” in this particular case incorporates, as it were, the verb for “reading”, meaning that hearing the Torah read and turning away from it and from its Giver will result in evil befalling or happening to those who act in such manner.

[1] The New Brown, Driver, Briggs, Gesenius Lexicon, Francis Brown Hendrickson.
Publishers, Peabody, Mass. 1979.

[2] Etymological Dictionary of Biblical Hebrew, Rabbi Matityahu Clark, Feldheim

Publishers, Jerusalem, New York.

Hebrew Insights into Parashat Ki Te’tzeh – Deuteronomy: 21:10 – 25:19

2011-08-18T01:11:00.002-05:00

Hebrew Insights into Parashat Ki Te’tzeh – Deuteronomy: 21:10 – 25:19

Parashat Ki Te’tzeh – “when you go out”… consists of lists of commandments, some of which we have encountered earlier on in the Torah. Others are repeated in a modified form, while quite a few are mentioned here for the first time. It should be noted that even though at first glance the various injunctions seem to be placed randomly, a closer study reveals them to be organized in clusters wherein there is a common theme, or some other link which ties them together within each respective group. One such example, where the rulings almost form a story line, is right at the beginning of the Parasha. The first one deals with a case of a man desiring and marrying a foreign woman taken captive in war, but losing interest in her at a later stage. The next ruling focuses on the rights of the firstborn son of (again) an unloved wife, whose husband has another, favored, wife. From the firstborn son we are taken to a command regarding a rebellious son, whom some of the sages believe to be the offspring of the foreign wife mentioned above. This son’s behavior makes him a “candidate” for stoning. The next ruling deals with a criminal who is sentenced to hanging (ref. 21:10-23). At the very end of the Parasha (in 25:14-16), to mention another example, we read about unjust weights and measures which are detestable in YHVH’ sight. The concomitant ruling is a reference to the Amalekites, who are to be completely wiped out because of their ill treatment of Yisrael during the Exodus, which places them under the category of: “Anyone doing these things is hateful to YHVH your Elohim everyone acting evilly” (25:16), even though “these things” is actually in reference to using unjust weights. Parashat Ki Te’tzeh illustrates the extent of YHVH’s involvement in every aspect of the Israelites’ life - the individuals as well as the community. They, in turn, were therefore to live their lives and express themselves in a manner worthy of Him.

The stubborn and rebellious son, of 21:18, 20, according to his own parents’ admittance, “will not listen to his father's voice or his mother's voice; even though they discipline him, he will not listen to them.” “Stubborn and rebellious” is “sorer u’moreh”; “sorer” is of the root s.r.h (samech, resh, hey) and means “turn aside, defect, or withdraw”; “moreh” is of the root m.r.h (mem, resh, hey) meaning, “contentious, or rebellious.” This conduct issues forth from the heart, as we read in Yirmiyahu (Jeremiah): “To this people there is a revolting and a rebellious – sorer u’moreh - heart” (5:23). This son is further described as “a gluten and a drunkard.” The latter noun is “soveh”, the root being s.v.a. (samech, bet/vet, alef), recalling, “sovah” (sin/shin, vet, ayin) which is not only close in sound but also in meaning (albeit employing a different spelling). In Parashat Vayera (see Gen. 21:27-31) we examined this root and found that “satisfaction,” or to “have had enough” (especially in reference to food), is “sovah,” relating to the number "seven" – “sheva.” By calling the week "shavua," the language points to the fullness and completeness of what Elohim has achieved. "In Your presence there is fullness ("sova") of joy; I will be satisfied ("es'be'ah") with Your likeness when I awake," (Ps. 16:11; 17:15). Thus, if one is not ‘satisfied’ with being “sa’veh’ah” and overindulges, he becomes a “soveh”. By making use of similar sounds Hebrew, typically, points to life’s fine demarcation lines. The rebellious son was to be executed by stoning (ref. V. 21), which is the verb “ragom.” Another stoning was to occur in the event of a young woman who upon marriage was found not to be a virgin (ref. 22:21), as well as when “a girl that is a virgin, betrothed to a man, and a man finds her in the city, and lies with her” (v. 23). In these cases the stoning is “sakol” (s.k.l, samech, kof, lamed), which means not only to “hurl rocks,” but also to “gather rocks,” such as in Yishayahu (Isaiah) 5:2: “My Beloved has a vineyard in a fruitful horn. And He dug it, and cleared it of stones” (italics added). This illustrates again the close proximity between apparent contradictions, of which we shall see another example later on. Following the prodigal son in 21:21, the text goes on (v. 22) to speak of “a man [who] has committed a sin worthy of death, and he is put to death, and you hang him on a tree” (v. 22), appending, “He who is hanged is accursed of Elohim” (v. 23). This, of course, is how Yeshua “redeemed us from the curse of [breaking] the Torah laws, having become a curse for us” (Gal. 3:13).

The next set of injunctions in chapter 22 focuses on concern for the property of one’s fellowman and his welfare, as well on sensitivity toward YHVH’s creation. “You shall not see your brother's ox or his sheep driven away, and hide yourself from them. You shall surely turn them back to your brother” (v. 1). “You shall hide” here is “hit’a’lamta,” of the root a.l.m (ayin, lamed, mem), and means “hidden or concealed,” and in this context also “disregard, neglect or pretend not to see.” It is from this root that we obtain “olam,” which in Biblical Hebrew speaks mostly of “eternity” (future but also past), that from the human point of view is indeed concealed and uncharted (e.g. Gen. 17:7; Ex. 12:24; Ps. 77:5, 7). “Young man, or young woman” are “elem” and “alma,” respectively, as their character is still unfolding and their future unknown also derive from the same root. At the other end of this cluster of injunctions we read: “If a bird's nest happens to be before you in the way in any tree, or on the ground, with young ones, or eggs; and the mother is sitting on the young, or on the eggs, you shall not take the mother with the young. But in every case you shall let the mother go, and take the young for yourself, so that it may be well with you, and you may prolong your days” (22:6,7 italics added). This somewhat obscure command holds a great promise, like that of the 5th Commandment of the Decalogue, which says: “Honor your father and your mother, as YHVH your God has commanded you, so that your days may be prolonged” (Ex. 20:12, Deut. 5:16). The fact that this promise is common to both these injunctions has puzzled the sages, all the way back to Talmudic literature. Some of them concur that YHVH’s ways are higher than ours, and therefore various precepts are “passed finding out,” while others maintain that one should not even try and discover whether the Divine commands have reasons or not. On the other hand, Professor Yitzchak Heinemann contends that “it is incumbent on us to detect the finger of God in the wonders of nature and the events of our life, though they will still remain unsolved mysteries, so we must endeavor, as far as possible, to appreciate the wisdom and justice of His commands”. [1] The identical reward for honoring parents and for shooing the mother bird before taking her young, may serve as a clue to a principle which applies to every word spoken in the Torah: “kala k’cha’mura,” meaning that each precept (and/or word), whether insubstantial or weighty, is to be treated equally. Thus, all the way from the weightiest precept to the least esteemed, through those that are ‘in between’, obedience is equally required, with the result (of doing so) being the same. Our Parasha, to cite another such example, also exhorts us to “have a perfect and just ephah; so that they prolong your days in the land” (25:15 italcis added).

In 23:8-9 we read: “You shall not despise an Edomite, for he is your brother. You shall not despise an Egyptian, for you were an alien in his land, sons of the third generation that are born to them may enter into the assembly of YHVH.” This direction is in opposition to the one relating to the Ammonites and Moabites, who were not to enter the assembly of YHVH for ten generations. Da’at Mikra ponders: “Why is it that the Torah deals this way with the Edomites, not demanding from them what was demanded of the Moabites and Ammonites, which was to greet Israel with bread and water when they had passed by these peoples’ territories? Because Ya’acov tricked Esav and had wrested from him the birthright and the blessings; while for having chased Ya’acov, Esav and his progeny have already been punished by having been held off from the assembly of Israel for two generations. The Egyptians are also forgiven for their treatment of Israel, as [their reason for doing so was because] they were afraid lest Israel would join their enemies.” [2]

Several rulings are laid concerning the purity of Israel’s camp and assembly. One of them is: “None of the daughters of Israel shall be a cult prostitute, nor shall any of the sons of Israel be a cult prostitute” (23:17). The word used here for “female prostitute” (in pagan worship) is “k’desha,” while “male prostitute” is “kadesh.” This is one more example of contradictory terms being closely linked in the Hebrew language and mind, since the word for “holy” is “kadosh” (and in feminine gender – “kdosha”). In verse 18 we read: “You shall not bring the hire of a harlot or the wages of a dog into the house of YHVH your God for any vow, for both of these are an abomination to YHVH your Elohim.” This type of “wage” is “et’nan,” an unusual form of “natan” (noon, tav, noon) which is to “give,” or to “offer” of t.n.h (tav, noon, hey). Regret for betraying Yeshua led Yehuda of Krayot - Judas Iscariot – to give back to the priests the 30 pieces of silver he had been given for committing this act. “The chief priests said, ‘It is not lawful to put them into the treasury, since it is the price of blood’. And taking counsel, they bought of them the potter's field, for burial for the strangers” (Mat. 27:6). The priests acted this way based on the above-mentioned ruling, to which they appended “price of blood.” Is it a coincidence that “wages of a dog”, which is included in this category, is followed by issues pertaining to usury (v. 19, 20), using “neshech” for “usury, or interest,” whose literal meaning is “to bite”?

Before examining the next cluster, let us pause and inspect a certain term which appears in 23:20: “…that YHVH your Elohim may bless you in all that you set your hand to in the land where you go to possess it” (emphasis added). “Set your hand to” is literally the “sending of your hand” – “mish’lach yadeh’cha.” In the past we saw that one’s work or occupation was called “m’la’cha” (of the root l.a’a.ch, - “to send”, and hence “messengers, angels, sent out ones”), which by its very definition conveys the idea that one’s work is a goal or an accomplishment that does not remain in confinement or within one’s own vicinity only. Rather, it is something rendered or performed as a mission (for the community), and therefore was not to be considered incidental or self serving. The same idea is expressed in “mishlach yad,” of the root sh.l.ch (shin, lamed, chet), which also means “to send.”

In Parashat R’eh we discussed the noun “makom” – “place” - and the verb “kum” – “to rise or go up,” which shares the same root. In our Parasha we encounter other derivatives of the same root (kof, vav, mem). In 23:25 we read: “When you come into your neighbor's standing grain, then you may pluck heads with your hand; but you shall not wield a sickle in your neighbor's standing grain.” The “standing grain” is the ripe sheaves ready for harvesting, called “kama” (also in Exodus 22:6). “Plucking heads” is “m’lilot,” the verb being “malol” (m.l.l. mem, lamed, lamed) and means “to scrape or to break into crumbs.” And so we read in Luke 6:1: “And it happened on the second chief Sabbath, He passed along through the sown fields. And His disciples plucked the heads and were eating, rubbing with the hands.” The rabbis’ discussion as to whose right it is to partake of the above-mentioned, is followed by a concluding comment by Nechama Leibowitz (spanning more than just this particular commandment): “From all the opinions we have surveyed it seems apparent that the Torah was not concerned with favoring one side or according privileges to the other. It does not underwrite the privileges of a particular class but is concerned with human welfare. It does not approve of man conducting his life on the principles of strict justice alone, but calls for consideration and lovingkindness in human relations”. [3]

Interestingly, the “wielding of the sickle” (which one is forbidden to do in a neighbor’s field (in 23:25 the verse we looked at above), recalls an act of “felling” or “cutting off,” which in Hebrew is “k’ritut.” Indeed “k’ritut” is what the next chapter (24) takes us to. “When a man has taken a wife and married her, and it happens that she finds no favor in his eyes because he has found a thing of uncleanness in her, and he writes her a bill of divorce and puts it in her hand, and sends her out of his house.” “A bill of divorce” is “sefer k’ritut,” literally “a book of cutting off.” This bill, therefore, becomes an instrument of severing the relationship, much like a hatchet. “A thing of uncleanness” is “ervat davar,” literally “the exposing [erva] of something.” In a marriage relationship whatever has been covered up is naturally exposed and revealed just prior to the time of severance. The root of “erva” - nakedness, a.r.h (ayin, resh, hey) also lends itself to the verb “to pour out” and is used in Yishayahu (Isaiah) 53:12, when describing the Messiah: “And with the strong He shall divide the spoil; because He poured out [he’era] His soul to death” (italics added).

In 24:19 we come to a precept that has caused quite a stir in rabbinical polemics. “When you cut down your harvest in your field, and have forgotten a sheaf in the field, you shall not turn back to take it. It shall be for the alien, for the orphan and for the widow; so that YHVH your Elohim shall bless you in all the work of your hand.” It would hardly seem plausible that this could be a source of relief and provision for the needy. Additionally, this injunction also raises another query. In the Tosefta, Peah tract] 3, 8 it says: …”The Omnipresent has given all the other precepts in the Torah to be observed consciously. But this one is to be unconsciously observed. Were we to observe this one of our own deliberate freewill before the Omnipresent, we would have no opportunity of observing it”. The conclusion is therefore that, “if a man has no deliberate intention of performing a good deed [and] it is nevertheless reckoned to him as one,” therefore “he who deliberately performs a good deed, how much more so [is it reckoned to him]!” [4] Verse 20 follows on the heels of 19 and is similar to the former: “When you beat your olive tree, you shall not search the bough behind you. It shall be for the alien, for the orphan, and for the widow.” The word for “bough” is “pu’ara,” of the root “p’er” (p.e.r, pey, alef, resh), which is also “beauty or glory.” Yishayahu (Isaiah) 60:21 is very appropriate in this connection, reading as it does: “And your people shall all be righteous; they shall possess the earth forever, a branch of My planting, a work of My hands, to beautify [lehit’pa’er] Myself” (italics added). And although the boughs have been broken, yet the Olive Tree of Yisrael, when fully redeemed, is destined to be a glory unto YHVH (ref. Is. 44:23), especially if the people of Yisrael, with the Torah inscribed on their hearts, will follow the above injunction of generosity and kindness to the alien, orphan and widow. In contrast, and yet in connection to verse 19 which featured forgetfulness, are the commands in verses 17-18 and 21-22 (of chapter 24). In both these verses one is exhorted to remember having been a slave in Egypt and therefore consider the stranger, orphan and widow, for justice and provision. Thus, one’s memory, as well as one’s forgetfulness, is to be ‘harnessed’ for the purpose of manifesting YHVH’s nature.

Thus, when dried up and dead, as Yisrael’s stick/tree was, the collective outcry went forth: “Our bones are dried, and our hope is perished; we are cut off to ourselves” (Ez. 37:11). Yet through redemption Yisrael is to be resurrected. This principle is captured in the precept delineated in 25:5-10, where if a man dies leaving no offspring, his widow is to marry his brother and together they are to have a child who will be considered the firstborn of the dead brother, in order to raise up “… the dead brother's name, and his name shall not be wiped out of Israel” (v. 6). We have already studied (above and in other places) the word “kum” (also “makom”, place) - “to stand up, rise”. Here its usage, as the “raising up” of a name for the dead brother, connotes “resurrection” and thus in Modern Hebrew “t’kuma” (of the same root) is resurrection, while Vayikra (Leviticus) 26:13 says: “I am YHVH your Elohim, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, so that you should not be their slaves, and I broke the bars of your yoke and made you walk erect – “ko’me’mi’yoot” (once again of the same root). The following verse (Lev. 26:14) warns Yisrael lest they “reject My statutes.” Those engaged in such activities, that is rebelling and rising against YHVH, are called “te’komemim” (Psalms 139:21). Thus, those whom YHVH has caused to rise must do so in uprightness and in circumspection, lest they find themselves rising against Him.

[1] New Studies in Devarim, Nechama Leibowitz, trans. Aryeh Newman. Eliner
Library, Department for Torah Education and Culture in the Diaspora. Hemed Books Inc.,
Brooklyn, N.Y.
[2] Davrim with Daat Mikrah Commentary, Pub. Mossad Harav Kook, Jm. 2001.
[3] New Studies in Devarim
[4] Ibid.

Hebrew Insights into Parashat Shoftim – Dvarim (Deuteronomy) 16:18 – 21:9

2011-08-18T00:20:00.003-05:00

Hebrew Insights into Parashat Shoftim – Dvarim (Deuteronomy) 16:18 – 21:9

In Parashat Shoftim (“judges”) several institutions and their relevant supervisory regulations, are being set up for the future administration of Yisrael’s national life. To begin with, the appointment of judges and officers is provided for, leading to a number of ‘religious’ prohibitions and to the consequences resulting from breaking them. The institution of arbitrators and judges in all matters is followed by instructions concerning the monarchy, and the life of the Levites and priests. Cities of refuge and matters pertaining to witnessing crime, war regulations, and resolving cases of unknown murders seal off our Parasha.

The expression, which we encountered in last week’s Parashat R’eh, namely, “You shall put away [purge] – literally burn or consume - the evil from among you” (13:5), is repeated many times over, almost like a refrain (ref. 17:7,12; 19:13,19; 21:9) and thus subtly points to the results of incurring YHVH’s burning anger (as we also saw last week).

Right at the core of the account of these, mostly executive matters, there is a passage, which although at first glance may appear to be compatible with the others is nevertheless of an altogether different genre and purpose (18:13-22). It is, above all else, prophetic in nature, describing an individual who will appear on Yisrael’s horizon. This individual’s qualifying characteristics are specified to some extent in this passage, and are contrasted with potential false claimants or counterfeits (vs. 20 – 22, with more on the subject refer also to 13:2-8, in Parashat R’eh). The instructional aspect of this text is simply, “Whoever will not listen to My words which he [this prophet] shall speak in My name, I will require it at his hand” (18:19). Moshe says of Him: “YHVH your Elohim shall raise up to you a prophet from among you, of your brothers, One like me; you shall listen to Him” (v. 15), and again in verse 18 YHVH is speaking, addressing Moshe: “I shall raise up a prophet to them from among their brothers, one like you; and I will put My words in his mouth; and he shall speak to them all that I shall command him.” Mention is also made in verses 16 and 17 of the fact that before the giving of the Torah in Chorev (Horeb), the Israelites had asked Moshe to interpose between them and YHVH, a request that YHVH apparently looked favorably upon. This future prophet, like Moshe, will also have this characteristic of mediation. Some of his others attributes will be: granting deliverance from bondage, being mighty in word and deed, offering strong leadership yet being humble beyond any man who had ever lived, willingness to offer up his own life for the people, acting as a teacher and a judge and being raised from among the ranks of his own people. Dvarim (Deuteronomy) 34:10 appends, “And never has a prophet like Moses arisen in Israel, whom YHVH knew face to face,” thus adding another trait to the portrait of this (Moshe-like) individual.

Does the placing of this passage, amid the Torah’s civil and liturgical instructions, which flank it on both sides, point to the reason and end-all of these instructions themselves and to that which imbues them with life? In Romans 10:4 we read: “For the goal at which the Torah aims is the Messiah.” Shim’on Keyfa (Peter) also identifies this prophecy with the “One proclaimed to you before” (Acts 3:20), that is Messiah Yeshua.

In comparison with this passage, which portrays Yisrael’s supreme ruler, we read in 17:8 – 12 about the Levites and the priests who are to judge and instruct Yisrael: “If a matter is too hard for you in judgment, between blood and blood, between cause and cause, or between stroke and stroke, matters of strife within your gates… And you shall come in to the priest, of the Levites, and to the judge who is in those days, and shall inquire. And they shall declare the sentence of judgment to you” (v. 8-9). Summarizing the passage:

(1) The place where these arbitrations are to take place is “the place which YHVH your Elohim shall choose” (v. 9).
(2) The litigants’ response is to be obedient “to the word which they [the judges] declare to you,” and “you shall do according to the mouth of the law which they direct you, and according to the judgment which they deliver to you. You shall not turn aside from the word, which they declare to you right or left” (vv. 10, 11).
(3) The consequences of disobedience are: “And the man who acts with pride so as not to listen to the priest who is standing to serve YHVH your Elohim there, or to the judge, even that man shall die” (v. 12).

If we compare this set of conditions to those applied to the “prophet” of 18:15 – 21, we find that there are marked differences. Whereas obeying the above-mentioned priestly judges is to be preceded by some specific judicial matter, obeying the “prophet” is not subject to such prerequisites: “I will put My words in His mouth; and He shall speak to them all that I shall command Him” (18:18), says YHVH. And while it is YHVH who appoints this One, the judges are simply mentioned as: “the priest, of the Levites, and… the judge who is [that is, who happens to be officiating] in those days” (17, 9). Chapter 18 verse 19 points out: “And it shall be, whoever will not listen to My words which he shall speak in My name, I will require it at his hand.” And although the person who does not obey the priest or the judge is also subject to a death penalty, yet his proverbial hand is not being required by YHVH Himself. In addition, the priests and judges, unlike the “prophet,” are not mentioned as speaking in YHVH’s name, but rather as “standing to serve Him” (17:12).

Just prior to the passage about the “prophet like Moshe,” we read about the abominations of the people living in the land that Yisrael is about to enter. Yisrael is warned not to do as “these nations whom you shall expel [who] listen to observers of clouds and to diviners” (18:14). Rather, Yisrael is to be “perfect – “tamim” -whole, wholesome, innocent, without blemish - with YHVH” (v. 13 emphasis added). This calls to mind Avraham, who was told, “walk before Me and be ‘tamim’” (Gen. 17:1 italics added). It appears that “wholesomeness” in one’s walk before YHVH is connected to the passage we have just looked at, and to the Person at its center. It is He who enables us to walk this way, as Ephesians 1: 4-5 points out: “According as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, for us to be holy and without blemish before Him in love, predestinating us to adoption through Yeshua the Messiah to Himself” (Italics added).

We have seen that the “prophet” whose coming is predicted here, unlike the institution of the judging and teaching priests which is set up in response to the people’s needs, will be “raised up” by YHVH Himself. Unlike the priestly judges, He will not respond only to problem cases, but will represent YHVH in an overall manner. Another institution which is dealt with here is the monarchy (17:14-20), and it too will be set up in response to Yisrael’s request to have a king: “When you come into the land which YHVH your Elohim is giving to you, and have possessed it, and settled in it; and you shall say, ‘Let me set a king over me like all the nations around me’” (17:14). Once Yisrael decides to “place” (“sim” – “put”) a king over itself, this one is to be “from among your brothers” while YHVH will do the selecting. It will be incumbent upon the king to study the injunctions of the Torah. In fact, he is to make a copy of it in a book for his own use – termed here “mishneh Torah,” of the root sh.n.h, meaning to “repeat, or secondary.” The king is also to live modestly “so that his heart may not be lifted up above his brothers and that he may not turn aside from the commandment, to the right or to the left” (17:20).

Last week we examined the word “truma,” translated as “the offering of your hand”, and noted that its root “rah’m” means “lofty or high,” while here we encounter “lifted up” (in relation to the king’s heart) which is “rum” (or “room,” being again of the same root). The word for "king" in Hebrew is "melech." The root of m.l.ch (mem, lamed, final chaf) makes for a verb which means "consult, consider different views," such as we see, for example, in Nehmiah 5:7 where the verb is translated, "serious thought" or "consulted." Thus, the prime task of the king is to be consulting and considering different views; a very far cry from the common idea of kingship, certainly from the one that prevailed at the time.

Chapter 18 verses 3, 4 present the “priest's due from the people, from those that offer a sacrifice, whether an ox or sheep, that they shall give to the priest the leg, and the two cheeks, and the stomach, the first of your grain, of your new wine, and of your oil, and the first of the fleece of your flock, you shall give to him.” Concerning “this order of giving the priests of the fruit of the land and the fruit of the flocks,” Daat Mikra observes that it was a way to ensure that the priests would not lack “even when there is shortage or famine in the land, because whatever the people have available will also be made available to the Levites. And moreover, since the gifts will be handed from one person to another, from lay people to priests, these individuals will be meeting one another as well as exchanging views and thus drawing closer together. The Israelite (that is the “non Levite”) will learn the priest’s lofty manners, and the priest will get to know the customs and way of life of the ordinary farmer, his talk and concerns, and thus together all of them will become one single holy people.” [1] In reference to “customs” (mentioned by the commentator above), the text (18:3) reads: “And this will be the priests’ due…”, with the word for “due” being “mishpat” – of the same root as the Parasha’s name, which aside from meaning “judge/judgment; litigation, govern” etc. also means “custom or manner” (e.g. Ex. 21:9).

Most of chapter 19 is devoted to the cities of refuge and to the “ancient boundaries.” The cities of refuge were set up in order to prevent blood avenging, in cases of unintentional killing. The blood avenger is called a “go’el dam,” literally “a blood redeemer.” The role of a redeemer is to mete out justice (within his family), and bring about the required cleansing from pollution created by the shedding of innocent blood (ref. 19:10). All three of these terms, that is “meting out justice,” “cleansing” and “pollution” are described by the one verb - whose root is g.a.l (gimmel, alef, lamed). In this way the term’s tri-fold meanings portray accurately the ultimate Go’el – Redeemer - whose death, whereby He has taken upon Himself sin’s ‘pollution, accomplished all of these and more.

As to the “ancient boundaries”; in 19:14 we read: “You may not remove your neighbor's landmark, which those formerly have set in your inheritance, which you shall inherit in the land which YHVH your Elohim is giving you, to possess it.” The word for “remove” is “tasig,” of the root “sug” (samech, vav, gimmel), meaning to “move away” and therefore often accompanied by “achor” (“backwards”), hence “backsliding” (e.g. 2nd Sam.1:22: “the bow of Jonathan did not draw back” – “nasog achor”). According to Rashi, he who moves the marking of a property (in order to extend his own lot) is actually “backsliding,” or “retreating” away from the ones “formerly set” and from the way they were originally determined. The emphasis here on “the land which YHVH your Elohim is giving you to possess it,” leads to the inference that it is He who set these boundaries in the first place, and therefore altering them would indeed constitute “backsliding.” In Proverbs we find the same verb, “sug”, used very similarly in 22:28: “Do not move the old landmark which your fathers have set.”

The war regulations (chapter 20) stipulate who will be exempt from the obligation to go to battle. In 20:5-8 four such cases are cited. The first is a man “who has not dedicated [or consecrated or inagugurated] his new house” (v. 5 emphasis added). The verb “chanach” (ch.n.ch, chet, noon, chet) also means to “train” (e.g. Gen. 14:14, Avraham’s trained servants are called “chanee’chim”; see also, Prov. 22:6) as well and “consecrate and habituate.” The second person to be exempt from army service is he “who planted a vineyard and has not begun to use it” (v. 6 emphasis added). The verb in Hebrew is “chalel” (of the root ch.l.l, chet, lamed, lamed, which we examined at the end of Parashat Yitro, Ex. 20:25), and also means “profane, pollute, defile, begin, bore holes, entrust, release, dance and a dead body” (example of the latter is found in 21:1). In a typical Hebrew fashion, we find here that ‘ends meet’ and come full circle. “Profane” (as stated, of the same root, ch.l.l) is also “hollow” (void of real content), but “release” (once again, ch.l.l)[2] affords an opportunity for a “new beginning” – “hat’cha’la” (and for doing away with profanity). A dead body has certainly been “emptied out” of its content (soul and spirit), and is therefore “released” from obligations and duties, BUT at the same time, as our verb points out, this condition also constitutes a “new beginning”… albeit in another dimension. And so, like the term “chet,” “sin”, into which is built the means for reform (“cha’teh” – “cleansing”), here too, profanity and defilement are couched in a root which allows for transformation by way of a new beginning. The other two who are exempt from duty, are he who is betrothed but has not consummated the marriage, and whoever is fearful.

In last week’s Parashat R’eh we discussed the meaning of “male,” being “he who remembers,” and then pointed out the special reference there to those who belong to YHVH as “those who are being remembered” (16:16 italics added) – “z’churim.” Surprisingly, the same reference to males occurs here too (20:13), although applied to “all the men of a city which refuses to make peace” and who are to be “struck.” Thus, these men who are destined to be put to death are no less known and remembered by YHVH, who is indeed “over all and through all and in all” (Eph. 4:6)!

Lastly, the Parasha deals with the “decapitated heifer” – “egla arufa” (21:1-9), in connection with the case of an unknown murderer: “And the elders of that city shall bring the heifer down to an ever-flowing stream, which is not plowed, nor sown. And they shall break the heifer's neck there by the stream” (v. 4). The word for the “nape of the neck” is “oref” (such as in “stiff necked” – “k’sheh oref”), hence the verb for “breaking the neck” is “arof.” Although the heifer is killed while the elders pray that their own sin be atoned for, its killing is not a sacrifice or an offering and therefore it is not slaughtered. For this reason, its carcass is buried rather than burnt. [3] The heifer symbolizes the restitution (atonement) of the blood of the dead person, as he cannot be fully avenged without his murderer being found. Additionally, the shedding of innocent blood defiles both people and land, thus this occasion renders the opportunity for the elders of the area to “wash their hands off the matter,” and to be counted innocent of the blood of the deceased (21:6, 7). The language’s usage of the “nape of the neck” for the action of decapitating the heifer also alludes to the Hebrew idiom of “turning the neck” which means “to turn away from” (Jeremiah 2:27 for example). In this way, the elders’ action becomes a declaration that they have rejected and renounced the evil deed which has been committed. This then applies to the People of Yisrael as a whole (ref. vv. 8, 9), as well as to the land (19:10).

[1] Da’at Mikra, Dvarim, Aha’ron Mirski, Rav Kook Inst., Jerusalem, 2001
[2[ Etymological Dictionary of Biblical Hebew, based on the commentaties of Samson Raphael Hirsch, Matityahu Clark, Feldheim Publishers, Jerusalem, - New York, 1999.
[3] Da’at Mikra

Hebrew Insights into Parashat R’eh – Dvarim (Deuteronomy) 11:26 – 16:17

2011-08-17T23:49:00.001-05:00

Hebrew Insights into Parashat R’eh – Dvarim (Deuteronomy) 11:26 – 16:17

“Behold! – “r’eh,” “see, look” - I set before you today a blessing and a curse…” (Deut.11: 26, emphasis added). The imperative form of the verb “to see, look or behold” is in singular person, while the “you” in this verse is in plural form, denoting that although that which is about to follows is a charge to the entire nation, each and every Israelite is to take a good look at what is being said, and is to be personally responsible to obey YHVH’s word. Contrary to the English rendering, that a blessing will result “if you hear the commandments of YHVH your Elohim which I command you today; and a curse, if you will not hear the commandments of YHVH your Elohim” (11:27 italics added), in Hebrew it is simply “behold I set before you today a blessing and curse; a blessing [of] hearing the commandments…” while the prepositional “if” is attached only to the curse. Thus, the keeping of YHVH’s word constitutes a blessing in itself, which is the very reason He gave Yisrael the Torah - instructions for life abundant - in the first place!

In order to maintain the blessings, the Israelites are commanded: “You shall utterly destroy all the places where the nations whom you shall possess serve their gods… and you shall obliterate their name from that place” (12:2a.3b italics added). The verb used for “utterly destroy” is the same as for “obliterate” - “abed” of the root a.b/v.d (alef, bet/vet, dalet). The first reference is a double rendering, “a’bed t’abdoon (singular),” while the second is “ve’eeba’de’tem (plural).” “Abed” forms a pun with “avod” (ayin, vet, dalet), which is “work” but also “worship and service rendered to Elohim or to idols,” and may be an intentional device employed in our text. Thus we read above, “The places where the nations… serve [av’du] their gods”, and in 13:6-8: “If your brother… or your son or daughter, or the wife you cherish, or your friend… entice you secretly, saying, ‘let us go and serve [na’avda] other gods…’ you shall not yield to him or listen to him…” (emphasis added), as serving other gods will indeed bring about utter destruction and obliteration upon those thus engaged (ref. 13:8-11; 13-16).

Having been nomads in the wilderness, the Israelites have not yet experienced the “rest and the inheritance” promised them by YHVH (12:9). It is precisely in order to obtain those two that they are to “not do according to all that [you] are doing here today, each doing all that is right in his own eyes.” “And you shall cross over the Jordan, and shall live in the land which YHVH your Elohim is causing you to inherit. And He shall give you rest from all your enemies all around; and you shall live securely” ((12: 8, 10, italics added). “Rest” is “menu’cha” (root n.o.ch – noon, vav, chet), and “inheritance” is “nachala” (root n.ch.l – noon, chet, lamed), with the first two consonants of “inheritance” - “nachala” - forming the word for “rest,” thusly making these two (inheritance and rest) an indivisible unit. In Yishayahu (Isaiah) 30:15 we read: “For so says the Lord YHVH the Holy One of Israel, ‘in returning and rest – nachat - you shall be saved [but you would not].” From Hebrews 4:2 we learn that “the word [of the promise to enter the rest and receive the inheritance] did not profit those hearing it, not having been mixed with faith in the ones who heard.”

Large portions of our Parasha deal with YHVH’s place of choice, where He is to be worshipped. As we saw in Parashat Va’ye’tze (Genesis 28: 10 – 32:3), “place” is “makom,” and originates with the verb “kum” which means “to rise, stand up, or go up.” This place is defined as: “The place which YHVH your Elohim shall choose out of all your tribes; for you shall seek His dwelling, to put His name there” (12:5). It is there that the Israelites will “go” (v. 5); it is there that they will “bring” their “offerings, sacrifices, tithes, contributions and oaths” (v. 11); it is there that they will “do” all that He commands them to do (v. 14). It is to be a place for both individual and corporate service to and worship of YHVH. The Pesach sacrifice will also be offered there (ref. 16:2, 6), as will the “rejoicing” during the Feast of Shavu’ot (Feast of Weeks ref. v. 11). Finally, “three times in a year shall all your males appear before YHVH your Elohim in the place which He shall choose” (16:16 emphasis added). The word here for “males” is not the usual “z’charim” (singular, “zachar”), but another version of the same root (z.ch.r. zayin, chaf, resh), “z’churim.” The root z.ch.r means to “remember,” and thus a “male” is “one who remembers.” But here, the changed form (“z’churim”) means “those who are remembered.” If the Israelites remember to obey YHVH’s word, He will definitely not forget them and will maintain His faithfulness to them (and to their households).

Among the things that the Israelites were to bring to this place of worship were the”burnt offerings, and your sacrifices, and your tithes, and the heave offering of your hand” (12:6). In Parashat Vayikra (Lev. 1 – 6:7) we saw that “burnt offerings” were, as they are here too, “olot,” of the verb “aloh” (ayin, lamed, hey) which is to “go up,” and in a different conjugation to “lift up or raise.” It is only natural that offerings to Him who is “high and lifted up” are to be “raised”! Similarly, the “offering of your hand” (v. 6) - “trumut” (singular – “truma”) - is of the root “rah’m,” meaning “lofty or high.” Yisrael, then, is not only to “rise” or “get up,” but is also to “lift up” their all to El Elyon (Most High God).

Whereas the sacrifices and offerings are not to be offered randomly (“take heed to yourself that you not offer your burnt offerings in every place that you see”, 12:13), the slaughtering and partaking of meat, once Yisrael enters the land, may be done at will. This will enable the people to eat the meat of undomesticated animals such as deer and ram, which although kosher, could not be eaten in the wilderness as they were not to be used for sacrifices. But in addition to this changed regulation, another change is now being enacted. Because meat eating in the wilderness always involved a sacrifice (“peace offering” for the laymen), those partaking of it had to be “tahor,” that is in a state of ritual cleanliness. However, with the changed conditions and requirements in the Land of Yisrael, he who is ritually unclean, the “tameh,” will also be able to partake of meat (except meat which is to be sacrificed in the place designated by YHVH). It is here that the prohibition of consuming blood is also repeated (12:16) and elaborated upon in verse 23, where it says: “Only, be strong not to eat the blood, for the life is in the blood, and you shall not eat the life with the flesh” (emphasis added). Rashi, quoting Rabbi Yehuda, comments that it took “strength” to restrain oneself and not partake of the blood. He further quotes Rabbi Shim’on ben Azay who says that this indicates that if fortitude was needed to stay away from blood, which naturally does not constitute a great temptation, how much more so regarding YHVH’s other injunctions![[1]] However, the blood that we are obligated to ‘drink’ is Yehsua’s, for He said: “Truly, truly, I say to you, except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink His blood you do not have life in yourselves. The one partaking of My flesh and drinking of My blood has everlasting life, and I will raise him up at the last day” (John 6:53, 54).

The “life is in the blood,” of 12:23, is actually the “blood is [or constitutes] the soul,” as we see also in B’resheet (Genesis) 9:4. Soul - “nefesh” - stems from the root. n.f.sh meaning “rest” or “refreshing oneself.” Shmot (Exodus) 23:12 provides a good example and illustration of the usage and meaning of this verb: “Six days you are to do your work, but on the seventh day you shall cease from labor [in order] that your ox and your donkey may rest, and the son of your female slave, as well as your stranger may refresh themselves” (emphasis added). Thus, embedded in the very word for ‘soul’ is YHVH’s original intent and design for it, which is “rest, repose and refreshment.”

Chapter 13 begins with a challenge concerning false prophets or dreamers of dreams, which the Israelites are not to heed if they truly love YHVH their Elohim. Accordingly, we read the following in verse 3: “You shall not listen to the words of that prophet or that dreamer of dreams; for YHVH your Elohim is testing you to find out if you love YHVH your Elohim with all your heart and with all your soul.” The Hebrew for “you love…” is “ha’yesh’chem ohavim…” This is an unusual usage of “yesh,” which means “there is, substance, or existence” and is generally not attached to pronouns. The particular usage employed here indicates that the love the Israelites are supposed to have for YHVH is to be part and parcel of their very being, their make up and fiber. The rest of chapter 13 and the first part of 14 deal with idolatrous practices, about which it says: “You shall put away evil from among you” (13: 5). The verb for “put away” is “(u)ve’arta,” of the root b.ae.r (bet, ayin, resh) , which literally means to “burn.” In Bamidbar (Numbers) 11:1 we read: “And when the people complained, it displeased YHVH and YHVH heard it; and his anger was kindled, and the fire of YHVH burnt among them.” That fire of YHVH, which burnt among them, was also denoted by the same verb. And thus, we may infer that here (in 13:5) they are not only to “burn” the articles which are “evil,” but that failing to depart from evil they will be incurring YHVH’s burning anger. Moreover, another word that is spelt the same, means “brutish or ignorant,” and by inference also “beasts and cattle” (e.g. Gen. 45:17). The fools are addressed in Tehilim (Psalms) 94: 8 – 11 in this way: “Understand you beastly ones [“bo’arim”] among the people; you fools, when will you be wise? He who planted the ear, shall He not hear? He who formed the eye, shall He not see? He who chastises the nations, shall He not punish, He who teaches man knowledge? YHVH knows the thoughts of man, that they are vain.” It appears that b.ae.r (“burning”) is applied to those who have incurred YHVH’s anger (or are likely to do so).

The laws of tithing are also repeated in our Parasha: “You shall surely tithe all the increase of your seed that the field yields year by year” (14:22). “Aser te’aser,” you shall surely tithe,” is emphatic, whilst the letters ayin, sin and resh which are the root of “eser” - “ten” (the tithe of course being the tenth part of the whole and is called “ma’aser”), also form the root of “rich” - “ashir” (with a slight modification in the letter “sin”, placing dot on the upper right hand side which turns it to “shin”). Are we to surmise from this that he who pays his tithes is guaranteed riches? The reason given here for the tithes (and for having to be faithful to eat it in the place chosen by YHVH), is for the purpose of teaching “to fear YHVH” (14:23). The commentator Alshikh asks, “How can eating, drinking and abundance of rejoicing teach people to be God fearing? … Perhaps the Holy One blessed Be He commanded them to take a tithe of all their possessions to Jerusalem, to deter them from repudiating the source of their bounty and that they should realize that this wealth did not originate with the power of their own hands. It was as if they were giving the king his portion. This tithe is ‘holy to the Lord’, and from the table of the Most High. They were partaking of the table of the Most High (this tithe was regarded as their own personal goods…) … The ‘living would take this to heart’ that he was a slave of the king of the universe, partaking of His bounty, and in this way never stop fearing the Lord continually.”[[2]]

The principle of the release of debts comes next. “Every seven years you shall make a release”… a “sh’mita” (15:1) of the verb sh.m.t. (shin, mem, tet), which means to “drop, release, or let go” (as we saw in Parashat Mishpatim – Ex. 21-24). The lesson learned thereby is not only the remission of debts, but also the remission of sins granted us by YHVH, who in forgiveness and grace “lets go” of our transgressions. The results of an attitude denoted by the expression “an open and free hand” (15:8), and by the deeds accompanying it, is such that there will be: “…no one in need among you, for YHVH will greatly bless you in the land that YHVH your Elohim is giving you for an inheritance, to possess it” (15:4). But should the poor nevertheless remain in the land, “sh’mita” will afford an opportunity to “give freely” (ref. vv. 8, 10, 11) and, further, to be blessed in return. Even Yeshua made the comment that “the poor are always with you” (John 12:8). The word used in this text for “poor” (15:8, 11) is “ev’yon,” of the root a.v.h (alef, bet/vet, hey) which is “submit to exiting demand” [3], thereby describing the lot of the less fortunate member of society. Two other verbs with similar meaning are found within the same context in chapter 15. In verse 2 we read: “… every creditor shall release what he has loaned to his neighbor…”, while “loaned” here is “yasheh” (root m.sh.h, mem, shin, hey) and means “obligate, give up rights.” In verse 6 we read again: “For YHVH shall bless you as He has promised you, and you will lend to many nations, but you will not borrow…”. “Lend” is “avot” (a.v.t. ayin, vet, tet), meaning “obligate, to be indebted”. [4] In face of full graciousness and generosity comes full freedom, with none having to “submit to the demands of others” to whom they are “indebted,” but, as mentioned above, when that is not the case, YHVH makes provision for those who fall under this category, thus giving an opportunity to the rest of society to be exercised in goodness and care toward the needy.

In the latter part of chapter 15 we encounter instructions concerning Hebrew slaves, who are to be released on the seventh year: “And when you send him out free from you, you shall not let him go away empty. You shall richly bestow on him from your flock, and from your threshing floor, and from your winepress…” (v. 14, emphasis added). The Hebrew reads: “bestowing you shall bestow,” while the verb for “bestow” is “ha’anik” (the root is a.n.k, ayin, noon, kof). According to Daat Mikra commentary [5] the usage here of this verb which is connected to “anak,” a necklace, is in order to point out that rather than ‘hang burdens on the neck’ (as the idiom goes) of the former slave, the (former) master is to ‘hang on his neck’ gifts of every kind.

Still on the same theme, in 16:11, we read concerning the Feast of Shavu’ot: “And you shall rejoice before YHVH your Elohim, you and your son, and your daughter, and your male slave, and your slave-girl, and the Levite that is inside your gates, and the alien, and the fatherless, and the widow that are among you…” According to Rashi, the first four form a list that parallels the last four. The first lot belongs to man, while the second lot belongs to YHVH, who says to man: “If you will treat well those who belong to Me, I shall likewise be kind [literally, ‘cause to rejoice’] to those who belong to you”. [6]

[1] Dvarim with Daat Mikrah Commentary, Pub. Mossad Harav Kook, Jm. 2001.
[2] New Studies in Devarim, Nechama Leibowitz, trans. Aryeh Newman. Eliner
Library, Department for Torah Education and Culture in the Diaspora. Hemed Books
Inc., Brooklyn, N.Y.
[3] Etymological Dictionary of Biblical Hebew, based on the commentaties of
Samson Raphael Hirsch, Matityahu Clark, Feldheim Publishers, Jerusalem, - New
York, 1999.
[4] Ibid
[5] Dvarim with Daat Mikrah Commentary, Pub. Mossad Harav Kook, Jm. 2001.
[6] Ibid

Hebrew Insights into Parashat Ekev–Dvarim (Deuteronomy) 7:12–11:25

2011-08-17T22:47:00.001-05:00

Hebrew Insights into Parashat Ekev–Dvarim (Deuteronomy) 7:12–11:25

“And it shall be, because you hear these judgments, and keep and do them, even YHVH your Elohim will keep with you the covenant and the mercy which He swore to your fathers” (italics added)), is the opening verse of Parashat Ekev. “Because” is “ekev,” from the root a.k.v (ayin, kof, bet/vet) whose primary meaning is “heel.” In other words, taking the right step (of hearing and obeying) will result in the desired consequences. Our forefather, Ya’acov, was so named because he was born holding his twin brother’s heel (Gen. 25:26). He literally came in the footsteps of his brother, and thus his name, which means to “follow,” perfectly matched the birth condition. His, however, was not the kind of following of the faithful disciple, who walks in the footsteps of his master. The image of ‘heel-holding’ or ‘heel grabbing’ refers to hindering or trapping someone, such as we see in the following examples: “Dan shall be a serpent... that bites the horse’s heels” (Gen. 49:17 italics added); “The trap shall take him by the heel” (Job 18:9 italics added); “They mark my steps [heels]” (Ps. 56:6). In the following words of Psalm 41:9, we find an allusion to Messiah’s destiny: “My own familiar friend... which did eat of my bread has lifted his heel against me” (italics added). This type of follower will possibly steal quietly behind the one whom he follows, with a crafty intent (as was the case with Messiah’s “familiar friend”). Indeed, from the same root of “heel” and “follow,”(a.k.v.) stem words like “crafty, cunning, and deceptive,” as we see, for instance, in Yirmiyahu (Jeramiah) 9:4: “... surely every brother deals craftily [akov ya’akov]” (italics added). When Esav (Esau) was startled by his younger brother’s cunning, in B’resheet (Genesis) 27:34, 36, “He cried out with an exceedingly great and bitter cry: ...’Is not he rightly named, Ya’acov? For he has supplanted (“akav”) me...?’” (italics added). The prophet Hoshe’a (Hosea), many centuries later, traces the waywardness of the nation of Yisrael (who in this prophecy is called “Ya’acov”) to their progenitor: “In the womb he took his brother by the heel” (Hos. 12:4, italics added). In the wake of this ‘birth mark,’ Ya’acov (the man and the nation) remained true to his (and their) nature. “In the wake of” or “as a result of” - in short “because” - is “ekev,” such as is cited here. Quite often YHVH declares: “And in your seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed, because (ekev) you have obeyed my voice“(Gen. 22:18 italics added). David answers the prophet Na’tan (Nathan), who told him a parable following his sin with Bat-Sheva (Bathsheba), and says: “He must make restitution for the lamb, because [ekev] he did this thing and had no compassion” (IISam.12:6 italics added). Thus, this little “ekev,” - “because” - becomes the fulcrum on which the balance of justice depends, much like the heel in terms of the physical body. And just as this section of the Parasha started with “And it shall be, because [EKEV] you hear these judgments, and keep and do them…” so it ends with: “So you shall perish; because [EKEV] you would not listen to the voice of YHVH your Elohim…” (8:20).

Parashat Ekev features two major themes, which alternate throughout; the physical conditions of the Land and the connectedness of these conditions to the people’s obedience to YHVH. The second topic is in the form of reflections on the people’s rebelliousness during their wilderness journey. The recounting of the latter is for the purpose of illustrating sin and rebellion, and warning the people in face of the new circumstances that they are about to face.

In 7:12-13, “keeping the judgments,” as we saw above, guarantees a promise of love, blessing, and multiplication, a promise which is built into the two-sided covenant (the other side being the curse incurred by disobedience to the “judgments,” as we shall see next week). “Covenant” is “b’reet,” of the root b.r.t (bet, resh, tav), leading to the verb “barot” whose primary meaning is “separate out the parts” [1], thus rendering the covenant as a very special agreement with a special and separated out people. “Blessings” – “bracha” is primarily “growth, or unhindered prosperity.” Its root, b.r.ch (bet, resh, kaf) is also the root of “berech,” which is “knee.” This all-important word, to “bless, or blessing," is surprisingly not attached to the imagery of the more regal hand-stretching posture, or to the mouth which is often an instrument of (verbal) blessings, but rather to the humble action of kneeling which connotes submission. Neither is there a special word to describe Elohim's blessings (so as to distinguish it from blessings conferred by men); time and again this ‘humble’ term, ba’rech" is used just as we see here: “YHVH your Elohim… will bless you”.

The words uttered in 7:12,13 are echoed in 8:13, in a manner that confirms the above-definition of “blessing”: “And your herds and your flocks will multiply, and your silver and your gold will have multiplied, and all that you have is multiplied…” However, this multiplication (of the root “rav”) may “rise up into your heart, and you [could and will] forget YHVH your Elohim who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slaves” (v. 14). Thus, the very blessing may turn into a temptation leading to sin which will, in turn, lead to destruction (ref. 8:20). The wilderness, therefore, was to serve as a place of refinement, humbling and trial (ref. 8:2,3,16) in order to obviate just this kind of outcome. Some of the blessings (in 7:13) will entail “the increase of your oxen and the wealth of your flock.” Here “increase” is “sh’gar”- “cast or throw” in Aramaic, hence “that which comes forth from the womb.” [2] “Oxen” in this context is “alafim,” which also means “thousands” (“elef” singular). We already encountered this term in Parashat Chayey Sarah (Gen. 23 – 25:18), where we found that its root, alef, lamed, fey, is also shared with “aluf” which means “prince or chief” and with “alef,” the name of the first letter of the alphabet). The prominence of “alef” makes it, by implication, also of great numerical value – hence “elef” - a “thousand.” Thus, the oxen mentioned here allude to great wealth. The “wealth of the flock” is the rare “a’shtarot” (used in this way only in Dvarim) of the root a.sh.r (ayin, shin, resh), related to “osher” – “wealth” and to “eser,” which is the figure “ten” (and is also connected to Ashtaroth, the goddess of fertility, hence multiplication and riches).

In Shmot (Exodus) 23:27, 28 (Parashat Mishpatim), we read the following promise: “…and I will confound all the people among whom you come. And I will give the neck of your enemies to you. And I will send hornets before you which shall drive out the Hivite, the Canaanite, and the Hittite before you” (italics added). Here, in 7:20 we read again: “And YHVH your Elohim shall send the hornets among them, until the ones who are left perish, even those who hide themselves from your face” (italics added), and in verse 23: “And YHVH your Elohim shall…. confuse them into great confusion until they are destroyed” (literal translation). Both “confound” in Shmot 23:28 and “confusion” here in 7:23 are of the root h.m.m (hey, mem, mem) meaning to “make noise, confuse or discomfort” (and is an onomatopoeic word, just like the English “hum”). This, then, in not only a promise for the future; but also in looking back, the Israelites could recall that YHVH had “confused – “va’yaham” - the camp of the Egyptians” (Ex. 14:24), when they were emerging out of the “house of bondage.”

In spite of all the material wealth and the increase promised, both in the beginning of the Parasha and later (in 8:7-10), sandwiched in between these two passages, in 8:3, is the following: “And He has humbled you, and caused you to hunger, and caused you to eat the manna, which you had not known, and your fathers had not known, in order to cause you to know that man shall not live by bread alone, but man shall live by every word that proceeds from the mouth of YHVH” (italics added). All material goods, whether plentifully or scantily supplied, are the outcome of a “word that proceeds from the mouth of YHVH.” One way or another He ‘calls the shots’. Moreover, it is not these provisions, again whether in great or small quantities, which determine life or the quality thereof but “every word that proceeds from the mouth of YHVH.” When Yeshua cited this very scripture, in a situation somewhat similar to that of Yisrael which was (according to 8:2,3,16) “tried,” like Him, in the wilderness, He passed the test and overcame his trial. The word “bread” - “lechem” - is many times translated “food,” as indeed it is a generic term for man’s sustenance. The root of “lechem” is l.ch.m (lamed, chet, mem), with the last two consonants - ch.m - making up the word “chah’m,” meaning “hot” or “warm.” Only by baking the dough in a hot oven will it turn into the desired edible substance. Hence, heat, energy and effort are all part of the bread-making process. Another noun that shares the root l.ch.m is “milchama,” which is “war,” as does the verb to “fight, or struggle for one’s existence or survival” – “lachom.” The closeness of these two terms is well illustrated by two verses in Mishley (Proverbs) 23. Verse 1 says: “When you sit down to eat with a ruler, look carefully at what is before you.” The Hebrew for “eat” reads here “lilchom,” which literally means “to fight,” but because of l.ch.m’s dual meaning it is possible to read the verb as “eat” or more literally “to partake of bread.” Verse 6 of the same chapter, says: “Do not eat the bread of one who has an evil eye, and do not desire his delicacies.” Here “eat” is “tilcham,” which again could be read as “fight.” Thus, we may infer that man cannot live solely by the bread of his own fighting and striving neither “by might, nor by power, but by My Spirit, says YHVH of Hosts” (Zech. 4:6).

The circumstances awaiting the Israelites in the land will differ vastly from those that prevailed in the desert, yet just as until now every detail pertaining to their lives and needs was determined by “every word proceeding out of the mouth of YHVH,” so will it continue to be the case in their new home. But for this principle to stay afloat, the people must keep and guard His every word and live in accordance with it. The section of 8:7-10 is regarded “as the classic description of the fertility and other wonderful qualities of the holy land. But we must not ignore its other implication. The Torah sings the praises of the land to emphasize too the moral dangers and pitfalls that such gifts might bring with them. Although the life of the Israelites in the Promised Land would no longer be dependent on water being extracted from the rock or on manna dropping from heaven, nevertheless even the normal rainfall and all the natural gifts of the land were similarly derived from the Creator and not in virtue of their own power and might of their hand.”[3]

The land YHVH promises to Yisrael is a land “in which you shall eat bread without poverty – miskenot” (8:9). “Misken” (of the same root, s.ch.n) is a “poor person, one to be pitied” (e.g. Ecc. 9:16). In Shmot (Exodus) 1:11, we are told that the storage cities that Yisrael built for Par’oh were “arey miskenot.” Ironically, the Hebrews themselves were very “miskenim” (plural of “misken” - poor and to be pitied) when they built those “miskenot cities.” Now, not only will they not experience poverty and want, neither will they have to labor for someone else. In fact, last week we read in 6:10,11 about their future dwelling places: “…to give to you great and good cities, which you have not built, and houses full of every good thing which you have not filled…” Moreover, there will be so much provision that they will not even need to erect for themselves “arey miskenot,” cities of storage, as storing up for the future will not be called for. However, this plenty will require “watchfulness” lest they forget YHVH (ref. 8:11), who “took you out of Egypt… who led you through the wilderness,” and “who fed you” (vv. 15, 16). There is always the danger of saying in one’s heart: “My power and the might of my hand have gotten me this wealth” (v. 17), while it is YHVH “who gives to you power to get wealth” (v. 18). Wealth is a translation of “cha’yil.” Remember “not by might…” (Zech.4:6)? “Might,” in Z’chariah 4:6, is also “cha’yil.” Thus, it is only YHVH’s spiritual might – cha’yil - which is able to grant all this wealth. It is therefore paramount that you should “remember YHVH your Elohim, for He gives to you power – “ko’ach” - to get wealth.” Again, Z’chariah’s “nor by power” (4:6) is “lo be-ko’ach,” but it is by YHVH’s “ko’ach”.

Chapter 9 continues to center on YHVH’s promises of “consuming the enemies” in the land, and also recounts Yisrael’s golden calf rebellion and the need that arose then to inscribe anew the two tablets of the Torah. It opens with the famous words: “Hear oh Yisrael…” implying that Yisrael is to hear and obey, as “hearing the voice…” is a Hebrew idiom for obeying, as is evident from the previous verse (the last one in chapter 8): “…You shall perish; because [EKEV] you did not listen to the voice of YHVH your Elohim” (v.20, emphasis added). In 9:6,13 reference is made to Yisrael’s “stiff neck,” or literally “hard nape.” Having a “stiff neck” implies a literal inflexibility, which does not allow one to turn one’s face (panim - “face” - from the root p.n.h which is also the root for the verb “turn,” while “pina” is “corner”). Thus, the proverbial stiffness of the neck speaks of a head that is facing in one direction only, and of a person who is headstrong and unable to turn (from his old ways). We have already noted in the past that “panim” - “face” - stemming from the verb “to turn,” exposes the essential nature of YHVH’s approach toward us, and that is His relational nature of which we are to partake. Yisrael’s “stiffness” and “hardness” of neck and uncircumcised heart are addressed in the following: “And you shall circumcise the foreskin of your heart, and you shall not harden your neck any more” (10:16). “Such an exhortation is made to bring men to a sense of their need of it [that is, of the exhortation], and of the importance of it, and to show how agreeable it is to the Lord, and so to stir them up to seek unto him for it”. [4] In chapter 30:6 there is a promise that YHVH will circumcise their heart, so that they may love Him, thus laying the foundations for the new covenant of the heart, in the course of which the latter becomes the ‘parchment’ on which the Torah is inscribed (ref. Jer. 31:33).

The Parasha ends with another look at the land; “a land which YHVH your Elohim cares for; the eyes of YHVH your Elohim are constantly on it, from the beginning of the year to its end” [5] (11:12). “Care for” is “doresh,” whose literal meaning is to “seek.” YHVH is very intent in His constant surveillance of the land, “from the beginning of the year to the end…” (1:12), meaning that He is involved in every part of the natural cycle to which this land is subject. And as pointed above, Yisrael’s conduct toward Him will also have its ramifications on the land (e.g. 11:13 – 17). These words of YHVH were to be inscribed on the hearts and are also to be for a sign on frontlets – “totafot” – between the eyes and on the hand (ref. 11:18). One of the explanations for “totafot” is that it is a derivative of the Egyptian hair ornament “tataf.” [6]

Above we noted that multiplication (of the root “rav”) of both people and livestock is mentioned several times in our Parasha. In summation of the Parasha we read: “And you shall teach them [YHVH’s commands] to your sons by speaking of them as you sit in your house, and as you go in the way, and as you lie down, and as you rise up. And you shall write them on the side posts of your house, and on your gates, that your days and the days of your sons may be multiplied [“yirbu”, again of the root “rav”], and the days of your sons in the land which YHVH has sworn to your fathers, to give to them, as the days of the heavens over the earth” (11:19-21). These “heaven and earth,” according to last week’s Parashat Va’etchanan (4:26), are YHVH’s witnesses in His dealings with the people of His choice, both here and also when He proclaims a new covenant in Yimiyahu (Jeremiah, 31:37).

1 Etymological Dictionary of Biblical Hebrew, Rabbi Matityahu Clark, Feldheim Publishers,
Jerusalem. New York.
2 The New Brown, Driver, Briggs, Gesenius Lexicon, Francis Brown Hendrickson. Publishers,
Peabody, Mass. 1979.
3 New Studies in Devarim, Nechama Leibowitz, trans. Aryeh Newman. Eliner Library,
Department for Torah Education and Culture in the Diaspora. Hemed Books Inc., Brooklyn,
N.Y.
4 Online Bible, Gill Commentary.
5 The spelling of the word used here for “beginning,” “reshit”, is irregular. This spelling of
“reshit” hints at “ree’sh,” which is poverty (ref. Parashot Matot/ Masa’ey), since the beginning
of the year in the month of Aviv occurs at the end of the winter dormancy.
6 Chumash Dvarim with Daat Mikrah comentary, Pub. Mossad Harav Kook, Jm. 2001.

Hebrew Insights into Parashat Va’etchanan – D’varim (Deuteronomy) 3:23 – 7:11

2011-08-11T11:29:00.001-05:00

Hebrew Insights into Parashat Va’etchanan – D’varim (Deuteronomy) 3:23 – 7:11

If there is any one term that typifies D'varim, it is "transition" - or "avor" in Hebrew, stemming from the root. e.v.r, (ayin, vet/bet, resh) meaning to "traverse, cross over, pass by or through, transgress, get angry/crossed, side, for the sake of and fords, or passageway," being also the root for the word “Hebrew.” This term, with some of those derivatives, shows up many times in Parashat Va’etchanan, which is why we will follow it not only here, but also throughout the entire book of Dvarim (Deuteronomy). This excursion will also provide an opportunity to observe, once again, patterns of the Hebrew mindset and the compactness of the language, as well as the mutual effect of thought and language (on each other). We will see how “avor” lends D’varim its special character, and in turn how it expresses the calling of the People of Yisrael.

In Sh'mot (Exodus) the Hebrews 'passed over’ from one state of existence (slavery) to another (freedom and redemption) and also to a new geographical location, by "crossing" the Sea of Reeds. Here, in Dvarim, they are about to experience another "crossing." This time, it is the Yarden, which is to become the passageway that will lead them into the land promised them by YHVH. They will, once again, go through a change of status, ceasing to be nomads. In the past, we have noted that "Hebrews"- "Ivrim" - are those who are destined for transitions of one form or another. This group of people is seen here (and throughout Scripture) fulfilling this very destiny, already alluded to by the name of their progenitor Ever (Eber) who is mentioned in B’resheet (Genesis) 11:14,15, six generations before Avraham. However, nowhere is the "passing" or "crossing" – designated by e.v.r - more evident than in D'varim, where the term is used in several connotations, forming, as it were, a series of milestones that enable us to follow the Israelites through their journeys as depicted in this book.

Already in the opening verse, we see Moshe addressing "all Israel on the side of the Jordan – Ever ha'Yarden" (1:1 italics added). Ever is one of the words for "side," thus rendering the Yarden's eastern bank, or shore, "Ever haYarden." It was also at "Ever ha'Yarden" where Moshe "began to explain the Torah" (1:5). Sometime later Yehoshua (Joshua) reminds the Israelites of another "ever," the place where their forefathers came from, saying: "Thus says YHVH the Elohim of Israel: `Your fathers Terah, the father of Abraham and the father of Nahor, dwelt on the other side [ever] of the River in old times; and they served other gods. Then I took your father Abraham from the other side [ever] of the River, led him throughout all the land of Canaan, and multiplied his descendants and gave him Isaac'" (Josh. 24:2,3 italics and emphasis added).

In recounting the wilderness journey and its adventures, Moshe says, "We came through [a'va'rnu] the nations which you passed by [a'va'rtem]… " (29:15 italics added). About these nations he comments, recalling YHVH’s words to him: "You are passing [ovrim] by the border of your brothers, the sons of Esau" (2:4). And as to the actual event: "And we passed [va'na'vor] beyond our brother the sons of Esau… and we turned and passed [va'na'vor] by way of the Wilderness of Moab" (2:8). “ And the time we took to come from Kadesh Barnea until we crossed over [avarnu] the Valley of the Zered was thirty-eight years, until all the generation of the men of war was consumed from the midst of the camp, just as YHVH had sworn to them" (2:14). Preceding the crossing of this river, YHVH exhorted the Israelites: “Now rise up, and go over [ee’vru] the river Zered! And we went over [va’na’avor] the river Zered” (2:13, italics added).

The next “crossing over" [over, in Hebrew] (2:18) was through Moav and Ammon, whose people, according to YHVH's word, were not to be disturbed. But the command to "cross [e’e’vru]" the River Arnon, was different! The land of Sichon, the Amorite king, was to come under Yisrael's dominion. The Amorites ignored the message, "Let me pass through [e'ebra] your land; I will keep strictly to the road, and I will turn neither to the right nor to the left. You shall sell me food for money, that I may eat, and give me water for money, that I may drink; only let me pass through [e'ebra] on foot, just as the descendants of Esau who dwell in Seir and the Moabites who dwell in Ar did for me, until I cross [e'evor] the Jordan to the land which YHVH our Elohim is giving us" (2:27,28 italics added). Instead, we are told that, "Sihon king of Heshbon would not let us pass through [ha'a'virenu]" (v. 30 italics added). Thus, the land of the Amorites was conquered. A similar fate awaited Og the king of Bashan, whose land was also conquered by the Israelites. Moshe recalls: "We took the land from the hand of the two kings of the Amorites who were on this side of the Jordan [Ever haYarden], from the River Arnon to Mount Hermon" (3:8 italics added). This was also the land requested by the tribes of Reuven, Gad, and half of Menashe, who had to meet one condition: "All you men of valor shall cross over [ta'avru] armed before your brethren, the children of Israel" (3:18 italics added), in order to help them take control of the Promised Land, while promising to Yehoshua, "YHVH will do to all the kingdoms through which you pass [over]" (v. 21), what He had done to the former kingdoms.”

In addition to the above promise, there is an even greater one, (preceded by "Sh'ma Yisrael - Hear O Israel" 9:1): "Therefore understand today that YHVH your Elohim is He who goes over [ha'over] before you as a consuming fire" (9:3 italics added). And moreover, "YHVH your Elohim Himself crosses over [over] before you; He will destroy these nations from before you, and you shall dispossess them. Joshua himself crosses over [over] before you, just as YHVH has said" (31:3 italic added). The "crossing over [ovrim] to possess" or "inherit" the land, is also an inseparable part of the description of the Land itself as everything about its conditions constitutes a major change-over and transition from the setting of the desert (ref. 11:10 -12).

And while Moshe is thus preparing the nation, which he has so greatly nurtured and has been willing to give up his life for, he does not hide from his listeners and from posterity the sad fact that he had "pleaded with YHVH at that time, saying: `O my Adonai YHVH, You have begun to show Your servant Your greatness and Your mighty hand… I pray, let me cross over [e'ebra] and see the good land beyond [ever] the Jordan, those pleasant mountains, and Lebanon. But YHVH was angry [va'yita'ber] with me on your account, and would not listen to me" (3: 23-26 italics added). Yes, "angry" in this context is also made up of the root ayin, vet/bet, resh! Thus, there is more than one way to 'cross over'. ‘Crossing over' to the 'wrong side' and 'crossing' YHVH's will, will incur His anger (“evrah”).

Moshe continues to relate his plight, as pronounced by YHVH: "Go up to the top of Pisgah, and lift your eyes toward the west, the north, the south, and the east; Behold it with your eyes, for you shall not cross over [ta'avor] this Jordan. But command Joshua, and encourage him and strengthen him; for he shall go over [ya'avor] before this people…" (3: 27,28 italics added). Just before Moshe's death on Mount Nevo (Nebo), called here “Avarim” (32:48) - the Mount of Crossing - he is once again reminded by his Elohim, "I have caused you to see it [the land] with your eyes, but you shall not cross over [ta'avor] there" (34:4 italics added). In Psalm 106:32 this story is repeated: “They angered him also at the waters of strife, so that it went ill with Moses for their sakes [ba’a’vu’ram]” (italics added). The singular form “ba’avu’r” comes from “a’vur”, which literally is “one who has been caused to pass over.” Thus, even a common preposition such as “for” is rooted in e.v.r, - “crossing or passing over” - pointing to the centrality of this term and to an active force, or agent, greater than one’s self, who acts as the Prime Cause.

In our text, the covenant and the commandments are not 'passed over' either. In his discourse, Moshe elaborates extensively on these issues. YHVH made another covenant with the Children of Yisrael "in the land of Moab besides the covenant which He made with them in Horeb… that you may enter [le'ov'recha] into covenant with YHVH your Elohim" (29:1,12 italics added). Thus, in “entering” this covenant, they were literally "crossing" into it. "Transgressing" YHVH's commandments, according to 26:13, is also referred to as "crossing" [a'varti – literally, “I transgressed/crossed”]. Some of these commandments are: "When a man has taken a new wife, he shall not go out to war or be charged [ya'avor] with any business…" (24:5 italics added), and, "There shall not be found among you anyone who makes his son or his daughter pass through [ma'avir] the fire…" (18:10 italics added). "For this commandment which I command you today is not too mysterious for you, nor is it far off. It is not in heaven, that you should say, `Who will ascend into heaven for us and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?' Nor is it beyond [meh’ever] the sea, that you should say, `Who will go over [ya'avor] the sea for us and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it? But the word is very near you, in your mouth and in your heart, that you may do it" (30:11-14 italics added). According to these words, it appears that fulfilling Elohim's Word does not necessarily require a physical crossing or passing over; it is simply a matter of turning inwardly, to that which had already been deposited there by the Almighty (ref. Rom. 8:11).

Finally, "And it shall be, on the day when you [plural] cross over [ta'avru] the Jordan to the land which YHVH your Elohim is giving you, that you shall set up for yourselves large stones, and whitewash them with lime. You shall write on them all the words of this law, when you have crossed over [be'ovre'cha], that you may enter the land which YHVH your Elohim is giving you, a land flowing with milk and honey, just as YHVH the Elohim of your fathers promised you. Therefore it shall be, when you [plural] have crossed over [be'ovre'chem] the Jordan, that on Mount Ebal you shall set up these stones, which I command you today…" (27:2-4 italics added). Thus, the "crossing over" is to be marked by stones that were to be a testimony of a genuine "crossing over" and a “change over” assumed by the Hebrews, the 'People of Transition'!

The root e.v.r, however, does not escape the enemies of the Hebrew people. Prior to the actual crossing, Yehoshua sent two spies to Yericho (Jericho). These two were pursued by men who themselves had to cross the Yarden’s "fords”. These “fords” are “ma’a’barot,” literally, “that which enables passage” (ref. Josh. 2:1-5).

In closing, let us pause briefly on “va’etchanan,” the name of our Parasha, which takes us back to the opening verse (3:23) where Moshe pleads with YHVH to let him cross the Yarden. “And I pleaded” or implored…” – etchanan – is of the root ch.n.n (chet, noon, noon), which means to “show favor or be gracious”; while “chen” (chet, noon) is “grace” (e.g. Zech. 4:7, 12:10). Thus, he who pleads with, and implores YHVH, knows he is invoking His grace, cognizant of the fact that even the pleading itself is linked to YHVH’s compassion and favor working in the one who pleads with an expectancy for a response.

Note: In the synagogue, the Torah scrolls are places in an ark called “teiva.” When the representative of the congregation who prays on behalf of the community, acting as a facilitator, stands before the ark, he “passes [over] before the teiva.”

Hebrew Insights into Parashat Dvarim – Dvarim (Deuteronomy) 1 – 3:22

2011-08-03T03:54:00.001-05:00

Hebrew Insights into Parashat Dvarim – Dvarim (Deuteronomy) 1 – 3:22

Dvarim is the book of Deuteronomy and lends its name to our Parasha. “These are the words which Moses spoke to all Israel beyond the Jordan” (1:1)… These “words” are “d’varim” (singular - “davar”), of the root d.v/b.r, which is also the root for “midbar” that encountered in the Parasha by the same name (opening the book of Bamidbar - Numbers). Thus, the names of the books of Bamidbar and Dvarim (as well as their respective contents) are connected by the root d.v.r, alluding to the Word (“davar”) spoken in the desert (“midbar”). Dvarim is also known as “Mishneh Torah,” mentioned in 17:18 as part of the instructions for a future monarch. This term suggests the copying of Dvarim, since “mishneh” originates with the root sh.n.h, meaning to “repeat” (and hence copy). However, “mishneh” also means “secondary” (with “two” – “sh’na’yim” - sharing the same root, thus being related to “second”), possibly indicating that the book at hand is a “secondary Torah,” as it is a synopsis of the three previous tomes (not including B’resheet).

In 1:5 we read: “On the other side of the Jordan Moses began explaining this law,” but more literally it says that Moshe was “willing to undertake” (“ho’eel”, of the root y.a.l, yod, alef, lamed) to expound – “ba’er” - this Torah”, thus summing up the essence of this fifth book of the Pentateuch. The Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament sheds more light on “ho’eel”: “The primary meaning of this root is ‘to make a volitional decision to commence a given activity.’ … This volitional decision to begin an act clearly indicates the function of one’s mind to initiate… The verb concentrates on the volitional element rather than upon emotional or motivational factors. It stresses the voluntary act of the individual’s will to engage in a given enterprise, not what may have brought him to that decision… Theologically this verb strongly supports the concept of man’s freewill, for man can make decisions to initiate any given action (within human control), but God holds him responsible for that volitional decision.”[1] Thus we see here Moshe’s volitional resolve to “ba’er” the Torah to the People of Yisrael.

“Ba’er” (b.a.r. bet, alef, resh) is to “make distinct, declare, make plain, make untreatable,” and shares its root with “be’er” which is a “well or cistern.” Although it is not altogether certain whether there is an etymological connection between “making plain” and “well,” the fact that the word for “eye” and for “spring” is one and the same in Hebrew (“ayin”), indicates that while water is connected to the act of seeing, it may also be related to ‘understanding,’ which is another form of ‘seeing’. By expounding on YHVH’s words, Moshe was certainly providing the Israelites with clear, thirst-quenching, well-drawn living water in the dry desert.

The passage comprising of verses 1:9-33 is characterized by a repeated term, one that we have encountered time and again, particularly in Bamidbar (Numbers). As a matter of fact, there is also a Parasha named after this tem (Num. 4:21-7), and that is the verb “nasso,” to “carry or lift, bear a burden.” From Moshe’s speech we learn how heavy of a burden this people was for him at times, although the One who truly carried them and cared for them was the Holy One Blessed Be He (compare 1:9,12, which is Moshe’s response to v. 31, and where the Father’s heart toward His people is described). When Moshe stresses just judgment (in 1: 17) he says: “You shall not respect persons in judgment…” which in Hebrew is, “you shall not acknowledge, or know, or recognize [anyone’s] face in judgment,” as “recognizing” one person above another does away with impartiality, which is indispensable for meting out justice. The term “recognize a face,” as it is presented here, many times appears in a different form (yet with the same meaning), as: “carrying or lifting of a face” [“noseh panim”], such as in Vayikra (Leviticus) 19:15, when reference is made to judging the poor. Yet for all the theme and usage of “carrying” in this passage, when reference is made to the ‘carrying out’ of justice, this common idiom of “to carry/lift a face” (that is, being partial) is strangely omitted.

Recently we took note of the fact that each of the references to the tribes was “ma’teh”, (“rod”), whereas the more common word for “tribe” (which also means “rod, staff, club, scepter” and also a live branch) is shevet (sh.v.t, shin, vet, tet). The “rod and staff [which] will comfort me” (of Psalm 23:4) are, respectively, “shevet” and “mish’e’net” (which is a staff for leaning on). In our Parasha every reference to the tribes is couched in the term “shevet.” The “shevet” is also the rod that if a father spares, may earn him the reputation of one who hates his son (ref. Prov. 13:24). The usage of “shevet,” which refers to didactic reproof (as preparation before entering the land and starting out a new life), is therefore quite appropriate in this 5th book of the Pentateuch!

One of the lessons Moshe wishes to draw from is the story of the spies. “Why did he not also refer to the sin of the Golden Calf? “Why did he select the sin of the spies and omit all the other historical experiences?” These are questions posed by Nechama Leibowitz, who then goes on to cite Hoffman who, “illuminatingly points out that Moses wishes to refer to an exactly parallel situation. The children of Israel were once again on the threshold of the Promised Land, just as their ill-fated parents had been, thirty-eight years previously. Let them not forfeit the Land once again…” Therefore Moshe is really concerned about warning “the children of Israel against once more forfeiting the land by their lack of faith…” [2]

The spies’ story truly serves to illustrate accurately the Israelites’ skepticism. In 1:22 we read: “And you came near to me, every one of you, and said, let us send men before us, and they shall search out the land for us…” It is significant that “every one of you” is mentioned as “coming [or drawing] near,” and requesting for a surveillance report of the land is interpreted as lack of faith. (This, in contrast to the original story in Parashat Sh’lach Le’cha, Bamidbar – Numbers -13-15; 32:8, where YHVH is presented as being the originator of the plan). Another “drawing near” is mentioned in the next Parasha, when Moshe recalls the scene at Chorev (Horeb). “And it happened, when you heard the voice out of the midst of the darkness, while the mountain burned with fire, you came near to me, all the rulers of your tribes, and your elders, and you said… If we hear the voice of YHVH your Elohim any more, then we shall die. For who of all flesh that has heard the voice of the living Elohim speaking out of the midst of the fire, as we have, and has lived? You go near and hear all that YHVH our Elohim may say, and you shall speak to us all that YHVH our Elohim may speak to you” (5:23, 24, italics added). We see that at the time of the giving of the Torah, the elders and leaders of Yisrael had a real concern about “drawing near” to YHVH, and instead “drew near” to Moshe and asked him to act on their behalf. If this was the leaders’ attitude, it is no wonder that some time later, the entire nation (“every one of you”) displayed a similar apprehension regarding YHVH’s promises, which is why that whole generation was condemned to die in the wilderness.

Moshe goes on to recount the sad episode, all those years back, in the course of which the ones who had previously displayed such unbelief, later insisted on “going up and fighting” the enemy (1:41), against YHVH’s wishes (as if to make up for their former attitude). YHVH declared, therefore, that they would be “struck” before their enemies (ref. v. 42). The word used for “struck” is “tinagfu” of the root n.g.f (noon, gimmel, fey). “Negef” and “mage’fa” mean “plague or pestilence,” and are usually divinely ordained for the purpose of discipline, such as in the case before us. In Bamidbar (Numbers) 17:13 we read about the plague (“magefa”) which followed the rebellion of Korach and his band, and later, in 25:8, mention was made of the “magefa” which struck the Israelites in the wake of the Baal Pe’or episode and the daughters of Mo’av, whereas in Sh’mot (Exodus) 12:27 it was the Egyptians who were “struck” while the Israelites remained untouched. Back to our chronology here as recounted by Moshe; In spite of YHVH’s warning, Yisrael “rebelled and … acted proudly and went up into the hills” (1: 43). “Acting proudly” reads here (va)ta’z’du" (root z.d., zayin, dalet). Back in B’resheet (Genesis) 25, in Parashat Toldot, Ya’acov was seen cooking a stew, which in Hebrew is: “va'ya'zed na'zid." We learned there that although “stew” is “nazid,” the root "zed” (z.d. zayin, dalet again) also means “pride, rebellion or presumptuousness.” Thus, Ya'acov was cooking up a non-too healthy stew (Gen. 25:29) for his brother, while his progeny’s conduct even surpassed that of their progenitor. It is no wonder, then, that Ya'acov's action and the behavior of his seed are presented with the same word.

The ensuing result of this failed attempt to go to battle is reported in 1:44: “And the Amorites who lived in that hill country came out to meet you and they chased you, as the bees do, and struck you in Seir, to Hormah.” In Shmot (Exodus) 23:28 it says: “And I will send hornets before you which shall drive out the Hivite, the Canaanite, and the Hittite before you.” However, because of disobedience and rebellion, they incurred defeat and were chased by so many (proverbial) bees, and were “struck” all the way to Se’ir and Chorma. The latter happens to stem from the root ch.r.m (chet, resh, mem), rendered “cherem” which in this case means “destruction.” In Bamidbar (Numbers) 21 (v. 1-3, Parashat Chu’kat) we read: “And king Arad the Canaanite…heard that Israel had come… and he fought against Israel, and took some of them captive. And Israel vowed a vow to YHVH, and said, ‘if you will indeed deliver this people into my hand, then I will utterly destroy [(ve)he’cheramti] their cities’. And YHVH listened to the voice of Israel, and delivered up the Canaanites; and they utterly destroyed [(va)yacharem] them and their cities; and the name of the place was called Hormah [Chorma]” (italics and emphasis added). However, Moshe’s narration here lets us know that destruction (“chorma”) was also the lot of the Israelites, who then “sat and wept before YHVH,” but at that time He “did not listen to them” (1: 45).

In chapter 2 of the Parasha, Moshe reviews some geographical and historical facts. As part of preparing the young Israelites for their relocation, he wants them to have a geographical and historical orientation and perspective. This is particularly true in 2:9-12 and 20-23. Some of the names of the peoples mentioned are rather revealing. In 2:10 we read about the “Eimeem” (Emims). “Eima” is “fear, dread or horror” (for example, in the Covenant Between the Torn Pieces it is written: “… and behold a terror – “eima” – of great darkness”, Gen. 15:12). These “Eimim” are compared to the Anakim, who are the giants described by the spies (Num. 13:28). Following them, mention is made (v. 11) of the “R’fa’eem.” The root r.f.a. (resh, fey, alef) is used several times to describe the dead, or dwellers of She’ol. In Yisha’yahu (Isaiah) 14:9 we read: “Sheol from beneath is excited over you to meet you when you come; It arouses for you the spirits of the dead (“r’fa’eem”)….” The R’fa’eem were also considered among the giants (and are mentioned in B’resheet 14:5). According to verse 20, the giants were also called “Zam’zumeem,” and lived in the land that was “considered the land of the R’fa’eem” (literal translation). This latter fact may have rendered that land as the “land of the dead,” perhaps subtly hinting to the fact that YHVH will “begin to put your dread and your fear on the face of the people under all the heavens, who will hear your fame, and will tremble and writhe because of you” (2:25). Appropriately, the Parasha ends with the following: “Do not fear them for YHVH your Elohim, He shall fight for you” (3:22).

Before concluding, let us examine a leitmotif that reoccurs a number of times in our Parasha and is first seen in 1:8 (and then in 1:21; 39): “See, I have placed the land before you go in and possess [“r’shu” – wrest it by impoverishing its present residents] the land which YHVH swore to give to your fathers… and to their seed after them.” Last week we examined briefly “yerusha,” one of the words for inheritance, which is rooted in the verb “resh,” used here by YHVH in its imperative form. YHVH declares that He has already “given/placed” – “natati” - the land before His people, but that first it was incumbent upon them to do two things. First they had to “see.” That is, they had to realize, by exercising faith, that their heavenly Father had already accomplished this. Secondly, they had to go and take/wrest the land, based upon the former realization and premise, and do so, again, in faith. In 2:9 YHVH, likewise, declares that He “has given Ar (Mo’av) to the sons of Lot as a possession” [“yerusha” – the same term He uses for Yisrael’s inheritance or possession). However, in this case, even though He has “given” – natan, again - them their land, “before them” is significantly missing. Thus, although YHVH is sovereign over all peoples, He is notably treating His own in an exceptional manner. In 2:31, YHVH declares again to His people (literal translation): “See, I have begun to give/place – “natati” – Sihon and his land over to you. Impoverishing begin to impoverish his land.” In the case of Sichon and his people, Yisrael’s Elohim also announces that it is He who has “hardened his [Sichon’s] spirit and made his heart obstinate” (2:30), having mercy on whom He will, and hardening [the heart of] whom He desires (ref. Rom. 9:18).

While YHVH is totally sovereign and controls all people groups, He puts certain expectations upon Yisrael, who are to apply their conscious will (as we saw Moshe doing at the beginning of the Parasha) and act volitionally in faith and obedience to their Maker and King, who uses the Land of Promise as a venue for applying these principles and for continuing to practice them..

1. Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, Vol. 1, ed. R. Laird Harris, Moody Press,
Chicago, 1980
2. New Studies in Devarim, Nechama Leibowitz, trans. Aryeh Newman. Eliner Library,
Department for Torah Education and Culture in the Diaspora. Hemed Books Inc.,
Brooklyn, N.Y.

Hebrew Insights into Parashat Masa’ey – Bamidbar (Numbers) 33 – 36

2011-07-27T08:24:00.002-05:00

Hebrew Insights into Parashat Masa’ey – Bamidbar (Numbers) 33 – 36

We have come to the end of Bamidbar (Numbers), to Parashat Masa’ey. “These are the journeys of – “masa’ey” - the sons of Israel… (33:1, emphasis added), “and Moses wrote their departures according to their journeys by the mouth of YHVH. And these are their journeys, according to their departures” (v. 2). Although Moshe is entirely familiar with the journeys and the name of each location that the people of Yisrael had gone through, and/or encamped at, the account which will now follow (vv. 3- 49) is dictated to him “by the mouth of YHVH.” Wondering as to the importance of these technical details, some of the sages, including Rashi, have concluded that this list was to serve as a reminder to the people of YHVH’s watchfulness over them, and of His attention to each and every detail pertaining to their lives and destiny. Thus, the names of each of the places is used as a device to invoke in them the memory of YHVH’s care for them. According to Maimonides, the names of the places are a testimony intended to verify that they have indeed stayed at the locations mentioned; places where only YHVH Himself could have sustained them, thusly bringing to their minds the miracles which He wrought for them. Sforno adds to this: “’The Lord blessed be He desired that the stages of the Israelites’ journeyings be written down to make known their merit in their going after Him in a wilderness, in a land that was not sown [ref. Jer. 2:2] so that they eventually deserved to enter the land. ‘And Moses wrote’ – he wrote down their destination and place of departure. For sometimes that place for which they were headed was evil and the place of departure good… Sometime the reverse happened. He wrote down too the details of their journeyings because it involved leaving for a new destination without any previous notice, which was very trying. Despite all this, they kept to the schedule…’ In other words, according to Sforno the Torah shows us both sides of the coin. We have been shown an Yisrael “composed of rebels and grumblers, having degenerated from the lofty spiritual plane of their religious experience at Mount Sinai… Now the Torah changes its note and shows us the other side of the picture, Israel loyal to their trust, following their God through the wilderness… They followed Him in spite of all the odds, through the wildernesses of Sinai, Etham, Paran and Zin… that was also a place of fiery serpents and scorpions and drought where there was no water, where our continued existence would have been impossible, were it not for the grace of God…”[1]

Chapter 34 details the extent of the territory of the inheritance. In an era when defined borders did not exist, this was a novelty which underscores, once again, the importance YHVH attaches to the land and to its occupation. It is here that He also appoints those “who will take possession of the land for you” (34:17). Following these instructions, the towns which are to be occupied by the Levites (among the other tribes’ territories), are listed. “Command the sons of Israel that they give to the Levites cities to live in, from the land of their possessions, and you shall give to the Levites open land for the cities” (35:2). “Open land” is “migrash.” One of the words for “inheritance” is “yerusha” (33:52, 53), in which is embedded the term to “impoverish” (being a reference to the party from whom one’s inheritance is wrested). “Migrash,” which the Levites were to be granted, is of the root g.r.sh (gimmel, resh, shin) and its primary meaning is to “cast" or "drive out.” Hebrew certainly does not conceal or embellish the hard-core ‘facts of life’, and does not make attempts at being politically correct. As a matter of fact, from Matthew 11:12 we learn that the Kingdom of Heaven is also “seized by force.” Thus, in taking hold of YHVH’s possession (and their inheritance), the Israelites had to “impoverish” and “cast out” the inhabitants of the land. When “Sarah saw the son of Hagar the Egyptian… mocking, she said to Abraham, ‘Drive away [“ga’resh”] this slave-girl and her son, for the son of this slave-girl shall not inherit [“yirash” – will cause another to be impoverished] with my son, with Isaac’” (Gen. 21:9,10).

The next topic is that of the refuge cities and their respective guidelines, one of which states that if a person has slain someone unintentionally he is to remain in the city of refuge until the death of the high priest, and only then return to the “land of his possession [inheritance]” (35: 25, 28). Similarly, it is only through the death of our High Priest that we too have been released, and may now come out of our proverbial confinement into the freedom of our inheritance (ref. Acts 20:32; 26:18; Eph. 1:11; Col. 3:24; Heb. 9:15). This fact gains even more validity when we read the last part of the chapter: “And you shall take no ransom [kofer, of the root k.f/p.r – kippur] for the life of a murderer; he is punishable for death, for dying he shall die. And you shall take no ransom [kofer] for him to flee to the city of his refuge, to return to dwell in the land, until the death of the priest. And you shall not pollute the land in which you are, for blood pollutes the land. And no ransom [kofer] is to be taken for the land for blood which is shed in it, except for the blood of him who sheds it; and you shall not defile the land in which you are living. I dwell in its midst, for I, YHVH, am dwelling among the sons of Israel” (35:31-34). Thus, the blood of Yeshua our High Priest has purified both our earthly inheritance and ourselves, and at the same time has also gained for us a heavenly one (ref. 1Pet. 1:4). According to the English translation, the cities of refuge are to be “selected.” The Hebrew, on the other hand, reads: “You shall cause cities to occur (for yourselves)… “ve’hik’re’tem” – root k.r.h (kof, resh, hey) (35:11), an expression which is an oxymoron, as one’s will is either actively involved, or else things occur in a happenstance manner, or (more likely) by Providence beyond one’s control. Once again the Hebraic mentality presents a challenge, pointing to the place where Providence and man’s choice meet, even at the expense of defying human logic.

YHVH’s detailed attention to the place He has set apart is seen again in the last chapter of Parashat Masa’ey, where we learn that “no inheritance of the sons of Israel shall turn from tribe to tribe, for each one of the sons of Israel shall cling to the inheritance of the tribe of his fathers. And any daughter that possesses an inheritance from any tribe of the sons of Israel to one of the family of the tribe of her father is to become a wife of the family of the tribe of her father, so that the sons of Israel may each possess the inheritance of his father. And the inheritance shall not turn from one tribe to another tribe. For the tribes of the sons of Israel shall each one cling to its own inheritance, as YHVH commanded Moses” (36:7-10 emphases added). The word for “turn” here, in future tense, is “tisov” of the root s.v.v (samech, vet, vet). “Savov” is to “turn about” or ”go around.” It is indicative of mobility, unstableness and temporariness. The usage of this verb here lends extra emphasis to the issue at hand: “For the tribes of Israel shall each cling – yid’b’ku, adhere, cleave like glue - to its own inheritance, as YHVH commanded…” In B’resheet 3:24 we read: “Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother, and will cleave/adhere/cling to his wife and they will become one flesh.” YHVH declares above that He dwells in the midst of the land, among the sons of Yisrael (35:34); it is no wonder therefore that He is so very particular about the set up of His abode.

1 New Studies in Bamidbar, Nechama Leibowitz, trans. Aryeh Newman, Eliner Library,
Department for Torah Education and Culture in the Diaspora, Hemed Books Inc.,
Brooklyn, N.Y.

Hebrew Insights into Parashat Ma’tot – Bamidbar (Numbers) 30 – 32

2011-07-21T11:41:00.005-05:00

Hebrew Insights into Parashot* Ma’tot/ Bamidbar (Numbers) 30 – 32

In the opening verse (30:1) of our Parasha, Moshe is seen addressing the “heads of the tribes of the sons of Israel.” The word used here for tribes is “ma’tot” (plural, while singular is “ma’teh”). In Parashat Chu’kat (Num. 19 – 22:1) we discovered that “ma’teh” is a rod or a staff (like the one Moshe used to hit the rock, Num. 20:8-11), and that this word is rooted in the verb to “stretch out” but also means to “incline, turn, or turn away.” Thus, by implication, “ma’teh” is used for “tribe,” emanating from the ‘rod of authority’ in the hand of the respective tribal leaders. (The other word for tribe, “shevet,” also means a “rod”.) In both of our Parashot, “mateh” is used solely for “tribe” or “tribes” (e.g. 31:4; 32:28). In Vayikra (Leviticus) 26:26 we encountered another “staff,” that is “ma’teh lechem” which is the “staff of bread.” There it was used metaphorically for that which is leaned (or depended) upon, as indeed our bodies cannot do without bread (used there as a generic term for “food”).

The first part of Parashat Ma’tot deals with oaths and prohibitions, and the abolition thereof (see Matt. 18:18, 19). In 30:3-5 we read: “And when a woman vows a vow to YHVH, and has bound a bond in the house of her father in her youth, and her father has heard her vow… and her father has remained silent… then all her vows shall stand... But if her father has prohibited her in the day he heard, none of her vows and her bond with which she has bound her soul shall stand. And YHVH will forgive her because her father prohibited her.” “Prohibited,” in both instances in this passage is “heh’nee”, of the root n.o.h (noon, vav, alef), meaning “hinder, restrain, or frustrate.” Similarly, in verse 8: “If in the day her husband hears, he prohibits her…” (emphasis added), the same verb is used. The latter part of Parashat Ma’tot presents the story of the sons of Re’uven and Gad who express to Moshe their desire to settle in the land of Gil’ad, on the eastern shore of the Yarden (Jordan). However, Moshe, being concerned that they may be separating themselves from their brethren and that their move could have a negative impact on the rest of the people, voices his misgivings and says: “And why do you discourage the heart of the sons of Israel from passing over to the land which YHVH has given to them? So your fathers did when I sent them from Kadesh Barnea to see the land. And they went up to the valley of Eshcol and saw the land, and discouraged the hearts of the sons of Israel” (32:7-9). Here we find the verb n.o.h once again, but this time translated as “discourage or discouraged.” Moshe attributes the same motives that operated in the hearts of the ten spies (Parashat Sh’lach Lecha, Num. 12-14), to the two tribes wishing to settle on the Yarden’s eastern shore. He interprets their plan as being one that would frustrate YHVH’s will, while at the same time incurring frustration in his listeners, who are no doubt concerned lest their leader would frustrate their plans. Frustration and a feeling of being hindered must also be the lot of the woman, mentioned above, who takes a vow and/or restricts herself in some way for Godly reasons and in good conscious and is later prevented from going through with the commitments she had taken upon herself.

The origin of the verb n.o.h, is “rise with difficulty” [1] illustrating what we have noticed time and again, namely that Hebrew is a very concrete language and thus most of its abstract terms are actually borrowed from the tangible world. Several other such terms in this Parasha are “bind” (e.g. 30:3,4,5,6 ff), which is “assor” (a.s.r., alef, samech, resh) and literally means “imprison or imprisoned” (such as in Gen. 40:3; Jud. 15:11,13; 1Sam. 6:7 etc.). Another one is “annul or make void” – “ha’fer” (in 30:12), whose root is “porer” (p.r.r. pey, resh, resh) and means to “crumble, break, shatter or destroy” (although its common usage is the metaphorical one rather than the literal).

Returning to Moshe’s exhorting address in 32:14 to the two tribes; the aging leader expresses his concern lest their actions would give rise to a “brood of sinful men.” The word used there is “tarbut,” which is of the root “rav” meaning “much, many, or great,” and is therefore simply a derivation of “increase.” Thus, Moshe is literally talking about an increase or spread of evil among them, without pointing to an existing grouping or a particular “brood.” In verses 14b and 15 he adjoins: “[Lest] you still [will] add more to the burning anger of YHVH against Israel. For if you turn away from Him, He will add more to His abandoning of them [i.e. Yisrael] in the desert…” (literal translation). Moshe is worried that the actions of the Reuvenites and Gaddaites would bring about an increase of evil and in this manner add to YHVH’s anger, adding disciplining measures, resulting in more suffering for the people as a whole.

Another issue dealt with in our Parasha is the command directed at Moshe to “execute vengeance… against the Midianites, afterward you [Moshe] shall be gathered to your people” (31:2). In the preparations leading to this eventuality Moshe calls out for men to be “prepared for the army” (31:3). However, “he-chal’tzu” (with root ch.l.tz, chet, lamed, tzadi), which is the command used here for “be prepared,” actually means to “draw, pull out, or remove” (such as “removing” one’s foot out of a shoe, Deut. 25:10). Thus, the literal rendering of 31:3 is: “Draw out from amongst yourselves men for the army…” Rabbi Mordechai Eilon, quoting Rabbi Yitzchak Arama, stresses that although the expression “draw out from amongst yourselves” is in reference to a select group, it actually points to the ‘whole’ from which this group is to be drawn, implying the involvement of the entire group. In this way, by virtue of being represented by the “cha’luztim” (plural for “cha’lutz,” “those who plod ahead,” (see also 32:20, 21), the whole army will be participating in the battle. Aside from meaning “drawn out,” the root ch.l.tz. also speaks of being removed from one’s customary environment and comfort zone, indicating that these vanguards were willing to venture and forge the way ahead of everyone else. The verb cha’letz’s additional meaning, which is “to rescue and deliver” (used a number of times in the Psalms), is totally compatible with the readiness of the two tribes to help their brethren.

In view of this, when the Re’uvenites and Gaddites declare later (in 32:17): “We shall ourselves go armed” (which reads, “va’necha’letz”, again of the root ch.l.tz), their intent appears much clearer. They are saying in fact that after they make basic provisions for their families and livestock, they will “remove” themselves from all that is familiar to them and will “hurry and go ahead of the sons of Israel until we bring them to the place which is theirs” (32:18, literal translation). In his response Moshe states that each of them is to be a “cha’lutz” for his brother, (while failing to do so, according to him, will be considered a sin “before YHVH” vv. 20-24). Their response is again marked by the term “cha’lutz” (v. 27). Moshe repeats this condition; namely, that only if they will act as “chalutzim” will they be entitled to land on the Yarden’s eastern shore. In their reply, the Gaddaites and Re’uvenites confirm their readiness to “go over… as chalutzim… before YHVH into the land of Canaan, so that the land of our inheritance on that side of Jordan may be ours” (v. 32).

Interestingly, the first time the root ch.l.tz shows up in Scripture is in Genesis 35:11, where the Almighty promises Abraham that “…A nation and a company of nations shall come from you, and kings shall come out of your loins.” “Loins” in that text is “chalatza’yim” - the strong place. In the context of our story, the descendants of the promised “kingly” race find themselves having to take the lives of their enemies’ kings, who no doubt were clad in royal robes, as one of the terms for such clothing is “mach’la’tzot” (again of the root ch.l.tz). Yehoshua the High Priest was dressed in such robes in exchange for his filthy ones (ref. Zech. 3:4).

1 The New Brown, Driver, Briggs, Gesenius Lexicon, Francis Brown Hendrickson.
Publishers, Peabody, Mass. 1979.

Hebrew Insights into Parashat Pin’chas – Bamidbar (Numbers) 25:10 - 29

2011-07-13T21:43:00.002-05:00

Hebrew Insights into Parashat Pin’chas – Bamidbar (Numbers) 25:10 - 29

The issue we encounter at the beginning of Parashat Pin’chas has already been introduced to us at the end of last week’s Parashat Balak. Pin’chas, A’haron’s grandson and El’azar’s firstborn, observed the sinful act committed by an Israelite, a leader of the tribe of Shim’on (Simeon) with a Midianite woman, and slew both of them. He thus “made atonement” (25:13) for the sons of Yisrael and brought to an end the plague that had smitten them. The word used here for “made atonement” is none other than “(vay)cha’per,” of the root k.f.r, which we know as “kippur,” or “covering.” Pin’chas’ action, along with the penalty paid for by the two sinners, had propitiated for Yisrael’s iniquity of “clinging to Ba’al Pe’or” (ref. 25:3). T’hilim (Psalms) 106 (28-30) also makes a reference to this episode: “They also were joined to Baal-Peor, and ate the sacrifices of the dead; and provoked Him with their deeds; and a plague broke out among them. Then Phinehas stood and intervened, and the plague was stayed.” In this latter reference Pin’chas’ act is describes as – (vay)fa’lel (p/f.l.l) – which is interposing, intervening, mediating, as well as judging and pleading. It is from this root that the word “t’fila”, prayer, is derived. Pin’chas’ action seems to have been multi-facetted.

As mentioned, Zimri the son of Salu was one of the leaders of the tribe of Shim’on. The Midianite woman, Cozbi, was likewise a daughter of a “head of the people of a father's house in Midian” (25:15). Leading Yisrael astray definitely ranked high on the list of priorities of the Mo’av-Midian coalition. The protagonists’ names, in this Parasha like that of last week’s, are also of interest. Thus, Pin’chas appears to be an Egyptian name, having the characteristics so typical of other Egyptian names, such as the name of the town of Tach’pan’ches (Jeremiah 44:1) and that of Tach’peh’nis Egyptian wife of Hadad the Edomite (1 Kings 11:19, 20). But even more interesting is the name of the Midianite princess Cozbi, which is made up of the letters kaf/chaf, zayin, bet/vet, and yod. The first three of those, that is c.z.b/v, constitute the root for the word “cazav” (or, phonetically, “kazav”), which means to “lie, deceive, lying, deception.” Last week we read in 23:19: “Elohim is not a man that He should lie.” The verb rendered there as “lie” is “(vay)cha’zev,” which refers particularly to “being unfaithful or untrue to one’s commitment or promise.” In a land thirsty for water as Yisrael is, riverbeds hold a promise of getting filled during the winter season. However, in the dry season such riverbeds dry up. Hence, a stream of water which dries up after the rainy season may be used as imagery for that which lets one down: “You surely are to me like deceitful – ach’zav - waters which cannot be trusted,” complains Yirmiyahu in a moment of dark despair to his Creator (Jer. 15:18). Cozbi, too, was nothing but a bait of deception and enticement to the people of Yisrael (cf. Prov. 5), and especially to leaders like Zimri. Walking in the paths of temptation, away from He Who is the Way the Truth and the Life, leads not only to disappointment, but far worse… to destruction and death, which was experienced by 24,000 souls (ref. 25:9) in Yisrael’s camp.

As noted above, Cozbi was a Midianite. Midian was a son of Avraham by his wife K’turah (Gen. 25:2). The name stems from the verb “din” (dalet, yod, noon), meaning primarily to “judge or mete justice,” referring to all aspects of government. It is the root for the word “medina” – province. However, this particular form – “Midian” - is related to “mah’don”, which albeit of the same root (as “judgment”) means “strife or contention” (e.g. Prov. 15:18; Jer. 15:10; Hab. 1:3 etc.). Thus, far from being a people of judgment (that is of justice and righteousness), the Midianites’ affairs were handled by resorting to magic and witchcraft and all forms of deception, as was so evident in the character of Bil’am. The fact that they were a people not totally unaware of the Elohim of Yisrael and of His ways (as illustrated by Yitro, Moshe’s father-in-law and even by Bil’am himself) only made the “din” (‘judgment’), pronounced upon them by Yisrael’s Elohim more severe. Hence YHVH says to Moshe: “Vex the Midianites; and you shall strike them; For they are vexers to you, because of the wiles with which they have beguiled you in the matter of Peor, and in the matter of Cozbi the daughter of a ruler of Midian, their sister, who was struck in the day of the plague because of the matter of Peor” (25:17-18). Highlighted in this passage is the cunning stance and frame of mind of the Midianites, illustrated so typically by Cozbi. The order from on High here is “to vex and strike” the Midianites, since they “vexed you.” “Vexing or harassing” in this case is “tza’ror” (tz.r.r - tzadi, resh, resh), meaning, “showing hostility,” while “tzorer” is an “enemy or adversary.” In Parashat Balak we heard Bil’am say of Yisrael: “he shall eat up the nations that are his foes – tza’rav” (24:8 italics added), and next week, in Parashat Matot/Ma’sa’ey a condition will be placed before Yisrael: “And if you will not drive out the inhabitants of the land from before you, then it shall be, those whom you let remain of them shall be thorns in your eyes, and as goads in your sides. And they will vex – (ve)tza’ra’ru - you on the land in which you are living” (33:55 italics added). Haman, the Jews’ cruel adversary, is named in Esther 3:10; 8:1, “tzorer ha-Yehudim,” the “foe of the Jews.” Haman the Agagite was a descendent of the royal house of Amalek, about whom it was said, “Amalek threatened the body of the people [of Yisrael], whilst Midian threatened its soul”. [1]

The opening section of the Parasha presents two words that are used several times within a few verses. The first one is repeated four times in 25:11-13, and it is “jealous” or “jealousy.” The root of “jealousy” is kano (root k.n.a. kof, noon, alef) originating in the “color produced in the face by deep emotion” [2]. It is especially related to marriage relationship and as “God is depicted as Israel’s husband; he is [therefore] a jealous God… Phinehas [too] played the faithful lover by killing a man and his foreign wife, and thus stayed the wrath of divine jealousy”. [3] The other word that occurs five times in verses 14-18, is “smite or smitten” and “strike” (in other translations “slay and slain”). In all these instances the verb “nako” (n.k.h, noon, kaf, hey) is used in a variety of conjugations. N.k.h (or “hakot”) is a very common root and may be used in many different ways, describing fall and defeat, punishment, being beaten, smitten or hurt for a variety of reasons. In our case it relates to the punishment of death. However, because of the emphatic repetition of “jealousy” - kano - just before the reiteration of “nako” - it would appear that our text is underscoring a situation in which YHVH’s “jealousy” has been provoked, resulting in a “smiting unto death.” Clearly, a cause-and-effect word picture is being conveyed here, being aided by a (subtle) play on words.

Chapter 26 is devoted to the census of the leaders of the tribes and of all those who were twenty-years old and above; that is, those eligible for army service. It is according to their relative number that the land of Yisrael is to be apportioned to them: “To the many you shall increase their inheritance; and to the few you shall diminish their inheritance” (v. 54 emphases added). On the other hand, in verse 62 we read that the census of the Levites applied to “all males from a month old and upward,” but it goes on to say that “they were not counted among the sons of Israel, because there was no inheritance given them among the sons of Israel” (emphasis added). “Inheritance” here is “nachala,” the root of n.ch.l (noon, chet, lamed) which is also a stream and therefore connotes a downward flow, meaning “a permanent possession inherited by succession” (the Levites were told by YHVH that He was their portion – “nachala”, Num. 18:20). A different conjugation transforms n.ch.l to “manchil,” which is “to cause to possess” such as is seen in Dvarim (Deuteronomy) 32:8: “When the Most High gave – “hinchil” - each nation its heritage, when he set apart the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the people of Israel.” And just as the Land of Yisrael was divvied out according to the size of each household, so was the rest of the world divided up by YHVH, who knew that His people would be scattered among the nations, according to their (the Israelites) number. In chapter 27 we meet Tzlofchad’s daughters who demand their possession saying: “Our father died in the wilderness… and had no son. Why is our father's name taken away from the midst of his family because there is no son to him? Give us an inheritance among our father's brothers” (vv. 3, 4 emphasis added). Inheritance in this case is “achuza,” of the verb achoz (root a.ch.z. alef, chet, zayin), meaning to “grasp or hold” and hence to “possess and possession.”

When YHVH reminds Moshe that his day of departure is close at hand, the latter expresses his concern regarding the future: “Let YHVH, the Elohim of the spirits of all flesh, appoint a man over the congregation who may go out before them, and who may go in before them, and who may lead them out, and who may bring them in, so that the congregation of YHVH may not be as sheep to whom there is no shepherd” (27:16,17). Evidently Moshe understands the integrated composition of man, being both flesh and spirit while at the same time also recognizing that YHVH knows his creatures through and through. In describing the need for a leader, Moshe underscores “going out before (the people)… going in before (them)… leading out… and bringing in…” Is Moshe subtly making reference to the possible fate of the next leader, lest it be similar to his own (that is, staying behind and not entering the land with the rest of the people)? Regardless if that is the case or not, Moshe displays no bitterness when told to “take Joshua, a man in whom is the spirit” (v. 18), echoing the “spirits” mentioned in verse 16 above. YHVH instructs Moshe how to ordain his successor, which Moshe follows implicitly; “as YHVH commanded” (v. 23), in spite of what was no doubt a grave disappointment to him. However, since Moshe had not been deceived or embittered, his disappointment cannot be categorized or classified as a disillusion, contrary to the description in Ee’yov (Job) 41:9: “Behold, your expectation is false [nich’zeva, of the root k.z.v examined above].” Neither was Moshe’s experience like that of the faithless ones from among the people of Yisrael who sought gratification from false sources that could not satisfy.

1 New Studies in Bamidbar, Nechama Leibowitz, trans. Aryeh Newman. Eliner
Library, Department for Torah Education and Culture in the Diaspora. Hemed Books Inc.,
Brooklyn, N.Y.

2 The New Brown, Driver, Briggs, Gesenius Lexicon, Francis Brown Hendrickson. Publishers,
Peabody, Mass. 1979.

3 Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, Vol. 2, ed. R. Laird Harris, Moody Press, Chicago,
1980

Hebrew Insights into Parashat Balak – Bamidbar (Numbers): 22 – 25: 9

2011-07-06T04:40:00.001-05:00

Hebrew Insights into Parashat Balak – Bamidbar (Numbers): 22 – 25: 9

Yisrael’s exploits and adventures (including the surprise attack of the Canaanite King of Arad, who defeated Yisrael) in the last Parasha, terminated with victory over the Amorites, which caused Balak, King of Mo’av (Moab) quite a concern. He therefore solicited the services of Bil’am (Balaam) son of Be’or the Midianite sorcerer, who was commissioned to put a curse on the people that constituted so great of a threat to the Moabite monarch. ”Now shall this company lick up all that are round about us, as the ox licks up the grass of the field… there is a people come out from Egypt: behold, they cover the face of the earth, and they abide over against me… for they are too mighty for me” (22:4,5), says Balak. In other words, ‘these numerous multitudes are liable to devour my land and my people, just like a hungry ox would green grass in a field. There are so many of them, that they cover every visible part of the land.’ The “face of the earth” or the ‘visible part’ is rendered here as “the eye of the earth.” The imagery of the “eye” (which has many and varied uses), is not utilized in this case for that which sees, but rather for that which is seen. Since the very theme of the Parasha centers on Bil’am’s visions, it only stands to reason that sight and eyes are mentioned frequently. Thus, in the beginning of chapter 24 we read that Bil’am “lifted his eyes”… and said about himself: “Balaam the son of Beor has said, and the man whose eyes are open has said the words of Elohim, which saw the vision of the Almighty, falling, with uncovered eyes” (literal translation, vv.3,4,16). Interestingly, the term for ”he whose eyes are open” is “sh’tum ey’na’yim.” With a slight modification “shatum” becomes “satum,” making it “that which is covered, or not revealed” (e.g. Ez. 28:3). Truly, Bil’am’s assurance about his inherent ability to ‘see’ is more than questionable. This is demonstrated very graphically in the episode with the she-ass, when it was only after YHVH “uncovered the eyes of Bila’m” (22:31) that the latter was able to see what his animal had noticed so clearly.

The meaning of the name Bil’am, just like Par’oh’s (ref. Parashat Miketz, Gen. 41 – 43), happens to be appropriate and relevant to its bearer, as it contains the letters that make up “bela” (b.l.a, bet, lamed, ayin), which is to “swallow or swallow down.” “Frequently this word is used as a symbol of destruction and ruin: Lam. 2:2, 5:8; Isa. 3:12; 49:19 etc.” [1] In Psalms 52:4 “devouring words” are “divery bela.” Balak’s intention was just that. He intended for Bil’am’s words to become a source of destruction for Yisrael. The Theological Wordbook Book of the Old Testament goes on to say that “bela” and “am” [making up the name “Bil’ am”] mean “destruction of a people” which accords with his reputation as a charmer and a conjurer.” Albright believes that its origin is from the Amorite “yabil’ammu,” meaning, “the (divine) uncle brings.” [2]

“Come now therefore, I pray, curse [“ara”] me this people… for I know that he whom you bless is blessed and he whom you curse is cursed” (22: 6), is the essence of Balak’s assignment for Bil’am. When the latter quotes the former (in 22: 11), he uses “kava” for “curse.” Hebrew is replete with verbs having to do with “cursing.” The most common is “kalel” (k.l.l, kof, lamed, lamed) which stems from “kal” meaning “light” and “easy,” inferring “of no esteem,” with its primal meaning being therefore, by default, “no blessing.” However a.r.r (alef, resh, resh) and k.v.v (kof, vet, vet), which are used in this narrative, are more ‘dynamic.’ “On the basis of the Akkadian “araru,” the Hebrew arar is to snare or bind, and the with the Akadian noun irritu being a noose or a sling. Brichto, following Speiser, advances the interpretation that the Hebrew “arar” means to bind (with a spell), hem in with obstacles, and render powerless to resist. Thus the original curse in B’resheet (Genesis 3:14, 17 ‘cursed are you above all cattle’ and ‘cursed is the ground for your sake’( means you are banned/anathematized from all the other animals and condemned be the soil on your account. Kavav connotes the act of uttering a formula designed to undo its object. The most frequent use of this root relates to the incident involving Bil’am and Balak. Certainly the ‘magical’ belief and intent of Balak is prominent here.” [3] Both a.r.r and k.v.v are used throughout the Parasha, denoting that the issue at stake is steeped in witchcraft. Several other terms found here verify that fact. In 22:7 the elders of Mo’av and Midian come with “divinations – “k’samim” - in their hands.” Again, in 23:23 we read the words that YHVH puts in Bil’am’s mouth: “There is no enchantment in Jacob and no divination – “kesem” – in Israel.” And thusly “it shall be said to Jacob and to Israel what YHVH has wrought” (literal translation, italics added), and not that which the diviners and sorcerers have uttered. Therefore “when Balaam saw that it pleased YHVH to bless Israel, he went not, as at other times, to seek for enchantments [“n’cha’shim”], but he set his face toward the wilderness” (24:1).

An interesting encounter forms a prelude to Bil’am’s oracles about Yisrael. As he is about to walk with Balak’s messengers (“mal’achim”), “the angel – “mal’ach” - of YHVH stood in the way as an adversary – “(le)satan” - against him… with his sword drawn in his hand (22:23,32). Juxtaposing “mal’ach” with “satan,” in this particular context may allude to YHVH’s supremacy over all powers and to the control He exerts over them to the point of using them (simultaneously and/or intermittently) for His own purposes, much like using the mouths of a pagan diviner to bless and the mouth of a donkey to talk.

However, the would-be prophet, unlike his she-ass, is unaware of YHVH’s messenger. When the animal is forced to divert from the path and to put its master in what appears - to him - as a compromising situation, Bil’am loses his temper and strikes the ass with his staff (22:27). What ensues is the most improbable dialog between a man and his donkey. Thus, Bil’am not only finds himself mishandled physically, he also has to deal with his own unjustified anger and express regret to a vindicated beast. And as if this is not enough, when his eyes are opened, he is the one who is seen as the blind fool who incurs a rebuke from the angel: “And the ass saw me, and turned from me these three times: unless she had turned from me, surely now also I would have slain you, and saved her alive” (22:33). Bil’am forthwith admits to being wrong, and only then is given permission to “go with the men,” while at the same time he is warned to utter only that which YHVH will speak to him (ref. v. 35). In the dialog between Bil’am and his she-ass, the latter justifies her conduct by asking (rhetorically) if she had ever caused her master any trouble “as a rule.” “A’has’ken his’kanti?” is the question. “Sachen” (s.ch.n, samech, chaf, noon) in this context is “customarily or habitually.” In other words, “has it been my custom (to so treat you)?” The root s.ch.n, however, also means to “be of use, benefit or service,” as indeed the she-ass had been in the past, and even more so in this particular case, acting as a tool in the hand of YHVH.

Three times in this text we encounter the phrase, “three times” (22:28,32,33). The word for “times” here is “r’galim” (“regel” singular). “Time” as referred to here is “an occurrence, event, or occasion.” The much more common phrase is “pa’am” (a word we briefly looked at in Parashat Tetzaveh, Ex. 28; 33, where we noted that it means, among other things, “pulse or beat”). “Regel” on the other hand, is the word for “foot.” It is evident that both “pa’am” and “regel” connote movement, which of course is an indication of the passing of time, but also, and especially in the case of the latter (“regel”), point to a purposeful advance such as walking. Since walking assumes an arrival, and arrival points to a specific destination (a place), we are led once more to the conclusion that in the Hebrew mind there exists an interrelation between time and place (as we have already observed when we examined “mo’ed” - appointed time in Leviticus 23, Parashat Emor). It was Bil’am’s crushed “regel” (“foot” in 22:25) which prevented him from arriving at his destination, thus perhaps prompting the usage of “r’galim” for “times,” rather than “p’amim” (both in the plural). Note that at the end of Parashat Chu’kat we met the spies that Moshe had dispatched (21:32), who were called “m’raglim,” again of the root r.g.l, not to mention “ragal,” which means “slanderer” (e.g. Ps. 15:3), thus taking us back to our protagonist.

The extraordinary episode just experienced by Bil’am proves to be part of his preparation for speaking YHVH’s words, couched in four powerful prophetic oracles describing Elohim’s intended destiny for His people. “The three blessings are… differentiated in their relation to the time factor; the first one refers to the immediate present, to the generation of the wilderness facing him, the second to the immediate future, to the generation which would conquer the land, whilst the third concerns the distant future, to an era when wars and conquests will be no more and when the lion will lie down to rest after it has finished its task.” [4] However, there is also a fourth blessing, one which has not been solicited (as a curse) by Balak (24:14-19).

After uttering the curses-turned-blessings, the angry king commands his appointee to flee, adding the following: “I thought to promote you to great honor; but, lo, YHVH has kept you back from honor” (24:11). Stubborn and blind, Balak dares to make the statement, “YHVH has kept you back from honor” (“kept you back” being “mah’nah”, m.n.a, mem, noon, ayin, meaning “withheld”)! It is at this point that Bil’am, now as a persona-non-grata, offers to speak out what “this people [Yisrael] will do to your [Balak’s] people in the latter days” (24:14). What comes next does not please the Moabite monarch, but at the same time (surprisingly) does not incur his protest (perhaps because of the late date ascribed to it). At the end of a very significant prophecy pertaining to Yisrael and to some of its neighbors, the two men depart silently; one “to his place,” while the other is said to be “on his way” (v. 25). All the pomp and ceremony planned by Balak have just been deflated without as much as another word.

The story of a pagan enchanter and magician, who is commissioned by an equally pagan king to lay a debilitating curse on YHVH’s people, and whose mouth utters some of the most profound words regarding the very people whom he is called to curse, is rather curious and stands out in the Torah narrative. The addition the talking donkey episode makes for an even more intriguing text. “The dialog between the man and the ass, [as interpreted by some of the commentators] is the Torah’s scornful commentary on the imaginary powers ascribed to sorcerers, its mockery of human gullibility, in believing in the power of the magician to curse and subject the supernatural to his will.” [5] Thus, the story of the she-ass echoes that of Bil’am’s and his so called wonder-working abilities. But, if an ass can talk, so can a con man be made to speak out YHVH’s words, calling to mind what 1st Corinthians 1 has to say about those who are wise in their own eyes: ”I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent. … Elohim has chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise… [and] the things which are mighty; … and things which are not, to bring to naught things that are: That no flesh should glory in his presence “ (vv. 19, 27-29). In the end, it is YHVH’s sovereignty that prevails far above any and all of man’s feeble attempts at controlling life.

The last section of the Parasha actually begins next week’s Parashat Pinchas. That which was not achieved by war or by sorcery is now being accomplished by seduction. [6] In 25:3 we read: “And Israel joined himself to Baal Pe’or.” In the former narrative, chapter 22:41, mention was made of Bamot Ba’al, the “high places of Ba’al,” as being one of the sites designated by Balak from which Bil’am was to curse Yisrael. Several places later, when Balak’s aspirations were not realized, he took the seer to Rosh (the “head of”) Pe’or (23:28). Thus we are introduced to both Ba’al and Pe’or earlier on; a premonition, as it were, to the tragic words: “And Israel joined himself [va’yitza’med – “clung”] to Ba’al Pe’or.” And is it a coincidence that Pe’or is similar to the verb “pa’or” (p.a.r, pey, ayin, resh), which means to “open wide,” such as is employed by Yisha’ya’hu (Isaiah) in 5:14: ”Therefore hell has enlarged herself, and opened [“pa’ara”, root p.a.r) her mouth without measure: and their glory, and their multitude, and their pomp, and he that rejoices, shall descend into it”? Indeed the elders of the people were “destroyed before YHVH against the sun” (25:4). Here “destroyed” is from the root y.k.a (yod, kof, ayin), literally meaning to “dislocate or pluck out” from the roots. Thus, the leaders who did not take care to root out sin were now being “rooted out.”

1 Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, ed. R. Laird Harris, Moody Press, Chicago,
1980.
2 Ibid.
3 Ibid.
4 New Studies in Devarim, Nechama Leibowitz, trans. Aryeh Newman. Eliner
Library, Department for Torah Education and Culture in the Diaspora. Hemed Books Inc.,
Brooklyn, N.Y
5 Ibid.
6 Gill Commentary, Online Bible

Hebrew Insights into Parashat Chu'kat – Bamidbar (Numbers) 19 – 22:1

2011-06-30T03:15:00.002-05:00

Hebrew Insights into Parashat Chu'kat – Bamidbar (Numbers) 19 – 22:1

This week’s Parashat Chu'kat (“statute of…”), not unlike many of the other Parashot, deals with several issues, some of which are unrelated or appear to be so. Moreover, a number of these topics are clouded over with an air of mystery, or at least with insufficient information, leaving us wondering as to their full meaning. Nechama Leibowitz [1] lists for us some of the queries which our Parasha gives rise to:
1) Chapter 19: “The chapter on the red heifer… is one of the most mystifying in the Torah…
[which] even the wisdom of the wisest of men failed to fathom.”
2) Chapter 20:7-13: “What was Moses’ sin for which he was so severely punished?”
3) Chapter 20:14-21: “What was the point of referring to all their [Israel’s] travail? Did
Moses wish to arouse their [the Edomites’] compassion?”
4) Chapter 21:1-3: “What made the King of Arad attack the Israelites? Especially with view to
the assertion made in the Song of the Red Sea that all the nations of the world were terror-
struck by the Divine miracles and dared not interfere with Israel (Ex. 15:14-15)?”
5) Chapter 21:4-9: “The serpents’ description as “fiery,” which in Hebrew is seraphim
[s’rafim], is curious in itself, but more so is this method given to Moses to heal the victims
[which] is somewhat strange” and “has puzzled many commentators…”

Although we shall not make an attempt to solve these puzzles, word investigations may help us to connect some of these ideas and discover a possible ‘internal logic’ within Parashat Chu’kat.

The red heifer, described as being "without blemish, in which there is no defect (“t’mee’ma”) and on which a yoke has never come”, is “para – cow – aduma - red” (19:2). As far back as Parashat B’resheet (Genesis 1-6:8) we noted that “man” – “a’dam” – is ‘rooted’ in “adama,” “earth” and that “dam” is “blood,” and hence the color “red.” Thus, the animal used in the purification process, whose blood was to be sprinkled (ref. 19:4) was ‘earthy,’ but was also without blemish or defect, recalling the humanity of Messiah (who “was in all points tempted as we are,” Heb. 4:15), as well as His perfection (“a lamb without blemish and without spot,” 1Pet. 1:19). Messiah is also the One who turns our scarlet sins, making them as white as snow and wool (ref. Is. 1:18). The mixture contained the ashes of the red heifer and the “scarlet of a [special] worm (tolah),” referring to the same scarlet (of the sins) that we just read about in Yisha’ya’hu-Isaiah (in both cases literal translation). It was this mixture which was made available to the impure for “cleansing” or “purification,” with the verb used being “yit’cha’teh” (“shall cleanse himself”, v. 12ff). The root of this type of purification is ch.t.a. (chet, tet, alef), which means “sin” (as we have already seen a number of times, e.g. Ex. 29:36; Lev. 6:19; 14:49 etc.). In the past we have noted that the remedy, or cure, for "missing the mark" (i.e. sinning) is already taken into account in sin’s very definition. This principle takes us to another topic of examination contained in the Parasha - the bronze serpent: “And it shall be that everyone who is bitten, when he looks at it, shall live" (21:8). Once again, the very cause of the disease (the serpents’ bite) also becomes, symbolically, its cure. Additionally, the serpents’ rendering as “srafim” (“fiery or burning”, of the root s.r.f – sin, resh, fey) forms another link to the red heifer (whose carcass was to be burnt), as the same root for “burning” is employed several times in the course of the red heifer passage.

At the very onset of the narrative, which leads up to Moshe smiting the rock, the congregation gathers around him and A’ha’ron, striving with them (ref. 20:2,3). “Striving” is “meriva” (y.r.b/v, yod, resh, bet/vet), and as we read concerning the Waters of Meriva (Parashat B’shalach, Ex. 17:7), here too it says: “This is the water of Meribah, because the children of Israel contended [“ravu”] with YHVH, and He was hallowed among them” (20:13). Right along with the striving comes rebellion and opposition. In verse 10 Moshe addresses the “rebels” who are called “morim” - “those who are contentious or disobedient.” The root is m.r.h (mem, resh, hey) and it means “oppose.” Moshe, like Y’chezkel (Ezekiel), was not to be “rebellious [“meri”] like that rebellious house [“beit ha-meri”]” (Ez. 2:8) of Yisrael, and although commanded to “take the rod,” he was to speak peaceably to the rock (ref. 20:8). Moshe and A’ha’ron, however, failed, proving their faith to be deficient (20:12) and acted much like their compatriots.

Moshe’s “rod” is called “ma’teh,” which aside from being rooted in the verb to “stretch out” also means to “incline, turn or turn away.” Thus, it was the rod, symbolic of Moshe and A’ha’ron’s authority, which the people followed, while the two leaders had the power to turn their subordinates either toward YHVH or away from Him.

The next part of the chapter presents Moshe’s surprising approach to the Edomites (20:14-21), whose compassion he appears to be seeking, promising that the procession of Israelites will not trespass or trample down their land, nor use anything of theirs along the road saying, “we will not turn aside (“nita”, once again of the root n.t.h that we just looked at) to the right hand or to the left” (v. 17). And when “Edom refused to give Israel passage through his territory, Israel turned away [“va-yet”] from him” (v. 21). Thus the last two episodes (the people’s rebellion and Moshe’s response, and the Edomites’ retort) seem to be characterized by acts of “turning” and “diversions” (of the root n.t.h – noon, tet, hey - again) from YHVH’s ‘straight and narrow’ path.

Following A’haron’s death on Mount Hor, the Canaanite King of Arad, upon hearing of Yisrael’s approach, fights them and takes some of them captive (21:1). As we have already pointed out, the fact that he dared to do so is rather curious. However, the mention, in that connection, of the “road to Atarim” led Nahmanides to connect the sad spy episode to this present adversity, as “Atarim” may share the root “tour” – to “spy out” - which we looked at in Parashat Sh’lach Lecha (Numbers 13-15). “What connection then was there between the incident of the spies and this attack on the children of Israel? The latter had shown their lack of confidence and fear of the future, by sending the spies. The Canaanites fortified themselves with the knowledge of Israel’s sense of weakness and inferiority. The lowering of the Israelites’ morale was followed, automatically, by the rising morale of their enemies.” [2] Thus, if Yisrael were indeed coming by “the way - or manner - of the spies” it would have given the Canaanite king the confidence to assail them.

We now return to the snakes’ story. The people complain once more, this time resulting in YHVH sending them fiery serpents which bit them, causing the death of many (ref. 21:5,6). Nechama Leibvowitz points out that the verb “sent”, “(va)y’sha’lach,” being in the conjugation of “pi’el”, and not in the more regular one of “kal”, connotes a “letting go” or “releasing” of the serpents, whereas up until that time they were held back by YHVH, who did not permit them to harm the Israelites in the desert. [3] The serpents’ title points to their characteristic of “burning” or of being “firey” (“saraf”), although the actual word for serpent is “nachash” and the bronze object made by Moshe is called “nachash” – serpent - ha’nchoshet” (of the) brass. The play on words and alliteration continues in 21:9: “If a serpent had bitten any man, when he beheld the serpent of brass, he lived.” “A serpent had bitten” is “nachash nashach” (although there no etymological connection between these two words). This unusual ‘formula’ of looking at the brass serpent and being cured, is interpreted for us by Yeshua: “And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life” (John 3: 14, 15). The healing is found in lifting up one’s eyes to the Creator, while the object (which has no power in and of itself) may serve as a reminder of one’s sin and disbelief on one hand, and of YHVH’s grace on the other.

In 21:17-18 we read the following: “Then Israel sang this song, ‘Spring up, O well. Sing to it. The well which the rulers dug, which the nobles of the people dug with their lawgivers’ staves and rods’”. Daat Mikra Commentary says: “The digging was initiated by the ‘nobles of the people,’ being a reference to Moshe and A’ha’ron who dug it without using ordinary work tools, but with ‘m’chokek mish’a’notam’ (‘their lawgivers’ staves’). [4] A “m’chokek” is a prince, ruler or lawgiver, but it is also the word used for the ruler’s staff (see Gen. 49:10). “The usage of this term is aimed at pointing out that many miracles were performed with this staff.” “M’chokek” originates with the root ch.k.k (chet, kof, kof) and means to “inscribe or engrave” (see Parashat Yitro, Ex. 18 – 21, where we examined this root more extensively), and is thus employed in the word “statute” – “chok” or “chukka,” such as we see in the title of our Parasha (“chu’kat” – the “statute of”). Perhaps the content of this song, describing a source of water that has been dug by a ruler’s staff of the law, sets out to present a counter-distinction to what otherwise should have been a bringing forth of water from a rock by an utterance of a word. This takes us back to the beginning of the Parasha, where the “statute/rule (chok) of the Torah” concerning the red heifer is presented for the purpose of “purification from sin,” enhancing the idea that the “rules/laws/statutes” have to be wielded and enforced in order to deal with rebellion (sin) against the Water (of the Spirit) which flows from the Rock by the Word.

The encounter with the Amorites, after bypassing Moav, resulted in a military victory and the possession of their cities. One of those cities was their capital, Cheshbon (Heshbon). This conquest engendered a statement by the “those who use proverbs … ‘Come to Cheshbon…’” (21:27). ‘Those who make use of proverbs’ is “moshlim” – also meaning rulers - while “cheshbon” is rooted in ch.sh.v (chet, shin, b/vet), which means “important, to think, ponder, calculate.” Thus, the combination of proverb and rule, as well as ponder and calculate led the commentators of the past to view the above quote as a statement relating to the rule (control) one should have over one’s natural inclinations (“flesh”) by self-examination (pondering and evaluating). In Parashat Cha’yey Sarah (in Gen. 24:2), we saw further connection between “proverb” and “rule.”

The Parasha ends with another spying episode. Before the Israelites venture out to conquer the Amorites, we read in 21:32: “Then Moses sent to spy out Jazer…” The word there for “spy out” is different than the one we encountered previously, this time it is “ra’gel”, of the root r.g.l, meaning “foot or leg” (“regel”), a term also used for the spies who were later sent by Yehoshua (Joshua) to explore Yericho (ref. Joshua 2:1). It seems that these spies (“footmen”) were not to “tour” – survey – the land, but rather walk to their designated destination one step at a time.

1. Nechama Leibowitz, Studies in Bamidbar, Eliner Library, Dept. of Torah Education and Culture in
the Diaspora, Joint Authority for Jewish Zionist Education, Jerusalem, 1995.
2. ibid
3. ibid.
4. Da’at Mikra, A’haron Mirski, Rav Kook Inst., Jerusalem, 2001

Hebrew Insights into Parashat Korach – Bamidbar (Numbers) 16 – 18

2011-06-22T07:55:00.005-05:00

Hebrew Insights into Parashat Korach – Bamidbar (Numbers) 16 – 17

This week's Parasha features a central episode in the forty-year wilderness journey, the rebellion of Korach (Korah), Da’tan (Dathan), Aviram (Abiram), On, and 250 other leaders, "… princes of the congregation, the elect men of the assembly, men of renown" who … assembled themselves together against Moses and against Aaron…" (Num.16:2, 3). The above quotes, as well as the language employed in the rest of the discourse between the malcontents and Moshe, contain words and expressions which we have already encountered elsewhere. The usage of the very same words (or ones emanating from the same roots) but in different contexts, as well as the protagonists' method of echoing each other's expressions, intensify and add color and poignancy to the characters and the issues at hand.

The "princes," with whom we commence the study, are called here "nesi'im" ("nasi" - singular, of the root n.s.a, meaning to "lift up"), just as were the leaders in Parashat Nasso (Num. 4:21-7). In the latter we noted that "nasso," "lifting, carrying, raising," also means "to bear" and in 5:31 (of the same Parasha) it was used as the "bearing of sin" (in reference to "being guilty"). However, the verb "bearing" may also indicate the bearing of another's sin in a sense of forgiveness, as is seen in Parashat Ki Tissa (whose title also means "lifting," in that case it is connected to the census of the People). In the said Parasha (Ex. 32:32), Moshe pleaded with YHVH on behalf of the people, in the wake of the Golden Calf episode, saying, "If you will forgive…"(or literally "bear"), in Hebrew: "eem tissa." In Bamidbar (Numbers) 11:11,12 (Parashat B'ha'alotcha) Moshe complains about "bearing" and "carrying" the people of Yisrael. “…You lay the burden (massa) of all this people upon me. Have I conceived this people? Did I bring them forth, that You should say to me, carry them (“sa'e'hu”) in your bosom like a nursing father carries (“yissa”) the sucking child, to the land which You swore to their fathers?" (Italics added). However, in spite of his momentary 'blowing of steam,' Moshe did in fact bear and carry the people. It was this very thing, which gave him the right to be called a "nassi," one who is "lifted up." According to the words uttered by Yeshua, "whoever desires to be great among you, let him be your servant, and whoever desires to be chief among you, let him be your servant; even as the Son of man did not come to be served, but to serve…" (Mat. 20:26, 27). In chapter 18 of our Parasha, the priests are told to bear – “tis'ou” - the iniquity of the sanctuary, as well as the iniquity of the priesthood (ref. v.1). "Nesi'im," therefore, aside from being lifted up, are also to be in a position of "bearing" and "carrying," a point which was not comprehended by the rebelling leaders, whose motivation and attitudes were entirely different.

Korach and company are also described here as "elect men of the assembly" (ref. above), or "k'ru'ey mo'ed." In Parashat Emor (Lev. 23:2-4) we recognized that the root k.r.a is to “call" and that "mikra" means "a called (out) assembly, a congregation, or a convocation." Thus, these leaders were not only "lifted up," but were also honored by being "called out" (translated here "elect"). However, their "calling" does not stop there. They are also the "called out" of the "mo'ed," which is translated "assembly," but if we refer again to Va’yikra (Leviticus) 23 we see that "mo’ed” stems from the root y.a'a.d (yod, ayin, dalet) and means "appoint, design, or designate." Thus YHVH's special appointments, His feasts, are called "mo'adim," plural, and "mo'ed,” singular. We also noted there that the people who are appointed and designated are collectively called "edah," of the very same root. Thus, the "nesi'im" are the "princes of the congregation," which is the "edah," or the "appointed assembly." How ironic that these "lifted up" individuals of the "appointed assembly," who have been "called," or "singled out," by "appointment" for special "YHVH-designated" occasions, and who are also men of renown ("shem", i.e. "name"), are the very ones now "gathered… against Moshe and A'haron" (v. 3)! These men did not understand that it was not for vainglory that they had been raised up. Although described as "men of name" (translated "renown"), it was not their own names that were to be lifted, but the name of the One who called and appointed them for His name's sake. Let us take note, though, that in spite of their flagrant behavior their "company" (v. 5, 11, 16, 21) is still termed here "eda" which is, as mentioned, "an appointed assembly."

These "nesi'im," in their blinded fury and haughtiness decry YHVH's leaders of choice and dare challenge them saying: "Why do you lift yourselves up [“tit'nas'u”] above the congregation of YHVH?" (v. 3b italics added). Prior to that they maintain: "This is too much ["rav"] for you, since all the congregation are holy, every one of them, and YHVH is among them" (16: 3a literal translation, italics added). Moshe's initial response to these words is to fall on his face, after which he says: "In the morning YHVH will show who are His, and him who is holy, and will cause him to come near to Him; even him whom He has chosen, He will cause to come near to Him. Do this, take fire-pans, Korah and all his company, and put fire in them, and put incense in them before YHVH tomorrow. And it shall be the man whom YHVH chooses, he shall be holy. This is too much ["rav", again] for you, sons of Levi!” (16:5-7 literal translation, italics added). "This is too much for you" - "rav la'chem" - is the expression employed by the rebels. Moshe was not unaware of their every word, and answered them ‘tit for tat’. As he continues, he says, "Is it a small ("m'at" - opposite of "rav") thing to you that the Elohim of Israel has separated you from the congregation of Israel, to bring you near Himself to do the service of the tabernacle of YHVH and to stand before the congregation to minister to them? And He has brought you near…" (v. 9, 10, italics added). Notice above (v. 5), Moshe claims that the one whom YHVH chooses, that one "He will bring near" (k.r.v, the same root as "offering" or "sacrifice"), and now he states that they have already been brought near by their very position. But not being satisfied with their lot, they are coveting the priesthood too, "therefore you and all your company are gathered against YHVH" (v. 11, italics added). The "company," once more, is "eda," while "gathering against" is "no'adim," of the same root - y.a’a.d - which, as we have seen means "appointed." Thus, those who used to take part in YHVH's appointed congregation, feasts and service, are now gathered for another 'appointment,' this time engendered by their evil and rebellious intent against YHVH's servants, but in so doing they are actually 'ganging up' against YHVH Himself.

The sad story continues… Again, notice the wording, "and Moses sent to call Dathan and Abiram, the sons of Eliab. And they said, 'we will not come up. Is it a small thing that you have brought us up out of a land that flows with milk and honey, to kill us in the wilderness, but must you also seize dominion over us?'" (16:12, 13 italics added). In their defiance, Da’tan and Aviram are determined to not "come up" ("na'aleh"), while this is followed by their accusation, "is it a small thing…" – ham'at" - echoing Moshe's words in verse 9, "is it a small thing to you that the Elohim of Israel…?" Their excuse for "not going up" (“lo na’alea”) is that it was Moshe who "brought them up" ("he'e'li'tanu", of the root for “going up") from "a land flowing with milk and honey," and has not brought them into "a land flowing with milk and honey" as promised (v. 14; Ex. 3:8). In this way, these two are responsible for twisting YHVH's promises and substituting truth for a lie by turning the land of their slavery and bondage into a dreamland of the past, while their supposed grim present holds no promises for the future. They choose to make their point by not only repeating and twisting Moshe’s own words, but also by employing the verb for “going/bringing up” (of the root a.l.h) in a way that imbues their statement with thick sarcasm. They maintain that the purpose for having been "brought up" to the desert was in order to "cause them to die," and so that Moshe could "dominate them with dominion" – tis’ta'rer hista'rer." "Sar" is the root of "dominion," while it also constitutes another word for "prince," from whence the term "Prince of Peace" ("Sar Shalom") is derived, as well as the name Sarah and Yisrael. They seal their harangue by accusing Moshe of not having given them "inheritance in fields and vineyards," adding, "Will you put out the eyes of these men? We will not come up ["lo na'aleh", again]" (v. 14, italics added). Their ultimate end - of "descending/going down alive into Sheol" (v. 30) - highlights their repeated refusal to “go up" with an eerie light.

Moshe's next comment, "I have not taken one donkey from them, neither have I hurt one of them" (v. 15) is reminiscent of Shmu'el's soliloquy in Shmu’el Alef (1st Samuel) 12:3: "Whose ox have I taken? Or whose donkey have I taken? Or whom have I defrauded? Whom have I oppressed?" The accusations hurled against Moshe are in stark contrast to his description in last week's Parashat B'ha'alotcha. Miriam and A'ha'ron's slandering against their brother was met there by the words: "Now the man Moses was very meek, more than all the men on the face of the earth" (Num. 12:3). In light of this statement, the present malicious words against him seem even more unjust and deplorable.

Now Moshe is angry - "(va)yichar le-Moshe"! (v. 15). Last week we encountered the same term for anger, which was appended to nose, and thus it was the “burning of/in the nose.” Moshe's anger here is followed by the injunction to the band of rebels to “light up” incense on their fire pans and to let YHVH judge them and the situation. YHVH commands Moshe and A'ha'ron to separate themselves from this "eda" (congregation, assembly), so that the latter may be "consumed" or "devoured" as by fire. Finally, after Korach, Da’tan and Aviram, and their entire company is swallowed up, "a fire came forth from YHVH and consumed the two hundred and fifty men who offered incense" (16:35, literal translation, italics added).

In verse 9 we read that the Elohim of Yisrael had separated Korach and his band in order to "bring you near Himself to do the service of the tabernacle." "Separated" there was "hivdil," being of the root b.d.l (bet, dalet, lamed), "to divide, separate, set apart, exclude, and single out." Later on, before punishment is meted out to this group, YHVH tells Moshe and A’ha'ron to "separate" themselves from “this congregation" (v. 21). There too the root b.d.l is used ("hibadlu"). Thus, when those who have been called and separated out by YHVH, according to His order and method of selection, oppose His ways they become separated and set apart again from the rest of the community, but this time for reproof of the severest kind. Further, YHVH says to the congregation (of Yisrael): "Turn away from the tents of these wicked men" (v. 26). "Turn away" is "suru," of the root "sur" (samech, vav, resh), whereas in verse 15 Moshe asks YHVH to “not turn" to these men's offerings, using the root panoh (with "panim – face” being its derivative). We have dealt with "p.n.h" a number of times, and found that it indicates a "turning toward," in contrast to "sur" which is a "turning away from." A "sorer" (again, of the root “sur”) is a stubborn rebel (e.g. Deut. 21:18,20) – a description quite appropriate of these 250 and some individuals.

Interestingly, the bronze fire pans used by the sinners were to be salvaged from the fire, and were to be reshaped and made into plates for covering the altar, thus rendering these objects sanctified. This was to be a visible sign and a warning to and for the Children of Yisrael, so that in the future no one who was not of the seed of A'ha'ron would attempt again to “come near” and offer incense before YHVH, “so that he may not be as Korah and as his company” (v. 40).

Only one day goes by and the people begin to complain again, saying to Moshe and A’haron: "You have brought death [“ha'mitem”] on the people of YHVH" (v. 41, italics added), thus echoing the words of Da’tan and Aviram to Moshe in verse 13 ("you have brought us up here… to cause us to die - le'hamitenu"). In both cases the root is "ma'vet", that is, “death” (m.v.t - mem, vav, tav). Once again the cloud covers the Tent of Meeting and the glory of YHVH appears (ref. v. 42), much like the description in verse 19, where the same thing took place before Korach and company. This time YHVH admonishes Moshe (and A'ha'ron) to stand back, as He is about to “consume” the congregation, using the very same verb which we encountered above (in verse 21). Moshe and A'ah'ron fall on their faces, as they did in the episode of the rebels (cf. V. 22), and what starts out as a plague is halted by A'ha'ron's action of kindling the incense on fire pans, with fire obtained from the altar. He then runs through the camp, holding on to the fire pans to "make an atonement… for wrath has gone out from YHVH" (v. 46), and thus halts the plague. The "wrath" described here is termed "ketzef", k.tz.f. (kof, tzadi, fey), which is also found in verse 22, when Moshe and A'ah'ron display their concern for the entire congregation of Yisrael upon the mutiny of Korach and his band, saying: "Shall one man sin and will You be angry [“tiktzof”] with all the congregation?" (Italics added). Thus, the entire congregation of Yisrael, far from learning the lesson displayed before them the previous day re-enacts this unfortunate scenario.

Following the major affront dealt to the office of the priesthood and the roles of the Levites, the rest of the Parasha is devoted to reconfirming their uniqueness, by the blossoming of A'ha'ron's rod, which is the ultimate evidence, witness, and testimony of YHVH's choice. It was for this reasons that another title is being accorded here to the Tent of Meeting. Ohel Ha’edut, that is, Tent of the Testimony/Witness, replaces its usual title of Ohel Mo’ed (17:8). A female witness happens to be “eda,” sounding the same as the word for “band or congregation” employed so often in our Parasha. This may be subtly pointing out to the (poor) ‘testimony’ of the assembly “eda,” as compared to YHVH’s true witnesses, represented by the Tent of the Testimony (Ohel Ha’edut).

A’ha'ron’s dead rod "had budded and had brought forth buds, and had bloomed blossoms, and had yielded almonds" (17:8); A miracle of life sprouting out of death – death that has been so characteristic of these last episodes - has taken place in front of the entire nation. As we have already noted (in Parashat Trumah, Ex. 25:31-40), almond is "sha'ked," which is of the root sh.k.d (shin, kof. dalet) meaning to “watch and to be diligent." From the famous passage in Yirmiyahu (Jeremiah) 1:11,12 we learn of YHVH's watchful determination to perform His word. Here too, after a line of incidents and insurrections, complaining and disciplinary measures, YHVH is pointing to His irreversible will (marked by resurrection power) in carrying out His word and accomplishing it, despite and in face of all opposition.

Hebrew Insights into Parashat Sh'lach Le'cha - Bamidbar (Numbers) 13 - 15

2011-06-15T07:07:00.003-05:00

Hebrew Insights into Parashat Sh'lach Le'cha - Bamidbar (Numbers) 13 - 15

"And YHVH spoke to Moses, saying, 'Send men for you, and they shall spy out the land of Canaan…one man, every one a leader among them'" (Num. 13:1). Being into their second year of wandering in the desert, it was time for the Israelites to 'touch base' with the Promised Land. Twelve leaders of the tribes were commissioned "to spy it out." These leaders are singled out individually, as we read in chapter 13:2,3: “.. from each tribe of their fathers you shall send a man, every one a leader among them… all of them men, heads of the children of Israel.” The Hebrew is even more emphatic, for “from each tribe… every one…” reads: “one man, one man” and continues, “every elevated leaders… all of them men, the heads of the sons of Israel.” These individuals were assigned the task that typically had the potential of becoming multi-facetted, turning in various directions, as the verb itself for "spying out" - "tour" - implies. Aside from "spying out," "tour" also means "to observe, seek, search, reconnoiter, explore, examine and follow." However, "tour's" primal meaning is “to turn". [1]

In the middle of last week's Parashat B'ha'a’lot’cha we read: "And they set forward from the mount of YHVH three days' journey; and the ark of the covenant of YHVH went before them three days' journey, to seek out a resting-place for them" (10:33 italics added). We are thus informed that before any "touring" could take place, before any human reports could be filed, it was first and foremost YHVH Himself who did the "seeking" - "tour" - of a resting place for His people. Let us now follow this band of twelve on their physical and spiritual journey.

Which way will they turn, as they set forth on their "touring" mission? Will theirs be a journey of real exploration, a seeking out of YHVH's face and a clinging to Him when faced with challenges (of which there will be no shortage in the new territory)? Will they see the land from His point of view, or will their experience prove to be a mere sightseeing tour, inspecting the 'attractions' of the land and expressing dissatisfaction if their expectations are not met? And above all, since these men were singled out so categorically, inferring that each of them was a strong individual; would they be able to come to agreement at the end of the day?

When YHVH tells Moshe to send the twelve He says, "shla'ch le'cha," meaning "send forth for yourself [or, on your behalf]…" recalling to mind a similar, and likewise vigorous call many years beforehand. Lech le'cha," or "go forth (for yourself)" (Gen. 12:1), were the words Avram was sent forth with from his "land and from [his] kindred, and from [his] father's house," going to the land which YHVH was about to show him. Both dispatches are marked by a certain sense of expediency and urgency to “get going." The first 'send off’' was followed implicitly, resulting in a successful mission despite a number of setbacks. Although living as a nomad, Avram/Avraham was no "tourist" in the Promised Land. He took YHVH at His word, to “rise up, walk through the land, its length and its breadth, for I will give it to you" (Gen. 13:17). When Moshe heard the words "sh'lach le'cha," the centuries-old story of the father of the Hebrew nation must have resounded in his heart. What wouldn't he have given to be numbered among the twelve?! What, then, does he have in mind when he follows YHVH's instruction to "sent them to spy out, to examine, to check - "la'tour" - the land of Canaan…”? (verse 17). Moshe specified: "And you shall see the land, what it is, and the people who are living on it, whether it is strong or feeble; whether it is few or many; and what the land is… whether good or bad; and what are the cities… whether in camps or in fortresses; and what the land is, whether it is fat or lean; whether wood is in it or not" (verses 18-20). Moshe is seeking information of facts and figures that are necessary for a strategic purpose, and not for scrutinizing Elohim's plan for the nation of Yisrael.

But, regardless of what that intelligence will turn out to be, the bottom line, according to the Nation’s leader is: "And you shall make yourselves strong and shall take of the fruit of the land" (v. 20, italics added). Paraphrased, Moshe's words may sound something like this, "If you rely on YHVH's strength and on the power of His might, you shall succeed and partake of the fruit of the land." This appears, then, to be the nature of the "tour" that Moshe had intended for the dozen leaders to take.

The Biblical narrative elaborates on the mission, and so we read the ‘headlines’: "And they went up and spied out the land…And they returned from spying out the land at the end of forty days…And they reported to him… " (13:21, 25, 27 italics added). The faithful messengers apparently did according to Moshe's bidding, and in addition also found the land to be "flowing with milk and honey" (verse 27), evidence of which was the fruit that they had picked and which they were now bringing to their leader, just as he had asked them to do. So far so good…

But what started out as a promising report suddenly came to a screeching halt: "e'fes" ! "E'fes" translated "but" or "however" (v. 28), is followed by the envoys' very negative descriptions. The literal meaning of "e'fes" is to “cease or come to an end", and hence "extremity" ("ends of the earth", Duet. 33:17), "naught or nothing" (Is. 34:12), and "only," which is actually the way it is used in our text. "E'fes" turns what promised to be a positive report into an extremely negative one. One of the characteristics which the report attributed to the land was that it “devours its inhabitants,” or literally “eats up” its inhabitants (13:32). Verse 30 depicts a conflict of opinions, as Calev (Caleb) "[stills] the people," assuring them of their ability to take the land. A little further Calev and Yehoshua continue to exhort the people: “Only do not rebel against YHVH, nor fear the people of the land, for they are our bread; their protection has departed from them, and YHVH is with us. Do not fear them” (14:9). Thus, instead of the land devouring them, their future enemies were to become their ‘consumption,’ if they would only obey YHVH. Additionally, for “their protection has departed from them,” the Hebrew says, “their shadow has departed…” Calev and Yehoshua paint a totally different picture from the one that was just presented. They counter the description of “men of great stature, giants” (ref. 13:32,33) with a depiction which ascribes to the enemy “no shadow," as if he is of no substance at all, not even having a (proverbial) shadow.

But when the evil reporting does not cease, "Joshua the son of Nun, and Caleb the son of Jephunneh, of those who spied out the land, tore their garments; and they spoke to all the congregation of the sons of Israel, saying, 'The land into which we passed, to spy it out, is an exceedingly good land'" (14:6,7 italics added). The eyes of these two devoted witnesses had seen something altogether different when they made their "tour" of the Land of C’na’an; evidently they were of "another spirit" (verse 24), and thus both of them were to be rewarded by being brought into the land and by possessing it (ref. v. 24, 30). As for the rest, their punishment was pronounced by YHVH: "By the number of the days in which you spied out the land, forty days, a day for a year, a day for a year; you shall bear your iniquities forty years…" (verse 34). The "tour" of the other ten resulted in what became for the entire body of the People of Yisrael a wandering 'tour' of the wilderness, and for themselves - death by a plague (ref. v.37).

By following their own hearts and inclinations these leaders, who had been granted the privilege of walking ahead of the nation, brought calamity not only upon themselves, but also upon the entire nation. This type of "going about after your own heart and your own eyes after which you go astray" (15:39, italics added) is, once again, defined by the verb "tour." Thus, at the very end of Parashat Sh’lach Le'cha provision is made against the inherent condition of following, or going about after one's own heart. Hence the "tzitzit" (root tz.u.tz tzadi, vav, tzadi meaning “bloom, burst out” and by inference “protrude” of one’s clothing which explains the shape of “fringes”), are introduced: "to look at and remember all the commandments of YHVH, so as to do them and not follow – tour – after your own heart and your own eyes, after which you played the harlot, in order that you may remember to do all My commandments, and be holy to your Elohim” (15:39-40). Appended to this injunction are the words, "I am YHVH your Elohim who brought you out of the land of Egypt, to be your Elohim. I am YHVH your Elohim" (v. 41), "Who goes before you in the way to seek out ["la'tour"] a place for your camping, in fire by night, to show you the way in which you should go, and in a cloud by the day" (italics added. Deut. 1:33, ref. also Ezekiel 20:6), as we also saw in last week's Parasha. Ultimately, for all of our own seeking, searching and exploration - our so called touring expeditions - it is He who goes before us to “seek out - 'tour' - a place and a rest” for us, so that we, in turn, may turn to Him.

Note: The English words "turn" and "tour" are derivatives of the Hebrew "tour," which we have just examined, having found their way to the English language via the Old French "tourner," meaning "to turn" (ref. The Word, Isaac E. Mozeson, Shapolsky Publishers, New York, 1989).

[1] The New Brown, Driver, Briggs, Gesenius Lexicon, Francis Brown Hendrickson. Publishers,
Peabody, Mass. 1979.

Hebrew Insights into Parashat B’ha’a’lot’cha: Numbers 8 – 10

2011-06-06T08:24:00.002-05:00

Hebrew Insights into Parashat B’ha’a’lot’cha: Numbers 8 – 10

Parashat B’ha’a’lot’cha is packed with a variety of issues, commencing with the lighting of the menorah. Thus in 8:2 we read YHVH’s instructions to Moshe: “When you raise (literal translation) the lamps…,” being the words that the Parasha is named after. We may note that last week’s Parasha’s title and leitmotif had to do with “raising” and “lifting” too, although an altogether different Hebrew verb was used for that purpose. The sanctification and service duties of the Levites is the next topic, and provision for keeping Pesach, for those unable to celebrate it on its given date, follow. The instructions are now intercepted by a narrative passage describing the cloud and its ‘function’ along the journey, with added instructions, this time concerning the two silver trumpets that were to be instrumental in rounding up the camp of Yisrael (as well as having other functions). A list of the heads of the tribes, as they were coming out of the wilderness of Sinai is next, while at the same time the text discusses the departure of Moshe’s father-in-law (here called Chovav). Chapter 11, almost in its entirety, is devoted to the story of the Israelites’ gluttony and desire for meat. An episode describing the bequeathing of a “portion” of Moshe’s spirit to the seventy elders is then related, with the final scene of Miriam and A’ha’ron maligning their brother Moshe, resulting in Miriam’s leprosy (chapter 12). Miriam had not only expressed jealousy (as did A’ha’ron) against her brother, but also decried him for having married a dark skinned woman. Now, having been struck by leprosy, her skin had lost its pigmentation rendering her completely white, making for quite a graphic and somewhat ironic lesson!

While the Levites’ purification rite entailed the sacrifice of two young bulls (v. 8), they (the Levites) were also to be “brought near” (“le’hakriv”, with its additional meaning, to “sacrifice or offer”, v. 9) before YHVH. At that point, “the sons of Israel” had to “put [or “lay”] their hands upon the Levites” (8:10). It was only then (v. 12) that the Levites could lay hands on the two bulls; one designated as a sin offering and the other as a burnt offering. In Parashat Tetzaveh (Ex. 29:10 ff.), we looked at the "laying of hands," which is “samoch” (s.m.ch, samech, mem, kaf/chaf), with the primary meaning of the verb being to “lean upon." The "laying of hands" as is seen preformed here by the priests (as well as in Parashat Tetzaveh), denotes identification with the sacrifice, which is about to give up its life in ultimate submission. Interestingly, as the People of Yisrael “leaned” on the Levites, the latter vicariously carried their sins, just before their own were transferred to the bulls (v. 12).

Aside from reference to the laying, or the putting of hands for atoning purposes, “hands,” as well as other body parts, are mentioned a number of times in our Parasha. Let us look at the handling of this imagery, especially in the instances when identical images are juxtaposed, and consider how this literary device contributes to the descriptions in which it is employed, and whether at times a (subtle) message is conveyed thereby.

In 11:21-22, when Moshe displays some doubts as to YHVH’s ability to provide an entire nation with meat, he hears: “Has YHVH’s hand become short?” (Italics added). However, in other instances it is Moshe’s hand that is mentioned… in connection with YHVH’s mouth. In 9:20,23 and in 10:13 it says about the desert travels: “At the command – Hebrew: by the mouth - of YHVH they encamped, and at the command – by the mouth - of YHVH they traveled. They kept the charge of YHVH at the command – by the mouth - of YHVH, [and] by the hand of Moses” (italics added). Notice that the mouth of YHVH represents the charge, but that the execution is symbolized by the hand. Thus, Moshe’s aforementioned doubt raises the questions: if Moshe’s hand is ‘long enough’ to carry out YHVH’s word, is it at all possible that YHVH Himself is not able to implement that which He set out to do (that is, can His hand be "short")?

When Miriam and A’ha’ron try to slander Moshe, YHVH, while scolding them, also points out that with His servant Moshe He “speaks mouth to mouth” (12:8 italics added). Thus, YHVH’s authority is signified by the usage of the noun “mouth” which lends an extra emphasis to His Word and to what it implies. The “nose” is also mentioned here several times. YHVH had cause to be angry with the Israelites more than once in the course of our Parasha, as we see in 11:1 where His anger is kindled against them. This “kindling” here, and also in 12:9 (the episode with Miriam and A’ha’ron), is described as taking place in the nose. The anger that “burned in YHVH’s nose” was caused by the People’s over-desire for meat. YHVH, therefore, promises to provide them, for a period of one whole month, with so much meat…“until it comes out of your noses” (11:20, literal translation, italics added). The Israelites certainly selected to ‘butt noses’ with the wrong Person!

It is a well-known fact that the eating process starts with the eyes. In 11:6 the people murmur: “But now our soul is dried away; there is nothing at all besides this manna before our eyes” (italics added). The text continues to convey to us that “the manna was like coriander seed, and the color of it was like the color of bdellium,” with the word for “color” being “eye.” And so, the consumers’ (i.e. the Israelites’) eyes looked ‘into’ the ‘eyes’ of the food that was handed them, but they did not like what they saw! Just before that, when Moshe’s father-in-law expresses his desire to depart to his own land, Moshe, pleading with him, says, “… you were to us for eyes” (10:31), meaning ‘you directed and helped us find our way in the wilderness.’ Thus the usage of “eyes” conveys clarity, direction and care, while the eyes that were turned in the wrong direction of some (in this case the People of Yisrael), only made their owners blind to the generosity and care that was granted them freely.

In Parashat Yitro, Moshe’s father in law advised him to lighten up his load by sharing his duties and delegating authority (Ex. 18:13-27). It is interesting that here he is mentioned again, in proximity to the appointment of the seventy elders who were instated as a result of Moshe’s complaint regarding his workload (ref. 11:14).

Another body part mentioned in Parashat B’ha’a’lot’cha is “bone.” In the first part of chapter 9 (v. 12, and Ex. 12:46) we read that no bones of the Pesach sacrifice were to be broken. The word for “bone” is “etzem,” whose root is a.tz.m (ayin, tzadi, mem). These three letters are shared by words such as “great, greatness, or might” (“atzum”), found for example in the promise regarding Avraham’s seed, which was destined to be a “great and mighty nation” (Gen. 18:18). It is also used for “forceful demand” or “protest” (“atzuma”. ref. Is. 41:21). “Multiplication” is another derivative of the same root, seen in Yirmiya’hu (Jeremiah) 5:6. In T’hilim (Psalms) 40:12 it is used for the “increase” of hair. “Strength” that is rendered as “otzem” and “otzma” - are other derivatives of the same root. At the same time a.tz.m also means the “essence of something” or “the very same,” such as in the oft-used expression “the very or selfsame.” In Parashat Bo, for example, we read: “And it came about at the end of four hundred and thirty years, to the very [“b’e’tzem”] day that all the hosts of YHVH went out from the land of Egypt” (Ex. 21:41 italics added). Carrying the marrow, the bone is indeed the bearer of the very essence of life, although in a compressed form. Yet out of this substance “strength, power, and greatness” emanate, implying also “increase” (in size and/or number). The employment of these terms not only discloses surprising anatomical knowledge, but it also evidences that the Hebrews must have been cognizant of the concept that a minuscule nucleus has a tremendous (sometimes latent) potential and an (explosive) force, such as is seen in the atom for example (and recognizable, of course, also in the ‘seed principle’).

The first part of chapter 10 deals with the silver trumpets, and their various uses. “Silver” is “kesef,” of the root k.s.f (kaf, samech, pey/fey) and has also come to be the generic word for “money.” The same root also serves the verb for “longing, yearning or desiring” (e.g. Gen. 31:30; Zeph. 2:1; Ps. 17:12; Job 14:15). Was it the longing for the pale precious metal that has given rise to this verb?

At the heart of the Parasha, in 10:35 and 36, we read the following powerful, vigorous and prophetic proclamation: “And it happened when the ark pulled up, Moses said, ‘Rise up, YHVH, and let Your enemies be scattered, and let those who hate You flee before You.’ And when it rested, he said, ‘Return, O YHVH, to the many thousands of Israel.’” Interestingly, upon YHVH’s rising the enemy has to flee, but His “rest” marks the returning and the restoration of Yisrael, and therefore their reconciliation with Elohim. This is all the more emphatic because the word for “return” – “shuva” – is reminiscent of “shev,” which means to “sit,” thus connecting Yisrael’s “return” to YHVH’s “rest.” “Shuv” may also be associated with “shevi” – “captivity,” as is seen, for example in the alliteration employed in T’hilim (Psalms) 126:4, where we read the plea: “Return YHVH our captivity,” which in Hebrew is, “shuva shvee’teynu,” while ”when YHVH brought back (“beshuv”) the returning/captivity (“shivat”) Tziyon we were as those dreaming a dream..." (Ps. 126:1).

In the course of Moshe’s complaint (12:11–15) concerning his burdensome task, he bemoans his lot, and addressing YHVH he asks rhetorically: “Have I conceived all this people? Did I bring them forth, that You should say to me, 'Carry them in your bosom like a nursing father carries the sucking child, to the land which You swore to their fathers?'” (v.12). “Nursing father” is a translation of “omen,” whose root is a.m.n (alef, mem, noon). One of the earliest references in the Tanach (Old Testament) to this root, is found in Shmot (Exodus) 17:12: “But Moses' hands were heavy; and they took a stone, and put it under him, and he sat on it; and Aaron and Hur stayed up his hands, the one on the one side, and the other on the other side; and his hands were steady until the going down of the sun.” This, of course, is the description of the war with Amalek. The word for “steady” is “emuna,” which is also the common word for “faith” and “trust.” Indeed, a great act of faith was displayed there, in the wilderness of Refidim, where a bitter foe was defeated by simply lifting up the tired hands of an elderly man!

Moshe, A’ha’ron and Chur, and certainly Yehoshua, who was conducting the battle against the enemy, were faithful (i.e.“ne’emanim”), being another of this root’s derivatives (see Prov. 27:6 for example), in the practice of their faith. In the post-biblical developments of the Hebrew language, use was made of this root for the creation of the verb “hit’amen” which means to “practice,” and the nouns “me’yoo’ma’noot” for “proficiency”; “omanoot” for “art” and craftsmanship.” Hence an “artist” (see Son. of Sol. 7:1) is an “aman,” all of which express the requirement for faith to be active and be made evident by action (e.g. James 1:22; 2: 14 - 26). However, the primal meaning of the root a.m.n. is "to confirm, support,” from which stem verbs such as “to nourish, bring up and to nurse.” Examples of this are found in Mlachim Bet (2nd Kings) 10:1 and 5; Ruth 4:16 and Esther 2:7. In the description of Wisdom-personified (Proverbs 8), Wisdom - Elohim’s “delight” - is said to have been “brought up” - “amon” by Him (v. 30). This terminology is also used in the Hebrew translation of Galatians 3:24, for “schoolmaster,” or “tutor,” in reference to the role of the Torah in bringing up and leading us (faithfully, we may add) to the Messiah. Thus, a faithful tutor (“ne’eman”) can truly (“om’nam,” ref. Gen. 18:13) be trusted (“ne’eman”) to lead his or her protégé on to the path of faith (“emuna”).

The exhortation in Divrey Hayamim Bet (2nd Chronicles) 20:20, to “believe - “ha’aminu - in YHVH...,” is followed by the promise: “and you will be confirmed” (“te’amnu”). Avraham “believed in YHVH and He counted it to him as righteousness,” it says in B’resheet (Genesis) 15:6. It is here that the root a.m.n makes its first appearance in Scripture. Having faith in YHVH is what constituted Avraham righteous. It follows, therefore, that those who are likewise constituted righteous by faith (Gal. 3:24) “will [also] live by faith (Hab. 2:4 italics added), having an Elohim whose “faithfulness is unto all generations” (Ps. 119:90 italics added). AMEN (a.m.n)?

The process of associative thought and images, that is found in sequential passages such as we have already observed in this Parasha, is also evident in 11:24-30 and in its subsequent verses, 11:31-35, although being far apart thematically. When the seventy elders were gathered by Moshe, YHVH “took of the spirit – ru’ach - which was on the latter and placed it on them” (v. 25). It was thus that they were enabled to function in their newly bestowed roles. Immediately following this episode, in the last part of chapter 11, we read, “And a wind – ru’ach - went forth from YHVH, and it cut off quails from the sea and let them fall by the camp…” (v. 31). Since “ru’ach” is both spirit and wind, this reference to YHVH setting up a team of elders endowed by the Spirit, is not coincidentally followed by Him ‘employing’ the ru’ach once again, though for a totally different purpose, and thus calling our attention to His total control over all matters. In the latter case it was for the purpose of driving the quail from the sea in order to satisfy the gluttonous demands of the people (ref. 11:31).

Another word connecting these two passages is the verb “asof,” which is “to gather”. But while in the first section we read about Moshe “gathering the elders” (v. 24 italics added), a much different picture follows, with the people of Yisrael gathering the quail (v. 32). In 11:4 another “gathering” is being referred to, it is that of the “mixed multitude.” In 11:4 they are described as lusting for the meat. Mixed multitude is “asaf’soof,” which is another derivative of the root a.s.f. - “gather or collect.” At the very end of our Parasha we read about Miriam, who was quarantined for a week (12:15) following her leprosy. After being kept at a distance from the camp, Miriam was “brought in” – or literally “gathered” (12:15) – once again of the root a.s.f - so that the people could continue on their journey.

Hebrew Insights into Parashat Nasso: Bamidbar (Numbers) 4:21 – Ch. 7

2011-05-30T04:54:00.004-05:00

Hebrew Insights into Parashat Nasso: Bamidbar (Numbers) 4:21 – Ch. 7

"Subject matter in the Bible is often arranged and linked together by a process of thought and, in particular, word association, probably originally designed as an aid to memory."[1] This principle is well illustrated in Parashat Nasso. There is no need to look far and wide in the Parasha's three and a half chapters for a unifying theme. It is apparent. In spite of the assortment of different and seemingly unrelated subjects that are dealt with here, the root of "nasso" pops up in a number of places and in different connotations.

Bamidbar 4:22 says: "Lift the heads of the sons of Gershon…" (Literal translation). "Lift" here is "nasso," of the root n.s.a (noon, sin, alef), which we have already encountered in previous portions [2]. Although the English translations use the imperative form (whether it be "take" or "lift"), in actual fact it is not what the Hebrew text says. The form “nasso” which is used here as a charge, is more like the English present progressive, rendering “nasso” almost as "lifting up." This unusual usage in an address form (cf. 3:40, in last week's Parasha, where the usual imperative form "sa" is used) [3] serves to call attention to this verb and lends it the character of a noun.

Let us follow "nasso" throughout our Parasha and examine its usages within the contexts of the different topics presented. The reason for the census as it applies to the Gershonite priests is given as: "This is the service of the families of the Gershonites, in serving and in bearing burdens ["masa"]…they shall bear ["venas'ou"] the curtains of the tabernacle, and the tent of meeting, its covering, and the covering of sealskin that is above upon it, and the screen for the door of the tent of meeting… At the commandment of Aaron and his sons shall be all the service of the sons of the Gershonites, in all their burden ["masa'am"], and in all their service; and you shall appoint unto them in charge of all their burden ["masa'am"]” (4:24,25,27 italics added). "Lifting" and "bearing a burden" are both of the root n.s.a, which describes the essence of the Gershonites' service in the Mishkan. The Meraris' census, on the other hand, is not qualified by the verb n.s.a, but rather by “pakod,” which is translated "number" but basically means to “attend or visit," although their work is also described as "a charge of their burden" (ref. vs. 29-31 ), once again "masa." Altogether the essence of the Levites' work may therefore be described as…"All those that were numbered of the Levites…every one that entered in to do the work of service, and the work of bearing burdens ["masa"] in the tent of meeting…every one that entered in to do his work of service, and the work of his burden ["masa'o"] in the tent of meeting" (vs. 46, 47,49, italics added). In "bearing" these "burdens" (literally “carrying” or “lifting”), the Levites were also "lifting" high the One to Whom they were rendering this service.

The next section where the root n.s.a makes an appearance is at the very end of the "law of jealousy" (5:11-31), as it is called (or “Sota” – ‘sinning woman’), which is the inspection of possible adultery on the part of a married woman. (Let us state, parenthetically, that for a man to “take a wife,” the same verb -“n.s.a” - is used.) If and when proven that the wife has transgressed in such a manner, and after having gone through the various rites enumerated, she was to "bear ["tisa"] her iniquity" (v. 31, italics added). Whereas the priests’ duties in "bearing the burdens" of the Mishkan were of the more 'uplifting' kind, here "nasso" connotes 'carrying' a heavy burden of guilt.

The issue of "lifting" comes up again in the famous priestly blessing which seals chapter 6. Toward the end of the blessing we read: "YHVH lift up ["yisa"] His face upon you and give you peace" (v. 26, italics added), which is an altogether different application of the root n.s.a, touching Elohim and His relationship with His People. Notice that the whole benediction is written in second person singular, implying that each individual within the Nation is being addressed. "Yisa YHVH panav," the lifting of YHVH's face, or countenance "toward you" or "upon you" indicates favor, acceptance, and a turning toward (as we have already seen in the past, regarding the meaning of "face" - "panim"), and contributes toward sowing hope in one’s heart.

Finally, chapter 7 is dedicated in its entirety to the offerings brought for the dedication of the Mishkan (or "Ohel Mo'ed") by the "princes" or "leaders," the "nesi'im" that is, those who are "lifted up." Nesi’im” is also plural for “cloud.” In Proverbs we find this word used metaphorically: “Whoever falsely boasts of giving is like clouds and wind without rain” (Proverbs 25:14, italics added). In Jude the same imagery is used (verse 12), regarding “ungodly men who creep unnoticed” among YHVH’s own, and “who turn the grace of our Elohim into lewdness and deny the only Master Elohim and our Master Yeshua Messiah” (v. 4). No doubt, what is coming up, below, about trespasses that are in the form of a deceptive cover-up, applies to such individuals, who are “clouds without rain.”

Let us return now to Umberto Cassuto, who says the following: "The book of Bamidbar is arranged chiefly after such a fashion…with various items being included because of a similarity of thought, or phrases recurring in the chapters concerned…"4, as, indeed, is the case of the root n.s.a. Cassuto incorporates other examples from our Parasha. "The laws applying to the suspected adulteress (5:11-31) succeed by those treating of the Nazirite (7:1-21), after which is appended the formula for the priestly blessing (6:22-27)." Preceding the law of the suspected adulteress, which focuses on a "man's wife [who] trespasses a trespass [“uma'ala bo ma'al”]," are the laws of the guilt offering, where we encounter the phrase "to do a trespass ["li'm'ol ma'al"] against Adoni" (5:6 italics added). Before we continue to follow our ‘chain,’ let us pause to look at the verb “ma’al.” A common noun that stems from the same root is “m’eel,” which simply means a “robe.” Thus we infer that “trespass” is a form of deception, as it is rooted an attempt to cover up one’s actions. By contrast, we read in Yishayahu (Isaiah) 61:10: “…For He [YHVH] has clothed me with the garments of salvation, He has covered me with the robe – m’eel - of righteousness…”

Back to Bamidbar 5:18, where it says about the adulteress: "And the priest shall set the woman before YHVH, and let the hair of the woman's head go loose - u'fara" (italics added). In 6:5 it says concerning the Nazirite: "He shall let the locks of the hair of his head grow long - "pera." Both u'fara and pera share the root p/f.r.a (pey/fey, resh, ayin). According to the above-mentioned principle, the similarities shared by Nazarite and the high priests, both of whom are not to be exposed to the dead (cf. 6:6 Lev. 21:11), are the reason why the Priestly Blessing is appended to this chapter (which deals with the Nazirite's laws).

Within the specifications of the laws of guilt offering and compensation, mentioned in 5:5-10, the topic of confession - "viduy" - comes up. This is not the first time we encounter this topic. In fact, we have already examined the term in Parashat Vayikra (Lev. 1-5). Sefer Ha-hinukh sheds further light on this issue: "The verbal confession of guilt provides an indication that the sinner truly believes that all his deeds are revealed and known to the Lord, blessed be He, and he will not deny the omnipresence of the All-seeing. Again, by verbally specifying the sin and regretting it, he will be more careful in the future not to stumble thereon. After he has said with his mouth…he will as a result, become reconciled with His maker. The good God who desires the welfare of His creatures guided them in this path through which they would gain merit."5 Similarly, we read in 1st John: "If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness" (1:9). Hirsh notes that the form of the Hebrew verb "to confess," "hitvadeh," conjugated as it is (in the "hitpa'el" form) …"indicates that the confession consists of man speaking to himself, admonishing his [own] conscience."6

Notes:

1Umberto Cassuto in New Studies in Bamidbar, Nechama Leibowitz, trans.
Aryeh Newman. Eliner Library, Department for Torah Education and Culture in the
Diaspora. Hemed Books Inc., Brooklyn, N.Y.

2 For more on the root n.s.a, look up Hebrew Insights into Parashat B’resheet (Genesis - with special reference to 3: 13; 4:7, 13).

3Although "nasso" in reference to the Kohathites is found in last week’s Parashat Bamidbar (Numbers) 4:2.

4 Umberto Cassuto in New Studies in Bamidbar, Leibowitz

5 Ibid.

6 Ibid.

Hebrew Insights into Parashat Bamidbar - Bamidbar (Numbers) 1 – 4:20

2011-05-24T14:33:00.001-05:00

Hebrew Insights into Parashat Bamidbar - Bamidbar (Numbers) 1 – 4:20

"And YHVH spoke to Moses in the wilderness…" (emphasis added), are the opening words of the Torah's fourth book, Bamidbar (Numbers). In this first verse YHVH is "speaking" –
"va’y'daber" – “in the wilderness" - "ba-midbar," with both words originating from the same multifaceted root - d.v.r (dalet, bet/vet, resh). Let us examine this root, and follow it to a number of unexpected places.

“In the beginning was the word (“davar”), and the word (“davar”) was with Elohim, and Elohim was the word (“davar”)"… And the word (“davar”) became flesh and lived among us…” (John 1:1,14). Davar – is the spoken word, the all-powerful utterance that creates or generates everything, while “thing” is also "davar." Thus, all "things" appear to be the results of that which has been "said" or "spoken." In the Tanach many terms, such as “lies, wisdom, falsehood, truth” and more, are preceded by “d’var” – meaning “thing of….” In this manner greater dimension and weight is accorded to these terms. Davar is that which proceeds out of the mouth of Elohim, and is therefore "the Word of Elohim". “Matters” or “business” are also “davar” (or “dvarim,” in plural form), as we see for example in Shmot (Exodus) 5:13, 19: “Fulfill your works, your – dvarim - daily tasks" (emphasis added), and in Shoftim (Judges) 18:7, where reference is made to the Danties who “… had no – dvarim - business with any man” (emphasis added). Terms such as “deeds" (Jer. 5:28, speaking of "deeds of the wicked") are also “dvarim”. "Reason, motives, customs" (“the custom of the king” in Esther 1:13, emphasis added) also fall within the framework of “davar.” The famous “after the order of Malchitzedek” (emphasis added) is literally, “upon my divra, Malchitzedek.” The form “divra” (and its content) illustrates the depth and scope of “davar,” which may be also rendered as an “order, pattern, type, and arch or proto type."

From this point let us venture further a-field to “dever,” which is "plague." Although this abrupt transition (in such a negative direction) may seem curious, it is not inconsistent with many such disparities found in the Tanach. If we remember that "davar" also means "reason," than the "plague," or "dever," illustrates the principle that “the curse causeless shall not come” (Pro. 26:2). Indeed, time after time the plague is the result of rebellion against Elohim, as in the case of the plagues of Egypt. YHVH says to Yirmiyahu (Jeremiah) about the people of Yisrael: “I will consume them by the sword, and by the famine and by the plague” (Jer. 14:12 italics added). The following is what He speaks to the Land of Yisrael through the prophet Y’chezkel (Ezekiel): “The sword from without and the plague from within” (Ez. 7:15 italics added). Amos 4:10 presents another warning by Elohim to send a plague upon His people.

"Subdue,” or "destroy" is once again from the root d.v.r, with its infinitive “lehadbir.” In T’hilim (Psalms) 18:47 we find, for example: “Elohim… subdues the people under me” (emphasis added). This verb also means “to expel or send away," such as sending off the flock to pasture, or to the desert. Thus, in Mi’cha (Micah) 2:12 the flocks are seen in the midst of their “hidabar” which is translated "fold" or "pasture."

The "subdued" enemy (or sinner) is thus often “pursued,", "sent away," or “driven” to the "wilderness" or "desert" - the "midbar." But just as the wilderness may turn out to be a place of “pasture” for the flocks, in the same way it can become a place of spiritual refreshing to those who are fleeing there. For the latter the quite desert becomes of a place of learning, experiencing, or of hearing the “Word.” YHVH has many ways in which to sound out His word in the lonely and deserted wilderness, and the list of those who spent time there is very long indeed. Another place where YHVH’s voice is heard is in the Holy of Holies, which in Solomon’s Temple is called Dvir (ref. 1st Kings 6). Dvir is the furthest and innermost place within the Temple. Divine communication, therefore, is to be found in the furthest and remotest of places; sometimes even in a land of banishment and punishment, which may not only become a refreshing oasis, but may even turn into a 'Holy of Holies.'

In summation, the Word, as epitomized by the Son of Elohim, is life giving, but rejecting Him (the "Davar") may result in a plague (“dever”), which subdues and drives ("madbir") one to the desert ("midbar"), there to be spoken to ("daber") to by the Living Word ("Davar") Who utters the Word of Truth ("dvar emet"). “And I will woo her to Me in the wilderness…” we read in Hoshe’ah (Hosea) 2:16. D.v.,r. teaches us why it was essential for the Israelites to go through their wilderness journey on the road to becoming a nation.

The rest of chapter 2 describes a situation similar to the one that we have already encountered in Parashat Ki Tissa, where the Israelites were charged to take a census (Ex. 30:11-16). However, whereas on the previous occasion each of them had to "give a ransom for his soul to YHVH while numbering them" (which was of one half shekel that was used for the Mishkan), here they are not required to do so.

"Lift the heads of all the congregation of the sons of Israel, by their families, by their fathers' houses, according to the number of names, every male, by their skulls” (literal translation, Num. 1:2 emphasis added). "Nahmanides emphasizes that the census was personal and individual… impressing on us the value and sterling worth of each and every soul which is a unique specimen of divine creativity and a world of its own". In the same vein, Isaac Arama says: "They were not just like animals or material objects, but each one had an importance of his own like a king or a priest. Indeed God had shown special love towards them and this is the significance of mentioning each one of them by name and status; for they were all equal and individual in status."[[1]] Yeshua’s death, for each and every man (ref. Heb. 2:9) on the Hill of "Galgota," which is "skull" in Aramaic, lends an even greater credence to the above statements.

When Yisrael's roll call was completed and the Levites' duties in the Mishkan were dispensed, "YHVH spoke to Moses and Aaron, saying: 'Everyone of the children of Israel shall camp by his own standard, beside the emblems of his father's house; they shall camp some distance from the tabernacle of meeting'" (2:1, 2). The organizational process, of turning these nomadic tribes into a nation, is continuing. The Israelites were to array themselves according to their tribes in specified directions around the Mishkan. The “standard" mentioned here is "degel," of the root d.g.l (dalet, gimmel, lamed). In Shir HaShirim (Song of Songs) 5:10 we read: "My Beloved is bright and ruddy, standing out among ten thousand"; "standing out" is "dagul," of the same root. "Dagul" may also be interpreted as "chosen" and "selected." Again in the same book, the betrothed says about her beloved, "And His banner ("diglo") over me is love" (2:4 emphasis added). The various banners, or standards (according to the respective tribes) with their emblems, were indicative of YHVH's favor and love over His "select" people. The "emblems" are "otot" (plural, and "ot" singular). "Ot" (alef, vav, tav) is a widely used term, denoting "sign, token, pledge, assurance, miracle, omen" and more. Although we do not know what the banners looked like, it appears that each of them had the "ot," or sign, of a particular "father's house," which thus rendered each tribe much like a family related to a single progenitor.
Concerning the grouping around the Mishkan, which was in the midst of the camp, Nahmanides says: “It was a kind of Mount Sinai on which the Torah was given, accompanying them on all their journeying.” Benno Jaccob follows up this idea: “The Lord transferred His presence from Sinai to the Tabernacle, from the sanctuary of the Lord which His hands had established, to the sanctuary which Israel had made'".[[2]] This may account for the strict orders of the camp's formation.

The above mentioned orders excluded the Levites, whose services were to be rendered within the Mishkan, and who were to be at YHVH's disposal. In the course of the detailed description of their duties and their responsibilities for the various parts of the Mishkan, mention is made of the edifice’s sides (in chapter 3). The Hebrew word here for “side” is “yarech,” of the root y.r.ch (yod, resh, kaf/chaf), which means “thigh, loin or base.” The thigh represents man’s strength and power, both in terms of virility and force (being also the place upon which the sword was placed). That is why in order for Ya’acov to become Yisrael his thigh had to be injured, and likewise the repentant one, who in order to demonstrate his true intentions had to smite that part of his body (e.g. Jer. 31:19, Ephraim’s repentance). Similar to the root d.v.r. in some of its uses, “yarech” also refer to the “furthermost point,” to the “backside” or to the “rear” (Gen. 49:13, Jud. 19:1, Is. 14:15), and hence the application to “side”.

The vicarious role of the Levites as firstborn follows in 3:41, 45, as well as a reference to their required conduct. They were to be taken “instead” or “in the place of all the firstborn among the sons of Israel.” “Instead,” or “in the place of” is rendered here (and in numerous other places) “tachat,” meaning “rear, under or underneath “; thus underscoring the required attitude of humility and servitude congruent with the tasks assigned to them.

In chapter 4 we view how the chosen family of K'hat (Kohath) was to dismantle the Mishkan, when it was time to move on. During this awesome procedure they had to restrain themselves and avert their gaze from the holy articles, with the help of A'ha'ron and his sons (v. 19). "They shall not go in to see the holy things as they are being covered, lest they die," is the Parasha's last verse (v. 20), which literally says, "And they shall not go in to see, at the swallowing of the holy things, [lest] they die". The usage here of "swallow" ("bela") for "covering" the Mishkan articles is very unusual. It may be alluding to the fact that an unwarranted gaze could bring upon the onlookers (that is, the members of the K'hat clan) the penalty of being swallowed alive (a form of punishment which was sometimes inflicted – supernaturally - upon offenders, such as in the case of Achan in Num. 16:34). Thus, A'ha'ron’s family was being charged with responsibility over the lives of their brothers, the K'hats, whose "keepers" they were to be.

[1] New Studies in Bamidbar, Nechama Leibowitz, trans. Aryeh Newman. Eliner
Library, Department for Torah Education and Culture in the Diaspora. Hemed Books Inc.,
Brooklyn, N.
[2] Ibid

Hebrew Insights into Parashat B’chu’kotai – Vayikra (Leviticus) 26:3 – 27

2011-05-18T07:35:00.001-05:00

Hebrew Insights into Parashat B’chu’kotai – Vayikra (Leviticus) 26:3 – 27

The topic of the important place accorded to the Land, which we examined in Parashat B’har with its varied ramifications, continues in Parashat B’chu’kotai ("In My Statutes"), as seen in 26:3-13. Keeping YHVH's statutes is destined to be reflected in the natural conditions of the Land of Israel. The correlation will be seen in the abundance of rain (and therefore of crops), the removal of dangerous carnivores, demographic expansion, abundance and prosperity. The other benefits resulting from faithfulness to YHVH and His Word will be peaceful conditions prevailing in the Land and its surroundings, the ability to defeat the enemy and primarily the fulfillment of His promise to instate His tabernacle in their midst… and to always walk among them (ref. 26:11, 12). In verse 5 we read…”and your threshing shall reach [or overtake] the vintage, and the vintage shall reach [or overtake] the sowing time; and you shall eat your bread to satisfaction, and live in your land securely.” This is especially pertinent in light Parashat B’har’s sh’mita-year promise: “Then I will command My blessing on you in the sixth year, and it will bring forth produce enough for three years” (Lev. 25:21 italics added). In a prophecy pertaining to a latter day, the Prophet Amos also echoes the “overtaking”: "The plowman shall overtake the reaper, and the treader of grapes him who draws along seed" (9:13).

Having examined in Parashat B’har one of the words for "interest" - “marbit” (whose root is r.v/b.a), we will now take a look at another word that shares the same root - “r’vava” (which we also encountered in Parashat Cha’yey Sarah Gen. 24:6). In 26:8 we read, "…and hundred of you shall pursue ten thousand (“r’vava”)…" (emphasis added).

Echoing 25:22 (“and [you] shall eat of the old crop… until the coming in of its crop; you shall eat of the old") from the previous Parasha, verse 10 says, "And you shall eat very old provision, and clear away the old because of the new." In other words, not only will there be a long and lasting overabundance which will remain fresh and usable for the entire time period, but even before it is fully consumed there will be a fresh crop!

These promises are sealed with the familiar: "I am YHVH your Elohim, who has brought you out of the land of the Egyptians, from being their slaves.” It then continues to say: “And I will break the bars of your yoke, and I will make you walk upright" (26:13). "Walking upright" is “ko'memi'yoot,” of the root k.o.m (kof, vav, mem), meaning to “rise or get up." In Parashot Va'ye'tze (Gen. 28:10-32:2) and Vayishlach (Gen. 32:3- 36) we noticed the significance of Ya'acov's "rising up," as well as that of the special "place" - ma'kom (of the same root) - where he experienced some of his ‘rising.’ Here the sons of this Patriarch are promised "an upright walk," providing they do so in Elohim's chosen paths. Additionally, in 26:37 we encounter the word “t’kuma,” translated "power to stand" (“you shall have no power to stand before your enemies”), with its more modern usage being "resurrection" and "recovery".

If the People of Yisrael choose "to walk contrary to Him" (ref. 26:21), YHVH will also "walk contrary" to them (ref. v. 24) and will inflict upon them a series of blows (such as the example we just looked at in verse 37). The expression "walking contrary" - “keri” - is used nowhere else except in this chapter, where it appears seven times. Its root is thought to be k.r.h (kof, resh, hey), meaning to “happen". Rashi comments on this: “Our rabbis said: ‘this word signifies irregularly, by chance, something that happens only occasionally. Thus, [meaning] 'if you will follow the commandments irregularly.’” Menahem explains it as an expression for refraining, cf…”Refrain (“hoh-ker”) your foot from your neighbor's house” (Prov. 25:17), or, of a refraining (“va'yikar”) spirit…."[1]. “Keri”, therefore may refer to an avoidance of performing YHVH’s Word along with a casual and nonchalant attitude toward Him, which was also condemned by Yeshua in Revelation 3:15, 16 where we read: "I wish you were cold or hot… So then, because you are lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spew you out of my mouth," leading us to the curse of eventually being spewed out of the Land (26:32 – 39, and also Lev. 20:22).

The list of curses (26:14-46) is somewhat parallel to the list of the blessings, albeit much longer. It is divided up into several progressive categories: diseases, defeat, drought, carnivorous animals, and a combination of wars, plagues and famines, which will cause parents to consume their own children's flesh. Finally, after the destruction of the idols and pagan images, there will be a dispersion of the People of Yisrael among the Gentile nations. Under these conditions, and once the Land has been emptied of its inhabitants, its Shabbats will be repaid (as the Israelites did not keep the Sabbatical years that we read about in the last Parasha). These Shabbats will "appease" the land, with the word used here being “tirzeh” (of the root “ratzon” - “will or acceptance”). Thus, the land "will be appeased" (v. 34, 35) and “accept” its inhabitants. Accordingly, the "year of acceptance" (Is. 61:2) is “sh'nat ratzon.” The same word for “acceptance” appeared in Parashat Emor, where we read in 23:11 about the Omer: "And he [the priest] shall wave the sheaf before YHVH, to be accepted [lirtzon'chem] for you…" (italics added). Negligence to observe the Shmita on the seventh year, is what makes the figure ”seven” stand out, relative to sin and the penalties subsequently incurred; thus we read, “I will chastise you seven times more for your sin… “(26:18, 21, 24, 28 italics added). The usage of seven here reminds us of some of the commands, which the Israelites will be transgressing, that are related to the figure seven, such as the seventh day of the week, the seventh year of rest, and the seven years multiplied by seven leading to the Jubilee, the 50th year of release of all debts and property.

The last part of Parashat B’chu’kotai deals with laws concerning vows made to YHVH (chapter 27), among which are those that pertain to the tithes. In verses 32-33 we read: “And all the tithe of the herd, or of the flock, all that passes under the rod, a tenth shall be holy to YHVH. He shall not search whether it is good or bad; neither shall he change it…” (italics added). Y’chezkel (Ezekiel) 20:37-38 echoes the terms we encounter here, applying them to YHVH’s sheep and to the land of their inheritance: “And I will cause you to pass under the rod, and I will bring you into the bond of the covenant. And I will purge out from among you the rebels and those who sin against Me. I will bring them out from the land where they reside, and they shall not enter into the land of Israel” (italics added). In the above Vayikra (Leviticus) text, we encountered “He shall not search” – “lo ye’vaker” (v. 33). Y’chezkel 34:11-12 reiterates this phrase, and so we read: “For so says Adoni YHVH: Behold, I Myself will search for My sheep and seek them out – uvikarteem, as the seeking out – kevakarat – of the shepherd of his flock in the day that he is among his scattered sheep, so I will seek out – a’vaker - My sheep and will deliver them out of all places where they have been scattered …” (literal translation, italics added)

The final verse, which is similar to the opening verse of Parashat B’har (referring to Mount Sinai), seals off the Parasha, and indeed the book of Vayikra (Leviticus) with the words: "These are the statutes which YHVH made between him and the children of Israel in Mount Sinai by the hand of Moses" (v. 34 italics added).

[1] New Studies in Vayikra, Nechama Leibowitz, trans. Aryeh Newman. Eliner
Library, Department for Torah Education and Culture in the Diaspora. Hemed
Books Inc., Brooklyn, N.Y.

Some of the word meanings were gleaned from:
The New Brown, Driver, Briggs, Gesenius Lexicon, Francis Brown, Hendrickson Publishers, Peabody, Mass. 1979.
Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, ed. R. Laird Harris, Moody Press, Chicago, 1980.

Hebrew Insights into Parashat B’har – Vayikra (Leviticus) – 25 – 26:2

2011-05-09T08:49:00.002-05:00

Hebrew Insights into Parashat B’har – Vayikra (Leviticus) – 25 – 26:2

The first verse of Parashat B’har (meaning, "In Mount…") serves to remind us that
YHVH’s words to the Children of Yisrael, via Moshe, were spoken in Mount Sinai.

The opening of the Parasha focuses on the seventh year suspension of all soil cultivation (known as “Shmita,” whose root sh.m.t is mentioned in Parashat Mishpatim Ex. 23:11. See also Heb. Insights into Parashat Mishpatim Ex. 21-24). In spite of this edict regarding work cessation, it is stated, "the Sabbath of the land shall be to you for food" (25:6). This declaration contains the familiar and principal thought, similar to the one that accompanies the weekly Shabbat, that YHVH is the Provider and thus the members of the community are afforded an opportunity to exercise faith throughout that year.

Secondly, every member of the community, as well as the livestock, is equally promised provision for that time period (v. 6, 7). Again, not unlike the weekly Shabbat, the benefits of YHVH's year of land-rest apply to one and all without regard to status and origin. However, this “Shabbat of Shabbats” (v. 4) year, together with the 50th year Jubilee, the "yovel" which the rest of this Parasha is dedicated to - apply only in the Land of Yisrael.

In verse 3 we read: "You shall sow your field six years, and you shall prune your vineyard six years, and shall gather its produce." "Produce" or "provender" is “t'vua,” of the root b.o. (vet/bet, vav, alef), meaning “to come, come in or go in"; but also, in another conjugation, to “bring.” Thus, the term "produce" does not convey the idea of something which results merely from man's own productivity or effort, but rather it is that which "comes" or is "brought" to him from an outside source.

Following YHVH's instructions guarantees that…"you shall live on the land securely. And the land shall give its fruit, and you shall eat to satisfaction; and you shall dwell securely on it" (25:18, 19). To this promise, there will be an extra and supernatural blessing added: "I have commanded My blessing on you in the sixth year. And it shall produce the increase for three years; and you shall sow the eighth year, and shall eat of the old crop until the ninth year, until the coming [bo] in of its produce [t'vua]; you shall eat of the old" (21-23, italics and emphasis added). Here again we see the connection between “produce” and the verb "to come" (remember, both originate in the same root).

The un-gathered harvest is called “that which grows of itself” – “safee’ach,” “safee’ach, of the root s.f.ch (samech, fey, chet), literally “adding, attaching.” In light of verse 23, where those addressed (the Yisraelites) are called, “strangers and sojourners,” it is interesting to note how the verb s.f.ch is used Yishayahu (Isaiah) 14:1: For YHVH will have mercy on Jacob, and will still choose Israel, and settle them in their own land. The strangers will be joined with them [nisfe’chu], and they will cling to the house of Jacob” (Italics added). "Your unkempt grapes" (v. 5, 11) are called here “ee'nvey (“grapes of”) nezir'cha.” The latter term is rooted in the word “nazir” (Nazarite), whose restrictive vows include abstention from wine drinking or grape eating. Why are these grapes qualified by the term “nazir”? The connection is thought to be the Nazarite's hair, which was to be left uncut and unkempt, much like these grapes. This is reinforced by the first part of verse 5 ("that which grows of itself," alluding to unkemptness). These two prohibitions (namely, "not to reap that which grows of itself," and to "not gather the grapes of your unkempt vine") no doubt refer to harvesting for profit making-during that particular season.

As mentioned, the second part of the Parasha deals with the Year of the “Yovel” ("jubilee," which is a direct derivative of “yovel”). The primary meaning of yovel is thought to be the word for “horned animal” or for the "horn" itself, which was used for multiple purposes in the ancient Israelite community. Quite possibly the role of the “horned animal” (such as the bull or ox), in leading solemn processions has branched off into nouns and verbs that share the root y.v/b.l (yod, bet/vet, lamed) and are therefore connected to “leading.” The verb “hovel” is to "lead," thus forming the noun for "stream" which is “yuval,” and for the "produce of the soil" – “y'vul” (the ‘issue proceeding out of the ground’). Another interesting derivative of this root is “tevel,” meaning "world." This renders the world and its elements (e.g. streams and produce) as mere ‘issues,’ or results that proceed (or ‘are led’) from that which has originally formed or produced them, but which exists outside of them. Notice the conceptual similarity to our former observation, in the term "provender" - t'vua. “The earth is YHVH’s, and the fullness of it; the world (“tevel”), and those who dwell in it” (Ps. 24:1), affirms this very point.

Aside from letting the land lie fallow during the year of the “yovel,” that year was also to be “sanctified” (“vekidashtem”) for the purpose of "proclaiming liberty in the land to all its inhabitants…" (25:10). "Liberty" is “dror,” which is the same word for the bird known as "swallow" (e.g. Pr. 26:2), thus lending a graphic rendition to this term. The yovel year signifies and stipulates that all property, or its calculated value in another form, is to be returned to its original owner.

But above all the human benefits attached to the yovel, there is a greater significance for its proclamation, a significance that at the same time also forms a ‘Divine paradox’ so typical of Hebraic logic. In 25:23 we read: “And the land shall not be sold in perpetuity; for the land is Mine; for you are aliens and tenants with Me." "Perpetuity" here is “tzmi'toot,” stemming from the root tz.m.t (tzadi, mem, tav) which is “to end, put an end to something" or “to freeze assets.” Thus, reverting property to its original owner demonstrates the fact that it actually belongs to… YHVH, as we just learned from the above Psalm. And as much as the Torah stresses ownership rights, it also reminds us, almost in the same breath, who the real owner is and that “we have no permanent city here, but we seek the one to come" (Hebrews 13:14).

Regarding this issue, “the Biur explains the different elements manifested in the two clauses of the verse: a) Elohim’s sovereignty – the land is Mine; b) the transience of man and his brief sojourn upon earth… The author of Sefer haHinukh considers the educational message of the commandment… The Torah reminds man [who is inherently materialistic] that [property is] not really his, and that eventually all land must return to those who possessed it by the will of Elohim in the first place, for ‘His is the land’.” According to American 19th century economist, Henry George, “the Torah as a Code of Law aimed at ensuring justice, equity, and happiness for those who follow it. It sought to avoid the concentration of land, the source of life, wealth, and power in the hands of the few. “ Rav Kook, focusing on the spiritual aspects, claims that “all that economic disequilibrium… is but a synonym for ‘deviation and turpitude’[baseness or depravity, can refer specifically to: Moral turpitude, a legal concept in the United States] which call for ratification. They suppress…. the radiance of the spiritual splendor of the Divine soul that dwells in the nation, and the nature of those deeds dim the resplendent light of its splendor. For the supreme purpose of reaching the nearness of Elohim, He gave the Shabbat to every individual, the Shemitah year law.... and the laws of the yovel year… in order to rectify all ‘deviations’ of the past and to imbue the nation ‘with the spirit of forbearance and repentance’ that it may endeavor ‘to rectify the distortions of the past’”. [1] Repentance in connection with the yovel is quite pertinent, as the yovel is announced by blowing a shofar “in the seventh month, on the tenth day, on the day of atonement” (v. 9, literal translation).

Another aspect of the yovel is redemption, “geula,” whose primary meaning is "kin" (denoted by “go’el”). It is the next-of-kin's duty to buy back that which a member of the family has lost - or perhaps even the family member himself, if he had been conscripted to slavery. In the case of a Hebrew servant, he is to be released on the yovel…"because they are My servants, whom I have brought out from the land of Egypt" (v. 42 italics added). The context of this verse deals accordingly with the releasing of slaves; Biblical Hebrew for "slave" and "servant" is one and the same - e'ved - from the root e.v.d (ayin, vet, dalet), meaning "work" or "labor" (and also rendering service/worship of YHVH).

As part of the proper treatment of one's fellow countryman, defined as "brother," there is a prohibition against charging usury, or interest (ref. v. 36, 7). The two words used are “neshech” and “marbit.” The root of neshech (n.a.ch, noon, alef, chaf) is also the root for the verb “to bite." "Those who bite" (e.g. Habbakuk 2:7) are therefore the oppressors and debtors. “Marbit” is from the root r.v/b.a (resh, vet/bet, hey) which literally means "much, many, to add, to make greater, to increase"; hence “marbit” is a "monetary increment."

The centrality of the Land in the life of the Israelites and their relationship with YHVH, are brought to bear in some of the terms we discussed above. In contrast, the “ger,” the sojourner, the one who merely resides, is called in verse 47 “eker,” which is translated “son or descendant of a sojourner.” However, “eker” is related to the verb “akor,” meaning “pluck out,” hence the sojourner is seen as an uprooted person. At the same time, the sons of Yisrael are not totally exempt from this definition either, as the Owner of the Earth says of them: “you are aliens and sojourners with Me” (verse 23).

Just as our Parasha opened up with the “When you come into the land which I give you, then the land shall keep a Sabbath to YHVH” (Leviticus 25:2 Italics added), so now it ends with the command to keep “My Sabbaths, I am YHVH” (26:2 Italics
added). Thus we see that not only are the Land (and its produce) and the People belong to YHVH, but so are the times and seasons, especially the ones that He had singled out.

[1] New Studies in Vayikra (II), Nechama Leibowitz, trans. Aryeh Newman. Eliner
Library, Department for Torah Education and Culture in the Diaspora. Hemed
Books Inc., Brooklyn, N.Y.

Some of the word meanings were gleaned from:

The New Brown, Driver, Briggs, Gesenius Lexicon, Francis Brown, Hendrickson
Publishers, Peabody, Mass. 1979. \
Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, ed. R. Laird Harris, Moody Press,
Chicago, 1980.

Hebrew Insights into Parashat Emor – Vayikra (Leviticus) 21 - 24

2011-04-26T09:07:00.005-05:00

Hebrew Insights into Parashat Emor – Vayikra (Leviticus) 21 - 24

Parashat Emor ("tell, say, proclaim or speak") contains the well-known chapter 23, which lists and specifies YHVH's appointed times. Chapters 21 and 22, on one end of the Parasha, deal respectively with the priests' conduct of holiness, the sanctity of the offerings and the handling thereof. It is interesting to note the order; the sanctity of the priests ("they shall be holy to their Elohim", 21:6) is followed by the sanctity of the offerings (called "holy things", 22:3). Followed by the sanctity of the appointed times (chapter 23) The other end of the Parasha includes chapter 24, whose themes are the perpetual light ("ner ha'tamid") and the showbread ("lechem hapanim"). A brief account relating an episode during which YHVH's name was profaned *, as well as the resulting and immediate consequences, together with a series of instructions for penalizing measures applicable in similar cases, including cases of felony, seal off Parashat Emor.

Chapter 23 is situated in the center of the Parasha, flanked by the above-mentioned themes of the set-apartness of the priests and the offerings on one end, and by mentioning the set apart location of the “ner ha’tamid” (the “perpetual light”) and the showbread. Verses 1 and 2 of chapter 23 read as follows: “YHVH spoke again to Moses, saying, 'Speak to the sons of Israel and say to them, YHVH's appointed times ["mo'adim"] which you shall proclaim as holy convocations [“mik'ra'ey kodesh”] - My appointed times are these…'" Here we encounter the important terms, “mo’adim” and “mikra'ey kodesh” (singular: “mo'ed” and “mikra kodesh”). Mo’ed stems from the root y.a'a.d (yod, ayin, dalet), which is "appoint, design or designate." Thus, in Amos 3:3 we read: "Do two men walk together unless it has been designated, or appointed for them [to do so]?" The conjugation of the verb implies that someone else was responsible for their meeting.

“Mo'ed,” as we see in the text before us, is connected to a specific called-out and destined assembly, many times termed “e'dah” (originating in the same root), which gathers or convenes together. In 24:14 for example, the assembly, or “edah,” is told to stone an offender. In T’hilim (Psalms) 82:1…"Elohim takes His stand in His edah." The “appointed times,” therefore, relate to an appointed group of people, but there is still more…

“Tent of [appointed] meeting” is “Ohel Mo'ed” (in this case, mentioned here in 24;3). A similar, though not identical term, is found in T’hilim (Psalms) 74:8 where we read, “They have burned Your sanctuary." The rendering there of "sanctuary" in Hebrew is “mo'adey El,” literally, "appointed times of El," making evident that Place and Time in the Hebrew mind are not always demarcated by a clear boundary. Our text reveals the “three-stranded cord” (ref. Eccl. 4:12) of place, time and people, as it is held together by the sovereignty of the One who has appointed and chosen them, and who is responsible for bringing about their interactions one with the other. Finally, y.a.a.d is also to “establish a destiny,” and so we read in Romans 8:29-30: “Whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son… Moreover whom He predestined, these He also called…” (italics added). In the Hebrew translation of the Greek text, “predestined” and “foreknew” are both of the root “ya’ad.” Who are the ones whom He foreknew, predestined and called? As we have seen above (and will see later), the calling and appointing has been and are Yisrael’s, thus establishing again (in context with the above quote), that y.a.a.d refers not only to people and place, but also to an eternal destiny (past, present and future).

The “holy convocations,” as mentioned, are “mikra'ey kodesh.” The root k.r.a (kof, resh, alef) makes up the verb “to call” even though the "convocation" - the assembling - is made up of people. The “mikra kodesh” is therefore designated by its calling. “Mikra,” like the term we just examined, is also related to place, as is illustrated by Yisha’yahu (Isaiah) 4:5: "Then YHVH will create over the whole area of Mount Zion and over mikra'eh'a ["her assemblies"] a cloud by day…." In addition, these “holy convocations” are also the special times that are synonymous with “mo’adim.” And so once again, the “calling” proves to be the common paradigm or ‘ingredient’ shared by the People, their special places of gathering, and the appointed times during which they are to convene.

The first "appointed day" – the “Shabbat” - is also the prototype upon which all the others are established (ref. v. 3). It speaks of rest, trust, and faith directed toward the Heavenly Father (a topic we dealt with at length in Parashat Yitro – Exodus 18-20).

The mo’ed which starts the annual cycle is to be celebrated on the first month of the biblical calendar (the month of Aviv). The 14th day of that month is designated as YHVH's Pesach (Passover), whereas the next seven days are called the Feast of Matzot (Unleavened Bread). The root p.s.ch (pey, samech, chet), which we examined in Parashat Bo (Exodus 10-13:16), means to “pass or skip over.” The lamb’s blood was smeared on the Hebrews’ doorposts, thus covering and protecting the sons of Yisrael from YHVH's arm, which dealt severely with the Egyptians. It was by virtue of that blood that YHVH “passed” or “skipped over” the dwellings of the Israelites. The wider scope of the principle set in motion here is the atoning blood of the Lamb of Elohim, that covers and protects the redeemed from sin’s death sentence.

Next is the Feast of Matzot, or Chag HaMaztot (plural of “matza,” which is a thin, wafer-like cracker baked without yeast). “Chag” is feast, whose root, ch.g.g (chet, gimmel, gimmel), means “to circle” (e.g. Ps. 107:27), thus pointing to the cyclical nature and annual reoccurrence of YHVH’s feasts and appointed times. As we have already seen in Parashat Bo, the root m.tz.h (mem, tzadi, hey) means “to drain or squeeze out” to the very last drop of water. Yeast can only be activated in an accommodating environment (that is, in water). Since yeast, or leaven, is likened to the sin which leavens or puffs up the whole lump (Gal. 5:9), water may be compared to the environment which enhances it. The "old leaven" (1st Cor. 5:8) being sin, in the form of the deeds of darkness (Rom. 13:12), wickedness (1st Cor. 5:13) and more, is removed as the redeemed are constituted "holy matzot; for Messiah, our Passover… [who] has been sacrificed" (1st Cor. 5:7). Notice that aside from “matza” unleavened bread is also called “lechem oni,” translated “bread of affliction” (Deut. 16:3). Yeshua, who is the “Bread of Life” (John 6:35), was born in the House of Bread (Beit-Lehem) and interestingly was in Beit Onya (Bethany) - House of Affliction (John 12:1) - six days before He gave His disciples the bread (“matza”) representing His body (Luke 22:19).

"Then YHVH spoke to Moses saying, ‘Speak to the sons of Israel and say to them, When you enter the land… and reap its harvest, then you shall bring in the sheaf [omer] of the first of your harvest to the priest. And He shall wave the sheaf before
YHVH for you to be accepted; on the day after the Sabbath the priest shall wave it’" (9-11 literal translation). The first harvest takes place very early in the spring. From Dvarim (Deuteronomy) 16:9 we learn that the picking is "from the time you begin to put the sickle to the standing [barley] grain." Because “omer” is also a measurement (one tenth of an epha), there is no question as to the amount of the "first of the harvest." Thus, the priest was to wave those first sheaves before YHVH, "for your acceptance" - lir'tzon'chem (root r.tz.h – resh, tzadi, hey – meaning, “satisfy, favor”), after the Shabbat. This was totally fulfilled by Yeshua. Following His resurrection, which occurred after the Shabbat, He immediately went up to His Father (ref. John 20:17) to offer Himself on our behalf, thus rendering us acceptable. It was from this day that seven weeks were to be counted, making the 50th day a “mo'ed” which is tied intrinsically to the Counting of the Omer.

The land and its fruitfulness, or lack thereof, was to reflect Yisrael's relationship with YHVH, as it is "a Land for which YHVH your Elohim cares; the eyes of YHVH your Elohim are always on it, from the beginning even to the end of the year" (Deut. 11:12). The Cycle of the Feasts "from the beginning even to the end of the year" is partly designed for this purpose. Thus, if the rains come in their due season, watering the ground which responds to the seed (ref. Hos. 2:21,22), it is an indication that the Nation of Yisrael is walking with their Elohim, "who keeps for us the appointed weeks for the harvest" (Jer. 5:24). In that case, all is well and the Counting of the Omer can begin. Conversely, the consequence of disobedience and sin is drought (Lev. 26:14, 20, 26, for example), which means that there is no barley, no sheaves and nothing to count. That, in turn, will affect the next mo'ed, which is Shavu'ot. The mo'adim, the Land and the relationship with the Almighty are all linked together, making the life of the Hebrew person inseparable from his Elohim, his Torah, his land and community. The omer affects the celebration of Shavu’ot. It also signifies total dependency on YHVH, and speaks of His control over the natural and spiritual causes.

On Shavu'ot the focus is on "a new grain offering to YHVH" (v. 16), also termed "first fruits of the wheat harvest” (Ex. 34:22) and called bikkurim, deriving from the word “b'chor” – “firstborn.” Note that this word does not appear in connection with the waving of the first barley sheaves (v. 10), where “reshit” (that is, “beginning,” "first" stemming from “rosh” – “head”) is used instead. Yisrael is declared "holy to YHVH, the first - "reshit" - of His harvest" (Jer. 2:3). Hence, both of these special times (the Counting of the Omer and Shavu'ot) are a reminder to Yisrael that as YHVH's firstborn (Ex. 4:22), they too belong to Him. Messiah is called the “reshita” (1st cor. 15::20, 23 Aramaic New Testament), the “beginning,” just like the first of the Omer, which is waved for our “acceptance.” The Feast of First Fruit has also been fulfilled by Messiah when He sent the Spirit of Holiness so that we may be the “bikkurim” (ref. 1st Cor. 15:20,23) – the “first fruit” who were “brought forth by the word of truth” (James 1:18). Interestingly, on Shavu’ot two loaves baked with leaven are to be waved (chapter 23:17,20), making it obvious that these signify YHVH’s two peoples who, unlike His Son, are not yet totally without sin.

Intertwined in this mo'adim ‘inventory’ is an important insertion, which lends another dimension to the feasts and to the life of the sons and daughters of Yisrael. It reads as follows: "When you reap the harvest of your land, moreover, you shall not reap to the very corners of your field nor gather the gleaning of your harvest; you are to leave them for the needy and the alien" (v. 22 italics added). The reason given for this injunction, albeit a very short one summarizes it all: "For I am YHVH your Elohim." We found a similar injunction in last week’s portion (Kdoshim), in 19:9-10, which was preceded by the declaration: "You shall be holy for I YHVH your Elohim am Holy" (19:2). YHVH’s holiness is expressed by His heart’s inclinations, His character and deeds, and it is this kind of holiness which He desires to bestow upon His people.

From the first month through the third - we now move to the seventh, which is replete with mo'adim, starting with the first day. )Rosh Chodesh - "head of the month", the usual term for the first day of the month, is not used here.) The "first day" of the seventh month is to be a “shabbaton,” a Shabbat-like day, and also a “mikra kodesh” - a "holy convocation." It is to be a “zich'ron tru'ah,” that is, a day dedicated to remembering and to making a “sound or a blast.” “T'ruah” is a generic noun; it is not used exclusively regarding this day of remembrance, thereby shrouding this mo’ed with some obscurity. The raising of human voices, or the blowing of a shofar (ram’s horn), or a silver trumpet can all produce the “t’ruah” sound. The combination of 'jarring' the communal memory and the emphasis on sound could possibly have to do with preparing the People for the tenth day of the month, the most solemn of all the feast days, “Yom HaKippurim,” literally "Day of the Atonements." The sound of the alarm is intended, therefore, to help the People of Yisrael recall the greatness of their Elohim, His deeds and commandments, as well as their own responses and shortcomings. In other words, it is a call to self-examination leading to repentance. Since “tru'a” signifies a number of different calls and alarms (e.g. Num. 10:5, 6,9) “…blessed is the people who knows [understands, discerns] tru'a [the specific sound and its intent]; O YHVH they walk in the light of your countenance!" (Ps. 89:15).

The Day of Atonement is a mikra kodesh, "on exactly the tenth day" (v. 27) to commence on the previous evening (according to verse 32); and "it is to be a Shabbat Shabbaton" - a Shabbat of Shabbats. What else singles out this day? In addition to a total cessation of labor, it is also to be a time of "affliction of the soul." To “afflict" is here “(ve)ee'ni'tem,” the root being a.n.h (ayin, noon, hey), shared by the adjectives “humility” or “self-denial.” Yisha’yahu (Isaiah) 58 clarifies for us the kind of affliction YHVH is referring to: "Is it a fast like this which I choose, a day for a man to afflict/humble [ah'not] himself? Is it for bowing one's head like a reed and for spreading out sackcloth and ashes as a bed? Will you call this a fast, even an acceptable day to YHVH? Is this not the fast, which I choose: to loosen the bonds of wickedness, to undo the bands of the yoke, and to let the oppressed go free and break every yoke? Is it not to divide your bread with the hungry and bring the homeless poor [ah’ni, the same root] into the house…?" (v. 5-7 emphases added). Thus, he who truly afflicts himself is not necessarily engaged only in ceremonial acts, but, rather, empathizes with the afflicted and comes to their aid. Lastly, a quick glance back to Pesach will remind us of the "bread of affliction" - lechem oni - literally "bread of affliction or humility," which is another name for the “matza,” as we already noted above. Lechem Oni, therefore, is a fitting title for He who is the "Bread of Life," the Pesach's Matza, who is also described in Z’char’yah (Zechariah) 9:9 as "humble - ah'ni - and mounted on a donkey."

The other aspect of the Day of Atonement, the “kippurim or kapara” of the root k.f.r (kaf, fey, resh), with its primal meaning, "to cover," we have examined a number of times (particularly in Parashat Noach – Gen. 6:9-11). The ultimate sin-covering and forgiveness was epitomized in the life and atoning death of Yeshua, who became the final sacrifice and ransom for all (ref. 1 Tim.2:6).

We are still in the seventh month. On the 15th day, the Feast of Succot - Booths or Tabernacles - is to be celebrated for eight days. The first day and the last are to be holy convocations, on which no work is to be preformed. This feast is to be kept "when you have gathered in the crops of the land" (vs. 39), and is therefore another one of those special times, during which the Israelites are reminded of the connection that the Land and its produce bear to their relationship with their Elohim. They are also enjoined to dwell in “succot” (“booths”) …"for seven days…so that your generations may know that I had the sons of Israel live in booths when I brought them out from the land of Egypt" (v. 42, 43). This is the only mo'ed with an eighth day, which, aside from being a mikra kodesh, is also described as an “atzeret,” translated "solemn assembly" (v. 36). The root a.tz.r (ayin, tzadi, resh) means, "restrain, hold back, refrain," as well as "to rule, possess and to check." "Solemn", in reference to the "assembly" is no doubt a development from the idea of "restraint," denoting the importance of the day.

“Succa” (singular for “succot”) stems from the root s.ch.ch. (sah'mech, kaf, kaf ), meaning to “cover, protect or a (temporary) shelter.” Its primal root is to “weave together" (for example, "You have woven me - tesukeni - in my mother's womb," Ps. 139:13). "Succa" is also a "thicket." Besides being translated as a literal shelter for men and animals, this word is used figuratively; especially known is the “fallen succa - dynasty - of David," which YHVH promises to restore (Amos 9:11, Acts 15:16). The "mercy seat" - kaporet - in the Holy of Holies was covered by the wings of the Cherubim, which are described as “covering the mercy seat with their wings” (Ex. 25:20). "Covering", in this instance, utilizes “soche'chim” which shares the same root as “succa.”

While Succot brings together several aspects and reasons for the mo'adim, it also points to future events. As we noted previously, Succot is the only feast with an eighth day. A full (and prophetically complete) unit of days is always comprised by seven days. The eighth day, therefore, signifies a new beginning. The restoration of David's “dynasty,” or “house,” when compared to a succa, clearly indicates that the Feast of Succot is yet to have an even greater fulfillment. On the day that…"the Branch of YHVH will be beautiful and glorious… there will be a succa to give shade from the heat by day, and refuge and protection from the storm and the rain," is an exciting future promise found in Yisha’yahu (Isaiah) 4:2, 6.

Shabbat, by commemorating the Creator’s work and His redemption of the Hebrews from bondage and their everlasting covenant, lays the foundation for the mo'adim; whereas the mo'adim illustrate the various phases of the life and path of faith. At the same time Shabbat, being the epitome of rest and cessation of all self-effort, is also a foreshadowing of the coming Kingdom. Thus it represents, as well as stands for the destination of the Believer's path, and hence it is twofold; while a foundation, it is also a tangible image of the goal. In this way, the Shabbat may be compared to Messiah Yeshua, in that He too is the foundation, the Root, as well as the Branch - both a Beginning and an ultimate Destination.

* The word used there for “profaned” is “yikov”(root k.v.v, kof, vet, vet) and means
“to bore a hole.” Thus, as we saw last week when examining the verb ch.l.l,
which also means to “profane or desecrate,” such an act constitutes ‘hollowing
out’ or ‘making empty’ (implying meaninglessness) that which is of greatest
import, seriousness, and sacredness.

Some of the word definitions were gleaned from:

The New Brown, Driver, Briggs, Gesenius Lexicon, ed. Francis Brown, Hendrickson Publishers, Peabody, Mass. 1979.
Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, ed. R. Laird Harris, Moody Press, Chicago, 1980.
Etymological Dictionary of Biblical Hebrew, ed. Matityahu Clark, Feldheim Publishers, Jerusalem, New York.1999.

Hebrew Insights into Parashat Kdoshim – Vayikra (Leviticus) 19-20

2011-04-26T08:13:00.002-05:00

Hebrew Insights into Parashat Kdoshim – Vayikra (Leviticus) 19-20

"And YHVH spoke to Moses, saying, 'Speak to all the congregation of the children of Israel, and say to them: `You shall be holy [plural -kdoshim], for I YHVH your Elohim am holy'" (19:1-2 emphasis added). The rest of the Parasha, like the previous one, constitutes a portrait of the 'holy’, or ‘set-apart’ Israelite, whose Elohim is Holy, a fact which could render him of the same status - as it says in Genesis 1:27: "So Elohim created man in His own image; in the image of Elohim He created him," (italics added).

In contrast to most of YHVH's addresses in the Parashot we have been studying, here the “entire congregation of the sons of Israel” – kol ah’dat b'ney Yisrael, is being addressed. We have here an assortment of directives, of both commission and omission. The penalties described (and mainly found in chapter 20), even if not exercised and carried out in our day and age, are indicators of the way YHVH views the transgressions that they are appended to. In fact, in chapter 19 “I am YHVH” (“your Elohim” added to some of them) is repeated 15 times tagged on to the various injunctions.

The theme of Parashat Kdoshim is encapsulated in 20:25…"You shall therefore distinguish between clean animals and unclean, between unclean birds and clean, and you shall not make yourselves abominable by beast or by bird, or by any kind of living thing that creeps on the ground, which I have separated from you as unclean. And you shall be holy to Me, for I YHVH am Holy, and have separated you from the peoples, that you should be Mine." This clearly illustrates the contaminating effect, which the unclean has upon Elohim's People; yet over and above that, it underscores the separateness of those who belong to Him and who are rendered set apart by this very fact.

Going back to chapter 19, we will notice that most of the injunctions or clusters thereof, end with "I am YHVH your Elohim." Thus, in chapter 19 we read about reverence for father and mother and keeping the Shabbat. This is followed by a command to reject idols. The issue of peace offerings, which follows, is succeeded by how one is to treat those less fortunate than oneself (the poor and the sojourner), by leaving for them the gleanings of the fields and vineyards, for… "I am YHVH your Elohim." Theft, deception, lying and swearing falsely in YHVH's name are enumerated next. All of these constitute "profaning" His Name, which is “chalel” (ch.l.l., chet, lamed, lamed) meaning, to “make hollow or burrow,” and is also the root for "casualty" (such as those killed in war). Dealing unjustly (a.sh.k – ayin, shin, kof, oppressing and stealing) with one's fellow man, cursing the deaf and putting a stumbling block in front of the blind, diverting justice in court, tale bearing and not taking responsibility when a friend's life is in danger… all are sealed by "I am YHVH." Obviously we are moving here into more subtle matters that may not be necessarily noticed by society at large, but will be seen by Him whose "eyes run to and fro throughout the whole earth" (ref. 2nd Chr.16:9; Zech. 4:10). This takes us to even deeper issues of the heart, such as, "You shall not hate your brother in your heart."

"Brother," aside from its obvious meaning, could also relate to one's “fellowman,” just as do the following terms: "Associate" - amit (v. 11) and "re'ah", that is, “friend or fellowman” (more commonly rendered "neighbor" in the English translations) (ref. 19:16-18). The utilization of these terms clarifies that ‘others’ are equal to one’s- self, and therefore should be treated accordingly. In verse 17, there is also an instruction of commission, relating to the action should take when the need arises to reprimand or rebuke his fellow man (rather than accumulate hatred and bitterness). If "open rebuke is better than love carefully concealed” (Prov. 25:7), how much more does this apply when hate is the option? One is not to nurse vengeance nor bear a grudge against one's own people, logically leading to the highest dictum; that one is to love one's fellow man as one's self (v.18). Again, this is sealed by "I am YHVH."

The tending of trees in YHVH's Promised Land - which for the first three years were to be considered “uncircumcised” – “arelim,” and in the fourth are to be “praises to YHVH" - “hiluleem,” as well as prohibitions concerning all pagan idolatrous customs, ensue next. However, "I am YHVH" does not seal the passage before the mention of the honor due the elderly. The next cluster deals with the sojourner, because of the Israelites’ own experience in Egypt. Chapter 19 ends with the injunction for utilizing strictly honest and just measurements, as befitting a Nation of a just Elohim. "You shall observe all My statutes and all My judgments, and perform them…" forms the ending of chapter 19 (v. 37), to which we must append 18:5 (of the previous Parasha), where it says…”which if a man does, he shall live by them: I am YHVH.” It is no wonder, therefore, that the Renewed Covenant's mandate is to do just that – to enable His People to live out this Torah of Life (or life of Torah) through Him Who is the very Giver of Life.

Chapter 20 echoes chapter 18 (in Parashat Acharey Mot), in dealing largely with various forms of incest, forbidden forms of cohabitation, and abominable sexual practices, which are described by the phrase, “exposing the nakedness” (again, nakedness is tantamount to not having a “covering” – “kippur”). “Nakedness” here is “erva” of the root a.r.h. (ayin, resh, hey). A similar word, stemming from the root, a.r.r (ayin, resh, resh), that means “stripped” and also “childless” is “ariri,” (e.g. Gen. 15:2; Is. 23:13) [1]. Thus, in verse 20, we read, “And if a man shall lie with his uncle's wife, he has uncovered his uncle's nakedness - erva. They shall bear their sin. They shall die bereft of children – arireem” (italics added). This makes evident the fruitlessness and lifelessness of sin, and symbolizes the fact that sin results only in death (childlessness).

[1] The New Brown, Driver, Briggs, Gesenius Lexicon, Francis Brown Hendrickson.
Publishers, Peabody, Mass. 1979.

Hebrew Insights into Parashat Acharey Mot – Vayikra (Leviticus) 16-18

2011-04-14T09:57:00.003-05:00

Hebrew Insights into Parashat Acharey Mot – Vayikra (Leviticus) 16-18

The first part of Parashat Acharey Mot describes the procedure of the High Priest's "drawing close" to YHVH. The opening verse, "Now YHVH spoke to Moses after the death [“acharey mot”] of the two sons of Aaron, when they drew close to YHVH, and died" (Lev. 16:1, literal translation, emphasis and italics added) stresses "drawing close" to YHVH and, conversely, "dying". Thus, in verse 2 we read, "Tell Aaron… not to come at any time into the Holy Place inside the veil, before the mercy seat which is on the ark, lest he die…(italics added)." This is the solemn opening of the long and detailed account of the necessary preparation and sanctification process, culminating with…"This shall be a statute forever for you: In the seventh month, on the tenth day of the month, you shall afflict your souls, and do no work at all… For on that day the priest shall make atonement for you, to cleanse you that you may be clean from all your sins before YHVH. It is a Sabbath of solemn rest for you, and you shall afflict your souls. It is a statute forever. This shall be an everlasting statute for you, to make atonement for the children of Israel, for all their sins, once a year" (16: 29-31, 43). Without actually pronouncing the term, it is, of course, the description of Yom Kippur. But rather than introducing Yom Kippur and its purpose, timing and varying procedures, the text first deals with the rightful process of entering the Holy of Holies. As this theme continues to unfold gradually, inductively, the ultimate purpose is exposed to the light.

Verse 2 contains the expression…"inside the veil before the mercy seat." In Parashat Truma (Exodus 25-27:19) we learnt that the "mercy sit" is “kaporet” (of the root k.p/f.r - "cover"). The veil, of the root p.r.ch (pey, resh, kaf/chaf) meaning "a shrine" [1], is made up of the same letters and is “parochet.” The rest of verse 2 says: "I will appear in the cloud above the mercy seat." Thus the two renditions of mercy seat and the mention of the veil all in the same verse make for an alliteration (kaporet and parochet, made up of the same letters), a fact which underscores the position of the mercy seat, being within the veil where the High Priest may enter only under very strict and special conditions.

After personally readying himself and making a sin offering as atonement for himself and his household, the High Priest is to take two male goats, which he is to obtain from the congregation. These two are to be placed "in front of YHVH" at the opening of the Tent of Meeting where lots are to be cast for them, "one lot for YHVH and one lot for Aza'zel" (ref. 16:5 - 10). The goats mentioned here are “s'eerim” ("hairy ones", sa'eer = "hairy"). The casting of lots is "goral," which is of the root g.r.l. (gimmel, resh, lamed), meaning "stone or stony place," since the lots were stones shaken after being put into a piece of cloth or a container [2]. Thus, in Matthew 27:35 we read the following about Yeshua: "Then they crucified Him, and divided His garments, casting lots, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, 'They divided My garments among them, And for My clothing they cast lots'" (Ps. 22:18). In the same chapter of Matthew (v. 15-17 and 21b) we read the following: "Now at the Feast the governor was accustomed to releasing to the multitude one prisoner whom they wished. And at that time they had a notorious prisoner called Bar Abba (Barabbas). Therefore, when they had gathered together, Pilate said to them, 'Whom do you want me to release to you? Bar Abba, or Yeshua who is called Messiah?' They said, 'Bar Abba!'" Thus the verdict was pronounced. The goat on which YHVH's lot fell was to be a sin offering, as it is written, "Elohim by sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, on account of sin: He condemned sin in the flesh" (Rom. 8:3). The other goat was to be for Aza'zel, with “azal” probably meaning "entire removal"[3], and was to be sent to the wilderness by the hand of a suitable "eeti,"meaning “timely”; "et" = the "right or appointed time") person (ref. vs. 21). Thus, Yeshua Bar Abba (Aramaic, “son of the father”) the criminal and counterfeit of Yeshua the Son of the Father, stood in proxy, as it were, for the goat that was allowed to live for the purpose of being sent to the wilderness, or “eretz grzera” ("land of separation," 18 :22) with all the sins and iniquities. And while the unrepentant Bar Abba was separated from the Father by his sins (ref. Is 59:2), Pilate was the timely person who facilitated the whole prophetic process and scenario.

Whereas chapter 16 began with a strong exhortation and command to the High Priest regarding time, place and procedures of coming before YHVH, chapter 17 enjoins the ordinary people not to sacrifice according to their own whims, lest they should be suspect of sacrificing to idols. And so we read in 17:7: "They shall no more offer their sacrifices to demons, after whom they have played the harlot." The word used there for "demons" is “s'eerim” again, the word that we have just encountered in the previous chapter for “male goats.” Goat worship prevailed in Egypt and it is thought that the demons worshipped there were in the form of male goats. [4] And as we see quite often in the Hebraic mindset and world, in the very essence of the transgression the solution is already provided (such as the word “chet” – sin – illustrates, as “hitcha’t’oot,” of the same root, is purification). Here we see that for the sin of serving the goat/deemon – s’eer – a provision has already been made by the usage of two goats (s’eerim).

Parashat Acharey Mot is made up of four sections. Aside from the part which leads up to Yom Kippur, and the section regarding the right place for the offerings, there are two more sections concerning the prohibitions of eating meat with blood, and incest. In the four sections, all so different from one another, one phrase is repeated like a refrain. Let us read the verses where this repeated verse is found: "In the seventh month, on the tenth day of the month, you shall afflict your souls, and do no work at all, whether a native of your own country or a stranger who dwells among you" (16:29 italics added). "This shall be a statute forever for them throughout their generations. Also you shall say to them, ‘Whatever man of the house of Israel, or of the strangers who dwell among you, who offers a burnt offering or sacrifice’…" (17:7-8 italics added). "And every person who eats what died naturally or what was torn by beasts, whether he is a native of your own country or a stranger…” (17:15 italics added). Finally, "You shall therefore keep My statutes and My judgments, and shall not commit any of these abominations, either any of your own nation or any stranger who dwells among you" (18:26 italics added).

"Stranger" is “ger,” and originates from the root “gur” (gimmel, vav, resh), meaning "to dwell, to tarry, or sojourn," as well as “to fear (see Ps. 22:23 for example). ”The importance of empathizing with the less fortunate, the weak and vulnerable is not only emphasized in this portion, but is repeated a number of times in several of the other Torah portions. The very essence of “ger” is not a mere stranger, but one who receives protection, because of his obvious vulnerability, from the community in which he abides.

The last section of Parashat Ahcarey Mot deals, as mentioned, with the prohibitions against incest and other sexual offences. Following the long list of specific details, YHVH admonishes Yisrael thusly: "Do not defile yourselves with any of these things; for by all these the nations are defiled, which I am casting out before you. For the land is defiled; therefore I visit the punishment of its iniquity upon it…" (18:24). According to Torah, when one comes in contact with anything which is (ritually) unclean, one is contaminated by it. The converse, however, is not true; i.e., coming in contact with that which is holy does not render one ‘automatically’ holy. In accordance with that verse, the Land itself is likewise subject to spiritual contamination by reason of the practices of its inhabitants, with the resulting consequences that “the land [will] vomit you out also when you defile it, as it vomited out the nations that were before you" (18:28). The following Parasha (Kdoshim) closes off with the same warning, as part of the command to stay separate (ref. 20:22).

Although the bulk of our Parasha deals with the type of precepts which could very easily turn into mere rituals and habits practiced mindlessly, we find the following in 16:30: "For on this day He shall make atonement for you, to cleanse you; for all your sins, before YHVH you shall be cleansed." The latter part of the verse which says: “before YHVH you shall be cleansed," may also be read, “before YHVH you shall be purified,” or “you shall purify yourselves.” Here then is the fervent call to appropriate by faith the atonement enacted by the Almighty, forming also an appropriate introduction to Parashat Kdoshim.

[1] Notice the "k" and "ch" here denote the same letter, i.e. "kaf".
[2] The New Brown, Driver, Briggs, Gesenius Lexicon, Francis Brown Hendrickson.
Publishers, Peabody, Mass. 1979.
[3] Ibid.
[4] Online Bible, Gill Commentary

Hebrew Insights into Parashat Metzo’rah – Vayikra (Leviticus) 14 - 15

2011-04-06T05:14:00.006-05:00

Hebrew Insights into Parashat Metzo’rah – Vayikra (Leviticus) 14 - 15

Parashat Metzo'rah forms a sequel to Parashat Tazri'a and is defined by the words…"the Torah of the leper for the day of his cleansing" (Lev. 14:2). Just as it was the priest who diagnosed the state of leprosy, it is only he who could now determine if "the affliction - or plague - of leprosy is healed" (v. 3 literal translation, emphasis added). This “affliction” or “plague” (which some of the English translations omit and in others, it is “plague” or “infection”) is “nega.” It stems from the root n.g.a (noon, gimmel, ayin), with the primary meaning being "to touch." The most famous 'touch' in Scripture that had a significant influence on all the afflictions we are dealing with here is found in B’resheet (Genesis) 3:3: "But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, Elohim has said, `You shall not eat it, nor shall you touch it, lest you die'" (italics added). The Children of Yisrael were likewise charged not to touch Mount Chorev (Ex. 19:12,13). The root n.g.a is found also in Yisha’yahu (Isaiah) 53:4 and 8, where it says about Messiah, "We esteemed Him stricken [nagu'ah], and "for the transgressions of My people He was stricken [nega]" (emphasis added). Thus, His affliction on our behalf becomes the healing touch for all of our “n’ga’eem” (plural for “nega” – affliction), which were brought forth by the initial ‘touch’ in the Garden.

Referring back to the person being cleansed…it is now incumbent upon him to take two living and clean birds, cedar wood, scarlet and hyssop for his offering. One of the birds was to be killed in an earthen vessel over “living” ('running,' in English) water. The living bird is to be taken with the cedar wood, the scarlet and the hyssop, all of which are to be dipped in the blood of the dead bird, over “living” ('running') water (ref. 14:4-6). Interestingly, "living" is mentioned four times in this short passage. "Scarlet" in Hebrew is “tola'at shani,” which is literally a "worm of scarlet" (i.e. the worm from which the dye was extracted). Incidentally, in Parashat F’kudey (Ex. 38:21-40) the term “worm of scarlet” – tola’at shani – was rendered scarlet thread – signifying the blood of the atonement and was mentioned along with the gold, the blue and the purple. The mention of the worm may denote a very humble status (e.g. Ps. 22:6; Is. 41:14). “Hyssop” is the translation (actually a form of transliteration) of “ezov,” symbolic of the lowliest of plants, especially when compared to the cedar. In Mlachim Alef (I Kings) 5: 13 we read: "…from the cedar tree of Lebanon even to the hyssop that springs out of the wall." In contrast to the worm and the hyssop, the cedar symbolizes grandeur and eminence. Next, the earthen vessel also connotes humility (e.g. "we have this treasure in earthen vessels" 2nd Cor. 4:7). Whether this combination of the lowly with the lofty denotes different types of individuals, or whether it is pointing to the characteristics within the individual (who is to reform from the sin of pride and haughtiness and become humble and submissive), is an issue that has been hotly debated. However, regardless of the answer to this question, in order for a state of cleanliness to be declared, the bird's blood must be sprinkled seven times on the person undergoing the purification.

In the course of the cleansing process, the priest had to go outside the camp to the place where the afflicted person was quarantined (v. 8). In the previous Parasha we noted that the phrase "outside the camp" (“the city, or “the gate”), has a dual connotation. In Vayikra (Leviticus) 4:12 and 6:11, we find "a clean place outside the camp." Here in 14:40, 41, and 45 there is reference to "an unclean place outside the city." Both places are singled out, and are in fact related. The priest who goes outside the camp comes in contact with the unclean, or afflicted person, much like our High Priest who (in order to cleanse us) had to come to our contaminated world so that we could join Him "outside [His] camp" (ref. Heb. 13:13).

On the “eighth day,” after the seven day watch (ref. v. 13,14) and the concurrent bodily purging, the person undergoing the cleansing comes forth with his offerings. Notice, this selfsame individual goes through a ritual similar to the dedication for service of A’haron and his sons (cf. Ex. 29:20-21; Lev. 8:23, 24). And thus we read: "The priest shall take some of the blood of the trespass offering, and the priest shall put it on the tip of the right ear of him who is to be cleansed, on the thumb of his right hand, and on the big toe of his right foot…And of the rest of the oil in his hand, the priest shall put some on the tip of the right ear of him who is to be cleansed, on the thumb of his right hand, and on the big toe of his right foot, on the blood of the trespass offering” (v. 14;17, ref. also v. 25-28). Atonement is thus granted, as well as anointing for 'hearing,' 'doing,' and 'walking' (see Hebrew Insights into Parashat Tetzaveh (Exodus 27:20 – 30:10, particularly 29:20).

Since quite a substantial offering was being expected of the person being cleansed, provision was made "if he is poor and cannot afford it…" (14:21). "Cannot afford" is expressed by a typical picturesque idiom…"his hand is unable to reach," since "hand reaching" (of this type), denotes financial well being. "To reach," stemming from the root n.s.g (noon. sin, gimmel), also means "to pursue, or overtake."

"When you have come into the land of Canaan, which I give [“natan”] you as a possession, and I put [literally “give”, natan ] the leprous plague [“nega”, referred to above] in a house in the land of your possession…" (14:34), is a non-ambiguous declaration that shows clearly that the cause of the “nega” (which, as we noticed last week was not a mere ‘natural phenomenon’) is YHVH Himself, although, it should be carefully noted that the above is dealing specifically with a built up structure. The usage of the verb “natan,” employed here twice for “give” and "put," reinforces both YHVH's involvement in the matter, and the fact that He is also its primary cause. A house so plagued is to be "emptied out" of its content (v. 36) -“pina,” of the root p.n.h (pey, noon, hey, meaning "to turn"), is the verb used here. In Parashat Trumah (Ex. 25:10-30), we have already encountered p.n.h, in relationship to the "showbread" ("bread of the face") and the faces of the cherubim placed on the Ark of the Covenant. In the course of "emptying out" the house there is a “turning” - that is, "making way" and by implication a “clearing” or an “emptying out." The act of emptying out one's house (and taking it apart, if need be, 14:40-45) also has a symbolic meaning. We thus read in 2nd Corinthians 5:1
"For we know that if our earthly house, this tent, is destroyed, we have a building from Elohim, a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens." According to Midrash Rabba 17:7: "And I will put the plague of tza'ra'at in the house of the land of your possession (14:34) - this refers to the Temple." Here is what Malbim, citing another source, has to say about this very thing: "The use of the term venatati [“and I will give”] regarding tza'ra'at prompted Rabbi Yehuda to consider the plague in a positive light as a medium for the elimination of sin and iniquity". [1] However, this passage not only deals with the tza'ra'at which pertains to buildings, but also with the type which affects clothing (v. 55), while mentioning other related conditions, namely "a scale, a swelling, a scab, and a bright spot" (ref. v. 54, 56).

"Scale" is “netek,” from the root n.t.k (noon. tav, kof), meaning “to pull off, draw, disconnect, or remove." Ee’yov (Job) laments: "…my purposes are broken off – “nitku”…” (Job 17:11 italics added). And again, "my tent is plundered, all my chords are broken…” (Jer. 10:20, italics added). The swelling is called “s'et,” of the root n.s.a (noon, sin, alef), meaning "to lift, carry or hold up." S'et, as such, according to B.D.B Lexicon is "exaltation, dignity or swelling". [2] Ee’yov (Job - 41:25), speaking of Leviathan, says: "When he raises himself up, the mighty are afraid" (italics added). “Scab” is the translation of “sapa'chat,” which is of the root s.f.ch (samech, fey, chet), meaning "to join, or add." It can also refer to that which is overgrown. In Chavakuk (Habakkuk) 12:15 we read, "Woe to him who gives drink to his neighbor, joining him to your wineskin, even to make him drunk, that you may look on his nakedness!” (Italics added). Finally, the "bright spot" is “baheret,” of the root b.h.r (bet, hey, resh), which means "bright or brilliant," used almost exclusively in relationship to a physical condition. However, one reference in Ee’yov (Job) 37:21 seems to indicate a light so bright that men cannot look at it.

Lining up the terms, according to their respective connotations, will create the following picture: A breaking, or removal (possibly from the Almighty) will lead to the attitude of loftiness resulting in rebelliousness and pride, followed by wrong attachments, and from there the path is open to what may appear as effulgence, but is nothing more than a blinding false light. The entire body of instructions is finalized by the words "…to teach on the day of the unclean, and on the day of cleansing; this is the Torah of the tza'ra'at" (v. 57, literal translation). Thus, this long passage, which starts in verse 34, is solely for the purpose of teaching (“le'horot”) the Torah (as it pertains to the issue at hand). Torah impartation, therefore, is what it takes to counteract the sequence portrayed above and its dismal results.

The next section of the Parasha (chapter 15) deals with unclean discharges omitted by the body (which are the natural outcome of the sequel of conditions described above). "This was an emblem of the corruption of nature, and of all evil things that are in or flow out of the evil heart of man, which are defiling to him"[3] (see Mat. 15:18).

"If a woman has a discharge of blood for many days, other than at the time of her customary impurity [her regular menstrual cycle], or if it runs beyond her usual time of impurity, all the days of her unclean discharge shall be as the days of her customary impurity. She shall be unclean [for as long as she has the discharge]…
Whoever touches those things [which she has handled] shall be unclean…" (15:25, 27). This injunction makes the episode recorded in the Gospels, of Yeshua healing the woman with the issue of blood, most remarkable (ref. Matt. 9:18-26; Mark 5:25-34, Luke 8:40-56)! Yeshua does not appear to be alarmed by the fact that an unclean woman has touched him. In fact, He does not even refer to her as such. As much as Yeshua respected the regulations of Torah (being the Torah incarnate), it was the Torah of Life and NOT the “letter” which He advocated and practiced. Yeshua ministered the life of the (Re)New(ed) Covenant, as defined by 2nd Corinthians 3:6: A "new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life."

Toward the end of Parashat Metzora we read: “So you shall cause the sons of Israel to be estranged – vehizartem, root of zar, stranger, foreigner - from their uncleanness, so that they do not die in their uncleanness when they defile My dwelling place that is among them” (15:31, literal translation). As those who form the abode of YHVH, the Israelites are to be “strangers” to uncleanliness. These words truly encapsulate the spirit of the Torah injunctions; a spirit that the Elohim of Yisrael wishes to bestow upon His people.

[1] New Studies in Vayikra Part 1, Nechama Leibowitz, trans. Aryeh Newman.
Eliner Library, Department for Torah Education and Culture in the
Diaspora.Hemed Books Inc., Brooklyn, N.Y.

[2] The New Brown, Driver, Briggs, Gesenius Lexicon, Francis Brown Hendrickson.
Publishers, Peabody, Mass. 1979.

[3] Gill Commentary, Online Bible

Hebrew Insights into Parashat Tazri'a –Vayikra (Leviticus) 12-13

2011-03-30T00:53:00.000-05:00

Hebrew Insights into Parashat Tazri'a –Vayikra (Leviticus) 12-13 Aside from dealing with the purification rites of a post birth woman, the beginning part of Parashat Tazri'a also touches on the eighth day circumcision (12:3). Last week's Parasha was called "Shmini," meaning "eighth." And while the bulk of Parashat “Tazri'a” deals with regulations of "tzarat" (leprosy and similar skin diseases), it is the next Parasha which bears the name of the leper ("Me'tzorah"). Thus, even when there appears to be no connection between two successive Parashot (plural of Parasha), one is often threaded into the other (even if it is only by a very thin cord). That, however, will be not true of (next week's). Parashat Me'tzorah, which forms a sequel to this present one and is therefore very closely related to it.

"If a woman conceives seed [literal translation] and gives birth to a male child, then she shall be unclean seven days…" (12:2). "Conceives seed" is "tazri'a," after which our Parasha is named, is a very unusual form for "becoming pregnant," since its root word "zera" - z.r.a. - (zayin, resh, ayin) is "seed" or "semen" (and by implication also "offspring"). S.R. Hirsch translates it: "When a woman has matured a human germ…" and goes on to comment: "Germ, basically the seed of plants and hence herb-yielding seed (Gen. 1:11), the seed-forming activity of plants for the continuation of their species, when applied to human beings is the usual term for the offspring by which Man continues his generation. By the use of the expression "tazri'a" here, which only occurs in B’resheet (Genesis) 1:11 and 12, referring to the activity of plants for the continuation of their species, the mother's role in producing progeny is looked at in the purely material physical character of its physiological process, and with that one word the whole idea of the uncleanness spoken of here is shown,"[1] In this manner Hirsch also provides one of several answers supplied to the question, "Why should a mother be declared 'unclean' for fulfilling a Divinely-ordained mission?" The sages especially question the need for a sin offering. [2] The expression "tazri'a," however, brings to mind not only B’resheet (Genesis) 1:11 and 12, as Hirsch points out, but is also reminiscent of the usage of the term "zera," “seed” in B’resheet 3:15, where there is reference to the "Seed of the woman" Who is destined to crush the head of the serpent (ref. Gal. 3:16). The seven initial days of the woman's "impurity" are comparable to the week of impurity during the menstrual cycle (see Lev. 15:19).

"When the days of her purification are fulfilled, whether for a son or a daughter, she shall bring to the priest a lamb of the first year as a burnt offering, and a young pigeon or a turtledove as a sin offering, to the door of the tabernacle of meeting" (12:6). The burnt offering, according to some of the sages, was a token of thankfulness to the Almighty for having preserved her through the labor pains and hazards, and for having been granted the strength to bear a child. "The new life within her made [the mother] deeply conscious of the greatness of the creator, as also of her insignificance as 'dust and ashes' and impurity; hence the need for a sin-offering."[3]

The sin offering may be linked to the fact that we are "brought forth in iniquity, and in sin my mother conceived me" (Ps. 51:5), as expressed by David, who was not singling out his own mother as a sinner for having conceived him, but was emphasizing the fact that man's inherent sin nature is hereditary, and simply passes through the blood line. The fact that it is transmitted from generation to generation is illustrated by what we have already observed, that contained in man is the seed for the perpetuity of his (sinful) race, and thus the fruit will resemble the parent plant. The unusual usage of "tazri'a" could therefore be the clue to unraveling the 'mystery' of the mother's "impurity" after giving birth, and the requirement of a sin offering. Incidentally, Miriam, Yeshua's mother, did likewise (ref. Luke 2:24), even though her son's conception had been totally different. In this case, following the Torah ruling was most likely performed in the same vein as Yeshua's immersion, which was for the purpose of "fulfilling all righteousness" (Mat. 3:15). The usage of "seed" in connection to bearing an offspring, therefore, underscores the heredity nature of sinfulness. Thus, the "Seed of the woman" (Gen. 3:15) is a reminder that the sinless Seed will likewise be propagated after His own kind.

In one breath with the birth of "a male," mention is also made of the eighth day circumcision. When we reviewed Parashat Shmini mention was made of the significance of the figure “eight” which stems from the root sh.m.n, being the root for “fat” (hence “oil - shemen"), following the fullness of seven ("sheva"), thereby indicating an overabundance (at times with negative connotations, such as "and Yeshurun waxed fat…" Deut. 32:15, emphasis added). The eighth day circumcision also indicates that it takes precedence over Shabbat, and a child who is born on Friday, notwithstanding, will be circumcised on the following Shabbat. Take note, in this respect, of the connection between the “seventh day” and the “eighth”.

The next part of the Parasha (chapter 13) is also devoted to issues of purity and impurity, this time related to skin diseases, as well as to contaminated houses and clothes. Since dealing with this variety of conditions was up to the priests' discernment, they are the ones mentioned, and it is therefore A'haron who is addressed here (whereas he was not mentioned in the first part of the Parasha). The various conditions described and elaborated upon all come under the general heading of "tza'ra'at" (tz.r.a, tzadi, resh, ayin). Another word which stems from the same root is "tzir'ah", meaning “hornet”. Both "tza'ra'at" and "tzir'ah" appear to be used symbolically, as we see for example in Shmot (Exodus) 23:28: "And I will send hornets before you, which shall drive out the Hivite, the Canaanite, and the Hittite from before you" (for a similar reference to hornets refer to Deut. 7:20 and Josh. 24:12).

The root tz.r.a. means “project outward.” If the sins committed, which result in this affliction, are mostly done in secret, then this condition reveals them, whether on one’s body, clothing or home. Doesn’t that illustrate each of our lives? We may think, contemplate or even say something secretly, thinking that we can hide away our iniquity. However, YHVH sees all, not to mention the fact that affliction, of one form or another, is “built into” the action of sin, and especially it affects our bodies. Anything, which is not of the nature of the One who indwells us is constituted sin, and thus, by not being conformed to the new life that now indwells us we bring on ourselves plagues and malaise, and every form of dis-ease.

The New Brown, Driver, Briggs, Gesenius Lexicon defines the root verb "tza'ro'a" as "to throw down, prostrate, humble oneself"[4]. The various forms of "tzara'at" certainly placed the one declared as contaminated in a humbling, if not a humiliating state, described in verses 45 and 46: "Now the leper on whom the sore is, his clothes shall be torn and his head bare; and he shall cover his mustache, and cry, `Unclean! Unclean!' He shall be unclean. All the days he has the sore he shall be unclean. He is unclean, and he shall dwell alone; his dwelling shall be outside the camp." The word for "unclean" is "tameh" (t.m.a, tet, mem, alef) with its literal meaning being "ritually polluted."

The concept, "outside the camp," like many others in Scripture, is twofold. Whereas here the "tameh" is separated from the community, in Shmot (Exodus) 33:7, after the Golden Calf episode we read: "Moses took his tent and pitched it outside the camp, far from the camp, and called it the tabernacle of meeting. And it came to pass that everyone who sought YHVH went out to the tabernacle of meeting which was outside the camp" (italics added). Likewise, in Hebrews 13:12-13: "Therefore Yeshua also, that He might sanctify the people with His own blood, suffered outside the gate. Therefore let us go forth to Him, outside the camp, bearing His reproach."

The latter part of chapter 13 deals with “tzra’at” as it contaminates leather or cloths (v. 47-59). Several times mention is made of “sh’ti va’erev,” that is, the “warp and woof” of the cloth (the threads woven lengthwise and crosswise). The woof which is threaded through the warp is thought of as being “mixed in,” and is therefore designated by the well known term “erev” (ayin, resh, vet), that we have been following in many instances, but primarily in the word for “evening,” which is a state of light being mixed with darkness.

Nechama Leibowitz concludes: "According to most commentators tzara'at is not a common disease, but supernatural infliction by Divine Providence through which man is reminded of his sinful ways, and called upon to abandon them". The appended footnote says: "It is noteworthy that medical research fails to associate the Biblical tzara'at with any known disease. Its diagnosis as leprosy is rejected by modern medicine". Earlier she pointed out that plagues in general had a special role as warning signs against sinful behavior [5], or were its consequences (e.g. 2nd Sam. 24:1, 15; 2nd Ch. 26:16-21).

[1] New Studies in Vayikra Part 1, Nechama Leibowitz, trans. Aryeh Newman. Eliner Library, Department for Torah Education and Culture in the Diaspora. Hemed Books Inc., Brooklyn, N.Y.
[2] Ibid
[3] Ibid
[4] The New Brown, Driver, Briggs, Gesenius Lexicon, Francis Brown Hendrickson, Publishers Peabody, Mass. 1979.
[5] New Studies

Hebrew Insights into Parashat Fkudey – Sh’mot (Exodus) 38:21- 40

2011-02-27T22:37:00.000-06:00

Hebrew Insights into Parashat Fkudey – Sh’mot (Exodus) 38:21- 40

Parashat Fkudey, the last in the book of Sh’mot, continues to elaborate on the inventory of materials for the Mishkan and on the priests’ official garments. “Fkudey” means, “which was counted,”or “this is the inventory.” But it is not only the Mishkan’s inventory which is counted or inventoried; the term is also applied here to the congregation itself (38:25, “pkudey ha’eda” – “those of the congregation who were numbered”). The meaning of the root p.k.d. aside from counting, visiting and commanding, originates with “invest with purpose or responsibility”1 Thus in last week’s Parashat Va’yakhel emphasis was placed on the congregation as a “kahal”, a crowd, a mass, host, whose parts (namely the individuals who make it up) have no significance in and of themselves. But the term “fkudey,” on the other hand, stresses the fact that the congregation has no existence apart from the individuals who make it up. Thus, each and every one has been “visited” and “counted” in order to make the half shekel payment (ref. 38:25,26).2

In 39:32, we read the following: "And all the work of the tabernacle of the congregation was finished (“vate’chal”), and the sons of Israel did according to all which YHVH commanded Moses; so they did” (emphasis added). In B’resheet (Genesis) 2:1 we read: “And the heavens and the earth were finished (va’ya’chulu), and all the host of them. And Elohim finished (va’y’chal) His work which He had made…” (italics added). Here is yet another parallel to the Creation process, found also in 39:43 where it says: “And Moses saw (“va’yar”) all the work, and behold they had done it…. and Moses blessed them.” This may be compared to the oft-repeated “and Elohim saw…“ (in B’resheet 1) and also to B’resheet 1:28, where in reference to the creation of man and woman it says, “and He blessed them” (emphasis added). In 40:33 we read, “And he raised up the court all around the tabernacle and the altar, and hung up the screen of the court gate. So Moses finished (va’yechal) the work (m’lacha) (emphasis added).” Compare to B’resheet (Genesis) 2:2: “And on the seventh day Elohim ended (va’yechal) His work (m’lacha) which He had done.”

In the opening verse we come across the expression “tabernacle of the testimony”, echoed in 40:3 by the “ark of the testimony,” whereas in Parashat Ki Tissa (34:20) we encountered the “tablets of the testimony.” “Testimony” is “edut,” which is “a witness” or “evidence. Thus, the reason for the existence of the Mishkan, the ark and that which it contained (that is the “tablets”) appears to be in order to validate YHVH’s covenant with His people. “Ed,” witness, and “edut,” testimony, witness or evidence, originate with the root ayin, vav, dalet (“ud”), whose primal meaning is to “endure, continue, repeat”, and by implication to “establish
facts”3 “Od” is therefore, “more and continually” and “ad” is “perpetuity”, while “edot” are YHVH’s “decrees”. Thus, the witnesses (whether human, inanimate objects, decrees, or even Time itself) are incorporated into the perpetual and firm arrangement which they are testifying to, in this case YHVH’s Covenant.

In Parashat Trumah (Ex. 25:27:19) we examined the association of the shape of the Menorah to the flora of the Land of Israel. A similar relationship is thought to exist here too. ”And he gave the table into the tabernacle of the congregation, on the side of the tabernacle, northward outside the veil; And he put the lampstand in the tabernacle of the congregation, opposite the table, on the side of the tabernacle southward…” (40:22, 24, emphases added). The placing of these articles in the directions specified above was not coincidental.

The fifty day period between Pesach and Shavu'ot is when the flowers of the olive open and the kernels of wheat and barley fill with starch. Thus, the productive fate of these crops is determined during that season which [in the land of Israel] is characterized by multiple changes and climatic contrasts. Scorching southern winds, which bring with them extreme dryness and heat, alternate with cold winds from the north and west which generate tempestuous storms containing thunder, lightning and rain. The northern wind is most beneficial to the wheat, if it blows during the wheat's early stages of ripening; yet the same wind can wreak havoc on the olive crop if the buds have already opened into flowers. Olive blossoms need successive days of dry heat. Both of these crops then require just the proper balance of the heat waves and cold northern winds, making the fifty day season (the ‘Omer counting’) a very important and yet precarious season. The Talmudic sages explained that this phenomenon is symbolized by placing "the table in the north and the Menorah in the south". The showbread, which represents the wheat and barley, faced the direction of the north wind. The Menorah, lit with olive oil, faced the direction of the southern wind. Placed together in the Holy Place, they symbolize the plea to the One Creator that each wind would come at the right time.4

Obviously it is only YHVH Who is able to hold all the elements of His Creation in the perfect balance required. Thus, He is seen using (more than once) the Land of Yisrael and the variety of its natural conditions as an instrument for building and maintaining the relationship with His People, as well as for instructing and chastising them. And, as we have already observed, this concept is implemented well before the Israelites even enter the Land of Promise!

Last week’s Va’yakhel and this week’s Fkudey complement one another. Whereas last week we were informed about the making of the vessels of the Mishkan, whereas this week their content and meaning are ‘poured’ into them: The tablets are placed into the Ark of the Covenant, the bread is laid on the Table of Showbread, the wicks are lit in the Menorah and the incense is burned5. We are also informed, of course, in detail about the making of the vestments of those who were to officiate in YHVH’s abode, i.e. the priests. Interestingly, the materials used for these garments -“gold, blue, purple, and scarlet and the fine woven linen” - were also used in the making of the tent itself.

Among the various parts of the high priest’s regalia was “the plate of the holy crown of pure gold” and on it “an inscription like the engraving of a signet: HOLINESS TO YHVH” (28:39:30 ). In 39:6 we read, similarly, about the two onyx stones that were placed on the high priest’s shoulders, with the names of the tribes etched on them. In this way, the high priest would approach YHVH on behalf of His people. “An engraving of a signet” is rendered “pituchey chotam”- literally “the engravings of a seal.” Digging a little deeper, we discover that whereas “chotam” is a seal, “pituchey” (engravings of…) originates from the root p.t.ch (peh, tav, chet) meaning “to open” or “opening.” So, how is it that a “seal” and an “opening” signify the onyx stones as well as the engraving upon the high priest’s crown? Do these two seemingly opposing terms allude to something beyond that which meets the eye? In Revelation Chapter 5 Yeshua is seen worthy of opening a special “book” and breaking its seals. What was it that enabled Yeshua to carry out this most important task, which no one else could execute? That which qualified Him to open the seals was what He had accomplished by having given up His life, redeeming for His Father those who are to be kings and priests, who would reign on earth and are sealed on their foreheads (Revelation 7:4). Thus, our High Priest is seen standing before the Father with the proverbial onyx stones on His shoulders and the golden band with “Holiness unto YHVH” on His forehead. Qualifying to open the sealed book of redemption, He was displaying His ultimate task of presenting to His Father those whom He had purchased by His blood, having enabled them to be “the sealed servants of Elohim” (Revelation 7:3).

1 Etymological Dictionary of Biblical Hebew, based on the commentaties of Samsom Raphael
Hirsch, Matityahu Clark, Feldheim Publishers, Jerusalem, - New York, 1999.
2 http://www.kipa.co.il/pash/
3 Etymological Dictionary of Biblical Hebew
4 Nature in Our Biblical Heritage, Nogah Hareuveni, trans. Helen Frenkley, Neot Kdumim
Ltd. Lod, Israel, 1996.
5 http://www.kipa.co.il/pash/