Beshallach - the Heart of the Matter

B"H

Full text here as usual.

1) Midrash Tanchuma Beshallach, Chapter 17

הים לא היה לו לב וניתן לו לב. האלה לא היה לה לב וניתן לה לב, שנאמר, עודנו חי בלב האלה (ש"ב יח יד). השמים לא היה להן לב וניתן להן לב, שנאמר, וההר בוער באש עד לב השמים (דברי' ד יא). יבא הים שלא היה לו לב ונתן לו לב, ויפרע מן המצרים שהיה להם לב ושעבדו ישראל בכל מיני פורעניות. תבא האלה שלא היה לה לב ונתן לה לב, ויפרע מאבשלום שהיה לו לב, וגנב שלש לבבות, לב אביו ולב בית דין ולבב אנשי ישראל, ויבואו השמים שלא היה להן לב ונתן להם לב, ויורידו המן לישראל שיש להן לב וקבלו את התורה בכל לב ואהבו את קונם בכל לב

 

2) Rashi on Shemot 15:8

בלב ים: בחוזק הים, ודרך המקראות לדבר כן (דברים ד יא) עד לב השמים, (שמואל ב' יח יד) בלב האלה, לשון עקרו ותקפו של דבר:

3) Shmuel 18:14

וַיֹּאמֶר יוֹאָב לֹא-כֵן אֹחִילָה לְפָנֶיךָ וַיִּקַּח שְׁלֹשָׁה שְׁבָטִים בְּכַפּוֹ וַיִּתְקָעֵם בְּלֵב אַבְשָׁלוֹם עוֹדֶנּוּ חַי בְּלֵב הָאֵלָה

4) Devarim 4:11

וַתִּקְרְבוּן וַתַּעַמְדוּן תַּחַת הָהָר וְהָהָר בֹּעֵר בָּאֵשׁ עַד-לֵב הַשָּׁמַיִם חֹשֶׁךְ עָנָן וַעֲרָפֶל.

Apologies for the delay...this week's offering is still a bit more 'discursive' than before. I might stick to this style from now on, partially because from Shemot onwards the Torah itself (and therefore the midrashim) seem to be much less character-driven than in Bereishit, which means a different way of interpreting and writing about the midrashim is required. We'll see how it settles down...

Chapter 17 of this week's Midrash Tanchuma focuses on one pasuk from the Song forming the central part of Beshallach - 'kapu tochomot b'lev yam' (the depths froze/congealed in the heart of the sea - Shemot 15:8). The midrash mainly expands on the rather mysterious statement that three natural entities- the Sea of Beshallach, the terebinth/oak tree in which Avshalom dies a rather nasty death dangling by his hair (source 3)*, and the Heavens at the time of matan Torah on Sinai (source 4) - did not originally have a lev (heart) but were given these (presumably by G-d, although this is not specified!). 

Having made this statement, the midrash then goes on to expand upon the reasons why these three entities were given a lev. In the cases of the Sea and the terebinth, this was done in order to punish the Egyptians and Avshalom respectively - the Egyptians drown in the Sea because they had a lev and they enslaved Bnei Yisrael, while Avshalom is speared alive because he deceived his father, the Beth Din (Sanhedrin) and the people of Israel into giving him adherents as part of an attempted coup against his father. However the purpose of the Heavens being given a lev is not to punish, but to reward the Bnei Israel for their acceptance of the Torah and love of G-d 'b'chal lev' by sending down the manna to feed them. 

There are a few odd things here, especially for an English reader. To start with, while we know the Rabbis don't need much of an excuse to hook a nice little homily onto a pasuk, if we are reading in translation one could easily just take the phrase 'b'lev yam' on which the midrash is based as a metaphor for 'in the middle/centre of the sea' without having to explain any further what 'lev' means. So the fact that the midrash feels the need to expand on this suggests that in Hebrew there is a deeper meaning to 'lev' than may be immediately obvious(even for someone reading the text in the original Hebrew rather than in translation). Secondly, the word 'lev' in this midrash is used in the singular throughout, even when being attributed to plural entities e.g. the Heavens, the Egyptians, the Beit Din, the people of Israel. 

Rashi's comments on this pasuk (source 2), which are obviously made with this midrash in mind, explain that the phrase' b'lev...' is a common Biblical idiom referring to the 'root/essence/strength' of something (again, I am relying on translation here!). This interpretation could explain both the deeper meaning of 'lev' and why it might appear in our midrash in the singular - if it is describing the 'essence' of the Egyptians etc. as an entity it would be more appropriate to use the singular than the plural. 

However (thirdly ;-), in explaining why the Sea/terebinth/Heavens were each given a 'lev' the midrash seems to differentiate between simply having a 'lev' and the actions carried out by the person/people having the 'lev' which justified their being rewarded or punished. For example, the Egyptians are punished 'she'hayah lahem lev v'shibdu Yisrael...[my emphasis]'. Rashi's definition of 'lev' does not seem to fit this usage, unless we read the midrash as saying that the essence of the Egyptians/Avshalom/B'nei Israel is in fact their respectively enslaving B'nei Yisrael/deceiving people who trust him/accepting the Torah.**

The other problem is that this way of reading 'lev' as meaning the 'essence' of things means that we are still left with a problem in reading this midrash - howe can it claim that the natural entities of the Sea/terebinth/Heavens started out without a lev but were given these for the purpose of rewarding or punishing people? The fact that these entities do not have a lev to begin with suggests that there is something about having a lev which is intrinsic to human beings and not to natural entities, which instead have to be given it for a reason. 

In order to appreciate the midrash, in addition to Rashi's comments we therefore also have to take into account an ethical facet to lev as being the peculiarly human attribute of free will and the source of choosing between right and wrong. This perhaps also explains the wording of the midrash above - the Egyptians and Avshalom are punished precisely because they have a lev but choose to oppress and deceive others, while the Bnei Israel are rewarded because at Sinai they choose to wholeheartedly (!) accept the Torah and love G-d. The natural entities mentioned in the midrash are therefore given an ethical dimension or lev because of the role they play in punishing or rewarding others - the Sea brings death to the oppressing Egyptians, the Heavens provide life and sustenance to the B'nei Israel. In the most complex example of this, the terebinth in Shmuel Beth practices a form of 'deception' on Avshalom first by trapping him, then by being connected with his staying alive after what should have been a fatal blow through his own lev - not in order to save him, but rather to prolong his suffering before death at the hands of Yoav's soldiers.

The message? Well, the midrash's point is basically homilectical - behave in a certain and G-d will use nature to give you what you deserve. But perhaps just as importantly, this is another example of how a metaphor in Torah is never as simple as it seems...

Shavua tov from snowy London!

RPT

*Basically Avshalom, having been caught in the terebinth by his hair while his mount rides out from underneath him, gets skewered through the heart by Yoav before being set upon by the other soldiers while somehow still remaining alive 'in the heart of the terebinth' after Yoav's blow. Not a nice way to go.

**Fourthly, there is also the oddity of the wording 'v'yipara min ha mitzrim/me'Avshalom' regarding the Egyptians/Avshalom being punished which sounds as if it should be translated as 'from the Egyptians/Avshalom' in some way...however, I don't have a answer for this. Any ideas?