Ha'azinu - Once Upon a Time

  B"H

 

The entire midrash text can be found here - it's Siman 8. It is wayyyy too long to paste below, but please do read before diving in (otherwise none of this will make sense). 

You'll also need to refer to Berachot 31b here. 

All translations below courtesy of Sefaria.

*****************************

Part 1

For as long as I can remember, I've loved the world of folktales, myths and legends. An avid bookworm, I grew up with Greek myths, assorted Scottish/British and international fairytales, and general fantasy literature (I think I was 12 when I tackled Lord of the Rings - this was before the films!). Later, I became a Terry Pratchett fan* and spent most of university diving headlong into folk and folk-rock music - to the extent that the work which inspired this blog in the first place (see here) was basically my way of wangling Pratchett and Fairport Convention into an Oxbridge dissertation**. 

So when I first read this midrash, my inner folkie was dancing a jig. After all, if this were a secular fairytale, there's a bucket-load of tropes to get stuck into. We've got:

• Our heroine, the beautiful, virtuous daughter of a rich man (of course), who is apparently cursed with her grooms always dying on their wedding night***;
  
• A poor, struggling woodcutter relative who happens to have exactly ten sons;
• Our hero, the eldest of the said ten sons, who goes to seek his/his family's fortune, is taken in by his uncle, and takes just one week to fall in love with his rich-but-cursed cousin;
  
• Someone being tricked into swearing to something he never ever would have agreed to otherwise (i.e. the rich man into marrying off his daughter again);
• A mysterious elder (Eliyahu) showing up to advise our hero about the Test (see below);
• A poor beggar dressed in black showing up at the wedding feast, with the Test apparently being for our hero to feed him and show him great honour etc. The beggar turns out to be the Angel of Death, obviously;
  
• Multiple bouts of bargaining with said Angel to try and cheat death.

And after all that - the Angel of Death is defeated, the curse is broken, and they all lived happily ever after. Hooray!

But, but, but - the problem is, this isn't just any old fairytale. This is midrash. And while it may not have precisely the same level of holiness as the Torah itself, it still belongs to the sphere of kodesh, on a different plain from secular literature.**** So while an academic could easily gloss over the difference and treat this midrash as 'Jewish exhibit A' for whichever tropes they want to discuss, I cannot in all conscience go down that route. 

So, what to do?

At this point, I turn to the late Rabbi Sacks zt"l and two ideas of his. The first is his famous saying 'aval zeh shelanu' (but this is ours), from an anecdote about an Israeli fisherman comparing the green hills of England with the landscape of the Kinneret. As fascinating as I may find the folk literature of other peoples or cultures, when it comes to midrash - zeh shelanu. Which, to my mind, also means that to do midrash justice it has to be read in the way it was originally intended - within the framework of the Torah and wider Jewish scriptures. 

But that doesn't mean discounting the wider context of myths and fairytales. In his Haggadah and elsewhere, Rabbi Sacks also advanced a theory - challenging Freud's 'Moses and Monotheism' - that Moshe's 'origin story' is in fact an anti-myth, upturning a classical mythic motif about the birth of heroes to teach us a moral lesson about heroism and royalty. Clearly, for this to work we have to be familiar with the motifs challenged by the Torah in the first place. 

Maybe, just maybe, Rabbi Sacks' approach above could also be applied to our midrash? Let's see. 

Part 2

The midrash opens and closes with the ideas that 'the Holy One, blessed be He, guards those tested by Him, like a man guards the pupil of his eye', (hence the link to Ha'azinu) and that 'the Holy One, blessed be He, guards those that have faith in Him' (notably, the 'faith' here is bitachon - active trust - rather than emunah). Presumably the point of the intervening tale is to prove these points. 

The question is - who exactly is being tested here? And who is shown to trust G-d? After all, we have three possibilities - the bride's father, the bride herself, and the groom. 

 The bride's father can be ruled out fairly easily. Despite appearing at the beginning and end, his actual involvement is minimal - he is tricked into marrying off his daughter to his nephew, throws a big party, then (unsurprisingly) gets up the next morning expecting the worst only to discover a happy ending. Is he tested? Possibly, by risking losing his nephew to his daughter's curse. Does he show trust in G-d? Not really, if he still expects to bury his nephew in the morning.

Then we have our hero, the groom. Is he tested? Yes - first by his own poverty, then by being asked to honour a poor beggar at his wedding feast. Does he show bitachon? Yes - he obeys the advice of our 'mysterious stranger' Eliyahu about how to treat the beggar aka Angel of Death, which can be read as a form of trust. 

But there's a problem. I'm 99.9% sure that if you look up this scenario in the Bumper Book of Mythical Motifs*****, honouring a poor beggar at your wedding feast is going to earn you some serious brownie points. Especially if done on the say so of a mysterious adviser who promises as much. But this doesn't actually change the Angel of Death's mind about bumping off the groom. At the most, it buys him enough time to go and tell his bride what's happening. Which, yes, is what saves him, but it's not the immediate reward we might expect. Could this be an anti-fairytale in the making?

And so we come to our heroine, the bride. Is she tested? Most certainly. Does she show bitachon? Yes - but it's the way she shows this which is key to unlocking our midrash. 

The bride speaks out three times. First, in declaring herself a metaphorical agunah (i.e. not to be married to anyone) until G-d shows her mercy. Second, in praying directly to G-d to bring an end to the curse of her grooms dying. Lastly - and most importantly - in challenging the Angel of Death with the following passage:

"She said to him, "He shall not die now - it is written in the Torah (Deuteronomy 24:5), 'When a man takes a woman for a wife, he shall not go out with the army nor be assigned to it for any purpose; he shall be exempt one year for his household, to rejoice his wife that he has married.' And the Holy One, blessed be He, is true and His Torah is true, but if you take his soul, you will make the Torah a fraud [te'aseh haTorah pelaster]. [So,] if you accept my words, good; but if not, come with me to the great court."

Note the bold italics. 

Within the world of aggadah, there are several examples of Biblical women arguing with G-d to change what appears to be destiny. Rachel and Leah spring to mind, but the most obvious is Hannah. Famously, there is an aggadah (Berachot 31b) where Hannah threatens to turn herself into a sotah - a woman accused of adultery - to force G-d into giving her a child as the stated reward for a sotah who is found innocent. And what do we find Hannah saying here?

"Since I secluded myself, they will force me to drink the sota water to determine whether or not I have committed adultery. I will be found innocent, and since You will not make Your Torah false [v'i atah oseh Toratekha pelaster], I will bear children."

The bold italics here being almost exactly the phrase which the bride uses in our midrash. Which is unlikely to be a coincidence. 

Hannah's prayer is the point at which she changes from passively accepting her fate as a barren wife to actively pleading with G-d on her own behalf, to the point - at least, according to the above aggadah - of blackmailing G-d by holding Him to account against His own Torah. Similarly, our bride's shift from passivity to action in arguing with the Angel of Death is the real turning point in breaking the apparent curse on her - again, by demanding that G-d act in line with the (implied) promise made to grooms in the Torah.

The bride, then, seems to be the one who demonstrates the moral of this midrash through her bitachon and passing G-d's tests. However, the bitachon shown here is not simply following orders (as per her groom, and the expected fairy tale trope the midrash may be alluding to). Rather, the bride puts her trust in the truth of the Torah itself, and in G-d's readiness to bear out that truth when challenged rather than make the Torah appear false. 

Which is a pretty Jewish approach in its sheer level of chutzpah. Aval, zeh shelanu.

RPT

* Hence the footnotes. Of which there are admittedly a lot this time. Sorry.

** No, this is not the most obvious of links to a blog about midrash. I could try and set out the full thought process some other time, but for now let's just say it works in my head. 

***There's a whole essay begging to be written here from a feminist and/or psychoanalytic perspective. But let's not go there...

****This is absolutely not to do down secular literature. There is a trend in more, ahem, 'black hat' circles to dismiss secular literature as trivial and not worth our time - possibly as an easy way to differentiate between kodesh and chol. Needless to say, I don't agree with this approach - especially when it comes to folk tales and song, which I feel are a timeless way of exploring the human condition. Hence my dilemma. 

***** Folklorists are basically a subset of geeks, so this must exist somewhere! 

Vayelech - Blessed are the Flax Workers?

 B"H

 

Source 1 - Midrash Tanchuma, Vayeilech Chapter 2 (abridged)

 [...]וְעַל כֵּן יָבִין וְיַשְׂכִּיל כָּל אָדָם בְּדַעְתּוֹ וְשִׂכְלוֹ לַהֲגוֹת בַּתּוֹרָה יוֹמָם וָלַיְלָה ,שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: וְהָגִיתָ בּוֹ יוֹמָם וָלַיְלָה (יהושע א, ח). וּבְמַעֲשִׂים טוֹבִים.[...] וְאִם לֹא לָמַד כָּל צָרְכּוֹ, יַעֲשֶׂה מַעֲשָׂיו בֶּאֱמוּנָה. אָמַר אֵלִיָּהוּ זִכְרוֹנוֹ לִבְרָכָה, פַּעַם אַחַת הָיִיתִי מְהַלֵּךְ בַּדֶּרֶךְ וּמָצָאתִי אָדָם אֶחָד, וְהָיָה מַלְעִיג לִי וּמִתְלוֹצֵץ בִּי. אָמַרְתִּי לוֹ, מָה אַתָּה מֵשִׁיב לְיוֹם הַדִּין אַחַר שֶׁלֹּא לָמַדְתָּ תּוֹרָה. אָמַר, יֵשׁ לִי לְהָשִׁיב, בִּינָה וָדַעַת וָלֵב שֶׁלֹּא נִתְּנוּ לִי מִן הַשָּׁמַיִם. אָמַרְתִּי לוֹ, מַה מְּלַאכְתֶּךָ. אָמַר לִי, צַיַּד עוֹפוֹת וְדָגִים אֲנִי. אָמַרְתִּי לוֹ, מִי נָתַן לְךָ דַּעַת וָלֵב לִיקַּח פִּשְׁתָּן וְלִטְווֹתוֹ וְלֶאֶרְגוֹ וְלַעֲשׂוֹת הַמְּצוּדוֹת וְלָקַחַת בָּהֶן דָּגִים וְעוֹפוֹת וּלְמָכְרָם. אָמַר לִי, בִּינָה וָדַעַת שֶׁנִּתְּנוּ לִי מִן הַשָּׁמַיִם. אָמַרְתִּי לוֹ, לִיקַּח אֶת הַפִּשְׁתָּן לֶאֱרֹג וְלִטְווֹת וְלָקַחַת הַדָּגִים וְהָעוֹפוֹת, נָתְנוּ לְךָ בִּינָה וָדַעַת. אֲבָל לִקְנוֹת אֶת הַתּוֹרָה לֹא נָתְנוּ לְךָ בִּינָה. וּכְתִיב: כִּי קָרוֹב אֵלֶיךָ הַדָּבָר מְאֹד בְּפִיךָ וּבִלְבָבְךָ לַעֲשׂוֹתוֹ (דברים ל, יד). מִיָּד הִרְהֵר בְּלִבּוֹ וְהֵרִים קוֹלוֹ בִּבְכִי. אָמַרְתִּי לוֹ, בְּנִי, אַל יֵרַע לְךָ, שֶׁכָּל בָּאֵי הָעוֹלָם כֵּיוָן שֶׁבָּאִין וְנִמְשָׁכִין מִן הַתּוֹרָה, מוֹכִיחִין עֲלֵיהֶם, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: וּבֹשׁוּ עוֹבְדֵי פִשְׁתִּים שְׁרִיקוֹת וְאֹרְגִים חוֹרַי (ישעיה יט, ט), וְעָלָיו וְעַל כַּיּוֹצֵא בּוֹ וְעַל הַדּוֹמִין לוֹ וְעַל הָעוֹשִׂין כְּמַעֲשָׂיו. וְאַחֲרִית דָּבָר, יִרְאַת ה'. וְעוֹשִׂין בֶּאֱמוּנָה, בּוֹ מוֹנֶה מְלַאכְתּוֹ וְרָאוּי לְחַיֵּי הָעוֹלָם הַבָּא.

"[...] And so every man [should] understand and fathom with his mind [b'da'ato] and his intelligence to contemplate the Torah day and night - as it is written (Joshua 1:8), "and you shall contemplate about it day and night" - and good deeds. [...] And if he has not learned as is fitting him, let him do his actions with faithfulness [emunah]. Elihayu, may his memory be blessed, said, "I was once walking on the way and I found a man, and he was mocking me and taunting me. I said to him, 'What [can] you answer on the day of judgement, since you have not studied Torah.' He said, 'I have what to answer - it is [because of] the understanding [bina] and intelligence [da'at] and heart [lev] that were not given to me from the Heavens.' I said to him, 'What is your craft?' He said to me, 'I am a trapper of birds and fish.' I said to him, 'Who gave you knowledge [da'at] and heart [lev] to take flax and spin it and weave it to make traps, and to catch fish and birds with them and to sell them?' He said to me, 'It is the understanding [bina] and the knowledge [da'at] that were given to me from the Heavens.' I said to him, 'To take flax and to weave and spin and catch fish and birds you were given understanding [bina] and intelligence [da'at]; but to acquire the Torah, they were not given to you? Behold, it is written (Deuteronomy 30:14), "But the thing is very close to you, in your mouth and in your heart to do it."' [So] he immediately thought in his heart [lev] and raised his voice in crying. I said to him, 'My son, Let it not be bad to you, as all those that come to the world are rebuked once they come and are pulled away from Torah, as it is stated (Isaiah 19:9), "And embarrassed will be the workers of flax, the combers and weavers of holes."' And it is about him and those similar to him, and those that do like his deeds. And the last word is the fear of the Lord; and those that do it with faithfulness [emunah] - his craft will be counted and he is fitting for life in the world to come.'"

Source 2 - Devarim 30:14

כִּי־קָרוֹב אֵלֶיךָ הַדָּבָר מְאֹד בְּפִיךָ וּבִלְבָבְךָ לַעֲשֹׂתוֹ׃         

"No, the thing is very close to you, in your mouth and in your heart, to observe it."

************************

Sometimes, it's hard to find anything interesting to write about a midrash. Either the midrash in question can be really esoteric, filled with snippety textual references or gematria, or its message can seem so straightforward that there is nothing much to add. 

This week's midrash covers both extremes. The full version starts with a lot of gematria - the abridged version at Source 1, with our tale of Eliyahu and the trapper, only covers the final section. The basic moral of this story seems clear: the trapper initially blames G-d for his lack of Torah learning, is rebuked by Eliyahu, and then on realising his mistake is comforted by the idea that he still merits a place in the World to Come if he acts with emunah. Sounds clear, right?

If we dig into the Hebrew text, something a little more interesting is going on. To paraphrase the central conversation of our midrash:

Trapper - G-d hasn't given me the bina, da'at and lev needed to study Torah, so what have I got to feel guilty about?

Eliyahu - who gave you the da'at and lev to make traps out of raw flax, use them for trapping and sell the catch i.e. all the steps needed to earn a living?

Trapper - it's the bina and da'at that G-d gave me.

Eliyahu - G-d gave you bina and da'at to do all the steps needed to earn your living, but not to study Torah? It's written in the Torah - "the thing is very close to you, in your mouth and in your heart [b'ficha u'v'levavcha], to observe it." (see Source 2). 

Immediately, the trapper hirhur b'libo and raises his voice etc.

Three key words are threaded throughout this conversation - bina, da'at and lev. Lev appears to be easy to understand - the 'heart', or possibly inner desire or emotional feeling, to do something. 

Bina and da'at are a bit more complicated. They each refer to different aspects of knowledge or intelligence. Unfortunately, this is where not being able to read Hebrew-only texts easily lets me down - however, as far as I can make out, possible definitions include:

• Malbim (on Proverbs 24:3) - bina is the ability to understand something based on what one has already learnt from an external source; da'at is clear understanding through intuition and insight.
• Rashi (on Exodus 31:3) - bina/tvunah is deducing something from what one has already learnt (i.e. like the Malbim above); da'at is heavenly inspiration (ruach hakodesh). 
• Rabbeinu Yonah (on Pirke Avot 3:17:5-6) - bina is when one derives one thing from another by comparison; da'at is that which one grasps on one's own. Here, Rabbeinu Yonah argues that da'at must precede bina because one cannot derive Y by comparison with X without being able to grasp X on his own in the first place (my paraphrasing).

What's interesting is that there appear to be two opposing views as to which type of knowledge precedes which. According to Malbim and Rashi, da'at follows bina as it involves some level of inspiration/insight beyond mere deduction from prior knowledge. According to Rabbeinu Yonah, it is the opposite - da'at is required for bina, so presumably bina is a higher level of knowledge as it requires da'at to be in place first.*

So, how does this help us? Well, the trapper starts off by mocking Eliyahu (presumably for appearing to be a Torah scholar), and blaming G-d for not granting him the bina, da'at or lev needed for Torah study instead of taking responsibility for this. He feels no shame for his lack of scholarship, and in fact appears to despise learners and learning. 

Eliyahu responds by asking the trapper where he got the da'at and lev from for his trade - without mentioning bina. Going by the above, by 'da'at' Eliyahu is either asking about the trapper's highest insight/inspiration for his work (as per Rashi/Malbim) or for the basic ability to grasp what he needs to know for this on his own (as per Rabbeinu Yonah). Either way, da'at, intellectual ability (of whatever type) is coupled with lev i.e. the desire or emotion to do a trade - and Eliyahu's question presumes that both come from an external source. 

The trapper responds by only mentioning bina and da'at - no mention of lev here. The trapper only thinks about G-d granting him the intellectual abilities needed to do his work. This could mean he has no emotional connection to his trade - alternatively, he thinks he already had the lev for this coming from within, and only requires the additional bina and da'at from G-d. Conversely, for Torah study the trapper thinks he needs to have lev granted externally by G-d alongside bina or da'at (instead of this coming from within) - so if he doesn't have any lev for study, this isn't his problem or fault. 

Eliyahu picks up on this change of language, pointing out that if G-d gave the trapper bina and da'at for his trade, surely this is enough for Torah study as well. For lev, by quoting the passage at Source 2, Eliyahu points out that the desire to learn and observe Torah comes from within ourselves - not externally from G-d, as originally stated by the trapper. 

This, then, was the trapper's mistake. Only once he realises this, with his heart and voice, does Eliyahu comfort him with the knowledge that he is not alone - unfortunately, it is all too normal for workers and craftsmen to be pulled away from Torah study, with the 'backup' then being their emunah. 

What, then, can we take from this? At the outset, we should all aim to study Torah even alongside our work. How much, and how deeply, will depend on the intellectual ability granted to us by G-d. However, regardless of our intellect, we must also remember that the potential for emotional connection to Torah is in all of us. It is up to us to listen to this inner voice and channel this towards Torah study, rather than just expect to be inspired to study from above.  

RPT

* incidentally, this tension can be seen in the different versions of the blessing 'honen ha'da'at' in the weekday Amidah. Ashkenazim and some Sephardim (myself included) ask for 'de'ah, bina v'heskel' - the remaining Sephardim/Mizrachim ask for 'chochma, bina v'da'at'. Note the different orders of bina and da'at. 

Netzavim - the Power of One

B"H

Sources (courtesy Sefaria):

1) Chapter 2, Midrash Tanchuma Nitzavim (abridged)

רָאשֵׁיכֶם שִׁבְטֵיכֶם. אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁמִּנִּיתִי לָכֶם רָאשִׁים זְקֵנִים וְשׁוֹטְרִים, כֻּלְּכֶם שָׁוִין לְפָנַי, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: וְכָל אִישׁ יִשְׂרָאֵל. דָּבָר אַחֵר, כֻּלְּכֶם עֲרֵבִים זֶה בָּזֶה. אֲפִלּוּ צַדִּיק אֶחָד בֵּינֵיכֶם, כֻּלְּכֶם עוֹמְדִים בִּזְכוּתוֹ. וְלֹא אַתֶּם בִּלְבַד, אֶלָּא אֲפִלּוּ צַדִּיק אֶחָד בֵּינֵיכֶם, כָּל הָעוֹלָם כֻּלּוֹ בִּזְכוּתוֹ עוֹמֵד, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: וְצַדִּיק יְסוֹד עוֹלָם (משלי ו, כה). וּכְשֶׁאֶחָד מִכֶּם חוֹטֵא, כָּל הַדּוֹר לוֹקֶה. וְכֵן אַתָּה מוֹצֵא בְּעָכָן, הֲלֹא עָכָן בֶּן זֶרַח מָעַל מַעַל בַּחֵרֶם וְגוֹ' (יהושע כב, כ). מִדַּת פֻּרְעָנִיּוּת מוּעֶטֶת, וְהַדּוֹר נִתְפַּס בָּהּ. מִדָּה טוֹבָה מְרֻבָּה, עַל אַחַת כַּמָּה וְכַמָּה. לְכָךְ נֶאֱמַר: כָּל אִישׁ יִשְׂרָאֵל. וְלֹא גְּדוֹלִים שֶׁבָּכֶם בִּלְבַד, אֶלָּא אֲפִלּוּ טַפְּכֶם נְשֵׁיכֶם וְגֵרְךָ. לְכָךְ נֶאֱמַר: כָּל אִישׁ יִשְׂרָאֵל, לְפִי שֶׁבָּשָׂר וָדָם מְרַחֵם עַל הַזְּכָרִים יוֹתֵר מֵהַנְּקֵבוֹת. וְהַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא אֵינוֹ כֵן, כִּי רַחֲמָיו עַל כָּל מַעֲשָׂיו, עַל הַזְּכָרִים וְעַל הַנְּקֵבוֹת, וְעַל הַצַּדִּיקִים וְעַל הָרְשָׁעִים[...]

"(Deut. 29:9:) “Your tribal leaders, [your elders, and your law officers].” Although I have appointed for you heads, judges, elders, and law officers, you shall all be equal before me, since it is stated (ibid., cont.), “every person in Israel.” Another interpretation (of Deut. 29:9): All of you are responsible for each other. Even though there is [only] one righteous person among you, you all shall survive (literally, stand) through his merit; and not only you, but the whole world in toto, as stated (in Prov. 10:25), “but a righteous person is the foundation for the world.” However, when one sins, the whole generation is stricken, and so you find in the case of Achan (in Josh. 22:20), “Was it not Achan ben Zerah who committed [embezzlement] in the proscription (i.e., the herem of Jericho)?” If with the measure of punishment which is small, the [whole] generation was seized, how much the more [will the generation prosper], with the measure of [divine] favor which is great! It is therefore stated (in Deut. 29:9), “every person in Israel”; and not only the great ones who are among us, but (according to vs. 10) “Your infants, your wives, and your alien.” It is therefore stated (in Deut. 29:9), “every person.” Now flesh and blood shows more mercy over males than over females, but the Holy One, blessed be He, is not like that. Rather (according to Ps. 145:9), “His mercy is upon all his works,” upon males and upon females, upon the righteous and upon the wicked [...]"

2) Chapter 1, Midrash Tanchuma Nitzavim (abridged)

 דָּבָר אַחֵר, אַתֶּם נִצָּבִים הַיּוֹם, מָה הַיּוֹם מֵאִיר פְּעָמִים וּמַאֲפִיל פְּעָמִים, אַף אַתֶּם כְּשֶׁאֲפֵלָה לָכֶם, עָתִיד לְהָאִיר לָכֶם אוֹר עוֹלָם, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: וְהָיָה לְךָ ה' לְאוֹר עוֹלָם (ישעיה ס, יט). אֵימָתַי, בִּזְמַן שֶׁתִּהְיוּ כֻּלְּכֶם אֲגֻדָּה אַחַת, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: חַיִּים כֻּלְּכֶם הַיּוֹם (דברים ד, ד). בְּנֹהַג שֶׁבָּעוֹלָם, אִם נוֹטֵל אָדָם אֲגֻדָּה שֶׁל קָנִים, שֶׁמָּא יָכֹל לְשָׁבְרָם בְּבַת אַחַת. וְאִלּוּ נוֹטֵל אַחַת אַחַת, אֲפִלּוּ תִּינוֹק מְשַׁבְּרָן. וְכֵן אַתְּ מוֹצֵא שֶׁאֵין יִשְׂרָאֵל נִגְאֲלִין עַד שֶׁיִּהְיוּ כֻּלָּן אֲגֻדָּה אַחַת, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: בַּיָּמִים הָהֵמָּה וּבָעֵת הַהִיא נְאֻם ה' יָבֹאוּ בְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וּבְנֵי יְהוּדָה יַחְדָּו וְגוֹ' (ירמיה נ, ד). כְּשֶׁהֵן אֲגוּדִים, מְקַבְּלִין פְּנֵי שְׁכִינָה.

"Another interpretation (of Deut. 29:9), “You are standing today”: Just as today (literally: the day) sometimes darkens and sometimes lightens, so it is with you. Although you have darkness, the Holy One, blessed be He, is going to shine on you with light eternal, as stated (in Is. 60:19), “for the Lord shall be your everlasting light.” When? When you all become one group, as stated (in Deut. 4:4), “are all alive today.” According to universal custom, if one takes a group of reeds, will he be able to break them at one stroke! But if he takes them one by one, even an infant can break them. So also you find that Israel was not redeemed until they became one group, as stated (in Jer. 50:4), “’In those days and at that time,’ says the Lord,’ the children of Israel, they and the children of Judah, shall come together.’” When they are united, they shall welcome the face of the Divine Presence."

***********************************

Parshat Nitzavim usually falls out just before the Yamim Noraim. It's therefore oddly appropriate that both the parsha and its related midrashim emphasise certain common themes: the importance of both studying and living by the Torah; the covenant (brit) between Israel and G-d; our unity as a nation and our shared responsibility for compliance (or lack of) with said brit. I've therefore picked out two midrashim which reflect on some of these themes - namely, our unity and each person's individual responsibility for upholding the brit.

Source 1 takes as its source text a verse describing the heads of the tribes. A little counterintuitively, it uses this to emphasise that - although we may be divided by tribes and have leaders over us - every member of B'nei Israel is equal before G-d. If that wasn't enough, having drawn this conclusion from the phrase 'kol ish Israel' (every man of Israel), the midrash goes even further to emphasise that this equality applies to women, children and gerim (either converts or observant Noachides). How? Because, while ordinary humans may be partial and favour men over women, G-d is impartial and 'has mercy on all His creations, on both males and females, and on both righteous (tzadikim) and wicked (rashaim).'

Sounds great, right? But before we exclaim over this apparent show of egalitarianism within the Jewish community, let's stop and think about the midrash's message here. Yes, on the one hand we are all equal before G-d in terms of relating to Him and receiving His mercy - which is especially important for those classed as rashaim, who would normally not have any hope of such mercy. However, the midrash also gives an alternative interpretation of 'equality', which is that everyone is responsible for each other - kulachem areivim zeh la zeh. What does this mean?

The midrash explains - even if there is only one tzadik or righteous person in the community, not only the entire community but the entire world 'stands' in his/her merit. But - and this is a big 'but' - the opposite is also true! If one person sins, the entire generation suffers - see the case of Achan described in Sefer Yehoshua, as cited by the midrash. 

However, even here there is hope - as the midrash points out through a 'kal v'chomer' device, if an entire generation can be punished for the sin of one person i.e. Akhan, then how much greater is the impact of a good action or something which draws upon G-d's 'midah tova'!

Source 2 looks at these themes of redemption and mutual responsibility from a different perspective. Basing itself on a different part of the same source text as Source 1, it acknowledges that we can live through times of both light and darkness - however, the ultimate reward will be light once we all become 'one group'. The midrash explains this through the example of a bunch of reeds, which can be easily broken when separated into individual stalks but become much harder to break when bundled together. Similarly, redemption will only take place when we are united as one. 

What is notable here is that the source from Sefer Yirmiyahu used by the midrash refers to the people of kingdoms of Israel and Judah coming together as one for this redemption to take place. While that may have made sense when Yirmiyahu was alive, nowadays it is not at all obvious how this is possible given that the descendants of the Northern Kingdom (Israel) cannot be easily traced. Given the amount of infighting amongst today's Jews, maybe we need to reframe this need for unity as referring to the various factions within the modern Jewish community - while bearing in mind the hopeful message from our first midrash about the impact of a single good action upon us all.

Shabbat shalom

RPT