Monday, 26 March 2012

Vayikra - the Divine Voice

B"H

Full source here 

Sources:

 1) Midrash Tanchuma Vayikra, Chapter 1 (extracts)

רבי תנחום בר חנילאי אומר, מי גבורי כח, זה משה, שאין גבור כמותו, שישראל עומדים לפני הר סיני ולא יכלו לשמוע את קול הדבור, שנאמר, אם יוספים אנחנו לשמוע את קול ה' אלהינו עוד ומתנו (דב' ה כב), ומשה לא ניזוק. ללמדך, שגדולים הצדיקים יותר ממלאכי השרת. שמלאכי השרת אינן יכולין לשמוע קולו (שנאמר, וה' נתן קולו לפני חילו (יואל ב יא)) אלא עומדין ונבהלין. והצדיקים יכולין לשמוע קולו, שנאמר, וה' נתן קולו לפני חילו. כי רב מאד מחנהו (שם), אלו המלאכים, שנאמר, מחנה אלהים זה
[...]
ואם תאמר, כשהיה מדבר עם משה, בקול נמוך היה מדבר, לפיכך היה יכול משה לשמוע. לא היה מדבר אלא בקול מתן תורה ששמעו ישראל ומתו בדבור ראשון, שנאמר, אם יוספים אנחנו וגו' (דברים ה כב). וכן הוא אומר, נפשי יצאה בדברו (שה"ש ה ו). ומנין שבקול מתן תורה היה מדבר. שכן הוא אומר, קול ה' בכח (תהל' כט ד). וכן הוא אומר, ובבא משה אל אהל מועד לדבר אתו וישמע את הקול מדבר אליו (במד' ז פט), הקול שהיה שומע במתן תורה, שנאמר, קול ה' שובר ארזים (תהלי' כט ה), ובו היה מדבר על כל דבור ודבור ועל כל אמירה וצווי. שמא תאמר, שנשמע הקול לישראל מבחוץ. תלמוד לומר, וישמע את הקול, הוא היה שומע בלבד. וכי מאחר שבקול גבוה היה מדבר, למה לא היו שומעים. לפי שגזר הקדוש ברוך הוא על הדבור שיצא והלך אצל משה ועשה לו הקדוש ברוך הוא שביל שבו יוצא הקול עד שיגיע למשה ולא נשמע לכאן ולכאן, שנאמר, לעשות לרוח משקל (איוב כח כה), שכל דבור ודבור שיוצא מפי הקדוש ברוך הוא, הכל במשקל. וכן הוא אומר, ודרך לחזיז קולות (שם שם כו), שעשה לו הקדוש ברוך הוא דרך לאותו הקול שילך אצל משה בלבד, שנאמר, ויקרא אל משה וידבר ה' אליו, אליו היה נשמע ולא לאחר. לכך נאמר, גבורי כח עושי דברו.


Apologies for the shortness of this week's korban - this will probably be the pattern until after Pesach...

Unfortunately I also seem to be making a lot of refuah shleima posts recently - this week's post is l'refuah shleima Aharon ben Leah Touil and zecher all those who passed away in Toulouse. 

 While Moshe's status as the greatest prophet in Jewish history is well established, the above midrash shows a new aspect of his relationship with G-d. Forming part of a series of midrashim linking G-d's calling to Moshe in the opening lines of Vayikra to a verse from Tehillim describing the malachaiv, giborei koach (angels, mighty warriers) who carry out and obey G-d's word, this midrash focuses on the teaching of Rabbi Tanchum bar Chanilai who identifies Moshe as the 'giborei koach' for his ability to hear G-d's kol or voice and survive. 

Rabbi Tanchum notes that in being able to listen to G-d's kol, Moshe is on a higher level than either the rest of Israel (who were only able to hear the first two of the Ten Commandments at Sinai before exclaiming that they would die if they heard G-d's voice any further - see Devarim 5:22), or indeed the angels (justified by the proof-text va'HaShem natan kolo lifnei heilo - and the Lord gives forth his voice before his army - Yoel 2:11). 

However, in order to link this with the opening lines of Vayikra in which G-d speaks to Moshe from within the Mishkan, Rabbi Tanchum is assuming that the kol with which G-d speaks from the Mishkan is the same kol with which G-d spoke to all of Israel on Sinai. If this is the case, could the rest of Israel not also hear G-d - and if so, why would G-d then tell of this to Moshe for Moshe to tell to the people if they could hear Him for themselves?

The midrash itself recognises and answers these concerns (see the section after the square brackets in source 1 above). In order to justify Rabbi Tanchum's statement, the midrash notes that G-d did indeed speak with the same kol with which He spoke at Sinai (referencing the same perek of sefer Tehillim - Tehillim 29 - which forms the highlight of the Kabbalat Shabbat service after Lecha Dodi itself), and in fact claims that this is the kol with which G-d spoke to Moshe in the Mishkan throughout the wanderings in the desert. 

Having established this, the midrash then goes on to tackle the question of why - if G-d was speaking with such a powerful kol - the rest of B'nei Israel were unable to hear it outside the Mishkan. The answer sounds surprisingly like some form of sonic technology - G-d made some form of derech or 'path' for His kol to travel to Moshe such that it could not be heard outside of that derech.

There are several other midrashim which describe the 'sound' experience at Sinai, and it would be well worth looking at these together with the above midrash in light of what we know today about sound waves and how we experience sound. On the other hand, a spiritual perspective we can perhaps also see that - while G-d's kol does not change in power or force - sometimes G-d may choose to direct that kol so that only certain individuals can hear it. Those of us outside of this derech of G-d's choosing may be tempted to say at times that G-d is somehow absent from our world - however, just because we cannot hear G-d's kol does not meant that it is not present...

Shavua tov v'chodesh tov

RPT



 

Monday, 19 March 2012

Vayekhel-Pekudei - A Messianic Mystery?

B"H

Full source text here

Post this week is l'refuah shleima Diana bat Ruby Geraldine v'Rochel bas Nomi
1) Midrash Tanchuma Pekudei, Chapter 1

אלה פקודי המשכן. זה שאמר הכתוב, כסא כבוד מרום מראשון מקום מקדשנו (ירמי' יז יב), שם מכוון מקדשנו. וכן הוא אומר, מכון לשבתך פעלת ה' מקדש ה' כוננו ידיך (שמ' טו יז). וכן אתה מוצא, שירושלים מכונון למעלה כמו ירושלים של מטה. מרוב אהבתה של מטה, עשה אחרת למעלה, שנאמר, הן על כפים חקותיך, חומתיך נגדי תמיד (ישע' מט טו). ועל מה חרבה. אלא כי מהרו בניך מהרסיך ומחריביך ממך יצאו (שם שם טז), על זה חרבה. וכן אמר דוד, ירושלים הבנויה כעיר שחברה לה יחדו (תהל' קכב ג). כלומר, כעיר שבנה יה. ותרגם ירושלמי, דמתבניא ברקיע בקרתא לאתחברתה כחדא בארעא. ונשבע ששכינתו לא יכנס בשל מעלה, עד שיבנה של מטה. כמה חביבין ישראל לפני הקדוש ברוך הוא. ומנין. שכן כתיב, בקרבך קדוש ולא אבוא בעיר (הושע יא ט). ואומר, ועתה מה לי פה נאם ה' כי לוקח עמי חנם (ישע' נב ה). רצונו לומר, ועתה מה לי פה נאם ה', מה אני מבקש פה בירושלים אחר שלוקח עמי ממנה. בחנם שאבוא בה, לא אבוא. יהי רצון שיבנה במהרה בימינו:

2) Midrash Tanchuma Pekudei, Chapter 2 (abridged)

[אלה פקודי המשכן. ... רבי לוי אמר, משכן העדות, זה שאמר הכתוב, כי יסכר פי דוברי שקר (תהל' סג יב), יסכר פיהם של אומות העולם שהיו אומרים לישראל שאין השכינה חוזרת אלינו לעולם, שנאמר, רבים אומרים לנפשי, אין ישועתה לו באלהים סלה (שם ג ג), אלו עד שלא עשו את העגל בא הקדוש ברוך הוא ושרה אצלם, משכעס עליהם היו אומרים אינו חוזר אליהם. מה עשה. אמר להם הקדוש ברוך הוא, ועשו לי מקדש ושכנתי בתוכם (שמו' כה ח), וידעו כל באי עולם שמחלתי לישראל. ולפיכך כתיב, משכן העדות כבר היה לעולמים

3) Midrash Tanchuma Pekudei, Chapter 3 (abridged)

וראוהו ונתיראו מלפניו. היו סוברים שהוא בראם, ובאו להשתחות לו. אמר להן, למה באתם להשתחות לי, נבוא כלנו נראה כל הבריות שברא הקדוש ברוך הוא. והיה תמה בלבו. התחיל משבח ומפאר ליוצרו, ואומר, מה רב טובך אשר צפנת ליראיך (תהלי' לא כ). ואומר, מה רבו מעשיך ה' (שם קד כד). קם על רגליו והוא כתואר וכדמות אלהים, והיה קומתו אחריו. והלבישו גאות ועוז והמליכו עליהם ליוצרו, ואמרו, ה' מלך גאות לבש (שם צג א). קנקן חדש מלא ישן

4) Kohelet 1:10

יֵשׁ דָּבָר שֶׁיֹּאמַר רְאֵה-זֶה חָדָשׁ הוּא  כְּבָר הָיָה לְעֹלָמִים אֲשֶׁר הָיָה מִלְּפָנֵנוּ

5) Pirke Avot 4:26-27

רבי יוסי ברבי יהודה איש כפר הבבלי אומר, הלמד מן הקטנים, למה הוא דומה--לאוכל ענבים קהות, ושותה יין מגיתו; והלמד מן הזקנים, למה הוא דומה--לאוכל ענבים בשלות, ושותה יין ישן.  רבי אומר, אל תסתכל בקנקן, אלא במה שיש בו:  יש קנקן חדש, מלא ישן; וישן, אפילו חדש אין בו.

Apologies both for the late publication and for any deficiencies in coherent analysis/dvar this week - unfortunately, things have been a little hectic...

The Midrash Tanchuma on Pekudei in particular contains a number of fascinating midrashim which one would not necessarily have expected given the relevant parshiyot (which basically comprise the design and building of the Mishkan components, a Biblical audit report, and the assembly of the Mishkan itself). Midrashim worthy of in-depth study include:

The comparison of the Mishkan to Bereishit (the act of Creation).
The process by which a foetus is formed, given a soul, taught Torah in utero and then made to forget everything upon birth (see here for more details of this midrash!)
The Shekhina departing seven levels from the earth due to humanity's sins in the generations between Adam and Amrofel, and returning to the earth due to the seven generations from Avraham to Moshe.
The 'copper mirrors' used by the women in Mitzrayim to arouse their husbands and conceive, and which were subsequently donated to the Mishkan.


Iy"H I would love to take a closer look at these sometime in the future, possibly outside of the context of the weekly parsha... 


This week's 'musing' was actually spurred by noting something a little odd at the end of the first three chapters of the Midrash Tanchuma on Pekudei, and for which (unlike the Kaputkaya question) I have very little in the way of an answer due to a lack of both time and resources. Al regel achat...

Several of the midrashim this week focus on the opening line of the parsha: 'eleh pekudei haMishkan Mishkan ha'edut...(These are the accounts/records of the Tabernacle, the Tabernacle of Testimony/the Pact...(Shemot 38:21)). The midrashim mostly base themselves upon both the repetition of the word Mishkan and the phrase 'Mishkan ha'edut' to derive several lessons concerning both the Mishkan itself and its successor, the Beit HaMikdash in Yerushalayim.


The opening midrash (source 1 above) uses a number of links from both earlier in sefer Shemot and throughout the Nevi'im to explore the concept of two Yerushalayims, one on earth and its counterpart in the heavens, which are lacking respectively the nation of Israel and some crucial aspect of G-d's presence since the Churban (destruction of the Beit HaMikdash). A powerful midrash in itself, it concludes with the heartfelt prayer 'yehi ratzon sheyibaneh bimhera b'yameinu' (may it be His will that [Yerushalayim/the Beit HaMikdash] be [re]built speedily in our days).


While this is a slightly unusual way for a midrash to conclude, given the context it is both unsurprising and understandable. However, while the next two chapters of midrashim also each conclude with a simple phrase (underlined in sources 2 and 3 above) which is not obviously 'closing off' the midrash itself, unlike the prayer 'yehi ratzon' above they do not appear to directly follow on from the subject of the preceding midrash.* Moreover, they have the air of being well-known phrases which the reader ought to be familiar with, but - unusually for the Midrash Tanchuma - are not attributed to any particular source.


What on earth is going on? Well, upon a quick google I managed to track down the sources for both phrases as follows:


Source 2's conclusion 'k'var hayah ha'olamim' is taken from the opening perek of sefer Kohelet (source 4 above). The entire phrase reads 'yesh d'var she'yomar re'eh zeh hadash hu, k'var hayah ha'olamim asher hayah mil'faneinu' (there is something of which they say 'look, this is new!' - it occurred long since in ages that went before us) and comes just after the famous phrase 'v'ein kol hadash tachat hashamesh' (there is nothing new under the sun)


Source 3's conclusion 'yesh kankan hadash male yashan' is taken from Pirke Avot 4:26-27 (source 5 above), in which Rabi argues against Rabbi Yosi bar Yehuda's stance that it is better to learn from an elder than from a younger person by pointing out: 'Do not look at the vessel, but at what is in it; there is a new vessel filled with old wine, and an old vessel that does not even contain new wine'[my emphasis to translate the phrase quoted at Source 3].



OK...so both phrases are in fact from elsewhere in Tanakh/Rabbinic literature. So, why does the Midrash Tanchuma fail to attribute them as such? Well, let's consider the relevant midrashim which these phrases follow. Source 2 concludes with a midrash said by Rabbi Leivi arguing that G-d's command to build the Mishkan so that He can dwell 'amongst' Israel is a way of proving the nations of the world wrong about their assumption that G-d would never return to Israel after the Chet HaEgel (sin of Golden Calf) as proved by command to construct Mishkan. Meanwhile, Source 3's concluding midrash tells of how the newly created animals in Gan Eden mistake Adam - created b'tzelem Elokim - for G-d Himself and come to worship Adam. Adam corrects them by 'crowning' G-d as King and encouraging all the animals to follow suit. 


It is at this point that - lacking any basis whatsoever other than gut feeling - I veer into somewhat sensitive/controversial territory. While I have had neither the time or resources to develop this further pre-posting, my instinct is that the two concluding phrases 'k'var hayah ha'olamim' and 'yesh kankan hadash male yashan' are both some kind of coded response to Xian 'replacement theology' (by which Jesus's crucifixion and the New Testament is held to replace the 'Old Testament' covenant between  G-d and Israel) and the Xian Trinity by which Jesus is given a divine status antithetical to Jewish belief. The non-attribution of these phrases may therefore have been some means of avoiding censorship (although quite how the anti-Xian message works in the case of the Pirke Avot quote at source 4, I haven't fully been able to decipher...) 

If this is the case, then the use of these two phrases and the relevant midrashim following the opening midrash and 'yehi ratzon' regarding Yerushalayim (source 1) may be to counteract Xian beliefs and any other kind of misguided messianism** regarding the restoration of the Beit haMikdash and Yerushalayim, while at the same time giving a poignant voice to the Jewish longing for a return to a rebuilt Yerushalayim and Israel's complete fulfillment of its role as a 'goy kadosh'.  

Responses/thoughts/requests for further research all welcome :-)


Shavua tov, v'yehi ratzon sheyibaneh bimhera b'yameinu


RPT



*in the Metsudah edition, on both occasions the concluding phrase is printed separately from the rest of the preceding text, thereby drawing attention to themselves. Otherwise, these might have gone unnoticed by most readers...


**Apparently the Midrash Tanchuma text was first collated for publication in 16th century Istanbul/Constantinople, although the midrashim themselves date back many centuries earlier. It did occur to me that there may therefore also be a link with the infamous Shabtai Tzvi who spent some time in this region, but the theory is rather spoilt by the fact that he showed up at least a century later...


 

Sunday, 11 March 2012

Ki Tissa - Confusing Message and Messenger

B"H

Full source text here


Sources:

1) Midrash Tanchuma Ki Tissa, Chapter 19 - Part 1 (The sorcerors/Michah)

וירא העם כי בושש משה, בא שש שעות. נתכנסו ארבעים אלף שעלו עם ישראל ושני חרטומי מצרים עמהם, ושמותם יונו"ס ויומברו"ס, שהיו עושין לפני פרעה כל אותם כשפים, כמו שכתוב, ויעשו גם הם חרטומי מצרים בלהטיהם (שמות ז יא). ונקהלו כלם על אהרן, שנאמר, ויקהל העם על אהרן ויאמר וגו', שמשה שוב אינו יורד כבר
[...]
השליך לאש ובאו החרטומים ועשו בחרטומיהם. ויש אומרים, שמיכה היה שנתמכמך בבנין, מה שהציל משה מן הלבנים. נטל הלוח שכתב עליו משה, עלה שור, כשהעלה ארונו של יוסף. השליכו לתוך הכור בין הנזמים, ויצא העגל גועה כשהוא מקרטע. התחילו אומרים, אלה אלהיך ישראל

2) Midrash Tanchuma Ki Tissa, Chapter 19 - Part 2 (The women)

. אמר להם אהרן, פרקו נזמי הזהב אשר באזני נשיכם. אמר אהרן להם דבר קשה, שהנשים מתעכבות בו, שהם ראו כל הנסים והגבורות שעשה הקדוש ברוך הוא במצרים ובים ובסיני. הלכו אצל הנשים. עמדו עליהם. ואמרו, חס ושלום שנכפור בהקדוש ברוך הוא שעשה לנו כל הנסים וגבורות האלו ונעשה עבודה זרה. כיון שלא שמעו להם, מה כתיב, ויתפרקו כל העם את נזמי הזהב. אשר באזני נשיהם לא נאמר, אלא אשר באזניהם


3) Midrash Tanchuma Ki Tissa, Chapter 19 - Part 3 ('Forgetting G-d') 

פתחו מלאכי השרת ואמרו, שכחו אל מושיעם עושה גדולות במצרים (שם קו כא). מה עשה אהרן. אמר ידחה הדבר עד למחר, שנאמר, ויקרא אהרן ויאמר חג לה' מחר. ורוח הקודש צוחת, מהרו שכחו מעשיו (שם שם יב). אמר הקדוש ברוך הוא, בעולם הזה, על ידי יצר הרע חטאתם. לעתיד, אני עוקרו מכם, שנאמר, והסירותי את לב האבן מבשרכם (יחזקאל לו כו


4) Shemot 32:1-3

א וַיַּרְא הָעָם כִּי-בֹשֵׁשׁ מֹשֶׁה לָרֶדֶת מִן-הָהָר וַיִּקָּהֵל הָעָם עַל-אַהֲרֹן וַיֹּאמְרוּ אֵלָיו קוּם עֲשֵׂה-לָנוּ אֱלֹהִים אֲשֶׁר יֵלְכוּ לְפָנֵינוּ כִּי-זֶה מֹשֶׁה הָאִישׁ אֲשֶׁר הֶעֱלָנוּ מֵאֶרֶץ מִצְרַיִם לֹא יָדַעְנוּ מֶה-הָיָה לוֹ.  ב וַיֹּאמֶר אֲלֵהֶם אַהֲרֹן פָּרְקוּ נִזְמֵי הַזָּהָב אֲשֶׁר בְּאָזְנֵי נְשֵׁיכֶם בְּנֵיכֶם וּבְנֹתֵיכֶם וְהָבִיאוּ אֵלָי.  ג וַיִּתְפָּרְקוּ כָּל-הָעָם אֶת-נִזְמֵי הַזָּהָב אֲשֶׁר בְּאָזְנֵיהֶם וַיָּבִיאוּ אֶל-אַהֲרֹן.

5) Shemot 32:7-8

  ז וַיְדַבֵּר יְהוָה אֶל-מֹשֶׁה  לֶךְ-רֵד כִּי שִׁחֵת עַמְּךָ אֲשֶׁר הֶעֱלֵיתָ מֵאֶרֶץ מִצְרָיִם.  ח סָרוּ מַהֵר מִן-הַדֶּרֶךְ אֲשֶׁר צִוִּיתִם עָשׂוּ לָהֶם עֵגֶל מַסֵּכָה וַיִּשְׁתַּחֲווּ-לוֹ וַיִּזְבְּחוּ-לוֹ וַיֹּאמְרוּ אֵלֶּה אֱלֹהֶיךָ יִשְׂרָאֵל אֲשֶׁר הֶעֱלוּךָ מֵאֶרֶץ מִצְרָיִם. 


There is a fundamental question underlying the episode of the Chet Ha-Egel (Sin of the Golden Calf) in parshat Ki Tissa - how could the Jews, having only just experienced G-d's presence at matan Torah in a way that nobody before or since has done, turn so quickly to avodah zarah? As you can imagine, out of the almost 40 (!) chapters of midrashim in this week's Midrash Tanchuma many explore this very question. Here, I have selected one particular set of midrashim in Chapter 19 which may already be familiar to a Jewish-educated audience -  the women refusing to give up their gold for the egel (idol in the form of a calf); Chur protesting against the people and being killed for it (after which Aharon concedes to their demands); and the involvement of sorcerors and sorcery in the formation of the egel itself.

However, while the individual midrashim in Chapter 19 (which I've broken down for ease of reference) may therefore seem familiar, by looking at them together we can also gain a new insight into what actually happened at this critical and tragic moment in Jewish history. Plus, there is a very long footnote for which I apologise! 

Here goes...

The midrash opens at Source 1) with an intriguing statement that amongst those who left Mitzrayim with the Jews were two Egyptian sorcerors who used to practice magic in Pharoah's court, and who had demonstrated their skills (and eventually, lack of them) when Moshe had first appeared before Pharoah to demand the Jews' freedom. While the midrash shifts its focus first to Chur (whose story I am not exploring here) and the women as dissenting voices, it then returns to these sorcerors to provide one explanation of how the egel was formed from the golden earrings thrown into the fire by Aharon.*

However, the midrash also goes on to provide an alternative explanation - Michah, whom Moshe had saved as a baby from being walled up into a building by the Egyptians, is somehow in possession of a tablet inscribed with the words 'olah shor' (rise up, ox) which Moshe had used when retrieving Yosef's coffin from the Nile. It is therefore as a result of Michah throwing this tablet into the fire that the egel is formed.**

Both explanations connect Mitzrayim and magical practices to the formation of the egel - however, what they also have in common is a link with Moshe as someone who is seen to carry out 'supernatural' acts. While the midrash only alludes to this in its choice of proof-text (Shemot 7:11), the two sorcerors would have been direct witnessess to the first three plagues of blood, frogs and lice inasmuch as they tried to reproduce all three before Pharoah. Indeed, when they were unsuccessful in reproducing the lice it was the sorcerors who declared 'etzba Elokim hi' (this is the finger of G-d) - which makes it highly ironic that they have a role in the Chet HaEgel at the very moment that G-d has given Moshe the luchot inscribed 'b'etzba Elokim' (with the finger of G-d). Much the same could be said of Michah, who is presumably aware of Moshe's original use of the inscribed tablet when he throws it into the fire - and who, in another irony, owes his very life to Moshe. 

Let's hold onto this thought while we turn to Source 2). This midrash draws on Shemot 32:2-3 to explain that one of Aharon's tactics in 'playing for time' was to tell the men to ask their wives for their gold earrings in order to make the egel, predicting that the women would not agree to this.***Just as Aharon had thought the women refused to comply, saying:

 'Chas v'shalom shenichpor b'HaKadosh Baruch Hu she'asah lanu kol hanisim u'gvurot ha'eilu v'na'aseh avodah zara' (G-d forbid that that we should deny the Holy One Blessed be He who did all of these miracles and mighty deeds for us, and that we should do idolatry!)

Unfortunately this does not prevent the egel as the men donate their own golden earrings rather than those of their wives. However, the message is clear - the women stand firm in refusing to take part in avodah zarah because they maintain their awareness of G-d and all that G-d has done for them in Mitzrayim, at the splitting of the Yam Suf (Reed Sea) and finally at Har Sinai itself. In which case, why on earth don't the men also recognise this having gone through the same experiences as the women?

Well, it seems that the men had not maintained this awareness of G-d in the same way as the women, hence their turning to avodah zarah. This can be seen in the concluding midrashim (underlined in Source 3 above) where the midrash twice quotes from Tehillim to point out that, in saying that the egel had brought them out of Mitzrayim, those participating in the Chet haEgel had 'forgotten' G-d and everything that G-d had done for them until now.

Perhaps now we can see the role of the sorcerors/Michah in this incident. While both the sorcerors and Michah may have been aware of G-d, their first knowledge of G-d would have been mediated through Moshe as G-d's messenger and 'miracle-worker' in Mitzrayim. Notwithstanding the direct revelation subsequently experienced by the entire people at matan Torah, they may therefore have assumed not only that Moshe was a necessary intermediary between G-d and the people, but that in Moshe's absence the only suitable substitute as an intermediary would be something linked with Moshe's role as a 'miracle-worker'. Given the sorcerors/Michah's particular experiences of Moshe, it would not have been a huge leap for them to assume that this apect of Moshe's role was down to his using the sort of sorcery commonly practiced in Mitzrayim at the time - hence their use of magic to raise the egel from the fire. 

This view of Moshe as a unique, quasi-magician intermediary with G-d may have been shared by those people clamouring for the creation of an egel as a substitute to 'lead' them in Moshe's absence. This was not an unknown danger - after all, one reason behind Moshe's burial in an unknown location was to avoid his grave becoming a shrine and potential location of avodah zarah, while Rambam famously traces avodah zarah to people's original attempts to engage with G-d through intermediary objects/nature before eventually ascribing divine powers to these intermediaries themselves.

This set of midrashim therefore appears to contrast the above attitude towards Moshe - as exemplified by the sorcerors/Michah - with the womens' clarity of vision and refusal to engage in avodah zarah. Despite the sorcerors appearing to recognise G-d in Mitzrayim through their exclamation of 'etzba Elokim hi!', by the time of the Chet HaEgel they have either forgotten that Moshe was only a 'messenger' for G-d's showing His power in Mitzrayim or shown that they had always been confused over Moshe's role in the plagues. By contrast, in their exclamation of 'chas v'shalom!' it is the women who avoid confusing the 'message' of G-d's redemption of the Jews from Mitzrayim and revelation of the Torah with Moshe as the 'messenger' who, as their leader, was only carrying out G-d's will. 

Shavua tov!

RPT

* For those interested, the midrash is probably basing this idea of the egel being formed by some kind of magic upon Aharon's explanation to Moshe of what happened, in which he makes it sound as if the egel emerged from the flames of its own accord - see Shemot 32:24

**If you're wondering about this, the stories of Michah/babies being used as bricks and Moshe raising Yosef's coffin from the Nile only appear in midrashic literature, much like Avraham smashing Terach's idols.

***As a female reader, one might expect me to be unreservedly happy about this midrash and its portrayal of women standing firm in their faith when the men were backsliding - indeed, this is one of the texts traditionally brought to prove womens' greater spiritual status in what is best described as Orthodox Judaism's version of 'radical feminism'.#  However, against this the midrash does raise other troubling questions centering around the implication throughout both the midrash and the Torah itself is that 'am' only encompasses male Jews - otherwise not only does this midrash not make sense, but in the text of Shemot Aharon would not be asking the 'am' to take the jewellry of their 'wife, sons and daughters' if these groups were included in 'am'. Yet, both texts go on to say that 'kol ha'am' took off their earrings for the Egel, just as earlier in the Torah 'kol ha'am' had twice indicated its acceptance of the Torah (parshat Yitro). I don't think this is coincidental - however, if we do read 'kol ha'am' on both occasions as encompassing just the men, then what does this say about women's inclusion in acceptance of the Torah??

I don't have an answer to this, but thought I'd throw this out there in case anyone has any ideas or way of resolving this....

# with thanks to Rabbanit Gilla Rosen of Yakar/Nishmat for articulating the parallels between chareidi and radical feminist views of gender difference at a recent conference in Oxford ;-)

Monday, 5 March 2012

Tetzaveh - the Holiest Song

B"H

Full sources here

Sorry for the delay in posting this - unfortunately our flat had a bit of a meningitis scare over the weekend. This week's blog is therefore for the refuah shleima of Rochel bas Naomi.

Sources: 

1) Midrash Tanchuma on Tetzaveh, Chapter 5


ואתה תצוה. זה שאמר הכתוב, הנך יפה רעיתי הנך יפה (שה"ש ד א). אמר רבי עקיבא, לא היה כל העולם כולו כדאי כיום שניתן בו שיר השירים לישראל, שכל הכתובים קדש ושיר השירים קדש קדשים. אמר רבי אליעזר בן עזריה, משל למה הדבר דומה. למלך שנטל סאה של חטים ונתנה לנחתום ואמר לו, הוצא ממנו כך וכך סולת, כך וכך סובין, כך וכך מורסן, וסלית לי מתוכה גלוסקה אחת יפה מנופה ומעולה. כך כל הכתובים קדש ושיר השירים קדש קדשים... עיניך יונים. אמר רבי יצחק, אמר להם הקדוש ברוך הוא, דוגמא שלך דומה ליונה, מי שמבקש ליקח חטים מחברו, הוא אומר לו הראני דוגמתן, אף אתה דוגמא שלך דומה ליונה. כיצד. כשהיה נח בתבה, מה כתיב שם, וישלח את העורב ויצא יצא (ברא' ח ז), ואחר כך שלח את היונה, ותבא אליו היונה וגו' (שם שם יא). אמר הקדוש ברוך הוא, מה היונה הביאה אורה לעולם, אף אתם שנמשלתם כיונה, הביאו שמן זית והדליקו לפני את הנר, שנאמר, ואתה תצוה ויקחו אליך שמן:



2) Shir Hashirim 1:15-16

  הִנָּךְ יָפָה רַעְיָתִי הִנָּךְ יָפָה עֵינַיִךְ יוֹנִים ..


3) Shemot 30:10

י וְכִפֶּר אַהֲרֹן עַל-קַרְנֹתָיו אַחַת בַּשָּׁנָה  מִדַּם חַטַּאת הַכִּפֻּרִים אַחַת בַּשָּׁנָה יְכַפֵּר עָלָיו לְדֹרֹתֵיכֶם קֹדֶשׁ-קָדָשִׁים הוּא לַיהוָה.



Apology number two - due to the late hour, I am unable to do full justice to the above midrash so the intention was to make a couple of quick points al regel achat (although it seems to have grown...). It's therefore worth reading the whole midrash and not just the heavily abridged version above.

The Midrash Tanchuma often starts building a midrash on a verse from e.g. Nevi'im, Ketuvim which is may or may not be unrelated to the relevant parsha, meanders in interesting ways and then finally relates back to the 'hook' pasuk from the parsha on which the midrash is based. This midrash is a good example, whereby the opening statements regarding Shir HaShirim are in fact related to the closing words of parshat Tetzaveh, while the ending in turn links back to the start of the parsha. While this makes for an interesting circularity, it also allows the midrash to teach us several important aspects of our relationship with G-d and our role in the world. 

The midrash starts off with a verse from Shir HaShirim in which the male lover/G-d addresses the female lover/Israel: hinach yafah ra'yati, hinach yafah, einayich yonim (Indeed you are beautiful, my beloved, indeed you are beautiful, your eyes are like doves)* It then goes on to quote Rabbi Akiva's famous saying that while all of Tanakh is kodesh (holy), Shir HaShirim is kodesh kadashim or 'holy of holies', and repeats this statement after bringing another teaching (this time, of Rabbi Elazar ben Azaryah) as proof. 

Where else have we heard this phrase kodesh kadashim? Well, as above it in fact forms the closing words of parshat Tetzaveh in describing the special altar for burning incense placed just outside the parochet separating the aron from the rest of the Mishkan's interior. Of course, we are also more familiar with this phrase used to refer to the space enclosed by the parochet itself, which has an even greater level of sanctity than the rest of the Mishkan/Beit haMikdash and which was therefore entered only on Yom Kippur by the Kohen Gadol

By describing Shir HaShirim as kodesh kadashim, Rabbi Akiva is therefore making a bold statement about the importance of Shir HaShirim as a sefer, implicitly elevating it above even the 5 seforim of the Torah itself! However, if we bear in mind the traditional understanding that Shir HaShirim is essentially a love song between G-d and Israel, then not only is Rabbi Akiva's statement more understandable but it also lends a new level of meaning to the Mishkan's status. If Shir HaShirim is the sefer which is kodesh kadashim, then conversely we should also see that part of the Mishkan which is kodesh kadashim as an expression of the special bond between G-d and Israel.**

Let's hold onto that thought while we turn elsewhere...

After giving several different interpretations of the above pasuk from Shir HaShirim***, the midrash culminates with the interpretation of Rabbi Yitzhak who compares Israel to the dove dispatched by Noach following the Flood to test how far the waters had retreated from the earth. Rabbi Yitzhak uses this comparision to interpret the phrase einayich yonim from Shir HaShirim - however the midrash makes a further interpretative link by connecting the olive leaf brought back to Noach by the dove and the olive oil which G-d commands Israel (through the Kohanim) to light the Menorah with in the Mishkan. Crucially, it does so by declaring that, just as the dove 'brought light to the world', so too Israel is commanded to bring light through the Menorah. If we bear in mind the role that the dove plays in parshat Noach by providing a sign of hope and rebirth following the destruction of the previous wicked generations, this teaches us an important lesson about the role Israel is supposed to play in a world slowly progressing towards perfection.

This midrash therefore ties together the parsha and Shir HaShirim in a way which sheds a new light (;-)) on both texts. The status given to Shir HaShirim as the kodesh kadashim reminds us not only that the relationship between G-d and Israel is as close as that between lovers, but that - despite our difficulty in relating to this today - the intricate layout and rituals surrounding the Mishkan and the Kohanim is in fact a manifestation of this deep bond. Yet we are also reminded that this relationship is not just inwards-looking, but that as Jews we are also to follow the path of the dove be a source of 'light' and redemption to the wider world. 

Shavua tov and Purim sameach!

RPT


* A word about Shir HaShirim and allegory/translations. With any literary text (especially verse), there is always a fundamental problem in translation - how does one balance accurately translating the individual words while maintaining the style/verse structure etc. which is an integral part of the original text's literary value? 

Most translations end up compromising between these two opposing forces by not using a 100% literal translation. However, with Shir HaShirim there is a third aspect to this dilemma, which is that even in the original Hebrew the p'shat or 'plain' meaning of the text, while being incredibly beautiful in its own right, is also only a 'surface' beneath which one must dive to understand the deeper allegorical meanings. While a translator of Shir HaShirim has to balance content with form, both the translator and the reader must always be aware that there is more to the text than initially meets the eye. 

Reading Shir HaShirim (whether in Hebrew or English) is therefore inevitably an exercise in interpretation of the p'shat text (which is one reason why I have a massive problem with ArtScroll's 'translation' of Shir HaShirim, but will save that rant for another time....;-) As you can see here, I am reading Shir HaShirim according to the traditional interpretation that this sefer is describing the relationship between G-d and Israel. However, I am resolutely sticking to the Metsudah translation for now...

** It is also worth bearing in mind that, if all of Israel is a goy kadosh, then the Kohanim who have a special status within said goy kadosh could be said to be kodesh kadashim. The Kohanim and the incense service/the Kohen Gadol's special service on Yom Kippur can then be seen as a further manifestation of the G-d/Israel relationship as described in Shir HaShirim. Just a thought...

***which is another danger behind the ArtScroll 'allegorical translation' approach, as it ends up only providing one possible interpretation out of many. But I think you've got the message by now ;-).

**** This takes on even more significance if we bear in mind the opinions that the commandments concerning the Mishkan were given after the sin of the Golden Calf, even though they are recorded in the Torah beforehand.