Devarim: talking about land

The end of the parsha, devarim, involves the conquest of the land east of the Jordan. The provenance of the land is given.  We are told that the occupants of the lands that were conquered by the Israelites had taken the land from an earlier inhabitants.  There is an implication that the true rights to the land are long gone, justifying  occupation by conquest.  History invalidates the claim of possession.  The ultimate deed to the land  comes by virtue of Gd's gift. Do the dispossessed know that?

I live in a place that was established by European people.  But Native American people  ( who had come thousands of years earlier from Asia) had a claim of possession. My "rights" to this home are protected by the police, the army, nuclear weapons (if needed). Gd is in my side, but I have twinges of conscience - especially when I see Native people sleeping on the street downtown. 

Land does not mean what it once did.  For most people it is no more than conspicuous consumption. The products of the land are now in the hands of multinational conglomerates ( Archer-Daniels-Midland, etc.) No one  owns the productive land but Bain,Inc and the Chinese politburo make money from it, wherever it is located.  The loquation is merely words ( devarim), people fight over words.

Matoth-Masei: Promises Promises

A promise implies a level of control over the future, at least enough control to fulfill the  promise.  This week's parshioth revolve around the fulfillment of the promise of the land and problems that this generates

One such problem is that the tribes of Reuben and Gad know that their lot lies in an area that needs no further conquest.  The Israelites  have already taken possession of the land that is destined to be theirs. But to lose these tribes would weaken the force necessary for the conquest of the land  included in Gd's promise to he patriarchs. The conflict is resolved with a promise. It is interesting to note that consequence to Reuben and Gad for  failure to  fulfill their commitment is not compete loss of inheritance, but rather a potion in the main-land west of the Jordan.  Gd's promise to the patriarchs takes priority over the possible penalty for breaching the contract.

 The parsha  includes rules of inheritance and the (apparently new) concept of the female heir. Notice that the land inherited by the daughthers of Zelophchad ( the female heirs)  is an addendum to the promised land.  This is a portion of the land of Gilad that the family of Machir independently conquered from the Emorites.

None of the other tribes  lost any land so that the women could inherit. Deus ex machina. 

The name of our national Gd is an elision of the past present and future. That name if the core of  promise.

Pinchas:inheritance

Pinchas begins with a reward for meritorious behavior.  Pinchas receives the Peace Prize and this includes an eternal priesthood. [That may mean that although Pinchas was excluded from the priesthood because he was born too early he is now included, or that he will spawn the high priests, or both).

The parsha then prescribes war on Midian. Pinchas’ mother, Moshe’s wife are both Midianites. This heritage, the heritage of Jethro, is to be destroyed, denied. It is the shameful heritage.

Then comes the counting, the naming and numbering of the clans who will inherit the land.  The land is to be divided among these clans, according to their number and by lot.  The land is given to people who have never been settled, people born in the wilderness.  They will possess the land and their children will inherit it. Their descendants (us?) will acquire a right to that land by virtue of birth. Inheritance.

Land is inherited, authority is  a separate matter.  The Cohanim and Leviim are enumerated to establish their lineage.  But Moshe’s position, the temporal leader... Not (yet [not until David]) heritable.  That position leaves the family. It goes to Joshua.

What we all inherit … mortality

Balak: point of view

Point of view is a major theme in Balak.  Balak hires Bilam to curse the Israelites.  He takes him to a certain (ad)vantage point.  When the result is not what Balak wants, he takes Bilam to another overlook.  Failure to obtain the desired result prompts another move, hoping that seeing the Israelite camp from another angle will be less favorable for them and more advantageous for Balak.  Now Bilam, in his wisdom, tries to not even look at the Israelites.  The ultimate point of view...eyes closed; But the result is still a blessing on the Hebrews. 


The story of Bilam’s trip, with the blocking angel is also a story of selective vision.  The donkey can see the angel and the danger he presents.  Bilam must have his eyes divinely opened to perceive what is obvious to an ass. Sometime intelligence blocks the obvious. 


To see truth one must simplify the understanding, take away the complications of opinion and desire. 


My professor of neuroscience once said:”seeing is believing”

2011 

2010 

2009 

2008

2007