Korach: populism

Korach: populism

Populism is the caricature of democracy.  The will of "the people", sometimes an overwhelming majority, sometimes an empowered plurality, installs a government of regret.  Populism is always after the fact; if it all works out,  the choice was a triumph of democracy. 

This week's haftarah is quite ironic. The narrative of the Torah portion concerns a challenge to the (unelected) special status of Moses and Aaron. The challenge comes from their Levite cousin: Korach, for whom the parsha is named.  Korach's behavior is so egregious that a unique (cruel and unusual) death penalty is created for him: the earth swallows him and ( some of)  his family.  This questioning of the Divine right to lead and minister is eliminated with extreme prejudice.

The haftarah deals with the selection of a leader: the first king.  A king is demanded by the people, despite the attempts at dissuasion  by the prophet Samuel, the current prophetic and consensus leader of the Israelites.  The first verse  in the book of Samuel tells us about Elkana, Samuel's father.  For those of us who will not remember Chronicles I 6:19-23, Rashi  comments: 

Elkonoh. He was a Levite of the sons of Aviosof, the son of Korach —his ancestry is thus recorded in Divrei Hayomim. 

The Korach legacy has reappeared, warning the people about dangerous political decisions! 

When I first learned about Korach and his band (third grade?), everything was clear and easy.  Korach and his band had an evil agenda.  They tried to seize power for their selfish motives.  Moses and Aaron, pure servants of Gd and the people, were the victims of slander and hate.  With the help of heaven, good prevailed. 

When I was a youth, now aware of oppression and the cause of justice, the story became more disturbing.  The legitimate grievances of a segment of the people were demonized and ultimately decided by superhuman forces.  Where was the free and fair election? 

Now I hold both views, and yet  more views. Events in the world are not elected or just.  Pandemics strike and they challenge the values of societies.  History reveals the merits and errors of previously held values; and shows how those judgments may well change again.  The "German People" overwhelmingly supported Hitler in the 1934 referendum (89.93%) .  Now they support Angela Merkel. A majority of America once supported the war in VietNam.

Good and bad, I define these terms quite clear, no doubt, somehow
Ah, but I was so much older then I'm younger than that now

    My Back Pages                                           Bob Dylan 

I do not  forsake the hope of understanding.  I am just not as disappointed anymore. 

Shelach: which side are you on?

Shelach: which side are you on?

The Haftara is a commentary on the parsha. The story in this haftarah is a contrast with the parsha.  The parsha tells the story of the scouts sent to investigate the Promised Land.  Their evaluation, based upon the physiognomy of the inhabitants was that Gd's Promise could not be kept.  Their report generates panic among the people and results in  the 40 year desert sojourn. 

The Haftarah recounts the adventure of the two ( more select) spies sent to Jericho in preparation for entry into the land. These spies come to Rahab.  When the agents of the state come for them, she hides the pair in the flax heap - in the hayloft.  

When my father escaped from Treblinka ( paired with another man [Velel Schneiderman]), they found a woman in the fields (my mother) who convinced the local farmers to hide them... in the hayloft.  The old Rahab trick!

The stories share something deeper than the coincidence of hiding in the hay.  Rahab subsequently tells the spies  that the people of Canaan sense that they cannot stand up to the Israelites and the forces that battle for them.  She knows that the current government of Jericho will be defeated. The Stys family also felt that the Nazis would be defeated, despite their current domination.  They would need to answer for their actions during the occupation. 

The only intelligence the Jericho spies bring back is that the spirit of the enemy is broken. Ten of the spies in the parsha deliver a report that discourages the Israelites. Belief is a pre-requisite for victory.

The sending of the spies in the parsha comes in the context of an established crisis of confidence.  Moshe had stated that the task of leading the people was more than he could bear. Sending the spies was another manifestation of insecurity.  What is the relationship between insecurity and lack of faith? 

The forces of justice and beneficence are at a disadvantage. They should never win.  The greedy and oppressive  do not have set rules, while the good must answer for everything they do.  It is only through Divine intervention that good can triumph. 

Behaalothecha: Ascent

Behaalothecha: Ascent

The root of the title word of this week's parsha is עֲלֹֽ.  It  is a pictograph.  The ayin, the letter that means "look",  is pointing to the Lamed, the letter that stands above all other Hebrew letters, the letter that, like a flame,  ascends. The word, עֲלֹֽ,  means ascend or kindle. Lamed, the name attributed to  לֹֽ, means teach, learn. To teach and learn has a close relationship to ignition.  True teaching is catalytic, it helps the learner overcome the inertial barrier and allows an independent  sustained reaction, a new flame, to come into existence. And the new flame can (should) ignite others.  The flame illuminates, allows definition to overcome the vague.  Knowledge rises above the mundane. 

The parsha shows aspects of the battle between ascent and descent. Guided by the Divine cloud and fed manna, the people complain (11;1). Is this the revolution of rising expectations of de Tocqueville? The apt punishment is the outbreak of fire stopped by Moshe's prayer.  Fire is the greatest human tool.  The control of a self sustaining process, that imparts its property of heat and the potential for activation to its surroundings, imparts the human with immense power that translates into our current technology and will generate  advances in the future.  Of course it is dangerous.  It is a fitting punishment for destructive aspirations. 

This mini rebellion is the harbinger of the more famous expression of Exodus remorse: the incident of the quail (11;4).  The people now recall the delightful ( probably rotten) [dog]food they were fed in Egypt.  Now they only eat cookies! The complaints anger Gd and depress Moshe.  Moshe loses confidence. He cannot bear the burdens of the people, he cannot provide them with the impossible resources Gd has promised alone. Elders come to share the burden and quail descend from the sky, a manna replacement.  Manna appeared with the ascent of the dew.  The quail fell the sky, they became available because the birds' flight was impaired and they fell to earth ( and started to rot).

Was it Moshe's despair  that invited the comments of his sister (and brother) questioning his preeminence (12;1)? Did Moshe's request for assistance compromise the perception of his position so that his family could question his actions and decisions? This time, Gd and the Holy cloud came to his defense.  Miriam was stricken with tzoraath and the people suffered temporary inertia. This was not the last crisis of confidence, this was not the last mistake. 

There is always uncertainty when you kindle a fire.  The control is never complete.  The light that lets you see may reveal things that you never wanted to know.  Children should not play with matches. 

Naso: Drinking

Naso: Drinking 

The meat of this week's parsha  is abbrevitated in the name NaSo נָשֹׂ֗א: Nazir (נ)  Sotah  (ש= ס) [ although the talmud uses  samech ס, the Torah uses sin ש )] Asham א.  These three concepts are bracketed by the Levitical burdens of the Tabernacle and the 12 identical tribal offerings of initiation for  the Tabernacle. 

Both Nazir ( the Nazerite) and Sotah ( the suspected wife) have their own tractates in the Talmud. The first discussion in  tractate Sotah  involves the relationship to the  Nazir

דתניא רבי אומר למה נסמכה פרשת נזיר לפרשת סוטה לומר לך שכל הרואה סוטה בקלקולה יזיר עצמו מן היין

  as it is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says: Why is the portion of a nazirite (Numbers, chapter 6) placed adjacent to the portion of a sota (Numbers, chapter 5)? This was done to tell you that anyone who sees a sota in her disgrace  should renounce wine, 

Rashi: יזיר עצמו מן היין - שהיין מביא לידי קלות ראש והוא גרם לה:

 translation:

renounce wine: because wine induces giddiness which caused her  [to become a sotah (suspected wife)]

Steinsaltz: יזיר עצמו מן היין, ששתיית יין היא לעתים קרובות הסיבה לזנות, וצריך אדם לתת דבר זה על ליבו. ולפי זה יש איפוא קשר ענייני בין סוטה ונזיר, ומשום כך נסמכו המסכתות.

translation: 
renounce wine: because drinking wine sometimes induces lascivious thoughts, and a person needs to consider that. Therefore there is some connection between the ideas of sotah  and nazir, and because of that they are juxtaposed.

Drinking  connects Nazir and Sotah  on several levels.  The sotah drinks the potion of proof and the drama of the event induces a  vow that includes the  avoidance of  wine, the vow of the Nazir.  

 The Nazir must avoid wine and grape products.  Rebi understands this to mean intoxicants.  Rashi and Rabbi Steinsaltz clarify the connection between the suspected woman and alcohol consumption.  The imagined scenario is that  a wife is found secluded alone with a man who will evoke the husbands jealousy.  Arriving at that situation involves a number of  misjudgments[including  getting caught]. The drinking leads to a lowering  of inhibitions. That relaxation -  that  includes some discounting of the rules, a change in perspective - might have been part of the motivation for that (third or fourth) glass of wine. The wine is an enabler. 

The Nazir makes herself and outsider.  He follows a new set of rules, accepted in all their arbitrariness. We have a modern phrase for this kind of blind adherence to arbitrary rules: Drinking the Koolaide.  The phrase has evolved to mean adherence to an abstruse  set of rules which could be dangerous.  The Talmud describes  incidents in which decade-long terms of naziruth ( the Nazir condition) are nullified and must be repeated.  

 The sotah, if she is guilty,  also drank from a Koolaide,  that is neither wine nor the waters of proof. Anna Karenina and Madam Bovary drank from the drug that places novelty and excitement above faithful marriage. 

The sotah ritual confronts a modern problem: the presumption of guilt. She has been found secluded with a man and intimacy is assumed.  She must take an oath and drink the potentially poisonous mixture to "prove" her innocence.   This is a sexist position that attributes lasciviousness to women.  The presumed male authorship leads to an argument that the law, written by the oppressor, is wrong because it  does not understand the victim.  It does not understand the low probability of an actual transgression and it is insensitive to the consequences of the ritual.  These kinds of presumptions need to be confronted. They are the  basis of racism.  They are the basis of antisemitism. Prejudice means the presumption of guilt based upon difference. 

It is not natural to understand the other.  I am not sure that it is possible. We need to strive to understand and optimize ourselves. 

 מִשֶּׁרַבּוּ הַמְנָאֲפִים, פָּסְקוּ הַמַּיִם הַמָּרִים, וְרַבָּן יוֹחָנָן בֶּן זַכַּאי הִפְסִיקָן

 When adulterers multiplied, the ceremony of the bitter waters ceased and it was Rabban Yohanan ben Zakkai who discontinued it,

(Sotah 9;9)

Things change.