Acharei Mot(h)- Kedoshim: the mixture

 Acharei Mot(h)- Kedoshim:

Again, there is a conflation of the daf yomi ( the "page of the day" of Talmud that is studied by convention since 1923) with the parsha.  Daf yomi is in Yoma, the tractate that deals with the Yom Kippur service as it was performed in the national sanctuaries. ( The second temple was destroyed 1,951 years  ago).  This week, on page 9a, these passage appear: 

מִקְדָּשׁ רִאשׁוֹן מִפְּנֵי מָה חָרַב — מִפְּנֵי שְׁלֹשָׁה דְּבָרִים שֶׁהָיוּ בּוֹ: עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה, וְגִלּוּי עֲרָיוֹת, וּשְׁפִיכוּת דָּמִים

Due to what reason was the First Temple destroyed? It was destroyed due to the fact that there were three matters that existed in the First Temple: Idol worship, forbidden sexual relations, and bloodshed.

אֲבָל מִקְדָּשׁ שֵׁנִי שֶׁהָיוּ עוֹסְקִין בְּתוֹרָה וּבְמִצְוֹת וּגְמִילוּת חֲסָדִים, מִפְּנֵי מָה חָרַב? מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהָיְתָה בּוֹ שִׂנְאַת חִנָּם. לְלַמֶּדְךָ שֶׁשְּׁקוּלָה שִׂנְאַת חִנָּם כְּנֶגֶד שָׁלֹשׁ עֲבֵירוֹת: עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה, גִּלּוּי עֲרָיוֹת, וּשְׁפִיכוּת דָּמִים.

However, considering that the people during the Second Temple period were engaged in Torah study, observance of mitzvot, and acts of kindness,  why was the Second Temple destroyed? It was destroyed due to the fact that there was wanton hatred during that period. This comes to teach you that the sin of wanton hatred is equivalent to the three severe transgressions: Idol worship, forbidden sexual relations and bloodshed

With the severe lesson of the loss of political independence, the loss of the protection of a national state, the loss of access to good graces of GD, we are taught this equivalence between careless hatred and the three sins to die for. 

The first parsha, Acharie Mot[h] has three sections.  The first describes the Yom Kippur temple service, prominently including the scapegoat, the goat chosen by  random (appearing) lot to be sent to ( or for) Azazel.  A  unique ritual. Were this rite of the goat for Azazel not a direct communication from Gd to Moses, its author would be stoned for idolatry. It is a demonstration that the ins and outs of  service to the Divine are not predictable; they do not make any rational sense. 

But failure to perform the service exactly as prescribed is a fatal offence. The  parsha,  is introduced by "After the Death"  of the sons of Aaron. It is a warning about entering the inner sanctum at unauthorized times and implies  that the act of entry alone is a risk for death through Divine wrath.  The death of Aaron's sons are proof that they mean business. 

The parsha then prohits offenses that bring destruction mentioned in the gemarrah.  Immediately following the description of the Yom Kippur service, there is an admonition against idolatry.  

וְלֹא־יִזְבְּח֥וּ עוֹד֙ אֶת־זִבְחֵיהֶ֔ם לַשְּׂעִירִ֕ם אֲשֶׁ֛ר הֵ֥ם זֹנִ֖ים אַחֲרֵיהֶ֑ם חֻקַּ֥ת עוֹלָ֛ם תִּֽהְיֶה־זֹּ֥את לָהֶ֖ם לְדֹרֹתָֽם׃ 

and that they may offer their sacrifices no more to the goat-demons after whom they stray. This shall be to them a law for all time, throughout the ages.

This is followed by a passage on the sanctity of blood, the prohibition on its consumption . 

כִּ֣י נֶ֣פֶשׁ הַבָּשָׂר֮ בַּדָּ֣ם הִוא֒

 For the life of the flesh is in the blood. 

(This is a concept well known to hematologists)

The parsha ends in the verses read in synagogue on  Yom Kippur: the forbidden sexual liaisons. 

It is not surprising that the Talmud echoes the relevant Torah passages, but the distortions (especially the twist on blood) are interesting.  The Talmud uses the phrase "spilling blood" to mean murder.  The Torah (according to Jews, cf J Witnesses)  is talking about non-human mammalian blood.  But the phrase is the same  וְשָׁפַךְ֙ אֶת־דָּמ֔וֹ וְכִסָּ֖הוּ בֶּעָפָֽר he shall pour out its blood and cover it with earth.

The second parsha, Kedoshim,  is a whirl of ritual and humanism. 

וְאָֽהַבְתָּ֥ לְרֵעֲךָ֖ כָּמ֑וֹךָ  Love your fellow as yourself: I am the LORD.

next verse:

שַֽׁעַטְנֵ֔ז לֹ֥א יַעֲלֶ֖ה עָלֶֽיךָ׃  you shall not put on cloth from a mixture of two kinds of material.

 It juxtapose the part of religion  that makes sense  to the modern with the most arbitrary, least intelligible of laws.  It is telling that the Lrd is the reason to love your fellow as yourself.  The text does not assume  this to be a natural or obvious idea

Much of the parsha deals with obligations to the poor and the stranger.  These are the commandments to negate baseless hatred.  Thus, the parsha reflects the reason given in the Talmud for the destruction of the  second Temple

The first and second temples differed in their significance.  The first temple was the symbol of the Kingdom of Israel. Its destruction meant the end of the state; it meant eviction, a new landlord.  That condition lasted until 1948.  The second Temple showed that a nationhood could exist while under subjugation. The Jewish people could continue through the transition from the Babylonian to the Persian to Macedonian to the Roman hegemonies. Thus, they could survive their "exile"  indefinitely, regardless of the dominant political entity. The great threat under these new, non-state conditions was groundless hatred.  The antidote was humanism. 

In these parshiot ritual and compassion are dissolved in one another. To our modern eyes this feels like  an  insoluble mixture with grains of  prohibitions and pebbles of victimless crimes desperately suspended in a clear, appealing solution of rules against hate. It is only through great effort that the suspension can be maintained in a confusing agitation, lest the heavy unintelligibles settle to the bottom ( and the clear solution decanted off).  

Actually, what we take for understanding is mostly comfort. The (nearly) universal acceptance of the Golden Rule makes this suppression and redirection of instinctive feelings seem "right".Where is the line between ritual and reasonable?  Relating the death of Aaron's sons to unauthorized entry into the inner sanctum is not the current understanding of cause and effect. Death is never a well understood event.  After death,  ritual is left as a comfort.

 Thazria-Mezorah: the debt of the survivor

וְאַרְבָּעָ֧ה אֲנָשִׁ֛ים הָי֥וּ מְצֹרָעִ֖ים פֶּ֣תַח הַשָּׁ֑עַר וַיֹּֽאמְרוּ֙ אִ֣ישׁ אֶל־רֵעֵ֔הוּ מָ֗ה אֲנַ֛חְנוּ יֹשְׁבִ֥ים פֹּ֖ה עַד־מָֽתְנוּ׃ There were four men, lepers, outside the gate. They said to one another, “Why should we sit here waiting for death?

אִם־אָמַרְנוּ֩ נָב֨וֹא הָעִ֜יר וְהָרָעָ֤ב בָּעִיר֙ וָמַ֣תְנוּ שָׁ֔ם וְאִם־יָשַׁ֥בְנוּ פֹ֖ה וָמָ֑תְנוּ וְעַתָּ֗ה לְכוּ֙ וְנִפְּלָה֙ אֶל־מַחֲנֵ֣ה אֲרָ֔ם אִם־יְחַיֻּ֣נוּ נִֽחְיֶ֔ה וְאִם־יְמִיתֻ֖נוּ וָמָֽתְנוּ׃ If we decide to go into the town, what with the famine in the town, we shall die there; and if we just sit here, still we die. Come, let us desert to the Aramean camp. If they let us live, we shall live; and if they put us to death, we shall but die.”

The Haftarah presents a trio of bad alternatives. The afflicted men can either die of starvation where they are, go back to their town and starve in some greater proximity to the people they care about, or go to an enemy camp and take their chances.  The enemy camp has the advantage of having food, so there is a non-starvation option.  But  it is the enemy, so immediate death by the sword is also an option. 

What could they hope would happen to them in the Aramean, enemy camp?  They could hope to be slaves involved in some menial, probably unpleasant work and be fed table scraps.  There was a chance that they would be required to provide service that advanced the cause of the Arameans against their friends and families.   What would they do then? Fortunately for the men ( and for the story), the Aramean army abandoned their  well stocked camp because of a misinterpreted noise, contrasting their cowardice with the courage (? or desperation) of the lepers.  

The four men in the haftarah are in this unique position because they have tzaraath, they have an affliction for which the ancient law prescribes banishment.  A disease, something that makes sense in Gd's calculus, but surpasses human reason -  something for which they cannot be blamed - has separated them from the community.  This alienation must have impacted their decisions.   A normal, integrated resident of the town under siege, apparently starving because of the siege, would not  have have thought about the possibility of seeking the mercy of the cruel enemy.  Tzraath, with its expulsion of the afflicted, opened these four men to alternatives that included the possibility of betrayal.  The bond to their kin had been loosened.  They could present themselves as independent of the conflict. They were facing a harsh, painful, and probably fatal, reality ... alone.  

On one of our Passover programs, a man was recalling  a story from his Holocaust experience.  He was starving.  The only source of food he could identify was in a Nazi work camp.  He surrendered (volunteered?) for the camp to avoid starvation.  On Passover we sing the Song of Songs which includes the phrase: "Love is as strong as death. " Starvation can be stronger than love. 

וְצִוָּה֙ הַכֹּהֵ֔ן וְשָׁחַ֖ט אֶת־הַצִּפּ֣וֹר הָאֶחָ֑ת אֶל־כְּלִי־חֶ֖רֶשׂ עַל־מַ֥יִם חַיִּֽים׃ The priest shall order one of the birds slaughtered over fresh water in an earthen vessel;

אֶת־הַצִּפֹּ֤ר הַֽחַיָּה֙ יִקַּ֣ח אֹתָ֔הּ וְאֶת־עֵ֥ץ הָאֶ֛רֶז וְאֶת־שְׁנִ֥י הַתּוֹלַ֖עַת וְאֶת־הָאֵזֹ֑ב וְטָבַ֨ל אוֹתָ֜ם וְאֵ֣ת ׀ הַצִּפֹּ֣ר הַֽחַיָּ֗ה בְּדַם֙ הַצִּפֹּ֣ר הַשְּׁחֻטָ֔ה עַ֖ל הַמַּ֥יִם הַֽחַיִּֽים׃ and he shall take the live bird, along with the cedar wood, the crimson stuff, and the hyssop, and dip them together with the live bird in the blood of the bird that was slaughtered over the fresh water.

The prasha describes the elaborate ritual of purification after remission from tzoraath.  Part of the ceremony is the liberation of the living bird after its  immersion of a  into the blood of its dead twin. This private ritual is the most dramatic of the set of rites that involve pairs, usually pairs of  birds. One bird is offered as  an olah ( burnt offering) and the other as a chatath  (expiation offering).

Currently, daf yomi is Yoma, the tratctate that  deals with Yom Kippur. The great public  Yom Kippur rite prominently includes the pair of  identical goats, chosen by lot.  One goat is an expiation offering to Gd,  The other is to Azazel. One goat is killed ( and its blood is sprinkled toward the Inner Sanctum)  and one is sent out alive onto a harsh, steep, mountainside where it will probably die in short order. Which goat won the lottery?

This week, we celebrated the transition from Yom HaZikaron, Israel memorial day, to Yom HaAzmauth ( Independence day) . Last week was Yom Hashoah,  Holocaust memorial day. We dip the wings and tail ( see mishna yomit Negaim 14:1 for the details of the dipping) of our glorious freedom in the blood of those who died for it. 

Shemini: Caution:Holy

Shemini: Caution: Holy

This week, in daf yomi, we had this famous and strange  passage: 

מַעֲשֶׂה בְּכֹהֵן אֶחָד שֶׁהָיָה מִתְעַסֵּק וְרָאָה הָרִיצְפָּה שֶׁהִיא מְשׁוּנָּה מֵחֲבֵרוֹתֶיהָ. בָּא וְאָמַר לַחֲיבֵרוֹ. לֹא הִסְפִּיק לִגְמֹר אֶת הַדָּבָר עַד שֶׁיָּֽצְתָה נִשְׁמָתוֹ, וְיָדְעוּ בְיִיחוּד שֶׁשָּׁם הָאָרוֹן גָּנוּז: 

there was an incident involving a certain priest who was going about his duties and saw a certain flagstone that was different from the others. He came and said to his fellow that he had noticed this deviation in the floor. He did not manage to conclude relating the incident before his soul left him,  Following this event, they knew with certainty that the Ark was sequestered there  (Shekalim 6:1)

The Haftorah contains this passage: 

  וַיָּבֹ֖אוּ עַד־גֹּ֣רֶן נָכ֑וֹן וַיִּשְׁלַ֨ח עֻזָּ֜א אֶל־אֲר֤וֹן הָֽ  וַיֹּ֣אחֶז בּ֔וֹ כִּ֥י שָׁמְט֖וּ הַבָּקָֽר   וַיִּֽחַר־אַ֤ף  בְּעֻזָּ֔ה וַיַּכֵּ֥הוּ שָׁ֛ם הָ עַל־הַשַּׁ֑ל וַיָּ֣מָת שָׁ֔ם עִ֖ם אֲר֥וֹן הָ

But when they came to the threshing floor of Nacon, Uzzah reached out for the Ark of God and grasped it, for the oxen had stumbled.

The LORD was incensed at Uzzah. And God struck him down on the spot for his indiscretion, and he died there beside the Ark of God.

The dramatic climax of our parsha,  Shemini : 

Fire came forth from before the LORD and consumed the burnt offering and the fat parts on the altar. And all the people saw, and shouted, and fell on their faces.

Now Aaron’s sons Nadab and Abihu each took his fire pan, put fire in it, and laid incense on it; and they offered before the LORD alien fire, which He had not enjoined upon them.

And fire came forth from the LORD and consumed them; thus they died at the instance of the LORD.

Then Moses said to Aaron, “This is what the LORD meant when He said: Through those near to Me I show Myself holy, And gain glory before all the people.” And Aaron was silent.

These stories  are the basis of  Raiders of the Lost Ark. Demonstrations of the deadly power of the tablets that Moses brought down from Sinai, as the emanation of Gd. Any approach to the ark and its contents must be through the correct ritual and only by the purified designee. Deviation - regardless of motive - results in sudden death. 

The priest who stumbled upon the ark was guilty of  noticing something he should not have known.  " I can tell you, but then I will have to kill you."   The toxicity of approaching Gd through kabbalah  (death or madness)  involves some volition by the violator. Tripping over the flagstone is the act of an innocent  - punishable by death. 

The case of Uzzah  is especially horrible.  The holy, holy, holy ark is about to topple from the oxcart. Uzzah just wants to help.  He wants to avoid the damage and  indignity of the fall and spillage . He is instinctively  trying to prevent a disaster.  He is struck dead, presumably for touching the sacred object in the wrong way, at the wrong time, without purification. The rules abide. 

In the context of the subsequent stories ( Uzzah, the priest, Raiders of the Lost ark), the purpose of the story of the sons of Aaron is clear as a warning against unauthorized visitation of the ark. The motive  of Nadav and Avihu is not specified.  Did they want to curry favor from the Almighty? Did they want to generate another phantasmagoria, like the one brought by the prescribed ritual? Did they want to modify the ritual? Were they intoxicated?  All unknown. To me, there is an aspect of adultery in their actions.  In the proper context, their actions would be loving; uninvited - it was a violation. 

The  silence of Aaron is an important prototype for the "approved"  Jewish response to tragedy.  Yesterday was Yom Hashoah, the day when the holocaust is remembered by  two minutes of ... silence.  I.L. Peretz's Bonshke Shweig ( the silent) describes the most uncomplaining  person who , when he goes to his reward has lost the ability to ask ( for justice).  Job, the model of the silent scream, does receive some recompense, but it is not necessarily a reward for silence, it seems more a compensation for injustice. 

The ark is not silent. It enforces its privacy and privilege with actions, lethal actions. 

Ultimately, Aaron was not entirely silent about the death of his sons.  Perhaps his initial mute response was prompted by his memory of his participation in the Golden Calf.  Maybe the death of his sons, engaged in some kind of alternative service, was punishment for his similar acts.  Perhaps he had modeled this unacceptable creative behavior.

 

And Aaron spoke to Moses, “See, this day they brought their sin offering and their burnt offering before the LORD, and such things have befallen me! Had I eaten sin offering today, would the LORD have approved?”

 

Aaron could not eat the sacrificial meat, as he was commanded.  The tragedy that had befallen him forced him to deviate from the ritual, now knowing that such a breech could have fatal consequences.  Aaron allows his feelings to guide him. This is not silence.  Silence would have been inappropriate.  Moses agreed.

וַיִּשְׁמַ֣ע מֹשֶׁ֔ה וַיִּיטַ֖ב בְּעֵינָֽיו׃ (פ) And when Moses heard this, he approved.

 

Gd does not comment. 

I am the fourth child at the Seder: I do not know how to ask.  Our history has made it hard. 

Passover: Freedom's just another word

Passover became the celebration of liberation, z'man cheruthainu. The reading for the Shabbath of Passover prominently includes the instruction to makes the second pair of Tablets.  These are to replace the Tablets that Moses broke when he saw the people dancing around the golden calf. The people had misinterpreted their liberation from Egypt as a license to follow their instincts.  The release from the arbitrary and unjust laws of Egypt permitted almost anything. 

 Such unrestrained freedom is alluded to in the Haggadah.  The magid, the retelling of story of Passover, begins with Terach  

בְּעֵבֶר הַנָּהָר יָשְׁבוּ אֲבוֹתֵיכֶם מֵעוֹלָם, תֶּרַח אֲבִי אַבְרָהָם וַאֲבִי נָחוֹר,   

 'Over the river did your ancestors dwell from always, Terach the father of Avraham and the father of Nachor, and they worshiped other gods.

Abraham's father did a very unusual thing: He left his homeland.  He did what Gd later  commanded to Abraham.  When Abraham leaves and goes to Canaan, Rashi quotes Genesis Rabbah  on how difficult  is this life of an immigrant. 

שֶׁהַדֶּרֶךְ גּוֹרֶמֶת לִשְׁלֹשָׁה דְבָרִים, מְמַעֶטֶת פְּרִיָּה וּרְבִיָּה וּמְמַעֶטֶת אֶת הַמָּמוֹן וּמְמַעֶטֶת אֶת הַשֵּׁם,

travelling is the cause of three things—it decreases (breaks up) family life, it reduces one’s wealth and lessens one’s renown

But Terach is the one who left the ancestral homeland of Aram.   Terach read left to right ( which the Hellenized  Jews in the time of the Haggadah may well have done) reads cheruth: freedom.  Terach had given himself the freedom to leave and go on the road, despite the sacrifices involved. The spirit of Terach may have been critical for Abraham to travel on to Canaan, as Gd instructed. 

Terach is described as an idolator. (His interest in theology may also have influenced Abraham).  In the context of the story of the Jews, Terach's travels were (at least somewhat) misguided, they missed the target.  Terach is freedom without direction...just another word for nothing left to lose

Freedom is a good thing.  A good life is better.