Eikev: Who is You

Last week, I wrote about  some of the problem posed by the verse: 

לֹ֣א אֶת־אֲבֹתֵ֔ינוּ כָּרַ֥ת  . אֶת־הַבְּרִ֣ית הַזֹּ֑את כִּ֣י אִתָּ֔נוּ אֲנַ֨חְנוּ אֵ֥לֶּה פֹ֛ה הַיּ֖וֹם כֻּלָּ֥נוּ חַיִּֽים׃ It was not with our fathers that the LORD made this covenant, but with us, the living, every one of us who is here today. 

The problems include the lack of prior agreement and punishment   for the  sins of ancestors. 

This week we have the opposite problem 

וִֽידַעְתֶּם֮ הַיּוֹם֒ כִּ֣י ׀ לֹ֣א אֶת־בְּנֵיכֶ֗ם אֲשֶׁ֤ר לֹֽא־יָדְעוּ֙ וַאֲשֶׁ֣ר לֹא־רָא֔וּ אֶת־מוּסַ֖ר .. אֶת־גׇּדְל֕וֹ אֶת־יָדוֹ֙ הַחֲזָקָ֔ה וּזְרֹע֖וֹ הַנְּטוּיָֽה׃

Take thought this day that it was not your children, who neither experienced nor witnessed the lesson of the LORD your Gd— His majesty, His mighty hand, His outstretched arm;

The trivial solution  for both verses is that Moshe really is talking exactly to that, long gone, generation who had sojourned in the desert and now come to the Promised Land. These two verses, taken together, close that loop. 

But the  ode that I recite twice daily ( to stay in compliance with the instructions within it)  and follows immediately after the outline of events to remember includes

וְלִמַּדְתֶּ֥ם אֹתָ֛ם אֶת־בְּנֵיכֶ֖ם  and teach them to your children. 

The generation that Moses addresses in  this book is tasked to spawn a tradition.  They will teach their children  and, presumably, those children will teach their children. A theoretically endless intergenerational transmission ( with the message degradation that accompanies all transmissions)

In last week's parsha, the analogous command was 

וְשִׁנַּנְתָּ֣ם לְבָנֶ֔יךָ Impress them upon your children

This word שִׁנַּנְתָּ֣ם (shinantom), often translated "teach" is clearly derived from  shein, tooth.  To my modern ear, it sounds  like the vampire bite that changes a civilian into a creature that lives on the blood  of others.  A bite that turns the bit into a biter.  A rabies-like contagion passed on by chomp.  It evokes the first  bite that altered the human genome, eating from the fruit of the tree of knowledge. 

This weeks parsha evokes those early days with its second word, Eikev. Here it is translated  "as a consequence", perhaps "on the heel(s) of."   It introduces the transactional tone that saturates the parsha: Do the commandments and reap the reward. 

 In its first use, eikev is the heel attacked by the serpent. 

ה֚וּא יְשׁוּפְךָ֣ רֹ֔אשׁ וְאַתָּ֖ה תְּשׁוּפֶ֥נּוּ עָקֵֽב   I will put enmity Between you and the woman, And between your offspring and hers; They shall strike at your head, And you shall strike at their heel.”

The heel, the eikev,  is the target of the tempter. The serpent prevents the fulfillment of the mission.  The heel is the eternal site of vulnerability. 

Eikev is a very important word.  The name Jacob, Yaakov, who is renamed Israel, is overtly derived from eikev.  At birth, Yaakov grabbed the heal of his nemesis  brother Esau in their imagined, and subsequently real,  battle for firstborn.   Yaakov receives the blessing of the firstborn.  Esau's reaction  reveals another meaning of eikev: 

וַיֹּ֡אמֶר הֲכִי֩ קָרָ֨א שְׁמ֜וֹ יַעֲקֹ֗ב וַֽיַּעְקְבֵ֙נִי֙ זֶ֣ה פַעֲמַ֔יִם אֶת־בְּכֹרָתִ֣י לָקָ֔ח וְהִנֵּ֥ה עַתָּ֖ה לָקַ֣ח בִּרְכָתִ֑י וַיֹּאמַ֕ר הֲלֹא־אָצַ֥לְתָּ לִּ֖י בְּרָכָֽה׃ [Esau] said, “Was he, then, named Jacob that he might supplant me these two times? First he took away my birthright and now he has taken away my blessing!” And he added, “Have you not reserved a blessing for me?”

He is named YaaKov ( the name contains eikev) because he eikeved,  "supplanted" me.  He heeled me? He consequenced me? The easiest translation of this word וַֽיַּעְקְבֵ֙נִי֙  is: He Jewed me. The target of the serpent and the target of the Jew are the same. They use a low , almost forgotten ,spot to foil a great mission...(like the Totalitarian state).  They turn their enemies' ambitions back at them, sometimes winning the battle and  earning their (intergenerational) hatred. 

These two parshioth box us into saying that Moshe, the man who lived 3500 years ago was talking to his contemporaries.  To make the Torah relevant, we can posit that The (eternal) Moshe, the voice of the author of Deuteronomy, indeed speaks to only one generation - the generation of the reader, our generation. It lays upon us the obligation to receive the ancestral and parental tradition  and transmit it ...along with our own experience, the Divine interventions that we have seen. 

The generation of the man Moses had seen what was done to Pharaoh and his army, all the miracles done in the desert, the earth opening to swallow the secessionists Dathan and Aviram , etc.  I received the Treblinka rebellion and the atom bomb, the State of Israel, electronics and  television.  I saw people go to the moon, major advances in cancer and heart disease, AIDS and COVID, a  world that could feed eight billion people,  and recombinant Beyond Beef (a food that my ancestors did not know).  I am witnessing a rise in nationalism using the technology and internet that I hoped would unify the world; a time when the educated see that the world is too complex for human understanding, and the ignorant insist on the truth of absurd convictions that serve to  oppress. Every generation was deluded. Are we merely more aware of the impossibility of enlightenment?  

All that is left: Do the commandments and reap the reward. 

 Ve'Ethchanan: Unity

In the parsha, the  restatement of the (now modified) Ten commandments are introduced by a strange sentence:

לֹ֣א אֶת־אֲבֹתֵ֔ינוּ כָּרַ֥ת  . אֶת־הַבְּרִ֣ית הַזֹּ֑את כִּ֣י אִתָּ֔נוּ אֲנַ֨חְנוּ אֵ֥לֶּה פֹ֛ה הַיּ֖וֹם כֻּלָּ֥נוּ חַיִּֽים׃ It was not with our fathers that the LORD made this covenant, but with us, the living, every one of us who is here today. 

Huh? How did that happen? How did an event thousands of years ago get transported to the present?  This sounds like a fait accompli, not an offer. The first few words:  It was not with our fathers  implies that the agreement had not even taken effect at the great Sinai spectacle; it is only here today that the agreement begins. 

There is an element of truth to the statement It was not with our fathers.  The covenant takes hold only after the entry into the Promised Land.  The introduction to the Shema, the Loyalty Oath, states: 

וְזֹ֣את הַמִּצְוָ֗ה הַֽחֻקִּים֙ וְהַמִּשְׁפָּטִ֔ים אֲשֶׁ֥ר צִוָּ֛ה . לְלַמֵּ֣ד אֶתְכֶ֑ם לַעֲשׂ֣וֹת בָּאָ֔רֶץ אֲשֶׁ֥ר אַתֶּ֛ם עֹבְרִ֥ים שָׁ֖מָּה לְרִשְׁתָּֽהּ׃ And this is the Instruction—the laws and the rules—that the LORD your God has commanded [me] to impart to you, to be observed in the land that you are about to cross into and occupy,

The use of the singular mitzvah could imply the inseparability of all of these commandments.  Also, since these words are the introduction to the Shema, a recommitment to the first Commandment,  the bond between the covent and entry into the Land, the fulfillment of the seller's obligation, seems significant. 

Casting the sentence in the context of the moment of its statement trivializes it. Why preserve a historical detail that applied 3500 years ago? To  me, the sentence makes the more powerful statement: the Covenant is with us, our generations living today; and it will be with generations of Hebrews that follow ours. That seems to generate the problem of commitment in the absence of agreement.  The solution is that we, whose ancestors bound us to this contract do, indeed, live with a deal that was made millenia before our births.  It was written in stone ( twice). Our choice is whether to abide. (the Dude?)

The second commandment contains.

כִּ֣י אָנֹכִ֞י ..  אֵ֣ל קַנָּ֔א פֹּ֠קֵד עֲוֺ֨ן אָב֧וֹת עַל־בָּנִ֛ים וְעַל־שִׁלֵּשִׁ֥ים וְעַל־רִבֵּעִ֖ים לְשֹׂנְאָֽ֑י׃ You shall not bow down to them or serve them. For I the LORD your God am an impassioned God, visiting the guilt of the parents upon the children, upon the third and upon the fourth generations of those who reject Me,

It reinforces the legacy nature of the covenant.  The debts of the estate can also be passed on to ( a limited number of) futures generations. 

Taken with the introductory verse, stating that the covenant is (re)made with the current generation, leads to a jarring result.  The people of now enter into a pact that means they will be punished for the sins of their ancestors. The next verse states 

וְעֹ֥֤שֶׂה חֶ֖֙סֶד֙ לַֽאֲלָפִ֑֔ים לְאֹהֲבַ֖י וּלְשֹׁמְרֵ֥י (מצותו) [מִצְוֺתָֽי]׃ {ס}         but showing kindness to the thousandth generation of those who love Me and keep My commandments.

It makes  the chance of benefit considerably higher  than retribution, but I imagine my grandparents, at the edge of their Einsatzgrupen pit considering the contract they were born into. And I imagine my own life, choosing between actions of comfort and actions of consequence. 

The great legacy prominently includes the Oneness. The Shema, the reassertion of the principle that "Gd is One" is  in this parsha.  It is the denial of this principle that is followed by the intergenerational admonition. This is a core principle; what does it mean? 

Is the statement symmetrical, does "is" mean "equals"  The introduction of the number one invites this kind of mathematical question ( The concepts attached to "one" have become richer over the last several hundred years).  If the is means equals, then (any) One is Gd. This is possibly an idolatrous statement, but I am not sure. I can refer to Gd as The One and that seems acceptable. 

In our world One is also the value assigned to certainty in probability. That concept seems to fit how we are instructed to think about Gd. ( Perhaps it can also help us think about certainty) 

Th,  UNIverse is an interesting concept in this regard. The universe is the one thing that contains everything. It is probably  a concept, not a logical necessity; it is perhaps a more  comfortable idea in an intellectual world dominated by monotheism. The Gd of Spinoza lives in a UNIverse. 

Gd as one  implies that we accept all of Gd's aspects as a package: The Creator, the banisher from Eden, the creator of Cain, the flooder, the covenant maker etc. etc..  This requires some suspension of values in favor of humility.  The oblecional parts are relegated to "We do not understand" (Generally, the packaging of political entities is a big problem)

Consider how the word Echad (One) is traditionally pronounced.  The chet is easily prolonged. The string of multifaceted aspects that are unified can be considered, but the final daleth is a plosive, it cannot be prolonged much, it closes the door on the ALL.

One means all; all means one

dvarim: perspective

The last book of the Torah, Dvarim, is unlike the other books of the Torah in its authorship. Although all five books are ( traditionally) the products of Moses, for the first 4 books, Moses is a scribe.  Moshe is the author of Dvarim.  This is Moshe's world view.

The journey from Mount Sinai to the edge of the Promised Land should take eleven days. Instead, they have arrived 40 years later. What happened?

Moses tells us the he had democratized the leadership.  Judges we elected and laws that apply equally to all were taught.

 This precedes the great error.  In his account, Moses instructed the nation to begin the conquest of the Promised Land.  The people (through their representativese?) asked that a scouting report be prepared. Moses admits that he likes the idea.  The scouts report that the land is very good, but, as you might expect for such a desirable entity, the current occupants are approximately invincible.

The nation has missed its opportunity. What a difference a day makes. The willingness to obey and engage the current occupants of the Promised Land is rejected. This turnaround of confidence does not count as repentance. 

I (author) prefer not to think that some element of time was the reason for the 40 year desert sojourn. Time (Chronos) is the alternative to Gd. The argument goes: " given enough time..."  Chaos, the embodiment of randomness,  could create something magnificent in our world. In this instance, invoking Time as the determining factor for entry into the land,  makes Gd subject to time, rather than the other way around (my preferred stance).

Time has a significant presence when we read Dvarim. It is always the Shabbat before Tisha'a Ba'av, called Shabbat Chazon. (The chastisement that initiates the book of Isaiah echoes the words of Moses. )  Tisha'a Ba'av is a commemoration of the declaration of 40 years of exile.  A string of misfortunes are attached to the day: the destruction of both Temples in Jerusalem, the Spanish inquisition, etc  Tisha'a Ba'av became un unlucky day. Commemoration slid into a force driving fate... independent of Gd. 

Gd created a reliable universe. What we perceive as the laws of nature are sometimes superceded. The unexpected might happen. There are undiscovered forces and rules. The calendar is real. Days are longer in the summer. This can influence events  Gd is the only arbiter of events.

 Matos-Massei: the back pages

Now we come to the end of the Torah storyline. A federation of tribes is at the edge of their Promised Land.  The conquest has begun accidentally, as a response to the attacks of nations that may have been otherwise  exempted from battle. The forty years of the struggle in the desert, the first national exile, come to an end. 

The last edict is that women who inherit ancestral lands ( like the daughters of Zelophchod) should marry within their tribe so that the land remains within the tribe when the usual male dominant inheritance laws are applied.  The book of Bamidbar has the happy ending of these female land barons accede to this new rule. 

We read these chapters during the three weeks that culminate in Tisha Ba'av, the commemoration of the greatest Jewish tragedies - from Gd's decree that entry into the Promised Land would be delayed by 40 years ( the archetypical exile), through the defeats  and exiles of the nation by Nebuchadnezzar  and the Romans, up to the Holocaust ( a disaster  of the disenfranchised exile). At their core, the misfortunes of Tisha Ba'av  are tribulations that are made possible by the  loss of self determination.   Internal dissention is the weakness that allows for defeat. This is consistent with the Talmud's attribution: 

(Yoma 9B) 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, and that they did not perform the sinful acts that were performed in the First Temple, 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.

  Bamidbar ends with compromises, attempts at minimizing strife.  The cities of refuge are a poignant intervention to protect the unintentional killer from the avenger. The perpetrator deserves protection and the manslaughter must be evaluated by an outside, objective agency.  If the act was unintentional, but lacking in caution, the slayer would be isolated from society, exiled to a city of refuge .  (This is a most ancient model, first applied to Cain.)  The death of the High Priest would mark the end of the sentence. 

It is the death of Aaron that declared the end of the desert experience, the first exile. 

 וַיָּ֣מׇת שָׁ֑ם בִּשְׁנַ֣ת הָֽאַרְבָּעִ֗ים לְצֵ֤את בְּנֵֽי־יִשְׂרָאֵל֙ מֵאֶ֣רֶץ מִצְרַ֔יִם Aaron the priest ascended Mount Hor at the command of the LORD and died there, in the fortieth year after the Israelites had left the land of Egypt,

Why does the  death of the high priest terminate the exile?  Perhaps leadership, especially priestly leadership, involves decisions that invite disagreement and are a reliable source of strife. Aaron's decision to participate in the populism of the golden calf  required atonement. 

This week, daf yomi completed tractate Yoma.  The penultimate mishna states

מִיתָה וְיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים מְכַפְּרִין עִם הַתְּשׁוּבָה. הַתְּשׁוּבָה מְכַפֶּרֶת עַל עֲבֵרוֹת קַלּוֹת עַל עֲשֵׂה וְעַל לֹא תַעֲשֶׂה. וְעַל הַחֲמוּרוֹת הִיא תוֹלָה עַד שֶׁיָּבֹא יוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים וִיכַפֵּר:

Death and Yom Kippur atone for sins when accompanied by repentance. Repentance itself atones for minor transgressions, for both positive mitzvot and negative mitzvot. And repentance places punishment for severe transgressions in abeyance until Yom Kippur comes and completely atones for the transgression.

Presumably these rules apply to individual transgressions, but national sins may require a change in leadership.

I see Tisha Ba'av as a lead in to its negation, Tu ( the 15th of ) Av. For me, it is the (most appropriate) day that I met my wife.  The Talmusd (Taanith 30b) says

אֶלָּא חֲמִשָּׁה עָשָׂר בְּאָב מַאי הִיא אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל יוֹם שֶׁהוּתְּרוּ שְׁבָטִים לָבוֹא זֶה בָּזֶה However, what is the special joy of the fifteenth of Av? Rav Yehuda said that Shmuel said: This was the day on which the members of different tribes were permitted to enter one another’s tribe, by intermarriage. It was initially prohibited to intermarry between tribes, so as to keep each plot of land within the portion of the tribe that originally inherited it. This halakha was instituted by the Torah in the wake of a complaint by the relatives of the daughters of Zelophehad, who were worried that if these women married men from other tribes, the inheritance of Zelophehad would be lost from his tribe (see Numbers 36:1–12).

Sometimes an unpleasant compromise is needed to  keep the peace. Its repeal can be a source of greater unity.  

The king is dead, long live the king

Pinchas: Usurpation

Pinchas: Usurpation

 

The second thing in the parsha is a census that concludes

לָאֵ֗לֶּה תֵּחָלֵ֥ק הָאָ֛רֶץ בְּנַחֲלָ֖ה בְּמִסְפַּ֥ר שֵׁמֽוֹת׃ 

“Among these shall the land be apportioned as shares, according to the listed names:

These are the  people who are to inherit the land.  These families are the  (eternal) heirs.  The population numbers determine the size ( or value) of the portions.  The names assign the duchies and counties.   A landed  nobility is established, the lineage of wealth is founded forever.  This is the least surprising element of the parsha.  It conforms with the mores of the ancient world. 

Following this, we have a great surprise.  The DAUGHTERS of Zelofchod arise and claim their father's portion. Had they not stood up to Moshe and the elders, I doubt they would have gotten anything.  Their father's ( rather large portion; see Bava Bathra 118b ff) would have gone to more distant male relatives. 

I love the big final nun in mishpachtaN, the emphasis on the female ending of the word "justice"  Gd holds the women's argument to be correct.  This is a great unexpected victory. The disenfranchised have put in a claim for justice... and it has been granted. This was a revolution. 

The third stanza of the dayenu song at the Passover seder 

אִלּוּ עָשָׂה בָהֶם שְׁפָטִים, וְלֹא עָשָׂה בֵאלֹהֵיהֶם, דַּיֵּנוּ. If He had made judgments on them and had not made [them] on their gods; [it would have been] enough for us.

The word translated here as "gods"  in other contexts is translated as "courts"  The verse can be read as praising the overthrow of the Egyptian  (meaning the enslaving) system of law.  Giving women, who were presumed disenfranchised, standing in the court... and agreeing to the rectitude of their claim was the overthrow of the concept of using the law as a weapon wielded by the powerful over the subjugated, a system branded Egyptian.  Now the people were liberated from the past. Now they could enter the Promised Land. 

The parsha begins with a parallel story: Pinchas is rewarded for his zealotry.  Pinchas, the grandson of Aaron, was the son of Elazar by a Midianite woman; born before restrictions  on suitable marriages had been imposed on Kohanim.  Pinchas had been born disqualified from the Priesthood. 

At the end of the previous parsha, after the conquests of Sichon and Bashan, the Israelites had begun mixing and  mating with the locals: Moabites and Midianites. Gd called upon Moses to 

קַ֚ח אֶת־כׇּל־רָאשֵׁ֣י הָעָ֔ם וְהוֹקַ֥ע אוֹתָ֛ם.  Take all the heads of the people and hang them.

He did not do that. He has spent all of parshath Korach battling these tribal leaders.  Moshe empowered the leaders to destroy the guilty. 

וַיֹּ֣אמֶר מֹשֶׁ֔ה אֶל־שֹׁפְטֵ֖י יִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל הִרְגוּ֙ אִ֣ישׁ אֲנָשָׁ֔יו הַנִּצְמָדִ֖ים לְבַ֥עַל פְּעֽוֹר׃ So Moses said to Israel’s officials, “Each of you slay those of his men who attached themselves to Baal-peor.”

Pinchas identified a guilty leader and impaled him and his consort, earning him the legacy of (High) priesthood conferred at the beginning of this parsha that bears his name. This is the usurpation by the hero that brings him and his descendants the reward of status. 

There may be an element of another competition here.  When Jacob addressed the 12 brothers at the end of his life , when he conferred their legacies, he combined Shimon and Levi.  Twining is a call to differentiation ( cf Jacob and Esau, etc) which can lead to ascendance. The population of Simon descended from 59,300 at the first census, to 22,200  in the census of our parsha. Meanwhile,  Levi spawns the priesthood and the leisure class supported by the tithe.  Pinchas, a descedent of Levi kills Zimri of Simon to clinche his ascent. 

Moshe's successor is selected after an appeal to   הָרוּחֹ֖ת לְכׇל־בָּשָׂ֑ר, the Gd of the winds  The leader must deal with all of the unpredictability of the future, and maintain the legacy.  Joshua is chosen. Joshua shares  some of the zeal of Pinchas.  When Joshua heard the report that Eldad and Medad were acting as prophets he said to Moshe

וַיַּ֜עַן יְהוֹשֻׁ֣עַ בִּן־נ֗וּן מְשָׁרֵ֥ת מֹשֶׁ֛ה מִבְּחֻרָ֖יו וַיֹּאמַ֑ר אֲדֹנִ֥י מֹשֶׁ֖ה כְּלָאֵֽם׃ And Joshua son of Nun, Moses’ attendant from his youth, spoke up and said, “My lord Moses, restrain them!”

Moshe answered that he wished all the people were prophets.  Moshe was teaching Joshua how to deal with a changing world. 

The parsha concludes with the sacrificial rite, as it is celebrated through the year.  It opens with constancy

כְּבָשִׂ֨ים בְּנֵֽי־שָׁנָ֧ה תְמִימִ֛ם שְׁנַ֥יִם לַיּ֖וֹם עֹלָ֥ה תָמִֽיד׃ As a regular burnt offering every day, two yearling lambs without blemish.

A changing world requires revolutions .  Survival in the world requires some constancy.