Re’eh: try it and see

 Re’eh: try it and see

The parsha opens with רְאֵה: re'eh: see! It then proceeds to tell the reader to see a blessing and a curse that is laid before him.

רְאֵ֗ה אָנֹכִ֛י נֹתֵ֥ן לִפְנֵיכֶ֖ם הַיּ֑וֹם בְּרָכָ֖ה וּקְלָלָֽה׃ 

 See, this day I set before you blessing and curse:

This is a challenge to our understanding. It instructs us to see something that is not visible. These instructions would be unintelligible to a machine, the machine would declare an  error: one cannot see  blessings or curses . They are not visible objects

This opening statement contrasts with the mitzvah to deny any visuals when Gd spoke with the nation at Sinai. 

וְנִשְׁמַרְתֶּ֥ם מְאֹ֖ד לְנַפְשֹׁתֵיכֶ֑ם כִּ֣י לֹ֤א רְאִיתֶם֙ כׇּל־תְּמוּנָ֔ה בְּי֗וֹם דִּבֶּ֨ר יְ' אֲלֵיכֶ֛ם בְּחֹרֵ֖ב מִתּ֥וֹךְ הָאֵֽשׁ׃ 

Take therefore good heed to yourselves; for you saw no manner of form on the day that the Lord spoke to you in Ḥorev out of the midst of the fire:— 4;15

 Clearly, this re'eh of our parsha  does not  mean the usual, physiological  vision that involves the neural connections between the eye, the retina, optic tract and the occipital cortex of the brain . Perhaps re'eh is better translated: imagine, generate the image. There is no object to be seen, only memories, ideas, dreams that can be synthesized into a vision.

In medical school, I had the privilege of attending a lecture by Eric Kandel, a Nobel prize winning neuroscientist.  The title of the lecture was: "Seeing is believing but touching is the real thing."  The lecture dealt with the complexity of the visual pathway in the brain.  The points of sensation of light in the retina are processed into lines and the lines are eventually  turned into faces. The brain is preprogrammed to try to make faces out of incomplete information.   Vision, according to Dr Kandel,  is always an amalgam of what is there and what we think should be there. The re'eh of our parsha is pure belief; there is  no external visual sensory input. It is a seeing that is purely believing. 

This is how we see the future. Imagination, based upon deduction and dread and hope generates possible  scenarios. In Pirkei Avoth 2:9,  Raban Yochanan ben Zakai asks  his five students to describe  the    דֶרֶךְ יְשָׁרָה שֶׁיִּדְבַּק בָּהּ הָאָדָם , the true path to which a person should cleave. Rabbi Shimon answers: הָרוֹאֶה אֶת הַנּוֹלָד. haroeh eth hanolad, one who sees the  products  of their actions.  This is a  seeing of what is not (yet) there. This is a synthetic vision that combines experience, calculation and honesty. A process that recognizes  the complexity of the consequences of actions and realizes how what is born differs from what is conceived.

 In the parsha, Moshe clarifies the consequences of taking  those paths. Gd will reward doing good; and punishment will devolve from doing bad. 

The way that blessing and curse are laid out is very telling.  The following verse reads:

אֶֽת־הַבְּרָכָ֑ה אֲשֶׁ֣ר תִּשְׁמְע֗וּ אֶל־מִצְוֺת֙ יְ

a blessing, אֲשֶׁ֣ר , asher ,that [not if], you obey the commandments of the Lord your God, which I command you this day:

and 

וְהַקְּלָלָ֗ה אִם־לֹ֤א תִשְׁמְעוּ֙ אֶל־מִצְוֺת֙

and curse, im, if, you do not obey the commandments of your Gd

 Rashi recognizes that there is an issue. ( Rashi only comments if an issue exists) :

 את הברכה. עַל מְנָת אֲשֶׁר תִּשְׁמְעוּ:

THE BLESSING — with the condition that you should obey

 

If Rashi had meant that we simply translate asher as "if" this time, he would have used the word 'אם' "im", the same word used in the next sentence in the text which always means "if."( This point is made by Eliahu Mizrachi, quoted by the Gur Arye. In Genesis where says asher which should be translated as "if. " There Rashi uses im. )

 The  Gur Arye ( Maharal of Prague) , commenting on this Rashi,  points us to Gittin 74 that elucidates  the meaning of al menath.  Al menath is a purchase on credit. The reward is given in advance, assuming the fulfillment of the condition that acquires it will occur. 

Onkolos, official translation of Torah into Aramaic, renders the verse: 

יָת בִּרְכָן דִּי תְקַבְּלוּן לְפִקּוּדַיָּא דַּיְ

      ... The blessing—that you accept  the commandments of Hashem

This translation is compatible with Rashi: the blessing is bestowed pending payment

Several commentators over many generations express this idea: the observance is itself a reward. 

       IBn Ezra (12th Century)

כי בשמעכם הנה אתם מבורכים

Since you have listened, behold you are blessed

to 

     Malbim (19th  Century)

א"כ זה עצמו מה שתשמעו אל מצות ה' הוא הברכה,

 Therefore that, itself , that you keep the commandments of Gd , that is the blessing.

Or HaChaim (18th Century) 

הוא אשר תשמעו כי השמיעה בתורה הוא תענוג מופלא ומחיה הנפש כאומרו (ישעי' נ''ה) שמעו ותחי נפשכם,

For the observance of the Torah is a wonderful pleasure and awakens the soul. 

Rav Hirsch (19th Century) 

The fulfillment of the divine commandments is itself a true part of the blessing, which not only follows obedience, but already begins its realization in obedience and the faithful fulfillment of one's duty.

Every year, when I read this sentence, with  its asher, I think about my father, wearing his tefillin at morning services in his synagogue in Florida. This was, ultimately, what he had wanted to do for so many years: just go to shul, put on tefillin and daven. What a complex, al menath, conditional payment. After all he had been through, all the years he could not daven wearing tefillin :  Soviet soldier, prisoner of war, hunted Jew, slave in death camp, displaced person, refugee, ... this was what he wanted to do. This was his pleasure; his longed for reward. 

Another verse always strikes me in this parsha:

{ח} לֹ֣א תַעֲשׂ֔וּן כְּ֠כֹל אֲשֶׁ֨ר אֲנַ֧חְנוּ עֹשִׂ֛ים פֹּ֖ה הַיּ֑וֹם אִ֖ישׁ כָּל־הַיָּשָׁ֥ר בְּעֵינָֽיו׃ 

You shall not act at all as we now act here, every man as he pleases,

 It is not exactly the opposite of the choice that opens the parsha. Even if we all agree that we will go for  the blessing, we may differ in how to get there. Conflict will now be  resolved into a single, unifying decision

This process of deferring strong opinions to the collective is  a key part of marriage. Marriage is, in part, the privilege and pleasure of considering the other, and sacrificing  what you think you would like -  for the common good. It is a part of  the blessing of  cooperation

This week, Karen and I sponsored the kiddush  because it is our  fortieth wedding anniversary. We are proud to celebrate at Ohr Chadash, a place that sprang from our common values, an example of many different ideas coming together, all for the sake of blessing, bracha. 

Often the only way to know the bracha is to accept the rules, suppress the hubris, and see how it works out. 

 

Eikev:  Mechanism

The  theme of attribution runs through the parsha. It begins with

וְהָיָ֣ה ׀ עֵ֣קֶב תִּשְׁמְע֗וּן

as a consequence of your heeding these laws
                                    Metsudah Publications, 2009

This complex  translation of עֵ֣קֶב,eikev, comes from Onkelos. Onkelos, the ancient ( c. 35–120 CE) ,official (Talmudically sanctioned) translator of the Torah renders  eikev  חֳלַף  chalaf, Aramaic for exchange.

I must put aside the very popular midrashic interpretation quoted by Rashi, relating eikev to its other meaning: the heel of the foot.

 אִם הַמִּצְווֹת קַלּוֹת שֶׁאָדָם דָּשׁ בַּעֲקֵבָיו תשמעון.

If, even the lighter commands which a person usually treads on with his heels, ye will hearken to

The simple meaning of the first sentence of the parsha, as expressed by the official translation is: If you will obey.. then you will receive. It moves the contingency from physics to the author of Nature, the Creator of the universal. The good outcome is not a consequence of successful effort, it is a gift from a pleased Gd.

 

The last section of the chapter contains the second paragraph of  Shema (of allegiance); it is a restatement of the command to love Gd  in its transactional form:

וְהָיָ֗ה אִם־שָׁמֹ֤עַ תִּשְׁמְעוּ֙ אֶל־מִצְוֺתַ֔י אֲשֶׁ֧ר אָנֹכִ֛י מְצַוֶּ֥ה אֶתְכֶ֖ם הַיּ֑וֹם

If, then, you obey the commandments that I enjoin upon you this day,

וְנָתַתִּ֧י מְטַֽר־אַרְצְכֶ֛ם בְּעִתּ֖וֹ

I will grant the rain for your land in season

הִשָּֽׁמְר֣וּ לָכֶ֔ם פֶּ֥ן יִפְתֶּ֖ה לְבַבְכֶ֑ם וְסַרְתֶּ֗ם

Take heed to yourselves, that your heart be not deceived, and you turn aside,

וְלֹֽא־יִהְיֶ֣ה מָטָ֔ר

there will be no rain

 

 if you will keep the commandments, the forces that you depend upon- and are out of your control -will help you. If you stray, there will be drought.

 There are several statements in the chapter that warn against errors of attribution. Eikev says that what we perceive as cause and effect is a convenient fantasy, a model.   It is not a truth. The parsha asks us to remember the manna and says that the human does not live by bread, but by the word of Gd.

The idea that humans can understand, and thus reliably influence, the “forces of nature” is increasingly questioned and denied. Medical journal advertisements for drugs, previously, included information about the (presumed/proposed) mechanism of action of the drug. I found this information useful to  help predict and deal with side effects and interactions. That information is no longer given. Known, documented side effects and interactions are stated, but the mystery of the (presumed) mechanism is not revealed.

This abbreviation of information can be excused as a greater level of honesty. The proposed mechanism may be incorrect.  There are numerous examples of misattribution. Silence may be better than uncertainty.

There is also an increasing awareness of complexity. The ramifications of an action that perturbs a complex and delicate system are so numerous and interact in unknown complex ways. Knowledge of one small aspect, even if it is an initiation point, may be misleading.

The emergence of artificial intelligence, offering perfectly functional answers that may not have a traceable path in logic, but are supported by large data sets (or, much more insecurely, large language models) has made the insecure and puny speculations, based on test tube observations, unacceptable. Why bother adding a paragraph about signal transduction pathways or cytokines?

Loss of faith is the Achilles heel. If we have no confidence in mechanism, and transfer belief into large language models, truth becomes what we are told. The oracle cannot be questioned. By grabbing the heel of Esau, Jacob did not accept his subservient fate. Deception,  excuse, the agents of temptation, impedes a true understanding of cause and effect.  The brother that races ahead, not thinking of what he is trampling on, is re-minded about consequences and considerations. It is Jacob who brings elements of the Torah to Esau.  The consequences seem to include getting his head stepped on.

Growing up in New York City, before people picked up after their dogs, I learned to watch where I stepped. Sometimes I failed and had to clean off the smelly dog poop. I think that is part of the reason for my bent posture.  Perhaps that is part of the intention of the mitzoth: to avoid stepping in things that are unpleasant to clean up later.

Eikev is intrinsic to the character of Jacob and his descendants.  It is curiosity and tenacity .  It invites us to analyze more closely the nature of the world: causes, effects, targets and defenses.   It is how we relate to Gd

 

In 2020, I wrote a poemoid about Eikev. I had hoped to edit it, but I did not. Please send reply with edits. Thanks. Here it is

 

 

A song to the Creator of a place for the Heel of Cause

 

I recognize Your Role

I recognize  the Kindness of Your Role

 

I recognize Your Role for creating the world

I recognize  the Kindness of Your Role for creating the world with a big bang

 

 

I recognize Your Role for providing clean water

I recognize  the Kindness of Your Role for  the variety of ways it comes into being

    the distillation of water from the seas into clouds

    the purification of soil  through selective absorption of plants

 

 

I recognize Your Role for creating  light

 I recognize  the Kindness of Your Role  for the ability to see

I recognize Your Role for creating  darkness

I recognize  the Kindness of Your Role  for the ability to not see

 

I recognize Your Role For creating variety

I recognize  the Kindness of Your Role for the random

    its predictability in the aggregate

    its unpredictability in the individual

 

I recognize Your Role for  spawning biological diversity

I recognize  the Kindness of Your Role for creating DNA

    for error prone replication

    for the corrective machinery

    for the errors that emerge and generate diversity

        the substrate of evolution

 

 

   I recognize Your Role in the (merciless) selective pressure

  I recognize  the Kindness of Your Role  for the haven of the niche

 

I recognize Your Role in the weather

I recognize  the Kindness of Your Role for the Butterfly in the Canary Islands

     that generates the hurricane anon

 

 

I recognize Your Role for creating  heaven

  I recognize  the Kindness of Your Role for views from space

    that made heaven more distant

        as it should be

 

I recognize Your Role for creating  the atmosphere

  I recognize  the Kindness of Your Role for breath

 

I recognize Your Role feeding the hungry

  I recognize  the Kindness of Your Role for hunger

    so that food can be appreciated

 

From <https://ideasintorah.blogspot.com/2020/08/aikev-heel-of-agency.html>

 

Ve'ethchanan: perspectives

 וְזֹ֣את הַמִּצְוָ֗ה הַֽחֻקִּים֙ וְהַמִּשְׁפָּטִ֔ים אֲשֶׁ֥ר צִוָּ֛ה יְ

Now this is the commandment, the statutes, and the judgments, which the Lord your God commanded to teach you, that you might do them in the land into which you go to possess it:

The Koren Jerusalem Bible

Every year, I am struck by the singularity of the word mitzvah, commandment, juxtaposed against the pleural, nearly synonymous statutes and judgements. I wonder: what is the Mitzvah. 

JPS avoids the problem by translating the sentence: 

And this is the Instruction—the laws and the rules—that your G

The Contemporary Torah, JPS, 2006. 

The Jewish Publication Society makes mitzvah into a collective singular noun, the Instruction,  that encompasses the subcategories of laws and rules. This is a credible interpretation, consistent with the relative absence of comment by the Medievals. 

I remain troubled. I want to understand the singular. Which mitzvah is the special one?

 The parsha ( chapter) motivates this idea. Immediately prior, we read the ten commandments. It is only in this parsha that the ten commandments are identified as the contents of the tablets delivered from Gd via Moses: (4;13)

וַיַּגֵּ֨ד לָכֶ֜ם אֶת־בְּרִית֗וֹ אֲשֶׁ֨ר צִוָּ֤ה אֶתְכֶם֙ לַעֲשׂ֔וֹת עֲשֶׂ֖רֶת הַדְּבָרִ֑ים וַֽיִּכְתְּבֵ֔ם עַל־שְׁנֵ֖י לֻח֥וֹת אֲבָנִֽים׃ 

[God] declared to you the covenant that you were commanded to observe, the Ten Commandments, inscribing them on two tablets of stone.

Absent this sentence, the idea  of the ten commandments would be an oral tradition, subject to question and possible alterations. Moses testifies to the special significance of these ten ( an import that is minimized by Orthodox Judaism). 

The ten commandments are singled out. Saadia Gaon saw all 613  commandments suggested within the ten. That does not devalue the ten. The first two: "I am ..." and the prohibition of other gods were communicated directly to the people. These may be THE Mitzvah. 

The prohibition of idolatry is strongly emphasis in the narrative of the chapter. Mythologizing the Sinai experience is carefully and repeatedly forbidden. 

Science is a great challenge. Is faith in science a violation of  THE Mitzvah: to have have faith in nothing but Gd? This question can be spectral. As science has become more instrumental, less intuitive, stranger ( quantum mechanics, relativity), it has increasingly become an article of faith. Even for those who study science and come to "understand" it,  the mindset that accepts the counterintuitive and the non-traditional is antithetical to faith in Gd, especially an unpredictable and transcendent  Gd [demonstrated by the opening passage: Gd rejects the prayer of Moses]. For those uninitiated or uninterested in the details, science truly is a competing Faith, an alternative source of claims with an obscure foundation. 

The opening scene in Liu  Cixin's Three Body Problem, a science fiction trilogy dealing with Earth's response to the discovery of an extraterrestrial intelligent society, is very telling and probably factual. During the Cultural Revolution (1966-1976) scientists were tortured and occasionally killed for their belief in the Big Bang theory: the idea that the universe had a point and time of origin. This belief violated Communist ( aka Scientific Socialism) doctrine that the universe is eternal, and smacked of creationism.  As the novel progresses, acceptance of the Big Bang is assumed. Beliefs change. Science changes. 

The  conflict between science and Torah forces the emergence of parallel consciousnesses; both  involving an uncomfortable departure from the intuitive world. Is it useful to have alternative platforms... or is it forbidden.

The genocidal instructions for conquest of the Promised Land that end the parsha also invoke the need for multiple perspectives. I, an American inculcated with a pseudo tolerant, universalist perspective want to reject this edict. I am not alone. Since the time of accurate historical recording, these instructions have been cancelled. "We cannot identify the nations that are to be annihilated."  Even Joshua accepted the partial  integration of Gibonites, concealed Canaanites, into the nation of Israel; he protected them and did not destroy them. But some element of permission for  hegemony in the Promised Land remains in the tradition. I cannot deny it. The approach to that perspective is treacherous for me.  

Dvarim: Summary

 In the Talmud, this last of the 5 books of Moses is called Mishna Torah. Mishna is usually used as a name for the six volumes of the collected sayings of the Tanaim (the post-prophetic sages) edited by Judah the Prince. The Mishna is a definitive anthology of legal opinion. The Mishna is the basis for all the law that follows - from the Talmud, through the various generations of printed commentators, down to the responsa literature, the decisions of individual, unique cases. 

The word Mishna contains the root shayni, second. It contains  the idea of  repetition.  Sheina also means to learn ( and probably evolves to tana in Talmudic Aramaic).  I can understand this to mean that the study should be deep enough that all of the original meanings are reproduced exactly.  As a modern, I also understand that the impossibility of that goal in the face of changing circumstances. 

In Dvarim, Moses summarizes and (almost) repeats many of the events and points made in the preceding three books ( Genesis is hardly mentioned here). These are the events  and laws that Moses saw and participated in. It is clearly a book written from the perspective of Moses and the deviations from previous telling's are attributable to this authorship. This seems to be one way to handle the need for a human intermediate between Gd and every day reality (but the human always moves beyond the reach of ordinary folk). 

Now we have Moshe's summary of the preceding 38 years, the journey after leaving Sinai. This is a lesson in summary.

Moshe reveals how he thought the approach to the holy land would transpire: 

אַחַ֨ד עָשָׂ֥ר יוֹם֙ מֵֽחֹרֵ֔ב דֶּ֖רֶךְ הַר־שֵׂעִ֑יר עַ֖ד קָדֵ֥שׁ בַּרְנֵֽעַ׃ 

it is eleven days from Horeb to Kadesh-barnea by the Mount Seir route. —

It would be an 11 day journey.... if all went well. The 11 day march was a reasonable plan  - in the context of a Gd that would miraculously provide for the needs of this people.  Instead it took 40 years and a generational change. Since it happened that way, it must have been Gd's plan. 

Moses accounts for the variance.  Dvarim is not an AI summary, mechanical and packed with  "should"s. This is   more than a restatement  of the events. There is a search for attribution - thus, it is a series of lessons.

 

The  terror that struck the people when the spies reported on the fierce indigenous population  is blamed for the change in Divine plan. This plague of fear is seen as a betrayal, loss of a faith in the power that promised the land; a faith that was fully justified by recent miracles of victory over the greatest nation in the world: Egypt. 

When the story is told in Bamidbar, the decision comes from Gd: 

וַיְדַבֵּ֥ר יְ

 אֶל־מֹשֶׁ֥ה לֵּאמֹֽר׃

And the Lord spoke to Moshe, saying, 

שְׁלַח־לְךָ֣ אֲנָשִׁ֗ים וְיָתֻ֙רוּ֙ אֶת־אֶ֣רֶץ כְּנַ֔עַן אֲשֶׁר־אֲנִ֥י נֹתֵ֖ן לִבְנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל אִ֣ישׁ אֶחָד֩ אִ֨ישׁ אֶחָ֜ד לְמַטֵּ֤ה אֲבֹתָיו֙ תִּשְׁלָ֔חוּ כֹּ֖ל נָשִׂ֥יא בָהֶֽם׃ 

Send thou men, that they may spy out the land of Kena῾an, which I give to the children of Yisra᾽el: of every tribe of their fathers shall you send a man, every one a ruler among them.

In this edited summary in Devarim, we are told some of the prequel: 

וַתִּקְרְב֣וּן אֵלַי֮ כֻּלְּכֶם֒ וַתֹּאמְר֗וּ נִשְׁלְחָ֤ה אֲנָשִׁים֙ לְפָנֵ֔ינוּ וְיַחְפְּרוּ־לָ֖נוּ אֶת־הָאָ֑רֶץ

Then all of you came to me and said, “Let us send agents ahead to reconnoiter the land for us 

The idea of sending scouts into the land had come from the people! The fear of entering into an unknown situation, without any prior information was not acceptable. Was this already a challenge to faith? Probably. 

Moses takes  responsibility for the decision: 

וַיִּיטַ֥ב בְּעֵינַ֖י הַדָּבָ֑ר

The idea pleased me. 

It is not clear what parts of the idea pleased Moses. Was  this to be an innocent accommodation to the will of the people?  Did Moses want intelligence so that the attack could be planned? Both? Neither?

Although it is not explicit here, the idea was ratified by Gd. This is demonstrated  by the presentation in Bamidbar. 

And the Lord spoke to Moshe, saying, Send thou men, that they may spy out the land. 

Moses adds interesting contextual details to the story. Before  Moses  describes the decision to send the scouts, he talks about the attempts to spread the responsibility for decisions  to trusted judges.  In verse 9, Moses says

וָאֹמַ֣ר אֲלֵכֶ֔ם בָּעֵ֥ת הַהִ֖וא לֵאמֹ֑ר לֹא־אוּכַ֥ל לְבַדִּ֖י שְׂאֵ֥ת אֶתְכֶֽם׃ 

I said to you at that time saying, ‘‘I cannot carry you by myself

In verse 14: 

הָב֣וּ לָ֠כֶ֠ם אֲנָשִׁ֨ים חֲכָמִ֧ים וּנְבֹנִ֛ים וִידֻעִ֖ים לְשִׁבְטֵיכֶ֑ם וַאֲשִׂימֵ֖ם בְּרָאשֵׁיכֶֽם׃

Provide yourselves men, wise and understanding and renowned to your tribes, and I will designate them your leaders.’’

Gd ratifies the idea. 

Moses puts the fatal decision to send the spies, the decision that led to the tragic failed test of faith within the framework of shared responsibility. Bad decisions are a consequence of democracy. That does not cancel the desirability of considering many opinions; it just demonstrates one danger  of that policy. 

I appreciate this summarization. In the annual cycle of Torah reading, Dvarim is always read on the Shabbat prior to Tisha Ba'av, the fast commemorating the loss of Jewish sovereignty over Israel. It begins the season of reflection  that ends the year. We read Deuteronomy, Moshe's summary, until the new year. It tells me to summarize my own life up to this time, in the hope that I can improve - or at least understand. 

Matoth-Massei: World order

וַיְדַבֵּ֤ר מֹשֶׁה֙ אֶל־רָאשֵׁ֣י הַמַּטּ֔וֹת לִבְנֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל לֵאמֹ֑ר זֶ֣ה הַדָּבָ֔ר אֲשֶׁ֖ר צִוָּ֥ה יְ

Moses spoke to the heads of the Israelite tribes, saying: This is what Gd has commanded

This introduces the last reading in the narrative Torah. Moses now presents the law to an assembly, the heads of the tribes.  The implicit single nation  is now addressed as a federation of tribes. Each tribe has been allocated a territory in the, soon to be occupied, Promised land.  This is an ancient example of state's rights...a response to universal ideas. 

Division into clans has an evolutionary advantage. The selective forces that will appear in the future are unpredictable and the traits that allow for survival must exist prior to the application of the selective pressure. One of the most important human advantages is the ability to act collectively. The evolution of clans and tribes fosters collective action. Sometimes the collective action opposes other people. This hones the group's cohesive skills. The greatest threat to humans is other humans. 

The tribal nature of the  nation is hardly mentioned in Exodus. This is a volume of unification. In Hebrew, the book is called  Shemoth, Names. It begins by  naming the individual sons of Jacob. The events described  are those that unify this people: their common slave-bondage, their liberation by a combination of unified action and Divine intervention, acceptance of a common code of law, and  the construction of a  central shrine, funded by a universal tax. 

Bamidbar,  Numbers, the book we conclude this week, recounts the division of the nation into sections and tribes. The initial counting, that opens the book, is done by patriarchal houses and divided by tribe. Much of Matoth, the first of this week's chapters, deals with the agreement that allows the tribes of Reuben, Gad and half of Menashe to occupy the territory conquered from the Emorites ( Sichon and Og), while the other 9½ tribes remain homeless. This is the  divisive struggle between those who have claimed resources and those who need their help to acquire it. The conflict is solved by a compromise that unifies the army, and recognizes the claim  of the shepherding tribes to the pasture lands.  Everyone wins!?.?

The section about unintentional  killing and the (prison)  cities of refuge unifies the end of the Torah story to the earliest stories. When Cain killed Abel, no retributive lightning bolt killed him. Instead, Cain was punished with permanent exile ( life in prison). Now, in this world of many people and avenging brothers, murder will be avenged by the death of the killer. But the circumstances will determine the guilt of the manslaughterer and that level of culpability will be decided by human peers. 

וְשָֽׁפְטוּ֙ הָֽעֵדָ֔ה בֵּ֚ין הַמַּכֶּ֔ה וּבֵ֖ין גֹּאֵ֣ל הַדָּ֑ם עַ֥ל הַמִּשְׁפָּטִ֖ים הָאֵֽלֶּה׃ 

in such cases the assembly shall decide between the slayer and the blood-avenger. 

וְהִצִּ֨ילוּ הָעֵדָ֜ה אֶת־הָרֹצֵ֗חַ מִיַּד֮ גֹּאֵ֣ל הַדָּם֒

The assembly shall protect the killer from the blood-avenger,. 

A distinction is needed between the story of Cain and Abel, reinforced by the exile of Moses after he kills the cruel Egyptian taskmaster, and the normative law. Stories are not the bases for decisions. 

The chiasmus between the cities of refuge and  Genesis brings us back to the first instruction that Gd gave Adam and the consequence of its violation: exile.

  Adam's violation led to a profanation of his life, a יַחֵ֖ל, (yachail); life became ordinary. The parsha starts 

אִישׁ֩ כִּֽי־יִדֹּ֨ר נֶ֜דֶר לַֽ  י  אֽוֹ־הִשָּׁ֤בַע שְׁבֻעָה֙ לֶאְסֹ֤ר אִסָּר֙ עַל־נַפְשׁ֔וֹ לֹ֥א יַחֵ֖ל דְּבָר֑וֹ כְּכׇל־הַיֹּצֵ֥א מִפִּ֖יו יַעֲשֶֽׂה׃

 

If a man vow a vow to the Lord, or swear an oath to bind his soul with a bond; he shall not break his word, he shall do according to all that proceeds out of his mouth.

The oath, the solemn, Gd witnessed, statement, is the basis of law. 

Watching today's politics, you'd never know it.