This week’s portion, Ha’azeenu -- which literally means
“Lend me your ears” (to quote a great biblical scholar, William Shakespear) –
is the penultimate portion of the week. It is also a great poem, delivered by
Moshe to his people on the day he dies, just prior to him ascending the
mountain from which he has “seen the promised land” (to quote another great
biblical scholar, the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King).
The
poem in question is justly considered by many to be one of the greatest
depictions of the relationships between the Chosen People and its God. While the poem itself merits a serious
discussion, I will forego such a daunting task and instead make very short two
comments on the word that opens the Portion and the single sentence that ends
it (the portion’s “bookends,” if you will).
The First Word in Ha’azeenu: On Listening
The Portion begins with – and is
therefore is named after – the order to “listen to me” - Ha’azee-nu. And who are those who are required to listen
to Moshe? The verse seems to suggest that the subject of the order to
listen are none other than the entire heavens and the earth. But are these
entities the actual intended audience? A
close reading of the last verse
in the previous Portion – Ve’ye’lech suggests another possibility:
“And Moshe recited to the entire congregation of Israel, to their ears, the following entire
poem from beginning to end.”
(Deut. 31:30).
This verse suggests that, far from
the amorphous Heaven and Earth, this poem was intended to arrive directly at
the ears of the “entire congregation of Israel.” [and compare God’s order to
Moses, at Deut. 31:19, to “now teach this
poem to the People of Israel so it may be preserved for the end of days by the
People of Israel.”]
But the verse from last week (a
mere technicality, as it is clear that it belongs in this week’s portion) goes
beyond merely stating the obvious – the
real designated addressees of the poem being the People of Israel. Rather, it
also discusses several other issues that may be relevant to us today. First, it suggests that Moshe spoke
not merely to the People, but actually to their ears. This is interesting, as in Hebrew,
the noun “ear” (“o’zen”) and the command to listen (“Ha’a’zee’nu”) come from
the same origin. That way, when a person speaks to someone’s “ear,” they expect
that person to actually “listen” to what they say rather than merely “hear” the
words uttered. But the verse goes further to suggest that Moshe insisted on
reciting the poem “from beginning to end.” That, again, tells us something
about the true meaning of listening: one can never truly listens if one does
not listen “from beginning to end.” Too often, unfortunately, this simple
command is being violated today – in TV, in Congress, on the street,
everywhere. True, that command has a flip coin: make sure your own argument is
short enough – unlike Moshe – such that the other person would listen to it
“from beginning to end.” But as a listener, and as a rule, try to let the other
person finish what they were trying to say.
Indeed, these two notions – of
listening, and of allowing the other to finish their thought – seem almost
archaic in this day and age, when Congress members do not hesitate to yell to
the President of the United States “You Lie” in the middle of a speech. Yet it is good to realize, as always,
how relevant and instructive the teachings of this ancient Torah are to our
lives today.
Finally, we all know of the
classic Jewish order “Na’a’se Ve’nish’ma” – we shall obey (first) and then hear
(second). In other words, in Emunah – that is, in the relationships
between a person and their Jewish God, the request is first and foremost to
obey the order. Listening – which may involve attempts to understand,
questioning, negotiating, and all sorts of dialogues – is preserved for after
the actual following has been completed. First you obey, tells us the
Jewish teachings, then you attempt to understand. Not so when the relationship
in question are between one person and another. Here, we should all “listen”
first – that is, try to understand, negotiate, conduct a dialogue – and only
then “obey.” This is another very crucial difference between the relationships
between us as persons and our God and us as persons and our fellow persons.
This difference comes to a head in the coming week, just before Yom Kippur,
when we are required to ask forgiveness from all our friends and relatives –
since even the Holiest of Days, Yom Kippur itself may not repent those
violations between a “person and his fellow person.”
In sum, the first verse of this week’s portion is
extremely instructive – for today’s manners, and for understanding the
different sets of relationship every person of belief may have.
Ha'azeenu's Last Verse: The Reward of God
The last verse of this week’s
portion is part of the final dialogue between God and his most trusted prophet,
the only person to ever be named a “Man of God” by the Bible (Deut. 33:1). That
great person, Moshe, is about to die, and God Himself arrives to bid farewell
to his trusted agent. One might expect, under these circumstances, a rewarding
summary by God of all of Moshe’s “greatest hits,” including things like the
parting of the sea, overcoming all of Egypt’s legendary’s army, leading Israel
for forty years in the desert, and many other acts. But instead of thanking him
for his longstanding service and loyalty over the years, the Lord opts to do
quite the opposite; He reminds Moshe of the single instance where, if one
attempts real hard, Moshe may have demonstrated a trace of distrust toward his
Lord. But God does not stop there – He is not here to merely mention that
single instance and omit of all Moshe’s greatest act of obedience; Rather, God
shows up for the last time only to tell Moshe of his punishment for that single
instance of indiscretion:
“And you shall only see that
land from afar, but there you shall not arrive – to the land which I shall give
to the People of Israel.” (Deut. 32:52)
Many a commentator were baffled at
this parting words by God to his devoted slave. Some tried to explain that Moshe the
leader, with his desert acumen and Egypt/slave mentality, was not the right “fit”
to lead the nation into their new chapter as an independent nation. Others have
pointed out that Moses was too old for the job – it was time for him to go and
for a new leader to step up (recall it was not a democracy and there were no
term limits). A better interpretation, in my mind, could be found in the
radical option that God’s message was not a punishment at all; rather this
final dialogue, like many that preceded it, was a the mere transfer of
information from God to Moshe about what is about to happen. The fact that Moshe was not a part of
this future occurrence is merely a descriptive, neutral reality rather than a
harsh punishment.
To understand such interpretation,
one must realize that for Moshe, being as close to God as anyone before or
since was his true life’s achievement. Being
physically in a different place – in the Land of Israel, for example – would
not change that. Being mentally in a different state – a leader in a country,
rather than in the desert – would not change that either. From a religious perspective – and
this is a religious text – Moshe has received his “prize” many times over: he lived a life of devotion and
standing before God like no other man before or since. This was his true “reward,” and no
“punishment” may ever erase that. And while it true that this life was now over
(like that of any other person since Adam), we should also be reminded that God
Himself felt close enough to Moshe to notify him of that fate in person. But from a religious perspective there
is no punishment here, nor a need to summarize Moshe’s greatest achievements:
The mere standing before God for the last time, the mere occurrence of that
last dialogue between a man and his God, is the very best summary of all of
Moshe’s life, as well as the best testimony of his greatest life “achievement.” So, no punishment here – only
rewards.
Shana Tovah, and Shabbat Shalom.
Doron
No comments:
Post a Comment