The two final portions of the Book of Numbers -- – Mattot
(literally, “canes,” but here in the meaning of “tribes”), and Massa’ei
(literally, “the travels of”) –
Which are often read together, are at once very ancient and very
contemporary. They are ancient in the detailed manner in which they described a
pedestrian 40-year walk through the desert – an unthinkable journey in today’s
“twitter” speed world. And they are extremely up-to-date by describing issues
of women’s equality, political leadership, and government structure in ways
that are more pertinent to us than seems at first sight. Here are my two
comments on this wonderful pair of Portions.
I. So Hot in the Desert …
The great heat wave that passed through the Eastern United States
this week has caused me to reevaluate my assessment of the Israelites walking
in the Desert. While the text sporadically mentions their complaints and
hardships, I thought, they were much more resilient than any of us could ever
be. Indeed, they were constantly walking, with their entire property, in the
desert without much shade, in temperatures much higher than we have ever
experienced, without air-condition, without running water, and, in fact,
without any knowledge where they are going and when they would ever get there
(if at all). To add to all that, this week’s portion (Mattot) demonstrates just
how tough the Israelites really had it in the desert:
“And the Lord was furious on this day and he swore of the
following: ‘None of the people who came up from Egypt from the age twenty and
up shall see the land to which I have sworn to Avraham, Itzhak, and Yaakov, as
they have never followed my orders.’” (Numbers 32:10-11).
Thus, it seems that even the single thing that seems to have hold
this band of former slaves together – the belief in the Jewish God – was not
satisfactory, at least not in His eyes. Even more, those walking in the desert,
by and large, were destined to die there. What a horrible faith.
In light of all of the above, I thought that the image often painted
of the Israelites – as a group of spoiled and stubborn people who frequently
tend to recreate history by painting Egypt as the “pot of meat” – is grossly
misconstrued. Then again, one has to remember that the text is very selective,
and was written by the “winner” of the story (history is always the (his)story
of the victor, to whom goes the spoils, including what – and what not – to
report). Accordingly, it is possible that the complaints were numerous, and
only a few were ever reported. Recall further that any and all hints of
resentment or opposition to Moshe were met with terrible faith (We have
discussed the story of Korach, as well as Aharon’s sons, in that cotext). That,
too, may teach us something about the regime of fear that may have controlled
these people. Still, in the last account,
these people were many – more than 600,000 – and Moshe was only one; at
some point, had they – or a strong majority thereof – wanted an out, they would
have gotten their way, and fairly easily. But at the end of the day they did
not; for that, at I give them a big credit this week.
2. Zlophchad Daughters and The Obama Administration
In today’s note I would like to highlight a very interesting point
that may teach us something about the current Obama administration. If you may recall, Obama came to the
White House on the wings of a “Yes We Can” campaign. He promised “Change,” and
to do things differently in Washington DC. But then Congress happened. And when
Harry (not Reid, but Obama himself) met Sally (pick your favorite conservative
leader in either chamber) – all good intentions came to a screeching halt. Or,
in other words, when the ideal and platonic notions of good, equality, human
rights, and prosperity met with the realities politics, cynicism, and cold hard
cost-benefit analyses, – most initiatives were eventually left out. (Take, for
example, the fantastic idea of a public option and universal healthcare [well
recognized in other Western
Democracies] that would require all health insurance companies to
reduce their rates and compete more vigorously – gone with the wind.)
How is all that even remotely related to the portion of Massa’ei?
To properly understand that, we have to begin with last week’s portion
(Pinchas) and the story of B’not Zlophchad (The Daughters of Zlophcahd). No
doubt one of the very first feminist groups, these five brave daughters of
Zlophchad – who, luckily for his daughters, failed to have a male son – were
intelligent, well spoken, independent (and, according to Midrash, beautiful as
well). In Numbers 27:1-11 we encounter their wonderful and very inspiring
story. (Please go ahead and read it – it is self explanatory). In short, when
their father passed, since he did not have a male son, he could not bequeath
(give away after his death) his land to anyone; the five daughters, then, were
left without any property. So they came before Moshe to plead their case. Now
this trivial detail is not trivial as it seems: recall that Moshe had accepted,
a while ago, an advice from his father-in-law to establish a much elaborated,
multi-tiered legal system that would essentially bring before him only the
hardest of cases. Here, not only that the five daughters (apparently) went
through all the “lower courts,” but their case was heard – as the text
emphasized – before Moshe, Elazar the Great Priest (Aharon, the first Great
Priest, passed a short time beforehand), the Heads of the tribes, and “all of
the community” -- and all that is happening in front of Ohel Mo’ed – the Tent
of Meeting, where the tabernacle was housed. In short, this is the Supreme
Court sitting in full session.
And their argument was unique. Like many feminists thousands of
years later – Ruth Bader Ginsburg comes to mind most prominently – they clothed
their case more in terms of human rights than in those of women’s rights (as,
indeed, we have since learned: Women’s rights ARE human rights). Their claim
was that their father and his
memory will be hurt by
erasing his name from the list of property owners after his death; in addition,
the whole tribe would be disadvantaged, as fewer families would have land
within it.
The case is so complicated, it seems, even for Moshe that he
cannot make up his mind. Should he give these five unmarried (!) women their
own land (for the first time ever), as their claims are just, plain, and
reasonable, or should he continue with the “men-only” policy, which worked so
well over the years (for men, at least). So Moshe “brought their case before
the Lord” as some translations tell us, or, in the more beautiful Hebrew
original suggests, he “brought the case closer to God.” And God did not hesitate:
Not only did He give the Daughters of Zlophchad their land (in this specific
case), but He also took the opportunity to announce a general law regarding all
women (as He is, indeed, the Supreme Law of the land (cf. U.S. Const. Art. VI))
– who may, from now on, receive land from their deceased father - but only if their father bore no sons; we
are still, let us remember, thousands of years before the feminist revolution.
So that’s the ideal, “Yes We Can,” part of the story. In today’s
portion, Massa’ei, we encounter “the heads of Congress” – the elderly members
of the Tribe of Menashe, the tribe in which this story occurred. They, too,
come to plead their case before “Moshe and the Heads of the Tribes” (though
neither in front of the chief religious authority nor in front of the people).
They, too, framed their arguments in terms of general public interest – nothing
to do with women’s rights in particular. And here is what they had to say, in
essence: (See Numbers 36:1-12): "You have provided the daughters of
Zlophchad with real property. Now these women would eventually marry; and most
likely, to people outside their Tribe. Once that happens, all five parcels
would be reduced from our Tribe, and added to the land of the other tribe (As
land parcels follow the husband, of course…). What should we do?"
Notice that this is somewhat of an appeal on a final Supreme Court
decision (authored by God Himself, no less). But Moshe is not too impressed; he
doesn’t even need to summon God to solve this hard, after-the-fact appeal.
Rather, he merely orders a simple solution – the women should marry inside the
Tribe; thus, he argues, the lands would always remain within the Tribe. [The
much simpler solution, that the land would actually follow its real owner, man
or woman, apparently never occurred to him at this stage in history.] This is
the law of Zlophchad daughters, and this is the law in general. And yes, the
text adds, the daughters indeed married "inside their tribe" - they
married their cousins, and everyone was happy, or so it seems. The interesting
thing to me, at least, was the way Moshe chose to phrase his decree (of
marrying inside the Tribe): “They may marry anyone they wish, provided they
marry in to a clan of their father’s tribe.” (Numbers 36:7).
This reminded me of an answer that my late father, an extremely
sharp lawyer, gave me when I asked him what is the meaning of the Israeli
lawyer’s dress-code, which requires all lawyers appearing in court to wear
“dark suits.” His answer, much like Henry Ford a century earlier was: “You may
choose any color you like, provided it is black.”
But back to the Obama administration: I hope the President would
remember he is still the President, and whatever the Republicans want should be
met with cautious deference while maintaining the core of the President’s own
set of values.
Shabbat Shalom.
Doron
