This week’s portion – Va’etcha’nen (literally “and I shall
beg,” as in Moshe’s plea to God to spare his life and allow him to enter the
Promised Land (a plea not well received)) – is one of the most famous,
audacious portions in the entire cycle. Indeed, after several weeks of “digging
deep” into the text in the hope of finding some nuggets, this week’s portion
contains two of the founding texts of all of Judaism: The Ten Commandment (the
second, expanded version), and the Shema (part one). To top that, the portion
also contains important sections of the Hagada (read in Passover), and the
wonderful argument between Moshe and God relating to Moshe’s punishment.
What, then, should I pick? While leaving the Shema for next
week (when part two is in store), I will comment today on the Ten Commandments,
but not in the traditional sense. That traditional sense, naturally, focuses on
the several slight differences between Version 1 of the Commandments (Exodus 20:1), and Version 2 (here, Deut. 5:6). But today I would like to
examine a different issue - an issue
that may shed light more generally on the biblical text as a whole, as well as
– to a lesser extent – on the philosophy of this blog.
I. On the Second Coming of the Second Commandment
As most – if not all – readers of this blog know, over the
years the biblical text was reviewed by thousands of Jewish sages. These
wise-men commentaries – such as Rashi’s, Eben Ezra’s, Rambam’s, Ramban’s, and
many others – are still considered today as the authoritative interpretation of
the text, as well as its crown jewls.
Beyond that, most orthodox students focus more on the teachings of Oral
Torah – the Mishna and the G’mara, which together form the Talmud. Accordingly, a typical notes on the Portion
of the Week from an orthodox Rabbi (or an orthodox student) will almost
invariably include some “authoritative” interpretation bits, some Talmudic
insights, and perhaps some original thought. Importantly, however, it would
contain very little of the biblical text itself. That has not been the approach
of this Blog. The idea here was that the text should be conveyed to the readers
“as is,” without any ancient (or modern) intermediaries. Indeed, the biblical
text itself contains so much beauty, so much richness, so much meaning on its
own, that it does not require any supplements to impress the reader –
definitely not during the “first date,” or its first readings as it were. (The
mistake of attempting to over-impress is committed until today by many a
participant of first dates, not only in this context).
Today’s portion provides a great example of the assertion
that the text itself may be its own best interpreter. Thus, the Second Commandment reads, in relevant part:
You shall not make for yourself a
sculpture (or) any picture in the form of anything in heaven above or on the
earth beneath or in the waters below. (Deut. 5:8)
Now, what is the meaning of this command? Why is it rank so
high on the ladder of our most sacred values, second only to “I am the Lord
your God,” which Leibovitz considers as containing the entire Torah?
There are, of course, some obvious answers: First, the
prohibition on the making of idols can be seen as mere concretization of the
first, more theoretic commandment, forbidding generally to have “any other God
over me.” Second, the creating of idols
has been for many years – and is still seen today – as one of the great
features of other religions, ones that cannot comprehend the notion of an
abstract, transcendent deity. But there is more, much more to that Second
Commandment. And unlike the first appearance of the list of commandments three
books ago, this time around Moshe provides a very comprehensive picture of the
restriction; in fact, he paints the entire relationship of God and the
People of Israel as a reflection – pun not intended – of the prohibition on
making any picture, sculpture, or image of God. Though you may read for
yourself (and enjoy) starting at Deut. 4:11 and ending at 4:20, here’s a
summary of the argument:
-
During the time the People of Israel approached the
Mountain to receive the Ten Commandments, God spoke to the people – so the
people heard the voices but could not see the image…
-
And the People of Israel were ordered to be very
careful, for they have not seen the image on the day God has spoken to
them from the fire …
-
And the People of Israel were warned not to be corrupt
– to start making any sculpture or picture of anything on earth, in the sky, or
beneath the waters….
-
Beware of forgetting the Covenant you have with your
God, by making sculpture and pictures against His express commands …
-
When your first generation of sons is being born, and
then the second, beware of them being corrupted by creating the
sculptures and pictures – an evil in the eyes of God…
Thus, if you only want, you could find it all in there:
Past, present, future, relationship built from the ground up and from the
heavens downward – it is all there. Just like the great moment of the Giving of
the Torah was signified by no picture, no image, and no sculpture of God (and
let us forget for a moment the great sin of the Golden Calf), so the many great
moment to follow – the great moment of worship, of “avodat Elohim” – the
service of God – should all be completed in our heads only, without an image, a
sculpture, or a painting of God.
Our sages did say on the text “Hafoch ba ve’Hafoch ba,
dechula ba” – turn its pages and turn it pages again – it’s all in there.
Indeed you would only read the text, the beauty will come out all on its own.
II. Moshe’s Famous Plea to God
Faithful readers of this Blog know full well that it fully
endorses Moshe’s greatness; indeed, “from Moshe to Moshe there has never been
as Moshe” (said originally on Maimonides, but fully conveys the notion of his
greatness). But this week’s portions
reveals, yet again, that Moshe, like all of us, was first and foremost human.
Last week we have discussed Moshe’s “revisionist” history,
when describing to the people Yitro’s advice on the Judicial Branch without, of
course, mentioning Yitro with as much as a hint. This week, Moshe begs God –
hence the portion’s title “Va’Etchanen” (“and I shall beg”) – to allow him to
enter the Land of Israel, despite God’s decision to punish him but not letting
him do so. Let us leave for a moment the notion that Moshe, the only true
“slave of God” truly believes that the Lord would actually change His mind
following Moshe’s begging. True, that has happened – even several times – but
those occasions had one thing in common: They related to God’s “decision” to
destroy the entire People of Israel, a decision Moshe fought against several
times, all successfully. But never before, so it seems, did God regret a
personal decision regarding someone. And yet Moshe begs him to change his mind,
without bringing forth many reasons to do so. But that, again, is not my point
today.
To me, the most interesting thing in the confession Moshe
makes – while delivering his speech to the People of Israel – reveals that he,
Moshe, does not understand at all why God has prevented him from getting
into the Land of Israel. Twice in this portion alone does Moshe explain why, in
his opinion, God prevented him from doing so, and twice he gets it wrong. Both
times, in Moshe’s mind, it was not for his own deeds (or sins) that he was
punished, but rather “on your [the People of Israel’s] account” – that is,
because of the sins of the People of Israel. (Compare Deut. 3:26 with
4:21)
Once again, then, we are confronted with somewhat of a
revisionist history: It was not for Moshe’s refusal to talk to the Rock (or for
his killing of the Egyptian man without an explicit authorization from God, as
one Midrash boldly claims), but rather due to the sins of others that Moshe has
suffered. Such rewriting of history (not to mention a notion that was happily
adopted many years later by Christians who insist that their Lord has suffered
for the sins of others) should be read with a grain of salt, and should also
used as an important lesson: Even the greatest ones sometime tend to belittle
their own misdeeds on the account of others.
Then again, in my mind at least, Moshe was right in that the
punishment was not proportional to the sin: Moshe should have at least be
entitled to see the end of the passage he led for over 40 years, without any
reward and in inhumane conditions, with the help of no-one (but God himself)
and without any discernable reward (other than the closeness of God himself).
Shabbat Shalom,
Doron
Shabbat Shalom,
Doron
No comments:
Post a Comment