Tag Archives: Reinterpretation

Devarim, Deuteronomy 1:1-3:22

Link to Parsha: http://www.hebcal.com/sedrot/devarim

History and Memory

By Rabbi Marc Saperstein

After a five-verse introduction, this entire parashah is presented as a speech by Moses addressed to the Israelite people not long before his death. The content of this oration is a historical overview of events experienced by the listeners or their parents, beginning after the Revelation at Sinai and continuing to the present. The events have already been narrated in earlier books of the Torah, but there are subtle shifts that make this not simple repetition. If the original narratives are a source of history, this oration is evidence for historical memory. I would like to illustrate by focusing on one passage, relating to Sihon the Amorite, king of Heshbon.

The original narrative comes in parashat Hukkat, Numbers 21:21–25. The facts seem straightforward. Israel sent messengers to Sihon asking for permission to pass through his territory, promising not to despoil any of the agricultural produce of the land. Sihon refused, gathered a military force and challenged the Israelites in the wilderness. The Israelites won a decisive victory and took possession of all the Amorite lands. There is no mention of God in this narrative; it is presented as simple reporting of a political decision, a military encounter, and the geographical and demographic consequences.

How different is Moses’ more expansive recounting of the same events in Deuteronomy 2:24–37. It begins with Moses’ report of a message delivered to him by God:

See, I give unto your power Sihon the Amorite, king of Heshbon, and his land. Begin the occupation: engage him in battle. This day I begin to put the dread and fear of you upon the peoples everywhere under the heaven, so that they shall tremble and quake because of you whenever they hear you mentioned (Deut. 2:24–25).

In this version, the military encounter with Sihon was a divine command, intended to enhance the prestige of the Israelites in the consciousness of the surrounding peoples. In the following verses, God is never absent for long: He has given the land of Canaan to the Israelites (2:29), He hardened the heart of Sihon to refuse passage (2: 30), He urges Moses again to take possession of the Amorite lands (2:33), He causes the defeat of Sihon and his forces (2:35) including all the significant towns (2:36), His commandment to respect the borders of the neighboring Ammonites was respected (2:37).

Thus we have two accounts of the same events: one in which human decisions and military factors are decisive, the other—perhaps in retrospect—with a thick theological overlay, making God responsible for all that has happened. Many believers will think of the second version as preferable, more pious. Some of us may prefer the more secular narrative of Numbers, without casting God as a global puppeteer, controlling human decisions, the outcome of battles, and the supplanting of a native population.

There is a twist in our parashah, however. After the report of the initial instructions from God to “engage [Sihon] in battle” cited above, Moses continues with the following verse, “And I sent messengers from the wilderness of Kedemoth to King Sihon of Heshbon with an offer of peace, as follows…,” namely, the proposal in Numbers 21, including an offer (not mentioned in Numbers) of repayment for anything eaten by the Israelites. God instructs Moses to engage Sihon in battle (2:24), and Moses responds by sending Sihon divrei shalom (2:26). Was Moses violating God’s instruction? This is something that the Sages and medieval commentators, who take such details seriously, are bound to explain. 

Nachmanides explains that the verses come out of order. It is as if Moses had used the pluperfect, referring to what preceded the divine command to engage in battle: “I had (previously) sent messengers with . . . an offer of peace,” which was rejected by Sihon. Other commentators suggest that this message of peace was itself the result of an unrecorded instruction from God to Moses. Don Isaac Abravanel, whose monumental biblical commentaries written before and after 1492 summarize much of the culture of Sefardi Jewry, was not convinced: “I have found no evidence” for such a separate communication.

Instead, Abravanel insists that this peace offering was indeed a diversion from God’s instruction—which was actually to find an excuse to go to war with Sihon—and it came at Moses’ own initiative, in order to communicate to the other nations that there is a real alternative to warfare. If there is an option for a peaceful resolution of a potentially violent conflict, it is worth taking the initiative even in violation of God’s direct command.

This would be a lovely message about the Jewish love for peace. But here too there is wrinkle. Numbers 31 of parashat Mattot begins with a divine command to “Avenge the children of Israel against the Midianites.” But then it is Moses who berates the victorious Israelite army for allowing the women and children to live, and orders his soldiers to kill every male, including children, and all mature women (Num. 31:15–18). Here Moses seems to be pushing God’s command in the direction not of peaceful co-existence but of a kind of violence that is horrifying to imagine.

Two ostensible conclusions. First, that we must be extremely careful about attributing divine sanction for anything relating to war, even when reading a biblical text. And second, that it is irresponsible to generalize about Judaism—or Christianity or Islam—as a religion either of peace or of violence. That Moses can be depicted in our parashah as taking the initiative for peace in apparent deviation from God’s instructions, yet in Numbers as ordering a genocidal massacre not explicitly sanctioned by God, reveals the complexity of our biblical literature in its teachings about war and violence, with a dark side along with its stirring visions of world peace. It is for us to choose which of these elements we will live by.

Saperstein, Marc. "Parashat Dearim." Leo Baeck College Weekly D'Var Torah. (Viewed August 2, 2014). http://www.lbc.ac.uk/201108041485/Weekly-D-var-Torah/parashat-devarim.html

Personal Exile

By Rae Hendriksz

In this week’s portion, we find Moses speaking to the Israelites before crossing the
border into their new land. After forty years of living in the desert in exile, the Israelites
have been led to the land of Canaan. Before they enter Canaan, Moses pauses to recall
significant events that have shaped the community before him.

During the four decades of wandering the wilderness, the Jewish people confronted a
variety of challenges; some so great they faced complete obliteration. They did not have
any knowledge about what they would face in the coming months and years. Through
all of these trials, Moses asked them to keep their faith in God. He encouraged them to
trust that God would protect them and at the right moment, would guide them to their
land. When the Israelites happen upon potential enemies, Moses encouraged them to
exercise self-discipline. Moses says:

Have no dread or fear of them. None other than God, who goes before you, will
fight for you, just as God did for you in Egypt before your very eyes, and in the
wilderness, where you saw how the Eternal your God carried you, as a parent
carries their child, all the way that you traveled until you came to this place. Yet
for all that, you have no faith in God, who goes before you on your journeys — to
scout the place where you are to encamp — in fire by night and in cloud by day,
in order to guide you on the route you are to follow. (1:29-33)

The Israelites did not always find it easy to retain their patience and trust in God in the
face of potential enemies or the hardships of their long years in the wilderness.

Exile can take many forms, both for whole peoples and in each of our lives. We may
feel alone and alienated from relatives or friends for a variety of reasons. Perhaps we
feel we feel distant from our family or community because of differences in the way we
live our lives. Perhaps we have selected a form of banishment for ourselves and chosen
to be alone. We may feel disconnected from ourselves or our previously-strong roots, as
though we are wandering in the desert, waiting for guidance to point us in a direction.
We may feel complete overwhelmed by an obscure future that we predict will be filled
with discomfort.

When we face exile in our own lives, whether self-imposed or forced, nourishing a trust
in anything, much less God, may seem difficult or even impossible. If we are struggling
with an illness or in the midst of a difficult time in our lives, we may feel isolated and
alone. We may face similar feelings of fear about being annihilated or terrified of an
unknown future. The fear of the unknown is often greater than its actualization. How do we encourage and cultivate any trust during these moments of felt exile?

There is a common yet mistaken myth that envisions a one-way trajectory away from
Exodus to Promised Land, from alienation toward community, and from disbelief or
doubt to trust. However, Jewish literature repeatedly affirms that these feelings do not
evolve automatically from one to the next and do not remain static. The tides of exile
and trust – the ebb and flow of hope and despair remain a consistent part our lives.

Just as the Israelites had no knowledge of the future that lay before them, we face life
without knowledge of what upcoming minutes, hours, months or years will hold. Some
time ago Rabbi Aliza Berk shared with me a Hebrew saying that sobers the joyous and
encourages the sad. This too shall pass is a powerful reminder that life’s moments are
fleeting and dynamic and change over time. It prompts us to take stock of the present
moment, and to remain open to a different future. The ancient Israelites had hope that
their time in exile would at some point end, and that one day they would live in a land
they could call their own.

Hendriksz, Rae. "Torah Reflections on Parashat Devarim." The Jewish Healing Center. (Viewed on August 2, 2014). http://www.jewishhealingcenter.org/TRs/Devarim_09.pdf

Matot, Numbers 30:2-32:42

Link to Parsha: http://www.hebcal.com/sedrot/matot

Struggling with Torah

By Rabbi Janet Darley

If you look at the Liberal Judaism Lectionary, you will notice that, unusually, for this week there is only one suggested reading. Why?  Well, a closer examination reveals that much of Mattot contains material that is quite uncomfortable.

The setting for Mattot is the last year of the Israelite journey through the wilderness. It contains three distinct sections. In the first, Moses addresses the assembled tribal leadership concerning vows and oaths. The second section discusses the war on Midian and the third, the request of Reuben and Gad to settle east of the Jordan rather than crossing it.

This last section is the only part that appears in the Liberal Judaism lectionary and that of the Movement for Reform Judaism. The division of lands is quite a safe topic. It contains the request of the tribes Reuben and Gad, herders with large numbers of animals, to remain in the fields to which they had taken a liking rather than be required to cross the Jordan. This incurs a rebuke since the order of their words in their plan to build pens for their livestock and cities for their children seems to indicate more interest in their flocks and herds than in their children, but it is not by any consideration unsettling.

The same cannot be said for the middle section, which prescribes a war against the Midianites.  Going far beyond a simple military campaign, it calls for the slaughter not only of soldiers, but of women and children as well.  This seeking of vengeance is in response to an incident at Baal-peor recounted in Numbers 25.  Rabbi Gunther Plaut points out war that has posed a moral challenge to Jews throughout our history.  In many ways, this passage stands in stark contrast to other discussions of warfare in Torah. Elsewhere, Torah sets out rules for war, including the prohibition of cutting down fruit-bearing trees when laying siege to a city and exempting people from military duty under certain conditions.  If asked about the Jewish view of war, we would be more likely to quote the injunction of Psalm 34:15 to “seek peace and pursue it”, than to quote Numbers 31.

Plaut reminds us that this account in Numbers, written after the fact, was more of a reconstruction of history than actual history.  He argues “it doubtlessly came from an age when Israel had trouble with the native inhabitants of its conquered territories and when widespread immorality was ascribed to these components of the population.”  This story is therefore a retrospective judgement, suggesting that if Moses’ injunctions had been followed correctly, there would have been fewer problems in the land.

Though this section requires a ritual atonement to be made by those involved in the killing of the prisoners, arguably a unique provision, I would struggle to explain it to a visitor to my synagogue.  Furthermore, there is always a chance that someone will use it to justify some horrible act.  Indeed this section of Mattot may well have been one of the texts relied on by Rabbi Dov Lior, arrested in Israel following his endorsement of a publication which states that it is permissible to kill innocent non-Jewish civilians in times of war.  That concern may be why we don’t read it—we certainly don’t want to be seen to be advocating such behaviour.

Yet, I wonder if we really do ourselves a favour when we forget that our sacred writings contain some passages in which we as Progressive Jews do not see divine inspiration but rather their writers succumbing to all too human fear and anger.  In the context of Interfaith relations it is often easy to point out troubling passages in others’ sacred texts, while we have seemingly forgotten our own. As Progressive Jews we believe that we can find divine inspiration by reading Torah, but we do not believe that everything in Torah is the word of God.

One value of reading these texts is the reminder that there are passions that we humans have had to struggle against in the past and still do today.  We also have to deal with the consequences of succumbing to them, and in the case of war the consequences are often more than we are willing to acknowledge at first. What effects would a war such as the one described in Mattot really have on those conducting it?

War is always troubling and the mental and moral impact on the combatants is as much to be feared as the physical destruction it brings.  As an American baby-boomer I became well acquainted with the effects of the Vietnam War on many of those who fought in it as well as its impact on American society. Only a couple of years ago a close friend spoke to me of her fears about what her son would be like when he returned from his tour of duty in Iraq.

The potential effects of war did not escape previous generations of rabbis. In his 1914 Rosh Hashanah sermon, Rabbi Israel Mattuck voiced his concern about the war seemingly enveloping the world: “The results of centuries of human effort in civilization are threatened with complete destruction.  The ruin of towns and sacred houses is but symbolic of the deeper spiritual ruin which this war threatens.”

Rabbi Harold Saperstein, in a sermon given on Armistice Day 1936, offered these words.  “I can see them marching down the streets of Lynbrook [the Long Island community of his synagogue].  Fine brave-hearted boys, chin up and eyes straight ahead.  Boys we know and love, boys whose voices we have heard from this pulpit, dedicating themselves to the cause of Judaism in their Bar Mitzvah speeches…. The years will pass.  A weary, shattered, broken world will declare another armistice.  The boys will come back. But not all of them. Some who come back will not come back the same as they went.  And some will curse God for having permitted them to live and suffer.”

I find little in Mattot that is inspiring or edifying, but I do find in it the reminder that our ancestors were human and that they struggled with some of the same issues we struggle with today. Their responses may have been appropriate for their time, but we cannot follow them unquestioningly.  We live in different times and with different knowledge and understanding.  We must bring that difference to our struggle with the texts left us by our ancestors.

Darley, Janet. "Parashat Mattot." Leo Baeck College D'var Torah Archive." (Viewed on July 19, 2014). http://www.lbc.ac.uk/201107211480/Weekly-D-var-Torah/parashat-mattot.html

Torah for an Imperfect World

By Punk Torah

Sometimes reading the Torah is like reading a book written by a blood thirsty thirteen year old with attention deficit disorder. This week’s portion jumps, not so elegantly, from women taking vows, to killing the Midianites and stealing their stuff, then all of a sudden we’re diving up a bunch of land. The end, next chapter please.

And you wonder why more people don’t take the Torah seriously? It’s like cut-and-paste poetry. Once the story gets really good, G-d interrupts everything with a census or some obscure set of rules that makes no sense. Or it starts off really boring, and you give up half way, only to find out the really good stuff is toward the end.

The Torah doesn’t have a good beginning, middle and end. And it’s really not meant to, either. I think there’s three basic reasons for that.

First, the Torah is a reflection of life. And life doesn’t have a real beginning, middle and end. Sure, individual lives start and finish, but the legacy of humanity lasts forever (or at least until SkyNet and the Terminators finish us off). At any rate, Torah reflects life, and life is filled with low points, high points, boring, pointless interruptions, scandals, intrigue, and everything else…and sometimes the order of those things doesn’t make any sense.

Second, the Torah is a reflection of Creation. There’s a midrash that says that G-d looked into the Torah before creating the world. I like that. The Torah is flawed at times, and frankly, so is the world. Now, I’m not calling HaShem a crummy writer or a bad creator, but the world isn’t perfect, and if you read the Torah enough, you’ll find out that the Torah isn’t perfect all the time either.

Finally, the Torah is the reflection of the human soul…sometimes for better, and sometimes for worse. This week, we’re dealing with the souls of women and warriors, liars and hinderers, revenge-seekers and oppressors. Next week, the soul may change, and go in a new direction. But the Torah does us a huge favor and lets us see all sides of the soul. Hopefully, the soul doesn’t end either.

So what’s the bottom line? Don’t let the strange ups-and-downs of the Torah, the weird jumping back and forth from women-and-their-dads-to-blood-and-guts keep you from learning. Life, Creation, and the human spirit has its ups-and-downs, and its weird moments, too.

Punktorah. "God is a Bloodthirsty Thirteen Year-Old Boy with ADD." PunkTorah.org. (Viewed July 19, 2014). http://punktorah.org/god-is-a-bloodthirsty-thirteen-year-old-boy-with-add-parshat-matot/