Parshat Re'ay

The Power of the Curse

Moshe begins this week's parsha by telling Israel that they have choice: "a blessing or a curse". "You shall place those blessing upon Mount Gerizim, and those cursing upon Mount Eval" (Devarim 11:29).

This ceremony is not performed until Israel crosses over the Jordan, as described in Yehoshua chapter 8.

The concept of a curse is strange concept for the modern world. However, the ancient world believed that the spoken word took on a power of its own, and curses therefore, could wreak havoc.

We can see this concept from a strange story that appears towards the end of Sefer Shoftim. A young man from the Ephraim hill country, called Michayahu, stole eleven hundred silver pieces from his mother. His mother, not knowing that her son was the thief, put a curse on him. This shocks him into confession: "Behold the silver is with me, I took it (Shoftim 17:2)."

His mother immediately responds: "Blessed be my son to the Lord." Learning this as a child, I wasn't sure what to make of this response. However, if we put ourselves into her mindset, we can understand that the power of her curse frightened her now that she realized that it would be utilized against her son. She could not cancel the curse as it already existed. Her only option was to counteract it, by immediately blessing him.

This mindset can also help us understand the son. He had no problem stealing, not even from his own mother, but it was the fear of the curse that made him retract.

The story continues. Michayahu' s mother decides to dedicate the money to God and to build a shrine to him: "I have dedicated the silver before the Lord from my hand for my son to make a graven image and a molten one" (ibid 3).

Once again, they were still frightened of the curse and so they dedicate it to God in order to counteract it.

He then employs a wandering Levite to act as his priest, and his house becomes a place of worship to the local populace. "Micah said, 'Now I know that the Lord will be good to me, because I had a Levite as my priest (ibid 13).'"

Micha's success makes him think that the curse had been lifted. However, note that the author has changed his name from Michayahu to Micha. The removal of God's name is a stunning criticism by the author…and the story ends with Micha being betrayed.

While we must be careful with our words, God's law is not a system of superstition and incantation, it is our actions that count, and no amount of prayer can counteract our lot if we are morally repugnant. Moshe teaches us that we have to chosse blessing, not a prayer, but a way of life.

Last year's Sedra Short on Parshat Re'ay entiled: " The Empty-Handed Slave" appears at http://parshablog.blogspot.com/2008/08/parshat-reay-empty-handed-slave-torah.html

Another Sedra Short on Parshat Re'ay entiled: " Doing the What Seems Right " appears athttp://parshablog.blogspot.com/2007/08/parshat-reay-doing-what-seem-right.html

A further Sedra Short on Parshat Ekev entiled: " The Place " appears athttp://parshablog.blogspot.com/2006/08/parshat-reei-place-in-this-weeks.html

Parshat Shelach

Biblical Conversation

In the haftara of this week's parsha, Yehoshua sends spies to Jericho. We have discussed previously why Moshe's spies failed in their mission while Yehoshua's spies were successful (see link at the end of this blog).

Yehoshua's spies knew they would be successful when Rahav, the Canaanite woman who protected them declared: "Your terror is fallen upon us, and that all the inhabitants of the land have melted away because of you" (Yehoshua 2:9).

This English translation unfortunately does not capture the brevity and the beauty of the words she used: "וְכִי נָפְלָה אֵימַתְכֶם עָלֵינוּ וְכִי נָמֹגוּ כָּל יֹשְׁבֵי הָאָרֶץ מִפְּנֵיכֶם".

What is amazing about these words is that they are poetry, not words used in prose, certainly not by a harlot and certainly not by a non-Hebrew speaker.

Furthermore, these words are actually a minor reworking of the "Song at Sea" that Israel sang when they left Egypt (see Shemot 15:16). Could Rahav really have known the song and then repeated it to them?

Maybe, but it is very unlikely. Their conversation probably took place in a Canaanite dialect and not Hebrew (see Bereshit 42:23, where Yospeh and his brothers are speaking to each other via an interpreter, with Yoseph speaking in ancient Egyptian).

Therefore, was the Bible being honest when it quoted Rahav?

It is obvious that the Torah does not bring the characters' conversations in their entirety. Dialogue must have included greetings, protocol statements and possibly even small talk. The Torah is not interested in all this. It has a message it wants to teach and so it brings a summary of the conversation.

Indeed, the Daat Mikra explains that only when the Torah uses the word: "לאמר" – "the following" is an actual quote being recorded.

Nevertheless, the Bible is still being honest when it quoted Rahav. She probably said something about how scared the whole country was. However, when the spies heard her, they were reminded of the Song at Sea. The author of Sefer Yehoshua wants us, the reader, to understand the impact that Rahav's words had the spies.

We would have missed this point had a plain translation of Rahav's words been recorded. Therefore, the author replaced those words with replicated poetry from the Song at Sea, so that we should understand the impact that Rahav's words had on the spies.

Therefore, even though the quote might not be accurate, it is truthful.

Last years' Sedra Short on Parshat Shelach, entitled: "The Giants and the Nephilim – Who were They and Where are They Now?" appears at http://parshablog.blogspot.com/2008/06/parshat-shelach-giants-and-nephilim-who.html.

Another Sedra Short on Parshat Shelach, entitled: "The Spies" appears at http://parshablog.blogspot.com/2007/06/parshat-shelach-spies-israels-camp-was.html.

A further Sedra Short on Parshat Shelach, entitled: "The Spies, Challa and Tzitzit" appears at http://parshablog.blogspot.com/2006/06/parshat-shelach-spies-challa-and.html.

Parshat VaYelech

The Lantern Shines On

Moshe knows that his days on earth are coming to end. He says: "I can no longer go or come" (Devarim 31:2).

He therefore, reaffirms that Yehoshua will be replacing him telling him in front of all Israel: "Be strong and courageous! For you shall come with this people to the land which the Lord swore to their forefathers to give them." (ibid 7).

This theme and writing style spills over into Sefer Yehoshua, causing many modern commentators to say that Sefer Devarim and Yehoshua were written by the same author, the Deuteronomic author or the Deuteronomist. We will bring an alternative theory, that Yehoshua and Devarim had separate authors,

It is clear from Sefer Yehoshua that Yehoshua himself had difficulty filling Moshe's shoes. He is constantly reminded "not to fear the enemy", to be "brave and strong" and that God will not abandon him (see Yehoshua 1:5-9).

It is for this reason that God performs for Yehoshua similar miracles to that what he id performed for Moshe.

Moshe's greatest miracle was the splitting of the Red Sea. In order for the people to know that Yehoshua really was Moshe's legitimate successor "that they may know that as I was with Moshe, so will I be with you" (Yehoshua 3:7), God splits the Jordan for him so that He will "make you great in the sight of all Israel" (ibid).

Of course, splitting a whole sea is a far greater miracle than the splitting of a river, however, no one is suggesting that Yehoshau was just a s great as Moshe, only that he was the rightful heir. Indeed the Rabbis state that Moshe was the sun while Joshua was the moon. The moon is an impressive celestial object, but the sun is far more impressive. So too, Yehoshua was a great leader, but Moshe was far greater. Indeed, Moshe shone on his own while Yehoshua gained his light from Moshe.

The point is for the people and Yehoshua himself, to appreciate that Yehoshua was indeed Moshe's legitimate successor.

Sefer Yehoshua brings numerous other examples to prove this point: "The Lord spoke to Yehoshua, saying" (ibid 20:1) is a deliberate and precise copy of the standard biblical verse attributed to Moshe. Furthermore, at the beginning of Yehoshua, Moshe is described is the "servant of the Lord", while Yehoshua is described as "Moshe's apprentice" (ibid 1:1). However, upon his death, Yehoshua is described as "the servant of the Lord" (ibid 24:29), the same epitaph given to Moshe.

Therefore, it is possible tha rather than Devarim and Yehoshua having the same author, that the author of Yehoshua deliberately wrote his book in the style of Sefer Devarim, because he wants to give not just his book Biblical authority, but because he wants to subtly show in a more latent way, that Yehoshua was the true successor to the path that Moshe could no longer walk.

Last year's Sedra Short on Parshat Nitsavim-VaYelech, entitled: "Alone in a Crowd" appears at http://parshablog.blogspot.com/2007/09/parshat-nitsavim-vayelech-alone-in.html.

Parshat VaYishlach

Israel and Shechem – a Varied Relationship

This week's parsha brings two explanations as to how Shechem became a possession of ancient Israel.

"Yaakov came safely [to] the city of Shechem…He encamped near the city. He bought the part of the field where he had pitched his tent from the sons of Hamor, the father of Shechem, for a hundred kesitas" (Bereshit 33:18-19). Israel took control of the area peacefully when Yaakov purchased the city from a noble Shechemite family.

However, in the next chapter, we see a different explanation: "Now it came to pass on the third day, when they were in pain, that Yaakov's two sons, Shimon and Levi, Dinah's brothers, each took his sword, and they came upon the city with confidence, and they slew every male. They slew Hamor and his son Shechem with the edge of the sword" (ibid 34:25-26).

Israel became masters of the city through violent conquest, in the aftermath of Shechem's violation of Dinah, Yaakov's daughter.

This was the beginning of Israel's strange relationship with this Canaanite city.

Historically, Shechem was different to other Canaanite cities. Regular Canaanite cities were city states, i.e. they were ruled by a king. Canaan's topography effectively allowed each city to remain self-sufficient and independent from each other. Indeed, Yehoshua conquers 31 kings (see Yehoshua Ch.12) in a tiny country barely the size of New Jersey. Indeed at least eight distinct nations lived in this land. Interestingly enough, Israel was the first nation to unite the land into one country.

However, Shechem's status was different. It was not ruled by a king: "Chamor and his son Shechem came to the gate of their city, and they spoke to the people of their city, saying, 'These men are peaceful with us'" (ibid 20:21). Note how Shechem and his father Chamor, have to persuade the inhabitants of Shechem to accept the agreement they had made with Yaakov's sons. Shechem might have been a leader of Shechem but he did not have ultimate power.

Interestingly enough, Shechem does not appear in the list of cities that Yehoshua captured. In fact, no conquest of Shechem is ever noted. Yehoshua even took all the people to make a covenant there (Yehoshua 8:30-35), and yet he does not fight with it. Moreover, from the Sefer Shoftim, it is clear that the people of Shechem were Israelite citizens, even though they were not Israelites.

There, Gaal Ben Eved inadvertently causes an uprising against Avimelech, Gidon's son and Israel's leader, saying: "'Who is Avimelech, and who is Shechem, that we should serve him? is not he the son of Yerubbaal (Gidon)? … serve the men of Chamor the father of Shechem" (Shoftim 9:28). From this source it is clear that the inhabitants of Shechem were clearly descendents of Shechem's original inhabitants, and yet they were Israelite citizens.

How did this happen? It is unclear. I would like to suggest two possible explanations that are linked..

Firstly, we have already seen how Israel in Yaakov's day became the legal masters of Shechem. It is possible therefore, that Shechem already saw itself as loyal servants of Israel at the time of Yehoshua's conquest, and hence, there was no need to conquer it.

Secondly, I would like to suggest that the Shechemites were part of the Givon alliance, the people who tricked Israel into making a non-aggression pact: "The men of Israel said unto the Hivites…" (Yehoshua 9:7). The Givonites were Hivites. So was Shechem: "Shechem the son of Hamor, the Hivite, the prince of the land, saw her" (Bereshit 34:2).

Simon and Levi tricked Shechem and took advantage of them. The Hivites then turned the tables and tricked Israel by making a treaty with Yehoshua. These people then caused havoc in Israel during the period of the Judges.

Perhaps the seeds to this incident were planted in this week's parsha.

Last year's Sedra Short on Parshat VaYishlah entitled: Reuven and Bilha" appears at http://parshablog.blogspot.com/2006_12_01_archive.html

Another Sedra Short on Parshat VaYishlach entitled "Struggling with the Present", appears at: http://parshablog.blogspot.com/2005_12_01_parshablog_archive.html