May 19, 2012

page 866
26:18 Blessings and curses. These are the curses. This is all metaphorical and very poetic. …I will smite you sevenfold for your sins… But what is the metaphor? AF: God has shown that he is capable of plagues so these are credible threats. PG: Many of these phrases are also found in the prophets. God can build and destroy. Prayer is filled with both blessings and warnings. But what gives rise to these punishments? Failure to believe in one God? There is an over-arching theme here – it is social injustice. You are causing the disorganization of society by failing to adhere to the law and maintain a social and civil society. The tendency is to think of these passages as supernatural and accordingly to be ignored. This is not primitive nonsense – the reason for laws is the maintenance of a just society. This is a reminder of the consequence of ignoring laws – social failure and anarchy. The orthodox view in most biblical faiths is one of crime and punishment – taking the text on the surface. Remember that God disappears from the Torah with Elijah – the still small voice story. The exception is in the Book of Job which is likely pre-Elijah. In the final story of the Bible – the Book of Esther – there is no mention of God. Finally, we must each take personal responsibility – not only for our actions but also for the well-being of others. DC: The Orthodox go to their Rebbe for answers. This is the abdication of personal responsibility. PG: We give up our freedom in some areas in order to be free to be free in other areas. AF: Does this mean that everyone has to obey or all will be punished? PG: This is the debate between God and Abraham in Sodom and Gomorrah. The fact is that a small group can cause the destruction of everyone – unless we are alert to taking responsibility even for those who violate the law. This is designed to be liturgical – call and response – instructive. The original intent of individual authors here is not important. It is the editor or redactor who has brilliantly assembled these writing in such a way as to establish a blueprint for a just government. LL: I am constantly amazed at the profound insights into human nature that these redactors have displayed. They know that poetry is the best teacher; that lessons must be embedded in metaphor in order to be lasting.

26:27 Very graphic curses. Consider the bumper sticker “I am spending my children’s inheritance.” AF: The writer is putting a repugnant description into the mind of the reader – it is hyperbolic language that will be remembered.
26:31 Even your connection to God will be severed. See Note 30 and reference to translation by Hoffmann.
26:34 “The sound of the driven leaf shall put them to flight.” What is being described is a society that has ignored the rules of social justice. That includes economic and ecological justice. Here the injunction as to the seventh year has been ignored – to let the land rest. This is the disconnection from the land that arises from conquest. See: As The Driven Leaf by Milton Steinberg. http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/100065.As_a_Driven_Leaf
26:39 Note that the patriarch’s are recited in reverse order so that ultimately the promise is the promise of the land. There are two significant portions of Torah that should be recited every day -The Song of the Sea and Abraham’s sacrifice of Isaac. The former is a memory of Exodus and the latter a reminder that we are all one brief step from obliteration. We are daily told to “be careful out there.” You are autonomous and responsible for yourself. Consider the parable of Kafka’s gatekeeper – the gate is always open and never closes until the traveler dies. See: http://www.kafka-online.info/before-the-law.html
Note that the people accept Moses authority to speak to God but all of the Prophets are challenged on that point. Now we have had 3200 years without receipt of a direct message from God. The writers of this text were well aware of the gap in their own time. What did they – and what do we – make of that? We cannot expect supernatural intervention. We must live within the pragmatic boundaries of a just society. There must be a benefit to being “good” beyond just doing what God has told us.

NOTICE TO READERS OF THESE TORAH STUDYPOSTS: The text submitted here is unedited. Corrections and comments are welcome. Generally, the initials shown are an attempt to credit the individual who made a particular point or responded to it. “PG” is Rabbi Paul Golomb. Page references are to Plaut. It is assumed that the reader is familiar with the text but these notes will be more inteligible if read in conjunction with the cited passages

May 5, 2012
p. 800
19:15 “You shall not render an unfair decision…” This is structured almost as a call and response – which raises interesting theological issues as to what “I as the Eternal” means at the end of each line. Is this a diktat? There is potential conflict with democracy where there is strict divine authority. Have we moved from the unchallenged power of pharaoh to the unchallenged power of God? This would suggest that the High Priest – channeling God – makes the decisions. DC: This is an establishment of standards – guidelines. AF: This is socialism. PG: And a kibbutz is communism – neither system precludes democracy. The only question is how government is shaped so as to avoid decay and corruption– such as occurred in the Soviet system.
19:19 No mixture of cattle, cloth or seed. PG: What comes to mind as to the controlling law here is the sequel to creation. “You shall observe my laws…” includes the physics of the universe – one must obey the law of gravity by proceeding prudently. Creation was compartmentalized day by day. This is a continuation of that compartmentalization. The suggestion is that we should not attempt to be god-like. AF: Is the creation out of nothing? PG: Maimonides argued that this could be accepted only as a matter of faith. The text is ambiguous. His position was challenged by the literalists.
19:20 Carnal relations with a slave. A ram of reparation offering. PG: There is a problem of logical continuity here. This seems to have no relationship to the preceding section. That section addresses the differing status between species – here it is the status of the individuals that differs. And compare this to the first read section which calls for neutrality in judging. Yet there are “social conventions” that are not categorical but significant. AF: the slave Is not an Israelite – therefore the prohibitions recited previously do not apply. PG: That is likely correct. Even the reference to a neighbor is probably to another Israelite. This is a limited variation of the Golden Rule – limited to those of your tribe. A challenge arises in dealing with others not of the tribe. Rabbi Akiba said that this passage as to dealing with one’s neighbor was the central message of Torah. Hillel turned the text around as “do not do to others what you find distasteful to yourself.” This is an expansion from neighbor to the person who is present before you. Akiba was idealistic whereas Hillel was pragmatic. The slave referenced here is a captured slave – a non-Israelite. Therefore the treatment of that individual is according to their standing. A violation of that standing makes one subject to public censure. Consider the case of Levi-Kahn. Public shaming has consequences. Emmanuel Levinas, the French moral philosopher and theologian, has pointed out that some evil conduct is not compensable. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emmanuel_L%C3%A9vinas

AF: What if a blind man pokes out someone’s eye? PG: Exactly, the lex talionis has many failings.
19;23 Harvest no fruit in the first three years. This may be a reflection of cultivation practices – allowing the fruit to be used to nourish the tree itself. See footnote on advantages of this technique. CL: The biblical references to slaves were quoted as justification for slavery in the 19th C. PG: Alfred Kazin – the literary critic – noted that there were 24 nations that had freed their slaves in that time period. Twenty three of them did it peacefully. The 19th C. was a very religious time in the U.S. The collapse of the cotton trade in the U. S. resulted in the growth of that trade in the middle east – and the subsequent success of Zionism.
LL/