[Note, in Israel the parshat hashavua is Naso… this and subsequent dvar’s are expected to follow the parsha in Israel.]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Select Parsha Highlights:
Another census.
Gershonites are blue collar. Managed by the sons of Aaron.
Ditto the clan of Merari.
Those with Tzaraat are to be sent outside the camp.
The Sotah ritual. (A husband who suspects his wife of adultery and is unable to resolve this concern within the relationship, goes to the Kohen Gadol who mixes an odd mixture of dried ink, dust and water for her to drink....)
Rules for those who take a nazirite vow: Not to shave. Not to eat any part of the grape vine -- not even grape skins or seeds.
And much more....
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
A couple decades ago, in the back of shul (where all the action is, IMO), I overheard the following:
"You know Rabbi ______ (Rabbinic gadol leading a shiur at Lakewood Yeshiva) had an incident in his shiur on Masechet Sotah. The talmidim were uneasy. One finally spoke up: 'Rabbi, what man would put his wife through such an ordeal? I mean who would impose that on a spouse?' The shiur stopped. The Rav looks over the room. Asks, 'Who here has read Shakespeare?' No hands.
The Rav halts the shiur: Everyone go home and read Shakespeare."
That Rav was of the generation of Jewish scholars that my great Uncle, Oscar Fasman, was part of. Many pursued advanced degrees (Uncle Oscar a PhD in English). As in other eras, the scholars of Yiddishkeit engaged deeply with local streams of thought.[1]
And of feelings? The feelings of "רֽוּחַ־קִנְאָ֛ה וְקִנֵּ֥א אֶת־אִשְׁתּ֖וֹ" -- a man with a spirit of jealousy. Taking a nazirite vow... what emotions inspire that? Rabbinic leadership is far more engaged with reason than emotion.
In 1934, Uncle Oscar traveled around Europe and Palestine. His diary[2] records conversations with Rabbis and Jewish leaders in Germany, Poland, Palestine and other places. Some themes that recur: What is the place for emotional resonance in Jewish observance? How to make dry synagogue services more engaging? Why do ignoramuses attain positions of power and influence in the community?
From his diary:
Harry [the friend he traveled with] observed:
In Germany the scientists and professors have always been the tools of the government and of militarism. In any argument of religion vs. science, the answer should be given that 7000 preachers in Germany had the courage to defy Hitlerism, but no professors.
Harry again: Intellectually men differ, but emotionally we are all equipped alike; i.e. a street cleaner may be emotionally constituted like a scientist. Yet the unintellectual masses, instead of recognizing emotion, turn to glorification of reason.
This last would seem to explain the rise of Evangelicalism which validates itself by explaining current events (the war in Ukraine, the Holocaust, etc.) as predicted, in detail, in their understanding of Scripture.[3] A powerful blend of pseudo-reason and emotion ("if the text from 2,000 years ago is right about events this year, it is right about everything else too!")
The Parsha is a counterpoint: Rational (or rationally comprehensible) constructs (census, roles, quarantine) and emotionally driven scenarios (jealousy, asceticism). Uncle Oscar's diary notes multiple instances of ethical leadership struggling to engage both sides of their human community. In Germany, he writes:
Orthodox Jews in Germany answered to the question, “Did Hitler drive many back to Orthodoxy?” in the negative. There were some cases to be sure, but what happened in the main was a return to Jewish studies, a practically forced enrollment in Jewish schools etc. but no turn to observance, nor even a deep change of heart. This should indicate that antisemitism does not create Judaism, as is almost universally asserted; Judaism must be created from within.
Which emotional "gears" drive what antisemitism does not? Happiness, sadness, fear, disgust, anger, surprise? How does the drive toward asceticism (or its subsequent contemplation) strengthen one's communal or spiritual bond?
The Sotah ritual can be thought of not as a solution to a marital question but as illustrative of the fragility of all human relationships. The need for relationship can be stronger than our ability to validate the fabric of that relationship. And if true among a married couple, so much more for larger groups.
On a group chat recently, someone posted a rant against Muslims. Reposted it from somewhere. It could have been copied from Der Sturmer in 1933 and simply replaced Jews with Muslims. When called out they deleted it. Yet I suspect the depth of the oversight is lost on them.
Engaging the emotional side is nuanced. And all are vulnerable.
Reason is the easy part.
----------------
[1] Maimonides, Abraham Ibn Daud and others come to mind.
[2] https://hakirah.org/vol30fasmandiaryeditedbysherman.pdf and http://www.hakirah.org/Vol30FasmanDiaryUnedited.pdf
He spoke with Ben Gurion, and many prominent leaders in Europe.
[3] c.f film: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt11405250/ - 75 Min, Streamable on Amazon Prime or at no charge (with Israeli IP), here https://old.kan.org.il/item/?itemId=77706
-----------------
Loaves of Bread
Peter Himmelman
---------------------------
--end--