Search Results

“Then the daughters of Zelophehad came forward” (Numbers 27:1). Do you know the story of Zelophehad’s daughters? The Bible depicts them as five sisters who find themselves in a perilous economic situation. Because they do not have husbands or any living male relatives, they cannot inherit their father’s land. Through a successful appeal to Moses they draw attention to the injustice and bring about a permanent change in the Israelites’ legal code. Read the story of the five sisters in Numbers 27:1-11. Then, with the help of traditional Jewish wisdom—with all its creativity and attention to detail— let’s ponder the sacred text. Perhaps you noticed that, like their ancestors (v.1), each sister is introduced by name: Mahlah, Noah, Hoglah, Milcah and Tirzah. Note, too, how they plead their cause. It is before the whole assembly (v.2). They clarify that their father was not part of the Korah rebellion (v.3). They appeal on account of kinship and their father’s honour (v.4). Their choice of words is bold (‘Give to us a possession’) and not couched in self-effacing language. With prayerful and imaginative attention to God’s word, what wisdom do you uncover in this ancient text? In Jewish storytelling traditions we find these five women held in high esteem. A famous midrashic anthology (Yalkut Shimoni) observes that the sisters correctly identified an injustice in its deepest sense: “When the daughters of Zelophehad heard that the Land was being divided among the tribes—but only for males, not for females —they gathered and took counsel. They decided that...flesh and blood is apt to be more merciful to males than to females. But [the One] who spoke and the world came into being is different—[divine] mercies are for males as well as females...”[1] Rashi comments: “Their eye saw that which the eye of Moses did not see.” [2] In Midrash Rabbah and in the Talmud we find the rabbis praising the five sisters for the way they approached their petition. The sisters are knowledgeable in the law (v.5 tells us that Moses brings to the Lord their ‘case’ or ‘judgment’, not just their query), and they are practical, timing their petition as Moses engages with the subject of inheritance. “They were wise and righteous women. What shows their wisdom? They spoke at the appropriate moment...” [3] Likewise, they are praised for their integrity. In case you were wondering why none of them were married at the time of the petition, the sages venture to tell us: they were uncompromising in their high standards! “They were righteous inasmuch as they married none but such as were worthy of them.” [4] Rashi adds that they “held the land precious” just as their ancestor Joseph held the land precious (see Num. 27:1; Gen. 50:25). “The daughters of Zelophehad are right in what they are saying” (Num. 27:7). Emphatic divine approval results in a legacy of land for the sisters and an altered law for Israel. As you continue to probe, question and debate this passage, ponder: How might it speak to us about the respectful and transformative interchanges that are possible between community members and their leaders in the quest for fullness of truth and a just society? 1. See Bialik & Ravnitzky, 97 (slightly adapted here for inclusive language). 2. Rashi: revered 11th century Torah scholar, France. 3. Num. R. xxi, 11. Also, Bava Batra 119b. 4. Num. R. xxi, 11. Bibliography: Bialik & Ravnitzky, eds., Sefer Ha-Aggadah (New York, 1992); Elper & Handelman, eds., Torah of the Mothers (New York, 2006); Midrash Rabbah: Numbers (New York: Soncino, 1983); Rashi: Commentary on the Torah (New York: Mesorah, 2001). Scripture: NRSV. © Teresa Pirola, 2013. lightoftorah.net Reproduction for non-commercial use permitted with acknowledgement of website. Download the PDF version here. Light of Torah is a grassroots ministry based in the Catholic community, encouraging Christians to reflect on Torah with the help of Jewish insights. More... The reflection above refers to Parashat Pinchas (Numbers 25:10 - 30:1), the Torah portion read for this Sabbath in the Jewish liturgical calendar. Shabbat shalom!

On their way to the promised land the Israelites encounter one obstacle after another: hunger, thirst, rebellion, war. Here we explore the story of how the Israelites are threatened by a Moab king (Balak) who employs a seer (Balaam) to curse his enemy, Israel. This is a colourful story, full of intriguing questions and complete with a talking donkey! We will leave the donkey aside for now and focus on Balaam and his futile attempts to curse Israel (see chapters 23 and 24). Balak, king of Moab, engages Balaam to curse the Israelites. Yet each attempt by Balaam results in a blessing! The Jewish sages, reflecting on this text over the centuries, are fascinated by the question of the authenticity of Balaam, the seer. Was Balaam God’s chosen prophet, or a sorcerer? Why do you think he was suspect in the sages’ eyes? To begin with, let’s compare Balaam’s oracles to the words of the Hebrew prophets. Balaam: 'Rise, Balak, and hear; listen to me, O son of Zippor...' (Numbers 23:18). Jeremiah: 'Now the word of the Lord came to me saying...' (Jeremiah 1:1). Read further into Jeremiah 1. Read too, the words below from Ezekiel and Hosea. What do you notice? 'The word of the Lord came to the priest Ezekiel...' (Ezekiel 1:3). 'The word of the Lord came to Hosea' (Hosea 1:1). Like the sages, you will note an important contrast. Whereas the Hebrew prophets consistently acknowledge divine authority (‘Thus says the Lord’), Balaam announces himself and his own powers. Says Ramban,[1] Balaam appears to run after prophecy, building seven sacrificial altars in an attempt to ‘force’ divine power from heaven, to shape the divine will for mortal purposes. By contrast, the Hebrew prophets don’t seek the job of prophet; rather they are sought out by God, and some, out of humility, need to be coaxed into the role. Balaam is not filled with prophecy; rather, he is full of himself. Do you agree with this appraisal? Why or why not? Despite their criticisms, the sages couldn’t ignore the fact that Balaam’s oracles work for the good of Israel. In fact, one of his phrases has found its way into contemporary Jewish prayer books: ‘How goodly are your tents O Jacob, your dwelling places O Israel' (Numbers 24:5). And how are we to interpret 24:2 ("Then the spirit of God came upon him”) in Balaam’s third oracle? Rashbam holds that a development has taken place, taking note of 24:1 which tells us that at this point Balaam stopped seeking omens ‘but set his face towards the wilderness,’ a scene that suggests a new openness and humility before God. Hirsch is more explicit, saying that Balaam comes to the realisation that he cannot control God through sorcery. His third blessing, then, takes on a whole new quality, no longer awkwardly accomplished but freely flowing on the breath of unrestrained spirit-filled prophecy. Are you convinced? Not all the sages are! Treasure the complex issues that emerge in this fascinating debate. In the light of this biblical story reflect on your faith journey and recall: A time when you attempted to ‘control’ God; A turning point when you began to trust God more deeply; A time when you had to discern between a true and false ‘prophecy’/message. How does the story of Balaam speak to you? • 1. The commentators named here: Ramban (13th century), Rashbam (12th c), Hirsch (19th c), quoted in Leibowitz, 282-289. Sources: Eskenazi &Weiss, The Torah: A Woman’s Commentary (New York, 2008); Leibowitz, Studies in Bamidbar (New York, 1994). Scripture: NRSV. © Teresa Pirola, 2012. lightoftorah.net Reproduction for non-commercial use permitted with acknowledgement of website. Click here for the PDF version. Light of Torah is a grassroots ministry based in the Catholic community, encouraging Christians to reflect on Torah with the help of Jewish insights. More... The reflection above refers to Parashat Balak (Numbers 22:2 - 25:9), the Torah portion read for this Sabbath in the Jewish liturgical calendar. Shabbat shalom!

"Miriam died there, and was buried there" (Numbers 20:1). That’s it. In one brief sentence, the Bible records the death of Miriam, sister of Moses and Aaron. The brevity seems almost insulting. Even a death notice in a newspaper says more. And here we are, twenty chapters into the Book of Numbers—in the midst of the Israelites’ wilderness journey in which Miriam has been an important figure, in reach of the Promised Land having survived slavery, escape from Egypt, hunger and thirst, conflicts and rebellions—and all we have is one terse statement marking her death. Just twenty verses later, the death of Miriam’s brother, Aaron, is described at some length and with certain emotion. The whole community observes a thirty-day period of mourning for Aaron. Why not Miriam? Is she less important? Less loved? Do we simply presume a patriarchal bias in the text’s historical development? Can we reconcile this brevity with the way Scripture elsewhere speaks of Miriam as a chosen co-leader along with Moses and Aaron? “I redeemed you from the house of bondage, and I sent before you Moses, Aaron and Miriam” (Micah 6:4). Fascinating responses to this question can be found in Jewish interpretative traditions. Creatively attentive to the text, the Rabbis observed that Miriam’s death does not go unnoticed. Look at what happens. The moment she dies, the very next sentence reads: “The community was without water” (20:2), a fact which impacts harshly upon the Israelites, even erupting into an attack on Moses to which Moses responds badly, displaying none of his characteristic virtues of patience and trust in God. Why do the community and its leadership become unhinged at the moment of Miriam’s death? What is God’s Word trying to teach us? In the Scriptures, Miriam is associated with water. At the Nile she ensures her baby brother’s survival; at the Red Sea she leads a victory dance (Exodus 2:4-8; 15:20). In rabbinic storytelling the Israelites are said to have been accompanied in the wilderness by ‘Miriam’s well,’ a miraculous source of fresh water.[1] When she dies, the well disappears. Can it be that Moses and the community are grieving more than the absence of water? Has the ever-present contribution of Miriam to the wilderness journey been taken for granted until now? Reflection on Miriam’s death releases precious insights into the greater biblical narrative as well as into our own stories and contact with death. Can we ever really fathom the impact of death until a loved one is no longer with us? Again turning to Jewish tradition, we find the Talmud offering this interpretation. Miriam, like Moses, died in a most sacred, intimate way: by the divine kiss. [2] Why a kiss? A literal translation of the Hebrew text tells us that Moses died “at the mouth of the Lord” (Deut. 34:5). [3] For many people death can be a terrifying struggle as they face the finality of ‘letting go’ this world. But so attuned was Moses to divine ways that his release from this life into the Lord’s embrace was like the gentlest of kisses. And this was also true for Miriam, say the Jewish sages, enjoying a midrashic play on a textual repetition: "So Moses the servant of the Lord died there..." (Deut. 34:5). "Miriam died there..." (Num. 20:1). An apparently extraneous word in the text fuels the rabbinic mind in such a way that the tradition enfolds a deeply-held conviction: the Lord’s special love and choice of his daughter Miriam. 1. BT Shabbat 35a 2. Mo’ed Katan 27b-28a 3. English translations often read ‘at the command of the Lord.’ © Teresa Pirola, 2013. lightoftorah.net Reproduction for non-commercial use permitted with acknowledgement of website. Click here for the PDF version. Light of Torah is a grassroots ministry based in the Catholic community, encouraging Christians to reflect on Torah with the help of Jewish insights. More... The reflection above refers to Parashat Chukat (Numbers 19:1 - 22:1), the Torah portion read for this Sabbath in the Jewish liturgical calendar. Shabbat shalom!

“Any dispute which is for the sake of Heaven, its end will endure. But if it’s not for the sake of heaven, its end will not endure. Which is a dispute for the sake of Heaven? That’s the dispute of Hillel and Shammai. And which isn’t for the sake of Heaven? That’s the dispute of Korah and all his gang” (Avot 5:17). [1] This quote is from the Mishnah (a collection of Jewish oral traditions which came to be written down in the second century of the common era). It refers to a famous dispute in Jewish history between two esteemed sages: Hillel and Shammai. Both were insightful and wise in matters of interpreting the Torah, however their approaches differed. Shammai and his followers adhered to a restrictive interpretation of the law, whereas Hillel and his disciples favoured a more flexible one. While the disciples of each school clashed fiercely, over time the rabbinic consensus favoured the school of Hillel. Even so, it was not a simple matter of ruling that, “Hillel is right and Shammai is wrong.” In fact, a famous story handed down in Jewish tradition tells how a divine voice went forth saying: “The words of Hillel and the words of Shammai are both the words of the living God, but the law is according to the school of Hillel.” Why was Hillel favoured? According to tradition it was because Hillel and his disciples were kind, humble and inclusive, not hesitating to teach Shammai’s rulings as well as their own. While settling the dispute in favour of one school, it was recognized that the other, too, had merit, and that the community was best served by respecting the healthy tension between diverse insights. It is this constructive tension that the Mishnah describes as being ‘for the sake of heaven.’ It is a tension that sensitises us to the complexities of life and helps us to resist glib answers where deeper searching is in order. This kind of dispute has enduring fruits; it takes us forward. What, then, is a dispute 'not' for the sake of heaven? It is one driven by self-interest; one that takes us nowhere. What, then, is a dispute ‘not’ for the sake of heaven? It is one driven by self-interest; one that takes us nowhere. This, say the sages, was the problem with the famous rebellion triggered by ‘Korah and his gang’ in Numbers 16. During the Israelites’ long desert trek, Korah wasn’t the only one to object to Moses’ leadership. Why, then, did he meet with a particularly tragic end? The problem was not that he objected, but the selfish and divisive spirit in which he went about it. These stories and commentaries hold wisdom for today. Conflicts within our families and Church communities can be counter-productive, revealing more arrogance and fear than certainty and truth. Then again, some of our debates capture lifegiving questions, tantalizing paradoxes, and the very genius of the term ‘catholic’, namely the capacity to be all-embracing, seeking unity amidst diversity. As God’s people, may we approach our disagreements with the maturity of Hillel. May we seek wisdom in the views of the ‘other’ as much as our own, and find the delicate balance between resolute patience and prophetic insistence. Like Hillel and Shammai, at times we clash fiercely. Robust opinions will be delivered with passion. Bring it on! We don’t want a Church of wimps too polite to say anything ‘controversial.’ But let us do this respectfully, without sarcasm or arrogance, without behaviour that belittles a brother or a sister. May we develop a profound humility that keeps us listening, wondering and probing a graced mystery that is beyond us all and which, even if expressed in the best categories we can muster today, will find richer expression in time to come. • 1. Quoted in Shai Cherry, Torah Through Time (Philadelphia, 2007), 154. © Teresa Pirola, 2012. lightoftorah.net. Reproduction for non-commercial purposes permitted with acknowledgement of website. Click here for the PDF version. Light of Torah is a grassroots ministry based in the Catholic community, encouraging Christians to reflect on Torah with the help of Jewish insights. More... The reflection above refers to Parashat Korach (Numbers 16:1 - 18:32), the Torah portion read for this Sabbath in the Jewish liturgical calendar. Shabbat shalom!

Have you ever faced a critical decision where the way forward was unclear, risky, and the stakes high? Yet everything in your life had brought you to this moment. What did you do? Forge ahead or turn back? This is the scene that confronts the Israelites in Numbers 13 as they stand at the edge of Canaan, ready to re-enter the promised land after years of slavery. Moses, Joshua and Caleb—convinced that God is with them—are ready to go forward. But the people are not, swayed by the warnings of the anxious scouts. Like Caleb and Joshua the other scouts have just returned from a reconnaissance mission in Canaan; yet their assessment of the evidence is very different. In Jewish tradition the behaviour of these scouts comes under tough scrutiny for their failure in moral leadership. To appreciate this strong judgement we need to be attuned to the Jewish way of reading Torah, attentive to the details of the text such as apparently extraneous inclusions, use of particular names, and other details. Read the story in Numbers chapters 13-14. Then let’s explore some of the details that the sages have interpreted. Note the amount of space (vv.3-15) given to identifying the names and tribes of the scouts sent to observe the land. Is this listing really necessary to the story? Couldn’t it be omitted? But as the Jewish sages teach us, everything in the Torah is there for a divine reason. How would you interpret the inclusion of vv.3-15? Perhaps you notice how these verses underscore a detail already mentioned in v.2, that the men chosen for the task are not just ordinary scouts, they are important tribal leaders. Their task is not simply to collect data but to make sound judgments based on the evidence. This is why their unfavourable report is so distressing. Their preoccupation with negativity and the chance of failure means that their people are left without hope. Unlike Caleb and Joshua, they give in to their fears, and their assessment of the situation ignores any role for God. At a critical moment they fail to act as responsible leaders. Note, too, the significance of the name Hebron (13:22). It is the place associated with the story of Abraham. It is where the patriarchs and matriarchs are buried. Hebron offers a powerful symbol of the Israelites’ return home. Yet, absorbed by their own fears, the scouts misread a sign vital to the salvation story of their people. Rather than seeing a place to begin a new life, Hebron becomes a reason to retreat to slavery. Before a fragile audience, the scouts describe the land’s inhabitants as ‘giants’ and themselves as grasshoppers “in their eyes” (13:33). To this latter point a rabbinic observer makes the ironic comment, “And how would they know this?” [TB Sotah 35a]. Their fraudulent report is not based on measurable evidence but the result of a faithless insecurity complex. The people are inconsolable. Read how they complain to Moses and Aaron in 14:2-4: “If only we had died in the land of Egypt! Or in this wilderness, if only we had died!” Their negativity spirals out of control. What might have begun as understandable fear becomes regret for the Exodus, for the signs and wonders performed in the desert, for the divine revelation... all these had not been worth it. Their whining moves to a critical stage of no return: “Let’s appoint a chief and go back to Egypt!” (14:4). In their readiness to turn their back on the promised land and head for a place of slavery and false gods, the sages detect not only a loss of heart but a practical plan that is nothing less than the path to idolatry. Reflection: Rabbinic interpretations highlight how small steps can lead to increasingly grave choices and life orientations. Reflect on this in the light of important ‘crossroad’ moments in your own life and in the life of your faith community. Some forms of anxiety reflect serious mental health conditions with complex causes. Other (milder) forms are a normal part of human experience and we have a responsibility to not 'feed' them, lest they become more than they are. Discuss in light of the story of the scouts. Reflect upon the 'lessons for leadership' that emerge from the story of the scouts. Bibliography: Friedman, Commentary on the Torah (New York, 2011); Leibowitz, Studies in Bamidbar (New York: Lambda, n.p.d.). Scripture translation: Friedman. © Teresa Pirola, 2013. lightoftorah.net. This article can be reproduced for non-commercial purposes with acknowledgement of website. For the PDF version click here. Light of Torah is a grassroots ministry based in the Catholic community, encouraging Christians to reflect on Torah with the help of Jewish insights. More... The reflection above refers to Parashat Shelach Lecha (Numbers 13:1 - 15:41), the Torah portion read for this Sabbath in the Jewish liturgical cycle. Shabbat shalom!

As the Book of Numbers continues the story of the Israelites’ epic wilderness journey, episodes of rebellion and conflict emerge. With the help of traditional Jewish wisdom, let’s explore an aspect of the rebellion in chapter 11. With the sages we ask: what is the real significance of the people’s complaints over their craving for meat? We also consider the character of Moses in both his fragility and strength. We begin with the Israelites’ complaint: “Who will give us meat to eat?” (11:4) Observe how Moses relays this complaint to God: "Where should I (get) meat to give to this entire people, when they weep on me, saying: Give us meat so that we may eat!” (11:13) Does Moses communicate the complaint accurately? What contradiction do you notice? Actually, the people are not weeping to Moses. In fact, the cry of ‘who will give us meat?’ implies that there is no one who can help, that they consider themselves leaderless. Worse, nowhere in their outburst do we hear any attempt to place their trust in God; they look elsewhere for their sustenance. This, say the Jewish sages, is what angers God: their grumbling amounts to idolatry. (See, too, how the psalmist recalls this event in Ps. 78:18-19.) Instead of being grateful that God feeds them with manna, the people bitterly and undermine the evidence of God’s action in their lives. Further, this loss of confidence is systemic. Remember all that counting of clans in the opening chapter of Numbers? Well, now they are ‘weeping by their clans’ (v.10); not only the ‘riffraff’ on the camp’s outskirts but the entire ‘Children of Israel’ (v.4). The maternal imagery in Moses’ prayer is striking. As he cries out to God in grief (11:11-15), the images of conception, birth and suckling suggest the intimate depths of Moses’ relationship with Israel. He leads not an organisation but a people formed by blood ties and divine election, a relationship both familial and spiritual. Like a parent he hurts when his children hurt. Further, his words suggest that God, not Moses, is the real mother of Israel. God’s anger in this event is directed at the people rather than Moses. Why not Moses? After all, he too is having words with God. Hasn’t the grumbling spread though the Israelite ranks right to the top, affecting Moses himself (not to mention Miriam and Aaron as we read later in chapter 12)? Look closely at the text. Despite Moses’ suffering and remonstration, he maintains his relationship with God, calling himself ‘your servant’ (11:11). He doesn’t cry out ‘Poor me!’ to the air; he cries out to God, speaking directly and honestly about his pain. “I am not able, myself alone, to carry this entire people, for it is too heavy for me!” (Num. 11:14). The ‘ill-fortune’ which causes Moses to prefer death is not the lack of meat but grief over the people’s rebellion, and a sense of having failed them. And if it seems that Moses doubts God’s willingness to respond to the people’s plight, in fact verse 12 leaves no room for doubt that Moses knows exactly who is Israel’s real parent. If it was not Moses who ‘conceived’ and ‘gave birth’ to this people, then who did? The clear implication is that God did. Moses’ heartfelt plea to God reminds us that even the ‘greats’ of the Bible struggled and went through periods where they experienced their faith, mission and community/family as a burden. Yet they kept talking to God. No matter how tumultuous the relationship, they maintained it. How do we relate to God in difficult times? Continue to ponder this Torah text in view of your experience of community and leadership.• Sources: Fox, The Five Books of Moses (New York, 1995); Leibowitz, Studies in Bamidbar (New York, n.p.d.). Scripture: Fox. © Teresa Pirola, 2013. lightoftorah.net. Reproduction for non-commercial purposes permitted with acknowledgement of website. Click here for the PDF version. Light of Torah is a grassroots ministry arising from the Catholic community, encouraging Christians to reflect on Torah with the help of Jewish insights. More... The reflection above refers to Parashat B'haalot'cha (Numbers 8:1 - 12:16), the Torah portion read for this Sabbath in the Jewish liturgical cycle. Shabbat shalom!

Sitting in church, Kathy gives the homilist the full impact of her gaze. Her look is direct, her eyes alert, her smile warm; at the very least, she presents a thoughtful, responsive facial expression. You might think Kathy is a friend of the homilist, or is enthralled by what she is hearing. In fact, she is warm and responsive towards every homilist and speaker, of whatever age, gender, spirituality, culture, and regardless of talent. Being experienced in public speaking herself, she understands how difficult it is to stand before a group, the courage it takes to present a point of view, the energy it takes to prepare and deliver a talk. So she uses her facial expression to communicate support, encouragement, solidarity, compassion. She ‘lifts up her face’ as an everyday gift of love. Who else do we know who ‘lifts up their face’? How about God! At least that’s how Scripture describes the divine love. Recall how the Psalms describe God’s face as ‘turning’ and ‘shining.’ Recall how Moses’ face shone after encountering the Lord’s glory with unprecedented directness. Then there is that beautiful passage in the Book of Numbers known as ‘Aaron’s Blessing’ - or the 'Aaronic Benediction', deeply embedded in Jewish spiritual life: May the Lord bless you and keep you! May the Lord shine his face upon you and favour you! May the Lord lift up his face toward you and grant you shalom! Number 6:24-26 (see translation by Everett Fox) Click here to enjoy a musical rendition of these verses, in English and in Hebrew. Lovely luminous imagery fills this blessing, along with poetic rhythm and a sense of comfort. The Lord draws near, with face lifted towards us in a gaze of pleasure and affection. Indeed, the text could read: ‘May the Lord smile on you.’ Note the pairs of divine actions: bless and keep, shine and favour, lift up and grant peace? Why might these actions be paired as they are? Jewish storytelling traditions (midrash) suggest that one action is consequential to the other. Thus, if you receive a blessing (gift), then it needs to be kept (protected) or it may be lost or stolen from us. Then again, the three verses are sometimes interpreted as having an ascending order: a blessing of material goods (food, shelter), followed by a blessing of spiritual qualities, and finally the promise of shalom as the combination of the first two, i.e., peace in its fullest sense. The midrash highlights this climax through a series of statements about the greatness of peace and how fitting it is as the ‘seal’ to the blessings: e.g.: ‘The blessings are of no avail unless peace goes with them… Great is peace, for it was given to the meek; as it says, But the humble shall inherit the land, and delight themselves in the abundance of peace (Ps. 37: 11). Great is peace, for it outweighs everything.’ - Numbers Rabbah 11: 7 In this last statement, can we hear echoes of the Beatitudes (‘Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth’)? We might ponder how Jesus, a faithful Jew, was influenced by verses of blessing in the Hebrew Scriptures. Aaron’s Blessing is a prayer that lends itself to Christian home-based spirituality practices. Deeply rooted in Scripture, it is a powerful prayer, yet also gentle and unlikely to offend, even where diverse levels of religious commitment are present under the one roof. You may wish to introduce ‘Aaron’s Blessing’ as part of extended family or community gatherings. Or bless young children before they sleep by laying hands and praying Aaron’s Blessing. Remind them that God is smiling at them; and check your own face: the medium is the message! • Bibliography: Fox, The Five Books of Moses (New York, 1995); Leibowitz, Studies in Bamidbar (New York, n.p.d.); Midrash Rabbah: Numbers Vol 1; (New York: Soncino, 1983). © Teresa Pirola, 2012, 2021. lightoftorah.net. Reproduction for non-commercial use is permitted with acknowledgement of website. Click here for the PDF version. Light of Torah is a grassroots ministry arising from the Catholic community, encouraging Christians to reflect on Torah with the help of Jewish insights. More... The reflection above refers to Parashat Naso (Numbers 4:21 - 7:89), the Torah portion read for this Sabbath in the Jewish liturgical cycle. Shabbat shalom!

With an eye to the Jewish cycle of readings, this week we open the Book of Numbers, also known by its Hebrew title ‘Bamidbar’ (In the wilderness’). It continues the story of the Israelites' forty-year wilderness trek after leaving Egypt, as they head for the promised land. This week, we can also be aware of Jewish communities celebrating the Festival of Shavuot (‘Festivals of Weeks’), commencing at sundown on 16 May 2021. And we pray for peace in the Holy Land. *** Numbers 4:1-20 relates the Lord’s instructions as to how the Tabernacle [the portable sanctuary] should be handled when the Israelites dismantle it in order to move camp. Read these instructions. Note that Aaron and his sons have a specific role in dismantling and covering the holy items, while the Kohathites (part of the Levite tribe) have the duty of transporting them. “Aaron and his sons shall go in and assign each to a particular task and burden. But the Kohathites must not go in to look on the holy things even for a moment; otherwise they will die” (Numbers 4:19-20). In Jewish tradition we find the Rabbis puzzling over these verses: Why the strict rules about who does what? Why the dire warning that the Kohathites must not look upon the holy objects? Where lies the danger? In the creative and inquiring spirit of the Jewish sages, ponder these verses before reading on. The midrash [1] presents two different views, both containing the idea that assigned duties prevent chaos from breaking out in the presence of the Holy One. According to Rabbi Eleazar, the holiness of the Ark (the most precious item) is so overwhelming that people may be tempted to run away from it, preferring to carry something else like the lamp or the table. Rabbi Samuel takes the opposite view: the privilege of carrying the Ark may cause people to abandon the other objects and quarrel over the right to carry the Ark. Either way, at risk is the decorum befitting such a sacred environment. Therefore, Aaron must “assign each to a particular task and burden” (v.19). Imaginatively enter the scenes depicted by these storytelling traditions. How does the sacred text speak to you? Still, the question remains: why does the Torah forbid even ‘looking’ upon the holy things? Says Hirsch [2], the Torah is warning against looking upon a sacred thing without the correct depth of vision. Should the Kohathites have witnessed the covering of the holy objects they might have perceived them as ordinary things being packed up like any other household item. Thus the command to refrain from looking protects ‘the sense of the sacred.’ For Abravanel [3] the holy things covered and kept from sight are a reminder to retain an appropriate sense of mystery. Not everything can be grasped by human endeavour. ‘The heavens are the Lord’s heavens, but the earth he has given to human beings” (Ps. 115:16). Faith calls for restful trust in a mystery ultimately beyond us. Yet another view is set forth by Hefez. [4] Enjoying the privilege of carrying the Ark, the Kohathites were in danger of becoming full of pride. By withholding from them an important detail, the Lord helps them to be humble and reverent. Then again, Sforno [5] explains the text without any resort to symbolism. The matter is purely organizational! It allows for the smooth carrying out of sacred tasks. Where do you find yourself entering this discussion? Share your views and the experiences and reflections that fuel them. Can we appreciate the vitality of Jewish interpretative voices and their respect for the 'seventy faces of Torah', the multiple interpretations that can be discovered within the infinite depths of God's word. 1. Bamidbar Rabbah. 2. Hirsch: 19th century German Torah scholar. 3. Abravanel: 15th c. Spanish. 4. Hefez: 16th c. Italian. 5. Sforno: 14-15th c. Italian Bibliography: Leibowitz, Studies in Bamidbar, (New York: Lambda, n.p.d.). Scripture: NRSV. © Teresa Pirola, 2013, 2021. lightoftorah.net. Reproduction for non-commercial purposes is permitted with acknowledgement of website. Click here for PDF version. Light of Torah is a grassroots ministry arising from the Catholic community, encouraging Christians to reflect on Torah with the help of Jewish insights. More... The reflection above refers to Parashat Bamidbar (Numbers 1:1 - 4:20), the Torah portion read for this Sabbath in the Jewish liturgical cycle. Shabbat shalom!

The Book of Leviticus holds detailed instructions for the formation of a people as they learn to walk in the ways of God. In chapter 26 we come to what might be described as a motivational ‘pep talk’ in the form of a series of blessings (vv.3-13) and curses (vv.14-45). What is one of the first things you notice in reading the blessings and curses in Leviticus 26? Like the Jewish sages, perhaps you note that there appear to be many more curses than blessings! Does this surprise you, bother you? Surely the God we know and love and who holds our deepest interests at heart is a God characterised by blessing rather than cursing? Why the apparent imbalance here? When we turn to traditional Jewish commentary, we find the sages asking this question. Ponder it yourself, ideally with a discussion partner, before reading on. In spite of the number of verses dealing with curses, Jewish tradition repeatedly discerns (here and throughout the Torah) a principle that says: divine goodness outweighs divine retribution. Jewish tradition repeatedly discerns a principle that says: divine goodness outweighs divine retribution. Let’s explore three interpretations in support of this principle: The first arises from the Spanish scholar Ibn Ezra [12th century] and has been elaborated over time: If we look closely at the text (Lev 26) we see that the blessings are to take place immediately and in their fullness. However, the curses are carried out in gradually increasing stages of severity. Transgressors are not struck down all at once, but first with minor blows, then—should they still fail to repent—by more severe blows. Only if they still refuse to reform does the major curse materialise. Does this view resonate with your close reading of the text? Our next interpretation is somewhat similar. Just before the blessings it says: “If you follow my laws and faithfully observe my commandments...” (26:3) By contrast, before the curses we read: “But if you do not obey me and do not observe all these commandments, if you reject my laws and spurn my rules, so that you do not observe all my commandments and you break my covenant...” (26:14-15). What do you notice? Only after a person ‘rejects’ and ‘spurns’ the laws do the curses follow. Blessings flow from a simple keeping of the law, however curses require a sustained effort of disobedience! [1] Our third interpretation involves a playful reflection on the Hebrew alphabet. Rabbi Shemuel said: The student will find more blessings than curses. How so? The blessings begin with the first letter of the alphabet (alef) and end with the last letter of the alphabet (tav), signifying that alef-tav [‘A to Z’] blessings will reach you. The curses, on the other hand, begin with the sixth letter and end with the fifth letter, and there is nothing between them. [Midrash Tanhuma, Re’e 4] Reflection The painful difficulties of life can threaten to eclipse our awareness of God’s blessings. How do you live with a fundamental sense of life as gift and blessing? The interpretation above approaches ‘curse’ as a carefully-applied corrective and presumes that God desires to give people every chance to mend their ways. Do you agree? How might this ancient text speak to the (often complex) relational and societal dynamics of present-day life? ********* [1] As noted, for example, by Seforno (1470-1550), Italian Jewish Torah commentator. Bibliography: Leibowitz, New Studies in Vayikra, Vol 2 (New York, 1996), 569-571. Scripture: JPS. © Teresa Pirola, 2013 lightoftorah.net Reproduction for non-commercial purposes permitted with acknowledgement of website. PDF version available here. Light of Torah is a grassroots ministry arising from the Catholic community, encouraging Christian reflection on Torah with the help of Jewish insights. More... The reflection above refers to Parashat Behar-Bechukotai (Lev. 25:1 - 27:34), the (double) Torah portion read for this Sabbath in the Jewish liturgical cycle. Shabbat shalom!

“If anyone maims another [person]: what was done shall be done in return—fracture for fracture, eye for eye, tooth for tooth” (Leviticus 24:19-20). The ‘eye for an eye’ verse is one of the most widely known biblical verses, and perhaps also the most misunderstood. It conjures up horrific pictures of eyes being gouged and limbs severed in pursuit of a distorted, inhumane justice. In ancient Israelite culture was this verse once taken literally as a physically inflicted punishment? Historically we can’t be sure, but what we do know is that early rabbinic opinion interpreted this verse as referring to monetary compensation, not physical retaliation. Tragically, in Christian history this verse had often become a preaching mechanism for depicting Judaism as a ‘vengeful’ religion in contrast to the gospel of love preached by Christianity. In Catholic teaching since the Second Vatican Council, the Church has warned against stereotypes which misrepresent the Jewish understanding of its own sacred texts. By reading Torah through the eyes of the Jewish sages and their tradition, we learn how Judaism has interpreted even difficult bible passages in ways congruent with a loving God. Here, let’s explore some of this reasoning for a non-literal interpretation of ‘eye for eye.’ A number of Talmudic voices consider a literal interpretation of this verse to be impractical. For “if a blind man blinded another . . . how would I be able to give an eye for an eye literally? Yet the Torah states (Lev. 24:22): one law shall there be for you” [Bava Kamma 83b-84a]. Ibn Ezra [12th century] points out that physical punishment is not feasible because it can never be exact. “For if a man deprived his fellow of a third of his normal sight by his blow, how can the retaliatory blow be so calculated as to have the same results?” It may blind the offender completely, it might even result in his death. Punishment would not fit the crime. A further practical issue is raised by the Kuzari:* compensatory money is actually useful to the victim, whereas “you will gain nothing by cutting off [the offender’s] hand.” Other sages argue their case directly from Scripture. For example, Maimonides [12th century] notes that in Exodus we read that if one party is physically injured in a quarrel “the assailant shall go unpunished— except for paying of the idleness [i.e. time lost] and the cure” (Exod 21:18-19). If monetary compensation is intended here, why would it be any different in Leviticus? We may query, as did Maharal of Prague [16th century]: if monetary compensation is intended by the ‘eye for eye’ verse, why doesn’t the text say it outright? In the voice of Maimonides we find a reply: there is a fundamental difference between injuring the body of a human being and harming his property. While money can fix the latter, it can never totally compensate for the former. The severity of the ‘eye for eye’ language is there to remind the offender of this fact, that really he deserves to be maimed in return, but this is not the Jewish way of settling disputes. Ultimately, a humane resolution to the whole tragic situation is only possible through real remorse on the part of the offender and forgiveness by the victim. Says Maimonides: “It is forbidden for the injured party to be cruel and unforgiving. This is not the Jewish way, but as soon as the guilty party has sought his forgiveness and made supplication once or twice, and he knows that the smiter sincerely regrets his action, he should forgive him.” Note the deft interpretative manoeuvres of these Torah commentators. What began as a verse that might sound like a license for revenge gives rise to teachings about restraint, remorse and forgiveness. **** * Kuzari: A treatise in defense of Judaism by Spanish scholar and poet Judah HaLevi (1075-1141). Bibliography: Friedman, Commentary on the Torah (SanFrancisco, 2001); Leibowitz, New Studies in Vayikra, Vol 2 (New York, 1996), 494-508. Scripture: NJPS. © Teresa Pirola, 2013. lightoftorah.net Reproduction for non-commercial use permitted with acknowledgement of website. Light of Torah is a grassroots ministry arising from the Catholic community, encouraging Christian reflection on Torah with the help of Jewish insights. More... The reflection above refers to Parashat Emor (Lev. 21:1 - 24:23), the Torah portion read for this Sabbath in the Jewish liturgical cycle. Shabbat shalom!

We begin with two verses: one from the Bible and one from the Babylonian Talmud. “You shall love your neighbour as yourself” (Leviticus 19:18). “What is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow” (Shab. 31a) The latter saying is attributed to Rabbi Hillel. Hillel was one of the most influential Jewish sages. He lived at the turn of the first century CE and his teachings would have been known to Jesus. Ponder these verses. Discuss with a friend. Then bring your observations into conversation with some of the Jewish sages* whose interpretations follow. Nahmanides (13th century Torah scholar) views Leviticus 19:18 from the stance of the person commanded to love. After noting that “one’s self” is unique, distinct from every other human being, he concludes that the Torah is teaching us to overcome the human tendency to be self-centred in our loving. (For example, I might wish my colleague success, but not to the extent that he/she might be promoted before me!) In Nahmanides’ view, we should wish other people well in all things, just as we do in our own case, and place no limitations on our love. The Biur (18th century Torah commentary) takes up Hillel’s statement in a way that affirms human equality: “the command to respect our neighbour’s feelings and interests apply to every human being without distinction.” While some traditional views emphasise the extent to which one should love, an alternative view among the Jewish sages focuses on the principle that motivates love. That is, love your neighbour because, like yourself, your neighbour was created in the image of God. As Rabbi Akiva says in the Mishnah (Avot 3,14): Beloved is the human being, created in the image of God. In this view, love for a human being is motivated by respect for the divine image. What we share with other members of the human family is a special relationship with the divine. Note that this interpretation would not be so clear if the words “as yourself” were omitted from our original verse. This personal identification with one’s neighbour is also found in Leviticus 19:34 where it says: “you shall love the alien as yourself, for you were aliens in the land of Egypt.” To know what it means to live as a stranger is to know (and empathise with) the heart of a stranger. Similarly, verse 19:18 could be understood this way: Since you know what it is like to be a human being, you understand your neighbour’s quest for love. Therefore, love him/her “as yourself”. It is important for Christians to be aware that 'love of neighbour' is a teaching deeply embedded in Jewish tradition, and to be mindful that there has been an unfortunate, long-held tendency to contrast Judaism negatively with the love commandment of Jesus. Thankfully, the Church today urges teachers, catechists and homilists to better understand Judaism and to present it accurately. In the words of the Pontifical Commission for Religious Relations with the Jews: “The Old Testament and the Jewish tradition must not be set against the New Testament in such a way that the former seems to constitute a religion of only justice, fear and legalism, with no appeal to the love of God and neighbour (cf: Dt. 6:5; Lv. 19:18; Mt. 22:34-40).” — 1974 Guidelines for Implementing Nostra Aetate, 4 . * See Leibowitz, 366-372. Sources: Leibowitz, New Studies in Vayikra, Vol.1 (Jerusalem, 1993); Dialogika online library of documentation pertaining to Jewish-Christian dialogue. Scripture: NRSV. © Teresa Pirola, 2013, 2021. lightoftorah.net Reproduction for non-commercial use is permitted with acknowledgement of website. Light of Torah is a grassroots ministry arising from the Catholic community, encouraging Christian reflection on Torah with the help of Jewish insights. More... The reflection above refers to Parashat Acharei Mot - Kedoshim (Lev. 16:1 - 20:27), the (double) Torah portion read for this Sabbath in the Jewish liturgical cycle. Shabbat shalom!

Following the festival days of Passover and the Easter Octave, Light of Torah resumes its weekly schedule of exploring the Torah portion of the week in the Jewish liturgical cycle. This week’s Torah reading comes from the Book of Leviticus where the theme of ritual purity draws the attention of Jewish commentators. Ancient ritual purity laws is not an easy topic for our twenty-first century mindset and can prove challenging for many a Christian reader. It is not uncommon to hear certain Old Testament passages dismissed as irrelevant, sexist, legalistic writings, supposedly rejected by Jesus and by our own ‘enlightened’ times. If this were the case, Leviticus would have little to say to us. Yet, as Christians we believe that these texts form an integral part of our Bible through which we encounter God's revealing word. We need to dig deeper . . . Let's listen to how Jewish tradition interprets its own sacred texts. Leviticus 12 is a good example. Particularly unsettling to contemporary ears are the opening verses that declare a woman who has just given birth to be in a state of ritual impurity: “The Lord spoke to Moses, saying: Speak to the children of Israel, saying: If a woman conceives and bears a male child, she shall be ceremonially unclean seven days … (Leviticus 12:1-2) When the days of her purification are completed, whether for a son or for a daughter, she shall bring to the priest at the entrance of the tent of meeting a lamb in its first year for a burnt offering, and a pigeon or turtledove for a sin offering.” (Leviticus 12:6) What is our starting point in unpacking this passage? We begin with the knowledge that Judaism holds procreation to be a God-given blessing and duty. Why, then, should a mother, having just given birth, be declared “unclean”? Jewish scholars take up this line of questioning. They note that, at the conclusion of her purification period, the Torah calls for both a ‘burnt offering’ and a ‘sin offering.’ In particular, the insistence on a ‘sin offering’ is deemed puzzling. The burnt offering is less problematic. The fifteenth-century Torah commentator, Abravanel, [1] suggests that this was a way for the mother to “cleave to her maker, who had performed wondrous things for her, in delivering her from the pain and danger of childbirth.” In other words, this sacrificial action is one of praise and thanksgiving. But why the need for a sin offering when the mother has committed no sin? In the midrash we find an explanation by way of a certain detail approached through two differing lenses. On the one hand, Rabbi Levi marvels at the wonders of pregnancy and birth: “Human beings entrust to [the Creator] a drop of fluid in privacy, and the Holy One . . . openly returns to them completed and perfected human individuals. Is this not a matter for praise?”[2] On the other hand, in another midrashic source we read: : “From whence do you come? From a fetid drop…”[3] Whereas Rabbi Levi focuses on the earthy realities of procreation as a holy wonder, the other midrashic source dwells on the insignificance of human beings compared to the majesty of the Creator. The latter has echoes in the Book of Isaiah. There the prophet witnesses a heavenly vision with angelic voices proclaiming “Holy, holy, holy is the Lord of hosts (Isa. 6:3).” And how does the prophet respond? “Woe is me! I am lost, for I am a man of unclean lips (Isa. 6:5).” Perhaps, then, this is the sense in which the Torah speaks of the impurity and sin offering of a woman after childbirth: she is profoundly in touch with both the greatness of the Creator and the smallness and fragility of the newly birthed human being, as well as her own vulnerability. Our reflections drawn from traditional Jewish commentary suggest that the ‘sin offering’ closing the mother’s purification period need not be interpreted as atonement for sin, but rather as an expression of the ‘gap’ in perfection between human beings and their Creator. In this way, our Leviticus reading leads us to questions and reflections that speak to us today; for example: In my own life, in what ways am I aware of God’s greatness, and my smallness? Recall, too, how even the greatest of Christian saints were acutely aware of their own insignificance, inadequacies and sins. What is the difference between awareness of one’s human fragility and poor self-esteem? What unique insights into life and faith do mothers bring to religious communities, attentive to the experience of giving birth? Perspectives of contemporary Jewish women As Christian readers we can also be aware that, just as Christian Bible studies today are enriched by the insights of women scholars and educators, so too has a similar development emerged within Judaism. Here we find diverse female opinions that both affirm and critique the tradition for its handling of biblical texts such as Leviticus 12. Some explore the problems in traditional interpretation arising from time-conditioned societal norms. Others draw from the tradition alternative interpretations that are affirming, empowering and protective of women, girls and female experience. (Note: The midrashic insights above are highlighted in the teaching of Nehama Leibowitz, an Orthodox Jewish woman widely regarded as one the leading teachers of Torah in twentieth-century Israel.) While further discussion is not possible in this brief article, an excellent starting point for those interested is The Torah: A Women’s Commentary, edited by Tamara Cohn Eskenazi and Andrea L. Weiss (New York: URJ Press, 2008). A connection with Luke’s Gospel Finally, note the reference to pigeon and turtledove as part of the ritual offerings in Leviticus 12:6. You may be interested to compare and contrast Luke 2:21-24 where a sacrifice of “a pair of turtledoves or two young pigeons” is mentioned in relation to Mary and Joseph “when the time came for their purification according to the law of Moses”. As Christians reading the story of Jesus’ birth and infancy, we are reminded that Jesus grew up in a Jewish family and community immersed in ancestral rituals and customs as practised in their day. ***** 1. Cited by Leibowitz, 177. 2. Vayikra Rabbah, Tazria XIV, 2-3. 3. Konteres Aharon in Midrash Yelamdenu; see Leibowitz, 179. Bibliography: Midrash Rabbah: Leviticus (New York, 1983); Leibowitz, New Studies in Vayikra, (New York, 1996); Eskenazi & Weiss (eds.), The Torah: A Women’s Commentary (New York, 2008). Levine and Brettler (eds.); The Jewish Annotated New Testament (Oxford University Press, 2017). Scripture: NRSV. © Teresa Pirola, 2013, 2021. lightoftorah.net Reproduction for non-commercial use permitted with acknowledgement of website. Light of Torah is a grassroots ministry arising from the Catholic community, encouraging Christian reflection on Torah with the help of Jewish insights. More... The reflection above refers to Parashat Tazria-Metzorah (Lev. 12:1 - 15:33), the Torah portion read for this Sabbath in the Jewish liturgical cycle. Shabbat shalom!