Ki Tissa 5766: The Second Tablets, A Third Covenant

[Benjamin Fleischer]

This is long.  It might be easier to read online.  It's three parts:  The dvar, the background, and a discussion of where to go.  Please comment!
Go to http://www.asktherebbe.org (The following link doesn't work yet)
http://asktherebbe.blogspot.com/2006/03/ki-tissa-5766-second-tablets-third_14.html

I'm off to Acapulco tomorrow through Thursday.  Hasta Luego!

Ki Tissa 5766: The Second Tablets, A Third Covenant

Ki Tissa Exodus 30:11 - 34:35 32:15 Thereupon Moses turned and went down from the mountain bearing the two tablets of the Pact, tablets inscribed on both their surfaces: they were inscribed on the one side and on the other. 16 The tablets were God's work, and the writing was God's writing , incised upon the tablets. 32:19 As soon as Moses came near the camp and saw the calf and the dancing, he became enraged; and he hurled the tablets from his hands and shattered them at the foot of the mountain. 20 He took the calf that they had made and burned it; he ground it to powder and strewed it upon the water and so made the Israelites drink it. יט וַֽיְהִ֗י כַּֽאֲשֶׁ֤ר קָרַב֙ אֶל־הַֽמַּחֲנֶ֔ה וַיַּ֥רְא אֶת־הָעֵ֖גֶל וּמְחֹלֹ֑ת וַיִּֽחַר־אַ֣ף מֹשֶׁ֗ה וַיַּשְׁלֵ֤ךְ מִיָּדָו֙ אֶת־הַלֻּחֹ֔ת וַיְשַׁבֵּ֥ר אֹתָ֖ם תַּ֥חַת הָהָֽר׃ The Commandments written on the first tablets were written by God. That covenant, in parashat Mishpatim (21:1-23:33) was broken when Moses shattered the tablets. This is why God offered to destroy Israel and create a nation out of Moses (32:10). In order to make amends, God had Moses write up a new covenant and put them on a second set of tablets . (Exodus 34:10-27, see Exodus 21:1-23:19 for the first one) The second tablets share with the first covenant the law of the firstborn, the exclusive worship of God, and the festivals. The second covenant doesn't include any of the slave laws, murder laws, damages laws, poverty and justice laws, and sabbatical year law that was in the first covenant. The additions to the first covenant are in laws in reference to the sin of the Golden Calf, an expansion of the festival law, and laws dealing with covenants and interactions with other nations. In short, here we have a small pact focused on the covenantal relationship between Israel and God. It is either extremely xenophobic or exclusive of God-worship and cultural adoption depending on your point of view. It's omissions show that it was not meant to be a law code, but rather a pact assuring that Israel worship only God, YHWH. (Some scholars say the Book of the Covenant is from the Elohistic source[E] while this is from the Yahwistic source[J].) In any event, we see the covenant reaffirmed with God by pledging allegiance to worship Him exclusively and regularly. This raises questions about how American Jews assimilate. I know this is a touchy subject, but I think that the sin of the Golden Calf raises serious issues about the extent to which Jews can adopt non-Jewish practices. See how Moses tests the people's allegiance to God below: 32:26 Moses stood up in the gate of the camp and said, "Whoever is for the Lord, come here!" And all the Levites rallied to him. 27 He said to them, "Thus says the Lord, the God of Israel: Each of you put sword on thigh, go back and forth from gate to gate throughout the camp, and slay brother, neighbor, and kin." 28 The Levites did as Moses had bidden; and some three thousand of the people fell that day. 29 And Moses said, "Dedicate yourselves to the Lord this day--for each of you has been against son and brother--that He may bestow a blessing upon you today." For Moses, even worshipping an idol and calling it God was deserving of death. Today, the majority of American Jews are non-practicing or minimally practicing. Is there a line they have crossed where we can call, "Come back wayward children!"(Jeremiah 3:14) Or is there a point of no return?(Hagiga 15a) And this is far less severe than Moses making people decide between God and death!( I Kings 18:21-22) So, what are we to do with the unbroken covenant the Israelites made with God at Sinai to which we are beholden? I believe that just like allowing women to assume traditional male roles and the movement to allow homosexuals full-participation in Jewish ritual life, we have made a decision that the Bible was wrong on how it made a blanket prohibition of foreign practices. That being said, the Jewish adoption of materialism, I think, is a bad thing. The Jewish adoption of reliance on single authorities for religious wisdom and direction rather than constant learning is a bad thing. The Jewish dismissal of religious practices as inconvenient or quaint is a bad thing. I believe that American Jews have adopted a non-Jewish/Christian mindset towards God, Religion, and Practice. For Christians, God is everything. For Jews, God is personal. We have no creed, as long as you practice and respect the precepts, you're good (ma'ase rav). Christians tend to understand the Bible literally. Jews understand it through homily, interpretation, and tradition. For example, biblically speaking, creation of the world is a minor theme and has not been understood by Jews as a fundamental belief. Lastly, Jews have a civilization of practices. Some are rooted in the Biblical times, some in Rabbinic, medieval, and modern. These practices fill our days and our lives with meaning, and sometimes challenge us with their dissonance. I believe that the future of Judaism can be found in redefining the covenant as in this portion. When Jews are no longer defined by their separation from non-Jewish culture, we will find our Jewishness in social action, text study, communal gatherings, and life cycle events. We will bring honesty to our practices. Bnei Mitzvah for children who do not believe in an obligation to Jewish practice (mitzvot) should be confirmed instead (as belonging to a faith community). Prayers should be printed and widely distributed for people who do not believe in God. Prayers should be in Hebrew and the local language. Hebrew should become the language of the Jews, once again. In short, Jews will able to universally understand each other's practices, will respect differences of opinion out of understanding (pluralism), and we will find a way of respecting differences in serious matters such as who is a Jew, marriage and divorce, trustworthiness of kashrut, and possibly accessibility of prayer services. My point here is, that we have broken the second tablets. We need to reconstruct them. It is very exciting to live today, in the times when our covenant with God, with the Jewish people, is being rewritten before our very eyes(Hosea 2:20-25, Jeremiah 31:30-33, Ezekiel 36: 24-2). Send me your comments! (See comments below) Hosea 2:20 In that day, I will make a covenant for them with the beasts of the field, the birds of the air, and the creeping things of the ground; I will also banish bow, sword, and war from the land. Thus I will let them lie down in safety. 21 And I will espouse you forever: I will espouse you with righteousness and justice, And with goodness and mercy, 22 And I will espouse you with faithfulness; Then you shall be devoted to the Lord. Jeremiah 31:30-33 "Behold, days are coming", says YHWH, "And I will cut with the House of Israel and with the House of Judah a new covenant. Not like the covenant which I cut with their fathers on the day I by strength of hand brought them out of Egypt which they broke my covenant and I owned them," said YHWH. "For this is the covenant which I will cut with the House of Israel after the those days," said YHWH. "And I will put my teachings (Torah) in their midst and on their hearts I will write them. And I will be to them God and they will be to me as a People. And they will not teach any more a man to his fellow or a man to his brother saying "Know YHWH" because everyone will know Me from the smallest of them to the greatest of them," said YHWH. "For I will forgive their iniquities; and their sins I will not remember further" Sefer haBrit haKatan- The Small Book of the Covenant With comments 34:10 He said: I hereby make a covenant. This is the introduction of where the second covenant or pact begins. Before all your people I will work such wonders as have not been wrought on all the earth or in any nation; and all the people who are with you shall see how awesome are the Lord's deeds which I will perform for you. 11 Mark well what I command you this day. This is the prologue where God explains why we should accept his Covenant. I will drive out before you the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites. God promises territorial dominance of the tribes in Canaan. The Covenant is reassured. 12 Beware of making a covenant with the inhabitants of the land against which you are advancing, lest they be a snare in your midst. We are only to be bound by our Covenant to God. Nothing else must come in the way. Some xenophobia. 13 No, you must tear down their altars, smash their pillars, and cut down their sacred posts; 14 for you must not worship any other god, because the Lord, whose name is Impassioned, is an impassioned God. Destroy the natives' religion and religious shrines. There can be no other religion with no other god, especially the Golden Calf. 15 You must not make a covenant with the inhabitants of the land, for they will lust after their gods and sacrifice to their gods and invite you, and you will eat of their sacrifices. 22:19 Whoever sacrifices to a god other than the Lord alone shall be proscribed. Repeat with emphasis not to share food with the polytheists. This is another reference to the exclusiveness of God, e.g. not the Golden Calf. 16 And when you take wives from among their daughters for your sons, their daughters will lust after their gods and will cause your sons to lust after their gods. Do not intermarry with them. They will corrupt you. More xenophobia. 17 You shall not make molten gods for yourselves. Do not make images. God has no image. No Golden Calf. 18 You shall observe the Feast of Unleavened Bread--eating unleavened bread for seven days, as I have commanded you--at the set time of the month of Abib, for in the month of Abib you went forth from Egypt. 23:14 Three times a year you shall hold a festival for Me: 15 You shall observe the Feast of Unleavened Bread--eating unleavened bread for seven days as I have commanded you--at the set time in the month of Abib, for in it you went forth from Egypt; Festival: The Canaanite month Aviv corresponds to the Torah's first month, now call Nisan. This is Passover. 19 Every first issue of the womb is Mine, from all your livestock that drop a male as firstling, whether cattle or sheep. Because the first is the best and we owe God for our produce, the firstborn animal belongs to God. It will be offered on an altar by priests. 20 But the firstling of an ass you shall redeem with a sheep; if you do not redeem it, you must break its neck. And you must redeem every first-born among your sons. 22:28 You shall not put off the skimming of the first yield of your vats. You shall give Me the first-born among your sons. 29 You shall do the same with your cattle and your flocks: seven days it shall remain with its mother; on the eighth day you shall give it to Me. God has high standards. Donkeys are not fit to be offered as they are dirty animals and are not kosher. Because God saved the firstborn in Egypt, they belong to him. However, because the Levites fulfill the maintenance tasks in the Temple, the firstborn are redeemed with money which is sent to the Temple. None shall appear before Me empty-handed. 23:15 and none shall appear before Me empty-handed; Festival: On the festivals, you must be a gift. Everyone is blessed enough to bring something. 21 Six days you shall work, but on the seventh day you shall cease from labor; you shall cease from labor even at plowing time and harvest time. 23:12 Six days you shall do your work, but on the seventh day you shall cease from labor, in order that your ox and your ass may rest, and that your bondman and the stranger may be refreshed. Festival: Shabbat is preeminent. No matter what is happening, even when time is of the essence, you must cease from labor on the seventh day. 22 You shall observe the Feast of Weeks, of the first fruits of the wheat harvest; and the Feast of Ingathering at the turn of the year. 23 Three times a year all your males shall appear before the Sovereign Lord, the God of Israel. 24 I will drive out nations from your path and enlarge your territory; no one will covet your land when you go up to appear before the Lord your God three times a year. 23:16 and the Feast of the Harvest, of the first fruits of your work, of what you sow in the field; and the Feast of Ingathering at the end of the year, when you gather in the results of your work from the field. 17 Three times a year all your males shall appear before the Sovereign, the Lord. Festival: Shavuot, Pentecost, the Feast of Weeks is the second major pilgrimage festival. Sukkot, Tabernacles, the Feast of Ingathering is the third major pilgrimage festival. Pesach, Passover, the Feast of Unleavened Bread (above) is the first major pilgrimage festival. The male Hebrews are told they must go to the Shrine and that their land will not only be safe while they are gone, it will expand, a miracle. 25 You shall not offer the blood of My sacrifice with anything leavened; and the sacrifice of the Feast of Passover shall not be left lying until morning. 23:18 You shall not offer the blood of My sacrifice with anything leavened; and the fat of My festal offering shall not be left lying until morning. Festival: On Passover, leaving is prohibited at the Shrine. Leaven is a symbol of evil ferment. The offering should be eating when offered, otherwise it is an affront to God. 26 The choice first fruits of your soil you shall bring to the house of the Lord your God. 23:19 The choice first fruits of your soil you shall bring to the house of the Lord your God. Festival: On Shavuot, in the summer, bring the harvest to the Shrine. You shall not boil a kid in its mother's milk. 23:19 You shall not boil a kid in its mother's milk. Festival: On Sukkot (by extension), when the ewes are birthing, do not follow the pagan custom of boiling the newly born lambs in their mother's milk, it is a perversion of nature that the milk meant to nurture the young should cook it. This delicacy is immoral to make as are most pagan practices. It is no surprise that the sentiment here of the disgustingness of the practice later expanded to a general prohibition against deriving benefit from mixtures of milk and meat. One would think to add not mixing eggs with chicken or caviar with fish, but that hasn't been done to the best of my knowledge. Did you know you can drink fish blood in milk according to the Halakhah? See Milgrom on a synopsis of ethics and kashrut. 27 And the Lord said to Moses: Write down these commandments, for in accordance with these commandments I make a covenant with you and with Israel. The Covenant is formally ended. Comments Ben, I wrote this dvar Torah and while I don't want to solve all the problems of modern Judaism in a few paragraphs, I would like to fairly outline the conflict. Please read this and let me know if you think it's fair, and if not, how I can rewrite it. Thanks In short, Jews will able to universally understand each other's practices, will respect differences of opinion out of understanding (pluralism), and those who wish to break from the Jewish practices of peoplehood will become sects. I can't see any other way to acknowledge that some Jewish practices now fundamentally conflict in serious ways. The Reform or Conservative observance of Shabbat does not impinge on the Orthodox observance, i.e they can reasonably coexist. However, Reform patrilineal descent is problematic for the Orthodox or Conservative because Reform people over time with have more and more non-Jewish status according to halakhah. At some point, they would be required to convert if they want their children to have Jewish status in the Conservative/Orthodox sect. Controversial, yes, a shame, most definitely, but necessary reality, quite possibly. This is also a problem in the area of marriage and divorce, where many liberal Jews will have Jewish weddings but not obtain gets, making any future children with other people mamzerim (unless the Orthodox and some Conservative decide that civil divorce is sufficient, an unlikely scenario). Ben wrote: I think this argument against Reform recognition of patrilineal descent is always disingenuous. It is the Orthodox who have become a "sect" by recognizing only Orthodox conversions. If the Reform movement were to require conversion for the child of a Jewish father and non-Jewish mother, then (assuming this was a Reform conversion) this wouldn't make one bit of difference as to how that child is viewed by the Orthodox -- a Reform convert is a non-Jew in their eyes. And the Reform movement certainly can't require its adherents to undergo Orthodox conversion, which involves not only going to the mikvah (a trivial requirement when, as you say, Jewish peoplehood is at stake) but committing to an Orthodox lifestyle. (Orthodox batei din require adult converts to send their kids to Orthodox day schools, for example.) So if the Reform recognition or non-recognition of patrilineal descent won't make a difference one way or the other to whether the people in question are viewed as Jewish by the Orthodox, then the Reform movement might as well keep on making its own decisions rather than striving unsuccessfully for compatibility with other movements. I responded: I agree with you, but I suppose I wasn't clear in that patrilineal threat poses a compatibility threat to both Conservative and Orthodox communities. Similarly, A friend of mine couldn't marry someone because he didn't consider her mother's conversion Jewish which would mean she wasn't Jewish which meant he as a cohen couldn't marry her. This is a problem in the Jewish community right now, not the dikdukei halakhah, but that Shammai and Hillel are finding it harder and harder to intermarry their children. Ben responded: I don't see the problem. If two people want to get married, and X doesn't consider Y to be Jewish to X's standards, then Y can always get a conversion that satisfies X's standards. If Y isn't willing to do that, and neither X nor Y is willing to reach a mutual solution, then they probably shouldn't getting married. I responded: Point taken. And they didn't get married. And I'm not trying to solve that problem, precisely. I'm trying to frame it. I want to frame our relationship to God or Judaism to make explicit whether we are now one religion with fluid movements or non-fluid sects. Ben wrote: And I think it's still fluid, even if we disagree on core principles. But the majority of Reform Jews probably aren't ever going to marry someone who doesn't accept them as Jewish, and therefore they shouldn't be worrying about that possibility until it actually comes up. And I disagree with your implication that this is a problem for the Orthodox only. At least in theory, Conservative communities have the same problem with respect to Jewishness. Ben responded: The Conservative movement has no business being on its high horse about this, when they themselves don't do conversions that are universally accepted. (Ipso facto, they can't, since the Orthodox don't accept any conversions performed by non-Orthodox batei in.) I responded: I agree with the sentiment, but in the ivory seminary tower, Conservative only accepts conversions done correctly, mikvah optional, I think, but not along movement lines. I'm a little fuzzy on this. Ben wrote: What is the Conservative understanding of kabbalat ol mitzvot? They're for it. As to the mikvah issue, I'm checking into it. Obviously, it's bediavad acceptance if I recall correctly. The question that I was trying to answer was, if our old covenant with God is that we are to be his exclusively and not intermarry or take on practices with the non-Jews, what will our new covenant look like? How will we now structure our community with so many conflicts that really make the different movements incompatible. How does this change our identity as Jews? Do we now require labels (of the sects we're in)? I personally don't like labels, beyond strict and liberal constructionism. So, I felt myself thinking in terms of how you describe pluralism as I was writing that, though I didn't really flesh it out. Do you have any ideas on how we can all get along, are do we need to admit that we are incompatible? Ben responded: I think in some ways we are incompatible, and I don't think that being "one people" is the highest value that trumps everything else. I responded: I agree. Erica made the point that it is customary to accomodate the strictest. Ben wrote: That means she's still in Stage 1. I made the point that it is customary to accomodate the majority, strict or not. We don't need Orthodox approval. We shouldn't let them frame the debate. For example, I'm pro-choice and pro-life, but not anti-abortion. Pro-life is a frame that I reject as exclusively the anti-abortion frame. Ben wrote: I'm anti-coathanger-abortion. Bill Frist is pro-coathanger-abortion. This really helped me figure out which lines I want to draw and which I don't. Do you mind if I post this in the comments on the post? Ben wrote: No problem. And i think i'm going to post something about it on my blog sometime soon.

Post A Comment