|
|
|
|
|
Parshat
Beha'alotecha: Flesh or Spirit
INTRODUCTION
- The book of Bamidbar. If
asked to summarise the theme of the book of Bamidbar (Numbers) I would
say that it is essentially a description of the Israelites' journey from
Mount Sinai to the border of the promised land. At first glance, it
would not seem to be a particularly tortuous or lengthy voyage. The
route on which they embarked was known to take only eleven days (see
Deuteronomy 1:2). But in reality, it took the Israelites forty years. What
happened? Why did an eleven day journey take forty years? What stalled
the process? A series of explosive incidents, rebellions against man and
God (the episode of the spies, the revolt of Korach) transformed and
reversed the process. Rather than marching swiftly and triumphantly from
Sinai to Canaan, the journey to Canaan became protracted, lengthy and at
times painful. The entry into the promised land was postponed. Only in
the final, fortieth year in the wilderness did God finally command the
Israelites to leave the desert and to make their way , a second time, to
the border of Eretz Yisrael. So
let us refine our definition. The Book of Bamidbar is not just an
account of the voyage to the promised land. In truth it is a story about
TWO journeys to Eretz Yisrael - The land of Israel. The first journey
collapsed. The second succeeded and resulted in the Israelite conquest
of Canaan. It is against this historical perspective that we might be
able to chart -obviously in a rather simplistic way- the structure of
the Book of Bamidbar: Ch.
1-10 The initial journey to
the promised land (in the 2nd year).[1] Ch.
11-19
Crisis and rebellion in the camp. The failure of the journey. Ch.
20-36
The second voyage to Canaan (40th year) and preparations for
entering the land. Bamidbar
describes the initial journey, its failure, and the second - successful
- journey which resulted in the conquest of Canaan by Joshua. Between
these two journeys, are ten chapters which tell us of the failures, the
scandalous episodes which sabotaged the
first expedition leading it to failure and collapse. In
our class this week, we shall look at the first of these incidents. We
shall study together the episode of the "lusting" of the
Israelites for meat, examining the actions of the Israelites, Moses, and
God, and of course, the implications of those actions . THE
CHAVRUTA SECTION: 1.
Read the entire Chapter 11.Divide it up into sections. *
How many "stories" do we have here? *
Moshe experiences a crisis of leadership at the same time as the
people's lusting for meat. How can these stories be separated out in the
pesukim. List which sections deal with the "Moshe and
leadership" issue, and which deal with the "meat" issue. *
Why did the Torah decide to "mix" the two episodes? 2.
Open up a chumash Shemot. *
Note that Ch.17 is a chapter about cries for food, with
"manna" and "meat". It is a similar story. Why does
God not get angry there? *
See Nehama Leibowitz's article (in Bamidbar) "The murmurings: a
repeat performance." CRAVING
MEAT. Our
parsha, in almost documentary style, logs the orderly mobilisation of
the Israelites as they embark from Mt. Sinai headed on their auspicious
expedition to the Land of Israel. The parsha records full details of the
signalling (public address) system - the trumpets and clouds of fire -
which would initiate travel or encampment (9:15 - 10:10). In the midst
of the busy preparations we watch on as Moses extends an invitation to
his father in law welcoming him to accompany Israel on their voyage
"to the place of which the Lord has said, ‘I will give it to
you.’" (11:29). We
watch the camp set off towards Eretz Yisrael: “In
the second year, on the twentieth day of the second month, the cloud
lifted from the Tabernacle… and the Israelites set out on their
journey… They marched from the mountain of the Lord a distance of
three days, the ark of the Lord travelling in front of them ...
”(10:11,33) All
would seem to be fine until, suddenly, unexpectedly, a cry erupts in the
camp. That simple complaint spreads like wild-fire. As we shall see, one
trouble generates another, until the whole thing escalates into a full
scale crisis and begins to spin out of control. The
first instalment in this episode is the people's desire for meat: "The
rabble in their midst felt a gluttonous craving, and the Israelites wept
and said, "If only we had meat to eat! We remember the fish that we
used to eat free in Egypt, the cucumbers, the melons, the leeks , the
onions and the garlic. Now our souls are dried out. There is nothing at
all! Nothing but this Manna to look to! Now the manna was like coriander
seed ... the people would go about and gather it, grind it ... boil it
in a pot or make it into cakes. It tasted like rich cream. When the dew
fell on the camp at night, the Manna would fall upon it. Moses heard the
people weeping, every family apart, each person at the entrance of his
tent. The Lord was very angry, and in Moses' eyes, it was evil."
(11:4-10) Moses
responds somewhat uncharacteristically with a collapse of
self-confidence. He hands over his resignation to God! "Moses
said to the Lord, 'Why have you dealt ill with your servant ... that you
have laid the burden of this people upon me? ... Where am I to give meat
to all this people when they whine before me saying "Give us meat
to eat!" I cannot carry this people by myself for it is too much
for me. If you will deal thus with me , kill me rather, I beg you, and
let me see no more of my wretchedness.'" (11:10-15) God
has no plans to let Moses resign. Rather, he comes up with an
alternative: Then
the Lord said to Moses, 'Gather me seventy of Israel's elders ... and
bring them to the Tent of Meeting and let them take their place there
with you. I will come down and speak with you there, and I will draw
upon the spirit that is on you and I shall put it upon them; they shall
share the burden of the people with you, and you shall not bear it
alone. And say to the people ... tomorrow you shall eat meat ... You
shall eat meat not one day, not two, not even five days, or ten or
twenty, but an entire month until it comes out of your nostrils and
becomes loathsome to you. For you have rejected the Lord who is among
you crying and saying "Oh, why did we ever leave Egypt!'"
(11:16-20) And
then this is how it all happens: "Moses
went out and reported God's words to the people. He gathered seventy of
the people's elders and stationed them around the Tent. Then the Lord
came down in a cloud and spoke to him; He drew upon the spirit that was
on him (Moses) and put it upon the seventy elders. And when the spirit
rested upon them , they spoke in prophecy and did not cease ... Moses
then re-entered the camp together with the seventy elders of Israel. A
wind from the Lord started up and swept quail from the sea and strewed
them over the camp, an area covering about a day's journey in either
direction, all around the camp and some two cubits deep on the ground.
The people set to gathering quail all that day and night and all the
next day - even he who gathered least had ten "omers" - and
they spread them all around the camp. The meat was still between their
teeth ... when the anger of the Lord blazed forth against the people and
the Lord struck the people with a very severe plague. The place was
called Kivrat Hata'ava (The graves of the lusting) because the people
who had a craving were buried there." (11:24-34) SOME
QUESTIONS
Many
questions shout to us from the text as we read, exasperated, this
incredible story. So many things happen all at the same time: The
inexplicable desire for meat, the strange phenomenon of the prophecy of
seventy elders, Moses' uncharacteristic desperation, God's raw anger. Maybe
the first thing that we should note is the unusual joining of what might
be considered to be two separate stories. On the one hand, we have a
story about a mad craving for meat. The people are restless with only
Manna to eat and they want an alternative. God gives a solution by
sending the quails and punishes them with a plague. This is the first
"story". The next story - related but still distinct - is the
crisis of leadership felt by Moses. In a very uncharacteristic mood of
desperation, Moses, the great defender of Israel seems to crumble under
the pressures of the leadership role that he has so ably held since
before the great Exodus. He expresses a total rejection of his
leadership position. The solution is to involve another seventy elders
in the leadership. This is the second "story". Now, these
stories are connected but they are hardly a single narrative. One
episode transpires in the heart of the Israelite "camp" and
around its periphery. The other episode happens in the place of man-God
communication; the Tent of Meeting. One is about the people. The other
is an internal leadership issue. 4-15
The desire for meat 11-15
Moses' Crisis of leadership 16-17
Prophecy : The seventy elders given by God in response to Moses. 18-22/23
Meat : God responds to the craving for meat by providing the
quails. 23-30
Prophecy : the seventy elders 31-34
Meat : the punishment There
is no good reason to mix the stories, but strangely the Torah text
chooses to intersperse the stories as if they were one. Why? Are these
stories a single story, or are they indeed two separate and distinct
happenings? But
there are other questions which might trouble us here. Why does Moses
collapse at this point in such an extreme manner? As we have noted,
Moses is the classic defender of his people, always deferring the wrath
of God against his people and standing up for them [2]. What changed? Is
there something about this sin in particular that makes Moses lose
heart? Why does Moses act in such an uncharacteristic fashion? And for
that matter, what prompts such an unbounded desire for meat on the part
of the people. We see them collect huge mounds of meat. Why now? Why
does this craving arrive at this particular juncture in the story of the
journey to the promised land? One
final question. In what way did seventy prohecising elders assist Moses
in his crisis of confidence? We do not see them take up leadership
roles. They do not become a national parliment, or a public-action
committee. We simply see them bestowed with the gift of prophecy, or
more accurately, they are bestowed with prophecy by virtue of Moses
exceptional spiritual power. How did this change Moses' feelings of
leadership loneliness, desperation and inability to cope? MEAT
AND MANNA Let
us begin with an examination of the people's complaint. "The
rabble in their midst felt a gluttonous craving, and the Israelites wept
and said, "If only we had meat to eat! We remember the fish that we
used to eat free in Egypt, the cucumbers, the melons, the leeks , the
onions and the garlic. Now our souls are dried out. There is nothing at
all! Nothing but this Manna to look to! The
phraseology of this complaint raises a clear contrast or comparison
between meat and Manna. Now, for the experienced Bible scholar, we
immediately realise this is not simply a comparison between two foods.
In reality this meat-manna connection is really a historical comparison,
for this episode reminds us of a similar story that occurred a year
earlier when the Israelites were a month out of Egypt. There we read: "The
whole community grumbled against Moses and Aaron ... 'If only we had
died by the hand of the Lord in the land of Egypt, when we sat by the
fleshpots, when we ate our fill of bread! For you have brought us out
into this wilderness to starve this whole congregation to death!' And
the lord said, 'I will rain down bread for you from the sky, and the
people shall go out each day to gather that day's protion ... The house
of Israel named it Manna." (Exodus 17:1-4,31) The
stories are very similar. The story in Exodus talks about hunger and
God's miraculous solution
for that hunger. It also talks about quails [3].
But the differences between the stories are crucial. In the
Exodus story, God doesn't get angry. Like wise, in that story, Moshe
doesn't lose his cool. In fact the entire episode is conducted in a calm
manner, as if God had been just waiting for the people to ask, to
formally present them with their desert food, the Manna. Why then, in
our case - in the lusting for meat of the nation - does God get so
furious? Why does Moses get so distressed? [4] I
think that it is precisely because we are now a year later that the
second incident is seen as so serious. A year earlier, the Israelites
were a slave nation fresh out of Egypt. They were used to being fed by
their masters. They found it difficult to fend for themselves. Their
plea for food was justified. But now, a year later, after the revelation
of Sinai, after the miracles, after the Tabernacle, the people are very
different. They have matured and grown. They now have national leaders
and systems of government: princes of tribes, judges, and other systems
of government. They have formed themselves into a nation with a
religious-spiritual ideology. They should have more patience. They
should havea more sophisticated way of coping with a problem of this
sort. Furthermore,
the cries for food in Exodus were justified. A month out of Egypt, their
food provisions fully spent, the people simply had no food. They were
fully justified in their complaint. But here, a year later, they DO have
food. They have the Manna. The verses deliberately stress this. The
verse tells us how the Manna was a wonderful food that could be
"baked" or "boiled". It tasted like "rich
cream." Do the Israelites have a right to complain so bitterly, to
weep and cry for meat? Are these the correct priorities? Is there truly
no food , or is there a different problem? Could it be that the problem
is not the Manna, but rather that "our souls are dried out" as
the verse indicates? Is the problem in their stomachs or their souls? But
there is also the spiritual dimension. The people should be aware by now
that God can provide for them. He has done so in the past. Do they have
to wail and bemoan the fact that they left Egypt? Are the nation
willing, after all this time; after Sinai, after receiving the Torah, to
really return to Egypt for some meat? Are they willing to forgo their
role as a Godly nation for an El Gaucho steak? REVERSING
THE PROCESS In
the text, the comparison between Manna and meat becomes more acute, if
we compare the way that the two are gathered. “The
people gathered quail all that day and night and all the next day - even
he who gathered least had ten "omers" of quail.” (11:32) In
the text it is portrayed as an immensely powerful urge, compulsive and
unstoppable. This extreme impression of the behaviour of the nation when
they get their meat - a landing of quails all around the camp
precinct.[6] - is clear from the text. They collect the meat in a
crazed, obsessive manner, a frantic hysteria gripping the Israelite
camp: The
food that they rejected however, was the Manna. This food is also
gathered and it too is measured by the "omer" measure. When we
read of the gathering of the Manna, it is described thus: “Gather
as much of it as each of you requires to eat, an ‘omer’ measure per
person .... The Israelites did so, some gathering much, some little, but
when they measured it by the ‘omer’, he who had gathered more had no
excess and he who had gathered little had no deficiency: they had
gathered as much as they needed to eat” (Ex. 16:16-18) The
Manna is the expression of a different mindset. It is a mindset of
control and limitation rather than frenzied passion. With the Manna,
somehow, everyone received according to his need. They gathered more or
less and it always amounted to an "omer" measure. With the
Manna, everyone gathered only what they needed, not what they desired.
And it was always enough. With the quails, nothing was enough, for they
were propelled by an insatiable lusting. The
desire for meat is a symptom of a way of thinking which is not Jewish.
It is a pagan expression of lust for physical gratification, a
gratification which will never reach its fulfilment. This is a mindset
alien to Judaism. Maybe,
this is the reason why these bitter cries are viewed so harshly by the
Torah. Let us place this episode in a wider historical context. The
Jewish people are on their way to Israel, marching to the promised land.
Now, in the midst of all of that, they desire to return to Egypt! What,
in fact, are they requesting? They are requesting a reversal of the
entire historical process! This parsha begs the question. How have they
lost the vision of the future? What caused them to lose sight of that
lofty vision? The answer is almost embarrassing. It is rather pathetic.
They lost sight of the larger picture through a simple base desire. This
lusting, en route to Eretz Yisrael, was a serious thing indeed. And
maybe this can explain some of the intensity of God's anger and Moshe's
desperation. Maybe it is exactly the timing which lead to the reaction
of God and Moshe. If after the miracles of the Exodus, after Sinai,
after Torah, after the Tabernacle, the people can be so drawn by a mad
rush for sensual pleasure, halting the journey to the promised land to
cry for meat, then are these people ever going to learn? ONE
STORY OR TWO? So
far, we have examined the meat-Manna connection. We have also proposed
an explanation for Moses' disillusionment and God's fury, but we still
must explain the role of the elders in all this. Maybe
the key to understanding the central message of the story is to solve
the question that we raised earlier. Is this one story or is it two
distinct episodes? When
comparing the language of the two stories so neatly intertwined by the
Biblical text, we note a number of words which run through both stories
linking them together. A clear "connection" of this sort can
be found in the following parrallel usage of the word "sevivot"
- around: "He
gathered seventy of the people's elders and stationed them AROUND (seviviot)
the Tent." (v.24) With
the quails, God, "strewed them over the camp, all AROUND (sevivot) the
camp." (v.31) But
this is just the beginning. One word seems to appear as a central word
throughout both stories. It is the verb, "ASAF" - to gather.
Let us see. v.16
"God said to Moses, ' GATHER me seventy elders'." v.22
"Could all the fish in the sea be GATHERED for them to
suffice them?" v.24
"He GATHERED seventy men of the elders of the
community" v.30
"Moses was GATHERED into the camp he and the elders of
Israel" v.32
"They GATHERED the quails ... even he who GATHERED least had
ten 'omers'" And
this word also appears in the opening line of the parsha. The
"rabble" or "mixed multitude" who first "felt a
lusting" are called the "ASAFSUF" also from the same
Hebrew root, "ASAF". So here we have seven uses of the same
word which span both stories indiscriminately. It would seem that the
Torah, by choosing common words to describe the gathering and placing of
meat and the gathering and placing of elders is trying to connect the
two stories and draw certain lines of comparison. But
what comparison? How might the stories be connected? MEAT
vs. SPIRIT If
the two stories are a single narrative, then we might be able to explain
the reason why they are intertwined with the following suggestion. Two
other words recur over and over throughout this narrative. These are the
words: "meat" and "spirit" (together, 14 times in
total). Note.
The "meat" is brought to the camp by "ruach", the
wind, and the spirit of God is also the "ruach". Even by the
usage of this simple word pun, the Torah posits the meat craze as
standing in direct opposition to God's desire for "spirit." On
a superficial level, we might suggest that the "expansion" of
Moses' prophecy, his divine "spirit", is an attempt to magnify
the "sprit" in the camp as a counterweight to the mad
attraction to "meat". However,
at another level, this is not superficial at all. The divine connection
of Moses' prophecy is contrasted by the text with the materialistic
aspirations of the people. The question which is being asked in the
Israelite camp is, "What will prevail, the spirit of God or the
human desire for meat?" The word "assaf" : What are we
"gathering"; flesh or spirit? This is the question that lies
in the balance for the month that the people eat their meat. God
shows them the spiritual shallowness of their desire for meat. Even a
powerful desire will die down if it is over satisfied. They will eat
"an entire month until it comes out of your nostrils and becomes
loathsome to you". The people will reach a point at which they will
lose their desire. At
the same time the prophecy of God is bestowed on seventy choice
individuals. God wants to show that His spirit is not available to
anyone no matter what level he is on. To connect with God, you must be a
learned, upstanding member of the community. But when you get the
prophecy, it never leaves you: "They spoke in prophecy and did not
cease." (v.25) Indeed, Moses exclaims: "Would that all the
Lord's people were prophets, that the Lord put His spirit upon them
all!" (v.30) TIMING Maybe
the timing is not incidental either. Is it coincidence that this
craving, this pagan lusting, this desire for Egyptian materialism is
aroused just now? After all, the Israelites have just completed the
first leg of their journey to Canaan and to national fulfilment. Maybe
some people are having second thoughts? Maybe the people are still
dithering between meat and spirit, between
Egypt and Israel [7}. Now, when they are on their way, they make
a final attempt, a final expression of their indecision. (It is of
interest that the next parsha talks of a delegation of spies to
investigate the promised land. Was this an expression of the
insecurities of the Israelites too?) God intercedes, reinforcing spirit
over flesh, but the journey is still delayed. The Children of Israel
stand between Egypt and Israel both in their geographical location and
in their psychological-religious mindset. Which is going to prevail? Shabbat
Shalom. FOOTNOTES [1]
I see Chapters 1-8 which deal with the organisational structure of the
Israelite camp as preparations for a camp and a society which is to be
portable, moving to Eretz Yisrael. The verses in these chapters set up
the exact locus of each group, its function in transit and in encampment
and the relationships between the various elements of the Israelite
camp. For more details see the shiur of Rav Menachem Liebtag on Parshat
Naso. [2]
See his passionate speech at the Golden Calf episode; Exodus 32:7-14, 3 1-34.
See also Numbers 13:11-20, 15:20-22. [3]
The stories are so similar that certain commentators have suggested that
they are the selfsame event! See the Bechor Shor. Other parshiot are
also mirrored here, eg. the Yitro visit, the appointment of
judges/elders. Not surprisingly, the Biblical critics see the stories as
sharing a common basis (eg. The literary Guide to the Bible. Ed. Alter
and Kermode. pg. 80), but their approach has a very different
theological basis to that of Rav Yosef Bechor Shor. It
is also clear that the two stories happened at exactly the same time of
year/ In Shemot (16:1-4) the request for meat happens on the 15th of
Iyar. Here in Bamiidbar it takes place on the 23rd of Iyar (see
10:11,33). A year later but almost to the day! Certainly food for
thought (excuse the pun!). See more in note 6. [4]
For more detail on this comparison, see the articles of Nehama Leibowitz
on our parsha in her "Studies in Bamidbar", especially the
article "The murmurings: a repeat performance." [5]
In the previous section Moses had invited Moses to join them on their
journey to Israel. His invitation is characterised by the constant
repetition of the word "Tov", "good". "We
are travelling to the place of which the Lord has said, ‘I will give
it to you.’ Come with us and we will be GOOD for you for the Lord has
promised GOOD for Israel. ... when you come with us the GOODness that
good will bestow (YETIV) on us will be GOOD for you as well.” (11:29-30) Now,
in our section, we see a multiple repetion of the word "Ra" or
"evil". "The
people complained, evil in the eyes of the Lord ... and in the eyes of
Moses it was evil ... why have you dealt ill (HaREYota) with your
servant .." (11, 10,11,15) The
good has turned to bad. [6]
It is interesting to note that the swarm of quails has been
substantiated by ornithologists: "It is well known that the quail, known to ornithologists as Coturnix coturnix, migrates in huge flocks from Europe to Central Africa in the autumn and returns in the spring. A short-tailed game bird of the pheasent family, it flies rapidly at very low altitudes. Due to the long distance involved, the migration is carried out in stages. The small quails twice each year lad exhausted on the Mediterranean shore, where they can easily be captured by hand and by nets in great quantity. Their flesh and eggs are sid to be delicious, and to this day they are a prized food among the local population and are exported as a delicacy to Europe. The season of the year in which the Israelites encountered the quailes fits in precisely with the bird's migratory pattern. " (Nahum Sarna, Exploring Exodus pg. 119) {7} Two Midrashim back this entirely. In the first, Am Yisrael as they exit Har Sinai are seen like schoolchildren running out of school. The image is of people who run away from an environment that might teach them something and yet see that framework only as coercive and oppressive. Likewise in 11:8 the people as they cry "in their families" are perceived as crying about the impositions of a new sexual ethic – the "family laws". Both Midrashim are animated by a view that portrays Am Yisrael as somewhat restless with their newly received Torah and the laws that Torah entails. |
|||
|
|
|||||||