Drawing on the sources identified in this paper I conclude; Israel’s relationships with the nations has particular relevance to Islam since it is the only mainstream religion that conforms to Torah’s universal laws as evidenced by the fact Halacha (Jewish law) permits a Jew to enter and pray in a mosque.
Parshat Yitro deals with the mystical and psychological relationship between the source of the minds Insight and Wisdom and its reflection from the attribute of Understanding[1] as it relates to the re-incarnation of Cain in Yitro and Abel in Moshe. The Zohar quotes; Yitro and her (Moshes wife) two sons came to Moshe and Moshe went out to meet him. To explain Rabbi Shimon quotes Isaiah 2:3 “ Many people will go and say ‘Come let us go up to the mountain[2] of HaShem, to the house of the God of Jacob, He will teach us His ways and we will walk in His paths.’ For Zion will come from Torah and the word of HaShem from Jerusalem”.
The Zohar goes on to explain “To the house[3]” – Jacob, who called this place “house”. “Mountain and house” – although all is a single rung [70a] one transcends the other[4]. “Mountain” – for other nations, when they come to enter under Her wings, “House” – for Israel, to be with them as a wife with her husband in one dwelling, in joy, crouching over them like a mother over her children. “…Moses father-in-law, and his sons and his wife came to Moses to the wilderness…”[5]. Since it is written “to Moses to the wilderness” the Zohar explains it to be the “Mountain of Elokim” – a place for converts to convert and whoever comes and attains it and is called “ger tzedeq”[6].
Rashi derives from the phrase “he encountered” that Yaakov prayed at the site of the Beis Hamikdash, and instituted the maariv prayer. There is a Midrash that cites the verse “Give praise to the Lord our strength; blow a teruah to the G-d of Yaakov”[7]. This Midrash asks why Yaakov is singled out here, and answers with a parable. Once a king had three friends to whom he showed a site where he intended to build a palace. The first looked and said, “You mean on that hill,” and the king left him. The second said, “You mean in that field,” and the king also left him. The third friend looked and said, “There’s going to be a palace over there.” The Midrash says that Avraham called the Beis Hamikdash a mountain, Yitzchak called it a field and Yaakov, on the other hand, called it a house, as when he awoke he declared, “this is none other than the House of Hashem.” The Midrash then relates that Hashem said that because Yaakov called it a house even before it was built, it would be called by his name.[8][9]
The Midrash Rabba quotes Rebbi Elazar in the name of Rebbi Yossi Ben Zimri who suggests that the ladder of Yaakov’s dream was rooted in Be’er Sheva, stretched to Beit E-l and had its center at Jerusalem. (Midrash Rabba Bereishit 69:7). The “house” Jacob speaks of is associated with Luz and Beit El, the location of Jacob’s dream, the monument he anointed to God (matzevah), the place Isaac was offered as a sacrifice, the mountain of God identified by Abraham and the field in which Isaac prayed.
Avraham always believed that Avraham and Hagar’s son Yishma'el would be included among the Chosen People. We find signs of this in many places. When Sarah suggested exiling Yishmael and Hagar, "It was very bad in Avraham's eyes, because of his son"[10]. It required a direct mandate from God to force Avraham to send Yishmael away. A more poignant proof is the Midrash cited by Rashi[11] regarding God's command to Avraham to sacrifice Yitzchak.[12]
When did Abraham have a son from Sarah? When he prayed on behalf of Abimelech[13]" [14]
Hagar, also “ha ger” translated “the convert” and Sarah’s concubine with whom Abraham had Ishmael, praises the Seeing God for recognizing her and showing her how to be humble[15]. The term used is אָֽמְרָ֗ה – [a]M[e]Ra[h] the meaning of which is drawn from its 15 occurrences in the Torah. It comes from a primitive word root that can mean answer, appoint, avouch, boast about self, call, declare, challenge, certify or command and it could reflect truth or untruth. In context the occurrence reflects Sarai’s encounter with Hagar, Avraham’s encounter with Avimelech over Sarah[16], Rivkah’s advice preempting Yaakov to take the first blessing of Yitzchak[17], Leah’s birth of Reuven[18], Tziporah’s action to save Moshe’s life[19], Hannah, Elkana and the birth of Shmuel[20] and Elisha’s miracle breaking the drought in Shomron[21]. In addition in Proverbs[22] - Wisdom, understating and evil[23], Kohellos[24] - Shlomo seeking one man’s wisdom, Lamentations[25] - faith and plea for help, Yechezkel[26] - the pleasure businessmen of Tyre obtained on hearing the temple was destroyed, Hoshea[27] - on illicit relationships and childbirth and punishment for harlotry and ultimately its relationship to Peace[28].
The present dynamic of Israel to the nations of the world is like The Temple Mount compared to the neck of the Mount Moriah on which the Temple Mount it is located – in the daily recitation of blessings before Sh’ma – “…break the yolk of nations from our neck and speedily lead us upright to our land” refers to the trappings of Israel’s exiled state and the last request made before entering the higher mind states designated for the Sh’ma and Shmoneh Esrei (Amidah) prayers. The future dynamic of Israel to the nations of the world is the Temple compared to its location on the neck of Mount Moriah.
The mystery of Parshat Yitro alludes to the higher order of Wisdom’s reflection from Understanding and the negation of ego to correctly interpret and benefit from it. Its inner meaning is alluded to in the twin girls born with Abel and the twin girl born with Cain, where Abel gazed on the (reflected) image of the Divine presence and for this he received death.
If Israel interprets the reflection of its wisdom in the manner of Yaakov’s middle line of Tifferet, it will learn that the neck is the designated place through which the correct vision of the head can pass and when this occurs the yoke of nations will be removed once and for all.
[1] Yitro - Apples from the Orchard Rabbi Wisnefsky on The ARI and Rabbi Vital
[2] Zohar [Matt] Yitro pg:388 mountain of H” - Avraham
[3] Zohar [Matt] Yitro pg:388 house Jacob – on the identification of the sire of Jacob’s dream as the Temple.
[4] Zohar [Matt] Yitro pg:388 Mountain and house…”both allude to Shekinah mountain alludes to accessibility whilst house alludes to intimacy and She welcomes converts under Her wings…
[5] Exodus 18:5
[6] Zohar [Matt] Yitro pg:389 that place – accessible - such a person is linked with Shekinah
[7] Tehillim 81:2
[8] http://www.northhendon.co.uk/sedra/pages/5764/vayeitzei5764.pdf
[9] http://www.parsha.net/pdf/Bereishis/Vayeitze59.pdf
[10] Bereishit 21:11
[11] Bereishit 22:2, based on Bereishit Rabba 55:7
[12] http://www.vbm-torah.org/archive/sichot/bereishit/07-60vayetz.htm
[13] Bereishit 20:18
[14] Pesikta Rabbati 39
[15] Genesis 16:13
[16] Genesis 20:5 and 21:16
[17] Genesis 27:6
[18] Genesis 29:32
[19] Exodus 4:26
[20] 1 Samuel 1:22
[21] 2 Kings 6:28
[22] Proverbs 9:4
[23] Proverbs 30:16
[24] Ecclesiastes 7:27
[25] Lamentations 3:24
[26] Ezekiel 26:2
[27] Hosea 2:5
[28] Hosea 2:12
Wednesday, September 19, 2012
Friday, September 14, 2012
Overt and covert - you can’t make this stuff up!
At the recent attack on the US embassy in Yemen they chanted "O Jews, Khyber, Khyber. The army of Muhammad will return!” President Obama, Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton compared to President Bush, Dick Cheney and Condoleezza Rice could not be more contrasted. Overt leaders are scrutinized according to their more public declarations. Covert leaders perceive their private declarations shield them. However, the death of American Ambassador to Libya, Chris Stevens expresses the disdain this lawless war has for overt and covert leaders of the American administration. The nature of this war is better reflected in the agreements Al Qaeda negotiated to launch their operations in the mountainous regions through which the Khyber pass links Afghanistan and Pakistan. Here the Pashtun people and their Taliban student fighters mount their continuing attacks; loyal only to those who provide their present temporal relief.
Climbing out of a bear pit with the bear may be easier than taming the beast outraged over social condition, legal imposition and moral composition. The insurgencies to which we subscribe are fuelled by ideological benefactors intent to prevail over tribal culture and the American administration is complicit. In 630 CE Prophet Muhammad’s army defeated the Jews fortressed in the Khyber pass. The battle paved the way for the conquest of Mecca and the establishment of Islam. After the Prophet’s death, Caliph Omar marched on Jerusalem where Akiva, a Jewish convert to Islam, advised the location of the destroyed Jewish Temples where Omar built his shrine. The shrine was erected over the place of the Holy of Holies and a subsequently built church and exists today as the Dome of the Rock on Jerusalem’s Temple Mount.
While Obama bows to Saudi Kings and the Bush family court their wealth, Sunni and Shiite blood flows in streets where ideology and culture clash, yet successive administrations have failed to recognize the importance of symbolic ‘game changing’ cues. Prime Minister Netanyahu’s latest demand for ‘red lines’ exposes the pathetic state of diplomacy in a modern world where enemies hide amongst friends to spit in the face of ideologists intent on dominating culture. When insurgency matters and life is cheap there is no end to the enemy! Complexity is rife and no more so than in the Jewish roots of the staunch Pashtun people, the symbolism of Caliph Omar’s shrine on the Temple Mount or the Saudi Kings Sunni reign over Mecca, Islam’s holiest site. Red lines are an absolute necessity in the face of such ambiguity especially when Shiite Iran is intent to prevail over Sunni Arabs including by proving their usefulness against Israel. No amount of coaxing, befriending, wheeling or dealing will contain the pent up anger and resentment that targets opposing ideology.
Covert operations of the Obama Administration intended to deliver planned results often play into the hands of cultural regimes that respond unexpectedly to make their insurgent views known. Such insurgency is the nature of modern terror, any opposition to it must be founded in unwavering support of suitable counter culture, yet American presidents repeatedly fail to recognize the importance of Israeli symbolism to American cultural survival. How much begging and pleading does Mr. Netanyahu need to offer to make the point? Not only are red lines on Iran important, red lines on pretty much everything else are equally important. Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Turkey, Yemen, Libya, Europe, Russia and China you name it, every one of these countries must understand that America means business and Israel is its chosen example over anything else in the region. For those who have visited Israel, its more than 40% Muslim population is a microcosm of a future Germany, Italy, France, England and America, a future with rapidly expanding Islamic constituents. Are these countries going to function as judiciously and how will their cultures and cultural icons be preserved?
Preservation of cultural identity is the color of our modern world. We must retain the freedoms necessary to respect and regard that which best serves each regions constituent cultures allowing those cultures to flourish. Notwithstanding counter insurgencies, established cultures cannot withstand long term ideological imposition to behave covertly. The Meranos of Spain and Portugal who were persecuted to convert to Christianity during the Spanish Inquisition still light candles in their kitchen cupboards before the Jewish Sabbath without knowing why they do it. Its time for overt leadership to ensure the red lines are drawn and widely publicized so that the preservation of our rich human heritage can prevail and if President Obama doesn’t understand that, Prime Minister Netanyahu has an obligation to expose his weakness.
Climbing out of a bear pit with the bear may be easier than taming the beast outraged over social condition, legal imposition and moral composition. The insurgencies to which we subscribe are fuelled by ideological benefactors intent to prevail over tribal culture and the American administration is complicit. In 630 CE Prophet Muhammad’s army defeated the Jews fortressed in the Khyber pass. The battle paved the way for the conquest of Mecca and the establishment of Islam. After the Prophet’s death, Caliph Omar marched on Jerusalem where Akiva, a Jewish convert to Islam, advised the location of the destroyed Jewish Temples where Omar built his shrine. The shrine was erected over the place of the Holy of Holies and a subsequently built church and exists today as the Dome of the Rock on Jerusalem’s Temple Mount.
While Obama bows to Saudi Kings and the Bush family court their wealth, Sunni and Shiite blood flows in streets where ideology and culture clash, yet successive administrations have failed to recognize the importance of symbolic ‘game changing’ cues. Prime Minister Netanyahu’s latest demand for ‘red lines’ exposes the pathetic state of diplomacy in a modern world where enemies hide amongst friends to spit in the face of ideologists intent on dominating culture. When insurgency matters and life is cheap there is no end to the enemy! Complexity is rife and no more so than in the Jewish roots of the staunch Pashtun people, the symbolism of Caliph Omar’s shrine on the Temple Mount or the Saudi Kings Sunni reign over Mecca, Islam’s holiest site. Red lines are an absolute necessity in the face of such ambiguity especially when Shiite Iran is intent to prevail over Sunni Arabs including by proving their usefulness against Israel. No amount of coaxing, befriending, wheeling or dealing will contain the pent up anger and resentment that targets opposing ideology.
Covert operations of the Obama Administration intended to deliver planned results often play into the hands of cultural regimes that respond unexpectedly to make their insurgent views known. Such insurgency is the nature of modern terror, any opposition to it must be founded in unwavering support of suitable counter culture, yet American presidents repeatedly fail to recognize the importance of Israeli symbolism to American cultural survival. How much begging and pleading does Mr. Netanyahu need to offer to make the point? Not only are red lines on Iran important, red lines on pretty much everything else are equally important. Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Turkey, Yemen, Libya, Europe, Russia and China you name it, every one of these countries must understand that America means business and Israel is its chosen example over anything else in the region. For those who have visited Israel, its more than 40% Muslim population is a microcosm of a future Germany, Italy, France, England and America, a future with rapidly expanding Islamic constituents. Are these countries going to function as judiciously and how will their cultures and cultural icons be preserved?
Preservation of cultural identity is the color of our modern world. We must retain the freedoms necessary to respect and regard that which best serves each regions constituent cultures allowing those cultures to flourish. Notwithstanding counter insurgencies, established cultures cannot withstand long term ideological imposition to behave covertly. The Meranos of Spain and Portugal who were persecuted to convert to Christianity during the Spanish Inquisition still light candles in their kitchen cupboards before the Jewish Sabbath without knowing why they do it. Its time for overt leadership to ensure the red lines are drawn and widely publicized so that the preservation of our rich human heritage can prevail and if President Obama doesn’t understand that, Prime Minister Netanyahu has an obligation to expose his weakness.
Monday, July 9, 2012
Three Festivals!
Rabbi Menachem Leibtag explains, that Torah narrates the story of Jacob out of its chronological sequence. He teaches that Jacob and his family had met his brother Esau with his army on the way back to Jacob’s parents traditional home in Hevron. If we accept the sequence of events as they are told in the Torah, which leaves the reader with the impression Jacob first lived in Shechem (in the north), we must struggle to explain why Jacob did not immediately proceed to Beit-El to fulfill his vow and then to Hevron to reunite with his parents.
Torah tells us that Jacob made shelters for his livestock in Sukkot, a word that means ‘temporary dwellings’ and could express a place known for gatherings of people who lived in tents. Much confusion exists about the timing of Jacob and his family’s arrival in Sukkot, however Rabbi Leibtag goes to great length to bring all the sources that support his chronological correction.
A reordering of the events would therefore be;
1. Jacob and family leave Haran (home of his father-in-law) in the north
2. Jacob encounters Esau at the Yabbok river
3. Jacob moves south passing through Shechem on his way to Sukkot
4. Jacob anoints the matzevah, builds a mizbeach (altar) at Sukkot the place he originally named Beit-El that was Luz
5. Jacob moves south to his parents home in Hevron
6. Rachel dies on the way during Benjamin’s childbirth at Bethlehem
7. Jacob arrives in Hevron
8. Jacob moves to Shechem
9. Dina is raped by Shechem
10. Shimeon and Levi slaughter the male residents of Shechem
11. Joseph is sold into slavery
12. Isaac dies in Hevron
The order suggests Sukkot is located on the route of Jacob’s travel between Haran and Hevron. Shalem, the holy place of high priest Malchitzedek or Shem was located in the middle of this route in modern day Jerusalem. It was also the likely site Abraham offered Isaac as a sacrifice.
The Torah phrase ‘Shalosh Regalim’ is used to describe the beating by Bilam of his donkey in his attempt to curse Israel and the same phrase is used for the three pilgrimage festivals. Pesah corresponds to Abraham, who hosted the three angels in his tent on Pesah, on the same day he discovered the water aquifer in the cave of Machpelah connecting Hevron to Shalem. On Shavuot, when Israel received the Torah at Mount Sinai a Shofar was sounded, the Shofar was the horn of the ram that Abraham offered in place of Isaac, thus establishing a connection between Shavuot and Isaac. When Jacob returned to the Land of Israel from exile he built a house and booths for his cattle, the place became known as “Sukkot” , thus the holiday of Sukkot corresponds with Jacob.
Bilam’s prophecy describes a messianic future where the world ascends to Jerusalem during these festivals. The water source, the sacrifice of Isaac and Sukkot are one location where sacrifices for these three festivals are offered.
.
The convincing evidence being discovered in the City of David reveals that the site of Jacob’s focus has been discovered and is presently being excavated. The image above describes the present discoveries including the matzevah or monument and provides an indication of the booths Jacob may have constructed in the bedrock for his animals.
The matzevah which can be seen in the second booth from the left was erected by Jacob on his exit from Israel and anointed by him ~21 years later on his return to Israel. The monument, around 45cm wide, 30 cm high stands erect in an elevated frame sitting ~6 cm above the bedrock.
No artifact like it has been discovered anywhere in Israel in a location that is also directly associated with artifacts of worship.
The evidence in the three festivals hints directly at the place Jacob memorialized his entry and exit point from Israel, Pesah marks Abrahams discovery of living waters that flow to the Gihon Spring, Shavuot marks the sacrificial place of Isaac at the living waters of the Gihon Spring and Sukkot is the festival of living waters originating at the Gihon Spring.
These holy days are thought to be a correction for the Israel’s sin of the golden calf that caused Moses to break the first set of tablets on which the Ten Statements were transcribed. That event took place on the Hebrew date 17th Tammuz, which is also the date the walls of Jerusalem were breached and the day temple services officially stopped. Those services cannot be restarted until the location at which Isaac was offered as a sacrifice is re-discovered.
Torah tells us that Jacob made shelters for his livestock in Sukkot, a word that means ‘temporary dwellings’ and could express a place known for gatherings of people who lived in tents. Much confusion exists about the timing of Jacob and his family’s arrival in Sukkot, however Rabbi Leibtag goes to great length to bring all the sources that support his chronological correction.
A reordering of the events would therefore be;
1. Jacob and family leave Haran (home of his father-in-law) in the north
2. Jacob encounters Esau at the Yabbok river
3. Jacob moves south passing through Shechem on his way to Sukkot
4. Jacob anoints the matzevah, builds a mizbeach (altar) at Sukkot the place he originally named Beit-El that was Luz
5. Jacob moves south to his parents home in Hevron
6. Rachel dies on the way during Benjamin’s childbirth at Bethlehem
7. Jacob arrives in Hevron
8. Jacob moves to Shechem
9. Dina is raped by Shechem
10. Shimeon and Levi slaughter the male residents of Shechem
11. Joseph is sold into slavery
12. Isaac dies in Hevron
The order suggests Sukkot is located on the route of Jacob’s travel between Haran and Hevron. Shalem, the holy place of high priest Malchitzedek or Shem was located in the middle of this route in modern day Jerusalem. It was also the likely site Abraham offered Isaac as a sacrifice.
The Torah phrase ‘Shalosh Regalim’ is used to describe the beating by Bilam of his donkey in his attempt to curse Israel and the same phrase is used for the three pilgrimage festivals. Pesah corresponds to Abraham, who hosted the three angels in his tent on Pesah, on the same day he discovered the water aquifer in the cave of Machpelah connecting Hevron to Shalem. On Shavuot, when Israel received the Torah at Mount Sinai a Shofar was sounded, the Shofar was the horn of the ram that Abraham offered in place of Isaac, thus establishing a connection between Shavuot and Isaac. When Jacob returned to the Land of Israel from exile he built a house and booths for his cattle, the place became known as “Sukkot” , thus the holiday of Sukkot corresponds with Jacob.
Bilam’s prophecy describes a messianic future where the world ascends to Jerusalem during these festivals. The water source, the sacrifice of Isaac and Sukkot are one location where sacrifices for these three festivals are offered.
.
The convincing evidence being discovered in the City of David reveals that the site of Jacob’s focus has been discovered and is presently being excavated. The image above describes the present discoveries including the matzevah or monument and provides an indication of the booths Jacob may have constructed in the bedrock for his animals.
The matzevah which can be seen in the second booth from the left was erected by Jacob on his exit from Israel and anointed by him ~21 years later on his return to Israel. The monument, around 45cm wide, 30 cm high stands erect in an elevated frame sitting ~6 cm above the bedrock.
No artifact like it has been discovered anywhere in Israel in a location that is also directly associated with artifacts of worship.
The evidence in the three festivals hints directly at the place Jacob memorialized his entry and exit point from Israel, Pesah marks Abrahams discovery of living waters that flow to the Gihon Spring, Shavuot marks the sacrificial place of Isaac at the living waters of the Gihon Spring and Sukkot is the festival of living waters originating at the Gihon Spring.
These holy days are thought to be a correction for the Israel’s sin of the golden calf that caused Moses to break the first set of tablets on which the Ten Statements were transcribed. That event took place on the Hebrew date 17th Tammuz, which is also the date the walls of Jerusalem were breached and the day temple services officially stopped. Those services cannot be restarted until the location at which Isaac was offered as a sacrifice is re-discovered.
Friday, May 18, 2012
The Honey Bee Paradox
.jpg)
In a recent documentary on ‘shapes in nature’ mathematician Marcus DuSautoy discussed honeycombs hexagon shape, which he declared to be nature’s most efficient because of the number of sides a hexagon can share with a neighbor.The beehive’s symmetrical compartments differ from anything else in nature where order is usually affected by disorder or entropy resulting in the rugged irregular appearance of natural objects. For example the disorder in nature can be seen in trees and their branches, or mountains, or even snowflakes where one in a million approaches perfect symmetry, but almost all never quite make it.
The interest in symmetry and its relationship to the natural world has a long history. The Ancient Greeks became obsessed to discover nature’s underlying building blocks and Plato identified five perfect symmetrical shapes well before modern science could see molecular structures. Several thousand years earlier the great mystics had already reached their conclusions about nature and symmetry. The most sophisticated and earliest living document used by the Greeks in their quest for insight into nature was Hebrews uniquely alphanumeric Torah - The Bible. Here’s a glimpse of their discovery in the numerical values derived from the value of its 22 letters in the first 7 words of its opening verse (read from right to left);
"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth" = 2701, which is also the addition of numbers 1+2+3+...73 known as the "triangle" of 73 it can also be expressed as ‘73 X 37 (37 is 73's midpoint)’.
The large triangle is the 73rd drawn with 2701 blocks. It contains the inverted 37th triangle drawn with 703 blocks, and three 36th triangles each with 666 blocks.
The three sides of the 37th triangle (in the middle) intersect the 73rd’s sides at each midpoint (37th).
The edges of the 36th triangles are drawn with 216 blocks also equal to the 6x6x6 cube - the only known cube with a superficial area equal to its volume.
The 6th word = 407 + 7th word = 296 (each a multiple of 37) = 703. According to Kabbalah - Yesod (6th) and Malchut (7th) are the attributes of Foundation and Kingship - the manifestation of the upper worlds in the lower.
The hexagram of 73 'stars' above contains the inner hexagon of 37
- 18 (purple) stars representing 666 and 19 (tan) stars representing 703 - the whole number midpoints of the 36th and 37th triangles.
The words in the opening line of Torah exhibit symmetry that is not visible in nature where disorder prevails. So, why reflect perfect order in the opening verse in which the natural world is created, a seeming contradiction to natural disorder? This paradox fascinated Greek thinkers who through their observations of the material world revealed mathematic and scientific distortions that would undermine the logic of Torah’s unified spiritual proposition.
Whilst the Greeks were leading the world to adopt a more material philosophy to explain logical reasons for the Honey Bee's hexagonal hive, Israelites were focused on emphasizing their spiritual origins. Ancient Jewish spirituality drove the materialistic Greek intelligentsia crazy. They could not comprehend why Jews would follow a text promoting belief in and homage to a monotheistic God no-one could see, touch or render. Eventually the maddened Greeks capitalized on Jewish disunity conquering and defiling Israel’s holy temple in Jerusalem where their God might dwell.
In the natural world, the Torah represents God by His female attributes referred to as the Queen and the Jewish assembly is strongest when She is in their presence. This spiritual logic is reflected in the actions of worker bees that perfect natural disorder by subjecting themselves to serve the greater purpose of their queen. Indeed , this is the archetypal model for their successful existence. And so it is true with the Jewish people, for the more Jews subjugate to this principle of spiritual unity and symmetry, the more unified their nation becomes and when they embrace this psychological disposition, the nations of the world, the plants and the trees, reap benefits.
The uniquely Jewish paradox that kosher honey emerges from non-kosher bees can now be understood. In nature, where disorder is the trending characteristic, order is achieved through reverence. In the unifying principle of monotheistic deference, which Torah proposes in its opening words, disorder is ordered. The bee is a worker devoted to lifelong service of its queen and the Jew pursues the same dedication to the unending presence of Queen with King that constitutes the God of Israel. Therefore, the bee represents the model ‘state of being’, an impure vessel producing that which is pure. The vessel never becomes kosher, however through the bees unquestioning commitment and service, pure honey - the product of the bees effort is awarded its unique recognition in the Jewish laws of Torah.
Wednesday, May 9, 2012
The Neck And The Site Of The Temple
To elucidate Rabbi Vital attributes five constrictions that distinguish God from His infinite state to establish the finite natural order. Rabbi Vital explains that God uses His name "Elo(h)im" which connotes constriction and is, therefore, representative of His natural manifestation. The numerical value of this name equals 86. Rabbi Vital brings this together by multiplying the 5 states of constriction by 86 which equals 430. Moreover, 86, God's constricted state also equates to the Hebrew word meaning "The Natural."
Returning to the Song of Songs, a few lines after the quote relating the Tower of David to the neck, the following line appears; "I have come into my garden, my sister, my bride." Rabbi Menachem Schneerson, drew inspiration from this for his inaugural work, Basi LeGani, which was written following the death of his father-in-law and presented upon his acceptance as the seventh and final Rebbe of Lubavitch. Basi LeGani describes the brilliance of release from exile relating its realization to the Temple in which God's name, in His ultimate state, is exclusively revealed. The physical Temple is simultaneously that deeply spiritual place discovered by an individual in which God, in His ultimate expansive state reveals one's truest and most soulful power.
The neck is the body's constricted conduit; at the front it houses, vessels for speech, nourishment, blood and breath, at the rear the protective spine feeds brain signals to the heart and body. In the time it takes for the brain's signal to pass through the neck Jewish mystics suggest the transfer of thought to physical action is at risk of disruption. For speech, synchronizing quickly formed brain signals to words from the larynx and mouth is often problematic. Overcoming this potential shortcoming is a free choice, moreover it is a choice in which one's state-of-mind is critical to the outcome.
In these verses, the Hebrew word used for the neck's ornament is 'talpiot' which is allegorically expressed by the sages as a contraction of two words that mean, "the heap (that was and will again be) beautiful" or "the mount (which and to which) all mouths (will) pray." The mystical interpretation of the ornament as an adornment to the neck could fill many books, but I wish to focus here only on its geo-physical implication.
In Jerusalem's City of David there exists a 'heap' or 'mound,' the subject of much excavation over the past 30 years. Today, this heap is known as the Tower of David and it is built over Jerusalem's only perennial spring known as Gihon. Recently, substantial excavations at this location revealed archaeological features so powerful they could literally rock the world. The findings contain bronze-age bedrock structures extensively used for sacrificial worship and, fortified to protect their sanctity. Around these structures all of Jerusalem eventually grew.
At this excavation a small, single monument, a sliver of stone that, remarkably (since no other like it has survived) remains standing after more than 3500 years. Supported in a frame of 12 stones, it marks the spot where Jacob slept on the night he fled from his home and the spot where he returned to accept the name Israel. Whilst this small stone is indeed monumental, its 12 supporting stones (according to Midrash) would have been extracted from the adjacent fully intact altar ramp. This altar was used well before Abraham offered his son Isaac, and that makes the site earth-shattering because, according to the scholarly works, yet contrary to all expectations, it would also mark the spot for Jerusalem's third and final Temple.
Topographically, the exposed bedrock of this sacred mountain, visible in its entirety in the bronze-age, would have resembled a head and neck when viewed by Abraham from his southern approach. Additionally, the location of the Tower of David at the present excavation would approximate the place on which an ornament adorning the neck would lie. King David re-conquered this mountain on which a fortified city had previously been founded. From the City of David, he planned the first Temple, never knowing, realizing or revealing its true location. David's son, Solomon, eventually built the Temple where his father planned, on the head of the mountain within the approximate boundaries of today's Temple Mount where the second temple was also built.
If we pay attention to the overwhelming preponderance of evidence from the Bible's exegesis, the location of the Tower of David as the neck's ornament marks "the heap (that was and will again be) beautiful" or "the mount (which and to which) all mouths pray", yet this is the site which King David denied us when determining his plans. Therefore, in reconstructing the evidence, it is likely that, 200 years later, King Hezekiah realized this, diverted the water of the Gihon, extended the city walls, and built around the Tower of David to mark, protect and hide this holy site for future generations. In doing so, his grief almost killed him.
The shocking revelations at this location will surely be a significant catalyst to change the status quo and existing states of mind. As such it presents enormous difficulties and challenges especially among religious Jews who are likely to constrict and dismiss this revelation reverting to their customary or orthodox interpretations of the Temple's location. In many ways our realization of the rectified state-of-mind and its expression through speech is the final redemption in which we all accept that knowledge constitutes a completion of our exiled state and if we learn to embrace all inputs as a holistic convergence, we get to experience and realize our ultimate and aggregate potential.
Mystics and scholars of the Hebrew Torah who left a trail of clues did so to promote this rectified state of exile emphasizing the holistic perspective; a world devoid of happenstance where every occurrence has its Divine purpose. Their written facts stare in Israel's face unequivocally declaring its sole and exclusive right to the land of its people. Other than for momentary abandonment because of acts of aggression against Israel since the time of Joshua more than 3000 years ago, Jerusalem has been held by Jews. Now Israel and its leaders must boldly pursue its inherent, often unexpected wisdom to dismiss with conviction and fortitude international leaders who demand Israels exiled state continue. Now is the time to finally take its rightful place as the nation by whom other nations are inspired and to complete the glorious mission started by Jacob so many years ago.
Saturday, April 28, 2012
The Exiled State - Shaping the Narrative!
Christianity made sure Easter always coincides with Passover. Passover lasts 7 days, but outside of Israel an additional day is celebrated, which in the orthodox services emphasizes the present state of exile and the future redemption of Jewish people. Israel’s national and mystical history associated with this day is as deep as heaven’s spiritual oceans and a study of the Biblical texts reveals the extent of the nation’s ancient connection to its land.
No other nation is sufficiently privileged to have retained its written record in such a well preserved state as that of the Jewish people. Its Torah (Bible) records a story transcribed by Moses who brought it to the Jewish people some 3400 years ago and the document records historical periods and the mystical construct that pre-dates its authorship. At a minimum the record retains its relevance by the continuum of ancestral Levite priests who, to this very day, trace their family lineage from a father to son. During Passover and throughout each of the past 3400 years these direct ancestors of Moses and his brother Aharon, the first high priest of Israel, have participated in religious services to bestow blessing upon the world.
In the period that followed the exodus by Israel and others that fled Egypt with them, the self described chosen people undertook the difficult task building their national commitment to a closer, unified, monotheistic state of being through common customs, practices and religious belief. The initiation lasted 40 years until all males who were over 20 years at the exodus, had passed on. Other than for leaders Joshua and Caleb, no other male remnants were permitted to enter the permanent land of Israel chosen for and by the chosen people.
The fledgling nation crossed over the Jordan River and first made their way to the city of Shechem (modern Nablus), land that was once occupied by Kanaan a nephew of Egypt’s founder Ham. This was Israel’s northern entry point to its promised land. Some 300 years prior, Jacob (who later changed his name to Israel) had once settled there and his sons led by Levi and Shimeon, in almost premeditated preparation for their future family nations arrival, massacred the Prince of Shechem and his kingdoms 24000 male adult inhabitants, a revenge act for his rape of their sister. It is also the location where Joseph was sold by his brothers before being transported as a slave on a caravan to Egypt. There, the new nation entered, formally memorialized their return and buried Joseph’s bones making Shechem his final resting place.
One would expect such well documented history to sufficiently establish an entitlement of a people to its land, however the the modern narrative of Nablus or Shechem ranks among the world’s greatest examples of imperial fraud, deceit and denial. Notwithstanding, the depth of Israel’s connection to this city, its enemies hate every undeniable historical fact for fear that exposure will overturn their ambit claims. Whilst most cannot reconcile detailed matters already past, we are fortunate enough to be living in the dynamic digital era where writers and editors painstakingly recall the past, flavoring it to suit their insurgent desires and no more so than @Wikipedia where this living record is being written.
In Wikipedia’s world, rules of editorial engagement are defined in an effort to promote accurate representation, but abuse and misuse is common. The editorial prize in a popular or politically charged subject like Nablus ensures attention to editors who best manipulate the truth to meet the ideological demands of their peers and benefits come quickly to those who get the mix right. Support from other editors aggregates to the ideological victor who receives commendation for their targeted editorial contribution and participation. The ideologically charged Nablus narrative is evident in its Wikipedia page, supported by one of its primary editors Al Ameer son - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Al_Ameer_son. This editor has been awarded no less than 20 awards from his fellow contributors, he is a member of the ‘Early Muslim Military History Task Force’ and helped promote Yasser Arafat to Featured Article status.
Like the Roman name Palestine or Egyptian Kanaan, editorial defenders of Wikipedia’s Nablus narrative open their article with this disclaimer; “This article is about the city of Nablus in the northern West Bank, and its predecessor, the Roman city of Flavia Neapolis. For the biblical city of Shechem, at the same location, see Shechem.” From here on the authors deny Shechem a place in their Nablus narrative, suppressing its Biblical and archaeological history, in order to deliver the indoctrination of Roman origin that follows their reduced font disclaimer in their - ‘see Shechem’ link. The Wikipedia narrative denies the city its Israelite origin and promotes the perpetual suffering their denial imposes.
Joseph’s Tomb and its Torah inscribed twin mountain backdrop are a fundament of Israel’s connection to its land. Wikipedia’s Shechem entry describes the 2000 year history of Nablus preceding its Roman occupation and connects it to the Egyptian archaeological record when events catalyzed the unification of the Israel’s tribes out of which the modern Israeli nation grew. Shechem, after whom the city was named, raped Joseph’s same age sister Dinah to whom daughter Asenath was born and who, many years later, married Joseph with permission from Egypt’s Pharaoh. The marriage of Joseph, (mother Rachel) and granddaughter Asenath, (Rachel’s sister Leah's granddaughter), unified Israel’s matriarch’s and made Shechem Joseph’s father-in-law - another aboriginal fact the Nablus editors would rather ignore. Out of this marriage sons Manasseh and Ephraim were born and due to Joseph’s special status in Israelite history became entitled to 2 of the 12 permanent tribal memberships.
Whilst displacement of important elements of a city’s narrative denies its history, it also serves those affected to strengthen their ancient tribal connection against the growing weight of public opinion motivated by distortion. This is the common trait of natives displaced in South Africa, North America and Australia and is not uncharacteristic to the rights of Israelis to their origin city in the land they first occupied. It also strikes at histories various attempts to deny the history of Jewish people usually as a forerunner to their elimination and eradication. The Israelite people are so deeply rooted in their land, there is no place some ambit historical claim can deny them. Therefore, its enemies defer to deceit and denial in order to defend their occupation of Israel’s land and to continue the exile of its people.
No other nation is sufficiently privileged to have retained its written record in such a well preserved state as that of the Jewish people. Its Torah (Bible) records a story transcribed by Moses who brought it to the Jewish people some 3400 years ago and the document records historical periods and the mystical construct that pre-dates its authorship. At a minimum the record retains its relevance by the continuum of ancestral Levite priests who, to this very day, trace their family lineage from a father to son. During Passover and throughout each of the past 3400 years these direct ancestors of Moses and his brother Aharon, the first high priest of Israel, have participated in religious services to bestow blessing upon the world.
In the period that followed the exodus by Israel and others that fled Egypt with them, the self described chosen people undertook the difficult task building their national commitment to a closer, unified, monotheistic state of being through common customs, practices and religious belief. The initiation lasted 40 years until all males who were over 20 years at the exodus, had passed on. Other than for leaders Joshua and Caleb, no other male remnants were permitted to enter the permanent land of Israel chosen for and by the chosen people.
The fledgling nation crossed over the Jordan River and first made their way to the city of Shechem (modern Nablus), land that was once occupied by Kanaan a nephew of Egypt’s founder Ham. This was Israel’s northern entry point to its promised land. Some 300 years prior, Jacob (who later changed his name to Israel) had once settled there and his sons led by Levi and Shimeon, in almost premeditated preparation for their future family nations arrival, massacred the Prince of Shechem and his kingdoms 24000 male adult inhabitants, a revenge act for his rape of their sister. It is also the location where Joseph was sold by his brothers before being transported as a slave on a caravan to Egypt. There, the new nation entered, formally memorialized their return and buried Joseph’s bones making Shechem his final resting place.
One would expect such well documented history to sufficiently establish an entitlement of a people to its land, however the the modern narrative of Nablus or Shechem ranks among the world’s greatest examples of imperial fraud, deceit and denial. Notwithstanding, the depth of Israel’s connection to this city, its enemies hate every undeniable historical fact for fear that exposure will overturn their ambit claims. Whilst most cannot reconcile detailed matters already past, we are fortunate enough to be living in the dynamic digital era where writers and editors painstakingly recall the past, flavoring it to suit their insurgent desires and no more so than @Wikipedia where this living record is being written.
In Wikipedia’s world, rules of editorial engagement are defined in an effort to promote accurate representation, but abuse and misuse is common. The editorial prize in a popular or politically charged subject like Nablus ensures attention to editors who best manipulate the truth to meet the ideological demands of their peers and benefits come quickly to those who get the mix right. Support from other editors aggregates to the ideological victor who receives commendation for their targeted editorial contribution and participation. The ideologically charged Nablus narrative is evident in its Wikipedia page, supported by one of its primary editors Al Ameer son - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Al_Ameer_son. This editor has been awarded no less than 20 awards from his fellow contributors, he is a member of the ‘Early Muslim Military History Task Force’ and helped promote Yasser Arafat to Featured Article status.
Like the Roman name Palestine or Egyptian Kanaan, editorial defenders of Wikipedia’s Nablus narrative open their article with this disclaimer; “This article is about the city of Nablus in the northern West Bank, and its predecessor, the Roman city of Flavia Neapolis. For the biblical city of Shechem, at the same location, see Shechem.” From here on the authors deny Shechem a place in their Nablus narrative, suppressing its Biblical and archaeological history, in order to deliver the indoctrination of Roman origin that follows their reduced font disclaimer in their - ‘see Shechem’ link. The Wikipedia narrative denies the city its Israelite origin and promotes the perpetual suffering their denial imposes.
Joseph’s Tomb and its Torah inscribed twin mountain backdrop are a fundament of Israel’s connection to its land. Wikipedia’s Shechem entry describes the 2000 year history of Nablus preceding its Roman occupation and connects it to the Egyptian archaeological record when events catalyzed the unification of the Israel’s tribes out of which the modern Israeli nation grew. Shechem, after whom the city was named, raped Joseph’s same age sister Dinah to whom daughter Asenath was born and who, many years later, married Joseph with permission from Egypt’s Pharaoh. The marriage of Joseph, (mother Rachel) and granddaughter Asenath, (Rachel’s sister Leah's granddaughter), unified Israel’s matriarch’s and made Shechem Joseph’s father-in-law - another aboriginal fact the Nablus editors would rather ignore. Out of this marriage sons Manasseh and Ephraim were born and due to Joseph’s special status in Israelite history became entitled to 2 of the 12 permanent tribal memberships.
Whilst displacement of important elements of a city’s narrative denies its history, it also serves those affected to strengthen their ancient tribal connection against the growing weight of public opinion motivated by distortion. This is the common trait of natives displaced in South Africa, North America and Australia and is not uncharacteristic to the rights of Israelis to their origin city in the land they first occupied. It also strikes at histories various attempts to deny the history of Jewish people usually as a forerunner to their elimination and eradication. The Israelite people are so deeply rooted in their land, there is no place some ambit historical claim can deny them. Therefore, its enemies defer to deceit and denial in order to defend their occupation of Israel’s land and to continue the exile of its people.
Solving the Riddle of Beit-El and Beit-el.
Rav Soloveitchik (ZL) advised that we look to the Haftarah of the Torah portion as a commentary in and of itself, so I use this to delve into the meaning behind the portion read on Pesach outside of Israel as Yom Tov on the second day. On the first day we read the Torah portion to do with the sacrifice immediately preceding the exodus from Egypt. On the second day we read the instructions for sacrifices required in the Mishkan one year later, for the festival of Pesach, in remembrance of the exodus and for the other major holidays.
In the first day’s haftarah we read of Israel’s re-commitment to the covenant through circumcision before they entered Israel 40 years later at the end of their exodus from Egypt. However, on the second day we read about King Yoshiayhu who restored, with full pomp and ceremony, the dwindling festival of Pesach in Yerushalam.
I can understand how the first day connects to the exit from Egypt and the entry to Israel, but for the second day why is this particular haftorah selected? Surely there are other stories in Tanach in the 815 years between entering the land of Canaan (Israel) that would perhaps be more worthy?
To understand this I look to the fact that the second day is only experienced by Jews outside of Israel. Its these Jews that the portions of the 2nd day must be speaking to. Perhaps the Jews in exile would be sufficiently inspired to discover the reasons for this selection. With this in mind I am motivated to try, but before I do it’s important to know the background.
Yoshiyahu was among the last kings in the lineage of King David along the ~400 year kings list that preceded him. His great-grandfather was Hizkiyahu, his grandfather Menashe was banished to exile and his father Amon ruled over the southern kingdom of Yehuda, but was killed by his servants. At 8, on the death of his father he was anointed king of Yehuda.
Yoshiyahu passionately followed the ways of King David, restored monotheistic traditions and renovated the Temple. During the renovation the high priest Hilkiyahu discovered a Torah scroll, written by Moshe Rabeinu, which was open on the section including Devarim 28:36 the curse predicting the exile of the Jewish people. Shaphan the son of Atzaliahu the son of Meshullam on behalf of Yoshiahu asked Hulda the prophetess of its meaning. She foretold the imminent destruction of the first Temple and the exile of the Jewish people.
Perhaps it was in an effort to change the nature of the prophecy that Yoshiyahu led the elders of Yehuda and the people of Yerushalam to the Temple where he read from the scroll and made a covenant to observe God’s commandments and the people accepted the same upon themselves. They immediately targeted all idolatry that had been brought into the Temple including vessels, pillars, trees and statues and burned them in the plains of Kidron (outside Yerushalam toward the Dead Sea) and carried their ashes to Beit-El. He banished idol practices, relinquished the Temple rights of priests who had followed any idolatry and defiled their altars. After all was accomplished they reconstituted traditions and made a Pesach celebration like no other before. No king turned to God with all his heart and soul like Yoshiyahu. Such was his genuine commitment to Torah and worship that the prophet Yirmiyahu ben Hilkiyahu managed to secure the return of some of the ten tribes who, for the first time in a hundred years agreed to live under his unifying reign.
On the surface the story sounds like a reasonable basis for selection on 2nd day haftorah, but further investigation into the missing sections of the story that did not make the haftorah reveal deeper mysteries of our exiled state and Jewish connection to the Temple. Firstly the haftorah is an amalgamation of two sections from Kings II 23:1-9 and 21-25, so what does 10-20 contain that it was left out? Perhaps the gory details of idol worship including the sacrifice of children to Molech in the valley of Hinnom. However, verse 17 and 18 stand out among all the destruction of idolatry, the altars and graves noted in these passages, because they describe how one specific monument was saved. An even closer analysis of the section reveals ambiguity, which are subjected here to their Hebrew analysis, which I highly recommend each reader studies. There are at least 4 major commentators who read this in differing ways;
15.Furthermore(וְגַ֨ם), the altar that was at Beit-El and the high place which Yerov’am ben Nebat, who made Israel sin, had made, also(גַּ֣ם) that altar and the high place he broke down. Then he demolished its stones, ground them to dust, and burned the Asherah. 16.Now when Yoshiyahu turned, he saw the graves that were there on the mountain, and he sent and took the bones from the graves and burned them on the altar and defiled (וַֽיְטַמְּאֵ֑הוּ) it according to the word of the LORD which the man of God proclaimed. 17.Then he said,“What is this monument (הַצִּיּ֣וּן) that I see?” And the men of the city told him, “It is the grave (הַקֶּ֤בֶר) of the man of God who came from Yehuda and who proclaimed such words/deeds upon (עַ֖ל) the altar of Beit-El.” 18. He said, “Let him alone; let no one disturb his bones.” So they left his bones undisturbed (אֶת) the bones of the prophet who came from Shomron. 19. Yoshiyahu also removed all the houses of the high places which were in the cities of Shomron, which the kings of Israel had made provoking the LORD; and he did to them just as he had done in Beit-El. 20. All the priests of the high places who were there he slaughtered on the altars and burned human bones on them; then he returned to Yerushalam.
23:15 וְגַ֨ם אֶת־הַמִּזְבֵּ֜חַ אֲשֶׁ֣ר בְּבֵֽית־אֵ֗ל הַבָּמָה֙ אֲשֶׁ֨ר עָשָׂ֜ה יָרָבְעָ֤ם בֶּן־נְבָט֙ אֲשֶׁ֣ר הֶחֱטִ֣יא אֶת־יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל גַּ֣ם אֶת־הַמִּזְבֵּ֧חַ הַה֛וּא וְאֶת־הַבָּמָ֖ה נָתָ֑ץ וַיִּשְׂרֹ֧ף אֶת־הַבָּמָ֛ה הֵדַ֥ק לְעָפָ֖ר וְשָׂרַ֥ף אֲשֵׁרָֽה׃
23:16 וַיִּ֣פֶן יֹאשִׁיָּ֗הוּ וַיַּ֨רְא אֶת־הַקְּבָרִ֤ים אֲשֶׁר־שָׁם֙ בָּהָ֔ר וַיִּשְׁלַ֗ח וַיִּקַּ֤ח אֶת־הָֽעֲצָמֹות֙ מִן־הַקְּבָרִ֔ים וַיִּשְׂרֹ֥ף עַל־הַמִּזְבֵּ֖חַ וַֽיְטַמְּאֵ֑הוּ כִּדְבַ֣ר יְהוָ֗ה אֲשֶׁ֤ר קָרָא֙ אִ֣ישׁ הָאֱלֹהִ֔ים אֲשֶׁ֣ר קָרָ֔א אֶת־הַדְּבָרִ֖ים הָאֵֽלֶּה׃
23:17 וַיֹּ֕אמֶר מָ֚ה הַצִּיּ֣וּן הַלָּ֔ז אֲשֶׁ֖ר אֲנִ֣י רֹאֶ֑ה וַיֹּאמְר֨וּ אֵלָ֜יו אַנְשֵׁ֣י הָעִ֗יר הַקֶּ֤בֶר אִישׁ־הָֽאֱלֹהִים֙ אֲשֶׁר־בָּ֣א מִֽיהוּדָ֔ה וַיִּקְרָ֗א אֶת־הַדְּבָרִ֤ים הָאֵ֙לֶּה֙ אֲשֶׁ֣ר עָשִׂ֔יתָ עַ֖ל הַמִּזְבַּ֥ח בֵּֽית־אֵֽל׃
23:18 וַיֹּ֙אמֶר֙ הַנִּ֣יחוּ לֹ֔ו אִ֖ישׁ אַל־יָנַ֣ע עַצְמֹתָ֑יו וַֽיְמַלְּטוּ֙ עַצְמֹתָ֔יו אֵ֚ת עַצְמֹ֣ות הַנָּבִ֔יא אֲשֶׁר־בָּ֖א מִשֹּׁמְרֹֽון׃
23:19 וְגַם֩ אֶת־כָּל־בָּתֵּ֨י הַבָּמֹ֜ות אֲשֶׁ֣ר׀ בְּעָרֵ֣י שֹׁמְרֹ֗ון אֲשֶׁ֨ר עָשׂ֜וּ מַלְכֵ֤י יִשְׂרָאֵל֙ לְהַכְעִ֔יס הֵסִ֖יר יֹֽאשִׁיָּ֑הוּ וַיַּ֣עַשׂ לָהֶ֔ם
כְּכָל־הַֽמַּעֲשִׂ֔ים אֲשֶׁ֥ר עָשָׂ֖ה בְּבֵֽית־אֵֽל
23:20 וַ֠יִּזְבַּח אֶת־כָּל־כֹּהֲנֵ֨י הַבָּמֹ֤ות אֲשֶׁר־שָׁם֙ עַל־הַֽמִּזְבְּחֹ֔ות וַיִּשְׂרֹ֛ף אֶת־עַצְמֹ֥ות אָדָ֖ם עֲלֵיהֶ֑ם וַיָּ֖שָׁב יְרוּשָׁלִָֽם
A very careful reading of this passage, juxtaposes its prophetic counterpart some 330 years earlier during the reign of King Yerovam (Kings 13:11-32), suggesting the man who came from from Yehuda is also the prophet who came from Shomron. Yoshiyahu was refrained after defiling the altar with human bones by his discovery of the monument (וַיֹּ֕אמֶר מָ֚ה הַצִּיּ֣וּן הַלָּ֔ז אֲשֶׁ֖ר אֲנִ֣י רֹאֶ֑ה). The word ha’tziun - used as ‘monument’ in this context, is the only occurrence of the word in Torah/Tanach. Further he was told by the men of the city it is the grave (הַקֶּ֤בֶר) - ha’kever of the man of God who came from Yehuda, another exclusive word.
The simple reading underscores this action occurring in Beit-el Shomron. However, if the text exclusively refers to Beit-el Shomron why would a grave of a man of God from Yehuda be at an altar in Shomron - the kingdoms were at war? Who fits the description - the man of God who came from Yehuda that is also the prophet who came from Shomron? To discover the answer we must try to understand the location of Beit-El or Beit-el to which this man came.
Today there is enormous confusion over place names in modern Israel with their origin in Torah. The confusion occurs because of mystical or literal interpretations, or through local or foreign competition or intervention through the millennia including as a result of the in-fighting between the Kingdoms of Yehuda and Ephraim for the temples ultimate location. In any event, (K2-23:20) we learn Yoshiyahu defiled the altar then the high places in Shomron before he returned to Yerushalam. Further, we understand, the act of Yoshiyahu was prophesied at the time of King Yerovam who lived in Shchem (K1-12:25), that Beit-el in Shomron was the location at which Yerovam dedicated the idolatrous altar. This was also the high place of one of the golden calves used by him to compete (K1-12:28) with Temple worship in Yerushalam and the southern kingdom of Yehuda. Finally, from an alternative reading of 23:15 the altar Yoshiyahu defiled near the monument at Beit-El could be counterpart to the idolatrous altar at Beit-el in Shomron.
Analogous to competing Beit-El/el’s of Yerovam and Yoshiyahu, the prophecy and message crystallizes. The man of God from Yehuda usurped King Yerovam with a prophetic proof when he split his altar at Beit-el, then he succumbed to the persuasion of his false prophet nemesis from Shomron, went against his own prophecy and was mauled to death by a Lion that was also at peace with the Donkey (Kings 13:11-32). The false prophet buried the man of God in his grave and requested his sons to bury him together in the same grave. Surely this points the reader to recognize the pathological condition that locks Israel in its exiled state and perhaps Beit-El is a key.
In the simple reading one is left to believe these events occur in Beit-el Shomron. In the alternative reading of 23:15 Yoshiyahu first defiles the altar at Beit-El before defiling its counterpart altar at Beit-el. Then the encrypted description of the man who came to Beit-El, as a man of God, from Yehuda who returned to Beit-El, as a prophet, from Shomron could also relate to Yaakov and the monument he dedicated to God at Beit-El? And where is this monument? It is located beside the altar of Beit-El in the City of David, Yerushalayim, not in the modern city of Beit-el (Shomron).
We can just begin to sense the fledgling and broken state of Jewish culture, interrupted through generations of wayward kings each of whom flavored Torah life, temple tradition and belief to benefit their plans. The Torah portion for 2nd day Pesach that instructs the holy days sacrifices of the Mishkan is linked to Yoshiyahu because he fervently restored Jewish life and culture prescribed in Torah. Yoshiyahu’s heightened sensitivity to Torah led him to destroy idolatry, restore The Temple, celebrate Pesach and hide the Ark of the Covenant in its still secret location, yet at 39 his body was pierced by 300 arrows of the lame Pharaoh Neco who was refused clear passage through Israel to attack the looming enemy, the king of Assyria who dominated Babylon. Approximately 22 years later the First Temple was destroyed.
Pesach, the one holiday Jews are commanded to remember their redemption from exile had almost been forgotten in Yerushalam. The monument, erected 1100 years earlier by Yaakov in the location he named Beit-El adjacent to which The City of David was built had also been forgotten. The men of Yerushalayim (the City of David) confused by the Yoshiyahu's statement at Yerovam’s altar at Beit-el about the man of God from Yehuda, the Prophet from Shomron. Their confusion reflecting Yerovam’s prerogative, the segmentation of the nation - the exiled state!
Today we have identified the location of the City of David, ancient Yerushalayim, the Gihon Spring, the fortified upper ridge (bama) at the Gihon which I maintain is Beit El - once called Luz, including the monument of Yaakov and even the adjacent altar on which Yitzchak was offered and which Yoshiyahu defiled. Perhaps this location holds within it ‘the stone the builders despised that will become the chief cornerstone’ and which if we care to remember it, will reorient our understanding of ancient Yerushalayim and through it the importance of Beit-El to the future development of the city.
See Part II - Solving the Riddle - continues...
In the first day’s haftarah we read of Israel’s re-commitment to the covenant through circumcision before they entered Israel 40 years later at the end of their exodus from Egypt. However, on the second day we read about King Yoshiayhu who restored, with full pomp and ceremony, the dwindling festival of Pesach in Yerushalam.
I can understand how the first day connects to the exit from Egypt and the entry to Israel, but for the second day why is this particular haftorah selected? Surely there are other stories in Tanach in the 815 years between entering the land of Canaan (Israel) that would perhaps be more worthy?
To understand this I look to the fact that the second day is only experienced by Jews outside of Israel. Its these Jews that the portions of the 2nd day must be speaking to. Perhaps the Jews in exile would be sufficiently inspired to discover the reasons for this selection. With this in mind I am motivated to try, but before I do it’s important to know the background.
Yoshiyahu was among the last kings in the lineage of King David along the ~400 year kings list that preceded him. His great-grandfather was Hizkiyahu, his grandfather Menashe was banished to exile and his father Amon ruled over the southern kingdom of Yehuda, but was killed by his servants. At 8, on the death of his father he was anointed king of Yehuda.
Yoshiyahu passionately followed the ways of King David, restored monotheistic traditions and renovated the Temple. During the renovation the high priest Hilkiyahu discovered a Torah scroll, written by Moshe Rabeinu, which was open on the section including Devarim 28:36 the curse predicting the exile of the Jewish people. Shaphan the son of Atzaliahu the son of Meshullam on behalf of Yoshiahu asked Hulda the prophetess of its meaning. She foretold the imminent destruction of the first Temple and the exile of the Jewish people.
Perhaps it was in an effort to change the nature of the prophecy that Yoshiyahu led the elders of Yehuda and the people of Yerushalam to the Temple where he read from the scroll and made a covenant to observe God’s commandments and the people accepted the same upon themselves. They immediately targeted all idolatry that had been brought into the Temple including vessels, pillars, trees and statues and burned them in the plains of Kidron (outside Yerushalam toward the Dead Sea) and carried their ashes to Beit-El. He banished idol practices, relinquished the Temple rights of priests who had followed any idolatry and defiled their altars. After all was accomplished they reconstituted traditions and made a Pesach celebration like no other before. No king turned to God with all his heart and soul like Yoshiyahu. Such was his genuine commitment to Torah and worship that the prophet Yirmiyahu ben Hilkiyahu managed to secure the return of some of the ten tribes who, for the first time in a hundred years agreed to live under his unifying reign.
On the surface the story sounds like a reasonable basis for selection on 2nd day haftorah, but further investigation into the missing sections of the story that did not make the haftorah reveal deeper mysteries of our exiled state and Jewish connection to the Temple. Firstly the haftorah is an amalgamation of two sections from Kings II 23:1-9 and 21-25, so what does 10-20 contain that it was left out? Perhaps the gory details of idol worship including the sacrifice of children to Molech in the valley of Hinnom. However, verse 17 and 18 stand out among all the destruction of idolatry, the altars and graves noted in these passages, because they describe how one specific monument was saved. An even closer analysis of the section reveals ambiguity, which are subjected here to their Hebrew analysis, which I highly recommend each reader studies. There are at least 4 major commentators who read this in differing ways;
15.Furthermore(וְגַ֨ם), the altar that was at Beit-El and the high place which Yerov’am ben Nebat, who made Israel sin, had made, also(גַּ֣ם) that altar and the high place he broke down. Then he demolished its stones, ground them to dust, and burned the Asherah. 16.Now when Yoshiyahu turned, he saw the graves that were there on the mountain, and he sent and took the bones from the graves and burned them on the altar and defiled (וַֽיְטַמְּאֵ֑הוּ) it according to the word of the LORD which the man of God proclaimed. 17.Then he said,“What is this monument (הַצִּיּ֣וּן) that I see?” And the men of the city told him, “It is the grave (הַקֶּ֤בֶר) of the man of God who came from Yehuda and who proclaimed such words/deeds upon (עַ֖ל) the altar of Beit-El.” 18. He said, “Let him alone; let no one disturb his bones.” So they left his bones undisturbed (אֶת) the bones of the prophet who came from Shomron. 19. Yoshiyahu also removed all the houses of the high places which were in the cities of Shomron, which the kings of Israel had made provoking the LORD; and he did to them just as he had done in Beit-El. 20. All the priests of the high places who were there he slaughtered on the altars and burned human bones on them; then he returned to Yerushalam.
23:15 וְגַ֨ם אֶת־הַמִּזְבֵּ֜חַ אֲשֶׁ֣ר בְּבֵֽית־אֵ֗ל הַבָּמָה֙ אֲשֶׁ֨ר עָשָׂ֜ה יָרָבְעָ֤ם בֶּן־נְבָט֙ אֲשֶׁ֣ר הֶחֱטִ֣יא אֶת־יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל גַּ֣ם אֶת־הַמִּזְבֵּ֧חַ הַה֛וּא וְאֶת־הַבָּמָ֖ה נָתָ֑ץ וַיִּשְׂרֹ֧ף אֶת־הַבָּמָ֛ה הֵדַ֥ק לְעָפָ֖ר וְשָׂרַ֥ף אֲשֵׁרָֽה׃
23:16 וַיִּ֣פֶן יֹאשִׁיָּ֗הוּ וַיַּ֨רְא אֶת־הַקְּבָרִ֤ים אֲשֶׁר־שָׁם֙ בָּהָ֔ר וַיִּשְׁלַ֗ח וַיִּקַּ֤ח אֶת־הָֽעֲצָמֹות֙ מִן־הַקְּבָרִ֔ים וַיִּשְׂרֹ֥ף עַל־הַמִּזְבֵּ֖חַ וַֽיְטַמְּאֵ֑הוּ כִּדְבַ֣ר יְהוָ֗ה אֲשֶׁ֤ר קָרָא֙ אִ֣ישׁ הָאֱלֹהִ֔ים אֲשֶׁ֣ר קָרָ֔א אֶת־הַדְּבָרִ֖ים הָאֵֽלֶּה׃
23:17 וַיֹּ֕אמֶר מָ֚ה הַצִּיּ֣וּן הַלָּ֔ז אֲשֶׁ֖ר אֲנִ֣י רֹאֶ֑ה וַיֹּאמְר֨וּ אֵלָ֜יו אַנְשֵׁ֣י הָעִ֗יר הַקֶּ֤בֶר אִישׁ־הָֽאֱלֹהִים֙ אֲשֶׁר־בָּ֣א מִֽיהוּדָ֔ה וַיִּקְרָ֗א אֶת־הַדְּבָרִ֤ים הָאֵ֙לֶּה֙ אֲשֶׁ֣ר עָשִׂ֔יתָ עַ֖ל הַמִּזְבַּ֥ח בֵּֽית־אֵֽל׃
23:18 וַיֹּ֙אמֶר֙ הַנִּ֣יחוּ לֹ֔ו אִ֖ישׁ אַל־יָנַ֣ע עַצְמֹתָ֑יו וַֽיְמַלְּטוּ֙ עַצְמֹתָ֔יו אֵ֚ת עַצְמֹ֣ות הַנָּבִ֔יא אֲשֶׁר־בָּ֖א מִשֹּׁמְרֹֽון׃
23:19 וְגַם֩ אֶת־כָּל־בָּתֵּ֨י הַבָּמֹ֜ות אֲשֶׁ֣ר׀ בְּעָרֵ֣י שֹׁמְרֹ֗ון אֲשֶׁ֨ר עָשׂ֜וּ מַלְכֵ֤י יִשְׂרָאֵל֙ לְהַכְעִ֔יס הֵסִ֖יר יֹֽאשִׁיָּ֑הוּ וַיַּ֣עַשׂ לָהֶ֔ם
כְּכָל־הַֽמַּעֲשִׂ֔ים אֲשֶׁ֥ר עָשָׂ֖ה בְּבֵֽית־אֵֽל
23:20 וַ֠יִּזְבַּח אֶת־כָּל־כֹּהֲנֵ֨י הַבָּמֹ֤ות אֲשֶׁר־שָׁם֙ עַל־הַֽמִּזְבְּחֹ֔ות וַיִּשְׂרֹ֛ף אֶת־עַצְמֹ֥ות אָדָ֖ם עֲלֵיהֶ֑ם וַיָּ֖שָׁב יְרוּשָׁלִָֽם
A very careful reading of this passage, juxtaposes its prophetic counterpart some 330 years earlier during the reign of King Yerovam (Kings 13:11-32), suggesting the man who came from from Yehuda is also the prophet who came from Shomron. Yoshiyahu was refrained after defiling the altar with human bones by his discovery of the monument (וַיֹּ֕אמֶר מָ֚ה הַצִּיּ֣וּן הַלָּ֔ז אֲשֶׁ֖ר אֲנִ֣י רֹאֶ֑ה). The word ha’tziun - used as ‘monument’ in this context, is the only occurrence of the word in Torah/Tanach. Further he was told by the men of the city it is the grave (הַקֶּ֤בֶר) - ha’kever of the man of God who came from Yehuda, another exclusive word.
The simple reading underscores this action occurring in Beit-el Shomron. However, if the text exclusively refers to Beit-el Shomron why would a grave of a man of God from Yehuda be at an altar in Shomron - the kingdoms were at war? Who fits the description - the man of God who came from Yehuda that is also the prophet who came from Shomron? To discover the answer we must try to understand the location of Beit-El or Beit-el to which this man came.
Today there is enormous confusion over place names in modern Israel with their origin in Torah. The confusion occurs because of mystical or literal interpretations, or through local or foreign competition or intervention through the millennia including as a result of the in-fighting between the Kingdoms of Yehuda and Ephraim for the temples ultimate location. In any event, (K2-23:20) we learn Yoshiyahu defiled the altar then the high places in Shomron before he returned to Yerushalam. Further, we understand, the act of Yoshiyahu was prophesied at the time of King Yerovam who lived in Shchem (K1-12:25), that Beit-el in Shomron was the location at which Yerovam dedicated the idolatrous altar. This was also the high place of one of the golden calves used by him to compete (K1-12:28) with Temple worship in Yerushalam and the southern kingdom of Yehuda. Finally, from an alternative reading of 23:15 the altar Yoshiyahu defiled near the monument at Beit-El could be counterpart to the idolatrous altar at Beit-el in Shomron.
Analogous to competing Beit-El/el’s of Yerovam and Yoshiyahu, the prophecy and message crystallizes. The man of God from Yehuda usurped King Yerovam with a prophetic proof when he split his altar at Beit-el, then he succumbed to the persuasion of his false prophet nemesis from Shomron, went against his own prophecy and was mauled to death by a Lion that was also at peace with the Donkey (Kings 13:11-32). The false prophet buried the man of God in his grave and requested his sons to bury him together in the same grave. Surely this points the reader to recognize the pathological condition that locks Israel in its exiled state and perhaps Beit-El is a key.
In the simple reading one is left to believe these events occur in Beit-el Shomron. In the alternative reading of 23:15 Yoshiyahu first defiles the altar at Beit-El before defiling its counterpart altar at Beit-el. Then the encrypted description of the man who came to Beit-El, as a man of God, from Yehuda who returned to Beit-El, as a prophet, from Shomron could also relate to Yaakov and the monument he dedicated to God at Beit-El? And where is this monument? It is located beside the altar of Beit-El in the City of David, Yerushalayim, not in the modern city of Beit-el (Shomron).
We can just begin to sense the fledgling and broken state of Jewish culture, interrupted through generations of wayward kings each of whom flavored Torah life, temple tradition and belief to benefit their plans. The Torah portion for 2nd day Pesach that instructs the holy days sacrifices of the Mishkan is linked to Yoshiyahu because he fervently restored Jewish life and culture prescribed in Torah. Yoshiyahu’s heightened sensitivity to Torah led him to destroy idolatry, restore The Temple, celebrate Pesach and hide the Ark of the Covenant in its still secret location, yet at 39 his body was pierced by 300 arrows of the lame Pharaoh Neco who was refused clear passage through Israel to attack the looming enemy, the king of Assyria who dominated Babylon. Approximately 22 years later the First Temple was destroyed.
Pesach, the one holiday Jews are commanded to remember their redemption from exile had almost been forgotten in Yerushalam. The monument, erected 1100 years earlier by Yaakov in the location he named Beit-El adjacent to which The City of David was built had also been forgotten. The men of Yerushalayim (the City of David) confused by the Yoshiyahu's statement at Yerovam’s altar at Beit-el about the man of God from Yehuda, the Prophet from Shomron. Their confusion reflecting Yerovam’s prerogative, the segmentation of the nation - the exiled state!
Today we have identified the location of the City of David, ancient Yerushalayim, the Gihon Spring, the fortified upper ridge (bama) at the Gihon which I maintain is Beit El - once called Luz, including the monument of Yaakov and even the adjacent altar on which Yitzchak was offered and which Yoshiyahu defiled. Perhaps this location holds within it ‘the stone the builders despised that will become the chief cornerstone’ and which if we care to remember it, will reorient our understanding of ancient Yerushalayim and through it the importance of Beit-El to the future development of the city.
See Part II - Solving the Riddle - continues...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)