Tag Archives: blood feud

May God avenge his blood

parshat shoftim, deuteronomy 16 – 21

Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse. הי״ד the Hebrew acronym הַשֵּׁם יִקּוֹם דָּמוֹ hašém yikóm damó, “May God avenge his blood” has been carved after the names of too many victims of bloodshed in the past few months. This week’s parsha addresses tribalism, revenge killings and blood feuds which, in the Ancient Near East, especially in the Sinai Peninsula, have a too rich history. We review the Biblical texts in light of pre-Islamic customs preserved by the Bedouin and we wonder …. when will it ever end.

Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/587623

Transcript:

Welcome to Madlik.  My name is Geoffrey Stern and at Madlik we light a spark or shed some light on a Jewish Text or Tradition.  Along with Rabbi Adam Mintz we host Madlik Disruptive Torah on clubhouse every Thursday and share it as the Madlik podcast on your favorite platform. This week’s parsha is Shoftim. הי״ד the Hebrew acronym  הַשֵּׁם יִקּוֹם דָּמוֹ “May Hashem avenge his blood” has been carved after the names of too many victims of bloodshed in the past few months, and especially in the last few days. This week’s parsha addresses tribalism, revenge killings and blood feuds which in the Ancient Near East, especially in the Sinai Peninsula, have a too rich history. Today we review the Biblical texts in light of pre-Islamic customs preserved by the Bedouin and we wonder …. when will it ever end. So join us for: May God avenge his blood.

more

Well, Rabbi, welcome back and Chodesh Tov.

It is Elul, when Elul comes, you know, the High Holidays are not far away.

That is for sure right, but we have a good, this year, we have a whole month of September, where we’re going to be able to do fun things, so that’s exciting.

Yeah.

So, as I said in the intro, this week, we were all torn apart.

On the one hand, there was a Israeli Bedouin hostage who escaped and then of course, there was the tragic murder of the six hostages in the tunnel, possibly when the IDF was approaching.

I don’t know if you’ve seen the pictures of where that tunnel started, but it started in a child’s room with Disney figurines and carriages.

It’s just so, so tragic that they were alive this long and now they are lost.

And one of the things that struck me as I started to see the WhatsApp groups that I’m part of an acronym that I had never really focused on before.

And it was after the names of those of the hostages that were killed.

And it was the Hebrew letters, Hei Yud Daled, which I said in the intro is Hashem Yakum D’amo, that God should avenge his blood.

And I had to actually look up what the acronym stood for.

And I guess we’re all more used to Zichrona Levracha, or Zecher Tzadik Lbracha.

So it was a new acronym that I decided it was appropriate to look into.

And it does talk about avenging.

And I will say, Rabbi, in the intro, you were saying how you watched the funeral of Hersh Goldberg Polin.

And I didn’t see the whole thing.

But one thing that was absolutely missing was any reference to revenge, actually any reference to the perpetrators of the crime.

It was, I wouldn’t say, a celebration, but it was all about the young man who was lost.

And I haven’t had the opportunity to be at all of the funerals that have occurred since October 7th.

I’m sure there is an element of anger and revenge.

But my gut feeling is that the emphasis has been on celebrating those that were lost.

And I must say, even the mother at one point was thankful that her son was free and out of the tunnels, even though he was obviously…

That was kind of spooky, right?

Yeah, yeah.

But anyway, I mean, you obviously have known what Hey yud Dalit stood for.

But to me, it was new, and it does tie in to the parshah.

But let me just stop here for your impressions.

So if you notice, Hey yud Dalit is always used for people who are killed in a terrorist attack.

And your point is a very strong point.

And that is Nikamah, which means revenge, is something that we don’t like to focus on.

But if somebody’s killed in a terrorist attack, it seems to be that we give space for Nikamah.

And in the show notes, which are on Sefaria, I do have an image of the WhatsApp post on not one of the hostages, but actually a policeman who was killed.

He was ambushed and his daughter had been killed on the morning of October 7th.

So this is a real tragedy for the family.

But there twice I saw this, even in the English, H-Y-D.

So that triggered it.

And then I have some pictures of tombstones that I took from Wikipedia that have this H-Y-D on tombstones, one is pre-state, but it was a terrorist attack.

I’m curious to know, Rabbi, whether this acronym precedes Israel and this is something that you might find on a grave in Iraq or in Eastern Europe.

Yeah, I don’t know.

That’s a super interesting question.

I don’t know the answer.

But in any case, as I said, it does tie into the portion.

So we are in Parshat Shoftim, Deuteronomy 16, and the name is Shoftim, and that means judges.

And it says, Judges and officers thou shalt make thee, and thou of thy gates throughout thy tribes, and they shall judge the people.

So that’s the broad stroke subject matter of the portion.

But then it goes on in Deuteronomy 17, and it starts talking about the need for witnesses.

In other words, against vigilantism.

The parsha is, at the end of the day, an argument for a judicial system, and not taking the law into your own hands, or as we said in last week’s parsha, (Deuteronomy 12: 8 אִ֖ישׁ כׇּל־הַיָּשָׁ֥ר בְּעֵינָֽיו every man whatever is right in his own eyes.)   doing what you want to do, whether it comes to religion or law.

And it says, The hands of witnesses shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hands of all the people, so thou shalt put the evil away from among you.

So, it’s interesting that it is a legal system, but it’s clear that it is adopting this sense, this emotive sense of the witnesses who saw the event are the first to transfer.

You almost feel a sense of transference.

The guilt that is in the world onto that person who perpetrated it, the rest of the community joins, and the objective is not so much punishment as it is, thou shall put evil away from among you.

And then it goes on and talks about if you have a case that can’t be judged locally, that thou shalt come to the priests, the Levites, and to the judge that shall be in those days.

So here all of a sudden we see that a role of the Cohanim and Levites, the priests, was to act not so much as spiritual leaders in this case, but as judges, in the centralized judges.

And then it goes in Deuteronomy 19, it talks about the subject matter that we’re going to dwell on.

When your God has cut down the nations whose land your God is assigning to you and have dispossessed them and settled in their towns and homes, you shall set aside three cities in the land that your God is giving you to possess.

You shall survey the distances and divide into three parts the territory that is allotted to you so that a man who has killed someone may have a place to flee.

Now, here, and I think we’re going to see, and you’ll probably agree with me, there’s a little bit of an evolution in these rules, but clearly in rabbinic tradition and even in the text that we’re going to read, that this has everything to do with unintended manslaughter and not intended murder.

But here it says someone who has killed someone will have a place to flee.

Now, this is the case of the killer who may flee there and live, one who has slain another unwittingly without having been an enemy in the past.

For instance, a man who goes with another fellow into a grove to cut wood, as his hand swings the axe to cut down a tree, the axe head flies off in the middle and strikes the others.

That man shall flee to one of these cities and live.

Otherwise, when the distance is great, the blood-avenger pursuing the killer in hot anger may overtake him and strike him down.

So it seems to say that either it’s condoning or it is acknowledging that there is a pre-existent tradition where if someone kills someone in your family or tribe, you have the right to avenge that murder, even if it was manslaughter, not intentional.

yet he did not incur the death penalty, since he had never been the other’s enemy. (7) That is why I command you: set aside three cities.


So first of all, the interesting thing is we have cities.

Up until now, we’ve been in the desert.

There are tribes.

We’re talking about distances.

And it all ties into the last few weeks, Parshiyot, where Judaism became centralized.

They were told to take down all of these local holy sites, and everything was centralized in Jerusalem, which is very nice when it comes to pilgrimage festivals.

But for everyday stuff, you have to have these refuges.

And we’ll see later that if there was a tradition of fleeing to a holy space like a temple, that now that there were no holy spaces distributed around the country, again, pushed one to have to have these cities of refuge.

But we always talk about what’s unique in the Torah.

This is a unique institution, and it’s an institution, I think, as we go along, that was created to address the situation of the blood revenge and blood killings, where, again, the fact that someone in your tribe or family was killed required you to avenge it.

Yeah, so, I mean, we know that from other cultures as well.

This wasn’t only a Jewish thing.

In the ancient world, you had, you had revenge killings.

There’s a phrase for it.

It’s called revenge killings.

Yeah, and we’ll see a little bit that, and I said this in the introduction, it was something very strong in the Sinai Peninsula, and Bedouin tribes today are still struggling with it.

And in Arab countries, I won’t say Muslim countries, because actually, Islam, we’ll see, came out against it, but it was pre-existent even to Islam.

It was a very strong tradition.

And so we’re not even talking about honor killings, which has a whole other element to it.

So in Deuteronomy 19, it continues going on.

And again, it talks about a premeditated murder that occurs, (11) If, however, a man who is the enemy of another lies in wait and sets upon [the victim] and strikes a fatal blow and then flees to one of these towns, (12) the elders of his town shall have him brought back from there and shall hand him over to the blood-avenger to be put to death;


So inside of our document, you have both the cure to blood avenging and participation in it.

(13) you must show him no pity. Thus you will purge Israel of the blood of the innocent, and it will go well with you.

I would suggest that if you read the laws in Sanhedrin, there is no giving it over to the blood avenger.

You bring witnesses, you go to court, but here we are at a stage in the development of the law where for murder, there was an acceptance of this pre-existent institution.

Would you agree?

Yeah, that is right.

Correct.

That’s interesting.

There clearly was an acceptance of it.

And that’s what’s so interesting in the Torah.

And you know, the commentaries, you know, the Jewish commentaries don’t focus on it.

But it’s like it’s the peshat (simple meaning) in the Torah.

It’s the literal explanation in the Torah, which I think doesn’t get enough Jewish focus.

Probably not.

But that’s what Madlik is here for, right?

That’s it.

That’s perfect.

Yeah, this is great.

So and Deuteronomy 19 ends, and it is no longer talking about the premeditated murder, but it does bring in the Lex talionis.

It says, In 19: 21, nor must you show pity, life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot.

This is important because we will see in Islamic law, and then in the way they fixed this blood revenge was monetary compensation.

And so here too, we have normally, we are used to eye for eye, tooth for tooth.

You pay the monetary substitute for the value that an eye or a limb might have.

Here, we also have life for life.

So we have all of these kind of concepts mixed in.

In Numbers, because Deuteronomy is not the only place that we talk about this, it gives us a little bit more flavor.

And there, in Numbers 35, it says in 31, you may not accept a ransom for the life of a murderer who is guilty of capital crime.

He must be put to death.

So already, it did have this concept of ransom, Kofir le-Nefesh.

And this was one of the tools in the toolkit.

And you were not to accept it for a premeditated murder, which would imply that you could accept it for an unintentional manslaughter.

So again, we have these these different ingredients that we shall see that come up in the general context of the Middle East, which is, there are holy places that you might go to.

There are monetary compensations that you can use, all designed so that you don’t have this kind of vigilante tribal revenge killing.

The interesting thing that is mentioned is that the person has to stay in the city of refuge until the priest, the Cohen HaGadol, dies.

(25) The assembly shall protect the killer from the blood-avenger, and the assembly shall restore him to the city of refuge to which he fled, and there he shall remain until the death of the high priest who was anointed with the sacred oil.

Yeah, that’s super interesting, isn’t it?

And that’s one of the questions you would, if I was giving my Bar Mitzvah drasha on this subject, that’s what I would ask.

Why is that?

And maybe we’ll come across something that has an answer to it, but again, we did have the sense of the Cohen and Levi as the judge, a few verses ago.

And so, we kind of see, and we do have this sense of putting the hands on the guilty person.

So, let’s see a little bit how this plays out.

And I should say that in Exodus 21, it says, When one party schemes against another and kills through treachery, you shall take that person from my very altar to be put to death.

Me’im mizbechi tikechenu l’amut.

So, here too, we have that ingredient that I referenced before.

The ingredient that most of us are familiar.

You run into the church, and you grab the altar, and you’re safe.

But the idea is, for premeditated murder, you can’t do that.

But the possibility exists that for man-slaughter, it existed.

But because in the last parsha or two, we took away decentralized holy spaces, we needed this.

So again, it’s unintended consequences.

It’s the development of the law.

So in pre-Islamic tradition, and I found an amazing article that is called Blood Revenge in Arabia and Israel.

It’s by a Walter Patton, and it’s dated 1901.

So what’s nice about that is, on the one hand, you might assume that maybe the research is dated, although I have done a little bit of research, and Wikipedia is still saying the same thing, and so are some scholarly articles and recent newspaper articles. (see Sefaria notes)

But it’s, you know, it’s, there was a great golden age of Jewish scholarship into, and biblical scholarship into Islam and pre-Islam, that now is not, maybe not so possible anymore.

But in this, he talks about the sense that even amongst the Bedouin, there is a statement, “I will have my revenge if I should cast into hell for it.”

So there was this idea that this transcended law, that this was something that was above law, that if there was a killing in your family or your tribe, it was imperative on you to redeem that.

And we saw that sense of the necessary idea of purging the land, purging people from this death.

And so he writes that when Islam came, the main modification introduced was that all Muslims were obliged to avenge a Muslim who was slain.

So he argues that Islam actually also came out against these revenge killings.

He says, This is as striking at the very root of the tribal principle and social organization would have brought a great change in blood revenge.

But despite Islam, the tribal principle has been preserved almost unmodified in the desert, and with it the ancient usage in blood feuds.

And what is fascinating, and this gives us insight into our own tradition, is the word that it uses for this future from the law is jâr.

In English, it’s J with a little tent at the top of it, jâr


And in the Hebrew, this scholar says that’s ger (גר)

And so we have looked at ger from many different perspectives.

You look at a ger as a convert, others look at them as a stranger in your midst.

But the idea of a fugitive, we all are aware of Bedouin hospitality.

At its most basic level, hospitality didn’t mean just taking care of the stranger, feeding him and providing a roof over his head that came into your house.

It meant granting them protection against anyone.

If you think back to Lot and Sodom, when the crowd forms outside of the home and says, throw out this stranger, that was the most basic responsibility of a community. (See Genesis 19: 4-10)

To protect those who had sought refuge within them.

It must be borne in mind, he writes, that the belief was that all protection is related to the god of the tribe.

So there is an element here of not only honoring your tribe and that you have a responsibility to protect this fugitive, but it’s under the protection of your god as well.

We certainly have that sense in Judaism that we’ll see in a second.

There’s a lot of information in the Sefaria notes, but I think what the most fascinating source that he brings is back in Genesis, and it is Cain and Abel, our old friends.

And in Cain and Abel 4.7, after the sacrifice has been rejected, it says, and when they were in the field, Cain set upon his brother Abel and killed him.

God said to Cain, Where is your brother Abel?

And he said, I do not know.

I am I, my brother’s keeper.

Pretty famous.

And as we know, what happened then was that Cain said to God, My punishment is too great to bear.

He was made a fugitive.

Since you have banished me this day from the soil, and I must avoid your presence and become a restless ranger on earth.

Anyone who meets me may kill me.

So when we’re looking at it from this sense of the fugitive from the law of murder of the Ir Miklat, these cities of refuge, here is Cain in the early part of Genesis who needs a city of refuge.

God said to him, I promise if anyone kills Cain, sevenfold vengeance shall be exacted.

And God put a mark on Cain, lest anyone who met him should kill him.

And the powerful part of this story, and then I’m going to stop and get your impressions, is that God becomes the city of refuge.

We’ve talked about these cities, we’ve talked about holy places and altars, we’ve talked about tribes, but we’ve also said that at the end of the day, it’s the god of the tribe who offers the ultimate protection.

And so here you have it in its most, I think, essential way, that ultimately God becomes the Ir Miklat, God becomes the protector of the fugitive.

You know, the idea is that the Ir Miklat is really God’s protection for the person.

Because when you think about it, you know, just think about an ancient world where somebody kills somebody else, and then the brother of the person who’s killed goes out and kills the murderer.

And that’s accepted, right?

That’s considered to be reasonable and acceptable.

And then they go basically to this gated community, right?

It’s like you live in Connecticut in a gated community, and you know, and you’re not allowed through the gate anymore because this is a protective space.

But that’s really God protecting them.

Because what makes that protected space?

Why is that protected space special?

That protected space is special because God made it special.

So that’s the idea that God is really protecting.

The whole institution of an Ir Miklat, of a city of refuge, is kind of abracadabra, right?

Why should it make sense?

If I’m angry that my brother was killed, I’m going to kill you even within your gated community.

I’m going to figure out how to get there.

But no, that’s not allowed.

So I totally agree with you.

I love what you’ve said.

I think that in a sense that the Cohen and the Levi was the representative of God and the justice.

And so that maybe when the Cohen Gadol dies, the person is somehow released.

It doesn’t explain how the blood avenger now cannot come after him.

But the point is that all of our tradition seems to move.

There are two main elements, and those elements never go away.

The first element that we are in total synergy with pre-Islam, with Islam, with Judaism is that the blood pollutes.

In Numbers 35, you shall not pollute in the land in which you live, for blood pollutes the land and the land can have no expiation for blood that is shed on it.

You shall not defile the land in which you live, in which I myself abide, for I, God, abide among the Israelite people.

This sense that you have to purge the evil and it’s not, what lies at its source is not retribution, it’s not taking revenge, it’s getting rid of the pollution.

In Job 16, he says, Earth, do not cover my blood, let there be no resting place for my outcry. (see also Genesis 4: 10 about Abel: “the voice of thy brother’s blood cries to Me from the ground.”)

So this scholar that I mentioned before, he looks at these verses and he talks about the crying of the blood, is very similar to, again, pre-Islamic, pre-ancient Semitic tropes.

Then he talks even about the ancient sacredness of the tent.

I didn’t mention it, but God warns Cain, evil is waiting at the door [of the tent]. לַפֶּ֖תַח חַטָּ֣את רֹבֵ֑ץ “Sin couches at the door”



This idea of coming inside of the tent and getting sanctity.

And so, you know, if you look at the Torah through this lens, and we do this a lot, you read it totally different.

You look at it, Moses running away from Egypt and going into Jethro’s protection differently.

You look at Jacob running away from his brother and going to his family; Laban.

There are so many instances of this kind of issue driving the narrative in the Bible.

But the key difference is you look at Gerim kind of differently.

You know, many of the Gerim in Israel, doubtless, were refugees from justice in other nations.

We were, you know, a rebellious group.

In Judaism, asylum was under the law, he writes.

This is a vital difference, for there is no law over asylum to restrict or direct it in nomadic times.

In Judaism, asylum protection by the injustice and the immoral violence of tribal custom, but did not protect from law as it has done in the desert.

And you kind of get this sense that this, we say tribalism, but all of a sudden as we start reading Deuteronomy, we’re not talking about tribes and tribal territories, we’re talking about cities, villages, and distances.

You know, you would expect there should be 12 Cities of Refuge for each of the tribal states, so to speak.

But there is a breakdown in the old tribal system, and it’s becoming more than a nation.

The decline of blood revenge and the introduction of principles of social justice.

So where I want to end is that it seems to me that there’s no question when one says, HaShem ye’nakeim d’amo, that a God should avenge, ye’na keim, is that, how would you literally?

Ye’kom d’amoh.

The word is ye’kom, and the word ye’kom comes from the word nikamah, meaning revenge.

Okay.

So when you say that word, I’m not going to whitewash it, it means take revenge.

We have this human need to lash out at those who have hurt us.

But in the tradition that we have just studied, I will argue that it means something slightly more nuanced.

And what it means is that at the end of the day, the strong emphasis in our tradition is that God is our sanctuary.

So in Isaiah 8, for instance, (14) And he shall be for a sanctuary; but for a stone of stumbling and for a rock of offence to both the houses of Yisra᾽el, for a trap and for a snare to the inhabitants of Yerushalayim.


Vahayalimikdash le’evin ne’ef le’tzur. וְהָיָ֖ה לְמִקְדָּ֑שׁ וּלְאֶ֣בֶן נֶ֠גֶף וּלְצ֨וּר מִכְשׁ֜וֹל



We all know what tzur is.

Tzur is protection. (Tzur Yisrael)

It’s the stone of protection.

So God becomes the protector.

And in Ezekiel, when it talks about the Jews spread around the world, it talks about, I have become to them, says God, a diminished sanctuary.

L’mikdash ma’at.

The idea is that God becomes the ir ha’miklat.

God becomes the refuge.

He has these protecting wings.

Beseter kenafecha.

He will shelter us, besukot, beyom ra.

And I will go one step further.

That that same God who is the refuge, He is the one who takes the revenge.

So in Psalms 94, it says, God of retribution, Lord, el nekamot ha’shem, el nekamot hofeah.

Rise up, judge the world, give the arrogant their deserts.

In Psalms 18, and God who has vindicated me and made people subject to me, in Deuteronomy, to be my vengeance and recompense at the time that their fault falters, yea, their day of disaster is near.

The idea is that we pass this responsibility on to God, just as when you lay the hands on it.

That’s my read of it.

And it is God’s obligation to get rid of the pollution, so to speak.

Of course, the biggest thing that we’re going to be saying on Yom Kippur in the Av HaRachamon, Vayin Kom Nikmat Dam Avdav HaShafuch, וְיִנְקוֹם נִקְמַת דַּם עֲבָדָיו הַשָּׁפוּךְ  and he will avenge the blood of his servants that has been shed.

And that was written for the people who were killed in the Crusades, so it’s very much in the same spirit.

And in the history of Yom Kippur, it brings the verses, it brings the texts, to prove it, that it is God who takes revenge.

So I think that number one, I love the way the Pasha speaks to us at this time and helps us understand and maybe help us direct our angst and our emotions.

But certainly there is an evolution here where it took this revenge and this need to somehow channel one’s emotions in a unique way.

And it was towards, away from us and away from the other amongst us and towards God, let God do what God needs to do.

That was my takeaway.

I’m curious to know what yours is.

It’s fantastic.

I think it’s really interesting.

And no, it’s unfortunate that this week was a week of Hashvichot Domam.

But, you know, it’s something that you see now in Israel, and I think it’s something that people need to understand.

And it’s something to think about what Nikamah means and the fact that Nikamah, revenge, has its place in the Jewish tradition.

But it has to be understood in the broader picture, which is exactly what we did.

Like we said, like I said before, the Jewish commentaries don’t give this enough, so I think this was a great topic today.

So thank you so much.

Shabbat shalom, everybody.

And we look forward to seeing you back next week for Ki Tetze.

And let us all hope that the day approaches very soon, where we can study verses and concepts like this as hypotheticals and not soclose to home as they are right now.

Let we all know peace and no more suffering.

Shabbat shalom and see you all next week.

Shabbat shalom.

Be well.

Hey, Bill, how’s it going?

I just wanted to say, I thought that this was great.

I think you know that one of my colleagues’ daughter was killed on October 7th.

And one of my student’s sons was one of the hostages from two days ago.

Oh, wow.

And so what you said means a lot to me.

What you two said means a lot to me.

I just wanted to thank you.

Thank you so much, Bill.

And it’s great to hear your voice.

I haven’t, we haven’t spoken in a while.

No, we should again.

Okay.

Shabbat shalom.

Let’s all be safe.

Bye bye.

Listen to previous episodes:

Courting Justice

Restore our Judges

You are not my Boss

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

The United States of Israel

parshat matot-masei, numbers 33-36

Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse on July 28th 2022 as we look at the configuration of the Israelite tribes through new eyes… the eyes of modern scholarship that suggests that the conquest of the Land of Israel by the freed slaves from Egypt also included the uprising of local tribes. Together they formed a confederation of tribes, united in their rejection of the existing class structure and the sovereign-vassal subjugation of Egypt and later empires.

Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/421369

Transcript:

Welcome to Madlik.  My name is Geoffrey Stern and at Madlik we light a spark or shed some light on a Jewish Text or Tradition.  Along with Rabbi Adam Mintz, we host Madlik Disruptive Torah on clubhouse every Thursday at 8:00pm Eastern and share it as the Madlik podcast on your favorite platform.  Today we look at the configuration of the Israelite tribes through new eyes… the eyes of modern scholarship that suggests that the tribes were distinct peoples including freed slaves from Egypt but also regional disrupters who formed a confederation of tribes. Independent states united in their rejection of the existing class structure and the sovereign-vassal subjugation of Egypt and later empires. So, take out your musket and join your local militia as we explore the United States of Israel.

more

So welcome to Madlik, as we were saying, in the pre-show, it is a very long portion, it is two portions combined. And we are finally going to be catching up with Israel. So that we’ll be on the same page, so to speak. But the portion as you were saying, Rabbi starts with kind of following up on what happened last week with the Midianites that we are going to surround it really talks in very brutal terms about killing, destroying their towns, even killing the women who were of age. And it’s very hard to swallow. And we’re not going to focus on that, but we might have some insight into it. And then it goes into the cities of refuge that need to be set up now as we’re about to cross the Jordan. And then finally, it revisits something that we could have all thought was a minor, little question of law. If all of you remember back in the day, we had the daughters of Zelophehad, whose father had passed away, and they had no brother, he had no sons. And they asked Moses, what’s going to happen with our inheritance in terms of the continuity of our dad’s name, and Moses consulted with God, and God came back and said, the daughters of Zelophehad can have the portion. And we thought that was behind us. But it reappears today. And that’s where we’re going to start, we’re going to kind of look at the portion backwards to forwards it, there’s an expression of אין מוקדם ומאוחר בתורה there’s no chronology. And we’re going to take that, we’re going to start with the daughters Zelophehad And we’re gonna work our way back. So, we are in Numbers 36. And we’re going to pick up in verse 3, where are the members of the same tribe, the tribe of Joseph, it’s called, that the daughters of Zelophehad’s father was a member of say, Now, if they become the wives of persons from another Israelite tribe, their share will be cut off from our ancestral portion and be added to the portion of the tribe into which they become wives, thus, our allotted portion will be diminished. So we’re really starting to get a very strong sense of this tribalism, but also how particular we Jews like to think of ourselves as homogeneous, there are Ashkenazim, there were Sephardic, Iraqi Jews, US Jews, but we’re starting to see that they took the tribal division of the land very seriously. And Moses comes back and says, and he sounds a little bit like Henry Ford here. He says they may become the wives of anyone they wish, provided they become wives within a clan of their father’s tribe. So, I’ll make the car in any color as long as it’s black. So the solution is that there is no intermarriage between the tribes. So here again, we have this emphasis on really the division between the tribes and I had really never focused that much on that. But Rabbi, am I correct in saying that from the viewpoint of Jewish history, I mean, we all know about the lost tribes and all that but ultimately, maybe being a Jew is so much determined by what others think. We’ve kind of coalesced into a Jew as a Jew is a Jew. But here we have to kind of change our lenders a little bit and really think more tribally, am I correct?

Adam Mintz  05:06

Absolutely. Right. Well, I mean, you know, that in the Middle East generally, you know, in the Arabian Peninsula even as late as the time of Mohammed, that the Arabs lived as tribes means tribalism was something that was very familiar. And the Jews had tribes, you know, today, it’s not really fair, because we read that before the destruction of the First Temple around the year 700 BCE, the 10 tribes the 10 northern tribes were actually dispersed, and they disappeared. So, we actually are all part of the tribe of Judah, Judah and Benjamin, which are called Judah. So that whole tribalism disappeared. But when they entered the land, everything was the tribe, you had to be part of your tribes. That’s the story of the daughters of Zelophehad, but they said, We want to inherit our Father, we have no brothers, we want to inherit our father, they were from Menasha. If they didn’t inherit their father, then their land would be lost. So what Moses tells them … your good will, you can inherit your father, but you need to marry within Menasha. If you marry outside the tribe, then you’re going to lose the land. It’s all within the tribe. I mean, it makes the shiduch market difficult, you know, who you can marry, you can only marry within the tribe, which is fascinating.

Geoffrey Stern  06:27

Well, it gives the word intermarriage, a whole new meaning.

Adam Mintz  06:30

Isn’t that right? Intermarriage had a huge, you know, a detriment, because, you know, your power was dependent on the amount of property that you had as a tribe, there was a lot of influence that was very much dependent on the tribes on the different tribes. So, you are this Shabbat Rabbi, I always ask you in the pregame, what you’re going to talk about, and you’re going to talk about Tisha B’Av, the ninth day above, and I believe that tonight is Rosh Chodesh Av… So, we are really talking this evening, at the beginning of a new month, and everybody does focus on the ninth of Av but I want to focus on a Mishnah that talks about the 15th. Day of Av, and in the tractate of Ta’anit, which deals with fasts. It says Rabbi Shimon, ben Gamliel, said, there were no days as joyous for the Jewish people as the 15th of Av and Yom Kippur as on them, the daughters of Jerusalem would go out in white clothes.  And later in the Talmud, it asks, you know, I get Yom Kippur, your pure, your purified, you go out in white, you feel it’s a new beginning, I can understand why the daughters of Israel will rejoice. But what about the 15th of Av…. What makes it special? And Rabbi Yehudah said that Shmuel said this was the day on which the members of different tribes were permitted to enter each other’s tribe by intermarriage. And it goes on to ask and how do we know that and it quotes the verse I just read from our weekly portion. And it says, this is the matter that the Lord had commanded concerning the daughters of Zelophehad. It says, this matter shall be practiced only, for this generation, the generation when Eretz Israel, the land of Israel was divided among the tribes, but afterwards, members of different tribes were permitted to marry. So somewhere and it doesn’t quite say when, you know, we have an instance. And I think we’re going to come across this, we’ve already come across this many times, where there’s a law on the books, but the law on the books doesn’t appear or doesn’t end up being what it appears to be. So even according to this piece of Talmud, the prohibition on one marrying someone from another tribe was either I can’t say it was while of the daughters of Zelophehad were alive. It was maybe while they were dividing up the land, and that could have been a generation or two, we’ll see. But certainly, there was a point and of course, because there’s a celebration on the 15th of Av, you’ve got to believe there was a precise point where that was no longer the case. And it was a time for great celebration. So Rabbi, what is your read on this? It’s not something every Jew probably has heard of the ninth of Av not so much the 15th of Av. Maybe because when you live in a period where the ramifications of the destruction of the temple might still be here. You can mourn it, but when you feel that Jew can marry a Jew, you’ve forgotten this time and place when we were divided into 12. So, I think that that amazing piece of Talmud has a couple of things. The first interesting thing is that the time that they were married, allowed to marry one another was a time of great celebration. That’s fantastic. Because that actually has to do with what I joked before about the shiduch market. You know, once you once you open up who you can marry, so it’s it, you know, it makes a huge difference. All of a sudden, your pool of potential husbands and wives is not only within your own tribe, but it’s open to everybody. That’s why they celebrate. And that’s interesting. The way we celebrate the 15th of Av is the women go out in white clothing to find husbands. It’s all about finding husbands. And this is what it was, because the tribes were able to marry one another. So, you know, so that’s interesting that that specifically was a celebration. Now, the idea that, once the land is divided, so the borders between the tribes was set, once the borders between the tribes was set, so then they could intermarry and go back and forth, because the borders within the tribes were set. It was only in the first generation when they were establishing those borders, that they had to be strict in terms of marrying one another. Now, what’s interesting about that piece of Talmud is that it doesn’t exactly tell you the story, right? It doesn’t exactly tell you how it worked. So what happened, if it turns out that the grandchildren of Zelophehad, you know, married outside the tribe? So what happened to the land? What happened to the property that belongs to Zelophehad? Did it move? Or did it stay where it was, but the daughters moved, but their land stayed where it was. And I think that’s probably what happened, there was movement of people, but there was no longer movement of land. And that’s what they wanted to establish.

Geoffrey Stern  12:06

 I mean, you definitely could make that case, I think you could also make the alternative case that over time, because the boundary of marriage was no longer there, the strict division between the tribes started to wear away, and you would have somebody from the tribe of Benjamin living in Yehudah, so to speak, or whatever. I think you could go either way on this. But definitely, what you were saying is that once the borders were there, so in other words, it’s kind of like you had a stake in the ground, you didn’t need to protect the concept as much. I like to think about it as, and I call this episode, the United States of Israel. You know, once you establish the state of New York, you can let people from Connecticut in, you already have your, your identity. And maybe that was part of it. But I want to continue with the Talmud in Ta’anit, because the next reason for why it was a joyous day is even more striking, who have Joseph said that Rob Nachman, said the 15th of Ab was the day in which the tribe of Benjamin was permitted to enter the congregation. And, and it is stated the men of Israel had sworn in Mizpah saying, none of us shall give his daughter to Benjamin as a wife, none of us, but our children could. So I’m going to let you all in on a little secret, you know, that I am an ex Bachur Yeshiva. I’m someone who studied in a traditional Jewish Academy. And I think this it’s safe to say that Rabbi Adam did as well. And unfortunately, many times in the Yeshiva, the only way you read stories of Tanach of in the book of Samuel, in the book of Chronicles in the book of Judges, is because you have a reference, as we just saw here, and then you go ahead and you read it. So you understand the text of the Talmud. And it’s a real shame. And I think Rabbi Adam, the organization that you’re involved with that reads a chapter from Tanach, is it every day or every week,

Adam Mintz  14:30

Every day, and it tries to solve this problem that you’re describing?

14:34

I’m actually studying Tanach with somebody. We’re already on the 10th Chapter of Joshua. Every week we study one chapter of tanach. It’s funny, amazing, important. It’s very important.

Geoffrey Stern  14:34

Maybe, you know, we always have to decide what we’re going to do next year. Come Simchat Torah and maybe we should start looking at different…. So here’s a story that if you’ve never I heard it will absolutely blow you away. There is a gentleman from the tribe of Levi, and his wife runs away, and she runs back to her father’s house. And after a while he goes to fetch her. And he goes to the Father’s house and the Father continually day after day, wines and dines him and tries to convince him to stay another day, stay another day, you don’t know what the situation is, clearly his daughter ran away, and he preferred that she’s under his roof. Maybe there’s an issue with this guy from the tribe of Levi. But finally, he takes this. And it’s a concubine. Not sure even if it’s his full wife, but they go in the direction of Jerusalem. But they don’t go to Jerusalem, they go into an adjoining town. And there’s no one who wants to give them a place a manger to stay in, so to speak, and then in the courtyard. And finally, and this gets a little bit to the comment I made earlier about people from different tribes living within those other tribes. Someone outside of the tribe, and I believe they’re in the tribe of Benjamin, that’s the area they’re in. But someone outside says, come into my house. And then the story starts to sound identical to the story of Sodom and Lot. A crowd forms outside, and they want to sodomized this Levite, this stranger, and the person who owns the house says, take my daughter, and the Levi says take my concubine. And finally, he throws his concubine out. And she gets raped multiple times. And in the morning, he sees her. We don’t know if she’s dead yet, but soon to be dead body. And he takes her and then he cuts her up into 12 pieces. And he sends a piece to each one of the 12 tribes and says, Look what has been done. And as a result, all of the other tribes mount an army they have I said in the intro, you know, go join your militia. Well, every one of the states have their own militia, and that is in the parsha as well. And they attack the tribe of Benjamin multiple times. Until finally, they are able to persevere and the language that they use, I ask you all if you’re interested at all, look at the notes in Sefaria that we published along with our podcast. And you will see that the language that they use about killing every male killing every female, who is childbearing age, is exactly the same as what we have in the beginning of our parsha to this week. And to the point where now they have an issue about who are these people going to marry. And I won’t get into all of the long story there. It’s very gruesome, it’s very brutal, but they decide two things which is to go ahead and attack other members of tribes who didn’t actually participate in the military action. And they force them to marry so that the tribe of Benjamin does not go extinct. But they keep to their guns, and they say there is no marriage between any of the tribes, none of us will marry the tribe of Benjamin. And it is referring to this story. When it says on the 15th, of Ab there was rejoicing because again, we don’t have a sense of why the 15th of Ab was picked, that it was a particular deadline. But in any case, there too this was behind us and what both these stories have is clearly about the tribalism and Israel working through the tribalism, what do you make of this story, Rabbi,

Adam Mintz  19:33

I mean, Israel working making, you know, working through the tribalism and somehow the realization that if we don’t allow intermarriage between the tribes, that Israel will disintegrate. To me that’s the more interesting part of it, meaning the story of Pilegesh of Givah the story of what went wrong there is its own story. But what the 15th of Ab celebrates is the realization that to make it as a nation, we have to allow marriage between the tribes. That’s interesting. Both stories are exactly the same. it’s realization that tribalism doesn’t work for us. That’s really what it is.

Geoffrey Stern  20:25

And I totally agree with you. But I also think that there’s a flip side of this, which is both recognize that the origins of our people were, in fact very tribal.

Adam Mintz  20:39

Well the story with Benjamin is extremely tribal. They blame Benjamin. That’s not the way we would do it. Today, we would blame individuals, Why do you blame the whole tribe? Where does that come from?

Geoffrey Stern  20:55

yeah, absolutely.

Adam Mintz  20:58

 And again, it’s other Jews, so to speak. I mean, we consider them Jews, I will argue that our concept of we’re all Jews, maybe doesn’t so much apply at this period of our history, where the association in an identification with the particular tribes was so strong, that you were Benjamites, or you were from the tribe of Manasseh, or Dan, it was total identification with your tribe. But one of the things I said that we were going to look at it through the eyes of modern scholarship as well. And one of the things that the modern scholars have said, is that they believe, looking at it, even from the perspective of the same identical language is used here as in our portion, where our portion we’re talking about exterminating, so to speak, the Midianites. Here, we’re talking about doing the same thing to the tribe of Benjamin, the argument is that Israel was formed from many tribes. And yes, we have a wonderful story about the 12, sons of Jacob. And of course, Jacob had concubines too, and it wasn’t all homogeneous. But the scholars really go back. And they say, that it could very well be that this amazing story of Egypt became the primary story of our people, but that ultimately, there were other peoples in the land of Canaan. Some of them were not friendly, the Midianites and we decimated them, some of them the Benjamites, we had to go through a process. You know, it reminds you this story, a little bit old, so of the rape of Dinah, and the story that we studied in Genesis of Shechem, where they’re she’s raped first, then they are required to circumcise, and then they get killed, if you just change the chronology slightly. And you have a situation where they become part of the tribal area, this Shchemites decide to convert and be part of our mission, and they circumcise, and then they rape, similar to what happened here with the Benjamites, then you have a very similar story. But you definitely have paradigms of different people joining up in modern archaeology shows that there were there was a real disruption in Canaan at this point, and that you can go look at cities, not only Jericho, but you can look at other cities that in this 100 200-year period, there was a revolution going on. And it could very well be that the Jews coming out of Egypt, joined a revolution, but also brought this amazing concept of one God and all that. And slowly but surely, this confederation of different peoples different tribes joined together. And there were definitely some speed bumps as we see in this tribe of Benjamin.  But it’s a different kind of model, I think that becomes kind of fascinating. And again, I get back to the rejoicing, that we ultimately rejoice our ability to accept all of these tribes and to break down the boundaries between all of these tribes, and whether you buy into there were other peoples or you really limit it to tribes. I think the message is similar. And I think we can all agree upon that. But that certainly is a little bit of what’s happening here.  There’s no question it’s a it’s a celebration of the nation of Israel. And you know, you suggest something which you’re right, you can’t prove, but you wonder about, where the 12 tribes like the 50 states. It’s interesting you call it the United States of Israel was elected 50 states which basically meant that they were one country and 12 tribes and 12 states, or were they really 12 countries more like Germany was, you know, in the, in the 1800s, where they actually were separate countries, in this kind of confit and this federal Federation, and what you’re suggesting, and I don’t think there’s any way to prove that you’re wrong, what you’re suggesting is that they actually were 12 nations. And you know, that’s why the story of Pilegesh at Givah, the story that you told about Binyamin is such an important story, because actually, there were there was, there were battles between the tribes, these were battles between nations. And then when they were allowed to marry one another, that was important, because that really says that we decided that that model is wrong, we need to be the United States of Israel. So I think the title of tonight’s class really tells us a lot about what was at stake in all of these things.

Geoffrey Stern  25:53

And I think that maybe you know, there were many times that we moderns have a problem understanding an ancient text. But in this particular case, as many of us are Americans and understand this dialectic between a federal government and states, clearly, we have an insight into this in our short history. Clearly, they had their own militias. And that’s pretty powerful in those days, they collected their own taxes. So, it is kind of fascinating. So, I promised that I was going to work my way backwards in the Parsha. So now I think is a wonderful segue to talk about the Cities of Refuge. So here too, clearly, you’re coming to a land. And of course, it’s fascinating that they already are talking about cities, the urban, you know, he you’re coming out of the desert. And you’re not talking about farmlands and all that you’re talking about people living in a very concentrated way in cities, but it’s there’s town planning going on. And there are two things that need to be done that are different from the current infrastructure in Canaan, you know, they can move into the city of Jericho, but they’ve got to modify it in a way. And the ways that they have to modify it a one, they have to have the Cities of Refuge, there were six of them, and three of them are in the mainland of Israel, and three of them are going to be on the other side of the Jordan. And we’ll get into that too. But then they will also 48 towns for the Levites. And we’ve talked about this multiple multiple times. So again, what it looks like is an archaeology proves this is that at this time, there was a confluence of all of a sudden turmoil and change, and cities were falling down and their infrastructure was being changed. And maybe we have situations of treaties, where the vassal, and the Pharaoh were being broken, there were rebellions going on. And here we formed the Cities of Refuge. But to the point that we were just discussing, the real function of the cities of refuge is to stop blood feuds, and blood feuds we know about it even till today, if someone in your family gets killed, the only way to redeem their blood is to kill somebody in the family or the tribe that did it. And it goes on and on. And so talking about this kind of arc of history that we’re seeing with tribalism is strong. And then come the 15th, of Ab it celebrated, that it’s not so strong. I think you can make a case I wonder, Where do you think, Rabbi, that the Cities of Refuge are again, a another chip away at this tribalism? And this this, this blood feuding and blood is thicker than water, so to speak.

Adam Mintz  29:12

So tribalism ….. here’s another term that we use, and that’s clans. You know, tribes are sometimes tribes and tribes are sometimes just large families. You know, you read about the the Saudi Arabia, you know, Saudi Arabia today is made up of these ruling families. He talks about the UAE, you know, they’re basically just ruling families. They’re not tribes, they’re just families. But the families are so large and so important that they become their own tribe. And I wonder whether that’s really what the Torah talks about when it talks about blood feuds. You know, you have these powerful families, which are themselves tribes, and that leads to this idea that they’re going to take revenge and that’s why you need your protection. So, there’s no question that that’s true. It’s just that the Torah sets it up as they’re being tribes, as opposed to families. But I think obviously that you know, that’s not so simple that really there were probably very, very big, powerful families. And we know that kind of, and this also relates to what’s in this week’s parsha. We know that from the story of Zelophehad, Zelophehad was a family. The father was clearly very prestigious, and he dies and he has no sons and the daughters are nervous because our father is prestigious our father is important, and he’s going to lose his land and they’re not worried about the tribe. They’re worried about the family. And that’s why it says it says it in this week’s parsha they have to marry within the tribe, which really means they have to marry within the families, לִבְנֵ֥י דֹדֵיהֶ֖ן לְנָשִֽׁים the Torah says they should marry their cousins, they should marry their first cousins very literally. So it’ not the tribes so much. It’s really the family. That’s interesting. I didn’t think about that. But what the Torah says לִבְנֵ֥י דֹדֵיהֶ֖ן לְנָשִֽׁים 

Geoffrey Stern  32:06

Absolutely. I think I mentioned that there were three cities of refuge on in the mainland of Israel, and three on the what we would call today the West Bank. And Rashi asks, why is that? And he says, because in Gilad and the East Side murderers were more numerous דִּבְגִלְעָד נְפִישֵׁי רוֹצְחִים. So here too, it wasn’t homogeneous. They had certain issues with some of the tribes, whether they were children of Jacob, or they were other people that had come in. Again, it gives you a sense of the real challenge of uniting this. And I think the flip side of that is that the United monarchy, and all of that didn’t last very long. But it this was something that was unique in history also, that for a shining moment, these disparate peoples were kind of United, I want to go back to the beginning of the parsha, which is the one that gave me the hardest time where we read about a conquering the conquest of the land, and much of it is very hard to read. And I think one of the comments of the those who read all of Tanach understand that it’s not altogether clear whether this actually happened. Whether, in fact, the Canaanites were ever totally exterminated from Israel, it might be kind of wishful thinking. And I think we have an example of that even today, when the ultra-orthodox Haredi are trying to recreate a Europe where everybody studies Torah, guess what, there was never a Europe where everybody studied Torah, they’re trying to recreate an ideal that never was. And I think that there’s no question that part of what’s going on in this rendering, because if you look at Joshua, and if you look at the later books of the Tanakh, in no way in form, does it say that everyone was exterminated. This is one kind of wishful opinion. I quote, a source in the notes, which is just absolutely, I think, rich and fascinating. And it’s from a guy named Moshe Weinfeld. And he actually goes all the way through the rabbinic period, how they dealt with this, quote, unquote, the harem and extermination. And there was no consensus on this. One of the most fascinating things that I’ve read, and I think I’ve mentioned this before, is it talks about killing the וְה֨וֹרַשְׁתֶּ֜ם אֶת־כׇּל־יֹשְׁבֵ֤י הָאָ֙רֶץ֙ (Numbers 33: 52) and we normally talk about יֹשְׁבֵ֤י הָאָ֙רֶץ֙ as the residents, the citizens of the land. But as everyone knows, when we bring the Torah back to the ark on Shabbat, we go ה’ לַמַּבּ֣וּל יָשָׁ֑ב וַיֵּ֥שֶׁב ה’ מֶ֣לֶךְ לְעוֹלָֽם The LORD sat enthroned at the Flood; the LORD sits enthroned, king forever.  And so יֹשְׁבֵ֤י הָאָ֙רֶץ֙ can also mean the rulers or the ruling class or those in charge. And that fits very well into this [theory of a] rebellion that went on. So, I don’t know, I think we all do have to struggle with it. But I think if you look in the context of this very long portion, you can see other threads very strong threads that we’re dealing with, which have to do with how do you make disparate people one, and I think that, to me, is the most positive, exciting and joyful aspect of this parsha and of the 15th of Ab which comes in a month full of tragedy.

Adam Mintz  34:46

I think that’s a great way especially on Rosh Hodesh Ab the first of the bad month, yet you talk about the positive that’s really beautiful. Enjoy the Parsha , this is a Hazak week. so to everybody we say Hazak Hazak Vnitchazek. We should be strong. We should be strong we should strengthen one another and we look forward to seeing you all next Thursday night. Shabbat Shalom everybody

Geoffrey Stern  35:07

Shabbat Shalom

Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/421369

Listen to last week’s episode: The Circle of Life

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized