Difference between revisions of "Shabbat Table Topics – Parashat Bechukotai/0/en"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m |
|||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
<page type="Basic"> | <page type="Basic"> | ||
<h1>Shabbat Table Topics – Parashat Bechukotai</h1> | <h1>Shabbat Table Topics – Parashat Bechukotai</h1> | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
<category>What Brings Forgiveness? | <category>What Brings Forgiveness? | ||
| − | <p>Do confession and repentance necessarily bring atonement in their wake? In the curses of Vayikra 26, the Torah describes how, after an initial punishment, the people will confess their sins.  Surprisingly, however, the text tells us that this | + | <p>Do confession and repentance necessarily bring atonement in their wake? In the curses of Vayikra 26, the Torah describes how, after an initial punishment, the people will confess their sins.  Surprisingly, however, the text tells us that this will lead not to forgiveness, but to redoubled punishment!  How is it that Hashem rejects the nation's repentance?</p> |
<ul> | <ul> | ||
<li>While <multilink><a href="AkeidatYitzchakVayikra70" data-aht="source">R. Yitzchak Arama</a><a href="AkeidatYitzchakVayikra70" data-aht="source">Vayikra 70</a><a href="R. Yitzchak Arama (Akeidat Yitzchak)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yitzchak Arama</a></multilink> suggests that the people's repentance was not sincere, <multilink><a href="IbnEzraVayikra26-40-41" data-aht="source">Ibn Ezra</a><a href="IbnEzraVayikra26-40-41" data-aht="source">Vayikra 26:40-41</a><a href="R. Avraham ibn Ezra" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham ibn Ezra</a></multilink> asserts that the text does not really mean that Hashem continued to punish them. Do these reinterpretations conform to the simple meaning of the verses?  What support can you bring for either position?  What marks repentance as sincere or insincere?</li> | <li>While <multilink><a href="AkeidatYitzchakVayikra70" data-aht="source">R. Yitzchak Arama</a><a href="AkeidatYitzchakVayikra70" data-aht="source">Vayikra 70</a><a href="R. Yitzchak Arama (Akeidat Yitzchak)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yitzchak Arama</a></multilink> suggests that the people's repentance was not sincere, <multilink><a href="IbnEzraVayikra26-40-41" data-aht="source">Ibn Ezra</a><a href="IbnEzraVayikra26-40-41" data-aht="source">Vayikra 26:40-41</a><a href="R. Avraham ibn Ezra" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham ibn Ezra</a></multilink> asserts that the text does not really mean that Hashem continued to punish them. Do these reinterpretations conform to the simple meaning of the verses?  What support can you bring for either position?  What marks repentance as sincere or insincere?</li> | ||
| Line 13: | Line 11: | ||
</category> | </category> | ||
<category>Autobiographical Parshanut | <category>Autobiographical Parshanut | ||
| − | <p>In trying to determine when the prophecy that the people will confess their sins but nonetheless be further punished was fulfilled, R. Avraham Saba looks to his own time.  The Jews of Castille, who had initially lived in exile like royalty, were expelled to Portugal and from there again to surrounding Arab lands. These Jews were righteous people, who had confessed their wrongdoings numerous times, but nevertheless continuously suffered. For more on this reading, see <a href="Repentance Rejected" data-aht="page">Repentance Rejected.</a></p> | + | <p>In trying to determine when the prophecy that the people will confess their sins but nonetheless be further punished was fulfilled, R. Avraham Saba looks to his own time.  The Jews of Castille, who had initially lived in exile like royalty, were expelled to Portugal and from there again to surrounding Arab lands. These Jews were righteous people, who had confessed their wrongdoings numerous times, but nevertheless continuously suffered. For more on this reading, see <a href="Repentance Rejected" data-aht="page">Repentance Rejected.</a></p><p>Can you think of other cases where commentators read the events of their own eras back into Tanakh?  For some examples:</p><ul> |
| − | <p>Can you think of other cases where commentators read the events of their own eras back into Tanakh?  For some examples:</p> | ||
| − | <ul> | ||
<ul> | <ul> | ||
<li>R. Chasdai Crescas understands the Egyptian bondage as being afflictions of love.  He thereby attempts to comfort the oppressed of his own time that their exile, too, stemmed from love, and not, as contemporary Christians claimed, from punishment.  See <a href="Purposes of the Egyptian Bondage" data-aht="page">Purposes of the Egyptian Bondage</a>.</li> | <li>R. Chasdai Crescas understands the Egyptian bondage as being afflictions of love.  He thereby attempts to comfort the oppressed of his own time that their exile, too, stemmed from love, and not, as contemporary Christians claimed, from punishment.  See <a href="Purposes of the Egyptian Bondage" data-aht="page">Purposes of the Egyptian Bondage</a>.</li> | ||
Version as of 21:33, 21 August 2019
Shabbat Table Topics – Parashat Bechukotai
What Brings Forgiveness?
Do confession and repentance necessarily bring atonement in their wake? In the curses of Vayikra 26, the Torah describes how, after an initial punishment, the people will confess their sins. Surprisingly, however, the text tells us that this will lead not to forgiveness, but to redoubled punishment! How is it that Hashem rejects the nation's repentance?
- While R. Yitzchak Arama suggests that the people's repentance was not sincere, Ibn Ezra asserts that the text does not really mean that Hashem continued to punish them. Do these reinterpretations conform to the simple meaning of the verses? What support can you bring for either position? What marks repentance as sincere or insincere?
- R. Avraham Saba prefers to maintain the literal reading of the text, and he claims that the assumption that repentance must avert punishment is simply wrong. Do you find this claim theologically troubling? Why or why not? For elaboration, see Repentance Rejected.
Autobiographical Parshanut
In trying to determine when the prophecy that the people will confess their sins but nonetheless be further punished was fulfilled, R. Avraham Saba looks to his own time. The Jews of Castille, who had initially lived in exile like royalty, were expelled to Portugal and from there again to surrounding Arab lands. These Jews were righteous people, who had confessed their wrongdoings numerous times, but nevertheless continuously suffered. For more on this reading, see Repentance Rejected.
Can you think of other cases where commentators read the events of their own eras back into Tanakh? For some examples:
- R. Chasdai Crescas understands the Egyptian bondage as being afflictions of love. He thereby attempts to comfort the oppressed of his own time that their exile, too, stemmed from love, and not, as contemporary Christians claimed, from punishment. See Purposes of the Egyptian Bondage.
- R"A Saba reads Esther's being forcibly taken to the King's palace in light of the forced conversions of Portuguese Jewry in his own time.1 See Esther's Relations with Achashverosh.
- U. Cassuto portrays Yitro as a diplomatic leader coming to visit Moshe so as to recognize the new people which had just emerged from slavery and joined the league of nations. In this he is likely influenced by events of his own day – the establishment of the State of Israel and the hope that it similarly gain recognition from surrounding countries. See Yitro's Visit – Purpose and Significance.
- Many medieval Spanish exegetes, themselves courtier Jews on good terms with their monarchs, read such relationships back into Megillat Esther, portraying Achashverosh as a positive figure with a favorable view of the Jewish people. See Achashverosh's Shock and Fury.
More...
For more, see: Parashat Bechukotai Topics.
