Difference between revisions of "Shabbat Table Topics – Parashat Behaalotekha/0/en"

From AlHaTorah.org
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m
m
 
(29 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 3: Line 3:
 
<page type="Basic">
 
<page type="Basic">
 
<h1>Shabbat Table Topics – Parashat Behaalotekha</h1>
 
<h1>Shabbat Table Topics – Parashat Behaalotekha</h1>
<div><b><center><span class="highlighted-notice">This topic has not yet undergone editorial review</span></center></b></div>
+
<category>Second Chances and Pesach Sheni
 
+
<p>In <a href="Bemidbar9-1-8" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 9</a>, a group of people who were ritually impure from contact with a corpse petition Moshe to nonetheless permit them to participate in the Paschal rite.</p>
<category>Miracles in the Wilderness: The Selav
 
<p>After the nation complains about the tediousness of their diet of manna, Hashem provides them with שליו.&#160; They gluttonously devour it, and with the "meat still between their teeth" Hashem smites them.</p>
 
 
<ul>
 
<ul>
<li>Though most identify the שליו as quail, a minority opinion asserts that it refers to fish.&#160; What proofs can be brought for each position? How might each identification illuminate the Biblical account?&#160; For elaboration, see <a href="Realia:שְׂלָו Fish or Fowl" data-aht="page">שְׂלָו Fish or Fowl</a></li>
+
<li><b>Nature of the request</b>&#160;– Given that the ritually impure are generally excluded from partaking in sacrifices, on what basis do the people expect Moshe to allow them to participate? Is their request grounded in strict legal arguments that the prohibition should not apply to them,<fn>See, for example,&#160;<multilink><a href="RYosefBekhorShorBemidbar9-6" data-aht="source">R"Y Bekhor Shor</a><a href="RYosefBekhorShorBemidbar9-6" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 9:6</a><a href="RYosefBekhorShorBemidbar12-1-6" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 12:1-6</a><a href="R. Yosef Bekhor Shor" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yosef Bekhor Shor</a></multilink>,&#160;<multilink><a href="RambamHilkhotKorbanPesach6-1-2" data-aht="source">Rambam</a><a href="RambamHilkhotKorbanPesach6-1-2" data-aht="source">Hilkhot Korban Pesach 6:1-2</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Maimon (Rambam, Maimonides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe b. Maimon</a></multilink> or <multilink><a href="AbarbanelBemidbar9-1" data-aht="source">Abarbanel</a><a href="AbarbanelBemidbar9-1" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 9:1</a><a href="R. Yitzchak Abarbanel" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yitzchak Abarbanel</a></multilink>.</fn> or are they asking for Moshe to override the law as a humanitarian dispensation?<fn>See, for instance, <multilink><a href="SfornoBemidbar9-7" data-aht="source">Sforno</a><a href="SfornoBemidbar9-7" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 9:7</a><a href="R. Ovadyah Sforno" data-aht="parshan">About R. Ovadyah Sforno</a></multilink>.</fn>&#160; Or, perhaps, do they simply wish to bring the offering at a different time, as ultimately occurs?<fn>See <multilink><a href="AkeidatYitzchakTorah74" data-aht="source">Akeidat Yitzchak</a><a href="AkeidatYitzchakTorah74" data-aht="source">Torah 74</a><a href="R. Yitzchak Arama (Akeidat Yitzchak)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yitzchak Arama</a></multilink>.</fn>&#160; Which possibility is best supported by the verses?&#160; Does Moshe have the power to overrule a Torah prohibition?&#160; See <a href="Pesach Sheni The People's Petition" data-aht="page">Pesach Sheni The People's Petition</a>.</li>
<li>The nation's complaint of having only manna to eat would suggest that it was their sole source of nourishment.&#160;&#160; However, the Hoil Moshe and others disagree, assert that there were other sources of food and it served only as a supplement.&#160; what might be promting this position?</li>
+
<li><b>Second chances</b> – Why does Hashem allow for a "second chance" specifically with regard to the Pesach sacrifice, as opposed to other commandments?&#160; Should people always be given a second chance, or are there instances when this is not warranted?&#160; What does our story suggest about who deserves a second chance and who might not?</li>
 
</ul>
 
</ul>
 
</category>
 
</category>
<category>Idle Gossip or Challenge to Authority?
+
<category name="The Selav">
<p>How is Miryam and Aharon's critique of Moshe to be understood?&#160; Was this simply idle and misguided chatter, or did they have a fundamental disagreement with his behavior leading them question his authority as leader?</p>
+
Miracles in the Wilderness: The Selav
<ul>
+
<p>After the nation complains about the tedious nature of their Manna diet, Hashem provides them with "שְׂלָו".&#160; The people gluttonously gather and devour it and are immediately punished by God.</p><ul>
<li>The Sifre views Miryam and Aharon as intending no harm, and in fact trying to improve Moshe's family life by encouraging the resumption of normal relations between Moshe and Zipporah.&#160; R"Y Bekhor Shor, instead, presents the siblings as bothered by what they perceived as hubris in Moshe's decision to marry a non-Israelite.&#160; Modern scholars cast&#160; Miryam and Aharon in an even more negative light, suggesting that they were contesting Moshe's leadership and claiming to be his equals.&#160; Debate the various positions, pointing out the pros and cons of each.&#160; See <a href="Miryam's Critique of Moshe and his Cushite Marriage" data-aht="page">Miryam's Critique of Moshe and his Cushite Marriage</a>.</li>
+
<li>Though most identify the "שְׂלָו" as quail, a minority opinion asserts that it refers to fish.&#160; How might each identification illuminate the Biblical account?&#160; For elaboration, see <a href="Realia:שְׂלָו – Fish or Fowl" data-aht="page">שְׂלָו – Fish or Fowl</a></li>
<li>Was intermarriage prohibited at this point in history?&#160; Is it a Biblical prohibition at all?&#160; Even if not, was not marrying an Israelite the ideal, and Miryam and Aharon thus somewhat justified in their complaint?</li>
+
<li>The nation's complaint of "אֵין כֹּל בִּלְתִּי אֶל הַמָּן עֵינֵינוּ" would suggest that the Manna was their sole source of nourishment.&#160; The&#160;<multilink><a href="HoilMosheShemot16-18" data-aht="source">Hoil Moshe</a><a href="HoilMosheShemot16-18" data-aht="source">Shemot 16:18</a><a href="R. Moshe Yitzchak Ashkenazi (Hoil Moshe)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe Yitzchak Ashkenazi</a></multilink> disagrees, suggesting that the Manna served only as a supplement and that there were often other food options.&#160; What might be prompting this position?&#160; What does it suggest about the miraculous (or not so miraculous) nature of the Israelites' wandering in the Wilderness?&#160; See <a href="Realia:Life in the Wilderness" data-aht="page">Life in the Wilderness</a> for more.</li>
<li>Is it always wrong to speak about another? What if your intentions are to help the other? If you truly find another's actions troubling, is it problematic to consult a third party about their behavior before approaching the person yourself?</li>
+
</ul>
 +
</category>
 +
<category>Idle Gossip or a Challenge to Authority?
 +
<p>How is Miryam and Aharon's critique of Moshe to be understood?&#160; Was this simply idle and misguided chatter, or did they have a more fundamental disagreement with his behavior, leading them to question his authority as leader? See <a href="Miryam's Critique of Moshe and his Cushite Marriage" data-aht="page">Miryam's Critique of Moshe and his Cushite Marriage</a>.</p><ul>
 +
<li><multilink><a href="SifreBemidbar12-1" data-aht="source">Sifre</a><a href="SifreBemidbar12-1" data-aht="source">12:1</a><a href="Sifre Bemidbar" data-aht="parshan">About Sifre Bemidbar</a></multilink> views Miryam and Aharon as intending no harm, and, in fact, trying to improve Moshe's family life by encouraging the resumption of normal relations between Moshe and Zipporah.&#160; Some modern scholars,<fn>Various aspects of this position may be found in: M. Margaliyot, "אופייה של נבואת משה", Beit Mikra 25:2 (1980): 132-149, J. Milgrom, The JPS Commentary, Numbers (Philadelphia, 1989):70, J. Licht, פירוש על ספר במדבר יא-כא, (Jerusalem, 1991):35, R. Yaakov Medan, "פרשת בהעלתך",&#8206; מקור ראשון מוסף שבת &#8206;(5770),and R. Amnon Bazak, "פרשת האישה הכושית" &#8206;(5771).</fn> in contrast, cast Miryam and Aharon in a negative light, suggesting that they were contesting Moshe's leadership and claiming to be his equals. With whom do you agree?&#160; What are the advantages and disadvantages of each position?&#160;</li>
 +
<li><multilink><a href="RYosefBekhorShorBemidbar12-1-6" data-aht="source">R"Y Bekhor Shor</a><a href="RYosefBekhorShorBemidbar12-1-6" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 12:1-6</a><a href="R. Yosef Bekhor Shor" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yosef Bekhor Shor</a></multilink> presents Moshe's siblings as being troubled by what they perceived as hubris in Moshe's decision to marry a non-Israelite woman.&#160; Was intermarriage prohibited at this point in history?&#160; Is it Biblically prohibited?&#160; If not, was marrying an Israelite nevertheless preferred, thus providing some justification for Miryam and Aharon's complaint?</li>
 +
<li>Under what circumstances is it permitted to speak about another person? What if one has positive intentions and is trying to be constructive?&#160; If another person's actions are troubling, is it problematic to consult a third party about their behavior before approaching the person him/herself?&#160;</li>
 +
</ul>
 +
</category>
 +
<category>Who is Chovav?
 +
<p>Chovav is introduced to the reader as, "Chovav the son of Reuel the Midianite, the <i>choten</i> of Moshe."&#160; From the verse, it is unclear whether Reuel or Chovav was the <i>choten</i> of Moshe.&#160; While <a href="Shofetim4-11" data-aht="source">Shofetim 4:11</a> clearly identifies Chovav as being Moshe's <i>choten</i>, in&#160;<a href="Shemot2-16-21" data-aht="source">Shemot 2</a> it is Reuel, not Chovav, who is identified as the father of Moshe's wife, Zipporah.&#160; To further confuse matters, in <a href="Shemot18-1" data-aht="source">Shemot 18</a>, it is Yitro who is described as Moshe's <i>choten</i>.&#160; What is the relationship between Chovav, Reuel, and Yitro?&#160; How can they all be Moshe's <i>choten</i>?</p><ul>
 +
<li>The question depends to a large degree on the meaning of the word <i>choten</i>.&#160; Does it refer only to one's father-in-law,<fn>See <multilink><a href="ShadalShemot18-1" data-aht="source">Shadal</a><a href="ShadalShemot18-1" data-aht="source">Shemot 18:1</a><a href="R. Shemuel David Luzzatto (Shadal)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto</a></multilink>.</fn> or might it refer also to one's brother-in-law, especially if he also played a role in contracting the marriage?<fn>See<multilink><a href="RYonahibnJanachSeferHaShorashimחתן" data-aht="source"> Ibn Janach</a><a href="RYonahibnJanachSeferHaShorashimחתן" data-aht="source">Sefer HaShorashim, "חתן"</a><a href="R. Yonah ibn Janach" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yonah ibn Janach</a></multilink>.</fn>&#160; For elaboration, see <a href="Dictionary:חֹתֵן – חֹתֶנֶת" data-aht="page">חֹתֵן / חֹתֶנֶת</a>.</li>
 +
<li>The&#160;<multilink><a href="MekhiltaDeRabbiYishmaelShemot18-1" data-aht="source">Mekhilta</a><a href="MekhiltaDeRabbiYishmaelShemot18-1" data-aht="source">18:1</a><a href="Mekhilta DeRabbi Yishmael Shemot" data-aht="parshan">About Mekhilta DeRabbi Yishmael Shemot</a></multilink> posits that Chovav, Reuel, and Yitro are all merely different names of one and the same individual.&#160; This is consistent with the general tendency of Rabbinic Midrashim to consolidate characters by identifying different names with the same person. See&#160;<a href="Commentators:Midrash/Identifications" data-aht="page">Identifications</a> for other examples and analysis.&#160; In our case, what are the advantages and disadvantages of such an approach?<fn>How could it explain why, in our verse, Chovav is referred to as the son of Reuel?</fn> &#160;</li>
 +
<li>If Yitro and Chovav are the same person, why is he still in the Israelite camp in Bemidbar, despite&#160;<a href="Shemot18-27" data-aht="source">Shemot 18</a> concluding with Yitro's departure to his own land?&#160; Did Yitro/Chovav return?&#160; If so, why?&#160; For discussion, see <a href="Yitro's Life After Shemot 18" data-aht="page">Yitro's Life After Shemot 18</a> and <a href="Yitro – Religious Identity" data-aht="page">Yitro – Religious Identity</a>.</li>
 +
<li>For elaboration and other approaches regarding the possible relationship between these three characters, see <a href="Yitro – Names" data-aht="page">Yitro – Names</a>.</li>
 
</ul>
 
</ul>
 
</category>
 
</category>

Latest revision as of 10:44, 28 January 2023

Shabbat Table Topics – Parashat Behaalotekha

Second Chances and Pesach Sheni

In Bemidbar 9, a group of people who were ritually impure from contact with a corpse petition Moshe to nonetheless permit them to participate in the Paschal rite.

  • Nature of the request – Given that the ritually impure are generally excluded from partaking in sacrifices, on what basis do the people expect Moshe to allow them to participate? Is their request grounded in strict legal arguments that the prohibition should not apply to them,1 or are they asking for Moshe to override the law as a humanitarian dispensation?2  Or, perhaps, do they simply wish to bring the offering at a different time, as ultimately occurs?3  Which possibility is best supported by the verses?  Does Moshe have the power to overrule a Torah prohibition?  See Pesach Sheni – The People's Petition.
  • Second chances – Why does Hashem allow for a "second chance" specifically with regard to the Pesach sacrifice, as opposed to other commandments?  Should people always be given a second chance, or are there instances when this is not warranted?  What does our story suggest about who deserves a second chance and who might not?

Miracles in the Wilderness: The Selav

After the nation complains about the tedious nature of their Manna diet, Hashem provides them with "שְׂלָו".  The people gluttonously gather and devour it and are immediately punished by God.

  • Though most identify the "שְׂלָו" as quail, a minority opinion asserts that it refers to fish.  How might each identification illuminate the Biblical account?  For elaboration, see שְׂלָו – Fish or Fowl
  • The nation's complaint of "אֵין כֹּל בִּלְתִּי אֶל הַמָּן עֵינֵינוּ" would suggest that the Manna was their sole source of nourishment.  The Hoil MosheShemot 16:18About R. Moshe Yitzchak Ashkenazi disagrees, suggesting that the Manna served only as a supplement and that there were often other food options.  What might be prompting this position?  What does it suggest about the miraculous (or not so miraculous) nature of the Israelites' wandering in the Wilderness?  See Life in the Wilderness for more.

Idle Gossip or a Challenge to Authority?

How is Miryam and Aharon's critique of Moshe to be understood?  Was this simply idle and misguided chatter, or did they have a more fundamental disagreement with his behavior, leading them to question his authority as leader? See Miryam's Critique of Moshe and his Cushite Marriage.

  • Sifre12:1About Sifre Bemidbar views Miryam and Aharon as intending no harm, and, in fact, trying to improve Moshe's family life by encouraging the resumption of normal relations between Moshe and Zipporah.  Some modern scholars,4 in contrast, cast Miryam and Aharon in a negative light, suggesting that they were contesting Moshe's leadership and claiming to be his equals. With whom do you agree?  What are the advantages and disadvantages of each position? 
  • R"Y Bekhor ShorBemidbar 12:1-6About R. Yosef Bekhor Shor presents Moshe's siblings as being troubled by what they perceived as hubris in Moshe's decision to marry a non-Israelite woman.  Was intermarriage prohibited at this point in history?  Is it Biblically prohibited?  If not, was marrying an Israelite nevertheless preferred, thus providing some justification for Miryam and Aharon's complaint?
  • Under what circumstances is it permitted to speak about another person? What if one has positive intentions and is trying to be constructive?  If another person's actions are troubling, is it problematic to consult a third party about their behavior before approaching the person him/herself? 

Who is Chovav?

Chovav is introduced to the reader as, "Chovav the son of Reuel the Midianite, the choten of Moshe."  From the verse, it is unclear whether Reuel or Chovav was the choten of Moshe.  While Shofetim 4:11 clearly identifies Chovav as being Moshe's choten, in Shemot 2 it is Reuel, not Chovav, who is identified as the father of Moshe's wife, Zipporah.  To further confuse matters, in Shemot 18, it is Yitro who is described as Moshe's choten.  What is the relationship between Chovav, Reuel, and Yitro?  How can they all be Moshe's choten?

  • The question depends to a large degree on the meaning of the word choten.  Does it refer only to one's father-in-law,5 or might it refer also to one's brother-in-law, especially if he also played a role in contracting the marriage?6  For elaboration, see חֹתֵן / חֹתֶנֶת.
  • The Mekhilta18:1About Mekhilta DeRabbi Yishmael Shemot posits that Chovav, Reuel, and Yitro are all merely different names of one and the same individual.  This is consistent with the general tendency of Rabbinic Midrashim to consolidate characters by identifying different names with the same person. See Identifications for other examples and analysis.  In our case, what are the advantages and disadvantages of such an approach?7  
  • If Yitro and Chovav are the same person, why is he still in the Israelite camp in Bemidbar, despite Shemot 18 concluding with Yitro's departure to his own land?  Did Yitro/Chovav return?  If so, why?  For discussion, see Yitro's Life After Shemot 18 and Yitro – Religious Identity.
  • For elaboration and other approaches regarding the possible relationship between these three characters, see Yitro – Names.