This week launches the third of the five books of the Torah, known in English as Leviticus. Typically, we associate this book with the arcane laws of the priesthood and holiness. But it has far greater practical relevance, even today.
The portion focuses on the substance and procedure of animal sacrifices on the Altar. But it also distinguishes between sins committed intentionally and those committed unintentionally, in terms of the kind of repentance required in each.
The problem of unintended consequences from unintended misdeeds is, Hannah Arendt wrote in The Human Condition, one of the major problems faced by civilization, and the Torah attempts to deal with it through ritual.
The portion also commands us not to forget what the evil nation of Amalek did to the Jewish people as they left Egypt, attacking the weak, young, and old from the rear. Amalek is associated with later Jewish enemies, including Haman, whose evil deeds are recounted next week in the Purim holiday, which involves publicly reading the Book of Esther (the Megillah). The additional reading tells the story of how King Saul wrongly spared the king of Amalek.
The story of Noah is familiar; the details, less so.
Noah is often seen as an ambivalent figure. He was righteous -- but only for his generation. What was his deficiency?
One answer suggests itself: knowing that the world was about to be flooded, he built an Ark for the animals and for his own family -- but did not try to save anyone else or to convince them to repent and change their ways (the prophet Jonah, later, would share that reluctance).
Abraham, later, would set himself apart by arguing with God -- with the Lord Himself! -- against the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, saying that they should be saved if there were enough righteous people to be found (there were not).
Still, Noah was good enough -- and sometimes, that really is sufficient to save the world. We don't need heroes every time -- just ordinary decency.
Hi all -- as I noted last month, I'm going to be closing down my Locals page, at least for tips and subscriptions -- I may keep the page up and the posts as well, but I'm no longer going to be accepting any kind of payment.
Look for cancelation in the very near future. Thank you for your support!
An interesting weekend -- one of the last of Daylight Savings Time -- in which there is much to celebrate, much to contemplate, and a bit to worry about.
The Gaza peace deal is shaky, but holding, after the living hostages returned; the shutdown is still going on, with no end in sight; the China trade war is heating up; and the confrontation with Venezuela continues to escalate.
The "No Kings" protest was a dud, despite the media's attempt to inflate it. What I find fascinating is that the Democrats have basically stolen the rhetoric and the imagery of the Tea Party protests, circa 2009. They claim they are defending the Constitution -- just like the Tea Party did.
On the one hand, this is good. How wonderful to have a political system in which both sides, bitterly opposed though they are, articulate differences through the Constitution -- and not, as in so many other countries, outside it.
On the other, this is sheer hypocrisy for the Democrats. Not only did they malign the Tea Party as ...
