This week's portion tells the story of the deal that three tribes made with Moses: they liked the land in Transjordan so much that they preferred to stay there rather than crossing into the Land of Israel. Moses agreed, on condition that they lead the Israelites into battle against the Canaanites. They did so.
The deal is portrayed as an unfortunate necessity, a concession to the stubborn nature of the people and the sinful nature of humankind in general, who would rather have instant gratification than fulfill a Heavenly mission. But the deal preserves the Divine spark of that mission, even in an earthly compromise.
The portion then recounts the journeys of the Israelites through the desert, until the final point of departure, across the Jordan River from Jericho. The Torah names the leaders that will guide the people after Moses's death, including Joshua, who was named as Moses's successor in the previous portion.
Then God gives specific commandments about setting aside land for the priestly tribe of Levites, plus the need to create four "cities of refuge" for exiling those who commit involuntary manslaughter. The rules for inheritance are also discussed; they provide that land shall not leave a tribe through marriage.
This week’s portion launches the great story of Abraham, who is told to leave everything of his life behind — except his immediate family — and to leave for “the Land that I shall show you.”
There’s something interesting in the fact that Abraham is told to leave his father’s house, as if breaking away from his father’s life — but his father, in fact, began the journey, moving from Ur to Haran (in last week’s portion). His father set a positive example — why should Abraham leave him?
Some obvious answers suggest themselves — adulthood, needing to make one’s own choices, his father not going far enough, etc.
But I think there is another answer. Abraham (known for the moment as Abram) needs to establish his own household. This is not just about making one’s own choice, but really about choosing one’s own starting point. It’s starting over.
Sometimes we start over in fundamental ways even if much that surrounds us remains the same. Sometimes the journey we have to ...
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!
