This week's portion is actually a double portion: the two are read separately in Hebrew leap years (in which there are 13 months, to align the lunar and solar calendars).
One of the most striking stories appears toward the end: the tale of the five daughters of Tzelafchad. Earlier, they brought a protest to Moses: since their father had passed away in the desert before entering the Land of Israel, they would not inherit any property there. Moses was stumped by their question, and turned to God for the solution.
The story is a striking one: women raised their voices; their grievance was taken up by male authority figures; the leader of the nation admitted he did not know the answer; and a solution was found.
Too often, "woke" readings of history or tradition presume that what came before the present moment was oppressive, or exclusionary, particularly to women or marginalized groups.
In fact, tradition often deliberately addresses complexity, and shows how people may find redress for grievances within the existing system -- without destroying it or changing it to meet their needs.
https://www.chabad.org/parshah/article_cdo/aid/398579/jewish/The-Daughters-of-Tzelafchad.htm
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!
