May 14, 2005 vol. 9, no. 32                                  5 Iyar 5765 Emor, Leviticus 21:1–24:23 The Torah: A Modern Commentary, pp. 912–938; Revised Edition, pp. 817–845 Haftarah, Ezekiel 44:15–31 Who Do You Think You Are? God?  Joel I. Wittstein

FOCAL POINT |

And to the Israelite people speak thus: Anyone who blasphemes God shall bear the guilt; and one who also pronounces the name Eternal shall be put to death. The community leadership shall stone that person; stranger or citizen—having thus pronounced the Name—shall be put to death. (Leviticus 24:15–16)

Our “Focal Point” verses conclude one of the rare narratives—albeit a very brief narrative—found in the Book of Leviticus. A fight breaks out between an Israelite and an unnamed “half Israelite.” The latter we are informed is the son of Shelomith, daughter of Dibri of the tribe of Dan, and an Egyptian father. Apparently in the midst of the fight the half Israelite both pronounces the Name of God and blasphemes, that is, curses, God. After he is placed in custody, Moses turns to God for a decision concerning punishment. The answer appears in verses 15 and 16: the individual must be put to death for what he has done!

In The Torah: A Modern Commentary, Revised Edition, W. Gunther Plaut questions what the intent of this section may have been and offers four possibilities (see pp. 839–840). He prefers the explanation that emphasizes an equal application of the law both to citizens and to resident aliens; no one, regardless of status, is excused from obeying this law against blasphemy and against uttering the name of the Eternal!

However, let’s ask a few questions in this regard. Why, for instance, is someone who pronounces God’s name to be punished by death, whereas one who curses God “shall bear the guilt”? Additionally, the half Israelite committed this sin in the course of an altercation, when tempers may reach irrationally high levels; shouldn’t the context of the violation play a part in the decision for punishment? Finally, why did the story name his mother and her tribe and omit the names of other, more significant individuals? Please note that the antagonist—the half Israelite—and his Egyptian father are left nameless in the narrative.

Any answer to these questions will have to be conjectural, of course, for, although we may try to put ourselves in the place of the biblical author, there are simply too many unknowns to guarantee that we have found “the truth.” That should not, however, keep us from probing further and from evaluating for ourselves what we discover as we attempt to make our Torah live for us today!

It is essential that we remember, in dealing with biblical texts, that they do not emerge unaffected by the political and social realities of their time. This, it might be suggested, is apparent in the delineation of the tribe with which the half Israelite is associated: the tribe of Dan. Scholars recognize a multitude of unresolved problems connected to the concept of the twelve tribes, but there is some consensus that many references to Dan in our sacred scriptures are negative ones (see “Dan,” The Anchor Bible Dictionary, vol. 2, pp. 10–12). In other words, cursing God and using the term YHVH would be exactly the type of activity you’d expect from a Danite! Such a not-so-subtle reference readily adds another dimension to the story.

In like fashion, applying our own criteria of evaluation to an action, criteria that recognize both context and intentionality, may do a disservice to the outlook of the biblical author. For that writer, more than for us, certain acts carried certain punishments and there were no extenuating circumstances. The act of blasphemy resulted in a person’s “bearing the guilt”—a term that most likely meant the punishment would be left to God—whereas uttering God’s name brought execution without recourse to ameliorating factors! Why such a seemingly harsh response? Although various explanations have been offered and there may be no one answer, it appears that pronouncing YHVH may have been interpreted as “an assault on heaven,” a crossing over into the divine domain, an initial attempt to wrest from God the power that was uniquely God’s. For us, less intrigued by sources of divine power, the act of cursing God may appear to be more reprehensible.

It is not uncommon for many of us to read verses from our Torah and to be “put off” by them. Our focal verses may be among such, for they strike us as harsh, uncompromising, and fraught with unanswered questions. It may be helpful, after considering well such verses and grappling with them, to look behind the well-considered text and to attempt to discover a principle to which we possibly may relate. In these verses and in the brief story they conclude, that principle may well be the ultimate holiness, mystery, and ineffability of the Divine as the biblical author understood God to be. Such attributes are no less present today as each of us struggles to discover a definition of the Deity that we find satisfactory, and to live our lives in keeping with the demands of such a discovery. 

• As thinking and feeling individuals, we often ask ourselves: Why am I here? What is the purpose of my life? How do I deal with my limitations? But that is not a new question. It was raised already by the Psalmist when he asked, “Adonai, what is man that You should care about him, mortal man, that You should think of him?” (Ps. 144:3; cf. 8:5). Though limited and destined to die, we are still given some understanding of the universe and increasing ability to resolve many of the issues we face daily. We are determined to spend our lives looking for answers and at times find them in whatever God concept we arrive at as the best possible framework through which we can understand our existential condition. Belief in the reality and existence of God is a leap of faith. But that is the best we can do at any particular stage in our life. (Rifat Sonsino, ed., The Many Faces of God: A Reader of Modern Jewish Theologies [New York: URJ Press, 2004], p. 249)

• R. Jeremiah ben Eleazar said: Ever since the Temple was destroyed, it is enough for the world to use only two letters [of the tetragrammaton], yod and he, as is said, “Let everything that hath breath praise by saying Yah” (Ps. 150:6). (Hayim Nahman Bialik and Yehoshua Hana Ravnitzky, eds., The Book of Legends: Sefer Ha-Aggadah: Legends From the Talmud and Midrash [New York: Schocken Books, 1992], p. 199, no. 30, based on Babylonian Talmud, Eiruvin 18b)

• Through prayer we struggle to experience the Presence of God. Let us be sure that the one we invoke is the Most High, not a god of battles, of state or status or “success”—but the Source of peace and mercy and goodness. For, truly: “The gods we worship write their names on our faces, be sure of that. And we will worship something—have no doubt of that either. We may think that our tribute is paid in secret in the dark recesses of the heart—but it will out. That which dominates our imagination and our thoughts will determine our life and character. Therefore it behooves us to be careful what we are worshipping, for what we are worshipping we are becoming.” (Ralph Waldo Emerson quoted [and slightly adapted] by Chaim Stern in Gates of Understanding, vol. I [New York: Central Conference of American Rabbis, 1977], p. 216)  

YOUR GUIDE |

1. Most Reform Jews write out the word “God” and do not follow the traditional custom of writing “G-d,” an extension of the prohibition against writing yod-hei-vav-hei. One might argue that any attempt to preserve the holiness and sanctity we associate with the Divine is praiseworthy. Do you agree or disagree? If you agree, what are you doing or what might you do to differentiate the secular and the holy in your life, to avoid trivializing what is sacred?

2. Rabbi Sonsino states that a belief in the reality and existence of God is a leap of faith—and the best we can do at any particular stage in our life. Do you agree with this statement? What are the arguments you use for or against the reality and existence of God? If asked to formulate your God concept, what would you offer as an answer?

3. In the quotation from Gates of Understanding, Emerson warns us against the danger of enthroning false gods, for “what we are worshipping, we are becoming.” What does he mean by that? Do you agree? In your life, what are you worshipping? As you interpret it, what does Judaism in its Reform expression urge us to worship and to become?

Joel I. Wittstein is rabbi of Temple Israel, London, Ontario, and a former president of NFTY and of NATE. He expresses his gratitude to the Tuesday Lunch and Learn group of Temple Israel for their input.

NEW IN 2005: Announcing the first revision of the classic, The Torah: A Modern Commentary, in more than twenty years. To learn more or to purchase The Torah: A Modern Commentary, Revised Edition, please click here.