Leviticus 12:1-13:59 – Exodus 12:1-20 – Ezekiel 45:16-46:18 – Luke 14:1-24

This week's edition of The Set Table contains:

Questions and Commentary on Tazria
Chayyei Yeshua - A Devotional Commentary on the Besora Reading
In Summary
Looking Ahead

Questions & Commentary on Parashat Tazria

1.  In the special maftir reading (Exodus 12:1-20) for this Shabbat, Shabbat HaChodesh, we read that God spoke to Moses and Aaron "in the land of Egypt" (Exodus 12:1). Why does scripture tell us this seemingly superfluous piece of information? What can we learn from it?

Rabbi Jonathan Kaplan

Shabbat HaChodesh is the last of four special Shabbats that fall in or immediately before the month of Adar. This last of these Shabbats derives its name from the second verse of the maftir reading for the day (Exodus 20:2), "This month (HaChodesh) shall be for you for the beginning of months." The reading of this text is supposed to help us begin our preparation, both spiritual and material, for the coming Passover celebration.

Our reading begins, "And the LORD spoke to Moses and Aaron in the land of Egypt" (Exodus 12:1). Those familiar with the Torah will recognize that the opening part of this verse appears throughout the Torah and is quite common. What is striking however is the inclusion of the phrase "in the land of Egypt." Why is this seemingly superfluous piece of information included in the Torah? What can we learn from it?

Mekhilta deRabbi Ishmael Masekhta Pischa 1 derives a number of spiritual lessons from the inclusion of this phrase. First, it tells us that the inclusion of the phrase "in the land of Egypt" is meant to assure us that God's revelation would not take place in the city, a place of idolatry, but in the country, away from temples and other places of devotion to foreign gods.

In the land of Egypt. This means outside of the city. You may say it means outside of the city, but perhaps it means within the city? Since, however, it says, "And Moses said unto him, ‘As soon as I am gone from the city, I will spread out my hand to the LORD'" (Exodus 9:29), should we not apply an a fortiori argument? If regarding prayer, the less important, Moses would utter it only outside of the city. It is a logical inference that with regard to the divine word, the more important, God would speak it to him only outside of the city. And why did God not speak with him inside the city? Because it was full of abominations and idols.

This, however, raises another question. If God ultimately would choose Israel and, in particular, the site of the Temple in Jerusalem as the place of divine revelation (e.g. Deuteronomy 12:13-14), how could God disclose divine revelation in any other location (i.e. Egypt)? Mekhilta answers this questions,

Before the land of Israel had been chosen, all lands were suitable for divine revelation. After the land of Israel had been chosen, all other lands were eliminated. Before Jerusalem had been chosen, the entire land of Israel was suitable for altars. After Jerusalem had been chosen, all the rest of the land of Israel was eliminated . . . Before the Temple had been especially selected, the whole of Jerusalem was appropriate for the manifestation of the divine presence. After the Temple had been chosen, the rest of Jerusalem was eliminated. For thus it is said, "For the LORD chose Zion . . . this is my resting place forever" (Psalm 132:13-14).

The Mekhilta continues and sees a similar principle at work in the selection of Aaron as high priest and David as king. Thus, for Mekhilta, though this superfluous phrase may strike us as odd, it serves the purpose of letting us know that it is ok for Moses and Aaron to have received divine revelation outside of Israel and the Temple in particular. God brought them to an acceptable place outside the city, free of idols, in order to disclose to them the commandments regarding Passover. As we listen to these instructions, let us prepare ourselves in the coming weeks for Passover with a similarly pure heart, ready to keep the feast.

2. At the beginning of Parashat Tazria, women are commanded to bring offerings to the Temple to mark the end of their periods of purification following the birth of a male or female child. What are those offerings, and why are they brought?

Rabbi Jonathan Kaplan

Our parasha tells us that women are commanded to bring two offerings at the conclusion of their periods of purification following childbirth - a burnt offering (‘ola) and a sin offering (chata't).

On the completion of the period of her purification, whether for a son or a daughter, she shall bring a lamb one year of age for a burnt offering and a pigeon or a turtledove for a sin offering to the opening of the Tent of Meeting, to the priest.

Leviticus 12:6

The first of these maternity offerings - the burnt offering - seems entirely appropriate. In one sense, it signifies the woman's return into the cultic community after a period of ritual impurity that prevented her from participating in the sacrificial life of the Jewish people. This offering purifies her so that she can again enter the sacred precincts of the Tent of Meeting. In another sense, the burnt offering can be understood as a thanksgiving offering for the gift of a child. The expense of the lamb suggests the value of the child that God has given the new mother.

It is the second offering - the sin offering - that seems out of place. What sin has the new mother committed that requires an expiatory offering, an offering to clean the slate of her sin? As the 15-16th century Spanish commentator Isaac Abarbanel puts it, "there is no iniquity that the woman in childbirth committed to warrant such a procedure!" Why then the sin offering?

Perhaps the answer to this question is found when we step back and consider childbirth. The gift of the child is truly an awe-inspiring event. The midrashim on this chapter in Leviticus repeatedly ask the question, "Is this not a matter for praise?" Indeed it is an opportunity for awe and praise. Nehama Leibowitz reminds us that in the midst of the joy, praise, and awe we encounter our Creator in a profound way. Indeed we have not sinned, but we are sinful. Childbirth reminds us of our position before God. She sees this dynamic in Isaiah's vision of God's throne where, when he encounters the holiness of God, he becomes profoundly aware of his own sinfulness.

And I said, ‘Woe to me, for I am undone. For I am a man of unclean lips, and I live in the midst of a people of unclean lips. For my eyes have seen the King, the LORD of hosts.

Isaiah 6:5

Indeed childbirth confronts us with the wondrousness of the creation and the Creator, humbling us and requiring us to reflect on our station before the Holy One. Thus the new mother, confronted with the gloriousness of God's creation and its Ruler is commanded to bring offerings that acknowledge God's gift and her renewed understanding of her place before her Creator.

Luke 14:1-24 - Contesting for Life

David Nichol

In our passage, Yeshua goes to the home of a religious man for dinner, gives three teachings, two of them parables, about dinner parties. It is important, when reading these parables, to remember the distance between ourselves and the original social location of this text. Otherwise, we might misconstrue these passages as being about lesser ethical matters - table manners, if you will - allowing the gravity of his teachings to pass us by.

Shared meals were very significant in ancient near eastern cultures. One need not be a cultural anthropologist or historian to know this; it is clear throughout the Tanakh and Besora.  From the patriarchs (Genesis 18:3-8; 24:31-54; 27:1-40; 43:32-34) to Yeshua himself (Matthew 14:13-21; 15:32-38; 26.17-30; Luke 7:36-50; 24:30, 41-43; John 2:1-10) and beyond (Romans 14; 1 Corinthians 8:1-13, 11:33), we see communal meals finding a central role throughout the biblical narratives.

In the first story, Yeshua tells his fellow guests at a dinner not to concern themselves with taking the places of honor, but to take for themselves the humble seats, that they will not be humiliated: "For all who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted" (v. 11). To Yeshua's contemporaries, this was no mere attitude adjustment.  Just the fact that certain seats were considered "honorable" or "humble" shows us that the sensitivities of the time were different than what we are used to.  One's standing was "social currency," and taking a seat lower than one's station was near unthinkable behavior!  Yeshua's challenge went well beyond what we might call humility. He challenged the values of the times, asking his listeners to take less than they might have expected or thought they deserved.

Next, Yeshua directs his admonishment at his host: "When you give a luncheon or a dinner, do not invite your friends or your brothers or your relatives or right neighbors, in case they may invite you in return and you would be repaid" (v. 12). Rather, "invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, and the blind. And you will be . . . repaid at the resurrection of the righteous" (v. 13-14).  He challenges this man who, as a member of the Perushim, advocated belief in the resurrection of the dead (to reward), to put his money where his mouth is, or, we might say, make his actions match his faith.

Thirdly, Yeshua tells of a great dinner that was being given. The host invited many guests, but when the time came, many of them made excuses and declined to come. The host sends out a servant into the streets, and replaces his honored guests with the poor and handicapped, those who have nothing or are "low on the totem pole." The analogy appears to be with the Kingdom of God (v. 15). It is a stark warning against self-righteousness and spiritual lethargy, and warns against thinking of the Kingdom as being full of people like ourselves.

These teachings challenge us across the generations, and perhaps find us lacking. Are we charitable only as long as we get what we "deserve," or chafe at perceived disrespect? Do we seek out true relationship with only those who are like us, or those from whom we can get something in return? Do we think or ourselves among the "invited" yet dismiss the invitation to draw near to our Creator except at our convenience? The common thread in these teachings is self-sacrifice, which, as we know, is the ultimate imitation of Yeshua. Today, if we would only listen and hear his voice . . .

NEXT WEEK'S READINGS - PARASHAT METZORA

Leviticus 14:1-15:33
2 Kings 7:3-20
Luke 14:25-33

UPCOMING YACHAD NETWORK EVENTS