Too often we make a mistake of filing "Judaism" in our minds under the very general title of "Organized Religions." The problem is that under "Organized Religions" appear other colorful concepts that shouldn't be allowed within a 100 foot radius of Torah: e.g. oppression of the masses through the perpetuation of illiteracy and the monopolization of information, Crusades, scapegoating, etc. etc.
Listen, everyone's got their problems, but let those not be our problems.
Perhaps the most tragic cultural misappropriation is the idea that the Torah demands from us strict uniformity and the annihilation of self, seeking to convert the greatest number of followers in order to find strength in numbers.
Of course, no one can deny the synergy of people working in concert -- "two are better than one..." (Kohelet 4:9), but speaking about human beings merely in terms of quantities is clearly a vulgarization of this concept.
This said, we open up this week the Book of Bamidbar (incidentally called "Numbers" by the Greeks and later King James), and lo and behold we find ourselves knee-deep in a census! Of all things to start a book with! Cold facts and numbers...what a great way to grab the reader right from the beginning!
It sounds terribly technical, no?
It's fine that they took a census for whatever reason it may have been, but leave us out of it! Why on earth would Hashem codify this census for eternity in the Chumash?!? 3,500 years later, who cares?!? And then, to go into every tribe one by one...Reuven had 46,500; Shimon 59,300, and so on...
And, come to think of it, why did they take a census? G!d Himself commission it (1st two verses). Isn't it safe to say that G!d knew the results of the census without having to actually take the census?
And just to strengthen the question: this is the 4th census in 13 months (see Rashi on the first verse who is keeping score for us)! Us Jews can be a tad neurotic, but this is Hashem asking for these countings -- what is going on here? This is absurd!
~~~~~
Names & Numbers
Last week, we began to speak about the idea of counting. Counting brings things together.
If one were to say, "there are 1 billion people in China," he means to say that those billion people have something in common in order that it makes sense to count them together, namely, of all the billions of people in the world, he wants to refer to, and therefore conceptually unite, the one billion people in China. This is straightforward.
But let's say he said, "there are 225,000 lychees and screwdrivers in the State of Delaware," he better have a good explanation for grouping Delawarian lychees and screwdrivers in that number.
A number has the capacity to unite. Interesting. Obvious perhaps, but on the other hand, we probably never stopped to think about it.
Now, there are certain things one would never count individually. Sand, for example -- even if you value sand very much -- let's say you're in the playground business -- you would not keep an inventory of grains of sand purchased and sold. You simply wouldn't -- ever. You would probably measure your sand in terms of metric tons, or cubic meters, but certainly not grains of sand.
In contrast to numbers are names. Names identify unique individuals. This is what names do -- they single one out from the crowd. "David K. Harris." "Jessica Sara Kahan." "Jonathan Rosenberg-Glickstein." And as surely as I wouldn't count my grains of sand, I wouldn't name my slices of bread.
Immediately, something unique pops out at us from the beginning of the Book of Bamidbar:
שְׂאוּ אֶת רֹאשׁ כָּל עֲדַת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתָם לְבֵית אֲבֹתָם בְּמִסְפַּר שֵׁמוֹת וגו
"[Hashem said to Moshe,] Count the heads of the entire Eida of the Children of Israel according to their families and the houses of their fathers with number-names..." (1:2).
This sounds like a nice idea trying to consolidate unity (numbers) and individuality (names), but don't they contradict eachother?
The reason that our initial reaction to the juxtaposition of these two concepts is that they clash is likely because our gut definitions for "unity" and "individuality" are slightly off.
"Unity" we often confuse with "uniformity."
And "individuality" we tend to define in terms of the interests, abilities, personality quirks, style, etc. of a person. (What comes to mind almost immediately are those high school years in which one so desperately is trying to forge his individuality through hair-cuts, clothing styles, so-called "alternative" music, and even flame decals on the sides of his car.)
These definitions are not totally off -- "unity" certainly implies some aspect of uniformity, and "individuality" is related to the unique bundle of the aforementioned attributes a person possesses.
The key to begin to understand how these two concepts can co-exist is to rethink of individuality as most essentially founded in mission. Of course, every person has a unique set of כחות strengths and שאיפות interests, but these only find their context and purpose in terms of the mission.
The best metaphor for this is the army. No two people in the army can have the same mission -- by definition. Joey is in charge of gathering information at point A. Billy is covering him from point B, and Joey from point C. Simultaneously, Jimmy is relaying this information to George who is infiltrating the compound through the air conditioning duct, and so on and so forth. Every person is indispensable to accomplish the meta-mission. As such, every person's micro-mission is unique to him, and was given to him after much thought by the General based on his strengths and interests.
Does an army need a lot of people? Yes. But, only because there are so many missions that must be accomplished to accomplish the ultimate goal.
Is there a uniformity among the soldiers? Of course. They are all wearing more or less the same uniform, they have the same basic training, they all have to abide by a basic level of physical fitness, they all have to speak the same language and lingo -- all of this is correct, but the purpose is not so that they become some large, indistinguishable, uniform blob. The goal of uniformity is entirely in order to facilitate all of these individual soldiers with their individual strengths and missions to work together towards a common goal.
There are different words in the Hebrew language that relate to the different aspects of the concept of "mission." One of them is תפקיד. It's fascinating to now see how the passuk lights up, when we see that the word used for "counting" is not the normal word לספור, but לפקוד. And why the Torah in counting the Jewish people specifically relates to those of age to serve in the army:
מִבֶּן עֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה וָמַעְלָה כָּל יֹצֵא צָבָא בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל תִּפְקְדוּ אֹתָם לְצִבְאֹתָם אַתָּה וְאַהֲרֹן
"From 20 years of age and above, all those who [would] go out [to serve] in the army in Israel, count them (תִּפְקְדוּ) according to their army ranks, you and Aaron." (1:3)
The Torah then proceeds to count the Jewish people according to each one's family, and tribe -- each tribe with its own flag and symbol, and unique spiritual gifts (see the end of the Book of Bereishit and the end of the Book of Devarim).
Why were we counted so many times in the desert? And moreover, why record it for eternity in the Torah?
Why were we counted so many times in the desert? And moreover, why record it for eternity in the Torah?
Rashi explains:
...מתוך חבתן לפניו מונה אותם כל שעה
"Because of the love for [the Jewish people] before [Hashem], He counts them all the time..."
Every person is precious.
No one can possibly know this more than Hashem who created us and gives us everyday the tools and learning experiences to bring out our potential. The Jewish people is not a mob nor a rally on the White House lawn nor a football crowd. The unity of individuals in the Jewish people comprise a magnificent mosaic -- a poem -- a symphony. It's therefore not sufficient to estimate more-or-less how many Jews there were in the desert. The census was not for technical reasons. Certainly not the 4th census in a little over a year. It was a show of love and appreciation of every individual who by definition cannot be replaced by anyone else. This is a message that shines throughout the Book of Bamidbar (see the intro to the sefer in the Emek Davar), and throughout the Chumash.
The fact that the census was included in the Torah, with such a shocking amount of space dedicated to it, is a testament to Hashem's love for us. It is one thing for HKBH to love us, but what is even greater is that He wants us to know it.
No one can possibly know this more than Hashem who created us and gives us everyday the tools and learning experiences to bring out our potential. The Jewish people is not a mob nor a rally on the White House lawn nor a football crowd. The unity of individuals in the Jewish people comprise a magnificent mosaic -- a poem -- a symphony. It's therefore not sufficient to estimate more-or-less how many Jews there were in the desert. The census was not for technical reasons. Certainly not the 4th census in a little over a year. It was a show of love and appreciation of every individual who by definition cannot be replaced by anyone else. This is a message that shines throughout the Book of Bamidbar (see the intro to the sefer in the Emek Davar), and throughout the Chumash.
The fact that the census was included in the Torah, with such a shocking amount of space dedicated to it, is a testament to Hashem's love for us. It is one thing for HKBH to love us, but what is even greater is that He wants us to know it.
No comments:
Post a Comment