I retaliated. I really didn’t mean to, but X aggressively pressured me to do something and without thinking, I verbally fought back. X was a little hurt. It didn’t need to play out that way. My starting point for this reflection is concern about excessive harshness and punishment.
Author, Dr. Richard Schwartz observed
that we treat others the same way that we treat those parts of ourselves that
challenge us. “In our attempts to control what we consider to be disturbing
thoughts and emotions, we just end up fighting, disciplining … or feeling
ashamed of those impulses …[i]”
Religious teachings, including some in the Torah, seem to be designed to crush
parts of ourselves. I want to examine these and consider alternative ways of
reading them.
In this week’s Torah reading we
have the strange ritual of burning a dead red cow[ii]
to purify anyone who has come in contact with a dead person. It is introduced
as a “Chuka”, a statute that God commanded. Commentary elaborates on the idea
of a Chuka, which has also been translated as decree[iii].
“It is a decree from before Me; you have no permission to ruminate about it[iv]”.
We are forbidden to ever question this divine command. That is harsh! It seems
like the purpose of the Chuka, with no logical explanation, is about a process designed
to beat us into submission[v].
The idea that crushing that part in
us that thinks for itself or lusts after permitted or forbidden pleasures also
comes up in one attempt to explain the mystery of the red cow. The animal is
seen as a symbol of the material aspects of life. The burning of the cow
represents a person who subjugates the material elements within him or herself.
This is hinted at by the fact that the ashes of the cow – now crushed and
defeated – when mixed with water, causes the person sprinkled with the mixture
to be regarded as spiritually pure and clean[vi]. To kill the “animal soul” is seen as a virtue[vii].
An alternative approach to the red
cow is offered by Rabbi Jonathan Sacks, of blessed memory. The symbolism of mixing
the ashes of a dead animal with “living water” is a reminder that although we
are all individually mortal, life continues after we die[viii].
He infers this from the fact that the law of the red cow is followed in the
Torah[ix]
by the deaths of Moses’ siblings. Rabbi Sacks wrote: “with great subtlety the
Torah mixes law and narrative together.” We all die, “... yet life goes on, and
what we began, others will continue.”
Sacks insists that Judaism is not a
matter of blind obedience[x]”. Some laws are not explained because they are
meant to move us at a sub-conscious level. The ritual of the red cow is
directed at what Sigmund Freud called thanatos, the death instinct[xi].
According to Freud, “a portion of the [death] instinct is diverted towards the
external world and comes to light as an instinct of aggressiveness.”
Sacks insists that the red cow ritual
“is a powerful statement that the holy is to be found in life, not death.
Anyone who had been in contact with a dead body needed purification. Judaism contains
no cult of worship of dead ancestors. Death defiles”.
Countering manifestation of the
death instinct, Sacks explains, “cannot be achieved by reason alone”. Instead,
he argues, rituals enable the learning to reach “into our unconscious mind and
alter our instinctual responses. The result is a personality trained to see
death and holiness as two utterly opposed states.”
What we have is not a ritual to
beat us into submission and encourage us to berate and crush ourselves but
something far more dignified. It is an invitation to engage with the text as
intelligent people grappling with the great challenges of life.
Sacks has a similar approach to one
of the saddest stories in the Torah. Moses was deprived of his dream to lead
his people in to the Promised Land. This was due to the seemingly petty offence
of using a stick to hit, rather than talking to, a rock to miraculously draw
water from it[xii].
This seems excessively punitive. But to Sacks[xiii],
the symbolic meaning of “hitting” at a moment that required “talking” was no
small matter.
At the end of his life, Moses was
leading a new generation, born in freedom in the wilderness. They were
different to their parents who had spent much of their lives as slaves. Slaves
understand that a stick is used for striking, which is how slave-masters compel
obedience. Free people, by contrast, must be educated, informed and taught.
To put it another way, public administration
academic, Holli Vah Seliskar, PHD, wrote, “people benefit most when things are
done with them rather than something being done to them[xiv]”.
Human beings are happier, more cooperative and productive and more likely to
make positive changes in their behaviour when those in positions of authority
do things with them[xv]”.
Moses using a stick instead of
words was symbolic of his failure to work with the people, rather than berate[xvi]
or order them around. Free human beings respond not to power but persuasion.
They need to be spoken to. What Moses failed to understand was that the
difference between God's command to "speak to the rock" and "strike
the rock" was of the essence.
Next time I am confronted with a
situation like the one with X, I hope both I and the person with whom I am
talking can focus on trying to find a mutually acceptable resolution to our
divergent views and needs. Hopefully, this will involve a collaborative
conversation rather than punishment. Failing that, I will go with a firm but
fair withdrawal from a situation that is not working, but without speaking harsh
words that detract from the sacred dignity of all humans.
[i]
Schwartz, R. C., (2021) No Bad Parts, Sounds True publishers, Boulder Colorado,
p. 8
[ii]
Numbers, 19:2-12
[iii]
Targum Yonasan Ben Uziel of 19:2 דָא גְזֵירַת
אַחְוָיַת אוֹרַיְיתָא
[iv]
Rashi to Number 19:2, based on Talmud Yoma 67b; Midrash Tanchuma, Chukat 7, I
translated the word as ruminate
[v]
See Kedushas Levi at the beginning of Parshas Chukas
[vi] Rabbi
Chaim Yosef David Auzulai, (The Chidoh), Nachal Kedominm in Toras Chido, p. 130
[vii]
Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi, Tanya chapter 1
[viii]
https://rabbisacks.org/covenant-conversation/chukat/healing-trauma-loss/
[ix]
The red cow is discussed in Number 19, the death of Mirram and Aaron are
recorded in the following chapter in 20:1 and 20:28
[x]
Sacks, J. Covenant and Conversation, Number, p. 239
[xi] https://rabbisacks.org/covenant-conversation/chukat/descartes-error/ See commentary by Rabbi Yosef Bechor Shor
[xii]
Numbers 20:7-12
[xiii]
https://rabbisacks.org/covenant-conversation/chukat/why-was-moses-not-destined-to-enter-the-land/
[xiv]
Seliskar, H. V. https://www.igi-global.com/chapter/doing-with-not-to-or-for/253464
[xv] Watchel,
T. in Seliskar
No comments:
Post a Comment