Search Results

Having just been victorious in battle, in Chapter 32 of the Book of Numbers we find the Israelites encamped on the plains of Moab ready to cross the Jordan river into the promised land. Finally! After all the obstacles they have encountered in their epic wilderness trek, can there be anything stopping them now? Apparently there is. This time the obstacle is not physical hardship, hostile foreigners or the discouraging reports of the spies. It is the desire to settle down and be comfortable, rather than forge ahead into the land that is integral to the covenant G-d made with Israel. "Now the Reubenites and the Gadites owned a very great number of cattle. When they saw that the land of Jazer and the land of Gilead was a good place for cattle, the Gadites and the Reubenites came and spoke to Moses, to Eleazar the priest, and to the leaders of the congregation, saying..."(Numbers 32:1-2). The Reubenites and Gadites seek permission to be excused from the Israelites’ approaching battle as they enter the promised land, to instead 'stay put' and settle with their families in the rich grazing country east of the Jordan. Chapter 32 tells of their approach to Moses, Moses’ response, and the outcome of the negotiations. Note that the Reubenites and Gadites present their petition in two parts. First, they politely present the facts. The land on which they stand “is a land for cattle; and [we] your servants have cattle” (32:4). Then the text says: “They continued...” It is as if there had been a pause. Were they dropping a hint and waiting to see how Moses responded? Were they hoping that Moses might be impressed by the ‘cattle’ link and suggest they stay behind and settle the land? If so, their hopes were dashed. Moses apparently was silent, and so they continued: “If we have found favour in your sight, let this land be given to [us] your servants for a possession; do not make us cross the Jordan” (32:5). To this Moses releases a torrent of fury: “Shall your brothers go to war while you sit here? Why will you discourage the hearts of the Israelites from going over into the land that the Lord has given them?” (32:6-7). Moses has no time for their cosy little plans when all their resources as a nation are being mustered to complete the arduous journey on which the Lord has led them. The promised land is within reach! In their proposal Moses sees the disaster of the spies (see Num.13-14) all over again: “If you turn away from following the Lord, the Lord will again abandon the people in the wilderness; and you will destroy all this people” (see 32:15). The Midrash, too, expresses disapproval: "In the case of the children of Gad and the children of Reuben, you find that they were rich, possessing large numbers of cattle, but they loved their money and settled outside the Land of Israel" (Num. R. 22:7). Yet, despite his fury, Moses negotiates with the Reubenites and Gadites. They will enter the battle along with the people of Israel and secure a victory. Then they, along with the half tribe of Manasseh (32:33), will settle in their land of choice, outside the land of Israel. Still, the gulf between negotiating parties remains. In Moses’ mind, Israel’s mission as G-d’s people is paramount. The Reubenites and Gadites on the other hand seem to view it as a business deal balancing their interests against the rest of Israel. Unlike Moses who is centred on G-d and the whole people, they are focused on their own material wealth and needs. Subtle details in the text reveal this critical difference in vision; can you pick them? Read the text closely, ideally with a study partner and discuss your findings and respective interpretations. Further reflection: If the motivation of the tribes in question was so wrong (v.14) and contrary to the divine will, why did Moses negotiate with them? And why did it not attract the same cataclysmic display of divine wrath as in the case of the story of the spies? Food for thought! As these stories draw us in, we are invited to engage, ponder and wrestle with the sacred text. Bibliography: Freedman and Simon, eds., Midrash Rabbah: Numbers Vol. 2 (London/New York: Soncino Press, 1983); Leibowitz, Studies in Bamidbar (New York, n.p.d.). Scripture: NRSV. © Teresa Pirola, 2013. lightoftorah.net Reproduction for non-commercial use permitted with acknowledgement of website. Download the PDF version here. Light of Torah is a Sydney-based initiative encouraging Christians to reflect on Torah with the help of Jewish insights. More... The reflection above refers to Parashat Matot-Masei (Numbers 30:2 - 36:13), which is the (double) Torah portion read for this Sabbath in the Jewish liturgical calendar. Shabbat shalom!

A number of educational events are approaching, organised by various groups, with the opportunity to spend time with Prof. Amy-Jill Levine, a prominent biblical scholar who has helped countless Christians to appreciate the Gospels and the Letters of St Paul within their Jewish contexts. These sessions offer important insights into the task of dismantling prejudice and supporting social cohesion. Click on the flyers and links below for details. One-hour Online Sessions | Hosted by Bat Kol International 4 August, 1 September Register at www.batkolinternational.org One-hour Online Interview | Hosted by Catholic Religious Australia Wednesday 8 July Register at www.catholicreligious.org.au/events In-Person Public Lecture in Adelaide (Norwood SA Catholic Parish) Thursday 9 July, 7.30pm

In Numbers 27, the Israelites are close to entering the promised land. The Lord prepares Moses for his death, reminding Moses that he is not to enter the land, with reference to an upsetting incident that occurred at the waters of Meribath-kadesh (see Num. 20:1-13). Here, with the help of Jewish interpreters, we explore the question of why Moses was excluded from the promised land. The Lord said to Moses, “Go up this mountain of the Abarim range, and see the land that I have given to the Israelites. When you have seen it, you shall be gathered to your people as your brother Aaron was [i.e., you shall die], because you rebelled against my word in the wilderness of Zin when the congregation quarrelled with me. You did not show my holiness before their eyes at the waters. (Numbers 27:12-14) Was Moses’ sin at the waters of Meribath-kadesh really so bad? Yes, we know that he lost patience with the people and struck the rock twice instead of once... but does the punishment really fit the crime? Over centuries of reflection, Torah commentators have offered diverse explanations. Review this incident in 20:1-13. Ponder the character of Moses, his past track record of leadership (e.g., at the Red Sea), the expectations of the people and the desperation of their drought-stricken situation. Then, let’s follow the lead of a contemporary commentator, Mosheh Lichtenstein. [1] Lichtenstein directs our attention to three Torah verses (Num.20:12; 27:14; Deut. 32:51). Each makes an association between the events at Meribath-kadesh and Moses’ inability to bring about a Kiddush Hashem, i.e., a sanctification of G-d’s name. "Because you did not...show my holiness before the eyes of the Israelites.” (Num. 20:12) "You did not show my holiness before their eyes at the waters.” (Num. 27:14) "...because both of you broke faith with me among the Israelites at the waters of Meribath-kadesh in the wilderness of Zin, by failing to maintain my holiness among the Israelites." (Deut. 32:51) In other words, Moses’ actions at Meribath-kadesh do not result in G-d’s holiness being shown forth to the people. Reflect on these three verses, above. Lichenstein argues that the events at Meribath-kadesh signal the essence of a far greater problem that plays out through the rebellion stories that consume so much of Numbers. The problem is a developing chasm between Moses as original leader of the exodus and the new generation born in the wilderness. In this view, the striking of the rock is not the issue that prevents Moses from entering the land. (Traditional commentators Rashbam and Ibn Ezra suggest that his ‘sin’ was not wicked defiance but a simple case of human failure.) What is really at stake is the growing alienation between Moses and his people. What is really at stake is the growing alienation between Moses and his people. There is no doubt that Moses is a great leader and prophet. Yet, for whatever reason, his leadership and communication skills are not working for this new breed of Israelite. He has lost his rapport with the people, unable to provide the guidance they need. As a result (and this is the critical point) G-d’s Name is not being sanctified. The people require a different leader to take them through the next stage of Israel’s journey. The chosen leader is Joshua. He is the one to take the Israelites into the promised land. One might argue that, even if ‘stood down’ as leader, could not the Lord have allowed Moses to enter the land as a private citizen? How do you respond? Note: In the Midrash Moses pleads to be permitted to enter as a simple Jew who would now be able to perform the Mitzvot Hateluyot Ba’Aretz (i.e., those commands which apply uniquely to those who dwell in the land of Israel). Reflection Stepping down from a leading role can be as challenging as stepping up to leadership. What insights might we glean from our Torah text to stimulate a discussion on leadership: its requirements, its development, its closure? 1. See Mosheh Lichtenstein, Moses: Envoy of God, Envoy of his people (NJ: KTAV, 2008). Scripture: NRSV © Teresa Pirola, 2013. Reproduction for non-commercial use permitted with acknowledgement of website lightoftorah.net Download the PDF version. Light of Torah is a Sydney-based initiative encouraging Christians to reflect on the Hebrew Scriptures with the help of Jewish insights. More... The reflection above refers to Parashat Pinchas (Numbers 25:10 - 30:1), the Torah portion read for this Sabbath in the Jewish liturgical cycle. Shabbat shalom! Download your free Jewish and Christian Liturgical Calendar, courtesy of Etz Hayim-Tree of Life Publishing.

Once again, we explore a passage of the Hebrew Scriptures that we might at first seem intimidating to a reader. As we shall see, even just a few verses can bring forth surprising, wise and practical insights. We just need to stop long enough and 'stay with' with the word of God in order to listen, ponder, discuss, debate and enjoy. This week’s reflection from Leviticus focuses on the priestly instructions concerning the ritual handling of one of the ancient sacrifices: ‘the sacrifice of thanksgiving.’ In ancient Jewish society, thanksgiving offerings expressed gratitude for deliverance from peril or misfortune. Read the ritual instructions for this sacrifice in 7:11-15. What details do you observe? “And the flesh of your thanksgiving sacrifice of well-being shall be eaten on the day it is offered; you shall not leave any of it until morning” (Leviticus 7:15). Perhaps you noticed that, in contrast to other sacrifices, a shorter time-frame is stipulated for eating the thanksgiving sacrifice. Did you wonder why? Ponder this. Test your ideas with a friend. Then let’s hear from some of the Jewish sages.[1] Why is the thanksgiving sacrifice to be eaten sooner than the other sacrifices? For Maimonides (12th century), respect for the sacredness of the offerings means that they must be in the best possible condition. Delaying the feast gives the meat a chance to spoil. Gersonides (14th century French scholar) expresses himself in direct, gastronomic terms: the meat is tastier before daybreak! The Sefer haHinukh (a famous medieval Jewish education text) views the instruction as an invitation to spiritual growth: “there is in this an allusion to our trust in God; a man should not begrudge himself his food and store it for the morrow.” This view resonates with rabbinic opinion in the Talmud: “He who has bread in his basket, and says: ‘what will I eat tomorrow?’ has little faith in God” (Sot. 48b). Recalled here is the miracle of ‘bread from heaven,’ manna in the desert, which the Israelites gathered “enough for that day” (Exodus 16:4). Abravanel (15th c. Spanish-Jewish Torah commentator), introduces a social dimension: “Seeing that he has only one day and one night for consuming his sacrifice, the owner invites his relatives and friends to share his meal and joy. On being asked what motivated this feast, the host will recount the Divine wonders.” Thus, the purpose of having a limited time for eating is to publicise the miracle. The HaEmek Davar (a 19th century Torah commentary) agrees: “This is designed to increase the number of participants in the feast on the day of the offering so that many people will learn of the miracle...” Note that what might appear to be an obscure cultic text (to 21st century sensibilities) becomes enlivened with meaning by the creative, prayerful energies of the traditional Jewish interpreters. In what way do your own creative, prayerful energies engage with the sacred text? How would you enter into this conversation with the sages? Further reflection Describe a time when an invitation to a community meal was a memorable occasion of thanksgiving to God. What was the ‘miracle’ for which you gave thanks? Enriched by our Torah discussion, listen afresh to the prayers and rituals of your Eucharistic celebration this Sunday. 1. Texts cited by Leibowitz, 81-82. Bibliography: Leibowitz, New Studies in Vayikra (New York, 1993); Strassfeld, The Jewish Holidays (New York, 1985, 2001). Scripture: NRSV. © Teresa Pirola, 2013. lightoftorah.net . Reproduction for non-commercial use permitted with acknowledgement of website. Download the PDF version . Light of Torah is a Sydney-based initiative, encouraging Christians to reflect on the Hebrew Scriptures with the help of Jewish insights. More... The reflection above refers to Parashat Tzav (Leviticus 6:8 - 8:36), the Torah portion read for this Sabbath in the Jewish liturgical cycle. Shabbat shalom ! Download your free Jewish and Christian Liturgical Calendar, courtesy of Etz Hayim-Tree of Life Publishing .

After all the action-packed stories of Genesis and Exodus, upon reaching the Book of Leviticus the reader notices the lack of movement. The entire book is set at the foot of Mount Sinai. There in the wilderness, The Lord G-d calls and speaks, forming the people by unveiling a series of instructions: how to worship, how to behave, how to deal with transgression. Through a system of order and repeated ritual, the identity of Israel, as a holy, chosen people, is solidified. As we read these texts it helps to be reminded of the ever-searching human heart desiring to express its encounter with divine mystery, in ancient times and still today. Having gathered volumes of insightful and creative commentary over many centuries, Jewish tradition can assist Christians in finding a lively connection with Leviticus. Traditional Jewish methods are painstakingly attentive to the tiny details of expression, and employ imaginative storytelling techniques ( midrash ) to enlarge the meaning of the text. Take, for example, the opening verses of Leviticus (1:1-2): The Lord called to Moses and spoke to him from the Tent of Meeting, saying: Speak to the Israelite people, and say to them... The two verbs in verse 1 were of particular interest to the rabbinic mind. Why does the text say that the Lord called and spoke to Moses? Are both verbs really necessary? What deeper meaning can we find here in the apparent redundancy? By the tone with which someone calls your name you can usually predict the sentiments of the message to follow! Likewise, the Rabbis interpret ‘call’ as a relational indicator preceding the message itself. G-d addresses Moses as an intimate, ‘like one whose hand is affectionately laid upon his son, ’ [1] as one with whom there is an existing relationship forged through shared purpose and activity. The call comes not as a thunderous voice for all to hear, but from the Tent of Meeting, i.e., from close by, from a site of great significance for both Moses and the Lord G-d. But how does this thought relate to the chapters of ritual material that follow? Let the rabbinic voices reply in the language of story... Scripture describes three ‘calls’ to Moses: at the burning bush, at Mount Sinai, and now as he is to be presented with Israel’s ritual code. But, say the Rabbis, Moses repeatedly resisted the Lord's call. At the burning bush he had to be convinced to confront Pharaoh. Having completed this task, he tried to step down from his public role, but the Lord called him again, this time to lead the people out of Egypt, across the Red Sea, to be fed by manna and quail, to receive the Law at Sinai, and to build the Tabernacle. Moses did all this, felt he had done enough and again tried to retire from leadership. At this the Lord said: I have one more great task for you: teach my people to live as a holy nation. Thus did G-d call Moses to a further work, by entrusting him with a code of holiness, the Scriptures which Christians refer to as Leviticus, and which Jewish communities also know by its Hebrew name Vayikra , ‘and he called’. The midrashic picture of Moses as a reluctant prophet-leader, gradually finding himself more and more enmeshed in G-d's service, speaks volumes to the life of faith. How many of us have offered a tentative ‘yes’ to an invitation to be involved in one particular good work, limited in scope, only to look back years later and see how it was the gateway to so much more - perhaps a lifetime of good works and sincere efforts to walk in G-d's way! Similarly, we can think of people who, in their twilight years, were called to make their greatest contribution of service to society. From here, there are many thoughts we could share from our experience of ‘G-d’s call’, in its blessings and challenges. And all this from a single verse of Scripture, creatively interpreted by way of time-honored Jewish approaches to the sacred text. • 1. Leviticus Rabbah, 1, 15 Bibliography: Friedman & Simon, eds., Midrash Rabbah: Leviticus (London: Soncino, 1983); Munk, The Call of the Torah (New York: Mesorah, 1992); Schorsch, Canon Without Closure (New York: Avi, 2007). Scripture: NJPS. Image: Shutterstock (via Wix). © Teresa Pirola, 2012. Reproduction for non-commercial use permitted with acknowledgement of website. Light of Torah is a Sydney-based initiative encouraging Christians to reflect on Torah with the help of Jewish insights . More... This week we commence the Book of Leviticus. The reflection above refers to Parashat Vayikra , Lev. 1:1 - 5:26, the Torah portion read for the coming Sabbath in the Jewish liturgical cycle. Shabbat shalom .

Prior to the Golden Calf episode, God had given Moses detailed instructions about how the Tabernacle was to be constructed. Now, after the Golden Calf episode, the Tabernacle instructions are implemented. Now that the Lord and his people have resolved their differences, doubt and disobedience are replaced by willing cooperation and the Tabernacle building proceeds with enthusiasm. Do you agree? Let's examine this claim more closely, in conversation with the Jewish sages who have pondered these Scripture verses. Read Exodus 35:21-29. Notice its similarity to the words of an earlier Torah passage (i.e., before the Golden Calf episode): “You shall accept gifts for Me from every person whose heart is so moved” (Exodus 25:2). We find repeated in 35:21-29 this wonderful picture of community giving, do we not? Why then, do we find a Talmudic teacher, Rabbi Yehuda Ben Pazi, saying, “Can we read these verses and not shudder?”[1] What might cause an attentive reader to shudder, or to at least pause before affirming the favourable scene depicted by the text? Ponder and discuss this with a friend. Our Rabbi continues, noting how the Torah records two instances of community giving: On the one hand, when the people were asked to donate for the good purpose of the construction of the Tabernacle, the verse states: 'And they came, both men and women, as many as were willing-hearted, and brought…an offering of gold to the Lord' (Exodus 35:22). This indicates that only the generous among the people brought donations. On the other hand, when the people were asked to donate for the evil purpose of the Golden Calf, it states that not only the willing-hearted but: ' all the people broke off the golden rings which were in their ears, and brought them to Aaron' (Exodus 32:3). [1] So perhaps we shudder to think that the energy being channelled into the present holy task was once directed to an idolatrous task. The memory of the Golden Calf, which involved "all the people" (32:3) in an enthusiastic pooling of gold jewellery, causes the sages to read the present Torah portion with caution. Even the description of each "willing-hearted" person is cause for pause... Were all the people involved this time in this act of giving, or only those whose hearts were moved? Then again, perhaps you took a more optimistic message from the text, like that found in the Midrash where Israel is compared to a king’s daughter. She is a fair maiden but one day her face is sunburnt. In response to those who mock her, she confidently replies that with the appropriate care her fair complexion will return! So it is with Israel, reasons the Midrash. The people have been damaged, but they heal. Further, they turn the things (gold ornaments) used for sinful purposes into a means of making amends and giving glory to God. [2] Ramban (12th century Torah scholar) concurs with this optimism. For Ramban, this is the whole point of the Torah’s repetition of construction detail: to indicate that while the Tabernacle building task remains the same as in previous Torah portions, the people (post-Golden Calf) are morally and spiritually in a very different place. Do you agree? Contribute an insight of your own in lively discussion with a friend (see havruta-style learning ). Notice how traditional Jewish approaches to Scripture seek a holistic view of the sacred text. Each Torah portion tells a story that sheds light on a story in another part of the Bible, leading us to puzzle, ponder, and enter deeply into the mysteries of faith and life. Think of a period in your life which was ‘interrupted’ by a major event/crisis. Afterwards, what was the same, and what was different? In what way had you changed? 1. Jerusalem Talmud, Shekalim 1:1. See Leibowitz, 665 and online English translation of Talmudic texts at sefaria.org . 2. Midrash Aggada , Terumah 26, quoted in Leibowitz, 667. ‘Midrash’ refers to Jewish storytelling traditions. Bibliography: Leibowitz, New Studies in Shemot (New York, 1996); sefaria.org . Scripture: JPS. © Teresa Pirola, 2013 . lightoftorah.net Reproduction for non-commercial use permitted with acknowledgement of website. Light of Torah is a Sydney-based initiative, encouraging Christians to reflect on Torah with the help of Jewish insights. More... This week’s reflection concludes our journey through the Book of Exodus. Next week we turn to the Book of Leviticus. The reflection above refers to Parashat Vayakheil *, the Torah portion read for the coming Sabbath in the Jewish liturgical cycle. Shabbat shalom ! *Note: In 2026, a double portion is read: Vayakheil-Pekudei .

This week we explore an episode of 'straight talk' between the Lord and Moses in chapter 32 of the Book of Exodus. The Golden Calf episode is a critical point in the God-Israel relationship. While Moses is up the mountain, his absence in the camp below (an absence perhaps far too long for a people desperate for firm leadership) creates a void that is unhappily filled. The people resort to building a golden calf and appear to succumb to idol worship. No wonder God is upset, angry. The conversation between God and Moses by now is fraught with tension. Read the account of the Israelites’ actions in Exodus 32:1-6, then read the dialogue that ensues between God and Moses in 32:7-14. Note the repetition, the interesting inclusions and puzzling aspects about the text. What does a close reading reveal about the developing relationship between the characters? Where does your empathy lie? What insights emerge? The Lord spoke to Moses, “Go down at once! your people, whom you brought up out of the land of Egypt, have acted perversely” (Exodus 32:7). Do you hear in the Lord's words the extent of the tragedy at hand? Your people? Wait a minute, isn’t this God’s own people whom God brought out of Egypt? Can the Almighty really be wiping his hands of the Israelites? Surely not! And yet verse 9 only feeds our concern: “I have seen this people, how stiff-necked they are.” Where we might have expected God to say ‘my’ people instead we find ‘this’ people. What we are hearing is not just disappointment, it is estrangement! Do you agree? What thoughts emerged from your own discussion? Support your comments with close reference to the text. Perhaps you also noted the strong response of Moses. If he takes a punch, he certainly gives back a right hook! “Oh Lord, why does your wrath burn hot against your people, who you brought out of the land of Egypt” (32:11). Moses has the gall to remind the Lord of His own doings: This is your people, Lord, to whose ancestors you swore a divine promise! (see vv. 12-13). Can you sense the electricity of the moment. Like a married couple experiencing a major conflict, God and Israel (with Moses as mediator) find themselves at crossroads: will they find their way to a deeper union, or will this incident tear them apart? With the help of Torah teacher Nehama Leibowitz, we learn that in Jewish tradition there are some sages who criticize Moses’ response. How dare he speak with such irreverence to the Almighty! Yet, within that same tradition, a deep sensitivity to the sacred text allows for a defense of Moses. “Now, let me alone,” says Lord (v.10) immediately before his stated intention to destroy his people. Say the Jewish sages, this unusual and seemingly unnecessary phrase (‘let me be’, ‘leave me’) offers a vital clue that God is stalling for time and in fact wants Moses to intervene! Says Rashi,[1] echoing midrashic interpretations: “Moses had not even begun to pray for them, yet God said: ‘Leave Me alone’? But here He gave Moses an opening and informed him that the matter depended on him.” In other words, amidst divine heartbreak God creates a space for more to happen, and Moses is astute and responsive enough to take the hint. He throws himself into active prayer. Indeed, the Jewish sages view Moses as a master of prayer, an intimate of God, boldly confident in the divine-human relationship and prepared to ‘give all’ according to the urgency of the situation. Reflection Am I trusting enough to approach the Lord with directness, confidence, boldness, in my prayer life? What do I learn from the example of Moses in this biblical story, and from the tradition that interprets it? • 1. Rashi, 11th C. Torah commentator, cited by Leibowitz, 565. Bibliography: Freedman & Simon, eds., Midrash Rabbah: Exodus (New York: Soncino, 1983); Leibowitz, New Studies in Shemot (New York, 1996). Scripture: NRSV. © Teresa Pirola, 2013. lightoftorah.net Reproduction for non-commercial use permitted with acknowledgement of the Light of Torah website. Download the PDF version . Light of Torah is a Sydney-based initiative encouraging Christians to reflect on the Hebrew Scriptures with the help of Jewish insights. More... The reflection above refers to Parashat Ki Tisa (Exodus 30:11 - 34:35), the Torah portion read for this Sabbath in the Jewish liturgical cycle. Shabbat shalom ! Download your free Jewish and Christian Liturgical Calendar, courtesy of Etz Hayim-Tree of Life Publishing .

You shall make sacred vestments for the glorious adornment of your brother Aaron. And you shall speak to all who have ability, whom I have endowed with skill, that they may make Aaron’s vestments to consecrate him for my priesthood” (Exodus 28:2-3). In the Book of Exodus the Israelites are guided, in meticulous detail, to create a system of worship. Chapter 28 turns to the making of priestly vestments. Why does the sacred text present a long, tedious list of details? Can priestly vestments really be that important? Let’s begin our reflection by considering the meaning of clothing today. What does your own choice of clothing signify? Why do we give authority to people in uniforms? How does festive or sacred clothing affect our experience of time and place? What messages are communicated through a piece of cloth? Jewish commentaries on this passage have interpreted the significance of clothing in various ways. For example, says Benno Jacob [1]: have you noticed that the Genesis creation account makes no mention of God teaching man and woman how to make a fire, till the soil or build a house. All is left to their initiative, except for one thing: God makes clothes for them . Not only does God make ‘garments of skins,’ says Benno Jacob, but God actually ‘clothes’ them (Gen. 3:21). Just as royalty are clothed in fine robes, God clothes man and woman as a sign of their consecration to be parents of the human race. Following the divine example, Moses clothes Aaron and his sons as a sign of consecration to priestly office. Other commentators [2], favouring an allegorical interpretation, view the priestly clothing in moral terms. To put on a garment is to be vested in qualities of fine character, to be God-like. “O Lord my God... You are clothed with honor and majesty, wrapped in light as with a garment” (Psalm 104:1). This idea is used to solve a contradiction in the text: Why does God command Moses to make the garments in v.2, then command the people to make the garments in v.3? The allegorists explain the double-command like this: The garments in v.2 refer to the instruction in holiness that Moses is to give the priests. The garments in v.3 refer to the outer garments of cloth that symbolize these inner ‘vestments of the soul.’ Note that the people who are to make these outer garments are described as ‘skilled’ (v.3). In the Hebrew, to be ‘skilled’ is literally to be ‘wise of heart.’ Only the ‘wise of heart’ understand the true meaning of the garments and the inner virtues they represent. Food for thought: In Jewish practice, a prayer shawl ( tallit ) with fringes ( tzitzit ) at the corners is worn. The fringes are a reminder of a Jew’s responsibility to observe God’s commandments ( mitzvot ). A blessing is prayed before wearing the tallit . The Jewish spiritual interpretation of "inner" and "outer" vestments also echoes in the New Testament where Paul's Letter to the Ephesians urges readers to “clothe yourselves with the new self, created according to the likeness of God in true righteousness and holiness” (Ephesians 4:24). This week, examine more closely what you wear, where you wear it, and why you wear it. What are you ‘saying’ by your dress customs and choices? Notes: 1. Jewish biblical scholar, 1862-1955. 2. E.g., Malbim, 19th century Russian-Jewish rabbi. Bibliography: Leibowitz, New Studies in Shemot (Jerusalem, 1996). Scripture: NRSV. Priestly image: Shutterstock via Wix © Teresa Pirola, 2013. lightoftorah.net Reproduction for non-commercial use permitted with acknowledgement of website. Download the PDF version here . Light of Torah is a Sydney-based initiative, encouraging Christians to reflect on Torah with the help of Jewish insights . More...    The reflection above refers to Parashat Tetzaveh (Exodus 27.20 - 30.10 ), the Torah portion read for this Sabbath in the Jewish liturgical cycle. Shabbat shalom ! Download your free Jewish and Christian Liturgical Calendar, courtesy of   Etz Hayim-Tree of Life Publishing .

“When you come upon your enemy’s ox or donkey going astray, you shall bring it back. When you see the donkey of one who hates you lying under its burden and you would hold back from setting it free, you must help to set it free” (Exodus 23:4-5). Examine these words from the Book of Exodus carefully. Read them aloud. Ponder the detail of the text. Note its setting: amidst rules against slander and the perversion of justice (23:1-3, 6-8) and concluding with a verse about protection of the stranger (23:9). Discuss your observations with a friend. Why would these verses appear here? Why would these verses appear here? Perhaps because personal animosity has a tendency to lead to slander and false witness. Likewise, the stranger, the ‘outsider,’ is vulnerable to being treated as an enemy. Note how this teaching is phrased as a case study. It is not a general prohibition against mistreatment of another; it calls for an actively positive response of returning good for evil and offers two concrete examples. The second example is especially pointed. Returning a stray beast (v.4) could be done via a third party while avoiding any contact with its owner. Raising the felled beast (v.5), however, requires direct contact with its owner as both parties engage in a common task for good. Rabbinic commentators compare “When you come upon...” (v.4) with “When you see...” (v.5). Even if your enemy’s plight is seen from a distance you must leave your path and make your way to him to give assistance. The phrase ‘‘and you would hold back” (v.5) also comes under the sages’ microscope. To overcome within oneself the instinct for evil is the moral task of every person. A just society is built on lifegiving deeds, enacted even when one’s feelings dictate otherwise. In Jewish legal tradition we find this case: If a friend requires help unloading his donkey, and an enemy requires help loading his—our first duty is to attend to our enemy in order to discipline our instincts.1 Clearly, compassion for enemies is by no means unique to Christian teaching; it is embedded in Judaism. For example, in the story of the crossing of the Red Sea the Torah celebrates victory over the Egyptians, the oppressors of Israel. But a well known rabbinic commentary on this text describes the scene thus: The ministering angels wanted to sing a hymn at the destruction of the Egyptians, but God said, ‘My creatures are drowning and you are busy with song?’ 2 Reflection: What does it mean to embody the insights of this Torah discussion in daily life? Christians: Jesus says ‘Love your enemies’ in Matthew's Gospel (5:44). Can this Torah discussion deepen an appreciation of this teaching in the context of his Jewish tradition? Notes: 1. Bava Mezia 32b. 2. Megillah10b. Bibliography: Larsson, Bound for Freedom (Mass., 1999); Leibowitz, New Studies in Shemot (New York, 1996); Montefiore & Loewe, A Rabbinic Anthology (New York, 1974). Scripture: NRSV. © Teresa Pirola, 2013. lightoftorah.net | Reproduction for non-commercial use permitted with acknowledgement of website. Light of Torah is a Sydney-based initiative, encouraging Christians to reflect on Torah with the help of Jewish insights . More...    The reflection above refers to Parashat Mishpatim (Exodus 21:1 - 24:18), the Torah portion read for this Sabbath in the Jewish liturgical cycle. Shabbat shalom ! Download your free Jewish and Christian Liturgical Calendar, courtesy of   Etz Hayim-Tree of Life Publishing .

Having escaped with his people from Egypt, across the Red Sea and into the wilderness of Sinai, Moses is joined by his wife and sons and visited by his father-in-law, Jethro. Yethro priest of Midian, Moses’ father-in-law, heard all that God had done for Israel His people, how the Lord had brought Israel out from Egypt. So Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law . . . brought Moses' sons and wife to him in the wilderness, where he was encamped at the mountain of God. (Exodus 18:1,5) Read Exodus 18:1-27, all 27 verses. The Jewish sages teach us to be attentive to the use of repetition in the text. Did you notice it? Like a drumbeat, reference to Jethro as Moses’ ‘father-in-law’ is repeated 13 times in just 27 verses. What sparks of enquiry might the sacred text be igniting in us? Ponder this, with a friend, before reading on. The text could have highlighted Jethro’s identity as a foreigner, a pagan priest, a leader among the people of Midian. Instead it highlights his identity as ‘father-in-law.’ Thus it implicitly reminds us that Moses—ex-prince of Egypt, Hebrew fugitive, reluctant leader, saviour to his people—is a married man. Nothing surprising about that, you say. After all, the Patriarchs—Abraham, Isaac, Jacob—were all married. Yet, whilst the Torah is relatively vocal on the topic of the Patriarchs’ wives, it is strangely silent about Moses’ wife. For instance, the Torah announces her arrival with Jethro (18:6), but quickly falls silent again. We are told that Moses goes out to greet his father-in-law, they embrace, they ask after each other’s welfare, they go into the tent and converse (18:7)... Not a word about Moses’ wife, Zipporah. The Torah is relatively vocal on the topic of the Patriarchs’ wives, yet strangely silent about Moses’ wife. Why? On the rare occasions that Moses’ wife appears in the Torah there is a jarring note. Earlier in Exodus (4:24-26), she is involved in a circumcision scene which poses difficulties for the reader and has troubled many commentators in Jewish tradition. Today, Torah interpreters with a particular awareness of women in the bible discuss this scene in terms of Zipporah's heroism in saving her family and her devotion to Moses. Yet, a sense of unease in the relationship persists. In a later biblical story, Moses' wife is the focus of a conflict between Aaron, Miriam and Moses (Numbers 12:1). [1] T he long period of separation between Moses and his wife, as suggested by the Torah, has given rise to midrashic (storytelling) views that her presence would have interfered with Moses’ mission. There are also sources that interpret her being "sent home" by Moses (Exodus 18:2; shalach , 'sent') as Moses divorcing Zipporah. Other commentators disagree, pointing out that Yitro refers to her as Moses 'wife' four verses later in 18:6. Compare all this to the wives of the Patriarchs. Sarah, Rebekah, Rachel and Leah are active participants; they evoke a response from their husbands who love them, listen to them, grieve their deaths. So then, a curious contradiction emerges as our Torah text reminds us, 13 times, that Moses has a father-in-law (read: Moses has a wife) and at the same time includes uncomfortable silences and question marks surrounding his wife. The Torah celebrates Moses as a great leader to his people; yet, in contrast to the Patriarchs, his wife and children are in the shadows. Why? Might we find here the emergence of a new kind of vocation to spiritual leadership that precludes normal family relations? Or, is it simply a case of human frailties and marital tensions breaking through the narrative? Perhaps our questions reflect the time-conditioned challenge of ancient stories being heard by modern ears and far removed from their original social context. Over to you: Re-read Exodus 18:1-27, closely, thoughtfully, creatively. How do you interpret the repetition and absence in the text regarding Moses, Jethro and Zipporah? Reflection : Moses’ wife is from a Midianite family. Reflect on the gifts and challenges that spouses bring from their family-of-origin. In what ways do spouses and families bless one another? Jethro teaches his son-in-law how to reorganize his judicial practices. Have you had a ‘Jethro’ influence in your life; a family member or friend who helped you to rethink familiar practices? • Notes: 1. Numbers 12:1-16, refers to "a Cushite woman" married to Moses. There is debate as to whether this is Zipporah or another wife of Moses. In the bible refers to Cushites as "dark-skinned", and this is how artwork sometimes depicts Zipporah. See Eskenazi & Weiss, eds., The Torah: A Women’s Commentary  , 859. Bibliography: Eskenazi & Weiss, eds., The Torah: A Women’s Commentary  (New York, 2008); Sarna, ed The JPS Torah Commentary: Exodus (Philadelphia/New York/Jerusalem, 1991). Scripture: NJPS. Image: Media from Wix © Teresa Pirola, 2013, 2026. lightoftorah.net. Reproduction for non-commercial use permitted with acknowledgement of the Light of Torah website. Light of Torah is a Sydney-based initiative, encouraging Christians to reflect on Torah with the help of Jewish insights . More...    The reflection above refers to Parashat Yitro (Exodus 18:1 - 20:26), the Torah portion read for this Sabbath in the Jewish liturgical cycle. Shabbat shalom ! Download your free Jewish and Christian Liturgical Calendar, courtesy of   Etz Hayim-Tree of Life Publishing .

In Exodus 14:15-16 the Lord speaks to Moses in the midst of a terrifying scene: Having escaped from Egypt, the Hebrew refugees find themselves trapped on the shore of the Red Sea: an expanse of water on one side and, on the other, Egyptian chariots in pursuit with murderous intent. In their terror the people cry out to the Lord, and even accuse Moses of leading them to their deaths (v.11). Now, in verses 15-16, G-d intervenes... Then the Lord said to Moses, “Why do you cry out to me? Tell the Israelites to go forward. But you lift up your rod, and hold out your arm over the sea and split it, so that the Israelites may march into the sea on dry ground.” (Exodus14:15-16) The sages of Israel, so attuned to the subtleties of the biblical text, noticed something odd about these two verses. Before reading on, see if you can spot it for yourself... Wouldn’t you expect G-d to command Moses to split the sea before telling the Israelites to go forward into it? Yet, the text has the order of the two steps reversed. What can be made of this? According to one creative interpretation: some of the Israelites lacked faith at the edge of the sea. Yet G-d asks that they show their faith by marching into the sea even before the waters have parted. Some commentators suggest a back-and-forth discussion among the tribes of Israelites, which we might paraphrase like this: “I’m not going first into the sea; you go.” “No way, I’m not going, you go first! ” By contrast, another creative version has the tribes competing for the privilege of being the first to take the plunge, which we might paraphrase as: “I’ll go first.” “No, I want to be first!” How do you imagine the scene? Can you relate it to a moment in your own life when you were called to ‘take the plunge’ into an unknown future and potentially perilous situation? How did you feel, react, behave? Did you ‘go first’? Can you think of a time when you were called to ‘take the plunge’ into an unknown future and potentially perilous situation? Another midrash (interpretative story) takes an even stronger view, saying that the people were doubly rebellious at the sea. Why double? Psalm 106:7 contains a repetition [evident in the Hebrew text]: But [they] rebelled at the sea , at the Sea of Reeds. If the first moment of rebellion was the hesitation to go forward into the water, what was the second? The second, say some commentators, was to complain about the mud as they were walking through the parted waters! This interpretation relies on the use of the Hebrew word for mud ( homer ) found in Habakkuk (3:15). The Jewish interpreters of old knew their Scriptures intimately and manoeuvred through the texts freely, creatively, insightfully and prayerfully. In this way they came to conclude: miracles in themselves don’t bring people to faith. (It would appear that Jesus himself shared this view, reluctant to be labelled as a wonder-worker.) Like the petty grumblings amidst the miracle of the Red Sea, so can we be blind to the divine presence in our lives, held back by our fears or distracted by the ‘mud on our shoes.’ The attitude of ‘counting blessings’, making gratitude lists and practicing affirmation as a lifestyle behaviour are all ways to attune our hearts and minds to the Lord’s liberating presence. Review your own practices in this light. Are you quick to notice blessings or burdens? Are you more likely to praise or complain? • Bibliography: Bialik & Ravnitzky, eds., The Book of Legends (New York, 1992); Leibowitz, New Studies in Shemot (Jerusalem, 1996). Scripture: JPS . © Teresa Pirola, 2013. lightoftorah.net . Reproduction for non-commercial use permitted with acknowledgement of the Light of Torah website. Light of Torah is a Sydney-based initiative, encouraging Christians to reflect on Torah with the help of Jewish insights . More... The reflection above refers to Parashat B'shalach (Exodus 13:17 - 17:16), the Torah portion read for this Sabbath in the Jewish liturgical cycle. Shabbat shalom ! Download your free Jewish and Christian Liturgical Calendar, courtesy of Etz Hayim-Tree of Life Publishing .

In Exodus 12 we find the story of a momentous event that shapes Israel as a people and is told and retold through the generations to this very day. What event? The Passover: the ritual meal shared by the Hebrews on the night of their exodus from Egypt. With this story comes the first comprehensive list of religious precepts that we find in the Bible. Many more will follow, especially in Leviticus. But here, at the critical turning point that is the Passover, we find the first. Read this passage in Exodus 12:1-28, then let’s focus on verse 14. “This day shall be to you one of remembrance: you shall celebrate it as a festival to the L ORD throughout the ages; you shall celebrate it as an institution for all time” (Exodus 12:14). Note all the instructions detailing how this festival is to be remembered (in Exodus 12:1-28). Why does the sacred text interrupt the exodus story with a list of seemingly tedious domestic duties and laborious legalities? Doesn’t this contradict the essence of the narrative which is all about liberation? The Jewish sages have pondered this question over the centuries, and the text continues to be studied today. What insights might Christians glean from Jewish interpreters? A key insight is found in the Sefer Ha-Hinukh: [1] “Consider well therefore your occupations and pursuits; for you will be influenced by them and not vice versa. Do not be lulled into a false sense of security as if to say: ‘seeing that my heart is perfect and unimpaired by its belief in God, what harm is there if I occasionally indulge in worldly pleasures, in idling in the streets...engaging in vain and boastful talk with the scorners...Why should they influence me?’” The text goes on to say that “actions shape character.” How fitting, say the sages, that Israel should commemorate its central redemptive event not only by telling the story but by performing an elaborate set of ritual actions. “Now that you know this, do not be puzzled by the large number of precepts connected with the commemoration of the miracles of Egypt.”[2] Here, Catholic readers might ponder how Jewish customs have influenced the development of their Church’s liturgical traditions, including its central act of worship: the Mass. To celebrate the Eucharist is not just to tell the story of Jesus' death and resurrection, it is also to perform an elaborate ritual. But wait! Didn’t Jesus have strong words of critique for religious rituals that had become mere lip service? Indeed. And from where might Jesus the Jew have gleaned such ideas? From the Hebrew Scriptures, from the Jewish prophetic tradition such as the voice of Isaiah: “Their worship of me is a human commandment learned by rote” (29:13, NRSV). The prophets of Israel warned against the distortions of ritual excess, and they also warned against lack of practice (e.g., see Jeremiah 7:27-28). Convictions of the heart are expressed in concrete action, while our actions confirm and strengthen the convictions of the heart. Christians are familiar with the idea that faith and good works, what we believe and what we do , go hand in hand in seeking to love and worship God. This delicate interplay is core to Christian discipleship, and its roots are to be found in the Scriptures and traditions of the Jewish people. Reflection Ponder your own experience of liturgy. What is your response to the claim that liturgical ritual is an “action that shapes character”? • 1. Ha-Hinukh: first book of religious instruction among Jews of the Middle Ages. Quoted by Leibowitz, 179-180. 2. Ibid. Bibliography: Leibowitz, New studies in Shemot (Jerusalem, 1996). © Teresa Pirola, 2013. lightoftorah.net . Reproduction for non-commercial use permitted with acknowledgement of website. Download the PDF version . Light of Torah is a Sydney-based grassroots ministry encouraging Christians to reflect on Torah with the help of Jewish insights. More... The reflection above refers to Parashat Bo (Exodus 10:1 - 13:16), the Torah portion read for this Sabbath in the Jewish liturgical cycle. Shabbat shalom ! Download your free Jewish and Christian Liturgical Calendar, courtesy of Etz Hayim-Tree of Life Publishing .