Deification of defacation? The inside story of Ba'al Pe'or

The opening portion of yesterday’s Torah reading concluded told of Pinchas’s exploits and reward – the conclusion of the sorry story of Israel’s entrapment in idolatry and immorality. While all idolatry is strictly opposed and prohibited by the Torah, there is something particularly unusual and unsettling about the worship of Ba’al Pe’or which draws the attention of the sages.

On Sanhedrin (60b), we read that the mode of worship of Ba’al Pe’or was defecation in front of it. In Rabbi S. R. Hirsch’s understanding, such a public act which goes against an innate human feeling of dignity and self-respect was deeply symbolic. It was intended to convey and internalize the message that humans are no different to animals – who feel no shame in publicly defecating. The public display of immorality that followed was a similar failing, not only sinning but performing the sin in a way which belied the usual human feelings of shame of committing sexual acts in public.

The philosophy of Pe’or worship in this telling is a complete abandonment of human dignity and shame – what Rav Hirsch called an almost Darwinian declaration that humans are not distinct from the animal kingdom. In keeping with this suggestion, the prophet Hoshea (9:10) described those who worshipped Ba’al Pe’or as having separated themselves for dedication to shame.

Judaism Reclaimed approaches the episode of Bila’am based on a midrashically-enhanced idea that, as representative prophet of the 70 nations, Bila’am sought to have Israel’s special chosen status revoked. Several verses openly state that Israel was not particularly worthy of leaving Egypt, receiving the Torah and entering the Land in their own right – they were mostly riding on the coattails of the Avot.

God clearly rejected Bila’am’s petition and doubled-down on Israel’s continued suitability as chosen nation to represent His word and teachings the world. Bila’am, it would seem, attempted to have the last laugh – seeking to demonstrate that he could lure the Jews to surrender not only their special enhanced status but even their very human dignity and Tzelem Elokim spark.

In light of this explanation we can gain a new appreciation for the verses stated in Devarim 4:3-4:

Your eyes have seen what God did at Baal Peor, for every man who went after Baal Peor, Hashem your God has exterminated from your midst. But you who cleave to Hashem your God are alive, all of you, this day.

For comments and discussion of this post on Facebook, click here.

Ayin Hara: A dangerous spiritual force or behavioural guide?

 few days ago, I received a Whatsapp message advertising the services of an “Ayin Hara lady” who could, it promised, banish any unwanted afflictions caused by the Evil Eye. Molten lead included. All for the small fee of $101!

The advertisement prompted me to recall an excellent Shiur I heard from Rabbi Aubrey Hersh a few years ago on the subject. I also noted that it has relevance to yesterday’s Torah reading, with Bilaam characterised by the sages as having possessed an “Evil Eye”.

Rabbi Hersh’s unexpected source for the concept of Ayin Hara was a series of verses towards the end of Parashat Mishpatim in which we are warned not to oppress or taunt strangers, widows and orphans. If such vulnerable people are mistreated, the passage continues, there will be a measure-for-measure punishment: “My wrath will be kindled, and I will slay you with the sword, and your wives will be widows and your children orphans.” (Shemot 22:23).

Without entering into the many questions that this raises concerning the nature of divine justice, there is a very clear message which can be taken from these verses. If you are fortunate enough to have been blessed with family, health and wealth, then these are blessings which God has showered upon you in order for you to have the wherewithal to improve and develop yourself and help those around you. But what of someone who has been blessed by God and subsequently uses their position in order to taunt and oppress those who are lacking and vulnerable? “If you oppress him, [beware,] for if he cries out to Me, I will surely hear his cry.” (Shemot 22:22).

This then is the reason why one should not flaunt one’s blessings in front of others. Proudly talking of one’s children and grandchildren – or one’s investments and vacations – in front of others in a way that might lead to jealousy and resentment. If people are oppressed because you are blessed, then the “Evil Eye” will cause it to be divinely redressed. It is not a dark or evil force that can be offset by strange rituals of molten lead. It is divine punishment for a severe character failing and misuse of divine blessings which can be set right by, as the Haftarah concluded yesterday, “walking modestly with God”.

Many of the traditional teachings concerning Ayin Hara also fit this model. Yosef was understood to be immune to the effects of Ayin Hara. This imparts an important principle since Yosef did achieve a position of wealth and prominence in his later years but, in contrast to (and perhaps in response to) the behaviour of his youth, his blessings were used to benefit those around him rather than engender jealousy.

The notion that fish symbolise some form of antidote or exception to Ayin Hara likewise makes sense without viewing them as magical creatures imbued with special protective powers. While fish are “blessed with multitudes of offspring” – the prayer recited Rosh Hashanah night asks God to make us as fertile as fish – their blessing is concealed beneath the water and thus not considered to be flaunted at others.

One prominent example of Ayin Hara found in the Midrash is found in the context of Sara and Hagar, where Sara is understood to have “placed an Evil Eye” on Hagar after she conceived, causing her to miscarry. Setting aside the implications for peshat and how literally we approach such a Midrash, this certainly fits the teaching presented here since Hagar, as a result of conceiving where Sara could not, now looks down on and mocks her mistress causing her to cry out in pain to God.

The evil eye here, again, is not about magical or demonic powers but rather it is a profound metaphor for character development, the proper approach to blessings and training oneself to consider the feelings of others.

Bilaam’s association with the Evil Eye is a little more complex. Judaism Reclaimed develops a theory, based on Midrashic interpretation sprinkled with a few hints from the verses, that Bilaam primary complaint against the Jewish nation arose from a form of jealousy. He recognises that they have ancestral merit working in their favour from the Avot and he is constantly attempting to argue that they are not worthy of this special assistance. He wants to present the nations as unjustifiably slighted as a result of Israel’s blessings and cries out to God in prayer as a result.

However, there is an additional dimension to Ayin Hara which is particularly pertinent to our discussion. Rambam, in his commentary to the 5th chapter of Avot (5:19), discusses the reasons why those with “Ayin Ra” are labelled students of Bilaam. There he contrasts the behaviour and attitudes to materialism displayed by Bilaam and Avraham. Bilaam, he points out, was so motivated by the wealth promised by Balak that he rushed over from Syria to curse the Israel; Avraham in contrast, even having fought in the battle of the 4-5 kings to rescue Lot, refused to take even a shoe strap as compensation.

We can right ask ourselves whether a person demanding $101 to perform some magical rite in order to “cure Ayin Hara” is actually perpetuating the very ill that she is claiming to heal.

For comments and discussion of this post on Facebook, click here.

Aiming High: Holy Nation and Resurrection

Since God is understood to be aware of our thoughts and feelings, and “probe the inner recesses of our heart”, it is not surprising that Judaism places great value on thoughts and aspirations – not just on a person’s actions. However noble and praiseworthy our spiritual ambitions may be, however, we must be extremely careful not to confuse them with our reality and consider ourselves more worthy than we really are. This, writes Rabbi S. R. Hirsch was the critical error of Korach and his assembly.

Focusing on Korach's statement: "the entire congregation are all holy and have God in their midst, and why have you elevated yourself over the community of God?" Rav Hirsch suggests that Korach's error was to confuse destiny with reality. The Jewish people had certainly been accorded the title of “holy nation”, but this meant only that they had been set aside for a holy purpose, to aspire and raise themselves towards holiness by dedicating themselves to God and His Torah (“tiheyun li” – you SHALL be to Me). The presence of God's Mishkan in their midst gave this holy ideal a symbolic expression, but there remained clearly defined boundaries and rules governing who could enter the Mishkan and when such entry would be permitted.

The danger posed by Korach's claims of equality of holiness and status for each Jew, and universal qualification to interpret the Torah, represented a threat to the entire system and process of expounding halachah. This is because those claims suggested that the nation had collectively arrived at a level of holiness and understanding that obviated any need for religious leadership or guidance in interpreting the Torah. Korach’s assertions drew an emphatic response from God, a miraculous phenomenon to demonstrate unambiguously the fallacy of such claims. This phenomenon was thus intended to make it clear that the nation designated to be holy must rely on the religious guidance of its members who have already succeeded in refining their character and relationship with God.

But while it’s important to have the clarity to distinguish one’s ambitions and goals from one’s reality, there are some scenarios in which Judaism certainly does place strong emphasis on aspirations. One possible example of this is the closing chapter of Rambam’s Hilchot Teshuvah which describes a level of religious worship – out of love and pure motive – that it recognizes are only practically attainable by a small minority of people. It would seem that there is religious value when one approaches the process of repentance in being aware and accepting the nature of higher levels of Judaism even if they are always likely to lie beyond one’s personal reality. On a more practical level, this may also explain the widespread custom that people have of striving to higher levels of observance during the Ten Days of Repentance despite the knowledge that this is a short-term effort that is unlikely to be sustained.

Finally, Judaism Reclaimed dedicates several chapters to the difficult subject of Resurrection of the Dead in Rambam’s thought. One possibility explored is the interpretation of Rambam offered by Rabbi Yosef Albo’s Sefer Ha’Ikkarim. Briefly stated, Rabbi Albo suggests that Resurrection represents an opportunity for those who were honest and righteous Jews yet lacked the life opportunities to develop the sort of spiritual connection to God necessary for an enhanced portion in the World to Come. Techiyat Hameitim, in a future idyllic Messianic era, affords such pious individuals the chance to pursue religious and spiritual perfection under optimum conditions.

Which attributes or merits does one require in order to qualify for this techiyah? Various Talmudic sources appear to support this understanding of Rambam’s approach to techiyah. One Gemara in Kiddushin (39b) identifies two mitzvot upon which techiyat hametim depends: sending away the mother bird and the honouring of one’s parents. These two mitzvot involve basic human character traits and attitudes regarding sensitivity to the feelings of others. This therefore makes them suitable determinants of whether a person deserves to receive another opportunity to maximise his Olam Haba under more favourable conditions. Arrogance, by contrast, is seen as a destructive trait that can prevent a person from receiving a second opportunity of techiya (Sotah 8b).

Another Gemara, in Ketubot (111b), mentions the merit of Torah study being connected to qualifying for techiyah. Crucially, however, it is not specifically the study of Torah which makes one worthy of resurrection: even seeking a connection to Torah study (such as by supporting Torah scholars) will achieve that result. The common denominator of these Gemaras is that what is most crucial in meriting techiyah is one’s attitude and effort. What one is aspiring towards not necessarily what has already been achieved. This can be contrasted, in Rambam’s line of thought, with qualification for Olam Haba itself, which focuses on the reality of a person having achieved an intellectual perception of divine truths.

For comments and discussion of this post on Facebook, click here.