Friday, February 1, 2019

We Will Do and Listen — BT Shabbat 88a,b — #125


R. Elazar said, “When the Israelites gave precedence to ‘We will do’ over ‘We will listen,’ a bat kol (heavenly voice) exclaimed to them, ‘Who revealed to My children this secret the Ministering Angels use? As it is written, Bless Adonai, you angels of [God], mighty creatures who do [God’s] bidding, hearkening to the voice of [God’s] word (Psalm 103:20)—first they fulfill, and then they hearken.” R. Chama b. R. Chanina said, “What is the meaning of, As the apple tree among the trees of the wood, [so is my beloved among the sons] (Song of Songs 2:3)? Why were the Israelites compared to an apple tree? To teach you that just as the fruit of the apple tree precedes its leaves, so did the Israelites give precedence to ‘We will do’ over ‘We will hearken.’” 
A heretic saw Rava engrossed in his studies while his fingers were under his leg and he was squeezing them so that his fingers spurted blood. [The heretic] said [to Rava], “You impulsive people who accorded precedence to your mouth over your ears—you still persist in your impulsiveness. You should listen first [to the conditions of the Torah] and, if you are capable, accept; if not, do not accept.” [Rava] said to [the heretic], “Concerning us, (88b) who are wholehearted, it is written, The integrity of the upright will guide them (Proverb 11:3). But concerning others, who walk in deceit, it is written, And the deviousness of the treacherous leads them to ruin.

INTRODUCTION
In the course of conveying God’s laws to Israel, Torah several times recounts the Israelites’ affirmation, “All that Adonai has said, we will do” (e.g., Exodus 19:8 and 24:3), but Exodus 24:7 employs the singular phrase na’aseh v’nishma (“We will do and we will hearken”), which  suggests  to the Rabbis that the Israelites were prepared to do as God commanded before hearing or considering the laws they were committing themselves to obey. In context, this is a difficult interpretation because na’aseh v’nishma follows on the heels of, “Moses took the record of the covenant and read it aloud to the people.” A more accurate translation is, “We will do and obey.”

COMMENTARY
R. Elazar tells us that at the very moment the Israelites uttered the words na’aseh v’nishma, a heavenly voice (i.e., God) cried out, “Who told the Israelites the angels’ secret?!” The claim that the angels obey God’s commands before they even hear them is supported by a verse from Psalm 103, which uses the same two linguistic roots as na’aseh v’nishma, in the same order—hence “doing” before “hearing.” For the psalmist, these are two parallel phrases that convey the same meaning; for R. Elazar, their order places precedence on “doing” over “hearing,” proving that this is an angelic, heavenly, divine mode of receiving God’s commands.

R. Chama produces a second verse in support of R. Elazar’s contention. In Song of Songs 2:3, a woman describes her lover as a sole apple tree in a forest—distinct, superior, bearing fruit. The Rabbis understand Song of Songs to be an allegory for the love relationship between God and Israel. Accordingly, and in defiance of botanical science, R. Chama explains that just as the apple tree bears fruit (equivalent to “doing”) before it produces leaves (equated with “hearing”), so too the Israelites committed to God’s Torah before they had heard a word of it.

The acclaim of Israel’s sight-unseen, word-unheard acceptance of God’s Torah is next bolstered with a story about Rava’s encounter with a heretic. Rava, we are to understand, was so utterly engrossed by his Torah studies—so thoroughly engaged in a way that reflects a post-Sinai version of na’aseh v’nishma—that he caused what should have been painful bleeding to himself, yet was neither aware of the blood or the pain. The heretic observes that the impulsive quality of the Jews, which caused them to accept God’s Torah without first knowing what they were committing themselves to, is evident in Rava’s irrational behavior. Rather, the heretic opines, one should first listen and considered whether one has the capacity to fulfill a commitment, and decide accordingly whether or not to accept it. Rava responds that those who are truly upright are guided by their integrity, which entails saying yes to God immediately, and only afterward asking what God’s requirements comprise. Those who are not upright and lack such integrity are devious and their modus operandi is treachery rather than devotion; this leads them to ruin.

QUESTIONS TO CONSIDER AND DISCUSS
  1. The Rabbis make their best case for Israel’s fervent and unqualified commitment to God’s commandments before having an inkling of Torah’s content—despite Torah’s multiple affirmations that things didn’t happen this way, and the likelihood that na’aseh v’nishma is best understood “we will do and obey.” What does it mean to accept God’s Torah whole cloth in a religious tradition that encourages adherents to scrutinize, interpret, and reinterpret every word? What is the meaning of na’aseh v’nishma today? How do you interpret it?
  2. Na’aseh v’nishma has long been emblematic of Israel’s unique commitment to God. Midrash Sifri Deuteronomy 343 (and at least four other midrashic compilations) recounts that God shopped the Torah around to other nations, each of which asked what it contained. As soon as God revealed a sample commandment, each nation rejected the Torah because they did not like that particular rule. Only Israel accepted the Torah sight unseen. The midrash intends to assert a qualitative difference between Israel and other nations. What do you think?
  3. Curiously, after the people utter na’aseh v’nishma, the next verse (Exodus 24:8) recounts that Moses dashes the blood of sacrificial offerings on the people. There is, as yet, no sacrificial system because the Mishkan (Tabernacle) has not been built, so it would appear that the nation itself is the altar or parochet (curtain) at this stage. That in itself is a fascinating idea to reflect upon. Additionally, do you think there is a connection between Exodus 24:8 and Rava’s blood, which flowed because of his exceptional devotion?

No comments:

Post a Comment