AND HE BROUGHT NEAR THE SECOND RAM, THE RAM OF THE

INVESTITURES, AND AARON AND HIS SONS LEANED THEIR HANDS [FORCEFULLY] UPON THE

RAM'S HEAD. AND HE SLAUGHTERED [IT]… AND

MOSES TOOK SOME OF ITS BLOOD, AND PLACED IT ON AARON'S RIGHT EARLOBE, ON THE THUMB

OF HIS RIGHT HAND AND ON THE BIG TOE OF HIS RIGHT FOOT.

If we have succeeded in explaining the three

earlier uses of the shalshelet in the Torah as signifying a moment of indecision,

why would we expect Moses to be especially indecisive and hesitant in the verse

from our parasha?

On each of the seven Days of Ordination,

three offerings were made: a sin offering, a burnt offering and a peace

offering. Tension builds from slaughter to slaughter. This is expressed by the

cantillation sign appearing above the word vayish'hat (and it was

slaughtered) in each verse. Verse 15, referring to the sin offering, uses

the sign reviya, which marks a break of moderate significance. Verse 19

deals with the burnt offering, and the very first word of the verse, vayish'hat,

is marked with an etnahta, signifying the most important division of the

verse. Our verse treats the ram of ordination, and is marked with a shalshelet.

There are those who explain that in the course of the service, Moses

experienced spiritual exaltation while performing the tasks that would be later

reserved for the High Priest. While dismayed by the thought that he will soon

have to abandon this role, he remains true to the divine command.

It seems to me that Moses' hesitancy had a

completely different cause. The third slaughter, on the seventh of the Days of

Ordination, was Moses' final ritual act before handing over the priestly role

to Aaron. In the course of those days, Moses served as an educator. Just before

he executes the slaughter and completes his job, Moses asks himself: Have I

taught flawlessly? Perhaps I have failed in my preparation of Aaron for his

role? That is why the word vayish'hat is marked with a shalshelet. The

great teacher is subjecting himself to merciless self-criticism.

(From Yossi Morgenstern's article, "The

Shalshelet as Interpretive Cantillation" Shabbat Shalom, Tzav

issue, 5764)

A Little Purim-Torah

Devora Weissman

They

used to say that Prof. Ernst Akiva Simon, of blessed memory, would spend Purim

day in Jerusalem

and Shushan Purim in Tel Aviv in order to avoid the obligation to observe the

holiday's commandments, especially the reading of the Meggilah. His son, our

comrade Prof. Uriel Simon (may he be granted long life) told me that this was

just an "urban legend." In any event, Simon's "trick"

wouldn't work this year or in similar years, when we observe a "Triple

Purim" in Jerusalem

and read the Meggilah together with the rest of the Jewish People However, the

story does point to a genuine issue which is a problem for many of my closest

friends.

Two

elements can be found in every Jewish holiday: the "theory" and the "practice."

The theory is the story, the meanings, and the ideas associated with the holiday.

The practice is the set of actions through which we celebrate the holiday. Some

of my good friends reject the theory of Purim, some of them reject the

practice, and some reject both! (How people who do not enjoy food and drink,

singing and dancing, unruly behavior, etc. became friends of mine is a mystery

whose solution would take us far beyond the confines of the present article). However,

I can understand why they have problems with the theory. Meggilat Esther seems

to tell a story which is violent, anti-feminist, and full of vengeance against

gentiles. Many do not see the connection between the rescue of a Jewish

diaspora community and the carnival atmosphere of its celebration.

I

must admit that since the 1990s it has become more difficult to celebrate

Purim, given all of the tragic events that occurred on that day. It began in

1992, with the attack on the Israeli embassy in Buenos Ares (which served as a

kind of harbinger of the mass murder that occurred in the Jewish community

center of that city two years later ion the tenth of Av.). The next tragedy

came in 1994, when in revenge for murders committed by Palestinians, Baruch

Goldstein entered the Ma'arat HaMachpela and murdered twenty-nine

Muslims at prayer. There were serious attacks in Tel Aviv in 1996 and 1997. It

is no wonder that for many people, this day bears extremely negative

significance.

Despite

all of the above, Purim is my favorite holiday. I believe that it is a

very deep holiday; it is fascinatingly complex. I do not ignore its potential

dangers. The Sages of the Talmud were aware of them, as we see in the tractate

Meggilah 7a: "Esther sent a message to the Sages: "Establish me

jealousy of the nations against us." She responded to them: "They

have already written about me in the chronicles of the kings of Media and Persia."

According to this passage, Esther was herself aware of the potential for her

story to arouse antagonism. Her argument was simply that her story was already

known. Throughout Jewish history, Purim offered an opportunity for our fellow

Jews to express their justified anger and their understandable frustrations. One

might say that the Meggilah preserves the dream of the diaspora Jew:

it was reversed, that the Jews should rule over their enemies.

The literary motif of it was reversed

is certainly characteristic of many of the Meggilah's plot developments. On its

surface, the Meggilah is a trivial tale of court intrigues and drinking parties.

Meggilat Esther is the only book of the biblical canon in which God's name does

not appear. This motif also finds expression in the holiday's customs. Ad'deloyada

requires that one drink alcoholic beverages until it becomes impossible to

distinguish between "blessed is Mordechai and "cursed be Haman."

The customary "Purim Torah" laughs at the most sacred things. Good

Jews who are usually serious dress up in costumes and act wildly.

The story of the Meggilah can be seen as an

archetype of Jewish communal experience in the diaspora; it includes

assimilation, antisemitism, existential threats, stress, lobbying, and

self-defense. The article on Purim in the Encyclopedia Judaica lists

more than a hundred local "Purims" celebrated in communities from

Frankfurt and Saragossa to Egypt. Over the course of many

generations, when a Jewish community wanted to commemorate a "miraculous"

escape from some impending disaster, it established a "local Purim"

which used the Meggilah as its model. Since communal solidarity is one response

to danger – Go gather all the Jews (4:16)

– the holiday's commandments, such as gift to the poor and mishloah manot

are deeds that encourage social solidarity.

And what of the costumes?¹ I

would like to propose that, in the final accounting, the holiday is about our

identity and our relation to the other. It is interesting that, one the one

hand, Purim is the most universal holiday on our calendar. It's mode of

celebration is very similar to the festivals of other peoples. African tribes

practice rites of role reversal. Some of these rituals and festivals are

celebrated in the same season as is Purim, between winter and spring, a time of

uncertainty and anxiety. On the other hand, Purim is the most Jewish of holidays;

it reflects Jewish experience – the experience of "Jews" rather than

of "Hebrews" or "Israelites." Mordechai is the first

biblical character referred to as a Jew who does not belong to the tribe

of Judah:

he is an ish Yemani (2:5), a

Benjaminite. This mix of the universal and the particular seems paradoxical,

and the holiday is awash in paradoxes.

One way to relate to the other or even to

identify with him is to "walk in his shoes." Perhaps this is a way to

contend with the other inside of us. The Hebrew word for "to masquerade"

– lehit'hapes – is a reflexive construction of the verb meaning "to

search for." It literally means "to search for oneself." In

order to masquerade, we must first know who we are; we must first know who we

are in order to pretend to be someone whom we are not, or perhaps in order to

masquerade as who we really are – the "I" who finds no expression on

the other days of the year.

Eruvin 65b contains a well-known proverb: "One

can be known by one's cup, by one's pocket, and by one's anger; some say also

by one's play." In its original context, the saying has no direct

connection with Purim. I would like to propose a "Purimesque"

interpretation of it: First of all, "one's play" – Purim is the

classic opportunity for Jewish humor, laughter, and acting. The Yiddish and

Hebrew theatres find their roots in the Purimspiel. Any nation's humor

is deeply connected with its cultural identity.

"One's cup"? We have already

mentioned the commandment of ad'deloyada. We can be proud of the fact

that this drinking rarely gives rise to the violence and "crimes of

passion" found in other carnivals.

"One's pocket"? We have already

mentioned that we are commanded to pay for charity and gifts of food from our

pockets on this holiday, making it an opportunity for social cooperation.

And what of the anger, which heads the

list?

The Purim tradition offers a wonderful model

for the sublimation of aggression into a non-destructive form. The Torah does,

of course, contain a commandment to erase the memory of Amalek. At first

glance, this commandment looks like it could lead us – God forbid – to commit

genocide. In practice, the commandment is observed with the help of an

ingenuous invention: the noisemaker. We erase the memory of Amalek by making

noise when Haman the Agaggite's name is mentioned during the reading of the

Meggilah. What a wonderful way to temper feelings of anger, frustration, and

aggressiveness. If only all the nations could find such creative ways to deal

with their anger, no matter how justified.

I say that on Purim the Jew's character is revealed in his cup, his

pocket, his anger, and his play. It is not a holiday of Jewish vengeance, but

rather a holiday of Jewish identity. Purim is potentially dangerous,

just as is Jewish identity if it finds expression in nationalist chauvinism or

hatred of the other. However, it also contains a potential for blessing, for

balance between the universal and the particularistic, and relations of identity

with the other, be that other within us or outside of us.

You don't agree? Than accept these words as "Purim Torah" – and

let us drink le'hayyim…

[1]. It might be also said that this expresses one of the Meggilah's central

ideas in a charming and Purimesque fashion: one must never depend on reality's

outer appearance, and we do not always know how to interpret that appearance. A

king can actually be a "clown" (e.g., King Ahasuerus is completely

negligent of state affairs, preferring to organize banquets and drinking

parties), a Persian queen can be a loyal Jew, an antisemitic public servant can

dress up his hatred in patriotic guise, and the hand of God which saves the

Jews can masquerade as the happenstance that drives the plot (hester panim

– the hiding of God's face).

Dr. Devorah Weisman, a founder of Jerusalem's Kehillat

Yedidya, is an educator.

When the fifteenth falls on Shabbat, the Meggilah is

money for the poor is collected and distributed that same day.

Two Torah

scrolls are taken out on that Shabbat;

Then

came Amalek is read

from the second.

Al

HaNissim is recited.

The Purim

Feast is not held until Sunday.

Like

clouds, wind – but no rain – is one who boasts of gifts not given.

(Proverbs 25:14)

Like

clouds, wind, etc. – As when

there is false

hope, when the skies fill with

clouds, and the wind blows, and one expects rain but it does not come, making

one distressed and desperate, so it is with a man who boasts, saying, "I

will give such and such charity to the alms-collector," yet he lies and

the poor desperately anticipate his gift, but it does not arrive.

(Rashi on Proverbs

25:14)

Even though they said that villagers advance [the

reading of the Meggilah] to the day they go into town, [gifts for the poor] are

collected and distributed that very same day. "Even though they

said"? On the contrary, because "they said" [i.e., gifts are

given to the poor on the day people go into town because "they said" the Meggilah would be read on

that day]. Rather: Since they said that villagers advance [the reading of the

Meggilah] to the day they go into town – [gifts for the poor] are collected and

distributed that very same day, because the poor look forward to the reading of

the Meggilah [knowing that they will receive gifts].

(Meggilah 4b)

The blood

is the soul

Eat no blood:

For it is improper for one having a soul to eat a soul, for the souls all

belong to God. The human's soul and the animal's soul are both His, they

the same spirit (Kohellet

3:19).

(RaMBaN on VaYikra

17:11)

It may also be said regarding the prohibition upon

eating blood: Besides its being an ill humor, eating it causes one to become

cruel. [That is what happens] when a human swallows parts of animals that are

physically similar to him, the parts upon which the animals are dependent for

their very lives. It is known that animals have a "soul", which the

philosophers call the "animal soul" – that is to say, [a soul] that

is not intellectual, even if it is apparent that their soul is capable of the

discernment necessary for avoiding falling into holes and a few other things…

(Sefer HaHinukh

148)

It is not implied that the actual substance of the

blood is life, only that the blood bears the spirit of life which is in living

creatures and is inextricably connected with the spirit of life, and both

together form the living creature. The blood is the instrument of the soul

through which it carries out its activities.

(R. David Tzvi

Hoffman's commentary on VaYikra, as quoted in Prof. Nehama Leibowitz z"l's

Studies in Vayikra, pg.55, Aryeh Newman, translator)

The consciousness of shame is the beginning of moral

improvement…Cover the blood! Hide your shame! These actions will bear fruit

and ultimately educate mankind. The mute protest will, when the time is ripe,

system of commandments regulating slaughter, inspection, and salting of meat]

be transformed into a mighty shout and succeed in its aim. The very nature of

the principles of ritual slaughter with their specific rules and regulations

designed to reduce pain, create the atmosphere that you are not dealing with an

inanimate automat, but with a living soul.

(R. A. Y. HaKohen Kook,

ztz"l, Talilei Orot, as quoted in Prof. Nehama Leibowitz z"l's

Studies in Vayikra, pg.55, Aryeh Newman, translator)

But they

did not lay hands on the spoil – The Distinction Between Rescue and

Redemption

But they did not lay hands on the spoil (Esther

9:10) Even though the royal decree

specified to plunder their possessions, they did not take spoil, lest

the king say that their intention was not deliverance from their enemies, but

the taking of spoils, therefore but they did not lay hands on the spoil

– that it be known that they were innocent of that. Know yet more, they related

properly to this miracle, for the miracle was wrought not so that Israel

acquires wealth, but to vanquish their enemies. This is the difference between

this deliverance (geulah) and other deliverances: from all other

deliverances, they profited. When they left Egypt

– the geulah was to bring them out of Egypt and make them a free people –

they profited from this geulah. But the purpose of this – the Purim –

miracle was to remove the foe, but not to gain anything beyond what they had

before, for even after the miracle they were still subjects of Ahasuerus. Thus Israel

acquired nothing in Ahasuerus's days beyond what they already had. Even though

the fear of Jews was upon them, this was to remove the adversaries, but not to

rule over them, as will soon be explained. Had they taken their wealth, it

would have looked as though the miracle was wrought so that they profit from

the geulah – but certainly there is no profit here, for they were still

in exile.

(Ohr Hadash L'Purim,

MaHaraL of Prague, p. 308)

If you enjoy Shabbat Shalom, please consider contributing towards

its publication and distribution.

• Hebrew edition distributed in Israel

  $700

• English edition distributed via email $

  100

Issues may be dedicated in honor of an event, person, simcha, etc.

Requests must be made 3-4 weeks in advance to appear in the Hebrew, 10 days in

advance to appear in the English email.

In Israel, checks made out to Oz VeShalom may be

sent to Oz VeShalom-P.O.B. 4433, Jerusalem

91043. Unfortunately there is no Israeli tax-exemption for local donations.

US and British tax-exempt contributions to Oz VeShalom may be made

through:

New Israel Fund, POB

91588, Washington, DC 20090-1588,

USA

New Israel Fund of Great Britain, 26 Enford

Street, London W1H

2DD, Great Britain

PLEASE NOTE THAT THE NEW ISRAEL

FUND IS NO LONGER ACCEPTING DONATIONS UNDER $100.

PEF will also channel donations and provide a tax-exemption. Donations

should be sent to P.E.F. Israel Endowment Funds, Inc., 317 Madison Ave., Suite 607, New

York, New York 10017 USA

All contributions should be marked as donor-advised to Oz ve'Shalom, the

Shabbat Shalom project.

About us

Oz Veshalom-Netivot Shalom is a movement dedicated to the advancement of

a civil society in Israel.

It is committed to promoting the ideals of tolerance, pluralism, and justice,

concepts that have always been central to Jewish tradition and law.

Oz Veshalom-Netivot Shalom shares a deep attachment to the land of Israel and it no less views peace as a

central religious value. It believes that Jews have both the religious and the

national obligation to support the pursuit of peace. It maintains that Jewish

law clearly requires us to create a fair and just society, and that co-existence

between Jews and Arabs is not an option but an imperative.

5,000

copies of a 4-page peace oriented commentary on the weekly Torah reading are

written and published by Oz VeShalom/Netivot Shalom and they are distributed to

over 350 synagogues in Israel

and are sent overseas via email. Our web site is www.netivot-shalom.org.il.