We reach the end of Sefer Vayikra and again encounter language that is so difficult for us to hear that it is chanted, as Devora did, in a quiet and rushed undertone. It is simply unbearable to hear of a God who would reward, but also punish, and who would punish with such devastating consequences in sharp relief to the abundant blessings that precede.
The blessings are about abundance and peace.
The curses scarcity and war.
The blessings are about eating until satiated and satisfaction.
The curses eating and never feeling full.
The blessings are about our abundant fertility and being strong though numbers.
The curses have us consuming the flesh of children.
One could hardly think of an antithesis for how we think about God then the God represented by these curses.
While these dire curses may have been persuasive in an ancient Near Eastern context, where they resemble other cultures that promote fealty to a king or deity, they stand for us in stark contrast to living in a world where all too often God's silence in the face of atrocities leaves us mystified.
For many, a theology of reward and punishment is an untenable basis for walking in God's ways and keeping God's mitzvot.
A theology of reward and punishment is impossible to hold, because, quite frankly, the inherent illogic based on our lived experience makes reward and punishment a dangerous way to think about God and our place in this world.
Contingency, the world following its natural course, and the ongoing suffering caused by human being to other human beings remains unabated. Despots rule and practice genocide. People, good people, get sick, injured or die through no fault of their own. Unexplained suffering persists.
Today we are neither in the ancient Near East, nor, would I suggest, do many individuals find reward and punishment palatable inducements to covenant.
How then can we interpret this text to produce the outcome it intends for us: to accept God's invitation to us to be full covenantal partners, to walk in God's ways and observe God's mitzvot?
Surprisingly the answer is within the self-said blessings and curses. For amid the blessings and the curses there is one constant: the covenant and God's commitment never to abridge it.
"I will maintain My covenant with you.
"I will establish My abode in your midst and I will not spurn you.
"I will be ever present in your midst: I will be your God and you shall be My people.
"I am YHVH your God who brought you out from the land of the Egyptians to be their slaves no more, who broke the bars of your yoke and made you walk erect." Note the inherent dignity that not only God broke the yoke of slavery, but in so doing, concomitantly dignifying the human partner in the covenant. The Israelite is given, literally, standing before God.
It is the dignity of the human
partner that is invited to covenant. Recognizing human dignity is
part of the majesty of God's being in covenant with us. One would
think that our abrogating the covenant would lead to God acting
similarly. Yet that is not the case, from among the curses we have
God reaffirming a commitment to covenant, even with a people as
stubborn as our ancestors:
"When I, in turn, have been hostile to them and have removed them into the land of their enemies, then at last shall their obdurate heart humble itself, and they shall atone for their iniquity. Then will I remember My covenant with Jacob; I will remember also My covenant with Isaac and also My covenant with Abraham; and I will remember the land."
Even in exile, the ultimate punishment, the covenant is affirmed: "Yet, even then, when they are in the land of their enemies, I will not reject or spurn them so as to destroy them, annulling My covenant with them: for I am YHVH their God. I will remember them in their favor the covenant with the ancients, whom I freed from the land of Egypt in the sight of the nations to be their God, I, YHVH."
We might say, then, that God privileges covenant and that covenant will persevere, despite what either side does.
If the message of b'hukotai is covenant, what then motivates us to be active partners with God? I have been greatly influenced by Rabbi David Hartman who posits that love, not punishment, is constitutive of a covenantal relationship.
Rabbi Hartman writes: "My understanding of the covenant presupposes that God invited the Israelites to participate in the drama of building a kingdom in history. The community accepts the mitzvot both because it loves God and because it appreciates the significance of the way of life charted out by the mitzvot. The mitzvot are not perceived as the price exacted by God at Sinai for services rendered, but as a gift of God's love."
Love is a powerful motivator. It is relational. While we can love our self, what gives love its energy is how it channels our human energies into relating to others. Love can make us fiercely loyal and protective. Love can make us tender and vulnerable. Love can make us obligated to the other. And love can persist even when we experience contingency, caprice, evil and suffering.
In Rabbi Hartman's covenantal theology, God is not the angry parent but lover and teacher. God will remain patient with us, and we with God. Our relationship will endure because it must endure: it is at the heart of who we are.
These blessings and curses that are so vexing each time we encounter them remind us that we still live in a highly imperfect world, but our covenantal relationship with the One remains. Our encounter with B'hukotai gives us the opportunity to recommit to a covenantal relationship, relating to a God who loves us and guides us in the ongoing experience that is life.