This week’s parsha, Mattot, has three parts, each of them distinct. At the outset, Moses speaks to the heads of the tribes and sets forth God’s commandments with respect to vows. When I read it the first time, with an eye to preparing this d’var Torah, I dismissed this part for two reasons. First, the directives on how to treat vows are very sexist. And, second, I thought the significance of vows and promises are more relevant to a Yom Kippur message. And, then I read the verses several more times, and yes it is still an old-fashioned view of a woman – a woman’s vows can be nullified by a father, if she is unmarried, and by her husband if she is married.
But there are at least a couple of observations that make this passage more interesting than merely a sexist statement on whether a woman’s word is binding. The vow of a widowed or divorced woman is binding. So, if you are a woman who has the responsibility of a household, then your vows matter. But for an unmarried daughter (presumably living in your father’s house) or a wife (and therefore regarded as subservient to the husband), then her vows can be nullified – but only immediately upon learning of the vow.
In other words, if the father or husband is aware of the vow and says nothing, it is as if he has agreed to it, and in ancient times the vow, therefore, became binding on the father or husband. So as Rabbi Brad Artson points out in a writing of his I found on the internet, saying nothing is agreement, assent. And then, think for a moment of all the things we say nothing about, that we fail to disavow. And think, am I really intending to agree? The easiest illustration is the German in the 1930’s and 1940’s who did nothing while dissenters, the mentally ill and others at the margin of society and, of course, the Jews were carted away and put to death. And, today, think of all the things around us – from homelessness to poverty in our midst. Is our silence intended to be agreement? And if not, what can we do about it? Rabbi Rembaum was here last week to challenge us to join the outcry about Darfur. So, if this sexist statement about the validity of vows does nothing else, let it cause us to end our silence.
But there is even more to the parsha….the Israelites do battle and vanquish the Midianites and they are left with all the booty – the spoils of war. Eleazar the priest lays out the ritual for purifying the booty. At first reading, the ritual sounds similar to the preparation we undertake for Passover – Gold, silver, copper, iron, tin and lead – any article than can withstand fire – should be passed through fire. And anything that can’t withstand fire must be passed through water – sort of like a mikvah. Then they are deemed clean. But then there is a second level of purification – they must be cleansed with water of lustration. Now, regrettably, I am not familiar with the water of lustration, but it does appear elsewhere – in Number ch. 19 (and credit must go to R. Joshua Heller of JTS for a commentary of his that I read on this passage). It is the application of the ashes of the red heifer – which is to cleanse the impurities that come from contact with a dead body. Presumably, the spoils of war were taken from those of the dead enemy, so this extra level of purification was necessary.
There is, however, another way of looking at this cleansing process. If we are going to absorb these things from the enemy – these items that were part of the temptation of the Midianites, part of the threat of assimilation (a threat we have today), then we have to take them into our way of life. Likewise, we can participate in the majority culture, but where there is the opportunity to do so, do it through our Jewish prism. For example, we took Josh and Mira last Sunday to see Charlie and the Chocolate Factory –a wonderful movie, not only for the children. And it provided a great opportunity to teach about menschen behavior. Five children start out with the possibility of winning a great prize, but by the end of the movie only one child is left. Why can’t the other children claim the prize – because they were selfish, rude, unappreciative, indulgent and self-absorbed. There is no ultimate punishment in this movie, but just a lesson that kindness may sometimes yield a very big surprise.
And some concluding observations about Mattot – which means tribes, and that is what were the Rubenites and Gadites thinking when they approached Moshe to ask for their land on the eve of the big battle for the land promised by God? Now, we have all had to ask a hard question of some authority figure – someone at work, in our family. Can you just picture these guys? Staring at their feet, kicking the dirt around – "this land, right here, is good for our cattle. We would like to stay right here, if that’s ok with you?" Now is that the worst presentation you could imagine? Moshe lashes out at them –"You will send your brothers to war while you sit it out; it’s people like you that caused us to wander for 40 years. I had to wait for your fathers to die out and now you are just like them. It is this kind of attitude that will be catastrophic for God’s people."
They get smart real quick and promise to fight like shock troops with the other tribes and get their brethren settled in the land, and they promise not to return to their homes until the Israelites are all in possession of the land. Moshe agrees, but not before correcting one more thing.
When they re-tooled their request, they said "we will build sheepfolds for our sheep and towns for our children." Moshe agrees that as long as they fight they can have this land on the east side of the Jordan river, but instructs them to get their priorities in order --first, build towns for their children and then sheepfolds for their flocks.
As an advocate, I know that presentation counts and that I need to marshal all the best facts to advance my agenda. And, Michael has devoted so much of his career to brilliantly presenting one of the darkest chapters of our history in a manner that honors those who perished and those who survived.
Shabbat shalom.