 |
|
|
| art articles blog drash poetry | ||
Acharei Mot / Kedoshim
"Acharei Mot" begins `after the death of the two sons of Aharon, when they came-near before the Presence of Hashem, and died. ` Aharon is told not to enter the Holy of Holies, except at a designated time. The rituals for this time are described, and then the laws for Yom Kippur are given.
The prohibition against consuming blood is repeated three times. We then find the portion known as the arayot (literally, the nakednesses), the traditional reading for Mincha of Yom Kippur. We are not to follow the practices of Mitzrayim, nor the practices of C `na `an, but to live by Hashem `s laws. A list of sexual prohibitions is then given--mostly various forms of incest (which one is missing?), as well as some other prohibitions (we `ll come back to one of them). The parasha concludes with the admonition not to do any of these things, because these were things that the people living in C `na `an did.Kedoshim--the Holiness Code--begins "Kedoshim tihyu, ki kadosh ani Hashem Elokeikhem." "You shall be holy, for I am Holy, Hashem your G!d." What we are to do to be holy people is then related, in the form of 13 positive and 38 negative mitzvos. Most of them--almost all--deal with relationships between people. Among them are: revere your mother and father, leaving the corners of the field for the poor and stranger, keeping Shabbos, not to curse the deaf/ put a stumbling block before the blind, to love your neighbor--and the stranger--as yourself,...The list of sexual prohibitions is repeated, and the penalties are given. (Interesting: After the first ki kadosh ani Hashem Elokeikhem, Ani Hashem [Elokeikhem] is repeated 18 times.)
And with a male you do not lie as one lies with a woman; a toevah is it.And a man who lies with a male, as one lies with a woman, a toevah the two of them have done. Death, they shall be put-to-death, their blood is in them.The Zohar teaches that the whole Torah is but one Name of G!d. The history--our family stories--, the mitzvot, are all contained within this Name. Every letter, every verse, is a part of this Divine Name. Sometimes, though, we see a word, a verse, and we say: How is this G-d? And we need to be able to turn these pieces over and over, until we understand how they fit--until we can read them as part of this Name of G!d. And one of those verses, for me, and for many people, is this: V `et zakhar lo tishkav mishkavei isha; toevah hi You do not lie with a male like the way of lying with a woman, it is an abomination. And so I have turned this and turned this, trying to see it at as many different levels as I can, trying not only to reduce its curse, but to find its blessing (I will not let you go until you bless me). I `ve found that there are indeed many different--sometimes very different--ways of interpreting this verse. Many, of course, follow the simple, traditional interpretation. Traditionally, in the Talmud, it is of course condemned--although the Torah-mandated death penalty, like most other death penalties, is reduced in the Talmud--but considered so uncommon among Jews that it really is not much mentioned much. I think, in fact that it may be the sexual prohibition dealt with least, though I `m not sure. There have been, of course, many different modern approaches to this verse attempting to reinterpret it in a more accepting light. Some of them rely on viewing the Torah as an entirely human document--the work of human hands and human minds, and therefore vulnerable to human prejudices. One way of dealing with this verse, if you look at Torah this way, is to say that this verse reflects the time and society in which it was written, and since we live in different times now, the verse is irrelevent. But I find that, while on some level I find this type of explanation satisfying, I cannot dismiss any verse as irrelevent or having no meaning anymore. I have, therefore, dealt with this verse word by word, looking at different traditional and modern--and my own--interpretations of them.
v-et zakhar lo tishkav mishkavei isha; toevah hi. v-et zakhar (And with a male)Why zakhar (male) and not ish (man)? I read a modern interpretation of the use of zakhar as refering specifically to a boy, a minor male, and not to an adult man at all But if that was the case, why wouldn `t a more specific word for minor / boy be used? It seems possible to me that zakhar is used to be clear that it refers to a male of any age. lo tishkav ([You] do not lie with) You do not lie with could be seen as not a command, but as a statement of fact: "You do not lie with a male in the same way as you would lie with a woman." mishkavei isha (as one lies with a woman)As one lies with a woman. What does this mean? To me, these are the key words in the verse. If Torah had simply meant to outlaw all sexual activity between men, wouldn `t it have sufficed to say "do not lie with a male"? Why is it specifically stressed that a man not lie with a male in the way of lying with a woman?First thought, upon first reading: that this is only clarification that the verse refers to sexual activity. (Although that is what we `ve been talking about in the entire above section, the arayot.)Traditional interpretation is that it referred to specific acts (considered, apparently, to be like the way a man would lie with a woman). The sense here is that when a man lies with a man, what they do must -of course- be imitation of male-female sex. (This whole idea here, of imitation, is one that I find...well, wrong, for one thing. And insulting, for another. It says that `the men ` are on top and `the women ` are on the bottom and therefore whoever is `on top ` (figureatively or literally) is (or is imitating) a man, and whoever is on the bottom is (or is imitating) a woman. And if the one in the `female ` role is not actually a woman, this is an unacceptable confusion of genders and gender-roles. And it `s insulting in that it suggests gay sexuality does not exist for its own sake, or its own purpose, but only in imitation of hetero-sexuality (which is the `real thing `).)
And now some of the more modern interpretations of mishkavei isha:First, there is the view that mishkavei isha means: Do not lie with a man as with a woman; that is, you must not lie with a man as a substitute for lying with a woman. If your true desire is to be with a woman, and you are using a man because he is the only one there--that is toevah, that is wrong. Or if your desire is, indeed, to be with a man, but you cannot be with him as with a man (because you are in the closet!) and are seeing him through a veil of male-female--this is also wrong. So to speak: "Do not lie with a male, as with a woman": of course not, "because Torah wants them to lie together as one lies with a man!" (Five Books of Miriam)You do not-you must not-lie with a man as with a woman. You must not use him as a substitute for a woman. If you are with a man--you must be with him truly. You must see one another for who you both are. And therefore, we can extrapolate--you must not lie with a woman as with a man. You must not use her as a substitute for a man. If you are with a woman--you must be with her truly. You must see one another for who you both are. All else is toevah, an abomination.Another (literal) interpretation of mishkavei isha is to say that since a male is not a woman, anatomically speaking, it is impossible for a man to lie with a male in the exact way he would lie with a woman. Therefore, what the verse describes could never happen--it `s an anatomical impossibility--and has no practical application. This seems like an odd argument; surely the verse is not meant to be taken so literally.
But a similar argument was used by Rabbi Y `huda in the case of the rebellious son. He interpreted "he will not listen to our voice" as literally, singular, voice: one voice. And how can two different people, mother and father, have one voice? Only if they are the exact same person. Which is impossible. So his conclusion was that the entire rebellious son commandment had no application, because what it described could never happen. (Talmud Bavli, Sanhedrin 71a) Which saves us from the painful reality that Torah says a rebellious son is to be stoned to death. (And if the verse was never intended to be carried out, why is it there? `To give us a reward for correctly interpreting it `.(Talmud Bavli, Sanhedrin 71a)) Maybe we can take this interpretation of one painful verse and apply it to another.
There is also yet another view of mishkavei isha that I have considered. I looked at (some of--again I `m sure I missed many) the other places sh-k-v was used in the Torah and found most--if not all--refer to situations of coercion or rape, prostitution, or adultery. For example, it is the word used to describe Shechem `s rape of Dinah (Vayishkav otah v `y `aneha: And he lay with her, and violated her), and it is also used in Potiphar `s wife `s attempted seduction of Yosef (Shikhvah imi!--Lie with me!). So, according to this interpretation, the verse could be interpreted to mean: Do not force a male to lie with you as one forces a woman to lie. In other words, you are forbidden to rape a man, just as you are forbidden to rape a woman.
Toevah Hi (It is an abomination)I had read widely varying interpretations/ translations of the word. Some said it referred almost exclusively to idols or idol worship. Others said the word referred to something that was in and of itself disgusting (and needing no further definition), or that it meant something that was an affront to G-d. And there are varying translations of the word: Most translate it consistently as `abomination `; others as `abhorrence `; others alternate between the two.I found--and I `m sure I missed quite a few uses of the word--that toevah does in fact occur almost exclusively within the context of idol worship, or foreign (and forbidden) customs. So, if hbuwt does in fact generally refer to avodah zarah, (there are a few apparent exceptions, such as the prohibition against crossdressing or a man remarrying his wife after she has married another man and the commandment to have honest weights and measures), how could we apply it here?
First, if toevah is seen as referring to avodah zarah specifically--the worship of falseness and idols--we could tie that into the interpretation of mishkavei isha as "don `t lie with a male as a substitution for a woman". That if you lie with a male when your true desire is for a woman, you are commiting a form of avodah zarah--you are serving what is strange to you: it is falseness and dishonesty.
In Kedoshim, we are told to love our neighbor as we love our own selves. We are also told to love the ger as our selves. What is a ger? While it came to mean proselyte or convert, and is sometimes translated as sojourner (a translation I like a lot), its basic meaning is: stranger. You shall love the stranger like yourself. Who are these strangers, whom we are commanded to love? I would say, not only converts, nor only newcomers to a community, but those who are strange to you; those who are different. We must value our differences, and recognize the worth of those different from ourselves as we recognize our own worth. We cannot say, You cannot belong, because you are not like me--you are a stranger to me. Above all, we are told we must love the stranger because we remember we know what it was to be strangers, to be despised, to not belong, for we were strangers in Mitzrayim ("and have been strangers in all the lands of the world ever since"). Vayar Elokim et kol asher asah, v `hinei tov me `od. (And G!d saw all that He had made, and behold! it was very good)