Daf Yomi, Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, Torah and Psychology, Marriage Counseling, Psychotherapy
Our Gemara on Amud Aleph discusses two verses that reference the placing of the blood of the Asham, and then the oil, on the metzora’s ear tip, right thumb, and right big toe. The verses in Vayikra (14:17 and 28) show a small, but distinct discrepancy in the instructions of the placement of the oil:
When referring to the sacrifices of the wealthy metzora, the verse states to place the oil “upon the blood of the guilt offering.” However, by the indigent metzora, the verse states to place the oil “upon the place of the blood of the guilt offering.” What accounts for this change?
We have a rule that the asham guilt offering and the oil can be brought separately up to ten days later (Menachos 15b), though it is considered ideal to bring the oil at the same time (see Pesach Einayim ibid). Presumably, in this scenario, the person who brings the oil days later still performs the ritual of having the cohen place the oil on his ear, thumb, and finger, though days later.
In the introduction to Shu”t Binyan Shlomo, he explains that the wealthy person could afford the oil, so he likely brought the oil at the same time as the sacrifice. Hence, the oil would be placed “upon the blood.” While the indigent person would only be able to afford the oil days later, and hence his oil would not go upon the blood but rather “upon the place of the blood.” It was the “place of the blood,” because the blood may have long been wiped away days ago.
At times, the nuances and precise language of the Torah commentaries are breathtaking. A mortal author can theoretically build-in double entendres into his work and other kinds of wordplay. However, the consistency and degree to which one can mine verses for meaning and small grammatical shifts that demonstrate halachic intricacies is astounding. Sometimes we will encounter a gematria, or a typical rabbinic derash such as a klal uperat, and it is difficult to see that it is imperative and even may seem forced. Yet there are other hints such as this one that are quiet, but compelling. Also, the volume and consistency of these levels of interpretation serve as a formidable proof for the divine origin of the Torah. The Malbim and Ksav VeHakabbalah made a major focus of their exegetical works to show the grammatical and linguistic validity of the Oral Torah derashos from which many halachos derive.
But that is not the whole story. While these subtle and precise linguistic derivations are impressive, the overall organization of the Torah is difficult to comprehend. If you grow up frum and are used to the Torah from birth, you don’t question or even notice it. However, as a narrative, it appears fragmented and disjointed, with repetitive accounts (two creation stories; see Bereishis chapters 1 and 2) and narratives (three encounters of the matriarchs with a king who appropriated them, a number of “by the well” stories), and numerous repetitions of priestly commandments (Acharei Mos, Kedoshim, Emor) and sacrificial procedures, as well as four parshiyos repetitively and obsessively recounting the details of the Tabernacle. Such discrepancies were a field day for Bible critics. But for us, who understand and appreciate the grammatical and semantic precision of the words as discussed above, and who believe in the divinity of the Torah, we must still make sense of the seeming disorder and fragmentation of the Torah.
I believe the answer is to understand that order and taxonomy are not a particularly Jewish thing. Torah is more tangential, circling from related topic to associated topic, instead of building an orderly, systemic structure and narrative. It is not a flaw but rather it is inherent and necessary as I shall explain. It was a Greek obsession to organize and process verbal data in a hierarchical manner. The Western way of thinking has left an imprint on the consciousness of modern civilization. It is not an accident that Aristotle was an obsessive taxonomist, organizing various categories of species and elements he observed in nature. Aristotle, whom the Rambam admits was a major influence on his thinking (quoted approximately seventy times in the Moreh Nevuchim), also, may have inspired the Rambam to seek to organize the so-called disorganized Gemara into a massive, structured, chapter-by-chapter magnum opus of the Mishneh Torah. The Rambam’s feat was amazing and paved the way for the Tur, Shulchan Aruch, and other great halachic codes. But was the Rambam more clever than Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi? Why is the Mishnah not organized in that fashion? We have a rule, ein mukdam ume’uchar baTorah, literally, there is no before or after in the order of the Torah (see Pesachim 6b; Rashi, Shemos 31:18; Ramban, Bamidbar 16:1 for more details), but what are its implications?
I loathe to quote an apikores, but I also feel insincere not to give credit where credit is due. I have heard, though I cannot find the quote, that Gershom Scholem asserted: The more systematic something is, the less authentically Jewish it is. What he means is that the Western and Greek forms of organization are simply not the Torah’s form. But then, what is the Torah’s system? The way to understand this, is to consider that the Torah is an almost impossible encounter between the transcendent, non-physical Divine, and the human physical world. How can a God who is beyond time and space fit into a physically limited and organized structure? Moshe’s prophecy, while superior to any other mortal’s, still must have been like dipping a finger into a torrential rushing river.
The Ralbag (Shemos 4:10) captures this idea beautifully. Moshe was “heavy of mouth and tongue” because he struggled to reduce and translate his lofty spiritual experiences and awareness into the limited physical world. To a two-dimensional being, a three-dimensional object will appear incomplete and random. Imagine this thought experiment: You are a two-dimensional being, and someone from a three-dimensional world is passing a giant ball through your two-dimensional plane. As the ball passes through your plane, you will not see a ball. You will see, at first, a small dot, growing larger as the diameter increases and passes through your plane, and then see the circle shrink back to a dot and then wink out of existence. Can you imagine that? By necessity, the Divine “thought process” that Moshe tapped into would be highly disorganized from our perspective, because there was an infinite multiplicity and simultaneity of ideas that had to be unpacked and presented. This is why the Torah appears tangential and non-systematic, though elements of it come through in breathtaking prose and precision.
Translations Courtesy of Sefaria, except when, sometimes, I disagree with the translation
Free resource for couples/families:
Over 80 lectures on heathy communication, marriage and sexuality from a Torah perspective Click here
If you liked this, you might enjoy my Relationship Communications Guide. Click on the link above.
Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, LCSW-R, LMFT, DHL is a psychotherapist who works with high conflict couples and families. He can be reached via email at simchafeuerman@gmail.com