Torah-Bible Studies and Quantum Kabbalistic Insights: Just because it didn't happen doesn't mean it isn't true!

Is-life-fair? The-problem-of-evil, and the creation/Eden account in Genesis

designing-a-free-and-fair-cosmos-according-to-the-biblical-genesis

designing-the-cosmos-tzimtzum-shvirat-hakelim-and-free-will-in-genesis

Self-transcendence: Biblical heroes overcoming their inner natures

..................

Yom Kippur & Sneakers: Why?!

Why Rabbis wear sneakers on their holiest day. Alternate version: Published 2002, archived

See reference to my article on Wikipedia; Hebrew version: הקבלה בין איסורי יום הכיפורים לבין גירוש האדם מגן עדן

Biblical commentary (Hebrew): Redirecting to Hidush website: material by אבי רבינוביץ

Who Wants More Than One Mother-in-Law?!

published Hebrew version

Although people say that polygamy is allowed in Judaism, it is striking that the relevant stories recounted in the Torah (Bible) seem to imply that it is a very bad idea: as explored more in detail below, we can see that the Patriarchs didn’t willingly marry more than one woman - and polygamy always led to strife:

· Abraham had two wives, but Hagar was not his choice, she was given to him by his wife Sarah to fulfil Sarah’s need for surrogate children; and the result was tragic conflict between the children of the two wives.

· Isaac’s shiddach (marriage-match) was via his parents and an intermediary, and he had only one wife, the right one.

· Yakov had four: however Leah was not his choice, instead her father Lavan (with the help of Rachel and Leah) tricked Yakov into marrying her; and, as a result of this situation there was tragic rivalry between Rachel and Leah, and especially between their children. Furthermore it was only when Rachel and Leah ceased to give birth that they gave Yakov their handmaidens (Bil'ha & Zilpah) as wives. Even that was perhaps only due to the rivalry between them, and there were indeed complications with these handmaids and rivalry between the various sets of children.

· Later in the Bible we read of the rivalry of Pnina and Chana: a loved but childless wive and a wife who bore children. It’s clear from the story that the husband deeply loved the childless wife, and told her she was worth more than many children. So why would he have married the other wife?

To me it seems clear that the story means to imply that the childless wife who was loved was the chosen spouse, the other was married simply for children, and perhaps at the behest of the childless wife, as with Sarah, Rochel and Leah.

In conclusion, although polygamy is permitted according to Torah Law, my speculation is that the Torah does not approve of it, and is trying to tell us that it is destructive.

Also, as far as I know: The Talmud, with its vast amount of recorded events and stories does not contain references to polygamous marriages among the rabbis.

After all, not everything that is permitted by the Torah is recommended by the Torah. A famous case relates to the Torah law permitting a man to marry a woman prisoner-of-war because of her beauty: the Rabbis teach that the passages following this present the laws regarding a ‘rebellious son’ because the Torah wants to teach us that this will be the inevitable result of such a marriage.

.....................

Pinchas: Pinchas's action saved many lives. One has to remember that there was a plague, people were dying, and in retrospect of the cessation of the plague as soon as Pinchas acted, it is clear that this act was exactly what was necessary in order to stop the plague. Since people were dying, it was "sha'at hadchak", and one could apply "eys la'asos", so perhaps this would be considered sufficient justification, particularly as Zimri was perhaps like a 'rodef' (as in the justificaiton for abortion in case of harm to the mother). So perhaps 'kanaim pogim bo' was not even needed as justificaiotn or grounds to act.

Maybe what chazal say about 'forgetting a halachah' is that M"R and Aharon forgot 'shaat hadchak, eys la'asos', and were paralyzed, since actively killing one person to save other is generally forbidden, unless they are a rodef, and in this case it was Hashem who was doing the killing, not Zimri.

In any case we know from the recent parshos that in general M"R had reached the end of his ability to lead.

However a question arises: If the plague was indeed because of Zimri, and he didn't want to cease his act, why didn't the Jewish people gang up on him to save their lives - to kill Zimri in order to stop the plague, in self-defense!? Partly of course because they too were involved. But then why did they not stop if there was a plague?

I think that the issue was that almost no-one else saw what was happening, why it was happening, and what needed to be done. The plague was a divine-human interaction, not visible to all (like the malach was not visible to Bilam); it was like the sneh, people walked by it not 'seeing' the miracle. M"R saw the sneh, not everyone else did, it was a form of nevuah due to his special level, and so the story is told in a nevuah-style narration, poetic:

"Asurah na ve'er'eh,

es hamr'eh hagadol hazeh,

lamah lo yiv'ar ha'sneh!"

So too in the case of Pinchas. Only he saw what was happening, that there was a magefah, and only he understood why it was happening, and what had to be done to stop it, and so only he acted. And indeed it stopped. Bnei Yisrael did not act in self-defense only because they did not realize what was happening, why it was happening, let alone what needed to be done to stop it.

This is my interpretation of what it means that Pinchas was a 'kanai': It was not 'kano-ous' in the sense of "I am a kanai, I know the halacha, I will kill him since he is evil" (and make a brocho and hineni muchan), but rather this: it was because Pinchas really "kine et kin'ati" internally emotionally-spiritually, in other words he did not have ego interfering, [and see my claim that he was actually "ish shalom". [I just saw something similar in the name of the Chabad Rebbe, Pinchas is a man of peace, who did what he did with the sole aim of “turning away My wrath from the children of Israel.”], wanting to be like his Zeideh Aharon - וַיַּרְא, פִּינְחָס בֶּן-אֶלְעָזָר, בֶּן-אַהֲרֹן, הַכֹּהֵן" - who made peace between people.

Pinchas overcame his inclination and desire to be a man of peace, lowering his sense of self and taking an action that was actually against everything he believed in, [like Avrohom Avinu, Ya;akov, M"R]; he was motivated only by 'lishmoh' (pure intent to do God's Will), that's why he was able to 'SEE', (like M"R saw the sneh) and to understand WHY, and what needed to be DONE, and also why he had the clarity to take action (ז וַיַּרְא,..וַיָּקָם .. וַיִּקַּח ... וַיָּבֹא .. וַיִּדְקֹר ) himself (וַיָּקָם מִתּוֹךְ הָעֵדָה) :.

In this, Pinchas was special. The shvatim in contrast were sure they were acting lishmah in selling Yosef, but they weren't. Chazal present reasons for a sanhedrin to judge Yosef and apply the death penalty, but hashem tells us in the chumash something that no-one else could know, that the shvatim themselves were not consciously aware of (and that maybe was first revealed to humanity at the time the chumash was given) - that they were motivated by hatred and jealousy! They would have laughed at anyone accusing them of such a childish and base motivation. And they would have felt themselves sincere in that. But Hashem knows our inner heart and motivation. And Hashem tells us that Pinchas's motive was purely leshem shamayim.

Moral: When someone judges their fellow, especially if it involves enacting judgement with physical consequence on someone, I believe that we are allowed to 'judge' them by assuming that the motivation is negative; even if at the conscious level the "kana'i" is sure they are a tzadik doing it all leshem shamayim, my assumption is that we should not be supportive of it unless they are considered by all of klal Yisrael (not just by themselves) to be even greater than the Shvatim.

.............................................................................................

Matos: Bil'am is killed. But one cannot just kill a figure like that using a sword in ordinary attack, it has to be part of Hashem's plan and with the right spirituallevel backing. MR had finished his tafkid, and gave it over to the new generaiton, Yehoshua, and now Pinchas. Pinchas was placed in charge of the war against Midian (after the znus event), and was the one who enbaled Bil'am to be killed (whehter directly by Pinchas, or at Pinchas's command:[There are various versions of how Bilam actually was killed. According to the Zohar, Pinchas commanded Tzilaya to kill Bilam on the spot with a magical sword upon which was inscribed the likeness of a snake. Another midrash says Pinchas himself drew a sword and killed Bilam. The Talmud(Sanhedrin 106b) relates that Pinchas brought Bilam for trial before Moshe and the Sanhedrin(Jewish court). He was found guilty and was executed with all four kinds of death penalty given by Torahcourts.http://www.torahtots.com/parsha/bamidbar/matot3.htm]

It was specifically Pinchas who could cause his death because Pinchas went beyond himself, and so was able to be like MR, and Bilam was on a level with M"R but let himself be led by his nature instead of overcoming it, so Pinchas at the level he went up to, could defeat Bilam at the level he went down to.

Pichas was willing to be moser nefesh to take the step of killing Zimri, he knew he could be killed by the Jewish people, or MR or by God as a result, but he acted, and this reduction of ego made him the counterpart to Bilam who was led by ego.

Quantum Kabbalistic Karma in the Bible's Ancient Egypt

Humorous

• The Taliban and the Bible Codes or My Trip to Pakistan:
• Jacques Cousteau and Islamic Fundamentalism - Codes of Bnei Yishmael
• Earth is NOT Flat : Which Direction to Pray (Daven)? (Did anyone ever ask at the Western Wall : "which way is East"? )
• [My cartoon: someone at Kotel asking: which way is Mizrach? [luckily it is the Kotel Ma'aravi!])