Divine Favoritism? R. Yaakov Bieler Parashat Naso, 5774 Birchat Kohanim appears in Parashat Naso. One of the most well-known passages of the Tora, due to its being recited both inside and outside the synagogue, appears in this week’s Parasha: BaMidbar 6:22-27 Speak unto Aharon and unto his sons, saying: In this way ye shall bless the children of Israel; ye shall say unto them: The Lord Bless thee, and Keep thee; The Lord Make His Face to Shine upon thee, and be Gracious unto thee; The Lord Lift up His Countenance upon thee, and Give thee peace. So shall they put My Name upon the children of Israel, and I will Bless them.' When Birchat Kohanim is invoked. Kohanim directly bless the people living in Israel daily each time the Amida is repeated, and in Chutz LaAretz on Yom Tov; the Shliach Tzibbur (prayer leader for the congregation) in the diaspora regularly invokes these blessings in Chazarat HaShaTz (the repetition of the Silent Devotion); and parents bestow these blessings on their children on Friday nights and Erev Yom HaKippurim both inside and outside Israel. A difficulty with an implication of these Berachot. Despite how well-known and often recited these particularly blessings may be, the Talmud startlingly points to one portion of this famous text and challenges it as unjust, and even hypocritical: Berachot 20b R. 'Avira discoursed — sometimes in the name of R. Ammi, and sometimes in the name of R. Assi — as follows: The Ministering Angels said before the Holy One, Blessed Be He: Sovereign of the Universe, it is written in Thy Law, (Devarim 10:17) “Who Regardeth not persons nor Taketh reward”,1 and dost Thou not (overly) Regard the person of Israel, as it is written, (BaMidbar 6:26) “The Lord Lift up His Countenance upon thee”?2 1 For the LORD your God, He is God of gods, and Lord of lords, the Great God, the Mighty, and the Awful, Who Regardeth not persons, nor Taketh reward. 2 “Nesiat Panim”(lifting up of the face) is an idiom that standardly connotes showing favoritism, i.e., instead of neutrally not turning one’s face towards one or another of supplicants or litigants, the 1 He Replied to them: And shall I not Lift up My Countenance for Israel, seeing that I Wrote for them in the Torah, (Devarim 8:10) “And thou shalt eat and be satisfied and bless the Lord thy God”, and they are particular [to say the grace] if the quantity is but an olive or an egg (well short of satiation for the overwhelming majority of people). The premise of this Talmudic passage would appear to be that God should be held to the same standard as people, and since human judges are enjoined against showing favoritism, as in Devarim 1:17, Ye shall not respect persons in judgment; ye shall hear the small and the great alike; ye shall not be afraid of the face of any man; for the judgment is God's; and the cause that is too hard for you ye shall bring unto me (Moshe), and I will hear it,' similar impartiality should be expected of HaShem. Is it reasonable to expect that the same standards that apply to people should apply to God as well? While a famous Talmudic passage calls upon man to emulate God’s Examples as they appear in the Biblical narrative, Sota 14a R. Chama son of R. Chanina further said: What means the text: (Devarim 13:5) “Ye shall walk after the Lord your God”? Is it, then, possible for a human being to walk after the Shechina; for has it not been said: (Ibid. 4:24) “For the Lord thy God is a Devouring Fire”? But [the meaning is] to walk after the attributes of the Holy One, Blessed Be He. As He Clothes the naked, for it is written: (Beraishit 3:21) “And the Lord God Made for Adam and for his wife coats of skin, and clothed them”, so do thou also clothe the naked. The Holy One, Blessed Be He, Visited the sick, for it is written: (Ibid. 18:1) “And the Lord Appeared unto him by the oaks of Mamre”, so do thou also visit the sick. The Holy One, Blessed Be He, Comforted mourners, for it is written: (Ibid. 25:11) “And it came to pass after the death of Avraham, that God Blessed Yitzchak his son”, so do thou also comfort mourners. The Holy one, Blessed Be He, Buried the dead, for it is written: (Devarim 34:6) “And He buried him in the valley”, so do thou also bury the dead. distributor of gifts or the judge turns towards one group of individuals over the others and is predisposed towards them. 2 the universality of such a premise could be called into question in light of apparent exceptions to this ostensible rule. For example, human beings are Commanded not to engage in vengeful acts, VaYikra 19:18 Thou shalt not take vengeance, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself: I Am the Lord. Yet elsewhere in the bible, God is Defined as vengeful! Tehillim 94:1 O Lord, Thou God to Whom vengeance belongeth, Thou God to Whom vengeance belongeth, Shine forth. A second example of such an inconsistency is based upon a verse in the song of David that he composes towards the end of his life: II Shmuel 22:27 With the pure Thou dost Show Thyself Pure; and with the crooked Thou dost Show Thyself Subtle, (i.e., those who are crooked will be Treated by the Divine in a like manner.) An Aggada that asserts, albeit indirectly, that God’s Example is not always available for man to follow. The Talmud demonstrates, albeit indirectly, that acting deceptively towards another human being is not an option for human beings: Megilla 13b What was the modesty displayed by Rachel? — As it is written: (Beraishit 29:12) “And Yaakov told Rachel that he was her father's brother.” Now was he (literally) her father's brother? Was he not the son of her father's sister?3 What it means is this: He said to her, “Will you marry me?” She replied, “Yes, but my father is a trickster, and he will outwit you.” He replied, “I am his brother in trickery.” She said to him, “Is it permitted to the righteous to indulge in trickery?“ He replied. “Yes: (II Shmuel 22:27) ‘With the pure Thou dost Show Thyself pure and with the crooked Thou dost Show Thyself subtle.”4 3 Yaakov was the son of Rivka who was Lavan’s sister. 4 Although at first glance it would appear that Yaakov citing a verse from Shmuel is an abject anachronism, it is to be understood that themes and principles like the one appearing in II Shmuel were already part of the tradition much earlier, and it is only David who articulates the idea in a form that is 3 He said to her, “What is his trickery?” She replied, “I have a sister older than I am, and he will not let me marry before her.” So he gave her certain tokens (in order that he will be able to recognize whether Lavan has substituted Leah for Rachel). When night came, she (Rachel) said to herself, “Now my sister will be put to shame (when the ruse is discovered by Yaakov).” So she handed over the tokens to her. So it is written, (Beraishit 29:25) “And it came to pass in the morning that, behold, it was Leah.” Are we to infer from this that up to now she was not Leah? What it means is that on account of the tokens which Rachel gave to Leah he did not know until then. Therefore she (Rachel) was rewarded by having Shaul among her descendants.5 Although Yaakov is given the last word in his discussion with Rachel, when he categorically states that God’s Approach to the tricky should be something that man can emulate,6 ironically it is Rachel herself who thwarts his plan to trick Lavan. Since Yaakov’s course of action proves ultimately unsuccessful, the subtext of the Gemora is that what God is able to Do in this instance is not something that man should assume is within his purview. Why man may not be allowed to emulate particular examples of God’s Attributes. However, it could be maintained that these two examples are not pertinent to the issue of God’s showing favoritism to the Jewish people. In the cases of vengeance and misleading a trickster, it would seem that the principle of “Mida KeNeged Mida” (treating someone in the recorded in the later biblical text. A parallel manifestation (the example from II Shmuel is one of Hashkafa and belief; what follows is a Halachic matter) of such an assumption is the formulation of certain aspects of Shabbat observance in the book of Yeshayahu 58:13 : If thou turn away thy foot because of the Sabbath, from pursuing thy business on My Holy Day; and call the Sabbath a delight, and the Holy of the Lord Honorable; and shalt honor It, not doing thy wonted ways, nor pursuing thy business, nor speaking thereof. Halacha is not supposed to be innovated by prophets; they are mandated to only try to urge the people to comply with Commandments that are already “on the books” . Consequently for Yeshayahu to discuss how one is to avoid weekday affairs, walk and speak on Shabbat when such practices are not mentioned previously in the Five Books of the Tora, assumes that this was part of the Oral Tradition and was only first given written form in the times of this prophet.