Numbers Cycle 7 Nasso

Nasso

Have you ever walked into a museum hallway that feels as cold as deceit? As boring as a finished bottle of wine? There's great art here but for whatever reason this wing is empty. What kind of art is it?  Romanesque. You just may see golden halos, figures of Jesus Christ and/or Mary and/or saints or angels.  And the paintings all seem to have this strange intentional lack of perspective, as if the artist just doesn’t get it.  

These paintings aren't center stage today. That’s for sure. They don’t draw dynamic crowds. They aren’t the rock stars of museums but they are still hanging waiting patiently for their time to come (whatever the symbols and icons).

 In any case there is something calming about them. Something real despite their lack of realness.

So too, are the sacrifices at the end of Nasso. There’s something calming about them, elegant, holy, beyond  personal perspective. Real. So very real.

In any case, these days I’m fascinated by individual perspective and how it influences (or doesn't influence) both art and Torah interpretation. Just like art, Torah has been pulled through many ways-of-thought and ways-of-expression. And Torah (like art) is not built of perspective alone. The latter has been an effect, an influence, and has taken the reigns for centuries.

It all comes down to the advent of rationalism and therefore humanism. It’s rational to give great weight to our experiences and to our intrinsic involvement. Highly rational.  And,  just as humanism (and individual perspective)  has  had a strong effect on paintings (a few centuries after the art mentioned above) it certainly has had an effect on the way we see our sacred scroll (whatever our myth).  If nothing else it has validated the importance of individuality.  Rationalism can be recorded (at least) back to the 11^th century  with the commentary of Rashi.  At that time individual perspective began to matter to a much greater degree.  This was a necessary transformation.  Now though in 2014  (I believe) we may want to calm this cyclical transformation just a bit. This is why:

Not everything is caused by us, seen by us, seen in whole by us, or understood by us.

 The irony is this:  As I write this (I am after all just one perspective in a very long story of Torah interpretation) I’m only adding to the tomes supporting perspective even given my clear goal to reach beyond it.  But think of the numerous myths of  Rebbe Nachman and the Baal Shem Tov.  Think of Talmud. When a Talmudic rabbi wants to drive a lesson home he puts it in story. The prophets don’t. But by the time we get to 500 CE we are story and story is us. Do we want to understand the importance of not being unfair to one’s neighbor?  Look at the story of Hillel and Shammai. Do we want to understand the importance of  basic kindness? Look at any story involving Rabbi Akiba.  We begin to believe that if it isn’t story it isn’t Judaism.

 With respect for our great rabbis....so focused on ourselves we have become that it’s easy to look askance on any sacred writing that is not infused with story. I love story.  But it is not everything.  When we cling to it, it brings us war as well as ritual. It brings us a need to remain stuck in singular visions that might or might not be what God has wanted, especially if we end up killing for it.  And no doubt, we can have ritual without self-and- story-obsession.

We see such ritual in the offerings in Nasso.

First though, let's glance at the Book of Exodus.

The Exodus (in Exodus) is not told by one person, one perspective. We’re looking at it from above, from the non-angle and therefore the All-angle.  The Exodus has a super-natural feel, one that demands attention and (yes) religious behavior.

Ah, the conflict! So then how do we join together our absolute love for God and emphasis on community with our (obvious) love for rationalist humanist thought and individual perspective?  

I don’t know. Maybe the answer is in studying the perspective of Moses (and Deuteronomy).  Maybe we need some consciousness of the continuum of thought hitting us for the past thousand years. Maybe we need to admit that perhaps we’ve gotten a bit carried away (with ourselves).

 Needless to say humanism was probably not a consideration for the nomads of the sacred scroll. I can just about guarantee you that.  They were around way before anyone ever went to relationship seminars, private schools  or attempted to explain the world through their emotional thrill and yearning. I can almost see a cartoon now by Robert Crumb. There they are… Abraham and Sarah and Isaac and Rivkah and Rachel and Jacob… all receiving hypnotic therapy to finally find holy fertility!

 But no, this was not the way of Torah.   Our patriarchs and matriarchs just managed to get by and the focus was on pleasing God. The writings were not meant to reveal human progress (and satisfaction) but to merge with something greater than self.

 Just like ancient art (I believe) the sacred  writings were meant to reveal a cross section of a spiritual height. Please don't misunderstand me. The person is (very) important but the spiritual reflection is far more valuable. The people are not important into themselves. They are important in that they portray the shift of that same cross section…the continually transforming relationship with a Divine Force. In other words:  The Divine can’t be known in the set world of me alone, the one in my mind.  It can only be known in the shifting and transforming world of the expansive  us.

This is why the offerings are recorded as they are at the end of Nasso. Much commentary has been given as to why there is so much repetition.  After all, each offering is repeated twelve times.  The day changes.  The person changes. The repetition seems absurd given our present culture of self and story.  Why not just move it forward faster? Why hold up the narrative?  Why not just give a description of the sacrifices and say that it happened 12 times?

Such  an expression of offerings is highly reflective of Romenesque art. They show the absolute picture despite the changing moment. They get the snapshot from a place of equanimity beyond  one specific person. This is important since Judaism (as we see from the Exodus) moves through many people and many days.

The All therefore collapses not only individual perspective to one Divine Vision but it does the same with Time. The All collapses Time into that one visual, one painting, that series of words,  the  silver bowl (filled with wheat meal), the silver sacrificial basin (filled with wheat meal)the incense bowl filled with incense…a young ram, a young bull, and a young sheep for the burnt offering,  one goat for the sin offering, and two oxen, five rams, five goats and five young sheep for the peace offering.

And it isn’t boring at all.  The world here is one of trust and flow, the wine bottle is eternally full and the offerings are eternal.

This is Torah. This isn't new. It's just one way of looking at things.