Friday, October 19, 2007

Joshua - Chapter 15

1. What type of "map" would the author have had available in order to decline the borders, as he has, in such detail?

Maps have been in use long before Joshua's time, so it is possible a map was available; but I don't think a map is needed to explain this language. Remember that God is the general here, and from his vantage point, he doesn't need a map to define borders.


2. In verse 2 we find reference to the "Salt Sea." What does that tell us regarding the "natural characteristics" of the land thousands of years ago?

The Salt see is probably what we call the Dead Sea today - clearly the "natural characteristics" have not changed much in 3500 years.

3. In verse 4 there is reference to the "Nahal Mitzrayim." Does this have anything to do with the Nile?

Traditional interpretation ascribes this to the Nile - but perhaps a more reasonable position is that this "brook" refers to the Pelusian arm of the Nile.

4. The term "yamah" means seaward. What direction is this and, when text refers to "yam," what body of water does it invariably have in mind?

Yam, is talking about trhe Mediterranean Sea - so the direction would be west.

5. Why, in verse 8 is it necessary to add the sub-explanation "it is Jerusalem" and, further, what is "gey-hinom" and what has it come to mean subsequently?

Jerusalem had many previous names - perhaps this subtext is just there to clarify that Jebusite is really Jerusalem.

6. Why, adjunctive to the description of the boundaries of the Judea "portion," do we immediately follow with that for Kalev ben Y'funeh?

Kalev is from the tribe of Judea - so The tribal land for Judea includes that of Kalev.

7. In verse 15, there is a reference to the "city of the book." What would this imply about that particular location?

Perhaps this was a city known for its learning - perhaps set up by Noah's sons, or as a aresult of influence before the Jews went to Egypt.


8. In verse 51, there is a reference to the place named Goshen. Is this the same location as that which appears in the Egypt narrative?

Probably not the same place - since the land of Israel did not extend that far into Egypt.

9. Verse 63 confirms that the Jebusites dwell among the Judeans in Jerusalem "to this very day." What might be derived from this particular passage?

It would seem that although the Jews did not conquer Jerusalem, they still lived there - along side the previous inhabitants.

Thursday, October 18, 2007

Joshua - Chapter 14

1. What is the relationship of verse 4 to verse 33 in the prior chapter?

Both talk about the tribe of Levi, and that they were not given land of their own. Verse 4 indicates that although Levi was not given their own "heritage", they were given cities to dwell in, and fields for their livestock by each of the other tribes.

2. What is the claim of Kalev ben Y'funeh? With different vowelization, what would Kalev possibly sound like -- and what is a dominant characteristic of that particular domestic animal?

Kalev, claims that he was one of the 12 spies sent by Moses to scout the land - before the 40 years of wandering. Kalev and Joshua were the 2 spies to bring pack favorable reports, the other 10 bringing negative ones leading to 40 years of wandering. Kalev claims that as a reward for his faith in God, Moses promised that the land he scouted would be his heritage - that land being the city of Hebron.

Kalev, with different vowelization, would be kelev - meaning dog.

3. Once again, the phrase "to this very day" is encountered (verse 14); to what time does the phrase refer?

Traditional opinion is that the book was written by Joshua, with some small parts written by Pinchas the priest after Joshua's death. Others say it was written by a contemporary of Joshua - in any case, the book was written around the time of Joshua's death. The phrase "to this very day" certainly suggests some time has passed between the vents and the authorship of the book. (See wikipedia for an explanation of other positions). Perhaps the books is based on writings of Joshua, but compiled at a later date - that would seem to still attribute "authorship" to Joshua, but explain the "to this very day" phrase.

4. In verse 15, there is the refrain that "the land was quiet." Is there any reference to warfare since the earlier appearance of this refrain?

The last time this phrase appears is the end of chapter 11. Chapter 12 can be read as talking about new warfare.But there is no reference to war between chapter 12 and 14 - in which a lot of time seems to have passed.

Favourite Quote : "Perhaps Hashem will be with me, and I will drive them out, as Hashem has spoken." Verse 12

Wednesday, October 17, 2007

Joshua - Chapter 13

1. How does the beginning of this chapter seem to take issue with verse 23 at the close of chapter 11?

Chapter 11 closes by saying "Joshua took the entire land"; but this chapter starts by indicating that there is more to conquer.


2. How does verse 7 (and those which follow) relate to verse 23 at the end of chapter 11?

Similar to question 1 - chapter 11 says the land was divided among the tribes according to the ordinances God set to Moses; but here in chapter 13, Joshua is told by God "now divide the land" among the tribes. It would seem that much time has passed between the close of chapter 12 and the start of 13, and perhaps God is now reminding Joshua that he has a conquest to finish, and he'll need to redivide the land according to the new area they will soon conquer.

3. In verse 22, Bilaam is given an adjectival descriptive. Is that the same description which appears in the Five Books?

In the 5 books, Bilaam is never called a "sorcerer", as he is here. But from the context of the story in the 5 books, that is clearly a reasonable description of him.

Favourite Quote : "You have grown old, you are well on in years, and very much land still remains to be possessed." - Verse 1

Tuesday, October 16, 2007

Joshua - Chapter 12

1. Does the conquest as listed here include only Joshua's "victories"?

No, it also includes the conquest on the east side of the Jordan by Moses.

2. Are the listings in verses 7 through 24 specified in the earlier chapters?

Not by name. These verses seem to fill in the names of the cities that seem to be passed over with lines like “Joshua smote the entire land – the mountains, the South, the lowlands, the land of the waterfalls, and all their kings.” – Joshua 10:40

3. Is the conquest of Jerusalem given any special note?

No, it’s just listed amount the 30 others.

4. And, if every city conquered was destroyed, was Jerusalem destroyed as well?

It says these cities were “smote”, which doesn’t have to mean totally destroyed – just given a “heavy blow”.

5. What is set down as the sum total of kings having been conquered/destroyed west of the Jordan?

In total 31 Kings (and thus cities) were conquered west of the Jordan.

Monday, October 15, 2007

Joshua - Chapter 11

1. How is the alliance described in the opening section of Chapter 11 different from the earlier alliance which marched against the Gibeonites? Is there any reference to a different type of military resources (see verse 6) which might have elicited some new concerns on the part of the Israelites?

This alliance was formed to wage war on Israel; as opposed to the previous alliance which waged war against Gibeon (then fought Israel when they came to the defense of Gibeon). This new army seemd to be much better equipped than any Israel had fought previously – having “many hourses and chariots.”.

2. How does verse 15 serve as an encapsulating refrain/justification/ explanation of the total eradication approach?

This verse confirms that Joshua’s actions are exactly as God instructed Moses and Moses instructed Joshua.

3. Verse 20 echoes a refrain from the Egyptian experience, Pharaoh and Divinity. What is this refrain?

The refrain is about God “hardening the heart” of someone. This is somewhat troubling (as I’ve written about before). In Exodus, how is it fair to hold Pharaoh accountable for his refusing to let Israel go, when it was God himself who hardened Pharaoh’s heart, preventing him from freeing Israel sooner? Of course the answer (as I pointed out before) is that hardening of the heart is simply God giving Pharaoh or the armies in this chapter the strength to do what is really in their hearts – and not give up on it out of fear. In this case, the armies really wanted to destroy Israel, but God gave them the strength to keep fighting to the very end, rather than surrender.

4. In verse 21 there is a reference to "Anakim." Does this term necessarily mean "giants"? Does "Anak" have any other meaning? And why does Onkelos translate this term as "gibara?ya"?

The typical translation is Giant (or literally long-necked ones), it can be used to mean “noble ones” or as Onkelos translates it “mightily ones”.

5. How does verse 23 indicate that the closing mandates for the distribution of the conquered land were observed by Joshua?

Again, the book gives credence to the idea that the was Joshua just waged, was instructed by God – a means to the ends of allotting the land to the tribes as God laid out.

6. Is the impression communicated that, with the end of this chapter, the conquest of the land is over?

The chapter ends by saying “the land rested from war”. It doesn’t saw that was the end of war, just which the land rested. I take this to imply that more conquest is still to come.

Favourite Quote : "As Hashem had commanded Moses His servant, so Moses commanded Joshua; and Joshua did." - Verse 15

Sunday, October 14, 2007

Joshua - Chapter 10

1. What leads King Adoni Tzedek to attack Gibeon and what is the literal translation of "Adoni Tzedek"? Is there any echo of this particular name in the Five Books and in the Abraham story where an alliance of kings also narrated?

“Adoni Tzedek” literally means “Righteous God”; he is identified as the king of Jerusalem. In the story of Abraham and the war of the 5 kings, there was a kind named “Malchizedek” or “Righteous Angel”; he is identified as the king of Salem, which is an ancient name for Jerusalem.
Jerusalem’s status as a holy site – the holiest site on earth – clearly dates back a long way..

2. Is there any reference to a "natural phenomenon" in the victory of Joshua (over and above his own strategy of a night attack) -- and, if so, how does the author of Joshua consider this event and to what source does he ascribe it?

When it was clear that the Jews would defeat the 5-king’s armies in battle, the armies fled, but were struck down by “large stones from heaven”. The text clearly, and rightly, attributes this hail storm as an act of God.

3. Verse 12 and verse 13 deal with another "unusualness in nature" -- this, at the specific request of Joshua. Is it, indeed, correct that not before this day or subsequent thereto "Divinity listened to the request of a human being"?

These verses talk about the sun standing still in the middle of the sky for an entire day; thereby giving the Jews enough time to complete the battle.
There certainly seem to be other instances of God listening to the request of man – I can think of several places where God forgave the Jews at the request, or pleading, of Moses. But this verse is not so much God listening to a request from man - here Joshua seesms to be issuing a battlefield order to his superior officer - and God obeys. That does seem unique.

4. And, the phrase "because Adonai is fighting for Israel," does this appear for the first time in the Tanakh?

Just before the parting of the Sea of Reeds, Moses exclaims “Hashem shall make war for you”. Not exactly the same language, but just about.

5. And, why, at the end of the day, having hung the cadavers, are they removed at sunset?

Is there a mitzvah involved here? Does it have a biblical root or specification?
Perhaps this is based on the Jewish law to burry a dead body with out delay.

Favourite Quote : "There was no day like that before it or after it, that Hashem heeded the voice of man." - Verse 14

Saturday, October 13, 2007

Joshua - Chapter 9

1. What is the response of the residents of Canaan after having heard what became of Ai? (And as a matter of fact, does the first verse indicate that this was the report that they heard, or is this an assumption?)

While it doesn’t’ specifically say that the report they heard was about Ai – it’s reasonable to assume they heard about at least Jericho and probably Ai as well. The Art scroll give an interesting angle on this it says “Like the people of Jericho and AI before them, the Gibeonites chose to resist the Israelite conquest, but in a different manner. Jericho chose defense; Ai chose offense, the Gibeonites chose deception.
But I see their response as basically to surrender to Israel – albeit in a devious way. They wanted simply to have their lives spared.

2. Does it appear that the acceptance by Joshua of the "claim" of the Gibeonites is "naive"? What would the information sources available to Joshua have been at that time?

Joshua was a prophet, and could have consulted with Hashem before agreeing to the pact. So yes, outright acceptance does seem a bit naïve.

3. According to verse 18, what reason is given for not attacking the Gibeonites? And, why should the "aydah" (note: no reference is made to B?nai Yisrael) complain about this particular action?

The Gibeonites were not attacked because Joshua chose to keep true to the oath. Even though the oath was made under false pretences, and thus not binding, Joshua and the elders felt it would be a desecration of God’s name for Jews to nullify an oath made to non-Jews – even if they were within their rights to do so.

4. And as verse 27 indicates, the Gibeonites were menial workers "to this very day." As previously noted -- "what is this very day"?

See Answer to Q5.

5. What is the meaning of the very last four words in verse 27 "at the place which He will choose"?

It certainly sounds like it is referring to the Temple in Jerusalem – which would seem to imply that “until this day’ (see question 4) is referring to temple times or later – possible the time of the “canonization” of the Torah in time of Ezra (500-400 BCE).

Favourite Quote : "And now, we are in your hand; whatever seems good and right in your eyes to do with us - do." - Verse 25

Friday, October 12, 2007

Joshua - Chapter 8

1. Why, in the light of preceding events, would Chapter 8 begin with the reassuring statement to Joshua?

I think it is exactly because of the preceding events that Joshua needed reassurance. After a defeat in battle and having to put to death one of his own men, Joshua’s 9and all the people’s) moral was probably low. Having God tell you “Have no fear” is a good way to being up their spirits. And having God serve as your General and give you detailed battle plans puts a fait bit of confidence into your men.

2. What is the response of Joshua -- and is it oral or "action"?

The response was for Joshua to do exactly as God commanded. He communicated the battle plan to the nation, and made preparations to carry them out.

3. What will explain the policy of total devastation -- including men, women, children?

???

4. How does verse 26 echo an experience in the Five Books involving Moses?

Joshua stretching out his spear during the battle echoes the actions of Moses when he Kept is staff raised during the battle with Amalek,

5. Verse 28 makes reference to "to this very day." Which is the "very day"?

The verse said the mound where they buried the king of Ai remains until “this very day”. Literally, “this day” would refer to the time of the authourship of the book of Joshua. But it could be taken to mean whatever day you are reading the chapter – in orther words- is there for all time.

6. Why, precisely at this juncture, does Joshua then build an altar and, as well, erect stones which set forth the "Torat Mosheh"? And what was the Torah which Mosheh (according to this verse) actually wrote "in the presence of the Israelites"?

Sacrifices to God were a sign of thanks, so after God performs a great miracle – like delivering Ai into their hands – it would be common practice to build an alter and offer sacrifices. There are many opinions on what “Torat Mosheh” refers to. Some say the Ten Commandments, others say the Book of Deuteronomy, others say the entire 5 books. Rabbi Yossh ben Yose said in the name of Rabbi Eleazar ben Simeon: “They only wrote on the stones what the nations of the world would want to see.”

7. Verse 34 makes reference to "Sefer HaTorah." To what does this refer?

Again may differing opinions here – it could mean the entire 5 books, some say he listed all the mitzvot, others say it refers specifically to Deuteronomy chapter 28.

8. How does the term "K?hal Yisrael? (verse 3 5) dfffer (or parallel) Am Yisrael?

I take Am Yisrael to mean the single nation, while K’hal Yisrael are the people who make up the nation.

Favourite Quote : "Do not fear and do not loose resolve" - Verse 1

Thursday, October 11, 2007

Joshua - Chapter 7

1. From what tribe does the violator of the instruction regarding the herem derive? Would one have expected it to have been from another tribe?

The transgressor came from the tribe of Judah. This is surprising, because both Jakob and Moses speak highly of the tribe of Judah in their respective blessings. Perhaps Simeon would have been more expected - since both Moses and Jakob castigated him in their blessings.

2. The number of casualties at Ai (verses 2 through 5) is 36. Some 3,000 were in the force. Does this seem disproportionate in terms of the "melting of the courage of the people" and their courage "turning to water"? Or does "shloshet alafim" possibly mean three contingents rather than 3,000 (from the term aluf) and might this have some significance in terms of numbering in various Biblical texts?

I think that even if 1 out of 3000 (or 3 contingents) had been killed, the response would have been the same. After destroying the most powerful city in the lab without a single casualty (let alone fatality) suffering any damage at the hands of a weaker city would certainly be enough make Israel feel that God was not with them.

3. Is the reaction of Joshua understandable in terms of the recent victory at Jericho? What is his stated reason for the overwhelming concern?

Joshua's concern was not with the fate of the nation, but for how the defeat of the Jews would affect peoples perception of Hashem. This reminds me of the verse we recite twice a week in Tachanun - "Do not tun us over to sadists. Why should the nations say 'Where is their G-d now'". Similar language was used by Moses to cool God anger at the Jews on several occasions.

4. What is the significance of the Divine response: "Why are you prostrate before Me?" To whom or what does Divinity direct Joshua's attention?

As always, God redirects fault back to the nation. Like a parents raising a child, God response to the nation is always based on the nations actions. One person disobeyed God's command not to take anything from Jericho. But surely others saw him transgress, or knew of it, and did nothing. That is why the entire nation was held accountable - clearly they did not treat God's word - spoken by his prophet Joshua - with the necessary gravity.

5. How is this a dialogue comparable to Moses calling out at the Reed Sea and the response of Divinity at this time? Is this consistent?

???

6. What is the solution to the "military problem" of the Israelites?

Since this conquest was a religious one, not a military one, the solution to the problem obviously lies in the religious realm. Correct the wrong done by Achan - repair the rift in the relationship between Israel and God that his actions caused - and the military problems will go away.

7. The closing refrain of the chapter indicates a sobering (to put it temperately) punishment not only to him who took from the herem but for his entire family. Does the punishment fit the crime?

The traditional interpretation of these verses is that while Achan was liable for the death penalty for his actions, his family was not. The family was taken to witness the punishment (as a deterrent), but was not harmed. The phrase which seems to imply the family also being killed (verse 25) is taken to mean "They pelted Achan, burned his belongings and stoned his animals.

Favourite Quote : "Indeed, I have sinned against Hashem, God of Israel." - Verse 20

Wednesday, October 10, 2007

Joshua - Chapter 6

1. Who determined the strategy for the conquest of Jericho?

Joshua may be the leader and General in the field, but the strategy is clearly coming directly from God.

2. Is the conquest to be effected by way of "military strength" or through some other means?

Clearly, the breaching of the walls of the city had nothing to do with military might. The walls fell when the Arc marched around the city 7 times with the sounding of the shofar. But once the walls fell, the Israeli "army" still had to fight with the sword. But even given that it would be foolish to think the Jericho fell by human hands. God brought the walls down, and after seeing that the people of Jericho would have been too awe-stuck to fight. As it says in verse 2 God "has delivered into your hands Jericho and its King."


3. In verse 6 there is a reference to an Ark. How is it different from the earlier reference to same in terms of nomenclature -- or is it the same?

Actually verse 6 references the arc two times - in different terms. First it's referred to as the "Arc of the Covenant", as it has been referred many times before. Then it is called the "Arc of Hashem". Clearly there is only one arc. Perhaps the different names are used to refer to different uses of the arc - just as different names are used to refer to God's different attributes.


4. In verse 17 what is the definition of the word "herem" -- and what is the exception to same and for what reason? (Note that the reference here is not to spies but, rather, to "messengers.?) Does this have any significance in terms of the emphasis desired by the author of this phrase?

"Herem" means "all that is in it" - in other words everything, every person, animal and object. The only exceptions being some valuable objects (see question 5) and Rahab and all of her family and property.

Perhaps the "spies" are called "messengers" here because the verse is talking about what they actually did, not what they were sent to do. They may have been sent to spy on the city, but what they actually did was bring the message of the truth of God to Rahab.

5. The "herem" has a prohibitional element. What is it -- and why? Is anything to be saved and, if so, for what purpose?

The only things to be saved are the silver and gold vessels of copper and iron. These were to be "donated" to the treasury of Hashem - or in other words given to the Kohanim to use to maintain and administer the Sanctuary. Remember that the Kohanim and Levim have an important and expensive role to play, yet they don't get a portion of land in Israel - they live of the charity of the rest of the tribes. They clearly need to build a treasury to allow them to fulfill their role.

6. Why is it necessary to repeat what happened to Rahab in verse 23 and again in verse 25; is there any difference between the two versions? And, if so, does the difference have anything to do with the view towards the conversion of the non-Jew and acceptability into the Jewish community?

Verse 23 says Rahab was taken and placed outside of the camp of Israel. verse 25 says she "dwelled in the midst of Israel to this day". The question seems to be implying that perhaps Rahab converted but were left to "dwell outside of the camp" - or never fully integrated into the nation. I don't agree. I think these two accounts could be saying something different. Verse 23 is a physical description - they were taken and put outside of the camp for their safely - to ensure that they are not accidentally killed. But verse 25 is talking spiritually - they converted and continue to live in our midst - a key part of our nation - to this day.

Favourite Quote : "It happened when the people heard the sound of the shofar that the people cried out with a great shout" - Verse 20

Tuesday, October 09, 2007

Joshua - Chapter 5

1. Why is it necessary to provide for a second circumcision operation?
2. And, how does verse 2 relate to verse 4, since the former makes reference to "a second time" and verse 4 would seem to indicate that this would be "the first time"?
3. Does verse 5 resolve this tension? Why does the word "brit? not appear in this particular narration?


These first three questions are all related, so I'll answer them all at once. Before leaving Egypt, the Jews engaged in a mass circumcision where all those who were not able to be circumcised (because of the conditions of slavery) entered the Brit. However, in the desert the conditions didn't make circumcision possible, so the generation to enter the land was not circumcised. Hence the mass circumcision. This was the second mass circumcision that the nation undertook, but for this generation it was the first.

4. What is the significance of the phrase "to remove the shame of Egypt from you"? Is this a physiological observation or is it an observation dealing with the relationship of the people, one circumcised to freedom, and independent? Or, to neither?

Circumcision is one of the core acts in Judaism. While the Jews in Egypt and the desert were not able to fulfil this obligation, they knew of the obligation, and not being able to fulfil it could have been a source of shame - not in front of others, but shame in front of God.

The mass circumcision here put that in the past. The Jews were now a free nation, and never again would they have to endure the shame of not fulfilling the mitzvoh of Brit Milah. An history shows that to be true, despite all the hardships we have endured for 1000's of years, we have always managed to keep true to Brit Milah.

So, I think the answer is that the verse is about physiological observations, relationships, and freedom.

5. According to verses 10 and 11, how long did the Passover last at this time?

These verses describe one day of Passover - bringing the sacrifice on the 14th of Nisan and eating matzoh on the 15th. But I don't think that implies that Passover was only 1 day at the time; it is only the first Festival day that is being described. Nothing in the following verses suggests that those events could not have happened during Passover.

6. In verse 13 the action of Joshua would indicate what characteristic?

This verse shows how Joshua was a very different leader than Moses. Joshua perceived the events from the eyes of a military leader, someone about to lead an army to war - totally missing the spiritual aspect. Joshua was surely a righteous leader but was charged with a military mission - to conquer the land, so he viewed everything through those eyes. Contrast this episode to when Bilam encountered the angel of God. Bilam was not a righteous man, but he was spiritually oriented. When he saw the angel, he immediately knew what he was looking at. The fact that he was wicked didn't cloud his judgement.

Perhaps the ability to perceive God doesn't lie in whether or not you are a good person, but depends just on how you choose to see the world?


7. Why, in verse 14 is the answer, first, "no"? And, what is "an officer of God's army"? How does the instruction given to Joshua parallel the instruction given to Moshe in Exodus?

The "commander of God's army" is not with the Jewish people, the Jewish people are part of Gods army. Perhaps the initial "No" is to set that straight.

The angel proceeds to tell Joshua to remove his sandals, for he is on holy ground. This is the same language used with Moses at the burning bush.


8. And what, indeed, is the answer to Joshua's observation at the end of verse 14: "What does my Lord have to say to His servant?" Other than the instruction to remove the sandals -- is there any other communication?

The rest of the communication is that "the place upon which you stand is holy". When God used that phrase with Moses at the burning bush, he meant that particular bit of land was holy - because of God's presence at the burning bush. But in this case, perhaps the holy land being referred to is the entire land of Israel. This verse is making it clear that now that they have crossed the Jordan, they are on holy land.

Favourite Quote : "Are you with us or with our enemies?" - Verse 13

Monday, October 08, 2007

Joshua - Chapter 4

1. Is the symbolism of the 12 stones directed toward history or toward performance mandate (there were 12 stones which were prominent in the closing chapters of D'varim as well)?

The verse certainly suggests the stones were for historical purposes. Verse 6 says “When your children ask ‘what are these stones to you’, you shall answer…”. This is similar language to the verses we read about Teffilin – that they should serve as a sigh for your children and prompt discussion.

2. Verse 14 synopsizes the experience. Does it stress the miraculous or does it stress the impact upon the "leadership"? And, the verb construct "Va'yiru" can be translated either as "feared? or "were in awe of." Would this make any difference in terms of the relationship to Joshua?

I think it stresses the miraculous – the first “miracle” Joshua performed was parting the waters – that was previously Moses’ thing. By doing that God and Joshua demonstrated for the entire nation that God was in fact with Joshua just as God was with Moses. By doing that God “exalted Joshua in the eyes of all Israel”.

However, you can also look at this in terms of leadership. Being able to move 40,000 Jews across a river in short order is no easy task. When the people saw he was able to do that, they accepted him as a capable leader. Of course, I would say being able to move 40,00 Jews like that is, in and of itself, miraculous – so I stand by my original answer ;)

3. What is the tenth day of the first month?

Just prior to the exodus from Egypt, God tells Israel to start counting the months with the month of the exodus. So, the tenth day of the first month should be the 10th of Nisan.
However, tradition puts Moses’ death on the 7th of Adar. Chapter 34 of Deuteronomy says Israel mourned Moses 30 days, bringing us to the 8th of Nisan – which would be the date of the start of Joshua. Chapter 2-16 says the spies spent at least 3 days on their expedition (maybe more), and Chapter 3-2 lists at least 3 days passing. That brings us to at least the 13th of Nisan – which is close, but slightly off from the date given.

The Hebrew calendar wasn’t fixed (with set number of days per month) until close to 2000 years later, so perhaps in those days Adar had a few extra days, but 6 or more days seems hard to account for.

Or, perhaps, this first month refers to the first month of Joshua’s rule. Crossing the sea happening 10 days after he “takes over” seems to fit the timeline. The bible often talks about the “5th year of the rule of king X”, so perhaps this means the “10th day of the first month of Joshua’s rule.”

I’ll add this to my list of possible thesis topics if I ever go back to school for Jewish studies.

4. The verses beginning with 20 indicate the avowed significance of the "12 stones" and show a relationship with the earlier "water experience" -- and indicate Who is the Hero, in the final analysis.

Despite Joshua being the face of the story, these verses make it clear that God is clearly the actor. Just as God was the actor in all the miracles performed at Moses’ hand, he continues to be the actor for Joshua (and beyond).

Favourite Quote : “So that all the people of the earth would know the hand of God, that it is mighty, so that you would fear Hashem, your God, all the days.” – verse 24

Sunday, October 07, 2007

Joshua - Chapter 3

1. Does the verb "to awaken early" resonate in terms of the Five Books of Moses and, if so, with what personality (or personalities)?

Avraham and Yitzchak arose early to fulfill the command Avraham received from God to sacrifice his son. Joshua was just as eager to fulfill God’s command, as his forefathers were to fulfill theirs.

2. The terminology in verse 3 mentions "the ark of God's covenant." Is there some reason why it is not referred to as the "ark of the Ten Statements"?

Tradition has it that the arc contained not only the 2 tablets of the 10 Commandments, but also the crushed remains of the first tablets (which Moses smashed upon seeing the Golden Calf). Also, some teach that it also contained the original 5 books of Moses, the ones that Moses wrote as G-d dictated. In any case, the arc clearly represents much more than a carrying case. The Arc was a symbol of the covenant between God and Israel. They say that the Cherubs on the arc would face each other when the relationship between God and Israel was good, and turn away when the relationship needed work.

3. Why is a distance mandated between the Ark and those who would follow it (save for the kohanim)?

???

4. In verse 5 the Hebrew term is "hitkadashu" usually rendered as "make yourself holy." How does one make oneself "holy"? Or does the term have some other implication -- perhaps in terms of "uniqueness" or "readiness" -- especially in this context?

This verse can certainly be read as “Make yourself ready” – since they are about to go to war – readiness would seem to be advisable. But, the conquest is really not a military war, it’s a holy war; not in the negative sense that we use the term today, but it is a war commanded by Gad and where God is acting as the General. Being ready for this type of war certainly requires one to be holy. Ritually purifying yourself could certainly be seen as part of the preparations.

5. Where does Divinity speak to Joshua in verse 7? And, does this verse indicate a parity in significance between Mosheh and Joshua?

This is an interesting verse; God says that he will begin to exalt Joshua in the eyes of the people. But you would think he would already be exalted. Perhaps up to this point, people gave Joshua respect because Moses told them to. Joshua was like the moon and Moses the sun – the moon shines brightly, but it’s light is just a refection of the sun’s. Here, God is saying that from this point on, Joshua will radiate his own light, and people will exalt him for his own merits, not because Moses told them to.

6. What does verse 13 call to mind in terms of an earlier event involving "bodies of water?

There are certainly parallels between this verse and the parting of the Sea of Reeds, with one important difference. The parting of the Sea of Reeds happened before the people steped into the water, and here we’re told that the river will part once the “soles of the Kohanim” enter the water. Here Israel has confidence to enter the water before it’s parted, with full faith that God will part it.

Favourate Quote : "This day I will begin to exalt you in the eyes of all Israel, that they may know that just as I was with Moses, so will I be with you." - verse 7

Joshua - Chapter 2

1. Why do the commentators at times translate "isha zonah" not as a prostitute but as one who "dispenses mazon," that is, "restauranteur"? What makes them "restive"?

From content, you easily come to the conclusion that the woman was a prostitute, but because of the merit of her actions the commentators chose to portray her in a more flattering light.

2. How does verse 9 clearly indicate that the role of the woman is not that of a "menial" but represents a crucial actor/character/ personality in the unfolding of sacred history?

Jericho is the first city being conquered, these 2 spies are the first of the Israelites to cross the Jordan, and this woman is the first person in the city the spies spoke to. Yet she knows “that God has given you (Israel) the land”. If the goal of the 10 plagues in Egypt and the splitting of the Sea of Reeds was to announce for the world to hear that HaShem is the one and only god, then this woman confirms that the world got the message (even if they don’t listen to it).

3. How does one have a residence "within the wall" and what does that teach about the construction of ancient cities and, as well, the location of certain types of "enterprises"?

The wall was clearly not just a wall as we know it, but clearly thick enough to contain dwellings and businesses. Clearly those living in the wall would be is the most dangerous position is the city ws to be attacked, so you would assume that would be the “low rent” district, which generally attracts the seedy underbelly of society – like prostitiues (see Q1 above)

4. How does the report of the "spies" (23/24) compare with the report of the 12 that had been sent by Mosheh -- in intent, and in "style"?

You could say that by this time the Israelites had come to have some faith in God. The heavily fortified city didn’t scare them, like it did when Moses sent spies 40 years before. The reported back, with confidence, than G-d had already delivered the land - land all they had to do was take it. This is in sharp contrast to the spies in Moses’ time (see my pervious post)

Favourate Quote: "We heard and our hearts melted... for Hasehm, your God, He is God in the heavans above and on the earth below." - Verse 11

Joshua - Chapter 1

1. Why is there no indication of the location, the time of day, or the mode of address in the very first sentence of Joshua?

The last few chapters of Deuteronomy and the start of the book of Joshua can really be viewed and a single book – with the first chapter of Joshua following immediately after the account of Moses’ death. The change in book really only reflects a change of authour - God being the authour of Deuteronomy (with Moses as his scribe) and Joshua the author of his own book. Accordingly, the location, line, and mode are all obvious from the close of the previous book.

2. How is the initial contact with Joshua different from the initial contact with Mosheh; and why is there no element of surprise in the response of Joshua? Had he been "spoken to" prior thereto?

When God spoke to Moses, it caught Moses off guard, he was a Sheppard at the time, with no expectation of every speaking with G-d. Joshua, on the other hand, had been Moses’ right hand mad for 40 years, and had been selected by God and Moses to be the next leader of Israel.

3. There is a repeated refrain in verses 6 and 7 -- the imperative to be "strong and resolute". Why the repetition? And is it really a repetition in terms of what it is that constitutes "being resolute"?

I don’t see this as a repetition, the two instances of the directive to be “strong and courageous” are in reference to different things. Both verses are talking about being resolute in leading the Jewish people, but verse 6 is talking about being strong when conquering the land while verse 7 is talking about being remaining loyal to mitzvoth while conquering the land. One verse is being physically strong and courageous, and the next is being morally strong and courageous.

4. Does verse 8 imply that by Joshua's time the Torah had been committed to writing? Or is this a poetic reference?

My understanding is that before Moses’ death, he completed scribing the 5 books (and in fact, made 12 copies of it, one for each tribe), so yes, this verse can certainly be taken to mean that the Torah had been committed to writing by this time.

5. How does the response of the Reubenites/Gadites and the Menasheh families indicate that Joshua's assumption of responsibility is with promise?

???

6. How does the author of the text (in the closing verse of the first chapter) reaffirm the basic theme of the charge to Joshua?

Israel put their faith in Joshua, and pledged to follow him, but on one condition – that he be “strong and courageous”. As I say above, that is being strong and courageous to follow God’s command exactly, straying neither to the right or to the left.

Favourate Quote: "Every place on which the sole of your foot will tread I have given to you." - Verse 3

Wednesday, October 03, 2007

I'm Back!

After a brief hiatus (ok, just under 3 years is hardly brief, but I did move twice, have a second son, and become Vice President of my Shul) I’m back.

I’ve decided to start a regular learning program. You may be familiar with “Daf Yomi”, a program started almost a hundred years ago where Jews all over the world undertake to study a page of Talmud per day, completing the entire Talmud in about 7 and a half years.

Well, I’m not quite ready for that, but the Conservative movement has a related program that I am undertaking (with my wife). While the Talmud is the gold standard for learning Jewish Law, the focus on Talmud has lead to poor knowledge of an even more basic text – the Torah (all 24 books of the Bible).

The USCJ has a program called “Perek Yomi” in which you read a chapter of the Torah each day, starting with the book of Joshua, continuing all the way through to Chronicles, then cycling back to the 5 books of Moses, ending with chapter 34 of Deuteronomy some two and a half years later.

I will use this blog to record my thoughts on each chapter (using the study questions provided by USCJ). I will also highlight a favourite quite from each chapter, in the hope of building up a repertoire of useful biblical quotes. Of course, I’ll also use the blog to record any other interesting learning I do.

The comment facility should be working, so feel free to discuss, or just let me know your reading.

Wish me luck, maybe after this cycle, I’ll be ready for Daf Yomi.