Moshe Rabbeinu gets a new job

The Torah is not supposed to repeat itself or waste words, right? If not, then why do Moshe and Hashem's conversations in the beginning of Sefer Shmot seem like deja vu? The first of these coversations takes place at the burning bush, (in chapters 3 & 4) and the second in Egypt. (in chapters 6 & 7) Let's note the similarities before we examine the differences.

In both prophetic conversations:

1) Hashem identifies Himself
2) He explains that he has noticed Israel's suffering
3) He explains His plan to fulfill his promises to the Forefathers, rescue the people and take them to Israel
4) Tells Moshe he must go to Pharaoh and ask for time off for His people. 
5) Hashem shows Moshe a wonder to perform to ensure belief
6) Moshe complains about his difficulties as a communicator *
7) Hashem assigns Aaron to help Moshe.

Two questions come to mind. First of all, why does Moshe need this much repetition? Didn't he get it the first time? Secondly, there must have been a shorthand way to say that these elements recurred. "And the Lord told Moses all the things that had been said in Midian", or something to that effect leap to mind. One could answer the first question by saying that Moshe had faced his first setback, (Pharoah rejected the request and took away the Israelites straw) and needed a pep talk. But this does not answer the second question. 

There are also, of course, differences. Professor Nehama Leibowitz always argued that when you run into any of these biblical “repetitive” passages, the differences are what deserve our attention. In this case it is these differences that show that the second round is much more than a “pep talk”. So what are the differences?
In the middle of this version of the conversation, (at the point when Moshe complains about his speech) Moshe and Aharon are reintroduced through a long family tree. There is a key, tell-tale statement at the beginning. In chapter 6, verse 11, Hashem says, 'Go in, speak unto Pharaoh king of Egypt, that he let the children of Israel go out of his land.' 12 And Moses spoke before the LORD, saying: 'Behold, the children of Israel have not hearkened unto me; how then shall Pharaoh hear me, who am of uncircumcised lips?'

Moshe had already spoken to Pharaoh. Pharaoh had not hearkened unto him. Why is Moshe expressing this in the future tense? I would argue that Hashem is not repeating his demand in verse 11. He is changing Moshe's job.

This is the key that unlocks all of the problems. In chapters 3 & 4, Hashem has appointed Moshe to be the leader of b'nei Yisrael. When this did not lead to their immediate release, they let him know at the end of chapter 5 that he was fired as their leader for making things worse. As it says in chapter 6, verse 9, “And Moses spoke so unto the children of Israel; but they hearkened not unto Moses for impatience of spirit, and for cruel bondage”

So in chapter 6, Hashem is sending Moshe no longer as the leader of the Jews, but as His ambassador to Pharaoh. This is a very new role for Moshe, and he balks at being Hashem's ambassador just as he balked at becoming the leader of b'nei Yisrael.
This is also why Moshe first shows a sign and wonder to Pharaoh in chapter 7. As leader of the Jews he had no need to turn a staff into a serpent. He only had to do that for the elders of the Jews. But now in chapter 7 he has to prove his bona fides as a Divine messenger to Pharaoh.
Hence all of the repetition. Moshe needs to be reassured again and told that Aharon will help him, etc., etc. for a new position.
You will find other pieces of evidence to support this hypothesis. Feel free to post them in the comments section below.


* I tend to assume that "heavy tongue" and "uncircumsized lips" do not refer to physical disabilities, any more than modern idioms like "tongue tied", "forked tongue" or "big mouth" do. They refer to difficulties with certain types of communication. In Moshe's case, it probably means a difficulty with diplomatic niceties. We are all familiar with the story of Moshe and the hot coals. I think that is designed less to explain the language of "heavy tongue", and more to explain elements of Moshe's childhood within the Rabbinic narrative of warning in Pharaoh's court. 

Wow. How web 2.0 can I get?

I am kind of proud that I sent this from my iPhone. I can also create weblinks in my blogposts, and even embed power point like presentations! I'm learning a lot from this!

Why do nice guys finish last?

More perplexing than the problem of the the cheit ha'egel itself, is the role of Aharon in particular. To put the question simply, what in the world was he thinking? The many suggested answers to the question only underlie the elusiveness of a satisfying answer.

Let's take a look at the question from another angle. Can you picture Moshe having made that mistake in that situation? One could argue that it would have been difficult to picture Aharon sinning that way, yet somehow it seems so much more impossible for Moshe. Why?

To me Moshe and Aharon represent archetypes that we see over and over again. The Ish Chessed and the Ish Emet. In many ways the dynamic is similar to that of Hillel and Shammai. We are all familiar with the story of the three converts who where rebuffed by Shammai, (the Torah on one foot guy being the best known) but warmly and cleverly received by Hillel. (the story appears in masechet shabbat 31a - http://www.ravkooktorah.org/TETZAVEH60.htm) In light of this story, and his reputation for legal strictness, we often think of Shammai as a tough, mean sort of guy.

But was he? His motto in Pirkei Avot is, “Make your Torah study a permanent fixture of your life. Say little and do much. And receive every man with a pleasant countenance.” Receiving people pleasantly seems like a lovely motto. Why did Shammai throw the converts out in the street though? That doesn't sound pleasant. Is Shammai a hypocrite? Are the sources confused? Can we discern a real Shammai?

Things become clearly when we bring up his colleage's motto. “Hillel would say: Be of the disciples of Aharon--a lover of peace, a pursuer of peace, one who loves beings and draws them close to Torah.” Note how much more active this saying is in its aggressive kindness and love. Shammai's pleasant receipt of people pales in comparison.

What is the machloket here? Both value truth and love. For Hillel love comes first, and truth second. (just look at his answers to the converts – how accurate are they?) Shammai shares the same priorities in the opposite order. Hillel sees his biblical role model as Aharon, and I would argue that Moshe should be Shammai's. See Moshe's responses from his first encounter to people striking each other to the sins of the nation he led.

Perhaps after 40 days without hearing the voice of Moshe, Aharon's ability to lovingly comprimise got the better of him. He needed his younger brother's fierce love of truth to guide him away from the pitfall of the egel. Moshe, for his part recognized that he could not do his job without Aharon. He only agreed to take his leadership role when Hashem promised to put Aharon at his side. For just as Aharon without Moshe lead to disaster, the reverse could have occurred as well.

One wonders what would have happened had Aharon been the leader and Moshe his “prophet” and advisor. When the generation of the desert have been more successful? Could Aharon have lovingly guided them to reach their potential. After all, to quote the three converts, "The strictness of Shamai almost made us lose our (spiritual) world; but the humility of Hillel brought us under the wings of God's Presence." 

I find the possibility tantalizing. 

P.S. My friend, Dr. Hillel Chiel pointed out to me today that Shammai chases the man out with a builder's ruler, called, "Amat habinyan". This is certainly a pun on the words "amat" and "emet". 

שוב מעשה בנכרי אחד שבא לפני שמאי אמר לו גיירני ע"מ שתלמדני כל התורה כולה כשאני עומד על רגל אחת דחפו באמת הבנין שבידו בא לפני הלל גייריה אמר לו דעלך סני לחברך לא תעביד זו היא כל התורה כולה ואידך פירושה הוא זיל גמור

OK - Here's the whole thing: 

דף לא,א

ת"ר מעשה בנכרי אחד שבא לפני שמאי אמר לו כמה תורות יש לכם אמר לו שתים תורה שבכתב ותורה שבעל פה א"ל שבכתב אני מאמינך ושבעל פה איני מאמינך גיירני ע"מ שתלמדני תורה שבכתב גער בו והוציאו בנזיפה בא לפני הלל גייריה יומא קמא א"ל א"ב ג"ד למחר אפיך ליה א"ל והא אתמול לא אמרת לי הכי א"ל לאו עלי דידי קא סמכת דעל פה נמי סמוך עלי:  

שוב מעשה בנכרי אחד שבא לפני שמאי אמר לו גיירני ע"מ שתלמדני כל התורה כולה כשאני עומד על רגל אחת דחפו באמת הבנין שבידו 

בא לפני הלל גייריה אמר לו דעלך סני לחברך לא תעביד זו היא כל התורה כולה ואידך פירושה הוא זיל גמור:  

שוב מעשה בנכרי אחד שהיה עובר אחורי בית המדרש ושמע קול סופר שהיה אומר (שמות כח) ואלה הבגדים אשר יעשו חושן ואפוד אמר הללו למי אמרו לו לכהן גדול אמר אותו נכרי בעצמו אלך ואתגייר בשביל שישימוני כהן גדול 

בא לפני שמאי אמר ליה גיירני על מנת שתשימני כהן גדול דחפו באמת הבנין שבידו 

 בא לפני הלל גייריה א"ל כלום מעמידין מלך אלא מי שיודע טכסיסי מלכות לך למוד טכסיסי מלכות הלך וקרא כיון שהגיע (במדבר א) והזר הקרב יומת אמר ליה מקרא זה על מי נאמר א"ל אפי' על דוד מלך ישראל נשא אותו גר קל וחומר בעצמו ומה ישראל שנקראו בנים למקום ומתוך אהבה שאהבם קרא להם (שמות ד) בני בכורי ישראל כתיב עליהם והזר הקרב יומת גר הקל שבא במקלו ובתרמילו על אחת כמה וכמה 

בא לפני שמאי א"ל כלום ראוי אני להיות כהן גדול והלא כתיב בתורה והזר הקרב יומת 

בא לפני הלל א"ל ענוותן הלל ינוחו לך ברכות על ראשך שהקרבתני תחת כנפי השכינה 

לימים נזדווגו שלשתן למקום אחד אמרו קפדנותו של שמאי בקשה לטורדנו מן העולם 

ענוותנותו של הלל קרבנו תחת כנפי השכינה

Changing Face in Poland - Skinhead Puts on Skullcap - NYTimes.com

I'm not sure what to think about this one yet.

Changing Face in Poland - Skinhead Puts on Skullcap - NYTimes.com

Avadar

The Oren Microcosm

Is it me, or is this film clip a microcosmic presentation of the entire Arab-Israeli conflict?

Michael Oren shouted down at UCI

Israel is trying to be reasonable, Arabs are denying Israel any right to anything, and well intentioned Westerners think they can help.