Having spent many years learning Gemara I realize that we trained to see this Mishna as merely the canvas upon which the Talmud is painted. What have I been missing by not seeing the Mishna as its own enterprise? Last year my son Yishama introduced me to Rabbi Yakov Nagen‘s book Nishmat HaMishna– The Soul of the Mishna. In this amazing book Rabbi Nagen offers us a window to the inner world of the Mishna. In reading this I have been opened up to rereading the Mishna as its own body of literature.

It has been a joy over the last couple of month learning Mishna in this way with Yishama who is in Israel. When reading a text that this terse and legal in nature when there is a literary flourish it hits hard. Recently we were going through the beginning of Sotah and we read:

הַמְקַנֵּא לְאִשְׁתּוֹ- With regard to one who is jealous of/envious of/zealous for and issues a warning to his wife not to seclude herself with a particular man, so that if she does not heed his warning she will assume the status of a woman suspected by her husband of having been unfaithful [sota] ( Mishna Sotah 1:1)

What do we make of this language of הַמְקַנֵּא ? It comes from Naso where we read :

Regarding anyone whose wife has gone astray and broken faith with him, in that another man has had carnal relations with her unbeknown to her husband, and she has kept secret the fact that she defiled herself without being forced, and there is no witness against her—but רֽוּחַ־קִנְאָה֙ וְקִנֵּ֣א אֶת־אִשְׁתּ֔וֹ a fit of jealousy has come over him and he is wrought up about the wife who has defiled herself; or if רֽוּחַ־קִנְאָ֛ה וְקִנֵּ֥א אֶת־אִשְׁתּ֖וֹ a fit of jealousy has come over him and he is wrought up about his wife although she has not defiled herself (Numbers 5: 12-14)

What does this mean? Is he jealous of the connection she has with this other man? Is he envious of their intimacy? Is he just zealous that she should only have eyes for him? In none of these cases has it been proven that she was actually intimate with another man, it is only dealing with his having told her not to be alone with him and she was. Sotah is not a case of adultery. Rather, while gruesome the whole enterprise of Sotah at its core is dealing with this uncertainty in the relationship between a husband and wife. It is telling that this language of jealousy/envy/zealotry frames the tractate. How do we deal with these feelings?

I was thinking about this language when reading the opening of this week’s eponymous Torah portion Pinchas. There we read:

Pinchas, son of Eleazar son of Aaron the priest, has turned back My wrath from the Israelites by בְּקַנְא֥וֹ אֶת־קִנְאָתִ֖י displaying among them his passion for Me, so that I did not wipe out the Israelite people בְּקִנְאָתִֽי in My passion. (Numbers 25:11)

Here God is expressing gratitude for Pinchas’s zealotry that was on full display at the end of last week’s Torah portion. There the people fall prey to the charms of the daughters of Moab, and are enticed to worship the idol Peor. When a high-ranking Israelite official publicly takes a Midianite princess into a tent, Pinchas kills them both, stopping the plague raging among the people. While gruesome God praises Pinchas because his zealousness preempted God’s. What do we make of the different feelings of jealousy, envy, or zealotry? Regardless of the state of uncertainty and gruesome actions, it is telling that the shared language of Pinchas and Sotah reframe the relationship between God and the people of Israel as one of a husband and wife. While it might not be marital bliss, it will be covenant that stands the test of time.