Archive for the '4.07 Pinchas' Category

Yehoshua and the Peaceful Transfer of Power: A Thought on Pinchas

In Pinchas, this week’s Torah portion, we see Moshe starting the process of transferring leadership to Yehoshua. There we read:

And the Lord answered Moshe, “Single out Yehoshua son of Nun, an inspired man, and lay your hand upon him. Have him stand before Eleazar the priest and before the whole community, and commission him in their sight. Invest him with some of your authority, so that the whole Israelite community may obey.” ( Numbers 27:18-20)

Yehoshua’s assent to power is a clear juxtaposition to Pinchas who the Torah portion is names. Pinchas took power in his own hands when killing Zimri and Cozbi at the end of last week’s Torah portion. In comparison Yehoshua is eased into his role by Moshe. God instruct Moshe to invest in him his authority so that the people will start seeing him in the role of successor. It is hard to imagine trying to fill those shoes.

In thinking about I was reminded of part of this wonderful video that highlights the importance of being the first follower. Please watch:

As we see here, the leader needs to confer authority on the first follower as equals to start a movement. Moshe is clearly the leader of the Israelite people, but would it have been a movement that has lasted to today if it was not for that first follower?

Most of history has been plagued by violent transfers of leadership marked by Pinchas-like acts of aggression. One could even say that the health of a society can be measured by the peaceful transfer of power. Like Yehoshua John Adams, a remarkable political philosopher, served as the second President of the United States (1797-1801), after serving as the first Vice President under President George Washington. Our first president, George Washington chose not to try to be elected for a third term. Power is alluring. It take a huge strength to make room for others to grow into leadership, but ultimately it is for the best.

-See another post on followership and Nachshon here

 

Advertisement

The Sound of a Ripple

Pinchas, the main character from this week’s eponymous Torah portion, is very similar to Elijah, the main character from this week’s haftorah (I Kings 18:46-19:21). Both of them zealously and selflessly fight for their God and their people. In the haftorah we see Elijah fleeing the death sentence issued against him by Queen Jezebel. He runs to the Judean desert. While he slept, an angel awoke him and provided him with food and drink. Reenergized, Elijah went for forty days until he arrived at Mount Sinai and took shelter in a cave. The word of God came to Elijah and asked him for the purpose of his visit. He responded and God instructed him to leave the cave and stand on the mountain and experience God’s Presence. There was a great and strong wind splitting mountains and shattering boulders, but Elijah realized that God was not in the wind. Then came an earthquake followed by fire, but again Elijah understood that not in the earthquake nor the fire was God. After the fire there was a Kol Demama Daka- still small voice, and Elijah realized that the Divine Presence had appeared. Again God asked him why he was there and instructed Elijah to return and support the people.

It seems very mysterious, what is this “still small voice”? I was thinking about this a few months ago when I was working with Josh Lake and Caroline Rothstein on a program for the Cornerstone Fellowship based on Ripple the iconic song by the Grateful Dead.

In the classic Rabbinic Tradition, we explored this song as a primary text and added commentary on it in the from of a contemporary page of Talmud. I invite you to take a look at Ripple In Still Water or any of the other pages I have made. On this Daf we explored the meaning of the lyric:

It’s a hand-me-down, the thoughts are broken
Perhaps they’re better left unsung
I don’t know, don’t really care
Let there be songs to fill the air (Ripple)

What does it mean that things might be “better left unsung”?  For Josh, Caroline and me, it resonated with this idea of the “still small voice” from our haftorah. As we wrote:

While Elijah thinks that God might be found in the large scale sensory experiences, God is in fact uniquely to be found in the subtle quiet moments when things are left unsung.

When reflecting on this and the people of Pinchas and Elijah, it is interesting to realize that not all zealotry is meant to be acted on or even heard. Some of the deepest acts of faith, family, and fraternity are subtle and even silent, like a ripple on still water.

Killer Shot: On Kawhi and Pinchas

Jonathan Haidt is a social psychologist and a Professor of Ethical Leadership at New York University. In 2008 he delivered a great TED Talk on the moral roots of liberals and conservatives. Haidt studies the five moral values that form the basis of our political choices, whether we’re left, right or center. In this talk he said:

The third foundation is in-group/loyalty. You do find cooperative groups in the animal kingdom, but these groups are always either very small or they’re all siblings. It’s only among humans that you find very large groups of people who are able to cooperate and join together into groups, but in this case, groups that are united to fight other groups. This probably comes from our long history of tribal living, of tribal psychology. And this tribal psychology is so deeply pleasurable that even when we don’t have tribes, we go ahead and make them, because it’s fun. Sports is to war as pornography is to sex. We get to exercise some ancient drives. (TED.com)

On one level these things are all about practicing and on another level sports, war, pornography, and sex are about power and teams. 

I was thinking about Haidt’s thoughts while reading the end of Balak, last week’s Torah portion. There we see Zimri and Kosbi, an Israelite man and a Midianite woman, fornicating in public. With a horribly miraculous shot, Pinchas kills them both with a toss of a spear. Falling short of war, this shot woke the people up by pulling them away from sex. And in a profound way this shot reestablished the teams. This shot seemed to so extraordinary that it must have been divinely ordained. So much so that in this week’s eponymous Torah portion Pinchas is given a “blessing of peace” because put an end to their lascivious behavior.

Lihavdil– making a totally separation, I was reminded of Pinchas’s shot in 2019 when Kawhi Leonard hit a miraculous shot to end the playoff series and beat the 76ers. Everyone knew that he was going to get the ball and at the last moment he hit a shot that bounced close to 5 times before going in, winning the game, and sending the Raptor to the NBA championship. It seemed to be ordained to go in. After that it was not surprising to see the Raptors go on to win their first NBA championship. 

 

 

While Pinchas brought that “ancient drive” to a pointed end, Kawhi’s  killer shot defined the team and unlocked their tribal drive. If there is no depth of this juxtaposition, we can just chock it up to the fact that I am a long suffering and disgruntled 76ers fan. I guess that 76ers are my tribe.

Pinchas and the Pitch 

In a conversation this week with Corey Cutler, the heads of Fundraising for the Foundation for Jewish Camp, we got to talking about the art of the fundraising pitch  and Pinchas, this week’s Torah Portion. In preparation for entering into the new land the Israelites had a lottery to determine who would get what property. There we read:

Then drew near the daughters of Zelophehad, the son of Hepher, the son of Gilead, the son of Machir, the son of Manasseh, of the families of Manasseh the son of Joseph; and these are the names of his daughters: Mahlah, Noah, and Hoglah, and Milcah, and Tirzah.  And they stood before Moshe, and before Eleazar the priest, and before the princes and all the congregation, at the door of the tent of meeting, saying. ‘Our father died in the wilderness, and he was not among the company of them that gathered themselves together against the Lord in the company of Korah, but he died in his own sin; and he had no sons. Why should the name of our father be done away from among his family, because he had no son? Give unto us a possession among the brethren of our father.’ ( Numbers 27:1-4)

The daughters of Zelophehad nobly presented their case to Moshe. Corey pointed out how they must have prepared, they went together, they defined their common cause with Moshe, and they made their pitch short and sweet. 

I was intrigued  by their fear of their father’s legacy disappearing because of an oversight. To me it seems that this is what gave their pitch gravity to Moshe. Even if Moshe could not relate to these women, how could Moshe not empathize with Zelophehad? For many philanthropists one of the motivators to invest beyond a common cause and a relationship with the person making the pitch is establishing their own legacy.  

As I discovered in my conversation with Corey, all of us involved in not-for-profit work need to learn from the  example of the daughters of Zelophehad. 

Prise de la Bastille: Noble Resistance

On the morning of 14 July 1789, the city of Paris was in a state of alarm. The partisans of the Third Estate in France, now under the control of the Bourgeois Militia of Paris, had earlier stormed the Hôtel des Invalides without meeting significant opposition. Their intention had been to gather the weapons held there. The commandant at the Invalides had in the previous few days taken the precaution of transferring 250 barrels of gunpowder to the Bastille for safer storage.  Amid the tensions of July 1789 the building remained as a symbol of royal tyranny. At this point, the Bastille was nearly empty, housing only seven prisoners: four forgers, two “lunatics” and one “deviant” aristocrat, the Comte de Solages.

The crowd gathered outside around mid-morning, calling for the surrender of the prison, the removal of the cannon and the release of the arms and gunpowder. Two representatives of the crowd outside were invited into the fortress and negotiations began, and another was admitted around noon with definite demands. The negotiations dragged on while the crowd grew and became impatient. Around 1:30, the crowd surged into the undefended outer courtyard. A small party climbed onto the roof of a building next to the gate to the inner courtyard and broke the chains on the drawbridge, crushing one vainqueur as it fell. Soldiers of the garrison called to the people to withdraw but in the noise and confusion these shouts were misinterpreted as encouragement to enter. Gunfire began, apparently spontaneously, turning the crowd into a mob. The crowd seems to have felt that they had been intentionally drawn into a trap and the fighting became more violent and intense, while attempts by deputies to organised a cease-fire were ignored by the attackers. The firing continued, and after 3 pm the attackers were reinforced by mutinous French Guard,  along with two cannons. A substantial force of Royal Army troops encamped on the Champs de Mars did not intervene. With the possibility of mutual carnage suddenly apparent, Governor de Launay ordered a cease-fire at 5 pm. A letter offering his terms was handed out to the besiegers through a gap in the inner gate. His demands were refused, but de Launay nonetheless capitulated, as he realized that with limited food stocks and no water supply his troops could not hold out much longer. He accordingly opened the gates to the inner courtyard, and the vainqueurs swept in to liberate the fortress at 5:30.

The Bastille was a symbol of abuses by the monarchy. The news of the successful insurrection at Paris spread throughout France. The Prise de la Bastille – Storming of the Bastille  was the flashpoint of the French Revolution.

Besides tomorrow being the 228th anniversary of the Storming of the Bastille, I was thinking about this moment when reading Pinchas, this week’s Torah Portion. In preparation for entering into the new land they had a lottery to determine who would get what property. There we read:

Then drew near the daughters of Zelophehad, the son of Hepher, the son of Gilead, the son of Machir, the son of Manasseh, of the families of Manasseh the son of Joseph; and these are the names of his daughters: Mahlah, Noah, and Hoglah, and Milcah, and Tirzah.  And they stood before Mosche, and before Eleazar the priest, and before the princes and all the congregation, at the door of the tent of meeting, saying. ‘Our father died in the wilderness, and he was not among the company of them that gathered themselves together against the Lord in the company of Korah, but he died in his own sin; and he had no sons. Why should the name of our father be done away from among his family, because he had no son? Give unto us a possession among the brethren of our father.’ ( Numbers 27:1-4)

The daughters of Zelophehad nobly presented their case to Mosche. Similar to the case of the Storming of the Bastille, there were very few people impacted by this miscarriage of justice, but it represented something symbolic that needed to corrected. Their resistance could have spelled the end of Mosche’s short rule of law, but instead of being inflexible Mosche found a solution. Throughout history following these lessons Halakha- Jewish law has evolved by fomenting and responding to many revolutions. As leaders we need to be open and listen to all issues regardless of few people might be marginalized by them. Like Mosche we will not survive imprisoned in our fortress. As citizens we need to follow the noble example of the daughters of Zelophehad and persist to resist in the name of justice.

 

No Church in the Wild

I have been thinking about the end of last week’s Torah portion discussing the Israelites committing idolatry and harlotry with the daughters of Moav. There we read:

 And, behold, one of the children of Israel came and brought unto his brethren a Midianitish woman in the sight of Moshe, and in the sight of all the congregation of the children of Israel, while they were weeping at the door of the tent of meeting.And when Phinehas, the son of Eleazar, the son of Aaron the priest, saw it, he rose up from the midst of the congregation, and took a spear in his hand. And he went after the man of Israel into the chamber, and thrust both of them through, the man of Israel, and the woman through her belly. So the plague was stayed from the children of Israel.( Numbers 25: 6-8)

In Pinchas, this week’s Torah portion,  we learn that he is praised “covenant of peace”. How can this be the case? Pinchas and his vigilante justice seems like the opposite of a “covenant of peace”. And what do we make of the fact that he was the son of Aaron. How does this depict the priesthood?

I was thinking about this when listened to No Church in the Wild by Kanye West, Jay -Z, and Frank Ocean.

Human beings in a mob
What’s a mob to a king?
What’s a king to a god?
What’s a god to a non-believer?
Who don’t believe in anything?

We make it out alive
All right, all right
No church in the wild

Tears on the mausoleum floor
Blood stains the coliseum doors
Lies on the lips of a priest
Thanksgiving disguised as a feast

I can imagine that there are circumstances when the ends justify the means, but it seems really hard to bring about a belief in God in the face of a mob through the lies (or in this case the aim) of a priest.

Temperamental Drink

In Pinchas, this week’s Torah portion, we read about all of the sacrifices. Starting with the Tamid, daily sacrifices, through the Shabbat, Rosh Hodesh, and all of the festivals we learn about all of the offerings. There about  the Tamid sacrifice we read;

And the drink-offering thereof shall be the fourth part of a hin for the one lamb; in the holy place you shall pour out a drink-offering of strong drink to the Lord. (Numbers 28:7)

What is this ” strong drink ” and why does this sacrifice need it?  On this Rashi  writes,” This is wine that intoxicates,to the exclusion of wine that comes directly from the wine-press. This daily sacrifice needs fermented wine, and not just grape juice. But what is the significance of fermented over juice?

I think it is interesting to realize that you cannot just whip up some wine. Fermentation demands preparation. Passover is s holiday during which we commemorate our not having planned ahead. We did not leave time for the bread to ferment. We procrastinated and now we are left with Matzah. In many respects I believe that we are the procrastiNation. In contrast to the Matzah, with the daily sacrifice they were instructed to make the needed preparation. To me it seems like an interesting lesson in the importance of planning ahead.  In terms of planning all I can say is that I married well. I know that my personal temperament is to shoot from the hip, but I know that this is something that I need to work on every day. For me planning is a daily sacrifice.

Problem Solving

A recent report by Daniel H Pink revealed that employees are faster and more creative when solving other people’s problems. Evidently people are more capable of mental novelty when thinking on behalf of others than for themselves In his article we read:

Over the years, social scientists have found that abstract thinking leads to greater creativity. That means that if we care about innovation we need to be more abstract and therefore more distant. But in our businesses and our lives, we often do the opposite. We intensify our focus rather than widen our view. We draw closer rather than step back.

There are a number of implications for this in terms of how we run our businesses and our lives. Obviously we need to find more diverse and interesting thought partners to help us to problem solving in our lives.

In Pinchas, this week’s Torah portion, we read about the seeming intractable issue of the Daughters of Zelophehad. Their father died in the desert leaving no male heirs. What are his daughters to do in terms of his inheritance? They bring their claim to Moses who in turn brings the matter to God. God is the most Other and the best at problem solving. In this sense God is the ultimate consultant or in this case Consultant. But where does that leave us in a world in which it is hard to relate to a personal God?

I think we can see an interesting model in this story itself. At the beginning of resolving the inheritance crisis we read:

1 Then drew near the daughters of Zelophehad, the son of Hepher, the son of Gilead, the son of Machir, the son of Manasseh, of the families of Manasseh the son of Joseph; and these are the names of his daughters: Mahlah, Noah, and Hoglah, and Milcah, and Tirzah. ( Numbers 27:1)

Rashi draws our attention to the fact that they record them lineage all the way back to Joseph. Why not just stop with Manasseh? Rashi assumes that it is to teach us of their righteousness. As compared to the rest of the tribes, saying that the daughters of Zelophehad were of Joseph is to say that their investment in the land was in memory of Joseph who longed for his land or that they were one more generation removed from the land. Either way I think it is to teach us Daniel Pink’s message.

Pink teaches us that when partners aren’t an option, you need to establish distance for yourself. Create some psychological space between you and your project by imagining you’re doing it for someone else or contemplating what advice you’d give to another person in your predicament. Whether it was their ability to work in the name of Joseph or the distance they can place between themselves and the issue, the daughters of Zelophehad teach us how to be better problem solvers. Thank you.


Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 242 other subscribers

Archive By Topic


%d bloggers like this: