Nehar Deah

Bo

Blood of the Pessach, the Binding of Isaac and the Threshing Floor of Ornan

The reason for the children of Israel being commanded to sacrifice a lamb on the eve of their departure from Egypt is mentioned twice in the weekly Torah reading. First in Hashem’s words to Moses and Aaron: “And when I see the blood, I will pass over you” (Shemot 12:13) and a second time in Moses’ speech to the elders of Israel: “When he sees the blood upon the lintel … and Hashem will pass over the door” (ibid, verse 23). The verb “[to] pass [over]” probably has the intended meaning of salvation and protection, as in Isaiah 31:5: “In this way the Lord of hosts will defend Jerusalem, defending and saving it, and passing over, he will spare it”. Hashem seeing the blood of the lamb will, therefore, protect Israel from the “plague” when the “[angel of] destruction” will smite all the firstborn of Egypt. According to the simple reading of the Bible, Hashem’s seeing the blood expresses the spiritual power of the sacrifice to protect man against the hand of the destroyer”. The blood of the animal is in place of the blood of man.

However the sages give this seeing of blood an almost opposite meaning: “’And I shall see the blood’ (Shemot 12:3) – I see the blood of the sacrifice of Isaac, as it is written ‘And Abraham called the place: Hashem will see’ (Bereishit 22:14). What did he see? He saw the sacrifice of Isaac, as it is written ‘Hashem will show him the lamb’ (Bereishit 22:8)” (Mechilta D’Rabbi Yishmael Masechta D’Pischa, Horowitz and Rabin Version, Pages 24-25, 29). According to this, the blood which saved in Egypt was not that of the lamb, the Passover sacrifice, but rather the blood of Isaac who was bound. It is fairly clear that this Midrash follows the opinion that, at the time of the Akeida (binding), Abraham spilt a revi’it (approximately 86ml or 3 fl oz) of Isaac’s blood (Tanchuma Vayeira, 23).

In his exposition, the commentator builds a connection between three issues: Passover, the Akeida and David’s purchase of the threshing floor of Ornan the Jebusite. The connection seems artificial and merely technical and is based only on the theme of a “seeing” God in all three cases. Also there is a similarity in style between the appearance of the “plague to destroy” in Shemot 12:13 and the “destroying angel” in Chronicles I 21:15. However, in truth, the connection offered by the Midrash is actually in no way merely technical. It expresses a viewpoint deeply imbued with the significance of the Akeida, the Passover sacrifice and Jerusalem as a holy place. Also the Midrash reveals a perceptive literary reading of the Biblical text and we will devote our efforts to this.

The purchase of the threshing floor of Ornan the Jebusite can be seen as the story of the establishment of Jerusalem under David. The story begins with a sin: “And Satan stood up against Israel, and caused David to count Israel” (Chronicles, ibid, verse 1). The Bible sees taking a census as something forbidden and David’s punishment for this deed is given by the hand of a destroying angel that is meant to smite the children of Israel for three days. David pleads for mercy and is answered: “And God sent an angel to Jerusalem to destroy it; and as he was about to destroy, the Hashem saw, and He regretted the evil, and said to the destroying angel: 'It is enough; now stay your hand.' And the angel of the Hashem was standing by the threshing-floor of Ornan the Jebusite” (verse 16). As stated: this verse reminds us of at what is written in Shemot 12 of the God who, seeing the blood of the Passover sacrifice, saves from destruction.

However, the similarity to the Akeida story is far greater. According to the apocryphal work, The Book of Jubilees (17:16), it is Satan who initiated the Akeida: “And the prince Mastêmâ came and said before God, 'Behold, Abraham loves Isaac his son, and he chooses him above all things else; tell him to offer him as a burnt-offering on the altar and you will see if he does this thing”. The story of David’s census also begins with Satan’s incitement. In both stories, the angel of Hashem brings salvation from mortal danger. Abraham is commanded “do not stretch forth your hand at the boy” (Bereishit 22:12) while the destroying angel in the Book of Chronicles commands “stay your hand” (verse 15). In both cases God sees and as a result is merciful and forgiving. Abraham lifts up his eyes and sees the ram, and of David it is written “David lifted up his eyes, and saw the angel of the Hashem” (verse 16).The angels suggests that David build an altar to make a sacrifice in the place where destruction would have happened – this too is in parallel to the ram stuck by its horns which is raised as an offering in the place of Isaac.

Indeed, David heeds the angel and tries to build an altar in that place. He approaches Ornan the Jebusite, owner of the threshing floor, and asks to buy it immediately: “And [Ornan] saw David, and went out of the threshing floor, and bowed down to David with his face to the ground. Then David said to Ornan: Give me the place of this threshing-floor, that I may build thereon an altar unto the Hashem; for the full price shall you give it me” (verses 21-22). Ornan refuses to sell the threshing floor to David and suggests instead that he will give him usage rights instead of ownership, but David in turn says: “No, I will surely buy it for the full price” (verse 24). Eventually Ornan accedes and sells him the land for the full price: “So David gave to Ornan in the place six hundred shekels of gold by weight” (verse 25). This exchange of words reminds us of the purchase of the cave of Machpela by Ephron the Hittite (Bereishit 23).

The story of the establishment of Jerusalem by David is made up of two processes: the census and its punishment and the purchase of the threshing floor – a process which parallels closely two sequential stories in Bereishit: the Akeida and the purchase of the cave of Machpela. Before us we have a Midrash, internal to the Bible, in which the Book of Chronicles reinterprets the story of the Akeida and reconstructs the story accordingly. According to it, the founding father of the holy place in Jerusalem is not Abraham, but rather David, the King of Hebron who was King of Jerusalem. The author uproots the Abrahamic story of buying a holy place in Hebron and transfers it to Jerusalem. It must be stated, that the book of Chronicles, is the only one that understands that “Mount Moriah”, the place where the Akeida took place, is in fact Jerusalem: “Then Solomon began to build the house of Hashem in Jerusalem on Mount Moriah, where it was shown to David his father; which David prepared the place, in the threshing floor of Ornan the Jebusite” (Chronicles II 3:1).

The Midrash brought from the Mechilta feels this connection strongly and therefore brings the Akeida and the story of Ornan the Jebusite in together. To both of these he adds a third element: the Passover in Egypt. We have already established the connection between the story of Ornan the Jebusite and Passover. We now find a Midrash which firmly establishes the connection which is offered between Passover and the Akeida. The connection is not merely literary but also theological and is established already in the “Targum Yerushalmi” (Jerusalem translation) of Shemot 12:42 according to which the act of the Akeida, like the creation of the world and the Brit Bein HaBetarim (Covenant between the pieces) both took place on the 14th day of the Hebrew month Nissan. On this date the future redemption is also supposed to take place; a common date indicates a common theme. It seems that the common religious theme of the Akeida and Passover is the principle of substitution which is offered: the ram in the Akeida or the Paschal lamb are substitutes for the sacrifice of Isaac or of a firstborn son. However, on this point the Midrash builds another idea, as it completely abandons this message when it declares that the God who sees in Egypt sees the blood of the bound Isaac. God saw his blood, human blood, and not the blood of an animal from the Passover in Egypt and the establishment of Jerusalem. This is a completely innovative step which stands in contradiction to the simple reading of Shemot 12.

It is not improbable, therefore, the view that behind this new interpretation stands a need to give the Passover sacrifice a new meaning, which can compete with the significance that Christians give to this festival: the festival of crucifixion and atonement. Jews felt the need to compete with the image of Jesus who, in dying as a “lamb of God” on the Passover festival, brought about atonement for humanity. The Midrash turns the story of the Akeida (Binding) of Isaac into a story of the sacrifice of Isaac. This is the meaning of the common timing of the Akeida and the festival of Passover – the occasion on which Christians celebrate their festival of Easter.

Professor Yisrael Yuval
Department of the History of the Jewish People

Literature of the Sages – The Mechilta

Tradition gives a group of five to six generations of sages, who were active in the Land of Israel for a period of about 200 years, from the beginning of the Common Era till approximately the year 200, the name “Tannaim”. These sages, many of which are very well known, include such people as such as Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakkai, Rabban Gamliel, Rabbi Akiva, Rabbi Meir or Rabbi Yehuda Hanasi – the creator of the Mishna (and from here we get their name, as in Aramaic “Tanna” means one who learns, by constant repetition or revision). The Tannaim also created other works, all of which are written in Hebrew, the most important of which is a collection of homiletical interpretations of the verses of the Torah according their order in the Bible. These works were gathered at the beginning of the third century CE and they include only the books of Shemot through Devarim. It seems that the learning of the Tannaim on the Book of Bereishit was not collected into a single separate work, despite the fact that they dealt widely with this first book of the Bible. Many like to call this work “Midrashei Halacha” (Midrashim of Laws), but it seems that this is not really a fitting name as a large percentage of these works deal with homiletics and not laws and often the ratio of homiletics is as much as half of the contents. Researchers divide the Midrashei Tannaim into two broad categories, two schools of learning, different from each other: “the Torah study house of Rabbi Yishmael” and “the Torah study house of Rabbi Akiva”. Each of these places of study created different Midrashim with clear differences between them – the names of the sages which appear in them, the language and especially the world view which is apparent in them.

For the Book of Shemot (which we are reading at the moment), the schools of study composed two works, both known by the name “Mechilta” (an Aramaic word meaning: measures, rules). Rabbi Yishmael’s school created the “Mechilta D’Rabbi Yishmael” (when we refer to the Mechilta without any qualification, then it is this work), while the school of Rabbi Akiva created the “Mechilta D’Rabbi Shim’on bar Yochai”. Both deal with commentaries on the Book of Shemot, verse after verse, but while the “Mechilta D’Rabbi Yishmael” begins at chapter 12 of the Book of Shemot, with the first commandment given to the children of Israel before they left Egypt, the “Mechilta D’Rabbi Shim’on bar Yochai” opens with the event of the burning bush in chapter 3. Also, beyond their starting points, the two works are not similar to each other, neither in terms of the number of verses they deal with, nor their interpretation methods, despite the fact that in many places they contain the same material, especially with reference to homiletical material. Even in places where we find comparable material in the two works, we still find differences in terms of style, order and emphasis.

The two works are quoted by medieval sages, but while the “Mechilta D’Rabbi Yiahmael” has reached us in its entirety, traces of the “Mechilta D’Rabbi Shim’on bar Yochai” have been lost over the generations. In the 19th century, researchers began to collect quotations from this Midrash from various sources, in order to try to reconstruct it. The discovery of manuscripts, containing pieces of this work, in libraries all over the world allowed for large sections to be reconstructed, but we are still waiting for a discovery which will throw light on the whole work, thereby returning this Tannaic work to its former glory.

History – Blood Libel

Blood libel, the claim that Jews murder Christians for ritual purposes, has been flung at Jews during various time periods and in various ways. One of the central claims within the framework of blood libels is the claim that Jews need Christian blood in order to make matzah (unleavened bread). One of the explanations given for this is that that Jews are not really human and in order to take a human form they need to drink human blood.

The first time that blood libel appeared in a form like this was in the 12th century (in the city of Norwich, England - 1144). During that century we know of at least four other cases in different countries where this type of blood libel occurred. There are those who see the many cases of blood libel in this century specifically as part of the struggles in those times between the church and the monarchy, where the local church authorities tried to use blood libels like this to gain popular support.

Blood libels have not yet ceased even in modern times. In the 19th century a blood libel was spread, in a Moslem region, and it is known as the “Damascus Blood Libel”. In 1840 a priest and his servant, who lived in Damascus, were murdered by people in the market because of a disagreement over some criminal matter. Despite this the Jews of Damascus were accused of torturing and murdering the priest and his servant for ritual purposes. Approximately ten Jewish males, including the Rabbi of the community, where taken prisoner and tortured in order to force them to confess to the murder. Two of them died during the torture and two broke and confessed to a murder they did not commit. The Jews of Damascus turned to Jews in various European countries to get them to pressure Mohammed Ali, who had revolted against Ottoman rule and now ruled the region at that time, to put a stop to the libel and torture and protect them against abuse by the masses. Foremost among the Jewish figures who worked in the international arena to bring an end to the libel were the Baron Jacob Rothschild, Moses Montefiore and Adolf Carmier. Eventually these pressures achieved their desired aim and those remaining alive after the torture where freed. The Turkish sultan also publicized a ruling which forbade court cases based on blood libel.

One of the most recent blood libel cases took place in the town of Kielce, Poland in 1946. Tens of Jewish Holocaust survivors had returned to the town and tried to restore their lives by rebuilding the old community. In July 1946 a Christian boy claimed that the Jews tortured him in the basement of the community building in order to use his blood to bake matza. (Even though this took place after Passover and the community building did not even have a basement.) After hearing his evidence a mob gathered opposite the home of the Jews with cries for revenge. After the Jews emphatically refused to hand themselves over or to give the police a gun they had for self-defense purposes, a signal was given to the mob to storm the house. Forty-two Jews where killed by the mob that day. This pogrom is seen as one of the turning points, after which many of the remnants of the Jews of Poland ceased trying to rebuild their lives in there after the Holocaust and left for the Land of Israel or other destinations.