Acharei Mot
/ Yayikra 16:1 – 18:30 “after” /
Leviticus 16:1 – 18:30
Sun. 16:1-17 / Mon. 16:18-24 / Tues. 16:25-34 / Wed.
17:1-7
Thurs. 17:8-18:5 / Fri. 18:6-21 / Shabbat 18:22-30
Friday
18:6 – 21
As I began reading for this week’s
writing, it seemed appropriate to me to pick up our discussion at today’s
portion, and not because it seems very “cut and dried,” which it does appear to
be.
Any time I read this portion it
seems to answer one question that I have, yet it also produces another one, for
which I have yet to find a satisfactory answer for myself. With that in mind I will delve into the
reading.
Surprising to no one, I would say
that the key word in this parashah is “nakedness”, for it occurs a minimum of
twenty-one times. The word also appears
in every verse except the ultimate one of this reading.
The main point seems to be that if
someone is related to you in any near-relative fashion, you are not to be
intimate with that individual. Their
nakedness does not belong to you; you have no right to be with them, for their
nakedness belongs to another, even if at the time it only belongs to them. For the most part, these commands seem common
sense to most of us, I presume.
Regardless, as I stated before, two
questions come to mind as I study our reading.
The first query takes me back to B’reisheet (Genesis) 9:20 – 27. The incident being referred to is when Noah
became drunk, uncovered himself in his tent, and then Ham saw his father’s
nakedness.
There are various theories as to
what actually happened in this cryptically “unrevealing” passage, but there is
one that I tend to favor. I would
propose that Ham lay with his own mother, and that Canaan was the fruit of that
union, hence he was the one who was cursed.
(Please do not ask me why Ham was not cursed, for I do not know.) I am presuming that either Noah knew what
happened after he awoke from his drunken stupor because his wife had told him,
or he knew something was up when his wife’s pregnancy became noticeable, though
I suppose he could have thought the pregnancy was his. Notwithstanding, if Ham had been intimate
with his own mother he had uncovered his father’s nakedness according to
Vayikra 18:8.
I will confess that it could be
considered that Ham had a time of intimacy with his father, for Vayikra 18:7
could be used for support in that instance.
However, I personally have a more difficult time with Noah awakening and
knowing what his son had done to him. It
is possible, but not as likely according to the thoughts rattling around in my
cranium.
My second question, perhaps you have
been able to guess, emanates from the book of Ruth. Ah, you know the story. Chapter 3, verses seven through fourteen is
the site of this incident. As I am
reading this in preparation, perhaps I have had my question answered regarding
this Scripture. Perhaps not.
As Noah was after a harvest, so is
Boaz – drunk. The difference I see is
that while Ham uncovered his father’s nakedness, Ruth only uncovered Boaz’
feet. As I muse on this, perhaps this is
a way of showing that she is and is willing to remain in submission to
him. After all, it seems that all she
did was to uncover his feet. There is no
indication that she covered herself with his skirt (kanaph – TwotOT #1003a, pp.
446 – 447), but she did ask him to do so in verse 9. From the context, it is now apparent to me
that this was a figurative request for him to perform the duty of a kinsman
redeemer, for the Scripture speaks not of him covering her in this locale. Nay, he told her that he would do what needed
to be done in the morning. At that
point, she lay back down at his feet.
Well, pending our discussion and any
comments that may be applied to this week’s parashah, I think I have had my
question answered regarding Ruth and Boaz, and to my relief, their integrity
seems to have remained.
In closing, let us consider that for those of us who are married, our nakedness is not only ours, but it is our spouse’s as well according to Vayikra 18:7 – 8. Likewise, the nakedness of one to whom we are not married is not ours, and as we have been told before, we are not to covet nor are we to steal.
In closing, let us consider that for those of us who are married, our nakedness is not only ours, but it is our spouse’s as well according to Vayikra 18:7 – 8. Likewise, the nakedness of one to whom we are not married is not ours, and as we have been told before, we are not to covet nor are we to steal.
May HaShem’s name be blessed in the
discussion of this reading. Shalom.
No comments:
Post a Comment