Numbers 12: a Case Study in
Some Methods of Jewish Bible
Study
Presentation for REL 211
Dr. Laurence Boxer
September, 2004
Happy the man [who] findeth wisdom
[Torah], and the man [that] getteth
understanding. … Her ways [are] ways of
pleasantness, and all her paths [are]
peace. She [is] a tree of life to them that
hold her strongly: and happy [is every one]
that retaineth her.
Proverbs 3:13,17-18
Summary
• Miriam and Aaron complain, unclearly, about Moses’ marriage. They
compare themselves with Moses, implying by the comparison that
something in Moses’ marriage is not like their marriages and
therefore is not as it should be.
• G-d rebukes them for comparing themselves with Moses, making
clear Moses’ superiority.
• Miriam becomes leprous (but not Aaron – presumably, Miriam led
the offense, and Aaron went along with it).
• Aaron pleads with Moses to help heal Miriam.
• Moses utters a brief prayer on Miriam’s behalf.
• Miriam is healed, but is quarantined for a week as punishment.
• Out of respect for Miriam, the people wait for the end of her
quarantine before resuming their travels.
• “The Talmud, more than 1400 years old, can be
considered the first hypertextual document. The text is
self-referential, as the same material is discussed in
many places. Each word of the text is also a jumping-off
point to the thoughts of many commentators, both on
and off the printed page.” [Roth:a]
• “The Talmud is not a graded work. It doesn't move from
the simple to the complex. To the contrary, every page of
Talmud assumes the knowledge of all other pages of
Talmud. That makes studying Talmud from the beginning
very difficult for new students.” [Roth:b]
• Talmud = “Oral Torah;” Jewish Bible = “Written Torah.”
Talmud comments on and extends teachings of Bible.
Statements similar to, if weaker than, R. Roth’s about
Talmud can be made about the Jewish Bible.
Rabbi Joel
Roth Louis
Finkelstein
Professor
of Talmud
and Jewish
Law at The
Jewish
Theological
Seminary
Num. 12:1: Miriam and Aaron spoke against Moses
‫“( על‬al”) – because of / on behalf of
the Cushite woman he had married; for he had married a Cushite woman.
Cushite usually rendered Ethiopian - black; ‫“( על‬al”) usually as “because
of.” With these interpretations, are Miriam and Aaron advocating racism?
Certainly, the Bible isn’t, since Miriam is divinely punished.
Song of Songs:
1:5: I am black and beautiful….
5:10: My beloved is white and ruddy….
Miriam and Aaron are regarded
traditionally as admirable; Aaron,
particularly, as resolver of conflict,
promoter of peace. Thus,
interpretations of verse 1 as advocating
prejudice (racial or class) must be
rejected.
•If “black” is a racial term, we
conclude the Bible does not
oppose interracial coupling.
•Alternately, “black” could be a
class term, referring to those
who work outdoors and are
deeply tanned. Hence, interclass coupling is not Biblically
opposed.
‫“( על‬al”) – “on behalf of” preferred
interpretation – but, then, what is
its significance?
•
[Midr on Ki Thetze VI,14]: “Rabbi Simeon said: … Miriam the pious
… had no intention to slander [Moses], but only criticised him
because of his neglect for his marital duty….” (See also [Midr on
Ve’zot Ha’brachah XI,10]: “… the son of Amram from the day Thou
didst reveal Thyself to him at the Bush has had no marital
relations….”)
•Why does Midrash teach that Moses neglected/separated from his wife?
•Num. 12:2: They said, “Has the Lord spoken only through Moses? Has He
not spoken through us as well?” The Lord heard it.
•Ex. 19:14-15 (preparation for revelation of 10 Commandments): Moses
came down from the mountain to the people and warned the people to stay
pure, and they washed their clothes. And he said to the people, “Be ready
for the third day; do not go near a woman.”
•Moses concluded that since he could be summoned by G-d any time, he
should separate from his wife. Miriam and Aaron argue that they are also
prophets, but they have not separated from their spouses. Thus, on behalf
of the Cushite woman he had married, Miriam and Aaron advocate that
Moses resume normal marital life.
•Further evidence for this interpretation is found in response to the
question: Why were Moses’ sons undistinguished?
Why were Moses’ descendants undistinguished?
• Aaron’s sons and grandsons assisted him, succeeded him as priest.
• Miriam’s husband Hur is identified as grandfather of Bezalel, architect of
Tabernacle (Ex. 31:1).
• Moses’ sons Gershom (Ex. 2:22, 18:3) and Eliezer (Ex. 18:4) are barely
mentioned in the Torah.
• Judges 18 discusses a time of idolatry in the tribe of Dan. The priest of
the idolatrous cult is identified (18:30) as Jonathan, son of Gershom, son
of Manasseh. Manassah is normally written in Hebrew as
‫( מנשה‬Menashe)
but appears in Judges 18:30 as
suggesting ‫( משה‬Moshe – Moses) – i.e., the upraised letter ‫ נ‬is perhaps an
inserted change from the original to diminish Moses’ disgraced grandfatherhood.
Thus, Moses’ excessive devotion to public duty caused him to neglect
family, with tragic consequences. See [Schorsch]
Num. 12:3: Now the man ( ‫ האיש‬- ha-ish) Moses was very meek, more
than all men on the face of the earth.
• What is the significance of the man? Why doesn’t the text simply say
Now Moses was very meek…? Note other unusual uses of man:
• Ex. 15:3: The Lord is a man (‫ – איש‬ish) of war…. [Don’t we prefer to
praise G-d as source of peace?]
• Num. 11:16-17: And the Lord said to Moses: “Gather unto Me seventy
men (‫ – שבעים איש‬shiv’im ish – literally, seventy man) of the elders of
Israel, … and they shall bear the burden of the people with thee, that
thou bear it not thyself alone.
• Latter verses are about appointment of leaders. Linkage among these
verses: shared unusual use of man (‫ – איש‬ish). Lesson: A leader
needs the strength of a warrior in order to lead, but ideally should have
humility of Moses, to listen, be sensitive to the needs of those he/she
leads. See [Frand; Haber; Midr on Behaalotekha, 15:23]
• Num. 12:6-8: and He said: ‘… when a prophet arises among you, I
make Myself known to him in a vision, … in a dream. Not so with my
servant Moses; he is trusted throughout My household. With him I
speak mouth to mouth, plainly and not in riddles…. How then did you
not shrink from speaking against my servant Moses!’
•Deut. 32:1: Give ear, O heavens, let me speak; let the earth hear the words I
utter.
•Isaiah 1:2: Hear, O heavens, and give ear, O earth, for the Lord has spoken.
Note Moses is more intimate with heavens (“Give ear, O heavens” vs.
Isaiah’s “Hear, O heavens”) and speaks more independently (“hear the
words I utter” vs. “for the Lord has spoken”). See [Rappel]
Deut. 34:10: Never again did there arise in Israel a prophet like Moses,
whom the Lord singled out, face to face.
Thus, Moses is the greatest of the prophets, for all time. This is one of
Maimonides’ 13 Principles of Faith (see [Or, p. 53]); Christianity and
Islam clearly believe differently.
See also the lengthy Midrash on this point in [Midr on Ve’zot Ha’brachah,
11:3].
Num. 12:10: And when the cloud was removed from over the Tent,
behold, Miriam was leprous….
• Leprosy = ‫ מצורע‬- metzorah, regarded as an abbreviation for the
expressions ‫ מוציא רע‬- motzi rah – one who brings forth evil, and
‫ מוציא שם רע‬- motzi shem rah – one who brings forth an evil name, by
evil speech or gossip [Midr on Lev., 16:1]. “Leprosy” was not what is
today called by that name. Rather, was regarded as divine punishment
for evil speech. Thus, a slanderer is a moral leper [Hertz, p. 461].
• The victim of leprosy was quarantined and ostracized for 2 weeks or
more, depending on recovery – see Lev. 13.
• Rituals of purification upon recovery include dabbing oil, as described
in Lev. 14:17:
• “… on the tip of the right ear [stressing need to hear the words of G-d]
of him that is to be cleansed, and
• upon the thumb of his right hand [stressing need to perform G-d’s
commands], and
• upon the great toe of his right foot [stressing need to walk in G-d’s
ways]…”
Torah tradition regards evil speech as one of the most serious moral
failings.
• Slander kills 3: the victim, the teller, and the hearer [Hertz, p. 315, citing
ancient sources].
• Note disapproval, penalties against malicious dishonesty (Ex. 20:13,
23:1-2, Deut. 19:16-19, 22:13-18, etc), gossip (Lev. 19:16).
• [Talmud, Pesachim 118a]: R. Shesheth … on the authority of R.
Eleazar b. Azariah: Whoever relates slander, and whoever accepts
slander, and whoever gives false testimony against his neighbor,
deserve to be cast to dogs, for it is said, ye shall cast to the dogs [Ex.
22:30], which is followed by Thou shalt not take up a false report [Ex.
23:1]….
• “The slanderer, the man of the evil tongue, the calumniator, is worse
than a murderer, since he destroys a man’s reputation, which is more
precious than his life (Talmud)” [Hertz, p. 501]. This is hinted at in Lev.
19:16: Thou shalt not be a ‫ רכיל‬rachil – pedlar/gossip/pedlar of gossip
among your people; do not stand idly by the blood of your neighbor….
• The lessons cited above are examples of learning from proximity – that
nearby phrases or verses often illuminate each other (here,
juxtaposition of casting to dogs and rumor-mongering; of gossip and
bloodshed).
A Chassidic Story – Gathering the Feathers
• A man appeared before his rabbi prior to Rosh Hashanah, declaring
he wished to repent the slander he had committed. He claimed he
would do anything the rabbi instructed him.
• The rabbi doubted the man’s sincerity. He told him to rip open a
feather pillow, scatter the feathers to the winds, and return to the
rabbi’s office for further instructions.
• The man thought the rabbi’s instructions odd, but did as instructed.
• When he returned to the rabbi, the rabbi instructed him to gather
the feathers – every last one.
• The man protested the impossibility of the task.
• The rabbi said, “The feathers are your words. Just as you cannot
gather the feathers, you cannot undo your slander. The way to
eliminate the harm of slander is not to engage in it in the first place.”
Lessons from other techniques of Torah study
• We have, above, illustrated lessons learned in hypertext style,
Midrash (imaginative investigation), and from proximity.
• There are many other methods of deriving lessons from the Torah.
• Among the more prominent:
P’shat – the “plain meaning of the text”
Logical deduction
• We consider other lessons learned from Num. 12 using these
methods of study.
Num. 12:11-12: Aaron pleads with Moses to alleviate Miriam’s leprosy.
• Num. 12:13: So Moses cried out to the Lord, saying, “G-d, please
heal, please, her!” (literal translation of ‫)אל נא רפא נא לה‬
• Despite the repetition of “please,” note the brevity of Moses’ prayer.
• “Moses is caught in a dilemma. On the one hand, Miriam had
spoken openly against him and deserved to be punished. On the
other hand, as his sister, she evoked his compassion. The result is
this terse prayer. Its brevity seems to reveal Moses’ lack of
enthusiasm and minimal compliance with Aaron’s plea.” [Etz, p. 835]
• Alternately: Moses was shy about publicly favoring his sister, “lest
the Israelites say, ‘For his sister, he pleads with G-d at length, but
were we in her place, he would only offer a few words.’” [Etz, p. 835,
citing Sifrei]
• Alternately: This confirms the greatness of Moses. He is so intimate
with G-d that these five words are all he needs to say. Contrast with
the more verbose pleas of Abraham on behalf of any righteous
residents of Sodom and Gomorrah (Gen. 18:16-33), and those of
Jacob when he requested divine protection from Esau (Gen. 32:1013).
•Num. 12:14-15: But the Lord said to Moses, “If her father spat in her
face, would she not bear her shame for seven days? Let her be shut
out of the camp for seven days, and then let her be readmitted.” So
Miriam was shut out of the camp seven days; and the people did not
march on until Miriam was readmitted.
Lessons from P’shat (plain meaning) and logical deduction:
• Infinitely greater than a human father, G-d might have insisted on a
more severe punishment, but instead gave Miriam a reduced penalty
(lepers were ordinarily quarantined at least 2 weeks – Lev. 13:5). G-d
is humble and forgiving; how much more should we be humble and
forgiving.
• Even the most righteous of individuals is not perfect. An occasional
misdeed need not diminish one’s stature in the eyes of others. “… the
people did not march on until Miriam was readmitted” – she remained
respected.
References
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
[Etz] Etz Hayim: Torah and Commentary, Rabbinical Assembly, United Synagogue
of Conservative Judaism, New York, 2001
[Frand] Rabbi Yissocher Frand, Commentary on Behaaloscha,
http://www.torah.org/learning/ravfrand/5757/behaaloscha.html
[Haber] Rabbi Yaacov Haber, Commentary on Lech Lecho,
http://www.ou.org/torah/haber/lechlecha47.html
[Hertz] Dr. J.H. Hertz, ed., The Pentateuch and Haftorahs, 2nd ed., Soncino Press,
London, 1968
[Midr] Midrash Rabbah (ancient Biblical commentary) – see The Midrash, Soncino
Press, London, 1961
[Or] Or Hadash: A Commentary on Siddur [prayerbook] Sim Shalom, Reuven
Hammer, ed., Rabbinical Assembly, United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism,
New York, 2003
[Rappel] Dov Rappel, Commentary on Beha’alotekha,
http://www.biu.ac.il/JH/Parasha/eng/behaalot/rap.html
[Roth] Rabbi Joel Roth, “Introduction to Talmud,”
a) http://courses.jtsa.edu/registration/syllabi/talmud_ae/
b) http://courses.jtsa.edu/tal/introdemo/demo/home.html
[Schorsch] Rabbi Ismar Schorsch, Commentary on Beha’alotekha,
http://learn.jtsa.edu/topics/parashah/5755/behaalotekha.shtml
[Talmud] The “Oral Torah” consisting of many volumes, thousands of pages of
commentary and elaboration on the Jewish Bible. See The Talmud, Soncino
Press, London, 1961