“This
they shall give, everyone who goes through the counting: half a shekel according to the sacred shekel. Twenty gerahs equal one shekel; half of [such] a shekel shall be an offering to
Hashem.” (Shemot 30:13)
In the opening passages of this week’s parasha,
Moshe is commanded to conduct a census of the nation. Moshe is provided specific directions for the conduction of the
census. These instructions deal with
two issues: who is to be counted and
how to conduct the census. The census
is to include all males over the age of twenty. The method is unusual.
Moshe is instructed that he is not to directly count the people. Instead, he is to instruct each male over
the age of twenty to contribute a half of a sacred shekel to the Mishcan – the Tabernacle. These coins will be counted and the sum of
the coins will correspond with the number of males over the age of twenty.
Moshe is told to instruct each person to be included
in the census to contribute a half of a sacred shekel. Nachmanides asks
two interesting questions regarding this instruction. First, the instruction makes reference of a coin called a “shekel.” The term “shekel” means “measurement.” Why is the
coin referred to by this name? Second,
the amount to be contributed is half
of a sacred shekel. What were these sacred shekel coins? What made
then sacred?
Nachmanides addresses both issues. He begins with a key premise. He suggests that Moshe minted his own
coin. He created the shekel.
Why is the coin referred to as a “shekel”
or “measure”? Moshe was scrupulous in
his minting of this coin. He made sure
that each coin contained exactly twenty gerahs of silver. The coin is referred to as a “shekel,” or “measure,” because each coin
was a full measure of silver.
Why was the coin referred to as a sacred shekel? Nachmanides suggests that the coin was
created to be used for various mitzvot.
It was to be used for the redemption of the first born and the payment
of various other amounts due to the Mishcan. Because of the coin’s role in the fulfillment of mitzvot,
it is referred to as the “sacred shekel”.
Nachmanides notes the Sages refer to Ivrit – Hebrew – as the “sacred
language.” Why is Ivrit regarded as
sacred? Nachmanides suggests that
because Ivrit is the language in
which the Torah, the Prophets, and other sacred works are composed, it deserves
to be referred to as sacred. These
works are sacred. Ivrit is the language in which their messages are
communicated. Therefore, Ivrit is a “sacred” language. Nachmanides also notes other reasons for
referring to Ivrit as sacred.[1]
He notes that his position differs from that of
Maimonides. Maimonides offers a rather
surprising explanation of the term “sacred language”. Maimonides explains that we should not erroneously assume that Ivrit is referred to as “sacred” as a
result of the language’s association with the Jewish people. Instead, the language is referred to as
sacred because of an important characteristic.
Classical Ivrit lacks terms
for the sexual organs, the sexual act, and for human waste and feces – all of
which are referred to though euphemism.
Maimonides reasons that the exclusion of terminology for these items and
actions from the language elevates Ivrit.
This characteristic is the basis of its sanctity.[2]
Maimonides’ position seems somewhat prudish. It seems he is suggesting that it is
improper to directly refer to the sexual organs and basic bodily
functions. These references are
proscribed and Ivrit is sacred
because it accommodates this taboo!
This is not consistent with Maimonides’ general
treatment of sexual issues. He deals
with sexual issues in a straightforward, unabashed manner.[3] It seems
strange that he should endorse a seemingly pedantic attitude towards sexuality
and basic bodily functions.
In order to understand Maimonides’ position it is
important to consider his comment more carefully. He explains that Ivrit
is sacred because of the structure of the language. It employs euphemisms for references to the sexual organs, the
sexual act and for bodily wastes. What
does this structural characteristic tell us about the design and objective of
the language? Apparently, although the
language is remarkably precise and effective for the communication of ideas, it
is ill-adapted for a discussion of sexuality, for example. In other words, the language facilitates the
exchange of most ideas but hinders
communication focused of sexuality.
Why is this characteristic significant? How does it “elevate” the language to
sanctity? Although the Torah favors a
healthy and balanced attitude towards sexuality, it discourages us from
focusing our attention on the sexual.
The Torah recognizes that sexuality is a basic component of human
nature. It should not be repressed or
associated with primitive and unhealthy taboos. But the Torah also recognizes that fascination with sexuality can
become obsessive. It can dominate our
thoughts and interests. A balance is
required. We should not repress our
human drive but we should not become obsessively fixated on the sexual. The structure of Ivrit reflects this balance.
It is well-suited for the communication of ideas and this should be our focus – the pursuit
of wisdom and knowledge. It is
ill-suited for discussion of the sexual.
This is an area in which we must maintain balance. It cannot become the focus of our attention.
This concept of balance is reflected in an interesting
comment by Rabbaynu Bachya. Rabbaynu
Bachya asks why we are commanded to provide half
of a sacred shekel to the Mishcan. Why not provide a full shekel? There are many
well-known answers to this question, but Rabbaynu Bachya’s response is one of
the most unique. He explains that the
use of half of a shekel is intended
to communicate a message: We cannot completely give ourselves over to the
sacred. We must balance our devotion to the sacred with a devotion to the material
world.
This seems to be a remarkable statement! Should we not wholly devote our lives to
elevating ourselves to the highest possible spiritual level? Should we not make every effort to escape
our attachment to the temporal, material world? Rabbaynu Bachya responds that this attitude is oversimplified; we
are material creatures and we cannot neglect, ignore or deny the material
element of our nature. If we attempt to
focus exclusively on our spiritual needs and neglect our material needs and
desires, then we will secure neither.
We cannot elevate ourselves spiritually unless we adequately address our
material and physical needs.
Rabbaynu Bachya suggests that this idea is reflected
in the manner in which we are instructed to observe our festivals. Halachah requires that we apportion
the day between spiritual and material endeavors. We are to spend half of the day in prayer, study and spiritual
pursuits. The other half of the day is
to be devoted to the festival meal and material indulgences.[4] It is strange
that the festival – a sacred day – is to be used for material indulgences! Rabbaynu Bachya responds that the addressing
of our material needs and desires does not detract from the spiritual element
of the festival day. On the contrary,
when our material needs and desires are addressed, we are better prepared to
pursue spiritual ends.[5]
If we take seriously Rabbaynu Bachya’s comments, they
have many important implications. Let
us identify one of these. We must
provide our children with an education that prepares them for adulthood and
independence. We can only execute this
responsibility by providing them with an education that will enable them to support
themselves. If, as adults, our children
cannot provide for their material needs, then they cannot be expected to
achieve their spiritual potential. Of
course, there is much more that can be said about this issue. But these
comments are merely intended to identify one of the many practical implications
of Rabbaynu Bachya’s comments.
[1] Rabbaynu Moshe ben Nachman (Ramban / Nachmanides), Commentary on Sefer Beresheit 30:13.
[2] Rabbaynu Moshe ben Maimon (Rambam / Maimonides) Moreh Nevuchim, volume 3, chapter 8.
[3] See, for example, Rabbaynu Moshe ben Maimon (Rambam / Maimonides) Mishne Torah, Hilchot Essurai Beya 21:9.
[4] Mesechet Pesachim 68b.
[5] Rabbaynu Bachya , Commentary on Sefer Shemot
30:13.