Rabbi Kahn’s insights stimulating, well worth reading

His book explores the mega-themes of Exodus in a way that incorporates the entire spectrum of the PaRDeS literature. The acronym פַּרְדֵּס“PaRDeS,” standing for “Peshat,” “Remaz,” “Derash,” and “Sod.” Briefly defined, peshat is based on the literal and factual meaning of a verse—the contextual meaning of a biblical passage. Remez (allusions) refers to the subtle types of word games and puns that are embedded in the text (cf. Gen. 1:31; 2:23; 6:8). 

The third method of exegesis, derash, provides more of a philosophical, theological, and moralistic examination of the biblical pericope. As a general rule, the rabbis resorted to derash only when the text posed a problem that could not be adequately explained through the method of peshat. Derash as its root word connotes, implies a search for truth and authenticity, while Sod concerns itself with the mystical nuances and mega-themes that see the passage in broader cosmic terms. This is the method of interpretation found throughout the Kabbalah and in the Chassidic writings. 

Kahn does that in each of his thought provoking essays on the weekly parsha in a manner that is reminiscent of Nechama Leibowitz and her famous studies on the Pentateuch. However, Kahn differs from Leibowitz and he incorporates a number of interpretations from the Jewish mystical tradition known as the Kabbalah. A reader will find a number of poignant insights from the Hassidic traditions as well. One other distinction from Leibowitz’s writings, Kahn often adds Hebrew footnotes of primary texts that he refers to. For the Orthodox Jew who is conversant with Hebrew, this is a nice feature. Unfortunately, Kahn consistently uses the Hebrew names for his characters, e.g., Pharaoh is “Paro” and Moses is “Moshe.” This may be fine for the religious community, but it is uncomfortable for an English speaking audience. 

One of the things that impressed me about Kahn’s style of writing was his willingness to explore a theme as it occurs throughout the Tanakh. This is an important approach—one that I have used in writing my own commentaries as well. In his exposition on the seemingly innocuous subject concerning straw, Kahn shows how straw plays an important role later on in the Torah. In their initial conversation, Moses orders Pharaoh to release God’s people: 

• · After that, Moses and Aaron went to Pharaoh and said, “Thus says the LORD, the God of Israel: Let my people go, that they may celebrate a feast to me in the desert.”Pharaoh answered, “Who is the LORD, that I should heed his plea to let Israel go? I do not know the LORD; even if I did, I would not let Israel go.” (Exodus 5:1-2) 

Pharaoh’s amusement disappears very quickly. 

• · That very day Pharaoh gave the taskmasters and foremen of the people this order:“You shall no longer supply the people with straw for their brickmaking as you have previously done. Let them go and gather straw themselves! (Exodus 5:5-6)

 Kahn immediately connects the pericope of Exodus with the narrative found in the Book of Numbers:  

• While the Israelites were in the desert, a man was discovered gathering sticks on the Sabbath day.  Those who caught him at it brought him to Moses and Aaron and the whole assembly.But they kept him in custody, for there was no clear decision as to what should be done with him. (Numbers 15:32-34)

 · Once again, we must be very sensitive to the allusion. The use of the word mekosheish is anything but arbitrary. The Torah employs this word to connect the behavior of the wood gatherer to the gathering of straw by the Jewish slaves. Let us consider the context of the mekosheish incident: The Jews were on their way to the Promised Land, but they were sentenced to a terrible setback. The entire generation that had been taken out of Egypt would perish in the desert because of the sin of the spies. The people became disheartened, depressed. Many must have felt that all hope was lost, that their dream of the Land of Israel was over. 

• · Within this context, the wood gatherer does not “accidentally” desecrate Shabbat. He commits an unheard-of act, a flagrant violation of the Shabbat, in order to remind his brethren that this is not the first setback they have experienced. His transgression is very carefully described as mekosheish, as if to shake them from their reverie of self-pity and despair: “Remember,” he seems to tell them, “after the setback in Egypt, things seemed just as hopeless. There too, we knew the pain of dashed hopes and disappointed aspirations. There too, just as our final goal was within reach, we experienced a painful reversal. We must not give up. Our mission is far greater than the here and now. The mekosheish takes tragic, self-sacrificing action when others submit to crippling despair. They have been issued a collective death sentence, and they cannot find the strength to continue their mission. They think that their actions are no longer meaningful, that their fate has been sealed and their remaining years irrelevant. He pushes their reasoning back in their faces by forcing the issue: his own death sentence is moved up thirty-nine years, jarring the entire congregation from the spiral of despair into which they had slipped. The imagery of the straw was powerful enough to reinvigorate the nation in the desert.

 Kahn’s exposition strangely transforms the wood gatherer into a tragic antihero, whose fatal flaw proves to be his undoing—a familiar theme in Greek tragedies. After I read his exposition, I thought that the connection to Numbers 15-32-34 was very good and noteworthy. However, I would have deduced an altogether different point. The wood-gatherer may well be of the attitude that as a result of God’s condemnation of the people in the wilderness, God’s commandments no longer matter. To show his disdain, he reverts back to a behavior that reflects Israel’s servitude to Pharaoh. The wood-gatherer flagrantly shows his contempt for the liberating spirit of the Sabbath day which aims to free the Israelites and their servants of the tyranny they experienced at the hand of Pharaoh. The Targum of Jerusalem adds an altogether different twist to the story: the man who gathered the wood on the Sabbath was actually caught stealing from his neighbor during the Sabbath! According to this reading, the wood-gatherer demonstrates his contempt for God’s laws as well society’s laws that govern ethical behavior. 

Although I may not completely agree with Kahn’s exposition here, his ideas did make me rethink both narratives. All of his essays should appeal to someone who is interested in understanding how the rabbinical mind treats a biblical text in the yeshiva, which I might add, often differs considerably from the way the rest of the world experiences the biblical text. Indeed, both worlds ought to learn from one another. In his passage dealing with the Eye for an Eye (Exod. 21:24), I was pleased to see him integrate the Code of Hammurabi in his exposition of this famous text.

 If you are interested in studying some stimulating ideas that are full of originality and controversy, Ari Kahn’s Echoes of Eden on Sefer Shemot: Salvation and Sanctity—Insights Into the Weekly Torah Portion is an excellent read.
*
The reviewer, Rabbi Dr. Michael Leo Samuel. is the author of “The Lord Is My Shepherd: The Theology of the Caring God (Jason Aronson, 1986), “Birth and Rebirth through Genesis: The Timeless Theological Conversation, Vol. 1 Gen. 1-3” (Llumina 2010), “Psalm 23: A Spiritual Journey” (iUniverse, 2013), “Birth and Rebirth: The Stirrings of Conscience” – Vol. 2 Gen. 4-11 (iUniverse, 2013).  Serving as spiritual leader of Temple Beth Shalom in Chula Vista, he may be contacted via michael.samuel@sdjewishworld.com