Masei
Numbers 33:1-36:13
Précis: The Book of Numbers ends with this parasha. “These are the stages (masei) of the journey” which the Israelites made through the desert. In what amounts to a recapitulation, all of the stops along the way are identified. The Israelites are reminded to drive the Canaanites from the Land. Most of the parasha deals with plans for entry into the Promised Land, and the first steps to establish their home, including the division of the Land among the tribes. The Levitical cities are described, as well as the cities of refuge. Just prior to their entry into the land, the laws differentiating murder and killing are repeated. The parasha ends with a summary of the commandments and ordinances.
Numbers 35:31 “You may not accept a ransom for the life of a murderer who is guilty of a capital crime; [a murderer] must be put to death”
The parasha mandates the creation of six “cities of refuge.” When a person is accidentally killed, the perpetrator can find sanctuary from vengeance-seeking relatives in one of these designated cities. Even if a court finds him innocent of murder, the malfeasor must remain in the city of refuge until the death of the reigning high priest (when a sort of Jubilee takes place, releasing the individual).
On the other hand, in the case of a premeditated murder, the text is clear. It constitutes a clear and unequivocal statement in support of capital punishment for intentional murder.
Nevertheless, the rabbis over the centuries tried time and again to limit the application of the death penalty. Ultimately, rabbinic law virtually abolished it. The Rabbis declared that the death penalty could not be imposed in the absence of a “proper” tribunal, or because the killer was not warned (perhaps even twice!) before committing the act, or because (at least two) witnesses had to testify to the event and the testimony of all witnesses had to agree on every detail. What we today call “procedural due process” became a central focus in the rabbinic effort to circumscribe capital punishment. Evidentiary rules (today some call them “loopholes”) became firmly embedded in Jewish law.
As recorded in the Mishnah Makot 1:10, “A Sanhedrin that puts a man to death once in seven years is called a murderous one. Rabbi Eleazar ben Azariah says ‘Or even once in seventy years.’ Rabbi Tarfon and Rabbi Akiva said, ‘If we had been in the Sanhedrin no death sentence would ever have been passed.’”
What does this say about the Jewish view of capital punishment today? If all are made in the image of God, even the malfeasor merits life. Our tradition describes a steady journey which began in a culture where vengeance killings were common enough to require the creation of cities of refuge. The journey continued with rabbinic limitations on capital punishment to the point of its eradication. As such, this “journey” is a fitting conclusion to the Book of B’midbar.
In the here and now, Amnesty International reported in 2010 that the United States ranked 5th in the world in the number of executions carried out, behind only China, Iran, North Korea, and Yemen, and followed by Saudi Arabia, Libya, and Syria. I submit that this is a "moral neighborhood" in which the United States should not feel comfortable.
Friday, July 29, 2011
Friday, July 22, 2011
Moses and the Art of the Critique
Matot
Numbers 30:2 - 33:42
Précis: The parasha begins with a speech to the heads (matot) of the tribes concerning the importance and sacredness of vows. The parasha then returns to the war with the Midianites, including the purification of the warriors and division of the booty. The tribes of Reuben, Gad and half of Manasseh express their desire to dwell east of the Jordon, and are permitted to do so, after promising to enter the Land to help the rest of the People defeat the Canaanites.
Numbers 31:13 – 14 “Moses, Eleazar the Kohen, and all the leaders of the assembly went out to meet them outside the camp. Moses was angry with the commanders of the army, the officers of the thousands and the officers of the hundreds, who came from the legion of battle.”
A war commanded by God against the Midianites has taken place. Moses angrily confronts the war leaders for failing to obey and fulfill the specific commands of God while waging the war, including slaying of all but the virgin girls.
The text tells us that Moses was angered by the leaders’ failure. Why? Moses stresses the importance of leaders in following instructions properly. If they fail to do so, how can they expect the common soldiers to follow their orders? At the same time, Moses exhibits an important leadership trait here, namely preserving the dignity of those he chastises. The Sages make note of the fact that Moses spoke angrily to the war leaders “outside the camp” (by implication, out of earshot of others). When it is necessary to reprimand someone (a co-worker, a congregant, or family member or friend), doing so quietly and out of the hearing of others is much more likely to lead to serious consideration of the critique by the offender.
It is a sad state of affairs when those in positions of authority feel a need to publicly display their power over others. Taking things behind closed doors, where one can explain quietly and clearly anothers’ miscue, shows a more mature and effective way of dealing with the matter.
The best leaders understand that people want to do well and want to do right. Good managers understand that public humiliation never enhances performance.
Numbers 30:2 - 33:42
Précis: The parasha begins with a speech to the heads (matot) of the tribes concerning the importance and sacredness of vows. The parasha then returns to the war with the Midianites, including the purification of the warriors and division of the booty. The tribes of Reuben, Gad and half of Manasseh express their desire to dwell east of the Jordon, and are permitted to do so, after promising to enter the Land to help the rest of the People defeat the Canaanites.
Numbers 31:13 – 14 “Moses, Eleazar the Kohen, and all the leaders of the assembly went out to meet them outside the camp. Moses was angry with the commanders of the army, the officers of the thousands and the officers of the hundreds, who came from the legion of battle.”
A war commanded by God against the Midianites has taken place. Moses angrily confronts the war leaders for failing to obey and fulfill the specific commands of God while waging the war, including slaying of all but the virgin girls.
The text tells us that Moses was angered by the leaders’ failure. Why? Moses stresses the importance of leaders in following instructions properly. If they fail to do so, how can they expect the common soldiers to follow their orders? At the same time, Moses exhibits an important leadership trait here, namely preserving the dignity of those he chastises. The Sages make note of the fact that Moses spoke angrily to the war leaders “outside the camp” (by implication, out of earshot of others). When it is necessary to reprimand someone (a co-worker, a congregant, or family member or friend), doing so quietly and out of the hearing of others is much more likely to lead to serious consideration of the critique by the offender.
It is a sad state of affairs when those in positions of authority feel a need to publicly display their power over others. Taking things behind closed doors, where one can explain quietly and clearly anothers’ miscue, shows a more mature and effective way of dealing with the matter.
The best leaders understand that people want to do well and want to do right. Good managers understand that public humiliation never enhances performance.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)