Stuff I noticed this morning
Jun. 27th, 2011 11:19 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
rhuTwo things I noticed this morning during the Torah reading.
This week's Parsha starts off with the laws of purification for one who has come into contact with a corpse, either directly or by being under a common roof. I was struck by the correspondence between the sprinklings on the third and seventh day, and the overall seven-day period of tumah, and our practice of sitting shiva for seven days, of which the first three are more intense. Is Chukat the source for this practice, an asmachta, or just a resonance? Don't know; don't have time to research; but was intrigued.
I also was struck by the wording of the heifer "upon whom a yoke has never been placed": אֲשֶׁר לֹא-עָלָה עָלֶיהָ עֹל. I wonder how Prof. Fox translates that --- because the Hebrew has a triple cognate for the words that I've translated as "upon whom", "a yoke", and "been placed." A contorted English translation would be a heifer "that [has] not had-the-state-of-something-being-put-"UPON" UPON-it [of] something-whose-defining-characteristic-is-that-it-is-put-UPON-the-animal." I never realized before that "yoke" -- 'ol -- is defined by that characteristic of "it's put UPON the animal." And I was, in my mind, also relating it to "aliyah" (being called UP to the Torah) and other words relating to "up"-ness (illui neshamot) --- and wondering whether any commentators play on this, where the 'ol malchut shamayim (the "yoke of the kingdom of heaven"; i.e., keeping the mitzvot) is an elevating act.
Sorry that this is incoherent. So am I. But I wanted to capture these thoughts while I can.
This week's Parsha starts off with the laws of purification for one who has come into contact with a corpse, either directly or by being under a common roof. I was struck by the correspondence between the sprinklings on the third and seventh day, and the overall seven-day period of tumah, and our practice of sitting shiva for seven days, of which the first three are more intense. Is Chukat the source for this practice, an asmachta, or just a resonance? Don't know; don't have time to research; but was intrigued.
I also was struck by the wording of the heifer "upon whom a yoke has never been placed": אֲשֶׁר לֹא-עָלָה עָלֶיהָ עֹל. I wonder how Prof. Fox translates that --- because the Hebrew has a triple cognate for the words that I've translated as "upon whom", "a yoke", and "been placed." A contorted English translation would be a heifer "that [has] not had-the-state-of-something-being-put-"UPON" UPON-it [of] something-whose-defining-characteristic-is-that-it-is-put-UPON-the-animal." I never realized before that "yoke" -- 'ol -- is defined by that characteristic of "it's put UPON the animal." And I was, in my mind, also relating it to "aliyah" (being called UP to the Torah) and other words relating to "up"-ness (illui neshamot) --- and wondering whether any commentators play on this, where the 'ol malchut shamayim (the "yoke of the kingdom of heaven"; i.e., keeping the mitzvot) is an elevating act.
Sorry that this is incoherent. So am I. But I wanted to capture these thoughts while I can.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2011-06-27 04:38 pm (UTC)I like your second point, and would like to hear more. It's the sort of discussion I really enjoy having with my curmudgeonly father-in-law.
(no subject)
Date: 2011-06-27 05:28 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-06-27 08:13 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-06-28 01:40 am (UTC)