Haftorat Eikev - A Permanent Bond

Speaker:
Ask author
Date:
August 10 2017
Downloads:
0
Views:
29
Comments:
0
 

A Permanent Bond


For so long as the Jew has even one ally, he will be convinced - in his smallness of mind - that his salvation came from that ally. It is only when he is alone - against all of his own efforts and frantic attempts - that he will, through no choice, be compelled to turn to God.”


The above quote, attributed to Rabbi Meir Kahane, seems to ring true to most of us. We must always understand that, as a product of our state of exile, we cannot rely on the sympathies of other nations, or on their offers of alliance. Ultimately, we must turn to God, as He is always with us. He does not abandon us, nor does He forget us. And yet, in this week’s haftorah, we turn to God and accuse, so to speak, the Creator of the Universe and the Melech Elyon of indeed casting aside the Jewish people.


In the first verse of the haftorah, the allegation is laid forth (Yishayahu 49:14):


But Zion said: 'The LORD hath forsaken me, and the Lord hath forgotten me.”


The next verse involves a transition of sorts (15):


Can a woman forget her sucking child, that she should not have compassion on the son of her womb? Yea, these may forget, yet will not I forget thee.


Many of the commentaries explain that the first half of this verse is a continuation of the Jewish people’s questioning of God. The second half, though, is God’s initial response to the Jews.


God then continues (16):


Behold, I have graven thee upon the palms of My hands; thy walls are continually before Me.”


This exchange between God and the Jews is quite bewildering for many, many different reasons. In the first verse, we see two changes in our relationship with God – “forsaken”, which in this context refers to God leaving the Jews, and “forgotten”. The Radak explains that this is referring to our view of the length of the exile. We feel as if God has left us, and forgotten us, evidenced in the duration of galus.


The question we need to ask is if we really believe God left us, what is the difference if He forgot us? What is each one of these terms describing? And which time period is the Radak referring to? The length of the exile is relative to each later generation. Each year that goes by obviously means a longer exile, so at what point is it considered so long that we feel that God has abandoned us?


In the second verse we continue, comparing God’s inability to forget to a mother with her young baby. God’s response is fascinating – indeed, a mother can forget, but God does not forget. Not the response we were all expecting. How do we understand this?


The last verse uses some major anthropomorphism, which in and of itself demands some type of explanation. Rashi offers a clarification of these descriptions (ibid):


Heb. כַּפַּיִם עַל- [lit. on hands]. I see you as though you are engraved on My hands, to see you and always to remember you. Another explanation is: עַל-כַּפַּיִם “from upon the clouds of glory.” Comp. (Job 36:32) “On the clouds (כַּפַּיִם) He covered the rain.


Here we see two distinct elucidations. The first refers to a certain type of remembering, metaphorically expressed as being engraved on God’s “hands”. The second possibility is difficult to understand on a literal level – what exactly is God seeing in the clouds?


It is possible that these three verses are in fact a progression of sorts, rather than simply a back and forth. Let’s turn to the first verse to help develop this hypothesis. As we mentioned above, there is a distinction made in the first verse between God’s abandoning us and God forgetting us. The destruction of the Temples and subsequent exile represented a watershed moment in the relationship between God and the Jews – this is the sense of “abandonment”, as the idea of hester panim is evident. But there is another aspect to the exile that brings about the concern of being forgotten. We know there will be an end to the exile, replaced by the geula, the redemption. However, we do not know when this will be. It is an open ended time span, where we have no end point to attach ourselves to. On a philosophical level, this happens to be an important idea, as many Rishonim express concern that knowledge of such a date would cause the Jewish people to lose focus on the Torah and commandments, opting to “wait it out”. However, on a psychological level, to live in perpetuity in our state of exile, without any end, is something that brings about this concern of being forgotten. The Tirgum on this verse adds strength to this overall approach. He interprets the verse where God leaving us as equivalent to God’s removal of His presence, while being forgotten refers to God being far from us. It could be that in this state, where we perceive no end to the exile, we see a shift in our relationship with God. There is the first step, where God removes His presence. However, if this were temporary, meaning we knew the end, we could consider things on hiatus, so to speak. By not knowing when this state will come to an end, we consider our relationship with God permanently changed – He is far from us.


In the second verse, we see a clarification of our position, as well as God’s response. The question posed in the first verse was a rhetorical one – God does not forget. Thus, we present a fairly solid analogy, comparing God’s “inability” to forget to the same bond between mother and child. Yet God points out that even the mother can forget, whereas God does not forget. The Ibn Ezra explains that God created an instinct in every mother, compelling her to always be concerned with the welfare of her baby. If so, does a mother then really forget, as God suggests? It could be that the analogy here is really tying to a more central theme when it comes to man’s attempts to understand God. When we try to understand God, we use extreme examples from within the human framework – that is as far as we can go. Therefore, we use what to us would be the most extreme example of an inability to forget. God responds that there is no way to guarantee such a thing. It is not whether a mother will forget – it is whether she can forget. God’s knowledge is of a different nature. He is all-knowing, and therefore the very terms “remembering” and “forgetting” partake of a different quality. God indeed does not forget, as such a concept does not exist in His realm. Before we understand how God indeed does not abandon or forget us, we must first place these notions in the correct context.


This now leads us to the third verse, and Rashi’s two explanations. In general, when we see a description evoking the “hand” or “arm” of God (such as “outstretched arm” or “powerful hand”), it refers to God’s relating to mankind, or hashgacha. This principle seems to bear out in both of these interpretations. In the first, God is emphasizing how remembering for Him is a constant. As we discussed above, there is a fear that God has abandoned us, that hester panim refers to a dissociation of God from us. In this verse, God is responding that hester panim is in fact an idea in hashsgacha. In other words, God’s seeming non-involvement is part of His unique relationship with the Jewish people. Other nations simply exist within the laws of nature, subject to chance. With the Jewish people, even when we are in the realm of being subject to chance, the hashgacha is still present. We can never be destroyed, we know there is an end point of a geula – these are all evidence of the constancy of our relationship with God.


In Rashi’s second explanation, we see a more subtle yet equally important idea about God’s hashgacha with the Jewish people. God “looks down” at the clouds and sees the Jewish people, and is reminded of their current state of exile. It could be this is referring to a unique fact about the plan involving the Jewish people. The future geula is in fact a true eventuality, a part of the causal chain of nature, as much as any other natural phenomenon. The sun rises and sets, the planets orbit, the cycle of evaporation and condensation are all viewed as part of the fabric of natural law. The same way the laws of nature dictate all processes of cause and effect, so too the concept of the geula of the Jewish people is included. It was placed into Creation, rather than being a hoped for breach in the natural order. This could be what it means that God looks at the clouds – He is reassuring the Jewish people that our future redemption is something that is built into Creation.  Therefore there is no reason to assume we are completely abandoned.


The feeling of abandonment and being forsaken is a difficult emotion to handle. As a nation, we have suffered for countless generations. For many Jews, it is difficult to recover from this sense, and it surely has led many away from the religion. This prophecy helps isolate this feeling, and attempts to assuage us by explaining how we are mistaken. And as everything else within Judaism, the answers lie in our study of God and His middos. As we engage in this study, and see the wisdom of God in all that surrounds us, we can cast aside any misguided notion of loneliness. 


 


 

Venue: Yeshivat Migdal HaTorah Yeshivat Migdal HaTorah

Parsha:
Eikev 

    More from this:
    Comments
    0 comments
    Leave a Comment
    Title:
    Comment:
    Anonymous: 

    Learning on the Marcos and Adina Katz YUTorah site is sponsored today by Judy & Mark Frankel & family l'ilui nishmos מרדכי בן הרב משה יהודה ע"ה and משה יהודה ז"ל בן מאיר אליהו ויהודית