Pensamiento judío sobre Isaías 28:7

Loss of the land of Israel to the Jewish people, is comparable to loss of the garden of Eden to mankind. Loss of Eden at the time was the introduction to the need of mortality. The Jewish people had conquered this mortality at Mount Sinai when they proclaimed the na-asseh venishma, the unqualified acceptance of G'ds law in its entirety. At that time, the domain of the angel of death was restricted, the Jewish people no longer being under his authority. The sin of the spies resulted in the angel of death regaining his authority over the Jewish people. (Bamidbar Rabbah 37) Life in the land of Israel is of a quality similar to what life in the garden of Eden had been. Midrash Eycha 1, states that whenever Israel is carrying out the Lord's will, it enhances His power. Whenever Israel fails to act in accordance with G'ds will, it causes His power to be diminished. The concept is based on the respective verses (Deut. 32,18) "The rock that begat you, you have weakened," as well as Numbers 14,17, "and now I pray let the power of G'd become great, as You have said for it to be proclaimed." The "weakness" of G'ds power referred to, does not stem from objective causes, but from a self imposed discipline that G'd has assumed. This fact, unknown to the gentiles, on occasion prevents G'd from displaying His power. When the Jewish people sin, and thereby forfeit G'ds promises or direct guidance, this may be perceived by the gentiles as a weakening of G'ds power. Similarly, when the Jewish people do perform the mitzvot, thereby qualifying for the reward promised them by G'd, the nations of the world who observe the good fortune of G'ds chosen people, will be impressed with His power correspondingly. When Moses prayed to G'd, pleading for the life of the nation, saying "now let Your power be great," he referred to this concept. Why, he asks, allow the nations to think that Your power has waned when they look at the misfortunes befalling the chosen nation? They will think that the denial of the land of Canaan to the Jews is simply proof of G'ds inability. They will not think that temporary causes have delayed the execution of G'ds avowed purpose. (as would be implied if we understood the word yecholet as a verb) Rather, they will be convinced that the task had proved somewhat beyond G'ds power. (using the word yecholet as a noun) Since, as we have seen, G'd Himself submits to the rules of laws He has created, to the point of allowing His freedom of action to be curtailed through the behaviour of others, we can understand the penalty of denying the land of Israel to the generation that accepted the majority report of the spies. The right to dispossess the Canaanites was embodied in the Jewish people’s superior moral conduct. Now the Jewish people had demonstrated that in spite of the revelation at Mount Sinai, and in spite of all the loving care lavished on the Jewish people ever since the Exodus, they had not risen to the challenge posed by the task of conquering the holy land. Now G'd had no legal means to expel the resident nation in favour of the Jews. The Jewish people belatedly declaring a readiness to risk their physical lives in order to achieve the conquest, had become meaningless. Once G'd had decreed that they would die in the desert, the only thing that they had left to lose was time. Therefore, they could not do the kind of teshuvah repentance that would demonstrate that their basic attitude had changed. Rabbi Joshua ben Levi in our opening Midrash summarizes the whole episode by showing the bride possessing three desirable qualities. Beauty represents visible attractiveness, an appeal to the senses, man's physical comfort. Wealth represents the useful. Nobility of ancestry represents the bride's superior moral qualities. Since all three qualities were combined in a single woman, union with a man becomes not only permissible but desirable, and an expression of G'ds purpose for man. Such a union would result in a life of discipline. A land blessed with similar attributes, would also enable the people on it to live a life of discipline. When the son insisted on looking over the bride, this was not because he did not trust his father who had,after all, always provided for him. It was because he did trust his father and because he knew him. The son looked for a way to avoid the moral commitment implied by this marriage. The father, though he realised his son's motives, was in a quandary all the same. Had he refused the son's request, he himself would have provided the fuel for the son's rebellion. The despatch of the spies needs to be seen in the same light. Regrettably, throughout the millenia, ever since the first Tishah be Av, we have still not learned to use the land of Israel and its bounty to help us discipline our lives and to assure ourselves of chayim shekullam aruchim, a life of infinite duration.

The station of man varies according to the exercise of this power. Some persons constantly strive to choose that which is noble, and to seek perpetuation in accordance with the direction of their nobler part,—their form: their thoughts are engaged in the formation of ideas, the acquisition of true knowledge about everything, and the union with the divine intellect which flows down upon them, and which is the source of man’s form. Whenever they are led by the wants of the body to that which is low and avowedly disgraceful, they are grieved at their position, they feel ashamed and confounded at their situation. They try with all their might to diminish this disgrace, and to guard against it in every possible way. They feel like a person whom the king in his anger ordered to remove refuse from one place to another in order to put him to shame; that person tries as much as possible to hide himself during the time of his disgrace; he perhaps removes a small quantity a short distance in such a manner that his hands and garments remain clean, and he himself be unnoticed by his fellow-men. Such would be the conduct of a free man, whilst a slave would find pleasure in such work;—he would not consider it a great burden, but throw himself into the refuse, smear his face and his hands, carry the refuse openly, laughing and singing. This is exactly the difference in the conduct of different men. Some consider, as we just said, all wants of the body as shame, disgrace, and defect to which they are compelled to attend: this is chiefly the case with the sense of touch, which is a disgrace to us according to Aristotle, and which is the cause of our desire for eating, drinking, and sensuality. Intelligent persons must, as much as possible, reduce these wants, guard against them, feel grieved when satisfying them, abstain from speaking of them, discussing them, and attending to them in company with others. Man must have control over all these desires, reduce them as much as possible, and only retain of them as much as is indispensable. His aim must be the aim of man as man, viz., the formation of ideas, and nothing else. The best and sublimest among them is the idea which man forms of God, angels, and the rest of the creation according to his capacity. Such men are always with God, and of them it is said, “Ye are princes, and all of you are children of the Most High” (Ps. 82:6). This is man’s task and purpose. Others, however, that are separated from God form the multitude of fools, and do just the opposite. They neglect all thought and all reflection on ideas, and consider as their task the cultivation of the sense of touch,—that sense which is the greatest disgrace: they only think and reason about eating and love. Thus it is said of the wicked who are drowned in eating, drinking, and love, “They also have erred through wine, and through strong drink are out of the way,” etc. (Isa. 28:7), “for all tables are full of vomit and filthiness, so that there is no place clean” (ver. 8); again, “And women rule over them” (ibid. 3:2),—the opposite of that which man was told in the beginning of the creation, “And for thy husband shall thy desire be, and he shall rule over thee” (Gen. 3:16). The intensity of their lust is then described thus, “Every one neighed after his neighbour’s wife,” etc. (Jer. 5:8); “they are all adulterers, an assembly of treacherous men” (ibid. 9:2). The whole book of the Proverbs of Solomon treats of this subject, and exhorts to abstain from lust and intemperance. These two vices ruin those that hate God and keep far from Him; to them the following passages may be applied, “They are not the Lord’s” (ibid. 5:10); “Cast them out of my sight, and let them go forth” (ibid. 15:1).

The object of Nazaritism (Num. vi.) is obvious. It keeps away from wine that has ruined people in ardent and modern times. “Many strong men have been slain by it” (Prov. 7:26). “But they also have erred through wine. . . . the priest and the prophet” (Isa. 28:7). In the law about the Nazarite we notice even the prohibition, “he shall eat nothing that is made of the vine tree” (Num. 6:4), as an additional precaution, implying the lesson that man must take of wine only as much as is absolutely necessary. For he who abstains from drinking it is called “holy”; his sanctity is made equal to that of the high-priest, in not being allowed to defile himself even to his father, to his mother, and the like. This honour is given him because he abstains from wine.