In Parshas Mattos, Moshe briefly mentions the "matter of Bilaam" when indicting the nation of Midian. But while there are commentaries that discuss when the sorcerer might have advised King Balak of his scheme, we need not look for offstage moments when it was there right before us. On the surface Bilaam appears to be pious and devout. A man who repeatedly insists that he cannot say anything that G-d does not place in his lips. But what appears to be a profession of integrity is actually a message. It is a message akin to "we are being listened to and I cannot speak freely." Balak, vulgar and arrogant, is slow to understand the message even though Bilaam lays it out for him in the first blessing. Bilaam understands what Balak does not, that cursing the Jews will not work and tells him what will by cleverly inverting a curse into a blessing.  "How can I curse whom G-d has not cursed, and how can I invoke wrath if the Lord has not been angered?" he asks, con

Parshas Mattos begins with a survey of the laws of oaths addressed to the tribal leaders.  Why specifically the tribal leaders? While Mattos may begin with the laws of oaths and vows, it concludes with the leaders of two tribes requesting that they settle the other side of the Jordan and committing to go and fight with the other tribes until they succeed in their wars.  Both times a similar phrasing "kol hayotze mepif taaseh" "that which comes from your mouth you shall do" is used.  But while Avraham bound Eliezer and Yaakov bound Yosef with oaths, Moshe asks no oath of them. He simply tells them that they must keep their word and that there will be consequences if they do not. Indeed there are two tragic oaths that will later follow, by Yiftah, who vows to sacrifice whatever comes to meet him on his return home, and Shaul, who vows that he will kill anyone who breaks his pledge to eat nothing until the enemy is defeated only to have his son Yonatan unknowingly eat

The story of Shavuot intersects with the story of two non-Jewish figures: Yitro, Moshe's father-in-law, and Ruth, whose story is read on Shavuot. The most compelling moment in the story of Ruth is also the beginning of her story when despite her mother-in-law's pleas, she refuses to go. There is a contrasting moment in the parsha or section in which the giving of the Ten Commandments is described which is known as Parshas Yitro. Parshas Yitro begins with Yitro visiting Moshe accompanied by Moshe's wife and sons. And yet in the more recent parsha readings in the Shabbosim around Shavuot which described the dedication of the Leviim, there is no mention of Moshe's sons. A genealogy states merely that the descendants of Moshe and Aaron are Aaron's sons.  In Parshas Behalaoscha, there is a brief reference to Moshe marrying a 'Cushite' woman who does not appear to jibe with the previous description of Moshe's wife and there is also an exchange between Moshe an

From the very beginning G-d had warned Moshe that Pharaoh would not listen to him. Why then did Moshe have to trek to the Egyptian tyrant, warn him of the plagues, only to be dismissed, over and over again? At the beginning of Parshas Bo, G-d finally tells Moshe the reason. "So that you may tell your children and grandchildren..." Throughout this whole process, Moshe and the Jews had been rooted in the present while G-d was speaking of the future. Here, G-d pulls back the curtain and reveals that the struggles of the present will inform and shape the Jews people throughout time. Often in our struggles, we feel stuck in the moment. The answer in Parshas Bo is to think of the future. Time is a theme in Parshas Bo.  The plague of the firstborn is visited at midnight. It is I believe the first explicit mention of time in the Torah, not in terms of broad measures like day and night, but a very specific measure of time. Likewise the first Mitzvah, that of the new moon and the cal

 Were the Jews affected by the plagues that struck Egypt?  It seems like an absurd question. Weren't the plagues there to force the Egyptians to free the Jews? And yet only in the plague of the swarm of wild animals does G-d for the first time make a point that the plague will distinguish between the Egyptians and the Jews. This event is treated as extraordinary and is described as a "sign" implying that this had not happened before. Going forward, some of the plagues contain this distinction while others make no mention of it. The swarm of wild animals and the disease that strikes the animals, Orov and Dever, both distinguish between Jews and Egyptians, as does Barad, the wave of burning hail, along with darkness, Hosech, and the death of the first born, but there is no mention of this during, for example, the plague of soot that leaves of blisters.  Why is there a distinction with some plagues but not others?  The pattern seems to be that those plagues that were letha

We all know the names of the ten plagues that struck Egypt. And some of us may even remember the order that they took place in. But is there any reason for the particular order? The plagues do become somewhat more devastating with time, but not entirely. Take the plague of darkness, which was traumatic, but not truly damaging, as opposed to the invasion of wild beasts. There is however an order of meaning to the order of plagues. The plagues don't necessarily move forward in degrees of devastation, but in degrees of altitude. From the first to the ninth plague, they begin at the very bottom, in the river, below the surface of the earth, and ascend to the sky, while the final plagues leading up to the end, hail, locusts, and darkness, emerge from the heavens. In between them, the plagues slowly ascend, rising from the Nile, blood and frogs, up to the third plague, vermin, which arise when the dust of the earth is struck. The fourth and fifth plagues involve the animals

(You can listen a version of this thought on my new Human Parsha podcast.) At the beginning of Parshas Vaera, G-d informs Moshe that the revelation of the name 'Hashem' is a unique one that had not been truly revealed to any previous generation including that of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.  When Moshe had asked what name of G-d should he tell the Jews sent him, the 'Name' was given for the first time. Without getting too esoteric, what does the revelation of the 'Name' Hashem mean? The name Hashem until now had been used exclusively by members of Avraham's immediate family. Outsiders however use the name 'Elokim', 'Adon' or other names meaning G-d. Must as in contemporary times a broad range of peoples use a term denoting a single Creator of the universe, but do not necessarily share values or beliefs, so too the people of that time had the concept of a Creator. Indeed, Abraham at one point encounters a 'priest' who serves a High Ho