A Thought on the Parsha
A Bridegroom of Blood
At the crucial juncture between Moshe accepting the
divine mission and his returning to the people and becoming their leader, a
curious and perplexing event occurs. Moshe begins to head back to Egypt,
and then, abruptly we read: “And it came to pass by the way in the inn, that
the Lord met him, and sought to kill him” (4:24). The “him”
here is ambiguous – it might refer to Moshe, the immediate antecedent, but it
just as plausibly could refer to Moshe’s son, the focus of the next
verse. But what is going on here? God wanted to kill Moshe or
Moshe’s son? Why? What sense does this make?
What is even more puzzling is Ziporah’s actions,
which came and saved the day:
Then Ziporah took a sharp stone, and cut off the
foreskin of her son, and cast it at his feet, and said, Surely a bridegroom of
blood are you to me. So He let him go: then she said, A bridegroom of blood you
are, of circumcision.
It seems that Moshe and Ziporah’s son had not been circumcised.
But in what way did the act of circumcision save Moshe from his death?
And what does Ziporah mean when she talks about “a bridegroom of blood”?
To understand what is going on here, we need to go
back a few verses. Here is what the verses say immediately before this
story of the inn:
And you shalt say unto Pharaoh, Thus says
the Lord, Israel is my son, even my firstborn.
And I say unto you, Let my son go, that he may serve
Me: and if you refuse to let him go, behold, I will slay your son, even your
firstborn.
If we understand that it was Moshe’s son who was at risk,
the parallel is striking. God warns that God will slay Pharaoh’s firstborn, and
then God attempts to kill Moshe’s son, perhaps even his firstborn (see Targum Yonatan 4:24).
Once we note the parallel between the event in the
inn, and the foretelling of the slaying of the firstborn of the Egyptians,
other parallels also become clear. Ziporah circumcises her son and thereby
saves him from death. On the night of the Exodus, men who were not
circumcised could not eat from the Pesach sacrifice, and thus could not be part
of those who would eat the sacrifice in their houses. And to be left outside of
the Israelite houses, would mean death. “And you do not leave any man from the
doorway of his house until morning… and God will not allow the destroyer to
enter into your houses to smite you.” (12:22-23). To be an
uncircumcised man is, at this moment, to risk being slayed by God or by the
forces that God has unleashed.
This then brings us to the issue of blood. Ziporah
mentions blood twice: “Surely a bloody husband are you to me… A bloody husband
of circumcision.” What often goes without notice is that this is actually
the first time in the Torah, the only time in the Torah, that blood is
associated with circumcision. When Avraham was commanded to circumcise
himself and his children, the Torah only mentions the removal of the
foreskin. Similar to when the Torah commands the mitzvah in the book of
VaYikra. In those verses, the focus is on cutting and on removing the
foreskin. Here, the focus is on the blood.
And blood saves from death. For indeed, it was
not just the being in the house that saved the Israelites, it was the blood of the Pesach – a sacrificed linked to circumcision - that was placed on the
doorposts and on the lintel. And it was the blood of circumcision that
saved Moshe’s son in the inn (this point is already noted by Ibn Ezra).
This link, of circumcision blood to the blood of the
Pesach, and its salvific power is alluded to every year during the Pesach
seder. When we expound on the verses that tell the story of the Exodus,
and the state of the Israelites in Egypt, we read the verse from Yechezkel:
“And I passed over you and saw you wallowing in your blood, and I said to you,
In your bloods you shall live. In your bloods you shall
live.” What blood is this referring to? According to the
classical Rabbinic interpretation, which picks up on the plural of the verse,
it is two bloods: the blood of the Pesach and the blood of the
circumcision. It is these bloods which protected our lives in Egypt,
these bloods which gave us life. Indeed, Targum Yonatan on Shemot 12:13, states that the blood of circumcision - presumably done to enable the eating of the Pesach - was mixed with the blood of the Pesach sacrifice and they were both put on the doorposts in Egypt to save them during the plague of the firstborn.
What will be the story of the people at the climax of
the Exodus, is being enacted here, in the inn, with Moshe and Ziporah. In
Egypt, God comes down to slay the Egyptian first born, this sets free the
destructive powers of “the destroyer”, and it is the blood of the Pesach that
protects them. In the inn, God has just declared the slaying of the first
born, this sets destructive powers in action (see Targum Yonatan 4:25), and even Moshe’s child, or
perhaps Moshe himself, is at risk. But Ziporah leaps into action, knows
what to do, and the blood of circumcision protects them.
So what is it about the blood of circumcision? The parallel with the blood of
the Pesach points to simple conclusion: the blood of circumcision is like the
blood of a sacrifice. Or more to the point, the circumcision is a type of
a sacrifice.
It is this blood, this life-force, and yet not a
human life, that has this salvific power, that saves Moshe’s son and it is the
parallel blood of the animal sacrifice that saves the Israelites in
Egypt.
This idea is initially shocking. We don’t do
human sacrifices. And yet, the story of the Akeida speaks to a powerful
urge that people had, at least at that time, to give what is most dear to them
to God, to give even their child to God. God prohibits it. This is
the ultimate message of the Akeida: God does not want human sacrifice.
God will never ask us to sacrifice our children. And yet, the human
urge does not disappear. This can be heard in Rashi’s comment on the verse
where the angel says: “Do not do anything to the lad.” Rashi
states that Avraham said to the angel: if I can’t kill him, let me at least
wound him. To which the angel had to say: don’t do anything to him.
So what happens to this urge? What happens to the
phenomenon of child sacrifice? It gets transformed into the act of circumcision.
Consider Rashi (Breishit 22:1), quoting the Midrash: “Said Yitzchak to Yishmael
– you are bragging that by being circumcised at 13 you made a great
sacrifice. That is one limb. If God were to ask me to slaughter
myself, I would not refuse.”
Akeida is an extreme circumcision. Circumcision
is a symbolic, or reenacted, Akeida. The letting of blood, the cutting of one’s child –
and I am bracketing the critically important question of why it is sons and not
daughters – is the act of bringing one’s son into the covenant with God. It
is how we symbolically sacrifice our children, how we give what is most
precious to us to God. It is thus how we give ourselves to God and it is
how we give our children to God. We do not destroy life in the service of
God. Our sacrifice, the cutting and the spilling of blood of the
circumcision, is the dedicating of a life to the service of God.
Indeed, many of the rituals around circumcision echo
this idea: first, the quoting of the above verse from Yechezkel during the
ceremony. But more powerfully, there is a tradition that the lap on which
the infant is placed is like an altar. If the lap is an altar, then the
infant is being cut on the altar, is being sacrificed. And the
Haredi concerns around forgoing metzitza bi’peh, is linked, I believe,
to the power of blood- related rituals, and the focus on the blood of
circumcision. [For another, even more graphic example of this symbolism, and the link of milah to the Akedia, see Mishneh Brurah, 584:12.]
I share these ideas not because they sit easy with
me. Thinking of circumcision as a type of symbolic Akeida is a disturbing
idea. And yet, there is power to this reality, to the reality of blood.
And power to the idea of sacrifice. We live lives that are sterile,
are refined, and hence often out of touch with the raw power of blood, and with
the life force that can drive us to passionately serve God, that can drive us
to want to sacrifice everything in the service of God. Let’s not forget
that it was this blood that saved Moshe’s son, perhaps saved Moshe, and that saved
the Israelites, giving them life, and enabling the redemption.
Shabbat shalom!
Comments
Post a Comment