Minyan Replay with Rabbi Steven — Parashat Shemot

Today's episode is from our lively Morning Minyan discussion on Thursday, January 4th about Parashat Shemot. Who is this new pharaoh in the opening of Exodus? Just some fallible, faulty figurehead pushed around by a fearful populace?  Or is he an impossibly long-lived, inhuman monster?

Every weekday at 8:00 am, Mishkan Chicago holds a virtual Morning Minyan.  You can join in yourself, or listen to all the prayer, music, and inspiration right here on Contact Chai.

https://www.mishkanchicago.org/series/morning-minyan-summer-fall-2023/

****

For upcoming Shabbat services and programs, check our event calendar, and see our Accessibility & Inclusion page for information about our venues. Follow us on Instagram and like us on Facebook for more updates.

Produced by Mishkan Chicago. Music composed, produced, and performed by Kalman Strauss.

Transcript

Transcript

Copy Transcript Copied

Rabbi Steven Philp 
So we're going to be reading from Shin moats are in the first power shot, the first Torah reading from the book of Exodus. So it shares its name with the book, should moats or Exodus Shemot literally means names, greeted for the first few verses here in chapter one. The question that I'm holding, and sitting with is we see a shift in the relationship between the Israelites were living in the land of Egypt, and the Egyptians. And in particular, the blame for that shift is put on Pharaoh. And I think the obvious answer is that this is a new pharaoh. And so if it is a new leader that's arisen up over Egypt, then what has changed is my question, but also some of the rabbi's say that it's not actually a new pharaoh, but the same Pharaoh that interacted with Joseph, who's taken on a new personality or a new approach to how he is interfacing how he is interacting with the Israelites. And so if that's the case, my question is what's shifted the question for both whether it's a new pharaoh or an old Pharaoh with the new attitude what has changed over these years whether it's a short period of time or a long period of time, but first we'll read from the Torah

Rabbi Steven Philp 
say the blessing over setting tar together which is less so the defray to rap rock attack I don't I have oh hey New Mexico bomb I share Can you shut up admit to tab ditzy Vanu last so could be divrei Torah blessing Are you source of all things who brings holiness into our lives through our actions, asking us to busy ourselves with words of Torah that Lasha mode B'nai Israel RBE minutes reima as Yaakov each veto battle, when Shimon le V. V. Who is a cause of a loon. What do you mean? Donovan? Neftali God the ASHA Vahe call Nath ash, you're a Euro Yakov sheave EME nefesh that your safe harbor meets regime via mode you're safe the whole the whole hadoar Who overlays right power rule row, the yeesh read to the year boo the smooth beam Old Man Oh God, the team Allah areds are time via calm mela Hadash AMI time I show you your data at yourself. By yo man Li Mo he. Vanessa l Rob that Zoom me men who have neat hack my law pen you better hire higher. Key tick read now. Milka ma Venosa. GM who? Soon a new fan Neil come a know about alarming hot. Returning English says these are the names Elisha mots. This is the line from which she wrote the book gets its name. These are the names of the sons of Israel, who came to Egypt with Jacob each coming with his household. There's Reuben and Shimon LaVey and Yehudah, Isa car and ZEV balloon and Binyamin done enough tally God and Asha and the total number of persons that were of Jacob's issue came to 70. Joseph being already in Egypt, his second youngest son, now Joseph died and all his brothers and all that generation. The Israelites were fertile and prolific, they multiplied and increased very greatly, so the land was filled with them. And a new king arose over Egypt who didn't know Joseph, and he said to his people, look, Israelites are much too numerous for us, liberally great in number among us, let us deal shrewdly with them, so that they may not increase otherwise in the event of war, they may join our enemies and fighting against us and rise from the ground. And this is the beginning of enslavement in Egypt, which would last for a very long time. So my question again is what chain into what shifted? Is this an old king, a new king. It literally says a new king. But one of the ways that the rabbi's interpret this is that the old king had a change in heart. And so I'm just curious what comes up for people what changed what shifted in the relationship between the Israelites and the Egyptians?

Speaker 1 
I claim, the two things that occurred to me is one, if you interpret this to be the same king, then he's a flew solo type King, because we've already said, Joseph, all the brothers, that whole generation has died out so clearly, and they've increased the number. So clearly, many, many, many years have passed. So this king, if it's the same Pharaoh, then he's lived for, you know, a couple of 100 years. So, to me, that seems less credible than it is a different king. But the other thing that occurred to me is, the Egyptians see these people as different and separate. So these, I'm assuming the Israelites have kept themselves apart, they haven't integrated into Egyptian society. And I guess, you know, that makes sense. If they're worshiping one God, the Egyptians are, you know, have a pantheon of deities. So they've kept themselves apart. They're not intermarrying they're not, they're not integrating into the society, they're, they're creating their own society, so that they would be perceived as separate. So that's the other thought that comes to my mind.

Rabbi Steven Philp 
That's really interesting. You know, we do know, Joseph does take an Egyptian wife. But we also know that at least it seems all the brothers are already married, already have children by the time they come down to Egypt. And although we are also told that we leave Egypt as a mixed multitude, right, the question is, how, how much? How mix? Right? How much of that mixture is Egyptian? And maybe not right, the other peoples who are living in Egypt? Or who were enslaved in Egypt? How much of that mixing happened? Pre slavery versus in slavery? And, and yeah, as is Egypt equipped to be a multi ethnic society, or was maybe the expectation that the Israelites would just kind of integrate, assimilate and become part of whatever the monolithic Egyptian culture is. So Suzanne, in the chat pointed out that this is the old fifth column nonsense actually use this as an example in the class to teach to our interest students on anti semitism, to show how some of the common anti semitic tropes that we experience are very, very old, including the idea of the fifth column meant that we as a people are always more loyal to ourselves or perhaps to some external entity, the metaphorical or actual state of Israel, rather than the place that we live, that we would potentially join up with the enemy, or are already colluding with the enemy of a place that we live. So introducing that that kind of through light, what else came up for people?

Speaker 2 
This started out as sort of a not quite serious mental tangent, but thinking about what Glenn just said, If this is the same Pharaoh, he's, he's got to be a vampire, right? Or some sort of undead creature. And like so that started off as kind of a joking thought. But I am thinking about how we see a lot in early rabbinic thought, a tendency to literally demonize the things that frighten us. I'm thinking of specifically like the way that Lilith gets treated. And I'm wondering if that actually is relevant here that the rabbi's feel it necessary to demonize this figure of Pharaoh even farther than the original text? It goes, they want to go even farther than the original text. So like, I don't think anybody would argue that the way that Pharaoh was portrayed in Shimoda is particularly like sympathetic. Oh, Um, but the rabbi is really like they have to make him literally evil or supernatural in some way to sort of accommodate for I think all of the psychological projection that gets dumped onto the figure of Pharaoh in rabbinic literature.

Rabbi Steven Philp 
That's interesting. Or this is kind of almost like an another like a somebody who's almost inhuman in some ways. Now, it kind of maybe explains that, that shift in there is an interesting actually, among the rabbis who debate or as I read, a mother obviously argued that this the same Pharaoh there is a debate whether it was Pharaoh's change in heart or the people's change in heart. One, so one, because the plain meaning of the text, that's literally a new king, right, so this is Mel Kadosh, right, that is a new king. And so for the rabbi's who say it's still the same king, one camp is saying that the new king means that he issued new decrees, right, same person, new decrees. But there is actually one other camp that says it's a new king in the sense that he was taken from power and then reinstated that that people were the ones who were concerned about the Israelites, and that this Pharaoh was like, No, remember, Joseph, remember how these individuals right saved us from famine. And so they actually remove him from power for three months? I think the Midrash says, and then reinstate him once he caves their demands, which is what makes him a new king. So I bring in that to say there are there are rabbis who definitely say, you know, who kind of tried to create this villainous figure? Who's almost like this kind of eternal, right, this eternal figure of Pharaoh. And then there are those even say that, that maybe actually Pharaoh was the one who is sympathetic to us. Because they know I'm the one actually with institutional memory here. You all are not. And that is actually the people who, who put so much pressure on him that he had caving. All of these, I think big, interesting questions about again, like, right, what shifted, right? What changed in Egyptian society, or was actually where the Israelites always just barely tolerated? And, and this is nothing new. And maybe the chance for a new king or to put pressure on an old king finally arose that they could they could do that. And if it's Larry or Gayle, who just raised your hand, oh, it's Gail

Speaker 3 
Simpson might have been before me, though, not sure. It was just reminding me of how in this country and in other countries, when there's some minority that's getting more populous how the majority really that's unnerved by it. The what's happening here with that I can't remember the year if it's 2030 or 2040, but that there will be majority of the country will be people who are black and brown, and that is freaking out and has been freaking out a lot of white supremacists. Here. And that is what I was thinking. In addition to what Glenn said. Can you sense?

Rabbi Steven Philp 
Absolutely, absolutely. The parallels are very strong,

Unknown Speaker 
and other countries to suit. Yeah,

Speaker 4 
I would, I would echo what you were saying, Gail, that I was just struck by the emphasis on the number, you know, the multitude, they were great, these Jews among us, as long as they were just a small number. But when they got to be more, it was an issue of concern. And it just makes me think of like, you know, we're okay with integration, as long as there's not a lot of the other among us, but once the other becomes a majority, then, you know, that's a reason for concern. So they, in that passage speak more than once, or it's referenced more than once the number the multitudes you know, so they were prolific. They had a lot of kids, you know, something like that. So, yeah,

Rabbi Steven Philp 
absolutely. I certainly I do appreciate about it. This is something I appreciate about Torah generally, is that we use the example that Zanna highlighted of the fifth column, right, this old anti semitic trope that we see here, but we also see questions of emigration of national character of assimilation versus diversity of fears of a A new majority right rising within place that has maybe had a singular or a small set of cultural, ethnic, linguistic representation for a long time. And it's just a tour actually even a few passes, where we only read how to pursue read, only read 10 verses of Torah. And actually, most of those were just listed names. But it brings up a lot of questions and around issues that are still really relevant today. And and I think that that is what inspires me about Torah is that it gets us to ask, I think good questions about our own society today. And to see that you know, some some things, you know, some things have not changed, some things have changed. So, I wondered

Speaker 4 
what it meant to thy will rise from the ground. So that the fifth column idea does connect for me with that, but is there a literal like reference to it there? They're all buried here, right? Like we've had generations who are living in now dying here and are buried, is there any literal connection? Or what does that mean? The Hebrew they will rise from the ground? Yeah,

Rabbi Steven Philp 
it gets quite literally right. Go up right to love to go up Meena arts from from our out of the land. Rashi interprets it as against our will, right as a turn of phrase.

Rabbi Steven Philp 
Others actually say rare because it he it's, it's in the singular, which is, which is interesting. Others interpret as potentially, that we will, we will actually be like, we will be forced out of the land, and they will come to possess it in our stead. Although I think Ron Baum takes issue with that I'm just looking really quickly. Some see as an as an N against, right, I mean, as against, but then Robin says, that's actually, that's not actually correct.

Rabbi Steven Philp 
So he says possible that Pharaoh is saying, If wars will occur, the Israelites may join forces, the enemies to take the spoils to take the prey, they will get themselves up out of this land, to the land of Canaan with all of our belongings, and we will not be able to regard vengeance on them, nor go to war against them. So so that also, there's also another interpretation, that's by me that they might like, rise up, take everything and then leave, right. And they won't be able to follow that, which is interesting, because that actually is, in some ways predictive of what will happen, right? Which is that right? That's the Passover story. Of actually rising up and ending up taking a lot with him, or Pharaoh says like, Take Take everything go, right. So it's really prescient. And so he'll ask your question, Chad, how long are you for people in Milan? Because it'd be strangers in the land? You know, and I think actually, Gail, it's a really interesting question, because we have examples of people's who've come to you can American story of people who've come to this country, who were initially considered strangers, and are now no longer writing about like, Italian Americans, Irish Americans are, who were very much considered other for some time. You think about other populations, right, like black Americans, who are still very much considered other, if not the part of the fabric of American society. And then you have some stories like our story. You know, recognizing obviously, the Jewish story, the black story, the Irish retaliatory like, are all woven through the Jewish story, because we are met multi ethnic and multi linguistic people. But the fascinating thing about the Jewish story, and in particular, the white presenting Jews, is that we've experienced moments of not being the stranger and though you still experienced moments of being the stranger, and there was actually like an ebb and flow there in a way that I be curious if other peoples have also experienced that. I think that's why these questions are really provocative because there's some people who've never been able to not be the stranger. There's some people who, in a relatively short period time become not strangers. And then there's the the Jewish story, where we are sometimes treated by strangers and sometimes not, depending on what's happening in the world. Okay, we've reached the end of our time. I really appreciate all of you Once again why don't we wrap this conversation up and stop recording