This week’s Torah portion, Ki Tisa, opens with the command to take a census of the population. The Torah commands that each census should be done by the collection of a half shekel, in order to prevent a direct counting of people (Exodus 30:11-12).
The Book of Exodus, throughout, addresses the people of Israel in its entirety. The count is 603,550 men aged 20 and above (Exodus 38:26). The Book of Numbers will open with the same census exactly. However, this time the people will be counted according to their tribal affiliations. The question of tribal affiliation, the actions and relative strength of each tribe, the covenants and disputes among different tribes, will characterize the entire Book of Numbers. The Torah thus presents a deep divide between the Book of Exodus and the Book of Numbers, in how to relate to the people of Israel and count them. Is each individual counted on their own, making a unity together, or is the count by tribal/sectarian affiliation?
The struggle between the "Exodus" approach and the "Numbers" approach already begins in our parasha. When Aharon creates the Golden Calf, he responds to the demand of the people as a whole: "And the people gathered against Aaron" (Ex. 32:1). Aharon later justifies himself in the same fashion (Ex. 32:22). In contrast, Moses believes that the Golden Calf breaks the boundaries of national unity. Moses calls for a civil war, and for the first and only time in the entire Book of Exodus, he calls one tribe to himself, the sons of Levi, and declares a fratricidal war in which 3,000 men are killed (Ex. 32:26-28). According to Aharon, the preservation of national unity outweighs any other value. According to Moses, there are things that justify fratricidal war. Civil war occurs, and can only occur, when the people is divided into distinct tribes. On the other hand, only Moses' approach ensures that unity is not a supreme value which can justify any Golden Calf.
Since the last elections, the approach of the Book of Numbers had been greatly strengthened. For almost a year, we weighed the relative power of different sectors: Electoral power, economic power, the power to determine and influence the future of the state. Ostensibly, things have changed since the war broke out. Now, we talk about unity. About the Israeli nation as a whole. But we don’t really mean it. Aloud, we count Israeli casualties, as one nation, in the Exodus format; quietly, we count casualties from different sectors, in the Numbers format. Aloud, we talk about equality in national responsibilities; quietly, we wonder about the image of the IDF if such equality really existed: Which sectors would determine the army’s character, or be influenced by it. Aloud, most of us identify with the existential war imposed on us and mourn its casualties, the fallen and the hostages; quietly, we begin to wonder if the horrors and continued fighting are not the in the interests of a certain sector for whom the cost to Israel and certainly to Gaza are not sufficiently important?
Organisations and agencies fighting for human rights tend to speak of the people as one, and see themselves following the approach of the Book of Exodus. But in the eyes of the majority of the Israeli public, these agencies are highly sectorial - belonging to one specific tribe, and not even a large one: The public looks at us from the perspective of the Book of Numbers. Are we failing to be leaders like Aharon, who “loves peace and pursues peace”? Or do we have no choice but to prevent the worship of this Golden Calf? To ensure that unity does not justify idolatry? How do we seek to count and be counted? How do we seek to tell our story?
Against the backdrop of the ongoing war, the ancient question from parshat Ki Tisa, how to count the Israelites, has become more relevant than ever.
Translation: Rabbi Ma'ayan Turner
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ziva Ofek is a lawyer and a rabbinic student at HUC; married and mother to two children.
The Book of Exodus, throughout, addresses the people of Israel in its entirety. The count is 603,550 men aged 20 and above (Exodus 38:26). The Book of Numbers will open with the same census exactly. However, this time the people will be counted according to their tribal affiliations. The question of tribal affiliation, the actions and relative strength of each tribe, the covenants and disputes among different tribes, will characterize the entire Book of Numbers. The Torah thus presents a deep divide between the Book of Exodus and the Book of Numbers, in how to relate to the people of Israel and count them. Is each individual counted on their own, making a unity together, or is the count by tribal/sectarian affiliation?
The struggle between the "Exodus" approach and the "Numbers" approach already begins in our parasha. When Aharon creates the Golden Calf, he responds to the demand of the people as a whole: "And the people gathered against Aaron" (Ex. 32:1). Aharon later justifies himself in the same fashion (Ex. 32:22). In contrast, Moses believes that the Golden Calf breaks the boundaries of national unity. Moses calls for a civil war, and for the first and only time in the entire Book of Exodus, he calls one tribe to himself, the sons of Levi, and declares a fratricidal war in which 3,000 men are killed (Ex. 32:26-28). According to Aharon, the preservation of national unity outweighs any other value. According to Moses, there are things that justify fratricidal war. Civil war occurs, and can only occur, when the people is divided into distinct tribes. On the other hand, only Moses' approach ensures that unity is not a supreme value which can justify any Golden Calf.
Since the last elections, the approach of the Book of Numbers had been greatly strengthened. For almost a year, we weighed the relative power of different sectors: Electoral power, economic power, the power to determine and influence the future of the state. Ostensibly, things have changed since the war broke out. Now, we talk about unity. About the Israeli nation as a whole. But we don’t really mean it. Aloud, we count Israeli casualties, as one nation, in the Exodus format; quietly, we count casualties from different sectors, in the Numbers format. Aloud, we talk about equality in national responsibilities; quietly, we wonder about the image of the IDF if such equality really existed: Which sectors would determine the army’s character, or be influenced by it. Aloud, most of us identify with the existential war imposed on us and mourn its casualties, the fallen and the hostages; quietly, we begin to wonder if the horrors and continued fighting are not the in the interests of a certain sector for whom the cost to Israel and certainly to Gaza are not sufficiently important?
Organisations and agencies fighting for human rights tend to speak of the people as one, and see themselves following the approach of the Book of Exodus. But in the eyes of the majority of the Israeli public, these agencies are highly sectorial - belonging to one specific tribe, and not even a large one: The public looks at us from the perspective of the Book of Numbers. Are we failing to be leaders like Aharon, who “loves peace and pursues peace”? Or do we have no choice but to prevent the worship of this Golden Calf? To ensure that unity does not justify idolatry? How do we seek to count and be counted? How do we seek to tell our story?
Against the backdrop of the ongoing war, the ancient question from parshat Ki Tisa, how to count the Israelites, has become more relevant than ever.
Translation: Rabbi Ma'ayan Turner
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ziva Ofek is a lawyer and a rabbinic student at HUC; married and mother to two children.