Posts
http://sn111w.snt111.mail.live.com/default.aspx#!/mail/InboxLight.aspx?n=345730396!n=1014990120&fid=1&fav=1&mid=e46260f1-ab65-11e1-b6be-002264c2075c&fv=1
Diversity in Judaism
Chapter 2, Mishna 1(b)
"Rabbi [Yehuda haNasi] said: What is the proper path a person should choose for himself? Whatever brings glory to himself [before G-d], and grants him glory before others. Be careful with a minor mitzvah (commandment) as with a major one, for you do not know the reward for the mitzvos. Consider the loss incurred for performing a mitzvah compared to its reward, and the 'reward' received for sinning compared to the loss. Consider three things and you will not come to sin: Know what is above you: an eye that sees and an ear that hears, and all your deeds are recorded in the Book."
Last week we discussed the first statement of Rabbi. ("Rabbi" (Rah-bee) is the title of Rabbi Yehuda the Prince.) As we saw, Israel is charged with a dual mission in the world -- that we perfect ourselves before G-d and that we function as worthy role models to others, being a light unto the nations.
Rabbi's second statement is that we be as careful with "minor" mitzvos as we must be with more significant ones. One should never satisfy himself feeling he's keeping the "basics" -- the "important" stuff -- while letting a few of the burdensome details pass him by.
As Rabbi continues, the Torah rarely tells us the reward mitzvah performance earns us. We have no means of determining -- and certainly no right to arbitrate -- the relative importance of each mitzvah. We may well be surprised one day to discover that the "insignificant" deeds which no one takes much note of this world are far more consequential in the World to Come, whereas the high-profile ones down here will hardly be noticed up above. As the Talmud remarks, heaven is an upside-down world (Pesachim 50a). It could very well be that the few dollars and minutes we spent affixing that small mezuzah on our doorpost was far more precious to G-d than the many thousands we spent on that lavish Bar Mitzvah affair for our child. (And by the way, a mezuzah is supposed to be reexamined by a certified scribe twice every seven years.) We really have little way of truly knowing, and even more absurdly, we often borrow the same criteria we use to measure importance in the secular worl d -- prestige, public recognition -- to the spiritual realm. For better or worse, chances are we'll be in for some mighty big surprises after 120.
The commentators to our mishna make an interesting observation. Regarding the negative commandments the Torah generally does tell us the punishments incurred -- whether death penalty (of which there are four types), excision, lashes, exile, monetary fine, etc. Thus, our mishna's principle is true only regarding the positive commandments, not the negatives. What is the difference?
The commentators quote a midrash which explains by way of parable: A king had a large orchard surrounding his palace. He asked his workers to tend his orchard, and he did not tell them the worth of each tree and the wages they would receive for tending to each. The result was that all the fruit trees were cultivated and flourished, and the palace grounds became a tapestry of beauty. Now had the king told his workers the value of each tree, only the most valuable would have been cared for. The palace grounds would have become filled with exotic and magnificent trees, but would have lacked the harmony and variegated beauty of a truly breathtaking landscape.
This, explain the commentators, was G-d's intention as well. Had we been apprised of the relative worth of each mitzvah, we would have focused on the most lucrative alone -- to the neglect of many other worthy deeds. We would have begun to see mitzvah observance as an opportunity to earn reward alone -- almost as if "reward" were some kind of currency we accrue, to be "traded in" when we arrive in the World to Come.
This, however, is not the true concept of mitzvah observance. The mitzvos were not given to us in order to earn us reward or free mileage. They are to perfect ourselves, to make ourselves "whole" ("shalaim") in the terminology of Jewish thinkers. By performing all the mitzvos, we become whole and perfected human beings. The Talmud tells us that the Torah contains 248 positive mitzvos corresponding to the 248 limbs of a person's body (Makkos 23b). (The remaining 365 (out of 613) are negative commandments, correspond to the days of the year.) The message is that each mitzvah perfects our spiritual bodies and our characters in its own unique way. Had we focused on a few mitzvos -- even theoretically very important ones -- we would have denied ourselves the true perfection which must be our aspiration.
The negative commandments, however, are a different matter. There is far less harm knowing the punishments: we will hopefully not do any of them anyway. (I was told of a case in which a young man attempted to press a rabbi for some distinctions in the laws of forbidden male-female contact -- in a clear attempt to distinguish "worse" from "better". The rabbi wisely refused to answer.) Further, at times the courts must administer such punishments. It is also relevant to know which transgressions are more severe when it comes to matters of Jewish law -- for example, to know which to suspend first in cases of danger to life.
This principle has a fascinating -- but very logical -- extension on a much grander scale. Just as each individual perfects himself through the entire gamut of mitzvah observance, the world as a whole reaches its perfection only through the service of all mankind, each of us serving G-d in his or her own unique way. The beauty of the world is in its diversity. No two people were created quite the same -- and G-d intended it that way. The perfection of the world in the cosmic sense occurs when every human being, using his own unique nature and personality, devotes himself wholeheartedly to G-d. Every one of us has his or her own unique contribution to make. There is something special about each and every one of us (as we all know in our hearts), something we can offer to G-d which literally no one else can. G-d is not interested in only the few serving Him -- only the scholarly or the pious, and not even that Israel alone serve Him. Every human being, formed in the image o f G-d, must cleave to G-d in his or her own fashion. And when this occurs, the world over becomes a place of beauty, G-dliness and diversity.
The Mishna (Sanhedrin 4:5) offers a number of reasons why G-d decreed that all mankind be descended from a single set of parents (Adam and Eve). One reason is to show the greatness of G-d. If a human being creates many copies of a coin from a single mold, each will turn out exactly alike. G-d, on the other hand, using the hidden wisdom of DNA, as well as heterosexual reproduction, created all of humanity from one set of parents and yet no two people are alike. Therefore, concludes the mishna, everyone is obligated to say, "For me was the world created." I have something to offer which no one else can give.
(Another reason offered by the mishna is in order that we would all feel we're related and so would get along better. The Talmud there (38a) adds dryly that if things are so bad now, how much worse would it have been had we not shared a common ancestry...)
G-d in his infinite wisdom saw to it that no two people are alike. And this is for the reason above: G-d does not want all of us serving Him in the exact same manner. He is not interested in 7 billion carbon copies of one another. He made each of us unique. We must discover our own individuality, direct it towards the G-d who fashioned us, and transform the world into a place of beauty, harmony and diversity.
Thursday, May 31, 2012
winter is a time for seclusion??
http://lancasterfarmacy.blogspot.com/2011/03/winter-time-to-be-outdoors.html
Who says winter is a time for seclusion, slumber, and consumption?
The foxes are on the side of the fields hugging the brush as they hurriedly scamper about looking for an unsuspecting meadow vole or some other source of energy. The snow geese happily honk in unison as they search for any sign of unfrozen water. The wind is painting with a paintbrush of tiny dried goldenrod flowers creating long arcing shapes in the white fluffy crystals. Reflecting on the growing season we share a warming dried tea blend of lavender, chamomile, and chaga. A biting numbing cold blows across the meadow. Coyote tracks crisscross through the frozen ponds and disappear into the cattail marsh. This is the coldest season of the year. A time for identifying the unique dried shapes of winter wildflowers, a time when wood frogs freeze solid, a time for hibernation, a time for trees to sleep, a time for harnessing our inner strength to destroy the confines of our domestication. We are animals. We are humans. We have unnatural laws, rules, sexual numbness, monetary struggles, addiction, hate, substance abuse, words that hurt, looks that kill. We have the luxury of consumption, this is one of our “luxuries” that keep us blind to the natural ways of the world. We are animals. We can harness our inner desires and create a world our grandchildren will be proud of. Our reclaimed wildness will comfort the earth and her beings. This is healing, for ourselves, others, and the planet. We are animals.
Teasel:Dipsacus Sylvestris
A biennial that can grow over 7ft tall. With a very large egg shaped spiky flower head it looms above other dried plants and remains strong during harsh winds.The flower essence has been used to treat Lyme disease. Teasel root helps you with joint and tendon issues, muscle pain and inflammation. We look forward to making a teasel tincture this summer.
Yarrow:Achillea Millefolium
AKA Natures Stitches... We decided to forgo the flower head and focus on these wondrous dried lacy leaves that are clinging onto the stalk. We pulled one out of the ground to admire and found some small green leaves that were hiding under the snow. We ate every last green leaf at the base of the stalk that we could find, reminiscing its bitterness.
Mullein: Verbascum Thapsus
This spike that forms in its second year holds hundreds of seeds. Mullein a useful plant for healing burns, swelling, and ear problems can grow over 6 feet. The whole plant has a woolly like texture over the stalk and leaves. Hummingbirds have been known to use this "wool" to line their nests and native americans stuffed their moccasins with the felt textured leaves. Notice these majestic stalks along roadways, abandoned lots, and meadows...
Who says winter is a time for seclusion, slumber, and consumption?
The foxes are on the side of the fields hugging the brush as they hurriedly scamper about looking for an unsuspecting meadow vole or some other source of energy. The snow geese happily honk in unison as they search for any sign of unfrozen water. The wind is painting with a paintbrush of tiny dried goldenrod flowers creating long arcing shapes in the white fluffy crystals. Reflecting on the growing season we share a warming dried tea blend of lavender, chamomile, and chaga. A biting numbing cold blows across the meadow. Coyote tracks crisscross through the frozen ponds and disappear into the cattail marsh. This is the coldest season of the year. A time for identifying the unique dried shapes of winter wildflowers, a time when wood frogs freeze solid, a time for hibernation, a time for trees to sleep, a time for harnessing our inner strength to destroy the confines of our domestication. We are animals. We are humans. We have unnatural laws, rules, sexual numbness, monetary struggles, addiction, hate, substance abuse, words that hurt, looks that kill. We have the luxury of consumption, this is one of our “luxuries” that keep us blind to the natural ways of the world. We are animals. We can harness our inner desires and create a world our grandchildren will be proud of. Our reclaimed wildness will comfort the earth and her beings. This is healing, for ourselves, others, and the planet. We are animals.
Teasel:Dipsacus Sylvestris
A biennial that can grow over 7ft tall. With a very large egg shaped spiky flower head it looms above other dried plants and remains strong during harsh winds.The flower essence has been used to treat Lyme disease. Teasel root helps you with joint and tendon issues, muscle pain and inflammation. We look forward to making a teasel tincture this summer.
Yarrow:Achillea Millefolium
AKA Natures Stitches... We decided to forgo the flower head and focus on these wondrous dried lacy leaves that are clinging onto the stalk. We pulled one out of the ground to admire and found some small green leaves that were hiding under the snow. We ate every last green leaf at the base of the stalk that we could find, reminiscing its bitterness.
Mullein: Verbascum Thapsus
This spike that forms in its second year holds hundreds of seeds. Mullein a useful plant for healing burns, swelling, and ear problems can grow over 6 feet. The whole plant has a woolly like texture over the stalk and leaves. Hummingbirds have been known to use this "wool" to line their nests and native americans stuffed their moccasins with the felt textured leaves. Notice these majestic stalks along roadways, abandoned lots, and meadows...
The sleep before Mattan Torah
http://sn111w.snt111.mail.live.com/default.aspx#!/mail/InboxLight.aspx?n=345730396!n=1014990120&fid=1&fav=1&mid=df9a0e41-a5fa-11e1-9993-00215ad9bd52&fv=1
Shavous
Print this Page
Based on the teachings of the Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem M. Schneerson
Preparing for Mattan Torah
The Midrash says1 that the Jewish people slept the entire night before Mattan Torah, the giving of the Torah. They did so, because the "sleep of Shavuos is sweet and the night is short." Moreover, the Midrash goes on to state: "on that night, even fleas did not bite them."
The Midrash concludes that when G-d came at dawn and found the people asleep, it was necessary to rouse them. This is the meaning of G-d's query:2 "Why did I arrive and no one was there? I called, and nobody answered."
Our Sages inform us3 that when the Jewish people heard that, 50 days after their departure from Egypt, they would receive the Torah, they became filled with an intense desire to acquire it. They therefore began counting the days that remained until the Torah would be given.
Bearing in mind that, seven weeks prior to Mattan Torah, the Jews were already extremely impatient to receive it, we can imagine how much greater was their yearning on the night before it was given. This being so, how was it even possible for them to sleep, let alone sleep so soundly?
This leads us to the conclusion that their going to sleep on that night was not, G-d forbid, because they ceased thinking about the Torah, but quite the contrary, that going to sleep that night served to prepare them in some way to receive it.
Additional proof that this was indeed so can be adduced from the fact that the fleas did not bite them that night. If going to sleep constituted a lack of interest in receiving the Torah, G-d would not have kept the fleas from biting.
How was their going to sleep a preparation for receiving the Torah?
The Alter Rebbe writes4 that no matter how great a soul's comprehension of and union with G-dliness while clothed in a body, it can in no way compare to the soul's cleaving to G-d prior to its descent, when it was unencumbered by a physical body. For the body is simply incapable of experiencing such holiness.
When a person sleeps, the major portion of his soul leaves his body and ascends above.5 The soul of a sleeper can therefore attain much greater levels of spiritual comprehension.
This is why the Jews went to sleep just prior to Mattan Torah : They wanted their souls to attain greater spiritual heights. The Jewish people thought that this intense spiritual elevation would be the best possible preparation for the tremendous revelation they would soon be receiving from above.
Their good intentions notwithstanding, G-d was displeased with their going to sleep, for they should have prepared for Mattan Torah in another manner:
The unique accomplishment of Mattan Torah - as opposed to mitzvos performed before the Torah was given - was that the mitzvos a Jew performed afterwards refined and elevated the objects with which they were performed; the objects themselves became holy. It is specifically by working with the physical and refining one's physical body and surroundings that one attains union with G-d's Essence,6 something that cannot be accomplished by the soul alone.
Since Mattan Torah served to enhance the spiritual service of a soul within a body, it follows that the preparation for receiving the Torah should have been in a like manner; not a flight from the body, but rather an effort within the framework of a corporeal soul.
Based on Likkutei Sichos, Vol. IV, pp. 1024-1027
FOOTNOTES
1. Shir HaShirim Rabbah 1:12.
2. Yeshayahu 50:2.
3. See Shibolei HaLeket, HaArugah HaSheminis, Seder Atzeres 236; Ran conclusion of Pesachim.
4. Tanya, ch. 37.
5. Bereishis Rabbah 14:9.
6. See Tanya, ch. 35ff.
Shavous
Print this Page
Based on the teachings of the Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem M. Schneerson
Preparing for Mattan Torah
The Midrash says1 that the Jewish people slept the entire night before Mattan Torah, the giving of the Torah. They did so, because the "sleep of Shavuos is sweet and the night is short." Moreover, the Midrash goes on to state: "on that night, even fleas did not bite them."
The Midrash concludes that when G-d came at dawn and found the people asleep, it was necessary to rouse them. This is the meaning of G-d's query:2 "Why did I arrive and no one was there? I called, and nobody answered."
Our Sages inform us3 that when the Jewish people heard that, 50 days after their departure from Egypt, they would receive the Torah, they became filled with an intense desire to acquire it. They therefore began counting the days that remained until the Torah would be given.
Bearing in mind that, seven weeks prior to Mattan Torah, the Jews were already extremely impatient to receive it, we can imagine how much greater was their yearning on the night before it was given. This being so, how was it even possible for them to sleep, let alone sleep so soundly?
This leads us to the conclusion that their going to sleep on that night was not, G-d forbid, because they ceased thinking about the Torah, but quite the contrary, that going to sleep that night served to prepare them in some way to receive it.
Additional proof that this was indeed so can be adduced from the fact that the fleas did not bite them that night. If going to sleep constituted a lack of interest in receiving the Torah, G-d would not have kept the fleas from biting.
How was their going to sleep a preparation for receiving the Torah?
The Alter Rebbe writes4 that no matter how great a soul's comprehension of and union with G-dliness while clothed in a body, it can in no way compare to the soul's cleaving to G-d prior to its descent, when it was unencumbered by a physical body. For the body is simply incapable of experiencing such holiness.
When a person sleeps, the major portion of his soul leaves his body and ascends above.5 The soul of a sleeper can therefore attain much greater levels of spiritual comprehension.
This is why the Jews went to sleep just prior to Mattan Torah : They wanted their souls to attain greater spiritual heights. The Jewish people thought that this intense spiritual elevation would be the best possible preparation for the tremendous revelation they would soon be receiving from above.
Their good intentions notwithstanding, G-d was displeased with their going to sleep, for they should have prepared for Mattan Torah in another manner:
The unique accomplishment of Mattan Torah - as opposed to mitzvos performed before the Torah was given - was that the mitzvos a Jew performed afterwards refined and elevated the objects with which they were performed; the objects themselves became holy. It is specifically by working with the physical and refining one's physical body and surroundings that one attains union with G-d's Essence,6 something that cannot be accomplished by the soul alone.
Since Mattan Torah served to enhance the spiritual service of a soul within a body, it follows that the preparation for receiving the Torah should have been in a like manner; not a flight from the body, but rather an effort within the framework of a corporeal soul.
Based on Likkutei Sichos, Vol. IV, pp. 1024-1027
FOOTNOTES
1. Shir HaShirim Rabbah 1:12.
2. Yeshayahu 50:2.
3. See Shibolei HaLeket, HaArugah HaSheminis, Seder Atzeres 236; Ran conclusion of Pesachim.
4. Tanya, ch. 37.
5. Bereishis Rabbah 14:9.
6. See Tanya, ch. 35ff.
Porajmos,etc
Newly arrived Romanies at the Belzec concentration camp in 1940.During World War II, the Nazis murdered 220,000 to 1,500,000 Romanies in an attempted genocide referred to as the Porajmos.[34] Like the Jews, they were sentenced to forced labor and imprisonment in concentration camps. They were often killed on sight, especially by the Einsatzgruppen on the Eastern Front.
Post-war history This unreferenced section requires citations to ensure verifiability.
In Communist central and eastern Europe, Romanies experienced assimilation schemes and restrictions of cultural freedom. The Romani language and Romani music were banned from public performance in Bulgaria. In Czechoslovakia, tens of thousands of Romanies from Slovakia, Hungary and Romania were re-settled in border areas of Czech lands and their nomadic lifestyle was forbidden. In Czechoslovakia, where they were labeled as a “socially degraded stratum,” Romani women were sterilized as part of a state policy to reduce their population. This policy was implemented with large financial incentives, threats of denying future social welfare payments, misinformation, and involuntary sterilization.[35]
In the early 1990s, Germany deported tens of thousands of migrants to central and eastern Europe. Sixty percent of some 100,000 Romanian nationals deported under a 1992 treaty were Romani.
During the 1990s and early 21st century many Romanies from central and eastern Europe attempted to migrate to western Europe or Canada. The majority of them were turned back. Several of these countries established strict visa requirements to prevent further migration.
In 2005, the Decade of Roma Inclusion was launched in nine Central and Southeastern European countries to improve the socio-economic status and social inclusion of the Romani minority across the region.
America
Romanies began immigrating to the United States in colonial times, with small groups in Virginia and French Louisiana. Larger-scale immigration began in the 1860s, with groups of Romnichal from Britain. The largest number immigrated in the early 20th century, mainly from the Vlax group of Kalderash. Many Romanies also settled in other countries of the Americas.
Czech-Canadian Exodus
In August 1997, TV Nova, a popular television station in the Czech Republic, broadcast a documentary on the situation of Romanies who had emigrated to Canada.[36] The short report portrayed Romanies in Canada living comfortably with support from the state, and sheltered from racial discrimination and violence.[37] At the time, life was particularly difficult for many Romanies living in the Czech Republic. As a result of the dissolution of Czechoslovakia, many Romanies were left without citizenship in either the Czech Republic or Slovakia.[38] Following the large flood in Moravia in July, many Romanies were left homeless yet unwelcome in other parts of the country.[36]
Almost overnight, there were reports of Romanies preparing to emigrate to Canada. According to one report, 5,000 Romani from the city of Ostrava intended to move. Mayors in some Czech towns encouraged the exodus, offering to help pay for flights so that Romanies could leave. The following week, the Canadian Embassy in Prague was receiving hundreds of calls a day from Romanies and flights between the Czech Republic and Canada were sold out until October.[36] In 1997, 1,285 people from the Czech Republic arrived in Canada and claimed refugee status, a rather significant jump from the 189 Czechs who did so the previous year.[38]
Lucie Cermakova, a spokesperson at the Canadian Embassy in Prague, criticized the program, claiming it "presented only one side of the matter and picked out only nonsensical ideas." Marie Jurkovicova, a spokesperson for the Czech Embassy in Ottawa suggested that "the program was full of half-truths, which strongly distorted reality and practically invited the exodus of large groups of Czech Romanies. It concealed a number of facts."[36]
President Václav Havel and (after some hesitation) Prime Minister Václav Klaus attempted to convince the Romanies not to leave. With the help of Romani leaders like Emil Scuka, Chairman of the Roma Civic Initiative, they urged Romanies to remain in country and work to solve their problems with the larger Czech population.
The movement of Romanies to Canada had been fairly easy because visa requirements for Czech citizens had been lifted by the Canadian government in April 1996. In response to the influx of Romanies, the Canadian government reinstated the visa requirements for all Czechs as of October 8, 1997.
Romani Nationalism
Flag of the Romani peopleRoma nationalism has become an increasingly significant movement in Roma politics.
The first World Romani Congress was organized in 1971 near London, funded in part by the World Council of Churches and the Government of India. It was attended by representatives from India and 20 other countries. At the congress, the green and blue flag from the 1933 conference, embellished with the red, sixteen-spoked chakra, was reaffirmed as the national emblem of the Romani people, and the anthem, "Gelem, Gelem" was adopted.
The International Romani Union was officially established in 1977, and in 1990, the fourth World Congress declared April 8 to be International Day of the Roma, a day to celebrate Romani culture and raise awareness of the issues facing the Romani community.
The 5th World Romany Congress in 2000 issued an official declaration of the Romany non-territorial nation.
Timeline of Romani historyFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaJump to: navigation, search The Romani people have long been a part of the collective mythology of the West, where they were (and very often still are) depicted as outsiders, aliens, and a threat. For centuries they were enslaved in Eastern Europe and hunted in Western Europe: the Pořajmos, Hitler's attempt at genocide, was one violent link in a chain of persecution that encompassed countries generally considered more tolerant of minorities, such as the United Kingdom and Denmark. Even today, while there is a surge of Romani self-identification and pride, restrictive measures are being debated and passed by democratic states to curb the rights of the Romani people.
It is generally thought that the Romanies, because they had no written language until relatively recently, have origins obscured by some mythical past. Although there are many unanswered questions, much more is known about the Romanies than is assumed. The greater problem in attempting a comprehensive history of the Romanies is their distribution, not only throughout Europe, but also in the Middle East and the Americas. In each region, Romani history diverged, depending on the attitudes of the host population. For instance, although slavery and serfdom are key themes in the history of Roma in the Eastern Europe, other forms of persecution, including early forms of genocide, are preponderant in Western Europe.
What is not often considered is how the implications of this shatter traditional myths about the Romanies. For example, Romanies are considered to be nomadic, which was largely true in Western Europe; however, the fact that they were slaves and serfs in the Balkans since at least the 15th century (and until the late 19th century) implies that they were settled. In other words, their actual status in Romania contradicts the mythological associations of Romanies with nomadism prevalent (and not without basis) in Brit
WILL POST EARLY ROMANI HISTORY
1526: Henry VIII expels the Romanies from England. Romanies caught entering England are to be punished with death.
1530: Egyptians Act 1530 passed in England.
1538: Portugal expels Romanies to Brazil.
1560: In Sweden, the Lutheran Church forbids any dealings with Romanies.
1563: Romanies are denied entrance into the priesthood by the Council of Trent.
1589: Denmark imposes a death sentence on any Romani caught in the country.
1595: Ştefan Răzvan, son of a Romani immigrant from the Ottoman Empire, rules Moldavia for four months.
1619: Philip III of Spain orders all Romanies to settle down and abandon their traditional lifestyle and culture. Failure to do so is punishable by death.
1936-1945: Nazis begin systematic persecution of Romanies, that culminated in the killing of 500,000 to 1,500,000 Romanies in what is called Porajmos, the Romani Holocaust.
2006: University of Manchester completes its "Romani project", the first morphological study aiming to collect all the dialects of Romani language throughout Europe and dealing with their coherency. [1]
2006: The first entirely Romani party is founded in Hungary, called the "MCF Roma összefogás" (MCF Union of the Roma), although they managed only 0.08% of total votes at the parliamentary elections held on April 9, 2006. [2]
2010: In July 2010, French President Nicolas Sarkozy began a systematic deportation campaign against the Romani. His targets are Romanian and Bulgarian Roma. Critics of the Sarkozy regime consider the deportations as a diversionary tactic to reduce attention on threats to French social benefits. The United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination expressed concern the deportations are evidence of growing racism and xenophobia in France.
2011: On September 1, 2011, a Romani academy of arts and sciences was founded in Belgrade to promote, organize, and disseminate research into Romani culture, language, and history. The academy has 21 regular members, including prominent Romani academics and public figures from 11 European countries, India, and the United States. There are 13 honorary members, which have included former Czech President Václav Havel. The academy was co-founded by Rajko Đurić, a Serbian Romani writer and academic who is also its first president, and received initial supporting funds from the German Heinrich Böll Foundation. [3
Romani Nationalism
Flag of the Romani peopleRoma nationalism has become an increasingly significant movement in Roma politics.
The first World Romani Congress was organized in 1971 near London, funded in part by the World Council of Churches and the Government of India. It was attended by representatives from India and 20 other countries. At the congress, the green and blue flag from the 1933 conference, embellished with the red, sixteen-spoked chakra, was reaffirmed as the national emblem of the Romani people, and the anthem, "Gelem, Gelem" was adopted.
The International Romani Union was officially established in 1977, and in 1990, the fourth World Congress declared April 8 to be International Day of the Roma, a day to celebrate Romani culture and raise awareness of the issues facing the Romani community.
The 5th World Romany Congress in 2000 issued an official declaration of the Romany non-territorial nation.
References
Turner, Ralph L. (1926) The Position of Romani in Indo-Aryan. In: Journal of the Gypsy Lore Society 3rd Ser. 5/4, pp. 145–188.
Donald Kenrick (1993) From India to the Mediterranean: the migration of the Gypsies. Paris: Gypsy Research Centre (University René Descartes).
Marushiakova, Elena and Vesselin Popov. Gypsies in the Ottoman Empire. Hatfield: University of Hertfordshire Press, 2001.
Will Guy (2001) Between past and future: the Roma of Central and Eastern Europe. Hatfield, Hertfordshire, UK: University of Hertfordshire Press.
Isabel Fonseca (1996) Bury me standing: the Gypsies and their journey New York: Vintage Books.
Ian Hancock (1987) The pariah syndrome: an account of gypsy slavery and persecution. Ann Arbor: Karoma Publishers.
Deyan D. Kolev (2004) Shaping modern identities: social and ethnic changes in Gypsy community in Bulgaria during the Communist period. Budapest: CEU Press.
Michael Burleigh (1996) Confronting the Nazi past: new debates on modern German history. London: Collins & Brown.
Guenter Lewy (2000) The Nazi persecution of the Gypsies. New York: Oxford University Press.
Harish K. Thakur (2008)Silent Flows Danube, New Delhi: Radha Publications
Notes1.^
Fraser, Angus (1995-02-01). Gypsies (Peoples of Europe) (2nd ed.). Blackwell, Oxford. ISBN 978-0-631-19605-1.
2.^ Cf. Ralph L. Turner, A comparative dictionary of the Indo-Aryan languages, p. 314. London: Oxford University Press, 1962-6.
3.^ Hancock, Ian. Ame Sam e Rromane Džene/We are the Romani people. p. 13. ISBN 1-902806-19-0.
4.^ Mayall, David. Gypsy identities, 1500–2000: from ... - Google Books. Books.google.co.uk. ISBN 978-1-85728-960-2. http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=jHllbAvjX_gC&pg=PA122&lpg=PA122&dq=JAT+AND+GYPSY+CONNECTION&source=bl&ots=IcyVr9AI41&sig=wDQjHS_FMkG2YFi7yEKHWKmrdEY&hl=en&ei=r_tASp3cHtGZjAfmltyQCQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3. Retrieved 2009-08-09.
5.^ Saul, Nicholas; Tebbutt, Susan. The role of the Romanies: images and ... - Google Books. Books.google.co.uk. ISBN 978-0-85323-679-5. http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=KNVhLzzIcCEC&pg=PA94&lpg=PA94&dq=JAT+AND+GYPSY+genetic&source=bl&ots=EVMH52uVF6&sig=D546esHN3VmtG-6bObsE_f7oKsU&hl=en&ei=1fxASvTLOqS8jAfYjL2QCQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=7. Retrieved 2009-08-09.
6.^ "ROMANI Project - Manchester". Romani.humanities.manchester.ac.uk. http://romani.humanities.manchester.ac.uk/db/bibliography/index.html?cat=19. Retrieved 2009-08-09.
7.^ Hancock, Ian. Ame Sam e Rromane Džene/We are the Romani people. p. 13. ISBN 1-902806-19-0
8.^ "The search with the Jat Sikhs and Jats of Haryana most frequent haplotypes resulted no matches in Romani populations.". Fsijournal.org. http://www.fsijournal.org/article/S0379-0738(06)00523-8/abstract?articleId=S1872-4973%2807%2900046-4&articleTitle=Y+chromosome+haplotype+reference+database+%28YHRD%29%3A+Update&citedBy=false&medlinePmidWithoutMDLNPrefix=&overridingDateRestriction=&related=true&restrictdesc_author=&restrictDescription=&restrictterm_author=&search=&search_area=platform&search_currenturl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fsigenetics.com%2Farticle%2FPIIS1872497307000464%2Frelated&search_datecombo=&search_dateradio=combo&search_doi=&search_federated=no&search_hits=13073&search_id=&search_issue=&search_medline=no&search_monthendcombo=&search_monthstartcombo=&search_operator1=&search_operator2=&search_preview=no&search_query=Related+to%3A+Y+chromosome+haplotype+reference+database+%28YHRD%29%3A+Update&search_reqcount=20&search_reqfirst=1&search_sort=relevance&search_source=All+Periodicals&search_startpage=&search_text1=&search_text2=&search_text3=&search_text4=&search_volume=&search_within1=&search_within2=&search_within3=&search_wordsexactly=yes&search_yearend=&search_yearstart=&searchDisciplineField=all&select1=relevance&select1=relevance&select2=no&select2=no&select3=20&select3=20&terms1=&terms2=&terms3=. Retrieved 2009-08-09.
9.^ http://www.leeds.ac.uk/media/press_releases/current09/glaucoma.htm Leeds University Press Release
10.^ Shastri, Vagish (2007). Migration of Aryans from India. Varanasi: Yogic Voice Consciousness Institute.
11.^ Johann Christian Christoph Rüdiger. "On the Indic Language and Origin of the Gypsies" (PDF). http://www.llc.manchester.ac.uk/Research/Projects/romani/downloads/1/ruediger_translation.pdf.
12.^ Halwachs, Dieter W. (2004-04-21). "Romani - An Attempting Overview". http://romani.uni-graz.at/romani/ling/rom_gen.en.shtml. Retrieved 2007-08-26.
13.^ Gray, R.D. and Atkinson, Q.D.. "Language-tree divergence times support the Anatolian theory of Indo-European origin" (PDF). http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v426/n6965/pdf/nature02029.pdf.
14.^ Christina Wells (2003-11-13). "Introduction to Gypsies". University of North Texas. http://www.comm.unt.edu/histofperf/christiwells/topic_one.htm. Retrieved 2007-08-26.
15.^ "What is Domari?". http://romani.humanities.manchester.ac.uk/files/21_domari.shtml. Retrieved 2008-07-23
16.^ "ON ROMANI ORIGINS AND IDENTITY". http://www.radoc.net/radoc.php?doc=art_b_history_origins&lang=en&articles=true. Retrieved 2008-07-23
17.^ after Ian Hancock, On Romani Origins and Identity, RADOC (2007)[1]
18.^ a b Kalaydjieva, L.; Morar, B; Chaix, R. and Tang, H. (2005). "A Newly Discovered Founder Population: The Roma/Gypsies". BioEssays 27 (10): 1084–1094. DOI:10.1002/bies.20287. PMID 16163730.
19.^ Malyarchuk, B.A; Grzybowski, T; Derenko, M.V; Czarny, J. and Miscicka-Slivvka, D. (2006) (2006). "Mitochondrial DNA Diversity in the Polish Roma". Annals of Human Genetics 70 (Pt 2): 195–206. DOI:10.1111/j.1529-8817.2005.00222.x. PMID 16626330.
20.^ a b c "Mutation history of the Roma-Gypsies". http://lib.bioinfo.pl/pmid:15322984. Retrieved 2008-06-16
21.^ a b Kalaydjieva, Luba; Gresham, D; Calafell, F (2001). "Genetic studies of the Roma (Gypsies): A review". BMC Medical Genetics 2: 5. DOI:10.1186/1471-2350-2-5. PMC 31389. PMID 11299048. http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2350/2/5. Retrieved 2008-06-16.
22.^ http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2350/2/5/figure/F4
23.^ a b Gresham, D; Morar, B; Underhill, PA; Passarino, G; Lin, AA; Wise, C; Angelicheva, D; Calafell, F et al. (2001). "Origins and Divergence of the Roma (Gypsies)". American Journal of Human Genetics 69 (6): 1314–31. DOI:10.1086/324681. PMC 1235543. PMID 11704928. //www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pmcentrez&artid=1235543. Retrieved 2008-06-16
24.^ The Eurasian Heartland: A continental perspective on Y-chromosome diversity, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.
25.^ Jatt mutation found in Romani populations
26.^ Searching for the origin of Romanies http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=18768723
27.^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Donald Kenrick, "Historical Dictionary of the Gypsies (Romanies)," Second Edition, Scarecrow Press, 2007.
28.^ Indian studies
29.^ Gypsy Culture
30.^ Bright Balkan morning: Romani lives & the power of music in Greek Macedonia, Charles Keil et al, 2002, p.108
31.^ The Gypsies, Angus M. Fraser, 1995, pp.50-51
32.^ Pitts, M. (2006) DNA Surprise: Romani in England 440 years too early. British Archaeology 89 (July/August): 9
33.^ a b c Norman Davies (1996). Europe: A History. pp. 387–388. ISBN 0-19-820171-0.
34.^ ROMANIES AND THE HOLOCAUST: A REEVALUATION AND AN OVERVIEW
35.^ Silverman, Carol. “Persecution and Politicization: Roma (Gypsies) of Eastern Europe.” Cultural Survival Quarterly, Summer 1995. Helsinki Watch. Struggling for Ethnic Identity: Czechoslovakia’s Endangered Gypsies. New York, 1991.
36.^ a b c d The Roma Exodus to Canada, romove.radio.cz
37.^ ERRC Statement Regarding Canada as Haven for Roma, Patrin Web Journal, 17 April 1999
38.^ a b Gypsies in Canada: The Promised Land?, CBC, December 1997
Wednesday, May 30, 2012
What-Makes-a-Jew-Jewish
http://www.chabad.org/therebbe/article_cdo/aid/61957/jewish/What-Makes-a-Jew-Jewish.htm
Share this:
106 Comments
What Makes a Jew "Jewish"?
Adapted from a public talk by the Lubavitcher Rebbe
Question:
Is Judaism a "religion"? Is the term "non-religious Jew" an oxymoron? Can one still be Jewish without observing the edicts and ethos of Torah in one's daily life?
Answer:
Jews defy all conventional definitions of a "people" or "nation." We lack a common race, culture or historical experience. While we all share our eternal rights to the Land of Israel, for all but a few centuries of the last 4,000 years the overwhelming majority of Jews have not lived or even set foot in the Jewish homeland.
Throughout our 3300-year history, what has defined us as Jews is a relationship and commitment. We are Jews because G-d chose us to be His "cherished treasure from all the nations... a kingdom of priests and a holy people" (Exodus 19:5-6). We are Jews because G-d chose us to play the central role in the implementation of His purpose in creation: to orientate our lives in accordance with His will, and to develop a society and world community that reflects His goodness and perfection.
The substance of this relationship, the charter of this commitment, is the Torah. The Torah is G-d's concept of reality as communicated to man, the blueprint that describes the perfected world envisioned by its Creator and details the manner in which the Inventor of Life wishes it to be lived.
This would seem to define our Jewishness as a "religion": we are Jews because we adhere to the beliefs and practices mandated by the Torah. But the Torah itself says that this is not so.
The Torah itself proclaims (Leviticus 16:16) that G-d "dwells amongst them in the midst of their impurities" -- that His relationship with His people remains unaffected regardless of their behavior. In the words of the Talmud (Sanhedrin 44a), "A Jew, although he has transgressed, is a Jew."
According to Torah law, a person's Jewishness is not a matter of life-style or self-perception: one may be totally unaware of one's Jewishness and still be a Jew, or one may consider himself Jewish and observe all the precepts of the Torah and still not be a Jew.
In other words, it is the relationship between the Jew and his Creator that defines his Jewishness -- not his acknowledgment of this relationship or his actualization of it in his daily life. It is not the observance of Torah's mitzvot (Divine "commandments") that makes him a Jew, but the commitment that the mitzvot represent.
The Essence of a Transgression
This is the deeper significance of the axiom, "A Jew, although he has transgressed, is a Jew."
The simple meaning of these words is that a Jew is still a Jew despite his transgressions. But on a deeper level, it is because he has transgressed that he is a Jew. A non-Jew who eats chametz (leavened bread) on Passover has done nothing wrong; likewise, his eating matzah on the Seder night has no moral or spiritual significance. But for a Jew, the mitzvot of Passover are a component of his relationship with G-d: by observing them he is realizing this relationship and extending it to his daily life; if he violates them, G-d forbid, he is transgressing -- he is acting contrary to the commitment which defines his identity. Thus, in a certain sense, the fact of a Jew's transgression is no less an expression (albeit a negative one) of his relationship with G-d than his observance of a mitzvah.
Indeed, the Hebrew word mitzvah means both "commandment" and "connection." The relationship between the word's two meanings can also be understood on two levels. On the behavioral level, we connect to G-d through our fulfillment of His commandments. On a deeper level, we are inexorably connected to Him by virtue of the fact that He chose us as the object of His commandments. Obviously, these two levels of connection are two sides of the same coin, being the inner and outer faces of the same truth: our observance of the mitzvot is the manifestation, in our daily lives, of the intrinsic bond between G-d and Israel.
The Six-Dimensional Link
The Zohar, the basic work of the Kabbalah, expresses this concept in the following manner:
There are three connections ('kishrin") that are bound to each other: G-d, the Torah, and Israel --each consisting of a level upon a level, hidden and revealed. There is the hidden aspect of G-d, and the revealed aspect; Torah, too, has both a hidden and a revealed aspect; and so it is with Israel, who also has both a hidden and a revealed aspect.
The Zohar goes on to describe the manner in which the Torah serves as the connecting link between G-d and Israel: how the Torah is one with its Divine Author, and how the Jewish people connect to the Torah through their study and observance of its teachings.
But what are the "hidden" and "revealed" elements of G-d, Torah and Israel? And what is their relevance to our connection to G-d through His Torah?
The Zohar is intimating that these three "connections" are interlinked on two levels, both on a "hidden" and on a "revealed" plane. For each of the three interconnected links possesses both an explicit and an implicit dimension.
There is the so-called "revealed" aspect of G-d -- those expressions of His reality which He chooses to manifest within the created existence; and there is His "hidden" unknowable essence. The Jew, too, has his revealed and manifest self -- the manner in which he expresses himself through his behavior; and his hidden, quintessential self. And the Torah, as outlined above, has both a more pronounced as well as a more implicit significance as the connecting link between G-d and Israel.
On the "hidden" plane, the soul of the Jew is bound to the very essence of G-d through the underlying relationship and commitment which Torah represents. Even if the Jew's life, on the conscious-behavioral level, is inconsistent with the revealed will of the Almighty, s/he is no "less" a Jew, G-d forbid: no matter what, the "hidden" intrinsic bond that defines his Jewishness is unaffected. But in order to express this relationship on all levels of his being, in order to bring his life in line with her essence, the Jew must reiterate the connection on the "revealed" level. This s/he does by studying G-d's Torah and observing its mitzvot.
The Third Juncture
There is, however, another, yet deeper meaning to the Zohar's words.
The above-cited passage speaks of "three connections which are bound to each other." The Aramaic word translated here as "connections" is kishrin, which literally means "knots."
At first glance, this seems to be an inaccurate usage. If Torah is the link between G-d and Israel, then what we have are three entities (G-d, Torah and Israel) linked via two connections (Israel's connection to Torah and the Torah's connection with the Almighty). Where do we have three knots/connections?
This brings us to a second definition of the "hidden" and "revealed" dimensions of the relationship between G-d and Israel. The Midrash states:
Two things preceded G-d's creation of the world: Torah and Israel. Still, I do not know which preceded which. But when Torah states "Speak to the Children of Israel...", "Command the Children of Israel...", and so on, I know that Israel preceded all (Tana D'vei Eliyahu Rabba, chapter 14)
In other words, G-d created the world in order that Israel might implement His Divine plan for existence, as outlined in the Torah. So the concepts of "Israel" and "Torah" both precede the concept of a "world" in the Creator's "mind." Yet which is the more deeply rooted "idea" within the Divine consciousness, Torah or Israel? Does Israel exist so that the Torah be implemented, or does the Torah exist to serve the Jew in the fulfillment of his mission and the expression of his relationship with G-d? If the Torah describes itself as a communication to Israel -- the Midrash is saying -- this presumes the concept of "Israel" as primary to that of "Torah."
This means that G-d's relationship with Israel "pre-dates" (in the conceptual sense) the Torah, for the Torah comes to serve that relationship. In this sense, Israel is the "link" between the Torah and G-d: the Torah's existence as the embodiment of the Divine wisdom and will is a result of Israel's existence and its connection with G-d.
Thus, we have three connections linking G-d, Israel and the Torah:
On the revealed level, the Torah serves as the link between G-d and Israel: the Torah is connected to G-d, and Israel is connected to the Torah. (This includes both levels of connection outlined above -- the connection achieved through the performance of a mitzvah and the connection defined by the commitment itself ).
But on a deeper, more quintessential level, there exists a third connection: the "direct" connection between G-d and His people which precedes the very concept of a Torah. On this level, Israel's involvement in Torah is what connects the Torah to G-d -- what causes Him to extend His infinite and wholly indefinable being into a medium of "Divine wisdom" and "Divine will." On this level, it is not the Jew who needs the Torah in order to be one with G-d, but the Torah who "needs" the Jew to evoke G-d's desire to project Himself via the Torah.
Nevertheless, the Torah is crucial to the Jew's relationship with G-d. The essence of the Jew, as it is rooted within the essence of G-d, is indeed one with its Source. But then it "descends" to become part of the created existence, assuming a distinct identity as a soul and then as a human being. So G-d provided the Jew with His Torah. Through Torah, the Jew touches base with his own quintessential self and makes his intrinsic bond with his Creator a reality in his daily life.
Share this:
106 Comments
What Makes a Jew "Jewish"?
Adapted from a public talk by the Lubavitcher Rebbe
Question:
Is Judaism a "religion"? Is the term "non-religious Jew" an oxymoron? Can one still be Jewish without observing the edicts and ethos of Torah in one's daily life?
Answer:
Jews defy all conventional definitions of a "people" or "nation." We lack a common race, culture or historical experience. While we all share our eternal rights to the Land of Israel, for all but a few centuries of the last 4,000 years the overwhelming majority of Jews have not lived or even set foot in the Jewish homeland.
Throughout our 3300-year history, what has defined us as Jews is a relationship and commitment. We are Jews because G-d chose us to be His "cherished treasure from all the nations... a kingdom of priests and a holy people" (Exodus 19:5-6). We are Jews because G-d chose us to play the central role in the implementation of His purpose in creation: to orientate our lives in accordance with His will, and to develop a society and world community that reflects His goodness and perfection.
The substance of this relationship, the charter of this commitment, is the Torah. The Torah is G-d's concept of reality as communicated to man, the blueprint that describes the perfected world envisioned by its Creator and details the manner in which the Inventor of Life wishes it to be lived.
This would seem to define our Jewishness as a "religion": we are Jews because we adhere to the beliefs and practices mandated by the Torah. But the Torah itself says that this is not so.
The Torah itself proclaims (Leviticus 16:16) that G-d "dwells amongst them in the midst of their impurities" -- that His relationship with His people remains unaffected regardless of their behavior. In the words of the Talmud (Sanhedrin 44a), "A Jew, although he has transgressed, is a Jew."
According to Torah law, a person's Jewishness is not a matter of life-style or self-perception: one may be totally unaware of one's Jewishness and still be a Jew, or one may consider himself Jewish and observe all the precepts of the Torah and still not be a Jew.
In other words, it is the relationship between the Jew and his Creator that defines his Jewishness -- not his acknowledgment of this relationship or his actualization of it in his daily life. It is not the observance of Torah's mitzvot (Divine "commandments") that makes him a Jew, but the commitment that the mitzvot represent.
The Essence of a Transgression
This is the deeper significance of the axiom, "A Jew, although he has transgressed, is a Jew."
The simple meaning of these words is that a Jew is still a Jew despite his transgressions. But on a deeper level, it is because he has transgressed that he is a Jew. A non-Jew who eats chametz (leavened bread) on Passover has done nothing wrong; likewise, his eating matzah on the Seder night has no moral or spiritual significance. But for a Jew, the mitzvot of Passover are a component of his relationship with G-d: by observing them he is realizing this relationship and extending it to his daily life; if he violates them, G-d forbid, he is transgressing -- he is acting contrary to the commitment which defines his identity. Thus, in a certain sense, the fact of a Jew's transgression is no less an expression (albeit a negative one) of his relationship with G-d than his observance of a mitzvah.
Indeed, the Hebrew word mitzvah means both "commandment" and "connection." The relationship between the word's two meanings can also be understood on two levels. On the behavioral level, we connect to G-d through our fulfillment of His commandments. On a deeper level, we are inexorably connected to Him by virtue of the fact that He chose us as the object of His commandments. Obviously, these two levels of connection are two sides of the same coin, being the inner and outer faces of the same truth: our observance of the mitzvot is the manifestation, in our daily lives, of the intrinsic bond between G-d and Israel.
The Six-Dimensional Link
The Zohar, the basic work of the Kabbalah, expresses this concept in the following manner:
There are three connections ('kishrin") that are bound to each other: G-d, the Torah, and Israel --each consisting of a level upon a level, hidden and revealed. There is the hidden aspect of G-d, and the revealed aspect; Torah, too, has both a hidden and a revealed aspect; and so it is with Israel, who also has both a hidden and a revealed aspect.
The Zohar goes on to describe the manner in which the Torah serves as the connecting link between G-d and Israel: how the Torah is one with its Divine Author, and how the Jewish people connect to the Torah through their study and observance of its teachings.
But what are the "hidden" and "revealed" elements of G-d, Torah and Israel? And what is their relevance to our connection to G-d through His Torah?
The Zohar is intimating that these three "connections" are interlinked on two levels, both on a "hidden" and on a "revealed" plane. For each of the three interconnected links possesses both an explicit and an implicit dimension.
There is the so-called "revealed" aspect of G-d -- those expressions of His reality which He chooses to manifest within the created existence; and there is His "hidden" unknowable essence. The Jew, too, has his revealed and manifest self -- the manner in which he expresses himself through his behavior; and his hidden, quintessential self. And the Torah, as outlined above, has both a more pronounced as well as a more implicit significance as the connecting link between G-d and Israel.
On the "hidden" plane, the soul of the Jew is bound to the very essence of G-d through the underlying relationship and commitment which Torah represents. Even if the Jew's life, on the conscious-behavioral level, is inconsistent with the revealed will of the Almighty, s/he is no "less" a Jew, G-d forbid: no matter what, the "hidden" intrinsic bond that defines his Jewishness is unaffected. But in order to express this relationship on all levels of his being, in order to bring his life in line with her essence, the Jew must reiterate the connection on the "revealed" level. This s/he does by studying G-d's Torah and observing its mitzvot.
The Third Juncture
There is, however, another, yet deeper meaning to the Zohar's words.
The above-cited passage speaks of "three connections which are bound to each other." The Aramaic word translated here as "connections" is kishrin, which literally means "knots."
At first glance, this seems to be an inaccurate usage. If Torah is the link between G-d and Israel, then what we have are three entities (G-d, Torah and Israel) linked via two connections (Israel's connection to Torah and the Torah's connection with the Almighty). Where do we have three knots/connections?
This brings us to a second definition of the "hidden" and "revealed" dimensions of the relationship between G-d and Israel. The Midrash states:
Two things preceded G-d's creation of the world: Torah and Israel. Still, I do not know which preceded which. But when Torah states "Speak to the Children of Israel...", "Command the Children of Israel...", and so on, I know that Israel preceded all (Tana D'vei Eliyahu Rabba, chapter 14)
In other words, G-d created the world in order that Israel might implement His Divine plan for existence, as outlined in the Torah. So the concepts of "Israel" and "Torah" both precede the concept of a "world" in the Creator's "mind." Yet which is the more deeply rooted "idea" within the Divine consciousness, Torah or Israel? Does Israel exist so that the Torah be implemented, or does the Torah exist to serve the Jew in the fulfillment of his mission and the expression of his relationship with G-d? If the Torah describes itself as a communication to Israel -- the Midrash is saying -- this presumes the concept of "Israel" as primary to that of "Torah."
This means that G-d's relationship with Israel "pre-dates" (in the conceptual sense) the Torah, for the Torah comes to serve that relationship. In this sense, Israel is the "link" between the Torah and G-d: the Torah's existence as the embodiment of the Divine wisdom and will is a result of Israel's existence and its connection with G-d.
Thus, we have three connections linking G-d, Israel and the Torah:
On the revealed level, the Torah serves as the link between G-d and Israel: the Torah is connected to G-d, and Israel is connected to the Torah. (This includes both levels of connection outlined above -- the connection achieved through the performance of a mitzvah and the connection defined by the commitment itself ).
But on a deeper, more quintessential level, there exists a third connection: the "direct" connection between G-d and His people which precedes the very concept of a Torah. On this level, Israel's involvement in Torah is what connects the Torah to G-d -- what causes Him to extend His infinite and wholly indefinable being into a medium of "Divine wisdom" and "Divine will." On this level, it is not the Jew who needs the Torah in order to be one with G-d, but the Torah who "needs" the Jew to evoke G-d's desire to project Himself via the Torah.
Nevertheless, the Torah is crucial to the Jew's relationship with G-d. The essence of the Jew, as it is rooted within the essence of G-d, is indeed one with its Source. But then it "descends" to become part of the created existence, assuming a distinct identity as a soul and then as a human being. So G-d provided the Jew with His Torah. Through Torah, the Jew touches base with his own quintessential self and makes his intrinsic bond with his Creator a reality in his daily life.
Infallibility & How The Apostles Taught the Study of Sacred Tradition.
http://blackieschurchmilitant-apocalypsis.blogspot.com/2007/08/apostles-taught-study-of-sacred.html
Infallibility & How The Apostles Taught the Study of Sacred Tradition.
Quote:
Originally Asserted by a Non-Catholic:
Any church arrogant enough to claim infallibility is elevating it's self above God and is blasphemy! There are other "churches" that claim to be infallible, how shall I know which one is lying and which one is telling the truth?
I will answer this for you, by reading the bible for myself and letting the Holy Ghost interpret it for me as He does. BTW any church claiming infallability is a false church.
A rant without any support from the Word of God.
And yet Christ Himself promised that assurance of infallibility to His church when He said. 18 And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. 19 And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.Matthew 16.
So then you claim this infallibility for yourself? That is precisely what this statement does, while denying what Our Lord promised to His church and actually attempting to usurp that authority and promise of assurance for yourself. I wouldn't do that. So then you are telling us that you are never wrong? Yet I have already proved you wrong several times in this discussion alone.
By this statement you have logically condemned yourself.
Quote:
Originally Asserted by non-Catholic
2Ti 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
I love this verse! I don't suppose that you've noticed here that St. Paul does not say to St. Timothy. "Study the Bible", or "Study the scriptures", and so based on what this verse says (and the context nowhere changes this...) then sacred Tradition is included in what Paul is telling Timothy to study. In this he would be following the apostles.
Example: (I asked you to look all this up and apparently you dismissed my request, so now I'm going to show you why that was so important.)
Look at these verses from the letter of St. Jude, the next to last book in the New Testament. (You do accept Jude as inspired canon of scripture, right?)
Jude Chapter 1:9: But when the archangel Michael, contending with the devil, disputed about the body of Moses, he did not presume to pronounce a reviling judgment upon him, but said, "The Lord rebuke you."
Where is that found in the Old Testament? Please show me chapter and verse.
Jude Chapter 1:14: It was of these also that Enoch in the seventh generation from Adam prophesied, saying, "Behold, the Lord came with his holy myriads, 15: to execute judgment on all, and to convict all the ungodly of all their deeds of ungodliness which they have committed in such an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things which ungodly sinners have spoken against him."
Where is that in the Old Testament please? Again, I need chapter and verse?
Jude Chapter 1:9: But when the archangel Michael, contending with the devil, disputed about the body of Moses, he did not presume to pronounce a reviling judgment upon him, but said, "The Lord rebuke you."....Jude Chapter 1:14: It was of these also that Enoch in the seventh generation from Adam prophesied, saying, "Behold, the Lord came with his holy myriads, 15: to execute judgment on all, and to convict all the ungodly of all their deeds of ungodliness which they have committed in such an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things which ungodly sinners have spoken against him."
Where is that in the Old Testament please? Again, I need chapter and verse?
Jude Chapter 1:9: But when the archangel Michael, contending with the devil, disputed about the body of Moses, he did not presume to pronounce a reviling judgment upon him, but said, "The Lord rebuke you."....Jude Chapter 1:14: It was of these also that Enoch in the seventh generation from Adam prophesied, saying, "Behold, the Lord came with his holy myriads, 15: to execute judgment on all, and to convict all the ungodly of all their deeds of ungodliness which they have committed in such an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things which ungodly sinners have spoken against him."
2nd Timothy Chapter 3:8: As Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses, so these men also oppose the truth, men of corrupt mind and counterfeit faith;
The first 1st is quoting The Assumption of Moses. Not the Old Testament, yet the apostle Jude quotes it as a fact of belief.
The 2nd is quoting The Book of Enoch. Not the Old Testament, yet the apostle Jude quotes it as a fact of belief.
The 3rd is quoting the Book of Jannes and Jambres and not the Old Testament. (Go ahead and look...their names are nowhere found in the OT!), yet here again...St. Paul refers to something as fact that is not stated in the inspired canon. So then... he is clearly telling Timothy to study both scripture and traditional sources, since that is clearly shown here as apostolic practice.
So much for the idea that the apostles taught Sola Scriptura.
Quote:
Originally Asserted by non-Catholic
You see it all the time. People don't agree on everything, even within any church, including your catholic church. At the same time, if you go to the same source of truth (the bible) and study it though the Holy Spirit, you can understand no matter who you are.
If this were actually true then all faithful believers would hold the exact same doctrines and beliefs...but that is not so among n-Cs, though with in the Catholic Church one single authority is acknowledged and there is indeed one authoritative and knowledgeable source of doctrinal interpretation.
Your comments that some Catholics might dissent or disagree does not indict that infallible authority in faith and morals but instead indicts the consciences of those who dissent or oppose those teachings.
Infallibility & How The Apostles Taught the Study of Sacred Tradition.
Quote:
Originally Asserted by a Non-Catholic:
Any church arrogant enough to claim infallibility is elevating it's self above God and is blasphemy! There are other "churches" that claim to be infallible, how shall I know which one is lying and which one is telling the truth?
I will answer this for you, by reading the bible for myself and letting the Holy Ghost interpret it for me as He does. BTW any church claiming infallability is a false church.
A rant without any support from the Word of God.
And yet Christ Himself promised that assurance of infallibility to His church when He said. 18 And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. 19 And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.Matthew 16.
So then you claim this infallibility for yourself? That is precisely what this statement does, while denying what Our Lord promised to His church and actually attempting to usurp that authority and promise of assurance for yourself. I wouldn't do that. So then you are telling us that you are never wrong? Yet I have already proved you wrong several times in this discussion alone.
By this statement you have logically condemned yourself.
Quote:
Originally Asserted by non-Catholic
2Ti 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
I love this verse! I don't suppose that you've noticed here that St. Paul does not say to St. Timothy. "Study the Bible", or "Study the scriptures", and so based on what this verse says (and the context nowhere changes this...) then sacred Tradition is included in what Paul is telling Timothy to study. In this he would be following the apostles.
Example: (I asked you to look all this up and apparently you dismissed my request, so now I'm going to show you why that was so important.)
Look at these verses from the letter of St. Jude, the next to last book in the New Testament. (You do accept Jude as inspired canon of scripture, right?)
Jude Chapter 1:9: But when the archangel Michael, contending with the devil, disputed about the body of Moses, he did not presume to pronounce a reviling judgment upon him, but said, "The Lord rebuke you."
Where is that found in the Old Testament? Please show me chapter and verse.
Jude Chapter 1:14: It was of these also that Enoch in the seventh generation from Adam prophesied, saying, "Behold, the Lord came with his holy myriads, 15: to execute judgment on all, and to convict all the ungodly of all their deeds of ungodliness which they have committed in such an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things which ungodly sinners have spoken against him."
Where is that in the Old Testament please? Again, I need chapter and verse?
Jude Chapter 1:9: But when the archangel Michael, contending with the devil, disputed about the body of Moses, he did not presume to pronounce a reviling judgment upon him, but said, "The Lord rebuke you."....Jude Chapter 1:14: It was of these also that Enoch in the seventh generation from Adam prophesied, saying, "Behold, the Lord came with his holy myriads, 15: to execute judgment on all, and to convict all the ungodly of all their deeds of ungodliness which they have committed in such an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things which ungodly sinners have spoken against him."
Where is that in the Old Testament please? Again, I need chapter and verse?
Jude Chapter 1:9: But when the archangel Michael, contending with the devil, disputed about the body of Moses, he did not presume to pronounce a reviling judgment upon him, but said, "The Lord rebuke you."....Jude Chapter 1:14: It was of these also that Enoch in the seventh generation from Adam prophesied, saying, "Behold, the Lord came with his holy myriads, 15: to execute judgment on all, and to convict all the ungodly of all their deeds of ungodliness which they have committed in such an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things which ungodly sinners have spoken against him."
2nd Timothy Chapter 3:8: As Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses, so these men also oppose the truth, men of corrupt mind and counterfeit faith;
The first 1st is quoting The Assumption of Moses. Not the Old Testament, yet the apostle Jude quotes it as a fact of belief.
The 2nd is quoting The Book of Enoch. Not the Old Testament, yet the apostle Jude quotes it as a fact of belief.
The 3rd is quoting the Book of Jannes and Jambres and not the Old Testament. (Go ahead and look...their names are nowhere found in the OT!), yet here again...St. Paul refers to something as fact that is not stated in the inspired canon. So then... he is clearly telling Timothy to study both scripture and traditional sources, since that is clearly shown here as apostolic practice.
So much for the idea that the apostles taught Sola Scriptura.
Quote:
Originally Asserted by non-Catholic
You see it all the time. People don't agree on everything, even within any church, including your catholic church. At the same time, if you go to the same source of truth (the bible) and study it though the Holy Spirit, you can understand no matter who you are.
If this were actually true then all faithful believers would hold the exact same doctrines and beliefs...but that is not so among n-Cs, though with in the Catholic Church one single authority is acknowledged and there is indeed one authoritative and knowledgeable source of doctrinal interpretation.
Your comments that some Catholics might dissent or disagree does not indict that infallible authority in faith and morals but instead indicts the consciences of those who dissent or oppose those teachings.
Extra Biblical truths
http://blackieschurchmilitant-apocalypsis.blogspot.com/2012/03/does-bible-teach-that-everything-that.html
Does the Bible teach that everything that we believe and practice has to be found in its pages?
A Catholic buddy of mine offered this list as a start...
Hmmm...things non-Catholics believe that are not in the Bible. Lets see.
1. Evangelistic appeals.
2. Vacation Bible School.
3. Youth groups and youth pastors.
4. Church picnics,
5. Praise bands.
6. Bible Colleges.
7. Short hair on men, long hair on women. ( I once knew a preacher who insisted Jesus had a crew cut
A non-Catholic then asked, "Can you show me where in the Bible it calls tradition God breathed?" to which I replied, Sure...2nd Thessalonians 3:6 And we charge you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you withdraw yourselves from every brother walking disorderly, and not according to the tradition which they have received of us.
So still no one has shown me where the Bible says that everything that we believe and practice has to be found in the pages of the Bible. I need to see this if I'm going to abandon my Catholic faith and return to what you have.
In fact...you need to show it to all of us Catholics because so long as you can't, every Catholic reading this has no chance of converting away from our most holy faith. Worse still...it makes it appear that we are right to reject this and (God help us all!), that would mean that you would be wise to seriously consider converting to the Catholic faith ASAP.
If it's not in the Bible then it violates the very tenet that virtually every n-C doctrine is based upon, that such things must be found in the pages of the Bible. That's probably the fundamental foundation of most n-C belief and teaching in the last 500 years.
This is a doctrine is one that many non-Catholics hold very dear and I'm serious...if you can show me this and not be refuted by me and my Catholic brothers and sisters, then you have a chance to really dent our Catholic faith. If you can't....well...that dent might be somewhere else.
I have Bibles all over the place right here and you even get the benefit of the 73 book canon to use. I absolutely need to see this. Seriously.
This article is about getting some non-Catholic to show me where this idea is found within the pages of the Word of God. That's all I'm asking here.
If you want to shake me as a Catholic loose from my faith then this is what it will take.
I've read the Bible several times and cannot find this taught there, even with 73 books to work with.
I re-converted to the Catholic faith in part because of this very thing. If the Catholic Church is wrong on this...it should be pretty simple to show me.
This also has to with MATERIAL AND FORMAL SUFFICIENCY which is one of the things that a lot of people on both sides of this issue don't understand. My friend John Martignoni has a kinda neat way of explaining that here. A friend of mine said that his church takes the Bible literally, but that the Catholic Church doesn't...is that true?
The Fullness of truth is important. In John 14:6 Jesus tells us that He is "the truth" and I for one want nothing less.
I am trying to get you or any of the other n-Cs here that hold that belief to show us where it is found in the Word of God.
Again though....where is this scriptural mandate that all that we believe and practice must be found in the pages of the Bible?
I don't understand how people can believe this idea since St. Paul plainly tells Timothy that he's to withdraw from anyone who doesn't walk according to that tradition. If it wasn't inspired, the why would he make a big deal of it?
2nd Thessalonians 3:6 And we charge you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you withdraw yourselves from every brother walking disorderly, and not according to the tradition which they have received of us.
The following article from my blog points out some other ways in which the apostles showed their thinking on Sacred Tradition. Infallibility & How The Apostles Taught the Study of Sacred Tradition.
THIS CONCEPT OF SACRED TADITION IS THE UYNDERPINNING OF JUDAISM AS WELL AS TAUGHT IN THE MIDRASHIM THEN NEXT POST WILL HIGHLIGHT THIS ARTICLE
Does the Bible teach that everything that we believe and practice has to be found in its pages?
A Catholic buddy of mine offered this list as a start...
Hmmm...things non-Catholics believe that are not in the Bible. Lets see.
1. Evangelistic appeals.
2. Vacation Bible School.
3. Youth groups and youth pastors.
4. Church picnics,
5. Praise bands.
6. Bible Colleges.
7. Short hair on men, long hair on women. ( I once knew a preacher who insisted Jesus had a crew cut
A non-Catholic then asked, "Can you show me where in the Bible it calls tradition God breathed?" to which I replied, Sure...2nd Thessalonians 3:6 And we charge you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you withdraw yourselves from every brother walking disorderly, and not according to the tradition which they have received of us.
So still no one has shown me where the Bible says that everything that we believe and practice has to be found in the pages of the Bible. I need to see this if I'm going to abandon my Catholic faith and return to what you have.
In fact...you need to show it to all of us Catholics because so long as you can't, every Catholic reading this has no chance of converting away from our most holy faith. Worse still...it makes it appear that we are right to reject this and (God help us all!), that would mean that you would be wise to seriously consider converting to the Catholic faith ASAP.
If it's not in the Bible then it violates the very tenet that virtually every n-C doctrine is based upon, that such things must be found in the pages of the Bible. That's probably the fundamental foundation of most n-C belief and teaching in the last 500 years.
This is a doctrine is one that many non-Catholics hold very dear and I'm serious...if you can show me this and not be refuted by me and my Catholic brothers and sisters, then you have a chance to really dent our Catholic faith. If you can't....well...that dent might be somewhere else.
I have Bibles all over the place right here and you even get the benefit of the 73 book canon to use. I absolutely need to see this. Seriously.
This article is about getting some non-Catholic to show me where this idea is found within the pages of the Word of God. That's all I'm asking here.
If you want to shake me as a Catholic loose from my faith then this is what it will take.
I've read the Bible several times and cannot find this taught there, even with 73 books to work with.
I re-converted to the Catholic faith in part because of this very thing. If the Catholic Church is wrong on this...it should be pretty simple to show me.
This also has to with MATERIAL AND FORMAL SUFFICIENCY which is one of the things that a lot of people on both sides of this issue don't understand. My friend John Martignoni has a kinda neat way of explaining that here. A friend of mine said that his church takes the Bible literally, but that the Catholic Church doesn't...is that true?
The Fullness of truth is important. In John 14:6 Jesus tells us that He is "the truth" and I for one want nothing less.
I am trying to get you or any of the other n-Cs here that hold that belief to show us where it is found in the Word of God.
Again though....where is this scriptural mandate that all that we believe and practice must be found in the pages of the Bible?
I don't understand how people can believe this idea since St. Paul plainly tells Timothy that he's to withdraw from anyone who doesn't walk according to that tradition. If it wasn't inspired, the why would he make a big deal of it?
2nd Thessalonians 3:6 And we charge you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you withdraw yourselves from every brother walking disorderly, and not according to the tradition which they have received of us.
The following article from my blog points out some other ways in which the apostles showed their thinking on Sacred Tradition. Infallibility & How The Apostles Taught the Study of Sacred Tradition.
THIS CONCEPT OF SACRED TADITION IS THE UYNDERPINNING OF JUDAISM AS WELL AS TAUGHT IN THE MIDRASHIM THEN NEXT POST WILL HIGHLIGHT THIS ARTICLE
The Levites The descendants of Moses and Aaron
http://www.chabad.org/parshah/torahreading.asp?aid=36466&v=ds&p=4
Numbers 1:1-4:20
The Levites The descendants of Moses and Aaron
Chapter 3
Need to finish the rest of chapter 3
1. These are the descendants of Moses and Aaron on the day that the Lord spoke to Moses at Mount Sinai. א. וְאֵלֶּה תּוֹלְדֹת אַהֲרֹן וּמֹשֶׁה בְּיוֹם דִּבֶּר יְ־הֹוָ־ה אֶת מֹשֶׁה בְּהַר סִינָי:
These are the descendants of Moses and Aaron: Yet only the sons of Aaron are mentioned. However, they are considered descendants of Moses because he taught them Torah. This teaches us that whoever teaches Torah to the son of his fellow man, Scripture regards it as if he had begotten him - [Sanh. 19b] ואלה תולדת אהרן ומשה: ואינו מזכיר אלא בני אהרן. ונקראו תולדות משה, לפי שלמדן תורה. מלמד שכל המלמד את בן חבירו תורה, מעלה עליו הכתוב כאלו ילדו:
on the day that the Lord spoke to Moses: they became his descendants, because he taught them what he had learned from the Almighty. ביום דבר ה' את משה: נעשו אלו התולדות שלו, שלמדן מה שלמד מפי הגבורה:
2. These are the names of the sons of Aaron: Nadab the firstborn Abihu, Eleazar, and Ithamar. ב. וְאֵלֶּה שְׁמוֹת בְּנֵי אַהֲרֹן הַבְּכוֹר נָדָב וַאֲבִיהוּא אֶלְעָזָר וְאִיתָמָר:
3. These are the names of the sons of Aaron, the anointed kohanim, whom he consecrated to serve as kohanim. ג. אֵלֶּה שְׁמוֹת בְּנֵי אַהֲרֹן הַכֹּהֲנִים הַמְּשֻׁחִים אֲשֶׁר מִלֵּא יָדָם לְכַהֵן:
4. Nadab and Abihu died before the Lord when they brought alien fire before the Lord in the Sinai desert, and they had no children. Eleazar and Ithamar, however, served as kohanim in the presence of Aaron, their father. ד. וַיָּמָת נָדָב וַאֲבִיהוּא לִפְנֵי יְ־הֹוָ־ה בְּהַקְרִבָם אֵשׁ זָרָה לִפְנֵי יְ־הֹוָ־ה בְּמִדְבַּר סִינַי וּבָנִים לֹא הָיוּ לָהֶם וַיְכַהֵן אֶלְעָזָר וְאִיתָמָר עַל פְּנֵי אַהֲרֹן אֲבִיהֶם:
in the presence of Aaron: During his lifetime. [Num. Rabbah 2:26, Lev. Rabbah 20:11, Pesikta d’Rav Kahana p. 173b] על פני אהרן: בחייו:
5. The Lord spoke to Moses saying: ה. וַיְדַבֵּר יְ־הֹוָ־ה אֶל מֹשֶׁה לֵּאמֹר:
6. Bring forth the tribe of Levi and present them before Aaron the kohen, that they may serve him. ו. הַקְרֵב אֶת מַטֵּה לֵוִי וְהַעֲמַדְתָּ אֹתוֹ לִפְנֵי אַהֲרֹן הַכֹּהֵן וְשֵׁרְתוּ אֹתוֹ:
that they may serve him: What form does this service take? “They shall keep his charge” (verse 7). Since guarding the Sanctuary so that no stranger (non- kohen) should come near is his obligation, as it says, “You, your sons, and your father’s house with you, shall bear the iniquity of the Sanctuary” (Num. 18:1), and these Levites assisted him this was the service.
7. They shall keep his charge and the charge of the entire community before the Tent of Meeting, to perform the service of the Mishkan. ז. וְשָׁמְרוּ אֶת מִשְׁמַרְתּוֹ וְאֶת מִשְׁמֶרֶת כָּל הָעֵדָה לִפְנֵי אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד לַעֲבֹד אֶת עֲבֹדַת הַמִּשְׁכָּן:
They shall keep his charge: Any office to which a person is appointed and [the duty] he is bound to carry out, is מִשְׁמֶרֶת in Scripture and in Mishnaic idiom, as in reference to Bigthan and Teresh [where it says], “But my duty is not similar to your duty” (Meg. 13b), [meaning that the hours of my service do not coincide with those of yours]. Similarly [we find the word used in the clause],“The watches (מִשְׁמְרוֹת) of the kehuna and of the Levites.” ושמרו את משמרתו: כל מנוי שהאדם ממונה עליו ומוטל עליו לעשותו, קרוי משמרת בכל המקרא ובלשון משנה, כמו שאמרו בבגתן ותרש (מגילה יג ב) והלא אין משמרתי ומשמרתך שוה, וכן משמרות כהונה ולויה:
8. They shall take charge of all the vessels of the Tent of Meeting and the charge of the children of Israel, to perform the service of the Mishkan. ח. וְשָׁמְרוּ אֶת כָּל כְּלֵי אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד וְאֶת מִשְׁמֶרֶת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל לַעֲבֹד אֶת עֲבֹדַת הַמִּשְׁכָּן:
the charge of the children of Israel: All of them were bound [to take care of] the needs of the Sanctuary, but the Levites were in their stead, as their agents. Thus, in reward, they [the Levites] take tithes from them [the Israelites], as it says,“for it is your reward, in exchange for your service” (Num. 18: 31). ואת משמרת בני ישראל: שכולן היו זקוקין לצרכי המקדש, אלא שהלוים באים תחתיהם בשליחותם, לפיכך לוקחים מהם המעשרות בשכרן, שנאמר (במד' יח, לא) כי שכר הוא לכם חלף עבודתכם:
9. You shall give over the Levites to Aaron and his sons; they shall be wholly given over to him from the children of Israel. ט. וְנָתַתָּה אֶת הַלְוִיִּם לְאַהֲרֹן וּלְבָנָיו נְתוּנִם נְתוּנִם הֵמָּה לוֹ מֵאֵת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל:
Given over to him: for assistance. נתונים המה לו: לעזרה:
from the children of Israel: Heb. מֵאֵת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל, like מִתּוֹךְ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל, from among the children of Israel, that is to say, they have been singled out for this purpose from the rest of the congregation by the decree of the Omnipresent, and He gave them to him, as it says, “And I have given the Levites, they are… given” (Num. 8:19). מאת בני ישראל: כמו מתוך בני ישראל, כלומר משאר כל העדה נבדלו לכך בגזרת המקום, והוא נתנם לו, שנאמר (במד' ח, יט) ואתנה את הלוים נתונים וגו'
10. You shall appoint Aaron and his sons, and they shall keep their kehunah; any outsider [non kohen] who approaches shall be put to death. י. וְאֶת אַהֲרֹן וְאֶת בָּנָיו תִּפְקֹד וְשָׁמְרוּ אֶת כְּהֻנָּתָם וְהַזָּר הַקָּרֵב יוּמָת:
You shall appoint Aaron…: [The word תִּפְקֹד is] an expression of appointment, not of counting. ואת אהרן ואת בניו תפקד: לשון פקידות ואינו לשון מנין:
They shall observe their kehunah: [This refers to] receiving the blood [in a basin], dashing the blood, burning [the fats], and other rites entrusted to the priests. ושמרו את כהנתם: קבלת דמים וזריקה והקטרה ועבודות המסורות לכהנים:
11. The Lord spoke to Moses, saying. יא. וַיְדַבֵּר יְ־הֹוָ־ה אֶל מֹשֶׁה לֵּאמֹר:
12. As for Me I have taken the Levites from among the children of Israel in place of all firstborns among the children of Israel who have opened the womb, and the Levites shall be Mine. יב. וַאֲנִי הִנֵּה לָקַחְתִּי אֶת הַלְוִיִּם מִתּוֹךְ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל תַּחַת כָּל בְּכוֹר פֶּטֶר רֶחֶם מִבְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וְהָיוּ לִי הַלְוִיִּם:
As for Me: I have taken-As for Me; what right do I have to them ? ואני הנה לקחתי: ואני מהיכן זכיתי בהן:
from among the children of Israel: That the Israelites should have to hire them for My service? I gained My right to them through the [Israelite] firstborns, taking them [the Levites] in their place. For [originally] the service was performed by the firstborns, but when they sinned by [worshipping] the [golden] calf, they became disqualified. The Levites, who had not committed idolatry, were chosen in their stead. [Midrash Aggadah] מתוך בני ישראל: שיהיו ישראל שוכרין אותן לשירות שלי. על ידי הבכורות זכיתי בהם ולקחתים תמורתם, לפי שהיתה העבודה בבכורות, וכשחטאו בעגל נפסלו, והלוים שלא עבדו עבודה זרה נבחרו תחתיהם:
13. For all the firstborns are Mine; since the day I smote all the firstborns in the land of Egypt, I sanctified for Myself all the firstborns of Israel, both man and beast they shall become Mine, I am the Lord. יג. כִּי לִי כָּל בְּכוֹר בְּיוֹם הַכֹּתִי כָל בְּכוֹר בְּאֶרֶץ מִצְרַיִם הִקְדַּשְׁתִּי לִי כָל בְּכוֹר בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל מֵאָדָם עַד בְּהֵמָה לִי יִהְיוּ אֲנִי יְ־הֹוָ־ה:
Chapter 1
20. This was [the sum of] the children of Reuben, the firstborn of Israel, their descendants according to their families, according to their fathers' houses; the number of individual names of every male from twenty years old and upward, all who were fit to go out to the army. כ. וַיִּהְיוּ בְנֵי רְאוּבֵן בְּכֹר יִשְׂרָאֵל תּוֹלְדֹתָם לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתָם לְבֵית אֲבֹתָם בְּמִסְפַּר שֵׁמוֹת לְגֻלְגְּלֹתָם כֹּל זָכָר מִבֶּן עֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה וָמַעְלָה כָּל יֹצֵא צָבָא:
21. Those counted from the tribe of Reuben [were] forty six thousand, five hundred. כא. פְּקֻדֵיהֶם לְמַטֵּה רְאוּבֵן שִׁשָּׁה וְאַרְבָּעִים אֶלֶף וַחֲמֵשׁ מֵאוֹת:
22. Of the tribe of Simeon, their descendants according to their families, according to their fathers' houses; his tally, according to the number of individual names of every male from twenty years old and upward, all who were fit to go out to the army. כב. לִבְנֵי שִׁמְעוֹן תּוֹלְדֹתָם לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתָם לְבֵית אֲבֹתָם פְּקֻדָיו בְּמִסְפַּר שֵׁמוֹת לְגֻלְגְּלֹתָם כָּל זָכָר מִבֶּן עֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה וָמַעְלָה כֹּל יֹצֵא צָבָא:
23. Those counted from the tribe of Simeon: fifty nine thousand, three hundred. כג. פְּקֻדֵיהֶם לְמַטֵּה שִׁמְעוֹן תִּשְׁעָה וַחֲמִשִּׁים אֶלֶף וּשְׁלֹשׁ מֵאוֹת:
24. Of the tribe of Gad, their descendants according to their families, according to their fathers' houses; the number of individual names of every male from twenty years old and upward, all who were fit to go out to the army. כד. לִבְנֵי גָד תּוֹלְדֹתָם לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתָם לְבֵית אֲבֹתָם בְּמִסְפַּר שֵׁמוֹת מִבֶּן עֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה וָמַעְלָה כֹּל יֹצֵא צָבָא:
25. Those counted from the tribe of Gad: forty five thousand, six hundred and fifty. כה. פְּקֻדֵיהֶם לְמַטֵּה גָד חֲמִשָּׁה וְאַרְבָּעִים אֶלֶף וְשֵׁשׁ מֵאוֹת וַחֲמִשִּׁים:
26. Of the tribe of Judah, their descendants according to their families, according to their fathers' houses; the number of individual names of every male from twenty years old and upward, all who were fit to go out to the army. כו. לִבְנֵי יְהוּדָה תּוֹלְדֹתָם לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתָם לְבֵית אֲבֹתָם בְּמִסְפַּר שֵׁמֹת מִבֶּן עֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה וָמַעְלָה כֹּל יֹצֵא צָבָא:
27. Those counted from the tribe of Judah: seventy four thousand, six hundred. כז. פְּקֻדֵיהֶם לְמַטֵּה יְהוּדָה אַרְבָּעָה וְשִׁבְעִים אֶלֶף וְשֵׁשׁ מֵאוֹת:
28. Of the tribe of Issachar, their descendants according to their families, according to their fathers' houses; the number of individual names of every male from twenty years old and upward, all who were fit to go out to the army. כח. לִבְנֵי יִשָּׂשכָר תּוֹלְדֹתָם לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתָם לְבֵית אֲבֹתָם בְּמִסְפַּר שֵׁמֹת מִבֶּן עֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה וָמַעְלָה כֹּל יֹצֵא צָבָא:
29. Those counted from the tribe of Issachar: fifty four thousand, four hundred. כט. פְּקֻדֵיהֶם לְמַטֵּה יִשָּׂשכָר אַרְבָּעָה וַחֲמִשִּׁים אֶלֶף וְאַרְבַּע מֵאוֹת:
30. Of the tribe of Zebulun, their descendants according to their families, according to their fathers' houses; the number of individual names of every male from twenty years old and upward, all who were fit to go out to the army. ל. לִבְנֵי זְבוּלֻן תּוֹלְדֹתָם לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתָם לְבֵית אֲבֹתָם בְּמִסְפַּר שֵׁמֹת מִבֶּן עֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה וָמַעְלָה כֹּל יֹצֵא צָבָא:
31. Those counted from the tribe of Zebulun: fifty seven thousand, four hundred. לא. פְּקֻדֵיהֶם לְמַטֵּה זְבוּלֻן שִׁבְעָה וַחֲמִשִּׁים אֶלֶף וְאַרְבַּע מֵאוֹת:
32. Of the children of Yosef: of the tribe of Ephraim, their descendants according to their families, according to their fathers' houses; the number of individual names of every male from twenty years old and upward, all who were fit to go out to the army. לב. לִבְנֵי יוֹסֵף לִבְנֵי אֶפְרַיִם תּוֹלְדֹתָם לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתָם לְבֵית אֲבֹתָם בְּמִסְפַּר שֵׁמֹת מִבֶּן עֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה וָמַעְלָה כֹּל יֹצֵא צָבָא:
33. Those counted from the tribe of Ephraim: forty thousand, five hundred. לג. פְּקֻדֵיהֶם לְמַטֵּה אֶפְרָיִם אַרְבָּעִים אֶלֶף וַחֲמֵשׁ מֵאוֹת:
34. Of the tribe of Manasseh, their descendants according to their families, according to their fathers' houses; the number of individual names of every male from twenty years old and upward, all who were fit to go out to the army. לד. לִבְנֵי מְנַשֶּׁה תּוֹלְדֹתָם לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתָם לְבֵית אֲבֹתָם בְּמִסְפַּר שֵׁמוֹת מִבֶּן עֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה וָמַעְלָה כֹּל יֹצֵא צָבָא:
35. Those counted from the tribe of Manasseh: thirty two thousand, two hundred. לה. פְּקֻדֵיהֶם לְמַטֵּה מְנַשֶּׁה שְׁנַיִם וּשְׁלֹשִׁים אֶלֶף וּמָאתָיִם:
36. Of the tribe of Benjamin, their descendants according to their families, according to their fathers' houses; the number of individual names of every male from twenty years old and upward, all who were fit to go out to the army. לו. לִבְנֵי בִנְיָמִן תּוֹלְדֹתָם לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתָם לְבֵית אֲבֹתָם בְּמִסְפַּר שֵׁמֹת מִבֶּן עֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה וָמַעְלָה כֹּל יֹצֵא צָבָא:
37. Those counted from the tribe of Benjamin: thirty five thousand, four hundred. לז. פְּקֻדֵיהֶם לְמַטֵּה בִנְיָמִן חֲמִשָּׁה וּשְׁלֹשִׁים אֶלֶף וְאַרְבַּע מֵאוֹת:
38. Of the tribe of Dan, their descendants according to their families, according to their fathers' houses; the number of individual names of every male from twenty years old and upward, all who were fit to go out to the army. לח. לִבְנֵי דָן תּוֹלְדֹתָם לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתָם לְבֵית אֲבֹתָם בְּמִסְפַּר שֵׁמֹת מִבֶּן עֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה וָמַעְלָה כֹּל יֹצֵא צָבָא:
39. Those counted from the tribe of Dan: sixty two thousand, seven hundred. לט. פְּקֻדֵיהֶם לְמַטֵּה דָן שְׁנַיִם וְשִׁשִּׁים אֶלֶף וּשְׁבַע מֵאוֹת:
40. Of the tribe of Asher, their descendants according to their families, according to their fathers' houses; the number of individual names of every male from twenty years old and upward, all who were fit to go out to the army. מ. לִבְנֵי אָשֵׁר תּוֹלְדֹתָם לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתָם לְבֵית אֲבֹתָם בְּמִסְפַּר שֵׁמֹת מִבֶּן עֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה וָמַעְלָה כֹּל יֹצֵא צָבָא:
41. Those counted from the tribe of Asher: forty one thousand, five hundred. מא. פְּקֻדֵיהֶם לְמַטֵּה אָשֵׁר אֶחָד וְאַרְבָּעִים אֶלֶף וַחֲמֵשׁ מֵאוֹת:
42. Of the tribe of Naphtali, their descendants according to their families, according to their fathers' houses; the number of individual names of every male from twenty years old and upward, all who were fit to go out to the army. מב. בְּנֵי נַפְתָּלִי תּוֹלְדֹתָם לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתָם לְבֵית אֲבֹתָם בְּמִסְפַּר שֵׁמֹת מִבֶּן עֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה וָמַעְלָה כֹּל יֹצֵא צָבָא:
43. Those counted from the tribe of Naphtali: fifty three thousand, four hundred. מג. פְּקֻדֵיהֶם לְמַטֵּה נַפְתָּלִי שְׁלֹשָׁה וַחֲמִשִּׁים אֶלֶף וְאַרְבַּע מֵאוֹת:
44. These are the numbered ones, whom Moses and Aaron and the twelve princes of Israel counted each one [representing] his fathers' house. מד. אֵלֶּה הַפְּקֻדִים אֲשֶׁר פָּקַד מֹשֶׁה וְאַהֲרֹן וּנְשִׂיאֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר אִישׁ אִישׁ אֶחָד לְבֵית אֲבֹתָיו הָיוּ:
45. All the children of Israel were counted according to their fathers' houses, from twenty years and upward, all who were fit to go out to the army. מה. וַיִּהְיוּ כָּל פְּקוּדֵי בְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל לְבֵית אֲבֹתָם מִבֶּן עֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה וָמַעְלָה כָּל יֹצֵא צָבָא בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל:
46. The sum of all those who were counted: six hundred and three thousand, five hundred and fifty. מו. וַיִּהְיוּ כָּל הַפְּקֻדִים שֵׁשׁ מֵאוֹת אֶלֶף וּשְׁלֹשֶׁת אֲלָפִים וַחֲמֵשׁ מֵאוֹת וַחֲמִשִּׁים:
47. But the Levites, according to their father's tribe were not numbered among them. מז. וְהַלְוִיִּם לְמַטֵּה אֲבֹתָם לֹא הָתְפָּקְדוּ בְּתוֹכָם:
48. The Lord spoke to Moses saying: מח. וַיְדַבֵּר יְ־הֹוָ־ה אֶל מֹשֶׁה לֵּאמֹר:
49. Only the tribe of Levi you shall not number, and you shall not reckon their sum among the children of Israel. מט. אַךְ אֶת מַטֵּה לֵוִי לֹא תִפְקֹד וְאֶת רֹאשָׁם לֹא תִשָּׂא בְּתוֹךְ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל:
50. But you shall appoint the Levites over the Tabernacle of the Testimony, over all its vessels and over all that belong to it; they shall carry the Tabernacle and they shall minister to it, and they shall encamp around the Tabernacle. נ. וְאַתָּה הַפְקֵד אֶת הַלְוִיִּם עַל מִשְׁכַּן הָעֵדֻת וְעַל כָּל כֵּלָיו וְעַל כָּל אֲשֶׁר לוֹ הֵמָּה יִשְׂאוּ אֶת הַמִּשְׁכָּן וְאֶת כָּל כֵּלָיו וְהֵם יְשָׁרְתֻהוּ וְסָבִיב לַמִּשְׁכָּן יַחֲנוּ:
51. When the Tabernacle is set to travel, the Levites shall dismantle it; and when the Tabernacle camps, the Levites shall erect it; any outsider [non Levite] who approaches shall be put to death. נא. וּבִנְסֹעַ הַמִּשְׁכָּן יוֹרִידוּ אֹתוֹ הַלְוִיִּם וּבַחֲנֹת הַמִּשְׁכָּן יָקִימוּ אֹתוֹ הַלְוִיִּם וְהַזָּר הַקָּרֵב יוּמָת:
52. The children of Israel shall encamp, each man by his own camp and each man by his division. נב. וְחָנוּ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אִישׁ עַל מַחֲנֵהוּ וְאִישׁ עַל דִּגְלוֹ לְצִבְאֹתָם:
53. The Levites shall encamp around the Mishkan of the Testimony, so that there be no wrath upon the congregation of the children of Israel and the Levites shall keep the charge of the Mishkan of the Testimony. נג. וְהַלְוִיִּם יַחֲנוּ סָבִיב לְמִשְׁכַּן הָעֵדֻת וְלֹא יִהְיֶה קֶצֶף עַל עֲדַת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וְשָׁמְרוּ הַלְוִיִּם אֶת מִשְׁמֶרֶת מִשְׁכַּן הָעֵדוּת:
54. And the children of Israel did according to all that the Lord had commanded Moses thus did they do. נד. וַיַּעֲשׂוּ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל כְּכֹל אֲשֶׁר צִוָּה יְ־הֹוָ־ה אֶת מֹשֶׁה כֵּן עָשׂוּ:
Numbers 1:1-4:20
The Levites The descendants of Moses and Aaron
Chapter 3
Need to finish the rest of chapter 3
1. These are the descendants of Moses and Aaron on the day that the Lord spoke to Moses at Mount Sinai. א. וְאֵלֶּה תּוֹלְדֹת אַהֲרֹן וּמֹשֶׁה בְּיוֹם דִּבֶּר יְ־הֹוָ־ה אֶת מֹשֶׁה בְּהַר סִינָי:
These are the descendants of Moses and Aaron: Yet only the sons of Aaron are mentioned. However, they are considered descendants of Moses because he taught them Torah. This teaches us that whoever teaches Torah to the son of his fellow man, Scripture regards it as if he had begotten him - [Sanh. 19b] ואלה תולדת אהרן ומשה: ואינו מזכיר אלא בני אהרן. ונקראו תולדות משה, לפי שלמדן תורה. מלמד שכל המלמד את בן חבירו תורה, מעלה עליו הכתוב כאלו ילדו:
on the day that the Lord spoke to Moses: they became his descendants, because he taught them what he had learned from the Almighty. ביום דבר ה' את משה: נעשו אלו התולדות שלו, שלמדן מה שלמד מפי הגבורה:
2. These are the names of the sons of Aaron: Nadab the firstborn Abihu, Eleazar, and Ithamar. ב. וְאֵלֶּה שְׁמוֹת בְּנֵי אַהֲרֹן הַבְּכוֹר נָדָב וַאֲבִיהוּא אֶלְעָזָר וְאִיתָמָר:
3. These are the names of the sons of Aaron, the anointed kohanim, whom he consecrated to serve as kohanim. ג. אֵלֶּה שְׁמוֹת בְּנֵי אַהֲרֹן הַכֹּהֲנִים הַמְּשֻׁחִים אֲשֶׁר מִלֵּא יָדָם לְכַהֵן:
4. Nadab and Abihu died before the Lord when they brought alien fire before the Lord in the Sinai desert, and they had no children. Eleazar and Ithamar, however, served as kohanim in the presence of Aaron, their father. ד. וַיָּמָת נָדָב וַאֲבִיהוּא לִפְנֵי יְ־הֹוָ־ה בְּהַקְרִבָם אֵשׁ זָרָה לִפְנֵי יְ־הֹוָ־ה בְּמִדְבַּר סִינַי וּבָנִים לֹא הָיוּ לָהֶם וַיְכַהֵן אֶלְעָזָר וְאִיתָמָר עַל פְּנֵי אַהֲרֹן אֲבִיהֶם:
in the presence of Aaron: During his lifetime. [Num. Rabbah 2:26, Lev. Rabbah 20:11, Pesikta d’Rav Kahana p. 173b] על פני אהרן: בחייו:
5. The Lord spoke to Moses saying: ה. וַיְדַבֵּר יְ־הֹוָ־ה אֶל מֹשֶׁה לֵּאמֹר:
6. Bring forth the tribe of Levi and present them before Aaron the kohen, that they may serve him. ו. הַקְרֵב אֶת מַטֵּה לֵוִי וְהַעֲמַדְתָּ אֹתוֹ לִפְנֵי אַהֲרֹן הַכֹּהֵן וְשֵׁרְתוּ אֹתוֹ:
that they may serve him: What form does this service take? “They shall keep his charge” (verse 7). Since guarding the Sanctuary so that no stranger (non- kohen) should come near is his obligation, as it says, “You, your sons, and your father’s house with you, shall bear the iniquity of the Sanctuary” (Num. 18:1), and these Levites assisted him this was the service.
7. They shall keep his charge and the charge of the entire community before the Tent of Meeting, to perform the service of the Mishkan. ז. וְשָׁמְרוּ אֶת מִשְׁמַרְתּוֹ וְאֶת מִשְׁמֶרֶת כָּל הָעֵדָה לִפְנֵי אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד לַעֲבֹד אֶת עֲבֹדַת הַמִּשְׁכָּן:
They shall keep his charge: Any office to which a person is appointed and [the duty] he is bound to carry out, is מִשְׁמֶרֶת in Scripture and in Mishnaic idiom, as in reference to Bigthan and Teresh [where it says], “But my duty is not similar to your duty” (Meg. 13b), [meaning that the hours of my service do not coincide with those of yours]. Similarly [we find the word used in the clause],“The watches (מִשְׁמְרוֹת) of the kehuna and of the Levites.” ושמרו את משמרתו: כל מנוי שהאדם ממונה עליו ומוטל עליו לעשותו, קרוי משמרת בכל המקרא ובלשון משנה, כמו שאמרו בבגתן ותרש (מגילה יג ב) והלא אין משמרתי ומשמרתך שוה, וכן משמרות כהונה ולויה:
8. They shall take charge of all the vessels of the Tent of Meeting and the charge of the children of Israel, to perform the service of the Mishkan. ח. וְשָׁמְרוּ אֶת כָּל כְּלֵי אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד וְאֶת מִשְׁמֶרֶת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל לַעֲבֹד אֶת עֲבֹדַת הַמִּשְׁכָּן:
the charge of the children of Israel: All of them were bound [to take care of] the needs of the Sanctuary, but the Levites were in their stead, as their agents. Thus, in reward, they [the Levites] take tithes from them [the Israelites], as it says,“for it is your reward, in exchange for your service” (Num. 18: 31). ואת משמרת בני ישראל: שכולן היו זקוקין לצרכי המקדש, אלא שהלוים באים תחתיהם בשליחותם, לפיכך לוקחים מהם המעשרות בשכרן, שנאמר (במד' יח, לא) כי שכר הוא לכם חלף עבודתכם:
9. You shall give over the Levites to Aaron and his sons; they shall be wholly given over to him from the children of Israel. ט. וְנָתַתָּה אֶת הַלְוִיִּם לְאַהֲרֹן וּלְבָנָיו נְתוּנִם נְתוּנִם הֵמָּה לוֹ מֵאֵת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל:
Given over to him: for assistance. נתונים המה לו: לעזרה:
from the children of Israel: Heb. מֵאֵת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל, like מִתּוֹךְ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל, from among the children of Israel, that is to say, they have been singled out for this purpose from the rest of the congregation by the decree of the Omnipresent, and He gave them to him, as it says, “And I have given the Levites, they are… given” (Num. 8:19). מאת בני ישראל: כמו מתוך בני ישראל, כלומר משאר כל העדה נבדלו לכך בגזרת המקום, והוא נתנם לו, שנאמר (במד' ח, יט) ואתנה את הלוים נתונים וגו'
10. You shall appoint Aaron and his sons, and they shall keep their kehunah; any outsider [non kohen] who approaches shall be put to death. י. וְאֶת אַהֲרֹן וְאֶת בָּנָיו תִּפְקֹד וְשָׁמְרוּ אֶת כְּהֻנָּתָם וְהַזָּר הַקָּרֵב יוּמָת:
You shall appoint Aaron…: [The word תִּפְקֹד is] an expression of appointment, not of counting. ואת אהרן ואת בניו תפקד: לשון פקידות ואינו לשון מנין:
They shall observe their kehunah: [This refers to] receiving the blood [in a basin], dashing the blood, burning [the fats], and other rites entrusted to the priests. ושמרו את כהנתם: קבלת דמים וזריקה והקטרה ועבודות המסורות לכהנים:
11. The Lord spoke to Moses, saying. יא. וַיְדַבֵּר יְ־הֹוָ־ה אֶל מֹשֶׁה לֵּאמֹר:
12. As for Me I have taken the Levites from among the children of Israel in place of all firstborns among the children of Israel who have opened the womb, and the Levites shall be Mine. יב. וַאֲנִי הִנֵּה לָקַחְתִּי אֶת הַלְוִיִּם מִתּוֹךְ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל תַּחַת כָּל בְּכוֹר פֶּטֶר רֶחֶם מִבְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וְהָיוּ לִי הַלְוִיִּם:
As for Me: I have taken-As for Me; what right do I have to them ? ואני הנה לקחתי: ואני מהיכן זכיתי בהן:
from among the children of Israel: That the Israelites should have to hire them for My service? I gained My right to them through the [Israelite] firstborns, taking them [the Levites] in their place. For [originally] the service was performed by the firstborns, but when they sinned by [worshipping] the [golden] calf, they became disqualified. The Levites, who had not committed idolatry, were chosen in their stead. [Midrash Aggadah] מתוך בני ישראל: שיהיו ישראל שוכרין אותן לשירות שלי. על ידי הבכורות זכיתי בהם ולקחתים תמורתם, לפי שהיתה העבודה בבכורות, וכשחטאו בעגל נפסלו, והלוים שלא עבדו עבודה זרה נבחרו תחתיהם:
13. For all the firstborns are Mine; since the day I smote all the firstborns in the land of Egypt, I sanctified for Myself all the firstborns of Israel, both man and beast they shall become Mine, I am the Lord. יג. כִּי לִי כָּל בְּכוֹר בְּיוֹם הַכֹּתִי כָל בְּכוֹר בְּאֶרֶץ מִצְרַיִם הִקְדַּשְׁתִּי לִי כָל בְּכוֹר בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל מֵאָדָם עַד בְּהֵמָה לִי יִהְיוּ אֲנִי יְ־הֹוָ־ה:
Chapter 1
20. This was [the sum of] the children of Reuben, the firstborn of Israel, their descendants according to their families, according to their fathers' houses; the number of individual names of every male from twenty years old and upward, all who were fit to go out to the army. כ. וַיִּהְיוּ בְנֵי רְאוּבֵן בְּכֹר יִשְׂרָאֵל תּוֹלְדֹתָם לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתָם לְבֵית אֲבֹתָם בְּמִסְפַּר שֵׁמוֹת לְגֻלְגְּלֹתָם כֹּל זָכָר מִבֶּן עֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה וָמַעְלָה כָּל יֹצֵא צָבָא:
21. Those counted from the tribe of Reuben [were] forty six thousand, five hundred. כא. פְּקֻדֵיהֶם לְמַטֵּה רְאוּבֵן שִׁשָּׁה וְאַרְבָּעִים אֶלֶף וַחֲמֵשׁ מֵאוֹת:
22. Of the tribe of Simeon, their descendants according to their families, according to their fathers' houses; his tally, according to the number of individual names of every male from twenty years old and upward, all who were fit to go out to the army. כב. לִבְנֵי שִׁמְעוֹן תּוֹלְדֹתָם לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתָם לְבֵית אֲבֹתָם פְּקֻדָיו בְּמִסְפַּר שֵׁמוֹת לְגֻלְגְּלֹתָם כָּל זָכָר מִבֶּן עֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה וָמַעְלָה כֹּל יֹצֵא צָבָא:
23. Those counted from the tribe of Simeon: fifty nine thousand, three hundred. כג. פְּקֻדֵיהֶם לְמַטֵּה שִׁמְעוֹן תִּשְׁעָה וַחֲמִשִּׁים אֶלֶף וּשְׁלֹשׁ מֵאוֹת:
24. Of the tribe of Gad, their descendants according to their families, according to their fathers' houses; the number of individual names of every male from twenty years old and upward, all who were fit to go out to the army. כד. לִבְנֵי גָד תּוֹלְדֹתָם לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתָם לְבֵית אֲבֹתָם בְּמִסְפַּר שֵׁמוֹת מִבֶּן עֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה וָמַעְלָה כֹּל יֹצֵא צָבָא:
25. Those counted from the tribe of Gad: forty five thousand, six hundred and fifty. כה. פְּקֻדֵיהֶם לְמַטֵּה גָד חֲמִשָּׁה וְאַרְבָּעִים אֶלֶף וְשֵׁשׁ מֵאוֹת וַחֲמִשִּׁים:
26. Of the tribe of Judah, their descendants according to their families, according to their fathers' houses; the number of individual names of every male from twenty years old and upward, all who were fit to go out to the army. כו. לִבְנֵי יְהוּדָה תּוֹלְדֹתָם לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתָם לְבֵית אֲבֹתָם בְּמִסְפַּר שֵׁמֹת מִבֶּן עֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה וָמַעְלָה כֹּל יֹצֵא צָבָא:
27. Those counted from the tribe of Judah: seventy four thousand, six hundred. כז. פְּקֻדֵיהֶם לְמַטֵּה יְהוּדָה אַרְבָּעָה וְשִׁבְעִים אֶלֶף וְשֵׁשׁ מֵאוֹת:
28. Of the tribe of Issachar, their descendants according to their families, according to their fathers' houses; the number of individual names of every male from twenty years old and upward, all who were fit to go out to the army. כח. לִבְנֵי יִשָּׂשכָר תּוֹלְדֹתָם לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתָם לְבֵית אֲבֹתָם בְּמִסְפַּר שֵׁמֹת מִבֶּן עֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה וָמַעְלָה כֹּל יֹצֵא צָבָא:
29. Those counted from the tribe of Issachar: fifty four thousand, four hundred. כט. פְּקֻדֵיהֶם לְמַטֵּה יִשָּׂשכָר אַרְבָּעָה וַחֲמִשִּׁים אֶלֶף וְאַרְבַּע מֵאוֹת:
30. Of the tribe of Zebulun, their descendants according to their families, according to their fathers' houses; the number of individual names of every male from twenty years old and upward, all who were fit to go out to the army. ל. לִבְנֵי זְבוּלֻן תּוֹלְדֹתָם לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתָם לְבֵית אֲבֹתָם בְּמִסְפַּר שֵׁמֹת מִבֶּן עֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה וָמַעְלָה כֹּל יֹצֵא צָבָא:
31. Those counted from the tribe of Zebulun: fifty seven thousand, four hundred. לא. פְּקֻדֵיהֶם לְמַטֵּה זְבוּלֻן שִׁבְעָה וַחֲמִשִּׁים אֶלֶף וְאַרְבַּע מֵאוֹת:
32. Of the children of Yosef: of the tribe of Ephraim, their descendants according to their families, according to their fathers' houses; the number of individual names of every male from twenty years old and upward, all who were fit to go out to the army. לב. לִבְנֵי יוֹסֵף לִבְנֵי אֶפְרַיִם תּוֹלְדֹתָם לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתָם לְבֵית אֲבֹתָם בְּמִסְפַּר שֵׁמֹת מִבֶּן עֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה וָמַעְלָה כֹּל יֹצֵא צָבָא:
33. Those counted from the tribe of Ephraim: forty thousand, five hundred. לג. פְּקֻדֵיהֶם לְמַטֵּה אֶפְרָיִם אַרְבָּעִים אֶלֶף וַחֲמֵשׁ מֵאוֹת:
34. Of the tribe of Manasseh, their descendants according to their families, according to their fathers' houses; the number of individual names of every male from twenty years old and upward, all who were fit to go out to the army. לד. לִבְנֵי מְנַשֶּׁה תּוֹלְדֹתָם לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתָם לְבֵית אֲבֹתָם בְּמִסְפַּר שֵׁמוֹת מִבֶּן עֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה וָמַעְלָה כֹּל יֹצֵא צָבָא:
35. Those counted from the tribe of Manasseh: thirty two thousand, two hundred. לה. פְּקֻדֵיהֶם לְמַטֵּה מְנַשֶּׁה שְׁנַיִם וּשְׁלֹשִׁים אֶלֶף וּמָאתָיִם:
36. Of the tribe of Benjamin, their descendants according to their families, according to their fathers' houses; the number of individual names of every male from twenty years old and upward, all who were fit to go out to the army. לו. לִבְנֵי בִנְיָמִן תּוֹלְדֹתָם לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתָם לְבֵית אֲבֹתָם בְּמִסְפַּר שֵׁמֹת מִבֶּן עֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה וָמַעְלָה כֹּל יֹצֵא צָבָא:
37. Those counted from the tribe of Benjamin: thirty five thousand, four hundred. לז. פְּקֻדֵיהֶם לְמַטֵּה בִנְיָמִן חֲמִשָּׁה וּשְׁלֹשִׁים אֶלֶף וְאַרְבַּע מֵאוֹת:
38. Of the tribe of Dan, their descendants according to their families, according to their fathers' houses; the number of individual names of every male from twenty years old and upward, all who were fit to go out to the army. לח. לִבְנֵי דָן תּוֹלְדֹתָם לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתָם לְבֵית אֲבֹתָם בְּמִסְפַּר שֵׁמֹת מִבֶּן עֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה וָמַעְלָה כֹּל יֹצֵא צָבָא:
39. Those counted from the tribe of Dan: sixty two thousand, seven hundred. לט. פְּקֻדֵיהֶם לְמַטֵּה דָן שְׁנַיִם וְשִׁשִּׁים אֶלֶף וּשְׁבַע מֵאוֹת:
40. Of the tribe of Asher, their descendants according to their families, according to their fathers' houses; the number of individual names of every male from twenty years old and upward, all who were fit to go out to the army. מ. לִבְנֵי אָשֵׁר תּוֹלְדֹתָם לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתָם לְבֵית אֲבֹתָם בְּמִסְפַּר שֵׁמֹת מִבֶּן עֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה וָמַעְלָה כֹּל יֹצֵא צָבָא:
41. Those counted from the tribe of Asher: forty one thousand, five hundred. מא. פְּקֻדֵיהֶם לְמַטֵּה אָשֵׁר אֶחָד וְאַרְבָּעִים אֶלֶף וַחֲמֵשׁ מֵאוֹת:
42. Of the tribe of Naphtali, their descendants according to their families, according to their fathers' houses; the number of individual names of every male from twenty years old and upward, all who were fit to go out to the army. מב. בְּנֵי נַפְתָּלִי תּוֹלְדֹתָם לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתָם לְבֵית אֲבֹתָם בְּמִסְפַּר שֵׁמֹת מִבֶּן עֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה וָמַעְלָה כֹּל יֹצֵא צָבָא:
43. Those counted from the tribe of Naphtali: fifty three thousand, four hundred. מג. פְּקֻדֵיהֶם לְמַטֵּה נַפְתָּלִי שְׁלֹשָׁה וַחֲמִשִּׁים אֶלֶף וְאַרְבַּע מֵאוֹת:
44. These are the numbered ones, whom Moses and Aaron and the twelve princes of Israel counted each one [representing] his fathers' house. מד. אֵלֶּה הַפְּקֻדִים אֲשֶׁר פָּקַד מֹשֶׁה וְאַהֲרֹן וּנְשִׂיאֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר אִישׁ אִישׁ אֶחָד לְבֵית אֲבֹתָיו הָיוּ:
45. All the children of Israel were counted according to their fathers' houses, from twenty years and upward, all who were fit to go out to the army. מה. וַיִּהְיוּ כָּל פְּקוּדֵי בְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל לְבֵית אֲבֹתָם מִבֶּן עֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה וָמַעְלָה כָּל יֹצֵא צָבָא בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל:
46. The sum of all those who were counted: six hundred and three thousand, five hundred and fifty. מו. וַיִּהְיוּ כָּל הַפְּקֻדִים שֵׁשׁ מֵאוֹת אֶלֶף וּשְׁלֹשֶׁת אֲלָפִים וַחֲמֵשׁ מֵאוֹת וַחֲמִשִּׁים:
47. But the Levites, according to their father's tribe were not numbered among them. מז. וְהַלְוִיִּם לְמַטֵּה אֲבֹתָם לֹא הָתְפָּקְדוּ בְּתוֹכָם:
48. The Lord spoke to Moses saying: מח. וַיְדַבֵּר יְ־הֹוָ־ה אֶל מֹשֶׁה לֵּאמֹר:
49. Only the tribe of Levi you shall not number, and you shall not reckon their sum among the children of Israel. מט. אַךְ אֶת מַטֵּה לֵוִי לֹא תִפְקֹד וְאֶת רֹאשָׁם לֹא תִשָּׂא בְּתוֹךְ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל:
50. But you shall appoint the Levites over the Tabernacle of the Testimony, over all its vessels and over all that belong to it; they shall carry the Tabernacle and they shall minister to it, and they shall encamp around the Tabernacle. נ. וְאַתָּה הַפְקֵד אֶת הַלְוִיִּם עַל מִשְׁכַּן הָעֵדֻת וְעַל כָּל כֵּלָיו וְעַל כָּל אֲשֶׁר לוֹ הֵמָּה יִשְׂאוּ אֶת הַמִּשְׁכָּן וְאֶת כָּל כֵּלָיו וְהֵם יְשָׁרְתֻהוּ וְסָבִיב לַמִּשְׁכָּן יַחֲנוּ:
51. When the Tabernacle is set to travel, the Levites shall dismantle it; and when the Tabernacle camps, the Levites shall erect it; any outsider [non Levite] who approaches shall be put to death. נא. וּבִנְסֹעַ הַמִּשְׁכָּן יוֹרִידוּ אֹתוֹ הַלְוִיִּם וּבַחֲנֹת הַמִּשְׁכָּן יָקִימוּ אֹתוֹ הַלְוִיִּם וְהַזָּר הַקָּרֵב יוּמָת:
52. The children of Israel shall encamp, each man by his own camp and each man by his division. נב. וְחָנוּ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אִישׁ עַל מַחֲנֵהוּ וְאִישׁ עַל דִּגְלוֹ לְצִבְאֹתָם:
53. The Levites shall encamp around the Mishkan of the Testimony, so that there be no wrath upon the congregation of the children of Israel and the Levites shall keep the charge of the Mishkan of the Testimony. נג. וְהַלְוִיִּם יַחֲנוּ סָבִיב לְמִשְׁכַּן הָעֵדֻת וְלֹא יִהְיֶה קֶצֶף עַל עֲדַת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וְשָׁמְרוּ הַלְוִיִּם אֶת מִשְׁמֶרֶת מִשְׁכַּן הָעֵדוּת:
54. And the children of Israel did according to all that the Lord had commanded Moses thus did they do. נד. וַיַּעֲשׂוּ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל כְּכֹל אֲשֶׁר צִוָּה יְ־הֹוָ־ה אֶת מֹשֶׁה כֵּן עָשׂוּ:
Tuesday, May 29, 2012
Zaporozhian Cossacks
Note comment to the below:
May 29 2012 14:18 .The Zaporozhian love of freedom was, above all, an indigenous expression. While disrupted by Tsarism this impulse lived on in the soul of the Ukrainian peasantry intermittently enflamed by the agrarian disturbances of the region. In the Makhnovist context, the Zaporozhian tradition provided both a foundation and implicit rationale for the movement’s instinctual anarchism. The Makhnovist-Zaporozhian connection is not straightforward but is perhaps best conceptualized as, in the words of I. Kravchenko, a “religion of freedom." Kravchenko suggests:
This religion of freedom and instinctual anarchism was put in a glorified context with no clear conmection.The connection quite correctly is not straightforward.
The irony is that the Cossacks were absorbed by the Tsars as tools of oppression to silence and butcher the revolutionaires and used by the white army in pogroms of the Jews in Brisk in 1918 and other times during Hetman Khmelnytsky's massacres and pogroms of thousands with hatchets and clubs, so my research has indicated in the 1600s. My mother was girl of age 5 who survived these Cossacks and white Russians , if such they were in Brisk Lihuania(Belarus).Yet they valued freedom so much as anarchism tends to find romantic glory in the distant past, and to idealize that past.
Edward Yablonsky.
www.edwardsliteracylog.blogspot.com
http://libcom.org/history/makhnovists-beyond-rapids-zaporozhian-cossack-influence
Zaporozhian Cossacks.
At the Historical Musuem in Dnipropretrovsk an unassuming note dated November 27th 1919 bears the signature of Bat’ko Makhno. The note, promising security and financial assistance to the museum, was issued to the famous historian of the Zaporozhian Cossacks and then museum director Dmytro Yavornytsky. Beyond these details contained in the note the meeting of Yavornytsky and Makhno has receded into the realm of popular lore. According to legend, the Makhnovist counterintelligence came to the Yavornytsky’s home demanding he open the museum to fulfill necessary ‘contributions’. Understanding the seriousness of the situation Yavornytsky demanded an audience with Makhno who in turn requested a tour of the museum. During the tour, Makhno, quite fascinated by the exhibitions, requested an ancient Cossack drinking bottle as a present. In later renditions this bottle is described as an ‘elixir of life’ capable of giving immortality to its drinker. [12, p. 114]
Yavornytsky protested arguing the museum owned only two such artifacts. Makhno apparently responded by saying “For history one bottle of vodka is enough,” and took the bottle for himself. Makhno then asked to see the sword of a famous Hetman. Not to be fooled twice, Yavornytsky directed the Bat’ko’s attention towards a rusty artifact. In all, the visit was kindly and Makhno even refers to the director as “friend” in his security note. The following day fourteen cartloads of coal were delivered to the museum to help Yavornytsky through the winter months. As a final request Yavornytsky was asked to lecture on the Zaporozhian Cossacks to the Makhnovist army staff. Unfortunately the lecture was never held as Makhno was soon forced to evacuate the city. [5]
The Yavornytsky-Makhno meeting is a fascinating blend of history and folk memory illustrative of how the Zaporozhian heritage contributed to the Makhnovist identity. Arthur E. Adams writes: “Any effort to identify the motives of the peasant rebellions of 1918-1920 must begin with a consideration of the most powerful and glorious of all Ukrainian traditions—that of the Zaporozhian Cossacks.” [1, p. 249] Particularly for the peasant rank and file, their movement was intimately linked to the unique historical traditions of the Zaporozhian Host. The Zaporozhian tradition is a critical recurring theme in the Makhnovist narrative. It served as a wellspring of collective cultural memory and encouraged the social cohesion of the movement via references to a shared history, culture, and characteristic libertarian impulse.
Eighteenth century southern Ukraine was largely an unconquered territory. Ostensibly claimed by the Ottoman and Russian Empires, southern Ukraine in reality functioned as a grand refuge for peasants and outcasts seeking to escape the reach of lord and state. Voline writes that “thus for centuries, the Ukraine was the promised land of fugitives of every kind.” [16, p. 545] Beginning in the 15th century peasants that fled to the borderlands [ukraina] in search of ‘the free life’ [vol’nitsa] came to be called Cossacks. Derived from the south Turkic word qazak, or adventurer, in the Ukrainian context it came to refer to “the free, masterless man who lacked a well-defined place in society and who lived on its unsettled periphery.” [15, p. 108]. The Cossacks formed confraternities, or hosts, based around the Don and Dnieper rivers. These exclusively male encampments were open to all Christians irrespective of social background and members were free to leave at their own behest
The most fiercely independent of the Cossacks was the Zaporozhian Host. This group established their capital, or Sich, “beyond the rapids” [za porogy] in the islands of the lower Dnieper, near what would become the city of Alexandrovsk (modern day Zaporozhye). Voline describes the Zaporozhians as “men in love with liberty” who had “struggled for centuries against the attempts at enslavement by various neighbours.” [16, p. 544] The physical location of the host was integral to their free way of life providing a natural defence against Russians and Poles to the north and Turkic Tatars to the south. By the mid-17th century the Zaporozhians occupied an independent buffer zone in what would later become the provinces of Ekaterinoslav and Kherson. [8, p. 15] It is telling that the Zaporozhian and Makhnovist regions of influence correspond to a great extent. While the Zaporozhians were great allies in war, they were considered a disruptive presence during peacetime by the imperial powers. Frequently the Cossacks rose in rebellion, with the surrounding peasantry following suit “as if to an arranged signal.” [9, p. 181] The last centuries of Zaporozhian independence witnessed the famous Cossack rebellions of Stenka Razin, Bohdan Khmelnytsky and Emelian Pugachev. The Zaporozhian Sich also served as a supply and recruitment base for the right-bank haidamaky movement in their struggle against the Polish nobility. (15, 192) Despite their resistance to all outsiders, an encroaching Russian Empire gradually eroded Cossack independence through the cooption of the leadership and the recognition of special rights in return for military service. Those who refused these terms were violently repressed. Using Pugachev’s rebellion as a pretext, Catherine the Great ordered the Zaporozhian Sich destroyed in 1775. In the process, the Zaporozhian leadership was exiled. Some relocated to the Kuban region while the remaining population was gradually enserfed.
While the Zaporozhians were great allies in war, they were considered a disruptive presence during peacetime by the imperial powers. Frequently the Cossacks rose in rebellion, with the surrounding peasantry following suit “as if to an arranged signal.” [9, p. 181] The last centuries of Zaporozhian independence witnessed the famous Cossack rebellions of Stenka Razin, Bohdan Khmelnytsky and Emelian Pugachev. The Zaporozhian Sich also served as a supply and recruitment base for the right-bank haidamaky movement in their struggle against the Polish nobility. (15, 192) Despite their resistance to all outsiders, an encroaching Russian Empire gradually eroded Cossack independence through the cooption of the leadership and the recognition of special rights in return for military service. Those who refused these terms were violently repressed. Using Pugachev’s rebellion as a pretext, Catherine the Great ordered the Zaporozhian Sich destroyed in 1775. In the process, the Zaporozhian leadership was exiled. Some relocated to the Kuban region while the remaining population was gradually enserfed.
While never able to recover their former way of life, the spirit of volnitsa continued to flow through the veins of the toiling peasantry. Nationalist author L. Vynar, no friend to Makhno, was of the opinion that, “[Gulyai Polye's] inhabitants are mostly descendants of the old Cossack times, who have down to the present preserved the true Zaporozhian traditions.” [11, p. xx] The majority of Makhnovists descended directly from the Zaporozhians Cossacks and retained a strong cultural memory of their history through folk tales and song.
A specifically Zaporozhian tradition evolved over time, described by Adams as “a genuine egalitarianism, an anarchistic love of personal freedom that expressed itself in a profound distrust of all authority, and a proud tradition that, when a true Cossack is oppressed, he will rebel and fight with a fine disregard for consequences.” [1, p. 249] Integral to the Zaporozhian way of life was an early form of direct democracy, in which atamany [military chiefs] were elected at open councils [rady]. All Cossacks, regardless of their socioeconomic status, were free to participate in these often-boisterous elections. In contrast to their cousins on the right-bank of the Dnieper, the Zaporozhians experienced less social inequality and more restrictions on the power of their atamany in peacetime.
The Zaporozhians’ love of freedom could even extend to peoples outside their clan. In an event foreshadowing Makhnovist practices, the Zaporozhians released thousands of Turkish slaves in 1616 during a raid on Kaffa in the Crimea. [15, p. 112] All social outcasts and runaways seeking the free life were welcome to join the host. More surprisingly, and out of step with the other hosts, the Zaporozhians accepted Jews into their ranks. [9, 56] In his time Makhno would consciously adopt a policy of friendship towards Jews. The movement benefited from the participation of numerous Jewish intellectuals and ethnically Jewish battalions.
For Voline and Arshinov the influence of the Cossack heritage on the evolution of Ukrainian psychology cannot be underestimated. All three of our main sources for the Makhnovist narrative invoke Zaporozhian traditions as central to the indigenous development of the movement. Arshinov considered the presence of “the traditions of the Vol’nitsa … preserved from ancient times” as the most important Ukrainian factor facilitating the rise of the Makhnovshchina. [2, p. 50) For Voline the historical presence of the Zaporozhian tradition and its preservation in the memory of the peasantry through the years of enserfment is proof of a qualitative difference between the Ukrainian and Russian peasantry:
Certain parts of the Ukraine never allowed themselves to be wholly subjugated, as had happened in Great Russia. Their population always preserved a spirit of independence, of resistance, of popular rebellion. Relatively cultivated and refined, individualistic and capable of taking the initiative without flinching, jealous of his independence, warlike by tradition, ready to defend himself and accustomed, for centuries, to feel free and his own master, the Ukrainian was in general never subjugated to that total slavery – not only of the body but also of the spirit – characterized the population of the rest of Russia. [16, p. 544]
All factions of the civil war recognized the Makhnovshchina’s distinct Zaporozhian spirit. Anarchist Josef Gotman, remarked that, “in [Makhno’s] veins flowed the blood of Zaporog Cossack ancestors renowned for their independent spirit and fighting qualities.” [3] The White General A. Shkuro, remarked of the Makhnovists that they “take pride in calling themselves “Cossacks” and fantasize about re-establishing the Zaporozhian [Host].” Passing through Ekaterinoslav the peasants voiced their support of Makhno saying, “it doesn’t matter whether we’re Ukrainians or Russians, just that we’re Cossacks.” [13, Chapter 22] The Bolshevik Alexandra Kollontai wrote that “the village of Guylai-Polye took the form of a form of a fortified camp, reminiscent of old Zaporozhye.” [Pravda February 14, 1919, cited in 4] Likewise, during a May 1919 visit to Guylai-Polye, L. Kamenev’s assistant recalled that he felt as though he had been “transported back among the Zaporogs of the 18th century.” [cited in 14, p. 292] All levels of observers recognized the Zaporozhian influence. For example, in March 1919 the Supreme Military Inspectorate observed that, “Parts of Makhno’s army are strongly imbued with the spirit and traditions of a free Zaporozhye.” [cited in 4]
For Makhno himself, the Zaporozhian heritage was integral to his identity. He writes in his memoirs:
My mother often told me about the lives of the Zaporozhian Cossacks, about their free communes in the old days. I had once read Gogol’s novel Taras Bulba and was thrilled with the customs and traditions of the people of those times. But it never occurred to me that the day would come when I would feel myself their heir, and they would become for me a source of inspiration for the rebirth of this free country. [Makhno, A Rebellious Youth, 33]
During the agrarian disturbances of 1905 Makhno’s comrade A. Semenyuta would rally the local anarchist-communist group with the words: “A big cheer to you, children of the people, famous great-grandsons of the Cossacks!” [4] Peasant delegates from the region to the All Russian Peasant Congress in November 1905 similarly stated: “In our people there lives to this day that sense of freedom which was found among the Zaporozhian Cossacks.” [cited in 8, p. 236]
Nevertheless, Makhno was not one to romanticize the Cossack’s traditional role. He was well aware that the Cossacks over time had become “tools of the ruling class.” Makhno reflects in his memoirs:
Ever since they settled ages ago on the Don and Donetz, along the Kuban and the Terek, they had been the butchers of any attempt by labour to free itself. Yes, the Cossacks throughout their history had been the executioners for the toilers of Russia. Many of them had already realized this, but many still went to meet the revolutionary toilers with sabre and whip in hand. [10, 143].
At a February 1918 General Assembly in Gulyai-Polye Makhno describes the gathering as “truly of the old ‘Zaporozhian Sich’ as we knew it from history books” but added as a caveat that “the peasants were not as credulous as in olden times and they no longer met to discuss questions of church and faith.” [10, 174] For Makhno the Zaporozhians were a source of inspiration but not immune from criticism.
The organization of the Makhnovist army also echoed its Zaporozhian past. Military commanders at all levels were elected and commonly referred to as atamany. Likewise, according to V. Chop, Makhno’s title of Bat’ko betrays a clear Zaporozhian influence. [4] Makhno’s elite “black sotnia [hundred]” is also a traditional Zaporozhian term for a regimental unit. Additionally, many of the Makhnovists’ tactical maneuvers were distinctly Cossack.
Nevertheless, Makhno was not one to romanticize the Cossack’s traditional role. He was well aware that the Cossacks over time had become “tools of the ruling class.” Makhno reflects in his memoirs:
Ever since they settled ages ago on the Don and Donetz, along the Kuban and the Terek, they had been the butchers of any attempt by labour to free itself. Yes, the Cossacks throughout their history had been the executioners for the toilers of Russia. Many of them had already realized this, but many still went to meet the revolutionary toilers with sabre and whip in hand. [10, 143].
At a February 1918 General Assembly in Gulyai-Polye Makhno describes the gathering as “truly of the old ‘Zaporozhian Sich’ as we knew it from history books” but added as a caveat that “the peasants were not as credulous as in olden times and they no longer met to discuss questions of church and faith.” [10, 174] For Makhno the Zaporozhians were a source of inspiration but not immune from criticism.
The organization of the Makhnovist army also echoed its Zaporozhian past. Military commanders at all levels were elected and commonly referred to as atamany. Likewise, according to V. Chop, Makhno’s title of Bat’ko betrays a clear Zaporozhian influence. [4] Makhno’s elite “black sotnia [hundred]” is also a traditional Zaporozhian term for a regimental unit. Additionally, many of the Makhnovists’ tactical maneuvers were distinctly Cossack.
Despite its clear influence on the Makhnovshchina any appeal to a common Zaporozhian heritage is conspicuously absent from the movement’s propaganda. Indeed, even in a June 1920 appeal to the Don and Kuban Cossacks there is no mention of a common heritage, they are simply appealed to as labouring peoples. [2, p. 270-273] Some commentators have interpreted this as evidence that the Zaporozhian-Makhnovist connection is exaggerated, or an artificial attempt to harmonize Ukrainian history. [7, p. 526; 4] However, as is evident, participants and observers were keenly aware of the movement’s Zaporozhian inspiration. A possible explanation is that Makhnovist propaganda was commonly produced by non-peasant anarchist intellectuals. Many members of the cultural-educational department were urban Jews who would not have shared the rank-and-file peasant’s common Zaporozhian heritage. As such, the Makhnovist vision was expressed in the more universal language of revolutionary anarchism as opposed to the culturally limited, and potentially chauvinistic, language of Zaporozhian cossackdom. Furthermore, there is evidence that the peasant leadership also consciously adopted this attitude. None of the movement’s early proclamations mention Zaporozhian heritage. From the beginning the Makhnovshchina sought to include all exploited peoples of the region and thus avoided ethnically exclusive rhetoric. Makhno himself actively opposed any manifestations of national chauvinism and would have frowned upon any attempt to rally the troops around ethnic traditions. His language, and the movement as a whole, was based on the common heritage of the toiling worker, regardless of ethnicity, language or religion.
Particularly illuminating is the proclamation entitled “1654”. Published November 27th 1919 in the Ukrainian-language Makhnovist daily Shliakh do Voli [Road to Freedom], the title refers to the Treaty of Pereyaslav in which Bohdan Khmelnytsky, on the heel of his uprising, accepted the overlordship of Muscovy. The exact intentions of Khmelnytsky are still debated by historians, however for the Makhnovists the treaty was clearly a treasonous affair. In a clear indictment of the treaty, the anonymous author states that a slave is still a slave whether under the rule of Hetman or Tsar. [6, Shliakh do Voli, November 27, 1919]. The proclamation exhibits a willingness to critically engage Zaporozhian history and serves as a clear warning against any blind glorification of the Host. It points the reader to a perspective beyond national prejudices and towards a common solidarity through the experience of slavery. Furthermore, it presents a characteristically Makhnovist interpretation of history in which the rebellious masses are consistently betrayed by a privileged leadership.
The Zaporozhian love of freedom was, above all, an indigenous expression. While disrupted by Tsarism this impulse lived on in the soul of the Ukrainian peasantry intermittently enflamed by the agrarian disturbances of the region. In the Makhnovist context, the Zaporozhian tradition provided both a foundation and implicit rationale for the movement’s instinctual anarchism. The Makhnovist-Zaporozhian connection is not straightforward but is perhaps best conceptualized as, in the words of I. Kravchenko, a “religion of freedom." Kravchenko suggests:
If we ignore the anarchist slogans in Makhnovist manifestos, the political system of the Makhnovist movement was a romantic attempt to replace modern social relations with an idealized popular fantasy borrowed from Cossack times, which would allow people to find fraternal equality and personal freedom. Anarchism was only a modern 20th century formulation, which embodied similar values. Its doctrine, with its references to the methods of science, offered a way to make this dream a reality, while downplaying its utopianism. [4]
As a narrative thread the Zaporozhian heritage operates in the substrata of the Makhnovist story: implicit in the movement’s common language of the movement but never explicitly propagandized. At a fundamental level anarchism and Zaporozhian Cossackdom are profoundly complementary, functioning to narratively link the past with the present.
Bilbliography
[1] Adams, Arthur E. “The Great Ukrainian Jacquerie.” In The Ukraine, 1917-1921: A Study in Revolution, edited by Taras Hunczak, pp. 247-270. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1977.
[2] Arshinov, Peter. [1923] History of the Makhnovist Movement, 1918-1921. Translated by Lorraine and Fredy Perlman. London: Freedom Press, 2005.
[3] Berkman, Alexander. “The Man Who Saved Moscow”, Item 221. Alexander Berkman Papers, International Institute of Social History, Amsterdam.
[4] Chop, V.M. “Проблема традицій запорозького козацтва в історії махновського руху.” [“The Problem of the Zaporozhian Cossack Tradition in the History of the Makhnovist Movement”] Українське козацтво у вітчизняній та загальноєвропейській історії. Міжнародна наукова конференція. Тези доповідей. Одеса: 2005, pp. 69-70. http://www.makhno.ru/lit/chop/5.php
[5] Chop, V.M. “Ставлення до махновського руху з боку істориків запорозького козацтва Я.П.Новицького та Д.І.Яворницького.” [“The Zaporozhian Cossack Historians Navitsky and Yavornitsky’s Attitude Toward the Makhnovist Movement”] Матеріали Перших Новицьких читань. Запоріжжя: РА “Тандем-У”, 2002, pp.104-111. http://www.makhno.ru/lit/chop/16.php
[6] Chop V.M. “Газети махновського руху.” [“Newspapers of the Makhnovist Movement”] Наукові праці історичного факультету Запорізького державного університету. Запоріжжя: “Просвіта”, 2004, pp. 239-258. http://www.makhno.ru/lit/chop/6.php
[7] Darch, Colin. “The Myth of Nestor Makhno.” Economy and Society 14 (1985): 524-536.
[8] Friesen, Leonard. Rural Revolutions in Southern Ukraine: Peasants, Nobles and Colonists, 1774-1905. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2008.
[9] Gordon, Linda. Cossack Rebellions: Social Turmoil in the Sixteenth Century Ukraine. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1983.
[10] Makhno, Nestor. [1929] The Russian Revolution in Ukraine (March 1917 – April 1918). Translated by Malcolm Archibald. Edmonton: Black Cat Press, 2007.
[11] Malet, Michael. Nestor Makhno in the Russian Revolution. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan, 1982.
[12] Peters, Victor. Nestor Makhno: The Life of an Anarchist. Winnipeg: Echo Books, 1970.
[13] Shkuro, Andrei. Гражданская война в России: Записки белого партизана [“The Russian Civil War: Notes of A White Partisan”]. М.: ACT: Транзиткнига, 2004. http://militera.lib.ru/memo/russian/shkuro_ag/22.html
[14] Skirda, Alexandre. [1982] Nestor Makhno – Anarchy’s Cossack: The Struggle for Free Soviets in the Ukraine, 1917-1921. Translated by Paul Sharkey. Oakland: AK Press, 2004.
[15] Subtelny, Orest. [1988] Ukraine: A History. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2009, 4th edition.
[16] Voline. [1947] The Unknown Revolution. Translated by Fredy Perlman. Montréal: Black Rose Books, 1990.
May 29 2012 14:18 .The Zaporozhian love of freedom was, above all, an indigenous expression. While disrupted by Tsarism this impulse lived on in the soul of the Ukrainian peasantry intermittently enflamed by the agrarian disturbances of the region. In the Makhnovist context, the Zaporozhian tradition provided both a foundation and implicit rationale for the movement’s instinctual anarchism. The Makhnovist-Zaporozhian connection is not straightforward but is perhaps best conceptualized as, in the words of I. Kravchenko, a “religion of freedom." Kravchenko suggests:
This religion of freedom and instinctual anarchism was put in a glorified context with no clear conmection.The connection quite correctly is not straightforward.
The irony is that the Cossacks were absorbed by the Tsars as tools of oppression to silence and butcher the revolutionaires and used by the white army in pogroms of the Jews in Brisk in 1918 and other times during Hetman Khmelnytsky's massacres and pogroms of thousands with hatchets and clubs, so my research has indicated in the 1600s. My mother was girl of age 5 who survived these Cossacks and white Russians , if such they were in Brisk Lihuania(Belarus).Yet they valued freedom so much as anarchism tends to find romantic glory in the distant past, and to idealize that past.
Edward Yablonsky.
www.edwardsliteracylog.blogspot.com
http://libcom.org/history/makhnovists-beyond-rapids-zaporozhian-cossack-influence
Zaporozhian Cossacks.
At the Historical Musuem in Dnipropretrovsk an unassuming note dated November 27th 1919 bears the signature of Bat’ko Makhno. The note, promising security and financial assistance to the museum, was issued to the famous historian of the Zaporozhian Cossacks and then museum director Dmytro Yavornytsky. Beyond these details contained in the note the meeting of Yavornytsky and Makhno has receded into the realm of popular lore. According to legend, the Makhnovist counterintelligence came to the Yavornytsky’s home demanding he open the museum to fulfill necessary ‘contributions’. Understanding the seriousness of the situation Yavornytsky demanded an audience with Makhno who in turn requested a tour of the museum. During the tour, Makhno, quite fascinated by the exhibitions, requested an ancient Cossack drinking bottle as a present. In later renditions this bottle is described as an ‘elixir of life’ capable of giving immortality to its drinker. [12, p. 114]
Yavornytsky protested arguing the museum owned only two such artifacts. Makhno apparently responded by saying “For history one bottle of vodka is enough,” and took the bottle for himself. Makhno then asked to see the sword of a famous Hetman. Not to be fooled twice, Yavornytsky directed the Bat’ko’s attention towards a rusty artifact. In all, the visit was kindly and Makhno even refers to the director as “friend” in his security note. The following day fourteen cartloads of coal were delivered to the museum to help Yavornytsky through the winter months. As a final request Yavornytsky was asked to lecture on the Zaporozhian Cossacks to the Makhnovist army staff. Unfortunately the lecture was never held as Makhno was soon forced to evacuate the city. [5]
The Yavornytsky-Makhno meeting is a fascinating blend of history and folk memory illustrative of how the Zaporozhian heritage contributed to the Makhnovist identity. Arthur E. Adams writes: “Any effort to identify the motives of the peasant rebellions of 1918-1920 must begin with a consideration of the most powerful and glorious of all Ukrainian traditions—that of the Zaporozhian Cossacks.” [1, p. 249] Particularly for the peasant rank and file, their movement was intimately linked to the unique historical traditions of the Zaporozhian Host. The Zaporozhian tradition is a critical recurring theme in the Makhnovist narrative. It served as a wellspring of collective cultural memory and encouraged the social cohesion of the movement via references to a shared history, culture, and characteristic libertarian impulse.
Eighteenth century southern Ukraine was largely an unconquered territory. Ostensibly claimed by the Ottoman and Russian Empires, southern Ukraine in reality functioned as a grand refuge for peasants and outcasts seeking to escape the reach of lord and state. Voline writes that “thus for centuries, the Ukraine was the promised land of fugitives of every kind.” [16, p. 545] Beginning in the 15th century peasants that fled to the borderlands [ukraina] in search of ‘the free life’ [vol’nitsa] came to be called Cossacks. Derived from the south Turkic word qazak, or adventurer, in the Ukrainian context it came to refer to “the free, masterless man who lacked a well-defined place in society and who lived on its unsettled periphery.” [15, p. 108]. The Cossacks formed confraternities, or hosts, based around the Don and Dnieper rivers. These exclusively male encampments were open to all Christians irrespective of social background and members were free to leave at their own behest
The most fiercely independent of the Cossacks was the Zaporozhian Host. This group established their capital, or Sich, “beyond the rapids” [za porogy] in the islands of the lower Dnieper, near what would become the city of Alexandrovsk (modern day Zaporozhye). Voline describes the Zaporozhians as “men in love with liberty” who had “struggled for centuries against the attempts at enslavement by various neighbours.” [16, p. 544] The physical location of the host was integral to their free way of life providing a natural defence against Russians and Poles to the north and Turkic Tatars to the south. By the mid-17th century the Zaporozhians occupied an independent buffer zone in what would later become the provinces of Ekaterinoslav and Kherson. [8, p. 15] It is telling that the Zaporozhian and Makhnovist regions of influence correspond to a great extent. While the Zaporozhians were great allies in war, they were considered a disruptive presence during peacetime by the imperial powers. Frequently the Cossacks rose in rebellion, with the surrounding peasantry following suit “as if to an arranged signal.” [9, p. 181] The last centuries of Zaporozhian independence witnessed the famous Cossack rebellions of Stenka Razin, Bohdan Khmelnytsky and Emelian Pugachev. The Zaporozhian Sich also served as a supply and recruitment base for the right-bank haidamaky movement in their struggle against the Polish nobility. (15, 192) Despite their resistance to all outsiders, an encroaching Russian Empire gradually eroded Cossack independence through the cooption of the leadership and the recognition of special rights in return for military service. Those who refused these terms were violently repressed. Using Pugachev’s rebellion as a pretext, Catherine the Great ordered the Zaporozhian Sich destroyed in 1775. In the process, the Zaporozhian leadership was exiled. Some relocated to the Kuban region while the remaining population was gradually enserfed.
While the Zaporozhians were great allies in war, they were considered a disruptive presence during peacetime by the imperial powers. Frequently the Cossacks rose in rebellion, with the surrounding peasantry following suit “as if to an arranged signal.” [9, p. 181] The last centuries of Zaporozhian independence witnessed the famous Cossack rebellions of Stenka Razin, Bohdan Khmelnytsky and Emelian Pugachev. The Zaporozhian Sich also served as a supply and recruitment base for the right-bank haidamaky movement in their struggle against the Polish nobility. (15, 192) Despite their resistance to all outsiders, an encroaching Russian Empire gradually eroded Cossack independence through the cooption of the leadership and the recognition of special rights in return for military service. Those who refused these terms were violently repressed. Using Pugachev’s rebellion as a pretext, Catherine the Great ordered the Zaporozhian Sich destroyed in 1775. In the process, the Zaporozhian leadership was exiled. Some relocated to the Kuban region while the remaining population was gradually enserfed.
While never able to recover their former way of life, the spirit of volnitsa continued to flow through the veins of the toiling peasantry. Nationalist author L. Vynar, no friend to Makhno, was of the opinion that, “[Gulyai Polye's] inhabitants are mostly descendants of the old Cossack times, who have down to the present preserved the true Zaporozhian traditions.” [11, p. xx] The majority of Makhnovists descended directly from the Zaporozhians Cossacks and retained a strong cultural memory of their history through folk tales and song.
A specifically Zaporozhian tradition evolved over time, described by Adams as “a genuine egalitarianism, an anarchistic love of personal freedom that expressed itself in a profound distrust of all authority, and a proud tradition that, when a true Cossack is oppressed, he will rebel and fight with a fine disregard for consequences.” [1, p. 249] Integral to the Zaporozhian way of life was an early form of direct democracy, in which atamany [military chiefs] were elected at open councils [rady]. All Cossacks, regardless of their socioeconomic status, were free to participate in these often-boisterous elections. In contrast to their cousins on the right-bank of the Dnieper, the Zaporozhians experienced less social inequality and more restrictions on the power of their atamany in peacetime.
The Zaporozhians’ love of freedom could even extend to peoples outside their clan. In an event foreshadowing Makhnovist practices, the Zaporozhians released thousands of Turkish slaves in 1616 during a raid on Kaffa in the Crimea. [15, p. 112] All social outcasts and runaways seeking the free life were welcome to join the host. More surprisingly, and out of step with the other hosts, the Zaporozhians accepted Jews into their ranks. [9, 56] In his time Makhno would consciously adopt a policy of friendship towards Jews. The movement benefited from the participation of numerous Jewish intellectuals and ethnically Jewish battalions.
For Voline and Arshinov the influence of the Cossack heritage on the evolution of Ukrainian psychology cannot be underestimated. All three of our main sources for the Makhnovist narrative invoke Zaporozhian traditions as central to the indigenous development of the movement. Arshinov considered the presence of “the traditions of the Vol’nitsa … preserved from ancient times” as the most important Ukrainian factor facilitating the rise of the Makhnovshchina. [2, p. 50) For Voline the historical presence of the Zaporozhian tradition and its preservation in the memory of the peasantry through the years of enserfment is proof of a qualitative difference between the Ukrainian and Russian peasantry:
Certain parts of the Ukraine never allowed themselves to be wholly subjugated, as had happened in Great Russia. Their population always preserved a spirit of independence, of resistance, of popular rebellion. Relatively cultivated and refined, individualistic and capable of taking the initiative without flinching, jealous of his independence, warlike by tradition, ready to defend himself and accustomed, for centuries, to feel free and his own master, the Ukrainian was in general never subjugated to that total slavery – not only of the body but also of the spirit – characterized the population of the rest of Russia. [16, p. 544]
All factions of the civil war recognized the Makhnovshchina’s distinct Zaporozhian spirit. Anarchist Josef Gotman, remarked that, “in [Makhno’s] veins flowed the blood of Zaporog Cossack ancestors renowned for their independent spirit and fighting qualities.” [3] The White General A. Shkuro, remarked of the Makhnovists that they “take pride in calling themselves “Cossacks” and fantasize about re-establishing the Zaporozhian [Host].” Passing through Ekaterinoslav the peasants voiced their support of Makhno saying, “it doesn’t matter whether we’re Ukrainians or Russians, just that we’re Cossacks.” [13, Chapter 22] The Bolshevik Alexandra Kollontai wrote that “the village of Guylai-Polye took the form of a form of a fortified camp, reminiscent of old Zaporozhye.” [Pravda February 14, 1919, cited in 4] Likewise, during a May 1919 visit to Guylai-Polye, L. Kamenev’s assistant recalled that he felt as though he had been “transported back among the Zaporogs of the 18th century.” [cited in 14, p. 292] All levels of observers recognized the Zaporozhian influence. For example, in March 1919 the Supreme Military Inspectorate observed that, “Parts of Makhno’s army are strongly imbued with the spirit and traditions of a free Zaporozhye.” [cited in 4]
For Makhno himself, the Zaporozhian heritage was integral to his identity. He writes in his memoirs:
My mother often told me about the lives of the Zaporozhian Cossacks, about their free communes in the old days. I had once read Gogol’s novel Taras Bulba and was thrilled with the customs and traditions of the people of those times. But it never occurred to me that the day would come when I would feel myself their heir, and they would become for me a source of inspiration for the rebirth of this free country. [Makhno, A Rebellious Youth, 33]
During the agrarian disturbances of 1905 Makhno’s comrade A. Semenyuta would rally the local anarchist-communist group with the words: “A big cheer to you, children of the people, famous great-grandsons of the Cossacks!” [4] Peasant delegates from the region to the All Russian Peasant Congress in November 1905 similarly stated: “In our people there lives to this day that sense of freedom which was found among the Zaporozhian Cossacks.” [cited in 8, p. 236]
Nevertheless, Makhno was not one to romanticize the Cossack’s traditional role. He was well aware that the Cossacks over time had become “tools of the ruling class.” Makhno reflects in his memoirs:
Ever since they settled ages ago on the Don and Donetz, along the Kuban and the Terek, they had been the butchers of any attempt by labour to free itself. Yes, the Cossacks throughout their history had been the executioners for the toilers of Russia. Many of them had already realized this, but many still went to meet the revolutionary toilers with sabre and whip in hand. [10, 143].
At a February 1918 General Assembly in Gulyai-Polye Makhno describes the gathering as “truly of the old ‘Zaporozhian Sich’ as we knew it from history books” but added as a caveat that “the peasants were not as credulous as in olden times and they no longer met to discuss questions of church and faith.” [10, 174] For Makhno the Zaporozhians were a source of inspiration but not immune from criticism.
The organization of the Makhnovist army also echoed its Zaporozhian past. Military commanders at all levels were elected and commonly referred to as atamany. Likewise, according to V. Chop, Makhno’s title of Bat’ko betrays a clear Zaporozhian influence. [4] Makhno’s elite “black sotnia [hundred]” is also a traditional Zaporozhian term for a regimental unit. Additionally, many of the Makhnovists’ tactical maneuvers were distinctly Cossack.
Nevertheless, Makhno was not one to romanticize the Cossack’s traditional role. He was well aware that the Cossacks over time had become “tools of the ruling class.” Makhno reflects in his memoirs:
Ever since they settled ages ago on the Don and Donetz, along the Kuban and the Terek, they had been the butchers of any attempt by labour to free itself. Yes, the Cossacks throughout their history had been the executioners for the toilers of Russia. Many of them had already realized this, but many still went to meet the revolutionary toilers with sabre and whip in hand. [10, 143].
At a February 1918 General Assembly in Gulyai-Polye Makhno describes the gathering as “truly of the old ‘Zaporozhian Sich’ as we knew it from history books” but added as a caveat that “the peasants were not as credulous as in olden times and they no longer met to discuss questions of church and faith.” [10, 174] For Makhno the Zaporozhians were a source of inspiration but not immune from criticism.
The organization of the Makhnovist army also echoed its Zaporozhian past. Military commanders at all levels were elected and commonly referred to as atamany. Likewise, according to V. Chop, Makhno’s title of Bat’ko betrays a clear Zaporozhian influence. [4] Makhno’s elite “black sotnia [hundred]” is also a traditional Zaporozhian term for a regimental unit. Additionally, many of the Makhnovists’ tactical maneuvers were distinctly Cossack.
Despite its clear influence on the Makhnovshchina any appeal to a common Zaporozhian heritage is conspicuously absent from the movement’s propaganda. Indeed, even in a June 1920 appeal to the Don and Kuban Cossacks there is no mention of a common heritage, they are simply appealed to as labouring peoples. [2, p. 270-273] Some commentators have interpreted this as evidence that the Zaporozhian-Makhnovist connection is exaggerated, or an artificial attempt to harmonize Ukrainian history. [7, p. 526; 4] However, as is evident, participants and observers were keenly aware of the movement’s Zaporozhian inspiration. A possible explanation is that Makhnovist propaganda was commonly produced by non-peasant anarchist intellectuals. Many members of the cultural-educational department were urban Jews who would not have shared the rank-and-file peasant’s common Zaporozhian heritage. As such, the Makhnovist vision was expressed in the more universal language of revolutionary anarchism as opposed to the culturally limited, and potentially chauvinistic, language of Zaporozhian cossackdom. Furthermore, there is evidence that the peasant leadership also consciously adopted this attitude. None of the movement’s early proclamations mention Zaporozhian heritage. From the beginning the Makhnovshchina sought to include all exploited peoples of the region and thus avoided ethnically exclusive rhetoric. Makhno himself actively opposed any manifestations of national chauvinism and would have frowned upon any attempt to rally the troops around ethnic traditions. His language, and the movement as a whole, was based on the common heritage of the toiling worker, regardless of ethnicity, language or religion.
Particularly illuminating is the proclamation entitled “1654”. Published November 27th 1919 in the Ukrainian-language Makhnovist daily Shliakh do Voli [Road to Freedom], the title refers to the Treaty of Pereyaslav in which Bohdan Khmelnytsky, on the heel of his uprising, accepted the overlordship of Muscovy. The exact intentions of Khmelnytsky are still debated by historians, however for the Makhnovists the treaty was clearly a treasonous affair. In a clear indictment of the treaty, the anonymous author states that a slave is still a slave whether under the rule of Hetman or Tsar. [6, Shliakh do Voli, November 27, 1919]. The proclamation exhibits a willingness to critically engage Zaporozhian history and serves as a clear warning against any blind glorification of the Host. It points the reader to a perspective beyond national prejudices and towards a common solidarity through the experience of slavery. Furthermore, it presents a characteristically Makhnovist interpretation of history in which the rebellious masses are consistently betrayed by a privileged leadership.
The Zaporozhian love of freedom was, above all, an indigenous expression. While disrupted by Tsarism this impulse lived on in the soul of the Ukrainian peasantry intermittently enflamed by the agrarian disturbances of the region. In the Makhnovist context, the Zaporozhian tradition provided both a foundation and implicit rationale for the movement’s instinctual anarchism. The Makhnovist-Zaporozhian connection is not straightforward but is perhaps best conceptualized as, in the words of I. Kravchenko, a “religion of freedom." Kravchenko suggests:
If we ignore the anarchist slogans in Makhnovist manifestos, the political system of the Makhnovist movement was a romantic attempt to replace modern social relations with an idealized popular fantasy borrowed from Cossack times, which would allow people to find fraternal equality and personal freedom. Anarchism was only a modern 20th century formulation, which embodied similar values. Its doctrine, with its references to the methods of science, offered a way to make this dream a reality, while downplaying its utopianism. [4]
As a narrative thread the Zaporozhian heritage operates in the substrata of the Makhnovist story: implicit in the movement’s common language of the movement but never explicitly propagandized. At a fundamental level anarchism and Zaporozhian Cossackdom are profoundly complementary, functioning to narratively link the past with the present.
Bilbliography
[1] Adams, Arthur E. “The Great Ukrainian Jacquerie.” In The Ukraine, 1917-1921: A Study in Revolution, edited by Taras Hunczak, pp. 247-270. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1977.
[2] Arshinov, Peter. [1923] History of the Makhnovist Movement, 1918-1921. Translated by Lorraine and Fredy Perlman. London: Freedom Press, 2005.
[3] Berkman, Alexander. “The Man Who Saved Moscow”, Item 221. Alexander Berkman Papers, International Institute of Social History, Amsterdam.
[4] Chop, V.M. “Проблема традицій запорозького козацтва в історії махновського руху.” [“The Problem of the Zaporozhian Cossack Tradition in the History of the Makhnovist Movement”] Українське козацтво у вітчизняній та загальноєвропейській історії. Міжнародна наукова конференція. Тези доповідей. Одеса: 2005, pp. 69-70. http://www.makhno.ru/lit/chop/5.php
[5] Chop, V.M. “Ставлення до махновського руху з боку істориків запорозького козацтва Я.П.Новицького та Д.І.Яворницького.” [“The Zaporozhian Cossack Historians Navitsky and Yavornitsky’s Attitude Toward the Makhnovist Movement”] Матеріали Перших Новицьких читань. Запоріжжя: РА “Тандем-У”, 2002, pp.104-111. http://www.makhno.ru/lit/chop/16.php
[6] Chop V.M. “Газети махновського руху.” [“Newspapers of the Makhnovist Movement”] Наукові праці історичного факультету Запорізького державного університету. Запоріжжя: “Просвіта”, 2004, pp. 239-258. http://www.makhno.ru/lit/chop/6.php
[7] Darch, Colin. “The Myth of Nestor Makhno.” Economy and Society 14 (1985): 524-536.
[8] Friesen, Leonard. Rural Revolutions in Southern Ukraine: Peasants, Nobles and Colonists, 1774-1905. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2008.
[9] Gordon, Linda. Cossack Rebellions: Social Turmoil in the Sixteenth Century Ukraine. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1983.
[10] Makhno, Nestor. [1929] The Russian Revolution in Ukraine (March 1917 – April 1918). Translated by Malcolm Archibald. Edmonton: Black Cat Press, 2007.
[11] Malet, Michael. Nestor Makhno in the Russian Revolution. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan, 1982.
[12] Peters, Victor. Nestor Makhno: The Life of an Anarchist. Winnipeg: Echo Books, 1970.
[13] Shkuro, Andrei. Гражданская война в России: Записки белого партизана [“The Russian Civil War: Notes of A White Partisan”]. М.: ACT: Транзиткнига, 2004. http://militera.lib.ru/memo/russian/shkuro_ag/22.html
[14] Skirda, Alexandre. [1982] Nestor Makhno – Anarchy’s Cossack: The Struggle for Free Soviets in the Ukraine, 1917-1921. Translated by Paul Sharkey. Oakland: AK Press, 2004.
[15] Subtelny, Orest. [1988] Ukraine: A History. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2009, 4th edition.
[16] Voline. [1947] The Unknown Revolution. Translated by Fredy Perlman. Montréal: Black Rose Books, 1990.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)