Thursday, 11 September 2014

Chagiga 4: Exclusions: the Androginus, Tumtum, Women, Minors, those Marginalized, and More

"All males" are obligated to appear at the Temple during the three Festivals.  The rabbis use this phrase to help them define who is obligated and who is not.   The androginus is said by the Master in a baraita to be "a being unto itself"; something neither male nor female and intended by G-d.  The tumtum has some male genitalia as well, but can be considered a halachic uncertainty because his penis is not visible.  An uncertainty is usually not mentioned; however, the tumtum is mentioned in this case because people might assume certainty due to the existence of the tumtum's testicles.

Women are clearly not included in "all males".  They are also not obligated because appearing is a positive, time-bound mitzva, and women are exempt from mitzvot in that category.  Non-Jewish maidservants are exempt as well, for they are even less obligated than Jewish women.  Male slaves are also less obligated than Jewish women, and so they too are not obligated to appear.  The rabbis find a fun argument that allows them to include minors, however.  Minors are obligated to appear if they have reached the age of training according to rabbinic law.

Those who are ritually impure and those who have not been circumsized are exempt from attending at the Temple.  The rabbis teach us that while we understand that those who are ritually impure might be exempt, why would uncircumcized men be exempt?  We learn that these two states are considered similar.  This melding of categories helps the rabbis reestablish and maintain separation between Jewish and all other people.

When they discuss those who are blind in one eye, the rabbis turn to verses to prove that these people are also exempt.  They use a verbal analogy, a gezera shava, to explain that all males shall appear, yera'e, and will see, yireh.  This suggests that two eyes are required in order to appear.  We are told that Rabbi Huna cried when he read this verse.  Would a Master call to his slave and then forget about that slave? He asks. 

Those who smell because of their of their work are exempt as well. Our notes explain that this is not because they are offensive to others.  It is because others will respond offensively to them, trying to exclude them.  This approach is the opposite of modern 'progressive' thought, where we are encouraged to change the majority's offensive behaviour rather than exclude those who are already disadvantaged and marginalized.  I find myself wondering what G-d's intention might be regarding this response.  Should we exempt the marginalized people and save them from humiliation?  Or should we insist that others behave generously?  Does G-d - or do the rabbis - know that the general population is truly incapable of respectful behaviour, regardless of halacha?

We end the daf with a list of verses and circumstances that cause different rabbis to cry.  We are told about an instance when the Angel of Death takes the wrong Miriam.  He took the raiser of babies, when he had intended to kill Miriam the raiser (braider of women's hair).   This discussion touches upon the fundamental question of the will of G-d.  Do the rabbis believe that the Angel of Death is a force that works independently of G-d's will?  Or is accidental death a part of G-d's plan?

Why would the rabbis work so hard to exclude many categories of people but find ways to include minor boys?  Perhaps they wished to begin the full separation of boys from others, denoting their superiority and the responsibilities to come.  Perhaps they wanted to teach the boys what they must do when they attend before the serious obligations begin.  I'm sure that there could be other reasons as well.

No comments:

Post a Comment