Exegetically speaking, the Hebrew word "Shabbat" has nothing whatever to do with "rest" or "recuperation." --- It's meaning is much closer to "death," since it speaks of "severing" or "putting an end to" or else "cessation." --- This makes God's commandment that Israel remember the Sabbath in order to sanctify it, all the more perplexing? ---- Why is the Sabbath given such a central role in Jewish ceremony and liturgy? What is the true meaning of Shabbat?
With these questions in mind, I made a number of observations in previous threads on the subject. I came to realize that Shabbat rituals were in many ways similar to the mourning practices associated with the death and cessation of a family member. The Hebrew word for "seven" shiva, is the name given to the seven day period of grief and mourning which begins with the loss of a loved one. Furthermore, many of the practices of the Jewish grieving process seem to be replicated in the Sabbath rituals.
. . . Yet unlike the grieving rituals, Shabbat is also a time of joy and celebration not unlike a marriage ceremony; the focus on conjugal relations during Shabbat furthers the analogy.
Strange as it may seem, on close examination, Shabbat appears to be a unification of both death and marriage rituals:
Over a period of several centuries, the classical Kabbalists developed a rich body of myth and ritual which articulated a new vision of the Sabbath. Several outstanding examples of this are the re-imaging of the Sabbath as a mystical marriage ceremony, a day on which the divine lovers re-unite; the Sabbath as a cosmic Axis, around which Time is organized and through whose channels the week is ennobled and blessed . . . Elliot K. Ginsburg, The Sabbath in the Classical Kabbalah, p. 59.
Over a period of several centuries, the classical Kabbalists developed a rich body of myth and ritual which articulated a new vision of the Sabbath. Several outstanding examples of this are the re-imaging of the Sabbath as a mystical marriage ceremony, a day on which the divine lovers re-unite; the Sabbath as a cosmic Axis, around which Time is organized and through whose channels the week is ennobled and blessed . . .
Elliot K. Ginsburg, The Sabbath in the Classical Kabbalah, p. 59.
The bridegroom wears his death attire as his wedding attire, and at the very moment he becomes a true member of the eternal people he challenges death and becomes as strong as death. Franz Rosenzweig, Star of Redemption, p. 326.
The bridegroom wears his death attire as his wedding attire, and at the very moment he becomes a true member of the eternal people he challenges death and becomes as strong as death.
Franz Rosenzweig, Star of Redemption, p. 326.
Dan
You left off one word from the quote above,
Similarly, the bridegroom wears his death attire...
So what does that "similarly" hint at? And why do I care?
I care because inexact, or incomplete quotes can change the meaning of the material quoted. What Rosensweig is comparing is revelation and marriage, not death and marriage.
The paragraph before that the "similarly" reads exactly like this:
Thus, in the individual life, it is marriage that fills mere Jewish existence with soul. The household is the chamber of the Jewish heart. Revelation wakens something in creation that is as strong as death and sets it up against death and all of creation. The new creation of revelation is the soul, which is unearthly in earthly life. Similarly, the bridegroom wears his death attire...
You don't have to agree with me, or with Rosenzweig for that matter, but I think your connection Shabbat=death misses the boat entirely, in fact, reads the metaphysics backwards.
No matter how you try, your messages are steeped in the "death throes" of Christianity. No matter. Just don't call your constructs Jewish and all is well.
Hi Shoshana,
>. . . inexact, or incomplete quotes can change the meaning of the material quoted. What Rosensweig is comparing is revelation and marriage, not death and marriage.
You don't have to agree with me, or with Rosenzweig for that matter, but I think your connection Shabbat=death misses the boat entirely, in fact, reads the metaphysics backwards. <
. . . It would be foolhardy to assume my typical interlocutor has thoroughly read Rosenzweig, Buber, Hermann Cohen, Scholem . . . and perhaps a sprinkling of Kafka . . . which is the only true context for understanding what Rosenzweig is going on about (since all of these men were associates of, and contributed to, Rosenzweig's writing voice). --- So I don't quote Rosenzweig under the misimpression that anyone really knows what he's talking about.
I quote him because his statement is meaningful even freestanding. It's meaningful that he reveals to us that on a Jewish man's wedding day, he wears his burial shroud. ----- That truism is meaningful and important as it stands.
. . . Furthermore, fwiw, the section of The Star of Redemption that we're both quoting from, is titled: "Death and Life," and is speaking of the Days of Awe related to Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur (the latter of which Rosenzweig reminds us is the "Sabbath of sabbaths"). --- In the first paragraph, Rosenzweig says that:
Throughout these days [culminating in the Sabbath of sabbaths, DB], a wholly visible sign expresses the underlying motif, namely, that for the individual, eternity is here shifted into time. For on these days the worshiper wears his shroud. . . Thus the weekday and hte weekly Sabbath, as well as creation itself, illumine death as the crown and goal of creation.
Rosenzweig continues by telling us that "death is the ultimate, the boundary of creation." Only then does he imply that "revelation" . . . reveals to us . . . that "love is as strong as death":
And so a man wears, already once in his life, on his wedding day under the bridal canopy, his complete [death] shroud which he has received from the hands of the bride.
And in the next paragraph:
But on the Days of Awe it is worn in a very different spirit. Here it is not a wedding attire but the true attire of death.
The death shroud is worn by a Jewish male on his wedding day and on Yom Kippur (which is the Sabbath of sabbaths), setting the most basic foundation for my belief that the Sabbath is a union of rituals relating to "death" and "marriage." . . Israel's groom, used His own blood to consummate His betrothal to Israel.
DB<<. . . It would be foolhardy to assume my typical interlocutor has thoroughly read Rosenzweig, Buber, Hermann Cohen, Scholem . . . and perhaps a sprinkling of Kafka . . . which is the only true context for understanding what Rosenzweig is going on about (since all of these men were associates of, and contributed to, Rosenzweig's writing voice). --- So I don't quote Rosenzweig under the misimpression that anyone really knows what he's talking about.>>>How much more so then, that you should not mislead readers as to the nature of the context of your quotes.<
. . . In fairness, I started out the message in question with the odd truism that an exegesis of the word "shabat" shows that etymologically speaking, it never really mean anything like "rest" or "recuperation."
Before I quoted Rosenzweig, I had already given the context by which I wanted his quote to be meaningful: my belief that Shabbat is a combination of marriage and death rituals.
. . . Ergo, when Rosenzweig tell us that a Jewish man wears his death shroud (the toga he will be buried in) on his wedding day, and at the Sabbath of sabbaths (Yom Kippur) . . . it seems to me that I've been nothing if not clear as to where I am going with all this??
>No matter how you try, your messages are steeped in the "death throes" of Christianity. No matter. Just don't call your constructs Jewish and all is well.<
Within this very thread Rosenzweig is quoted saying that "death" is the boundary of creation!
Well . . . as fate would have it . . . "Shabat" (which I claim means "death") is the boundary of creation in the account recorded in the Torah (six days of creation bounded by the seventh day: Shabat).
Rosenzweig: "Thus the weekday and the weekly Sabbath, as well as creation itself, illumine death as the crown and goal of creation."
Nachmanides: "After that He commanded that Abraham keep this covenant, and the circumcision will be the sign of the covenant. Thus it is that this `sign' is as `the sign' of the Sabbath, and therefore circumcision sets aside the Sabbath. Understand this" (Torah Commentary, Lech Lecha, Genesis 17:9).
Ramban (not Dan) claims that the sign of circumcision is the sign of the Sabbath?
The making of a necrotic crown (and thus a hathan-dammim: "bloody-bridegroom") is said (by Ramban not Dan) to be "the sign" of the Sabbath.
According to two Jewish sages, Rosenzweig and Ramban (not Dan) . . .the crown of creation (Shabat) is a bloody one: a necrotic crown. Creation's King is a hathan-dammim, a bloody-bridegroom, whose seventh-day "cessation" marks "death" as both the boundary-condition and the crowning-achievement of the previous six days.
<<Nachmanides: "After that He commanded that Abraham keep this covenant, and the circumcision will be the sign of the covenant. Thus it is that this `sign' is as `the sign' of the Sabbath, and therefore circumcision sets aside the Sabbath. Understand this" (Torah Commentary, Lech Lecha, Genesis 17:9).
Ramban (not Dan) claims that the sign of circumcision is the sign of the Sabbath?>>
Ramban does not claim that brith milah is the sign of the Sabbath. That is a misreading IMO. Rather, both are signs of the eternal covenant between the descendants of Abraham who accepted the Torah and God.
Per Chavel on Ramban note 417:
Concerning the Sabbath it is also written It is a sign forever (Exodus 31:17)
Too bad, I've got the same books and can check the quotes.
>Ramban does not claim that brith milah is the sign of the Sabbath. That is a misreading IMO. Rather, both are signs of the eternal covenant between the descendants of Abraham who accepted the Torah and God.<
. . . Literally, letterally, Nachmanides appears to make a somewhat unambiguous claim that the sign that marks the covenant between God and Abraham is somehow meaningfully related to the Sabbath.
And just as it was the case that to appreciate Rosenzweig we needed to know Buber, Cohen and Scholem . . . . here too, to really appreciate Nachmanides requires that a person be familiar with the kabbalistic authors, and concepts, which form the foundation for Nachmanides' investigations.
Joseph Gikatilla feasted on the same kabbalistic texts that energized Nachmanides, and thus, when we read Rabbi Gikatilla, we're reading the concepts flowing throughout Nachmanides' commentary:
Know that the BRIT of circumcision is the essence of SHaBaT within the essence of circumcision and the uncovering of the corona which is within the essence of remembering the SHaBaT and keeping it (ZaCHoR and SHaMoR); remembering in the day and keeping by night . . . Gikatilla, Gates of Light, p. 80.
Know that the BRIT of circumcision is the essence of SHaBaT within the essence of circumcision and the uncovering of the corona which is within the essence of remembering the SHaBaT and keeping it (ZaCHoR and SHaMoR); remembering in the day and keeping by night . . .
Gikatilla, Gates of Light, p. 80.
. . . Now if we're true to the context of this thread, then we might marvel that in the ancient world (see Jeremiah 16:6, 41:5, 47:5, 48:37 . . . for starters . . .) a necessary component of grieving for the loss of a loved one involved "cutting" the flesh on some part of the body. Jeremiah 48:37 speaks of the yad (yod dalet), and the Hebrew word is interpreted as "hand," but also can mean the male-organ (which male-organ Jeremiah goes on to note is wrapped in sackcloth before or after the cutting).
In his seminal work on The Sabbath in the Classical Kabbalah, Professor Elliot K. Ginsburg has noted (as quoted earlier in this thread) that for the kabbalists, Shabat represented a mystical "re"-union (marriage) between God and Malkuth (His exiled bride). . . .
. . . With the facts in hand (so to say), wouldn't it be better to speak of Shabat as the "betrothal" rather than the actual wedding ceremony? Maybe the hathan-dammim arrives at the huppah still wearing the shroud marking the price He paid to stand under the canopy with His beloved? (The "re" in the "union" marks the period between betrothal and the huppah.)
Is this why Shabat comes before brit milah (the seventh before the eighth) . . . while brit milah is greater than shabbat?
Does the Bridegroom bethroth Himself to Israel/Creation, on the seventh day and simultaneously purchase Her back from sitra achra at the price of His own blood? Does He come into the "Other Side" (the fallen world) to rescue His Bride from her exile there? . . . Is brit milah the latter-day (eighth aeon) removal of the shroud-of-the-morgue just in time for the bloody-bridgroom to step out of it and stand under the canopy with His beloved??
Is the bride (Israel/Creation) still waiting at the altar for the hathan-dammim? Will He arrive to step out of the bloodstained toga-of-eternity to be with His beloved to live happily everlasting after:
I saw heaven standing open and there before me was a white horse, whose rider is called Faithful and True. . . He is dressed in a robe dipped in blood, and his name is the Word of God. . . I saw the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride beautifully dressed for her husband. And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, "Now the dwelling of God is with men, and he will live with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God. He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away." Revelation 19:13- 21:4.
I saw heaven standing open and there before me was a white horse, whose rider is called Faithful and True. . . He is dressed in a robe dipped in blood, and his name is the Word of God. . . I saw the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride beautifully dressed for her husband. And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, "Now the dwelling of God is with men, and he will live with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God. He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away."
Revelation 19:13- 21:4.
>Cutting is explicitly forbidden as a Jewish mourning rite.<
. . . What is forbidden in profane space is holy in sacred space.
We are not allowed to cut ourselves to morn a fellow human being, but brit milah turns our body into sacred space. It makes the human body the temple of God, sacred space, where what is formerly forbidden is now demanded.
We are not allowed to drink the blood of man nor animal. But unless we drink God's blood, we have no life in us. Brit milah creates a unity between divine and human in Jewish flesh so that metzitzah fulfills the divine imperative of John 6:53.
DB<<We are not allowed to drink the blood of man nor animal. But unless we drink God's blood, we have no life in us.>>>My visceral Jewish reaction is "something probably not allowed to be written in a protected folder " and how completely, totally unJewish. <
. . . Perhaps you're just going to the wrong bris milah ceremonies?
I have stacks of books (written by Jewish authors, for Jewish audiences) that tell a story of bris milah quite different from the safe modern world of Judaism you inhabit.
Professor Eric Kline Silverman has recently published a book called From Abraham to America: A history of Jewish Circumcision. On page 138 of his book, Professor Silverman tells us that:
The first person to sip during the circumcision ceremony is the infant. After the mohel performs metzitzah, he traditionally spits the child's blood into a goblet of wine or sloshes the blood and wine in his mouth and expectorates into a cup. The mohel dips his finger and gives the child a taste. The boy's parents next take a sip, followed by the mohel. . . Today, most Jews sip only wine. But they once drank blood.
On the same page Professor Silverman tell us that:
Sipping the circumcision wine as wine rather than blood also dilutes the symbolic potency of the rite. The Torah, to repeat, firmly prohibits the consumption of blood, one of the premier laws incumbent on all of humanity and not just Jews. Yet the paramount ritual remembrance of the covenant, with all its promise of progeny, requires participants to violate this decree by drinking a child's "life-force." To abandon this complex morality, regardless of whether or not one endorses it, is to deny the ceremony the very power that has enabled it to endure.
Amen.
Properly understood, brit milah transforms the human body into the temple of God. As such, it is the place where God resides, so that drinking the blood of circumcision is sanctified and protected against all the prohibition of the Torah.
Symbolically, circumcision places us inside the Most Holy Place of the Temple, behind the two curtains (milah and periah) where the Presence of God supersedes the "written" Torah.
The Alter Rebbe Shneur Zalman stated that, "Circumcision is above the name YHVH . . . and above the aspect of Torah, which lowers itself below . . .".
So great is circumcision that it supersedes Shabat: Shabat is merely the betrothal; circumcison is the consummation.
-Ivy
>>> any discussion of Shabbat does not belong in any folder that deals with Xtianity. I have to wonder why it took so long to figure that out? <<<
> . . . your messages are steeped in the "death throes" of Christianity. No matter. Just don't call your constructs Jewish and all is well<
. . . I was thinking about your statement set against Gikatilla's . . . about zachor and shamor ("remembering" and "keeping"). Rabbi Gikatilla says "remembering" (zachor) is a daytime practice, while "keeping" (shamor) is by night.
Within that context the Lord said he was the Light of day. He then recited kiddush and told his followers to "remember" that he shone on the world. ------ The very next day he had occasion to remark "It is finished," and he "ceased" (so to say) and was thus in the grave by Shabat.
His followers mourned on Shabat-morn. They held a wake: Shabat-mourn . . . since for them, the night (cessation of the Light of the world) had arrived: the Light of the world had ceased. A wake was in order:
wake (n.2) "state of wakefulness," O.E. -wacu (as in nihtwacu "night watch"), related to watch [Heb. shamor]; and partly from O.N. vaka "vigil, eve before a feast," related to vaka "be awake" (cf. O.H.G. wahta "watch, vigil," M.Du. wachten "to watch, guard;" see wake (v.)). Meaning "a sitting up at night with a corpse" is attested from 1412 (the verb in this sense is recorded from c.1250). The custom largely survived as an Irish activity. Wakeman (c.1200), which survives as a surname, was M.E. for "watchman." Dictionary.com (emphasis and bracket mine).
wake (n.2)
>How did I get into this conversation?<
Sorry if I said something wrong. I was in a thread a while back when someone said something about dans love of circumcision and I thought it was you who posted something from an older thread where dan clarified his love of circumcision. Maybe it wasn't you who posted the older message into that thread. sorry if I got it wrong.
