HOME
johndbrey@gmail.com
© 2009 John D. Brey.
johndbrey@gmail.com
© 2009 John D. Brey.
The basic
thrust of the verb is, when transitive, “to sever, put an end to,” and when
intransitive, “to desist, to come to an end.”
Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament.
Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament.
3. (a)
šbt qal means “to cease”; attested as par. expressions are ḥdl “to cease” (Isa
24:8; 58x in the OT, 8x in Judg, 7x in Job, 6x in 2 Chron; also ḥādēl
“ceasing,” Isa 53:3; Psa 39:5; “failing,” Ezek 3:27; ḥedel “cessation = realm
of the dead”? Isa 38:11.
Theological Lexicon of the Old Testament.
Theological Lexicon of the Old Testament.
"It is finished” . . . followed by Shabat:
he rested-in-peace; he ceased being as he previously was, he withdrew into the
realm of the dead.[1] ----- At mid-day, so the Rabbis say, the first man
entered Eden. ---- By twilight’s last gleaming on Shabat’s hallowed-eve,
he was driven out among the ghosts and ghouls and those who bereave. On the
marrow of Sabbath-eve’s dark night, he would have ceased but for Shabat’s
redeeming plight:
The
ministering angels cried aloud, Man in glory tarrieth not overnight". . .
The Sabbath day arrived and became an advocate for the first man, and spake
before Him: Sovereign of all worlds! No murderer has been slain in the world
during the six days of creation, and wilt Thou commence (to do this) with me?
Is this its sanctity, and is this its blessing? as it is said, “And God blessed
the seventh day, and hallowed it” (Gen. ii. 3). By the merit of the Sabbath day
Adam was saved from the judgment of Gehinnom.
Pirke de Rabbi Eliezer.
Pirke de Rabbi Eliezer.
In
his advocacy for the first man, Shabat (the personal pronoun)[2], so
unites his destiny with mankind, that he speaks of his own cessation as
the ransom for Adam’s murderous sin, “wilt Thou commence to do this with
me”? --- In his anthropomorphic retort, Shabat, the personal
pronoun, sees Adam’s judgment carried out on him, i.e. on Shabat, as
bloodying Shabat with Adam’s blood. ---- Shabat chooses instead
to bleed singularly as advocate for Adam, thus sparing Adam his rightful place
in Gehinnom.. ----- Shabat does not so much frame his
self-sacrifice, as discover it within himself, with a sort of joyous
astonishment, in all its seemingly spontaneous developments (Humboldt)[3] : “Now
I see! . . . So this is my sanctity, my blessing, and therefore my name”?
Both Genesis, and John’s Gospel, document the “It is finished,” which preseeds the “cessation” spoken of by the Hebrew word "Shabat". ---- The cessation in Genesis occurs after the creation of man, while the one in John’s Gospel follows immediately on the heels of the creation of the New Man.[4] ---- Both move directly from the creation of man/New-Man, into the Sabbath, marked by the word shin-bet-tav (the thornbush shin ש, as the residence, bet ב, of the one who dwells on the cross, tav ת). “ . . . in the ` Blessings of Moses,’ the god is designated `shokhni seneh,’ which is translated as `He who dwells in the thorn bush’” (Buber, Moses, p. 40). [5]
Associate Professor of Jewish Thought at the University of Michigan, Elliot K Ginsburg, remarks: "The Sabbath is the life-blood of the cosmos, upon which all existence depends." ------ John's Gospel: "Unless you drink my blood you have no life in you."
Adam's name segues seemlessly with the concept that Shabat speaks of "cessation" and willing self-sacrifice. The word translated "Adam" is made up of the alef, a dalet, and a mem. . . The"alef" is the particular letter of the Hebrew alphabet thought to most clearly symbolize God himself, while the remaining two letters "dalet mem" spell the Hebrew word "blood" (dam). "A-dam" is therefore God's "blood." The name "Adam" means the "blood" dam, of the alef. Adam is ransomed from Gehinnom by means of the blood of the alef, so that his name becomes almost an acronym for "God's blood."
alef=God.
dalet-mem=blood.
alef-dalet-mem (Adam)=God's blood.[6]
* * *
Pirke de Rabbi Eliezar remarks that when Adam realizes Shabat’s Abelness [7] to atone for his murderous shortcomings, he begins to “observe” or keep (shamor) the Sabbath, but also to sing a loving lament (zachor) for the Sabbath day: “He began to observe (the Sabbath) and to utter a psalm for the Sabbath day . . .”. ---- We know that the Psalm of the Sabbath Day (Psalm 92) is interpreted as a loving “lament,” since Rabbi Eliezar notes first and foremost that the harp which accompanies the Psalm has ten strings, while the testimony for the dead is through ten males. ----- The Psalm itself touches on the zachor, and shamor, of the dual commandments concerning the Sabbath: “To proclaim your love in the morning [zachor] and your faithfulness at night [shamor]” (Psalm 92: 2).
The night-vigil is marked by the Hebrew word “shamor” often translated “keep” (as in “keep” the Sabbath). The word has an interesting relationship with the English “wake,” in the sense that they’re both tied to the idea of someone performing the duties of a “night-watchman.” ---- Brown Driver Briggs, ties the Hebrew shamor to the Arabic samara, which means “to converse by night, to stay awake.” ---- Similarly, the English word “wake” (as in “funeral wake”) takes the Arabic a bit further by speaking of "a sitting up at night with a corpse.” [8]
In this vein, a passage in Tiqqunei ha-Zohar reads not only to presents a direct link to the concept of a night-vigil for the corpse of the beloved, but it also nails down the personage the foregoing has been beating around the thorn-bush not to address by another name:
Both Genesis, and John’s Gospel, document the “It is finished,” which preseeds the “cessation” spoken of by the Hebrew word "Shabat". ---- The cessation in Genesis occurs after the creation of man, while the one in John’s Gospel follows immediately on the heels of the creation of the New Man.[4] ---- Both move directly from the creation of man/New-Man, into the Sabbath, marked by the word shin-bet-tav (the thornbush shin ש, as the residence, bet ב, of the one who dwells on the cross, tav ת). “ . . . in the ` Blessings of Moses,’ the god is designated `shokhni seneh,’ which is translated as `He who dwells in the thorn bush’” (Buber, Moses, p. 40). [5]
Associate Professor of Jewish Thought at the University of Michigan, Elliot K Ginsburg, remarks: "The Sabbath is the life-blood of the cosmos, upon which all existence depends." ------ John's Gospel: "Unless you drink my blood you have no life in you."
Adam's name segues seemlessly with the concept that Shabat speaks of "cessation" and willing self-sacrifice. The word translated "Adam" is made up of the alef, a dalet, and a mem. . . The"alef" is the particular letter of the Hebrew alphabet thought to most clearly symbolize God himself, while the remaining two letters "dalet mem" spell the Hebrew word "blood" (dam). "A-dam" is therefore God's "blood." The name "Adam" means the "blood" dam, of the alef. Adam is ransomed from Gehinnom by means of the blood of the alef, so that his name becomes almost an acronym for "God's blood."
alef=God.
dalet-mem=blood.
alef-dalet-mem (Adam)=God's blood.[6]
* * *
Pirke de Rabbi Eliezar remarks that when Adam realizes Shabat’s Abelness [7] to atone for his murderous shortcomings, he begins to “observe” or keep (shamor) the Sabbath, but also to sing a loving lament (zachor) for the Sabbath day: “He began to observe (the Sabbath) and to utter a psalm for the Sabbath day . . .”. ---- We know that the Psalm of the Sabbath Day (Psalm 92) is interpreted as a loving “lament,” since Rabbi Eliezar notes first and foremost that the harp which accompanies the Psalm has ten strings, while the testimony for the dead is through ten males. ----- The Psalm itself touches on the zachor, and shamor, of the dual commandments concerning the Sabbath: “To proclaim your love in the morning [zachor] and your faithfulness at night [shamor]” (Psalm 92: 2).
The night-vigil is marked by the Hebrew word “shamor” often translated “keep” (as in “keep” the Sabbath). The word has an interesting relationship with the English “wake,” in the sense that they’re both tied to the idea of someone performing the duties of a “night-watchman.” ---- Brown Driver Briggs, ties the Hebrew shamor to the Arabic samara, which means “to converse by night, to stay awake.” ---- Similarly, the English word “wake” (as in “funeral wake”) takes the Arabic a bit further by speaking of "a sitting up at night with a corpse.” [8]
In this vein, a passage in Tiqqunei ha-Zohar reads not only to presents a direct link to the concept of a night-vigil for the corpse of the beloved, but it also nails down the personage the foregoing has been beating around the thorn-bush not to address by another name:
You must
not let his corpse remain on the Tree overnight.” [Dt. 21:23; John 19:31] This
refers to the Sabbath when a person is bequeathed an additional soul; the soul
that holds sway during the week should not be seen on it, doing that labor
[mela’khah] which is prohibited on Shabbat. Rather “bury it on that day,”
[Ibid.] for it should not be seen before the “Remember” and “Keep” of Shabbat.[9]
The
worker associated with the erection of man (so to say), and the erection of the
New Man, [10] must not remain on the Tree throughout Shabat-eve (“bury
him on that day”); nor may he be seen on Shabat, which is his cessation,
his time to rest-in-peace. Instead, keep a night watch, a night vigil. Let the
night-watchmen wear a corpse around the neck as token of their employment;
they’re watchmen keeping a vigil over a corpse they've vowed to remember until
he returns. Remember the Shabat-mourn to keep it holy.
* * *
* * *
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.
Nachmanides, Torah Commentary, Lech Lecha, Genesis 17:9.
Nachmanides, Torah Commentary, Lech Lecha, Genesis 17:9.
In
his Torah commentary, Nachmanides appears to make a somewhat unambiguous claim
that the sign which marks the covenant between God and Abraham is somehow
meaningfully related to the Sabbath. ---- Joseph Gikatilla took in 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.
Gikatilla, Gates of Light, p. 80.
In
this reading of Shabat as funeral-wake, it might be noted that in the
ancient world a normal component of grieving for the loss of a loved one
included "cutting" (milah) 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 Professor Ginsburg’s previously noted book, The Sabbath in the Classical Kabbalah, he states that for the kabbalists, Shabat represents a mystical "re"-union between God and Malkuth (His exiled bride).[11]
Notwithstanding the “re” in the “union,” still, it might be better to think of Shabat as the first stage, "betrothal," rather than the completed union itself, which is consummated at the actual wedding ceremony? Perhaps the hathan-dammim (“bloody-bridegroom”) arrives at the chuppah still wearing the shroud marking the price he paid to stand under the canopy with his beloved?
Is this why Shabat comes before brit milah (the seventh before the eighth), even though brit milah supercedes Shabat? Is this why the bridegroom wears his death attire under the canopy?
Since it's the "blood" which is important at brit milah (the prepuce is the shell, and not the kernel of truth), does the ritual symbolize the fact that Israel is not to recieve a groom who is not wearing a kittel stained with his own blood?
Does the bridegroom betroth 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? [12] . . . Is brit milah the latter-day removal of the shroud-of-the-morgue just in time for the bloody-bridegroom to step out of it and into the canopy with his beloved bride?
Here, in the context of a Jewish wedding, Rosenzweig speaks of love being as strong as death, love triumphing over death, death being the boundary-condition of God's love for creation, "death," i.e. "Shabat" being the mark of God's love for His creation. [13]
Since the central component of the commandment concerning Shabat, is that Israel "remember" the Sabbath, mark it as sacred, holy, and of grave importance to everything that Israel is, and represents, would it be inappropriate to invert the lyrics of a post-conversion Dylan song to speak of ". . . the bride still waiting at the altar"?
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 present the glorious chuppah he’s prepared with the blessings of the Father:
In Professor Ginsburg’s previously noted book, The Sabbath in the Classical Kabbalah, he states that for the kabbalists, Shabat represents a mystical "re"-union between God and Malkuth (His exiled bride).[11]
Notwithstanding the “re” in the “union,” still, it might be better to think of Shabat as the first stage, "betrothal," rather than the completed union itself, which is consummated at the actual wedding ceremony? Perhaps the hathan-dammim (“bloody-bridegroom”) arrives at the chuppah still wearing the shroud marking the price he paid to stand under the canopy with his beloved?
Is this why Shabat comes before brit milah (the seventh before the eighth), even though brit milah supercedes Shabat? Is this why the bridegroom wears his death attire under the canopy?
Since it's the "blood" which is important at brit milah (the prepuce is the shell, and not the kernel of truth), does the ritual symbolize the fact that Israel is not to recieve a groom who is not wearing a kittel stained with his own blood?
Does the bridegroom betroth 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? [12] . . . Is brit milah the latter-day removal of the shroud-of-the-morgue just in time for the bloody-bridegroom to step out of it and into the canopy with his beloved bride?
Here, in the context of a Jewish wedding, Rosenzweig speaks of love being as strong as death, love triumphing over death, death being the boundary-condition of God's love for creation, "death," i.e. "Shabat" being the mark of God's love for His creation. [13]
Since the central component of the commandment concerning Shabat, is that Israel "remember" the Sabbath, mark it as sacred, holy, and of grave importance to everything that Israel is, and represents, would it be inappropriate to invert the lyrics of a post-conversion Dylan song to speak of ". . . the bride still waiting at the altar"?
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 present the glorious chuppah he’s prepared with the blessings of the Father:
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.
Revelation 19:13- 21:4.
*
* *
The great Jewish mystics played on the strange gender ambiguity witnessed throughout the Tanakh. God is sometimes a male, and sometimes a female. --- There's a concept (in The Zohar for instance) that all creation is "feminine" in relationship to God Himself. ---- Within this universal creature-femininity, there's a relativity of "masculinity" based on a creature's closeness to the Godhead (so to speak)[14]. In Christian parlance, Jesus Christ is the “groom” of the Church, the kabod, of the Church, but he remains the “bride” of God. The Church is the bride of Christ, but the masculine ruler over Olam Haba. ---- Terrestrial Israel (as opposed to Kenneseth Israel) is the female friend of the bride (the Church), but the masculine ruler over all terrestrial real estate for ever and ever.
Rashi and Nachmanides appear to have been clearly but gingerly searching out these relationships by establishing the working symbiosis between Shabat and brit milah.
In gender terms, Shabat signifies the circumcision of the cosmic male, Adam Kadmon, while brit milah marks the circumcision of the bride, the moment when her veil is lifted (so to say) after she has seen the groom face-to-face.
On Shabat, the "groom" (the male) offers his blood as the high price of purchasing his bride (Malkuth) back from her exile (the betrothal), with the intent of engaging her forever. ---- The groom’s blood is the wine consumed by bride and groom at the consummation of the betrothal (Shabat-Kiddushin). ---- By drinking the cup, the bride proclaims that her love for the groom transcends the price they will both pay for the holy union (in her heart she's thinking: "if it be possible let this Shabat-cup pass from me, nevertheless . . ."). ----- Her drinking of the cup is witness to her acceptance of the terms of the betrothal, i.e. she will follow Him wherever he leads, even if it requires her to pass beyond his burial shroud (wedding attire) in order to conjugally consummate her love for him . . . she agrees to share in his blood as witness to the fact that for her, as was the case for him, love is as strong as death (Rosenzweig).
On one hand, brit milah seems to symbolize female circumcision (the bride’s veil being lifted by the groom), but more importantly a union of the concepts of male and female circumcision; and thus it transcends Shabat (which portrays the male actually passing through the hymen of the morgue with the female only agreeing to participate in principle to the holy death/union). ---- On the "seventh" day, male circumcision takes place with the female merely "agreeing" (formally and with "witnesses") to follow him past the veil of tears which is the hymen of the morgue . . . the tearing, or lifting of which finds one entering into the sacred-space of Olam Haba: the heavenly chuppah (which will one day descend out of heaven).
The "eighth" day sees the bridegroom's return from sacred-space (Shabat), which he entered through his own blood, and where he has prepared a place ("I go to prepare a place for you") in order to consummate the union. He blasts the ram's horn signifying that the ram is now free from the thorn-bush (divine-death, tzimtzum) and can, for he is Abel, lift the veil of tears and carry his bride into everlasting conjugal bliss in the Word to Come.
In the Jewish ritual, the groomsmen stand outside the chuppah (where the marriage is consummated) in order that after the consummation, they may spy the blood on the sheets which "witnesses" to the fact that the bride was faithful in her bridegroom's absence; she faithfully kept Shabat in her memory, never loosing faith that he would return even from a "cessation" witnessed by anyone willing to turn their head to see the blood on the shroud.
At every brit milah ceremony, the "witnesses" not only lift a Kiddush cup in the Name of the blood of the anthropomorphic organ of the covenant, they similarly witness the blood on the swaddling sheets wrapped around bride and groom now One in joyful union.
* * *
The great Jewish mystics played on the strange gender ambiguity witnessed throughout the Tanakh. God is sometimes a male, and sometimes a female. --- There's a concept (in The Zohar for instance) that all creation is "feminine" in relationship to God Himself. ---- Within this universal creature-femininity, there's a relativity of "masculinity" based on a creature's closeness to the Godhead (so to speak)[14]. In Christian parlance, Jesus Christ is the “groom” of the Church, the kabod, of the Church, but he remains the “bride” of God. The Church is the bride of Christ, but the masculine ruler over Olam Haba. ---- Terrestrial Israel (as opposed to Kenneseth Israel) is the female friend of the bride (the Church), but the masculine ruler over all terrestrial real estate for ever and ever.
Rashi and Nachmanides appear to have been clearly but gingerly searching out these relationships by establishing the working symbiosis between Shabat and brit milah.
In gender terms, Shabat signifies the circumcision of the cosmic male, Adam Kadmon, while brit milah marks the circumcision of the bride, the moment when her veil is lifted (so to say) after she has seen the groom face-to-face.
On Shabat, the "groom" (the male) offers his blood as the high price of purchasing his bride (Malkuth) back from her exile (the betrothal), with the intent of engaging her forever. ---- The groom’s blood is the wine consumed by bride and groom at the consummation of the betrothal (Shabat-Kiddushin). ---- By drinking the cup, the bride proclaims that her love for the groom transcends the price they will both pay for the holy union (in her heart she's thinking: "if it be possible let this Shabat-cup pass from me, nevertheless . . ."). ----- Her drinking of the cup is witness to her acceptance of the terms of the betrothal, i.e. she will follow Him wherever he leads, even if it requires her to pass beyond his burial shroud (wedding attire) in order to conjugally consummate her love for him . . . she agrees to share in his blood as witness to the fact that for her, as was the case for him, love is as strong as death (Rosenzweig).
On one hand, brit milah seems to symbolize female circumcision (the bride’s veil being lifted by the groom), but more importantly a union of the concepts of male and female circumcision; and thus it transcends Shabat (which portrays the male actually passing through the hymen of the morgue with the female only agreeing to participate in principle to the holy death/union). ---- On the "seventh" day, male circumcision takes place with the female merely "agreeing" (formally and with "witnesses") to follow him past the veil of tears which is the hymen of the morgue . . . the tearing, or lifting of which finds one entering into the sacred-space of Olam Haba: the heavenly chuppah (which will one day descend out of heaven).
The "eighth" day sees the bridegroom's return from sacred-space (Shabat), which he entered through his own blood, and where he has prepared a place ("I go to prepare a place for you") in order to consummate the union. He blasts the ram's horn signifying that the ram is now free from the thorn-bush (divine-death, tzimtzum) and can, for he is Abel, lift the veil of tears and carry his bride into everlasting conjugal bliss in the Word to Come.
In the Jewish ritual, the groomsmen stand outside the chuppah (where the marriage is consummated) in order that after the consummation, they may spy the blood on the sheets which "witnesses" to the fact that the bride was faithful in her bridegroom's absence; she faithfully kept Shabat in her memory, never loosing faith that he would return even from a "cessation" witnessed by anyone willing to turn their head to see the blood on the shroud.
At every brit milah ceremony, the "witnesses" not only lift a Kiddush cup in the Name of the blood of the anthropomorphic organ of the covenant, they similarly witness the blood on the swaddling sheets wrapped around bride and groom now One in joyful union.
* * *
I have
argued that one could chart the history of mystical speculation in Judaism as a
transition from an implicit to an explicit phallocentrism connected especially
to the visualization of God. The esoteric dimension so central to the various
currents of Jewish mysticism is inseparably tied to the question of eroticism.
The issue of gender, therefore, goes to the very heart of Jewish mysticism in
its different historical and literary configurations.
Elliot R. Wolfson, Circle in the Square, preface.
Elliot R. Wolfson, Circle in the Square, preface.
The
serious student of Jewish mysticism recognizes Professor Wolfson’s statement as
something like the quintessence of the truth concerning the mystical lore.
Scholem likewise noted the near obsession with the liturgies surrounding the
phallus, and stated that the Sages saw them as symbolic of the deepest stratum
of mystery within their creed, “It cannot be denied that this whole sphere
exercises a strong fascination upon the mind of the author of the Zohar. The
mystical character of his thought is more strongly pronounced in these passages
than in any others . . . not a minor psychological problem considering the
author’s strict devotion to the most pious conceptions of Jewish life and belief.”
[15]
It could be said in all fairness that the Sages of this mystical tradition saw circumcision and all that it entails nearly everywhere they looked in Scripture. As Professor Wolfson points out, these brilliant men saw circumcision as the very exegetical principal upon which a proper engagement with the Word of God must be based.
Even beyond the text of the torah, the Sages saw signs of circumcision throughout mundane reality itself. --- Nowhere was this more the case than in regards to the biology and phenomenology of sexuality. It becomes apparent through carefully chosen words in their narratives, that they had pieced together biological truisms of incredible intricacy, insight, and foresight. Nothing of importance concerning the biology of gender, or the sexuality it breeds, seems to have escaped their glance.
Based on their writing it’s a foregone conclusion that they understood the biological truth that the default gender in the human race is female. The nipples on the man, like the blind spot where the optic nerve obstructs vision, are tell-tale signs of secrets not readily apparent to the naked eye.
We can know, if we get beyond the thorns the Sages place in our path, that they appreciated the modern biological fact that the natural suture-scar known as the “frenulum” was formed when the default genitalia (female) was transformed into the very organ upon which their focus was so acutely tuned. --- Furthermore, they appear to have perceived that if the male organ is in fact a transformation of the female genitalia, then the same mucus membrane which forms the womanly veil underneath the female genitalia (i.e. the veil which must be intact when the groom arrives to consummate the covenant), is quite literally the second veil torn in a proper ritual circumcision.
A proper ritual circumcision includes the two stages “milah” and “periah” which is the opening of the flesh and the tearing of the mucus membrane beneath. When a mohel goes through the fleshly barrier, he arrives at the very same membrane which in the female gender, has developed into the hymen. So in ritual circumcision, the mohel actually tears what will be torn for the female at the consummation of her wedding night.
The thoughtful Jewish Sages are obsessed with the symbolism of brit milah partly because of this simple biological fact. From a basic knowledge of mundane biology comes the perception of precisely why these brilliant Jewish men considered brit milah to be the consummation of the covenant, a literal theophany of the Presence of God, where God enters into a real covenant with Israel, His beloved bride, His covenantal partner, when He passes through Jewish flesh to enter into the actual company of Israel.[16]
The Sagely obsession with brit milah is centered around a pre-scientific appreciation of the fact that the mucus membrane torn in the most important aspect of brit milah (periah) is actually the same element torn in the female body when the bride and the groom consummate their love for one another. ---- The same “blood-witness” seen by the husband’s groomsmen, is seen by the participants of the ritual circumcision. The participants of the brit represent the groomsmen witnessing the fact that the consummation of God’s covenant with Israel has taken place in conjunction with the severing of the self-same membrane that this new member of Israel will tear when he consummates his covenant with his own bride, when he first mates with her, after their own betrothal and marriage ceremony.
NOTES:
1.Jesus said: “It is finished” on early Shabbat eve, before sundown.
2. Throughout Jewish writings, "Shabat" is often considered a personal pronoun for God Himself, and even the Messiah. See Tishby, The Wisdom of the Zohar, p. 1223-1233, and Wolfson, Along the Path, p. 80-84.
3. A paraphrasing of Humbolt (On Language, p. 234) speaking of man’s finding “words” inside himself, seems apropos to the Word finding man, or love for man, inside himself, with a sort of spontaneous joy. Pirke de Rabbi Eliezer’s statement from the lips of Shabat seems to justify such a rendering.
4. Gen. 1:26 and John 19:30.
5. According to Rabbi Yitzchak Ginsburgh, the shin is constructed of three vav with a thorny-yud on top of each vav ש. Pictographically, the shin is a "thorn-bush." ----Since the shin is directly adjacent the tav in the Hebrew alphabet, the tav can be thought of as the stem, or trunk, of the thorn-bush. The shin is symbiotically related to the tav, even as the sages tell us that the Tree of Knowledge grows from the same root as the Tree of Life. The shin is the outer covering of the tav, the last thing/letter you see before the tav. You must pass through the shin to get to the tav. Thus the shin is the thorn-bush forming the outer protection of the Tree of Life – the tav -- where truth dwells -- the bet. The bet connected to the shin in SHaBaT signifies that the shin, i.e. the thorn-bush, is the “home,” or residence of God, the place where God dwells in His Shekinah Presence (Exodus 23:21). Daniel Matt (Zohar, Vol. 1, p. 174-175), states: "The opening letter of the Torah, the bet of Be-reshit, In the beginning, stands for bayit, house . . . ." Munk tells us that, "Literally, beis [bet] means house . . . ." The ancient tav was the emblem of a cross. Therefore the word SHaBaT pictures the shin as the source of knowledge, which is easily corrupted to become a falsehood (Munk). Separated from the root, or source, of its life, the thorn-bush becomes a mere tumbleweed (See Wolfson, Along the Path, p. 77). The tav, i.e. the “cross” is pictured as the Tree of Life covered by the falsehood, which the thorn-bush has become. The bet lets us know that the Tree of Life represents God dwelling in the thorn-bush, while simultaneously hanging as the fruit on the Tree of Life, which is the tav, which is a cross.
6. Pictographically the alef is an image of the head of a bull, similar to the one sacrificially slaughtered on Yom Kippur. Closer to this point, Moses sacrifices a bull and sprinkles its blood on Israel using a "hyssop" branch. The hyssop branch is specifically related to "purification" (Psalm 51), justifying the concept of Shabat as the alef, whose blood ransoms "adam" from gehinnom.
7. See essay “Cain’s Sanctification.”
8. Dictionary.com.
9. Quote found in Elliot K. Ginsburg, The Sabbath in the Classical Kabbalah, p. 127.
10. John chapters 14-19 document the spiritual erection of a New Man in Christ Jesus (Yesod).
11. 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 . . . .” ---- In this vein Franz Rosenzweig states that, “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, The Star of Redemption, p. 326).
12. This question is buttressed by the “chaos” interpretation of Genesis 1:1-2, which sees a chaotic fall into disorganization and disunion occurring between verses one and two of Genesis chapter one. Isaac Luria’s cosmology incorporates this catastrophe under his doctrine of tzimtzum, i.e., a shattering of the vessels; a chasm is created between God and His creation/bride. God’s blood is shed that He might enter the realm of death, where sitra achra has imprisoned His bride, making it appear that sitra achra now has unchallenged reign over the kingdom of heaven (in God’s cessation). But when the two fallen lovers embrace in the realm of death, a mystery hidden since before the creation of the world is revealed in them: their love is stronger than death itself, and thus stronger than the power of the angel of death, the ruler over the fallen world of the sitra achra.
13. Franz Rosenzweig's, The Star of Redemption, p.326. Rosenzweig is here paraphrasing The Song of Songs, 8:6, which is a direct play on the concept of conjugal love, betrothal, and death. The head and arm tefillin symbolize a "seal" of the Groom's death-defying love for his bride.
14. Charles Ponce, Kabbalah, p. 120, paraphrasing Mathers (Kabbalah Unveiled) states the case very clearly when he says: " . . . every Sefiroth is androgynous to a certain degree in that it stands in a relationship of receptivity (femininity) to the Sefirah which immediately precedes it, & transmissiveness (masculinity) to the Sefirah which immediately follows. The exceptions to the case are Kether, which has no Sefirah preceding it, & Malkuth, the last Sefirah, which has no Sefirah following it. Only Kether, therefore, is purely masculine, & only Malkuth is purely feminine.”
15. Scholem, Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism, p. 227, 228.
16. This essay won’t deal with the complexity of the fact that Yesod passes through the hymenal membrane in reverse order of the process initiated by the human groom’s desire. In this, we’re speaking of an allegory of virgin birth, with a man passing through an intact hymen from the inside out. Jeremiah 31:22 predicts the first time in human history when an intact woman will surround a man. 30:6 envisions brit milah as male labor-pains -- justifying the idea that when the membrane is torn it's either a symbol of conjugal consummation, or virgin birth (or both). Perhaps virgin birth is the true conjugation of God with His bride, Yesod tearing the hymen on his arrival into the world to impregnate those who will become the sons of God.
It could be said in all fairness that the Sages of this mystical tradition saw circumcision and all that it entails nearly everywhere they looked in Scripture. As Professor Wolfson points out, these brilliant men saw circumcision as the very exegetical principal upon which a proper engagement with the Word of God must be based.
Even beyond the text of the torah, the Sages saw signs of circumcision throughout mundane reality itself. --- Nowhere was this more the case than in regards to the biology and phenomenology of sexuality. It becomes apparent through carefully chosen words in their narratives, that they had pieced together biological truisms of incredible intricacy, insight, and foresight. Nothing of importance concerning the biology of gender, or the sexuality it breeds, seems to have escaped their glance.
Based on their writing it’s a foregone conclusion that they understood the biological truth that the default gender in the human race is female. The nipples on the man, like the blind spot where the optic nerve obstructs vision, are tell-tale signs of secrets not readily apparent to the naked eye.
We can know, if we get beyond the thorns the Sages place in our path, that they appreciated the modern biological fact that the natural suture-scar known as the “frenulum” was formed when the default genitalia (female) was transformed into the very organ upon which their focus was so acutely tuned. --- Furthermore, they appear to have perceived that if the male organ is in fact a transformation of the female genitalia, then the same mucus membrane which forms the womanly veil underneath the female genitalia (i.e. the veil which must be intact when the groom arrives to consummate the covenant), is quite literally the second veil torn in a proper ritual circumcision.
A proper ritual circumcision includes the two stages “milah” and “periah” which is the opening of the flesh and the tearing of the mucus membrane beneath. When a mohel goes through the fleshly barrier, he arrives at the very same membrane which in the female gender, has developed into the hymen. So in ritual circumcision, the mohel actually tears what will be torn for the female at the consummation of her wedding night.
The thoughtful Jewish Sages are obsessed with the symbolism of brit milah partly because of this simple biological fact. From a basic knowledge of mundane biology comes the perception of precisely why these brilliant Jewish men considered brit milah to be the consummation of the covenant, a literal theophany of the Presence of God, where God enters into a real covenant with Israel, His beloved bride, His covenantal partner, when He passes through Jewish flesh to enter into the actual company of Israel.[16]
The Sagely obsession with brit milah is centered around a pre-scientific appreciation of the fact that the mucus membrane torn in the most important aspect of brit milah (periah) is actually the same element torn in the female body when the bride and the groom consummate their love for one another. ---- The same “blood-witness” seen by the husband’s groomsmen, is seen by the participants of the ritual circumcision. The participants of the brit represent the groomsmen witnessing the fact that the consummation of God’s covenant with Israel has taken place in conjunction with the severing of the self-same membrane that this new member of Israel will tear when he consummates his covenant with his own bride, when he first mates with her, after their own betrothal and marriage ceremony.
NOTES:
1.Jesus said: “It is finished” on early Shabbat eve, before sundown.
2. Throughout Jewish writings, "Shabat" is often considered a personal pronoun for God Himself, and even the Messiah. See Tishby, The Wisdom of the Zohar, p. 1223-1233, and Wolfson, Along the Path, p. 80-84.
3. A paraphrasing of Humbolt (On Language, p. 234) speaking of man’s finding “words” inside himself, seems apropos to the Word finding man, or love for man, inside himself, with a sort of spontaneous joy. Pirke de Rabbi Eliezer’s statement from the lips of Shabat seems to justify such a rendering.
4. Gen. 1:26 and John 19:30.
5. According to Rabbi Yitzchak Ginsburgh, the shin is constructed of three vav with a thorny-yud on top of each vav ש. Pictographically, the shin is a "thorn-bush." ----Since the shin is directly adjacent the tav in the Hebrew alphabet, the tav can be thought of as the stem, or trunk, of the thorn-bush. The shin is symbiotically related to the tav, even as the sages tell us that the Tree of Knowledge grows from the same root as the Tree of Life. The shin is the outer covering of the tav, the last thing/letter you see before the tav. You must pass through the shin to get to the tav. Thus the shin is the thorn-bush forming the outer protection of the Tree of Life – the tav -- where truth dwells -- the bet. The bet connected to the shin in SHaBaT signifies that the shin, i.e. the thorn-bush, is the “home,” or residence of God, the place where God dwells in His Shekinah Presence (Exodus 23:21). Daniel Matt (Zohar, Vol. 1, p. 174-175), states: "The opening letter of the Torah, the bet of Be-reshit, In the beginning, stands for bayit, house . . . ." Munk tells us that, "Literally, beis [bet] means house . . . ." The ancient tav was the emblem of a cross. Therefore the word SHaBaT pictures the shin as the source of knowledge, which is easily corrupted to become a falsehood (Munk). Separated from the root, or source, of its life, the thorn-bush becomes a mere tumbleweed (See Wolfson, Along the Path, p. 77). The tav, i.e. the “cross” is pictured as the Tree of Life covered by the falsehood, which the thorn-bush has become. The bet lets us know that the Tree of Life represents God dwelling in the thorn-bush, while simultaneously hanging as the fruit on the Tree of Life, which is the tav, which is a cross.
6. Pictographically the alef is an image of the head of a bull, similar to the one sacrificially slaughtered on Yom Kippur. Closer to this point, Moses sacrifices a bull and sprinkles its blood on Israel using a "hyssop" branch. The hyssop branch is specifically related to "purification" (Psalm 51), justifying the concept of Shabat as the alef, whose blood ransoms "adam" from gehinnom.
7. See essay “Cain’s Sanctification.”
8. Dictionary.com.
9. Quote found in Elliot K. Ginsburg, The Sabbath in the Classical Kabbalah, p. 127.
10. John chapters 14-19 document the spiritual erection of a New Man in Christ Jesus (Yesod).
11. 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 . . . .” ---- In this vein Franz Rosenzweig states that, “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, The Star of Redemption, p. 326).
12. This question is buttressed by the “chaos” interpretation of Genesis 1:1-2, which sees a chaotic fall into disorganization and disunion occurring between verses one and two of Genesis chapter one. Isaac Luria’s cosmology incorporates this catastrophe under his doctrine of tzimtzum, i.e., a shattering of the vessels; a chasm is created between God and His creation/bride. God’s blood is shed that He might enter the realm of death, where sitra achra has imprisoned His bride, making it appear that sitra achra now has unchallenged reign over the kingdom of heaven (in God’s cessation). But when the two fallen lovers embrace in the realm of death, a mystery hidden since before the creation of the world is revealed in them: their love is stronger than death itself, and thus stronger than the power of the angel of death, the ruler over the fallen world of the sitra achra.
13. Franz Rosenzweig's, The Star of Redemption, p.326. Rosenzweig is here paraphrasing The Song of Songs, 8:6, which is a direct play on the concept of conjugal love, betrothal, and death. The head and arm tefillin symbolize a "seal" of the Groom's death-defying love for his bride.
14. Charles Ponce, Kabbalah, p. 120, paraphrasing Mathers (Kabbalah Unveiled) states the case very clearly when he says: " . . . every Sefiroth is androgynous to a certain degree in that it stands in a relationship of receptivity (femininity) to the Sefirah which immediately precedes it, & transmissiveness (masculinity) to the Sefirah which immediately follows. The exceptions to the case are Kether, which has no Sefirah preceding it, & Malkuth, the last Sefirah, which has no Sefirah following it. Only Kether, therefore, is purely masculine, & only Malkuth is purely feminine.”
15. Scholem, Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism, p. 227, 228.
16. This essay won’t deal with the complexity of the fact that Yesod passes through the hymenal membrane in reverse order of the process initiated by the human groom’s desire. In this, we’re speaking of an allegory of virgin birth, with a man passing through an intact hymen from the inside out. Jeremiah 31:22 predicts the first time in human history when an intact woman will surround a man. 30:6 envisions brit milah as male labor-pains -- justifying the idea that when the membrane is torn it's either a symbol of conjugal consummation, or virgin birth (or both). Perhaps virgin birth is the true conjugation of God with His bride, Yesod tearing the hymen on his arrival into the world to impregnate those who will become the sons of God.