This time, we shall review two amazing aspects in human interactions: Interaction with the environment, and interactions with other selves.
**
Exodus 18:5:
"Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law, together with Moses’ sons and wife, !came! to him; in the wilderness, where he was camped – near the mountain of God".
Specifically, I've added some gestures inside the quotation. And why? Because of the cantillation tropes. The musicality and the specific emphasis which is denoted there is pivotal, at least in my personal perspective.
Jethro CAME. As a venerate leader, an important character in Moses's personal arch, it is important to understand that the "Shver", the father-in-law, is the one bringing respect here. That will be discussed soon. However, the segment in bold is the main focus currently: in the wilderness. In Hebrew, though, the original word is "BaMidbar" which is also translated to – Desert. It is ofcourse, almost futile to remind us all that so many revelations and different spiritual/mental procedures were made in the desert. Further reading: here, here and here, to say the least.
However, another consideration to be made is about the vast emptiness, the Tabula Rasa property that the wilderness/desert represent. The Ramban asks: "…That which is written here is quite queer, since how come that a person who dwells in world-wide respect and pride, would thus ask to journey into the desert/wilderness, where there is nothingness?… It is but praise to Jethro that left his country and came into the desert, for he knew that there is the mountain of God and there God was revealed…"
It is indeed a need for a lot of us, sometimes, to renounce ourselves, even if our status was gained fair and square. Not because asceticism is the highest value or virtue, but rather because it is a part of learning. a Student of mine where I teach nutrition is an expert nurse, with years of experience. Sometimes we argue in my lectures regarding basic facts that I try to teach from my perspective as a dietitian. Once, after quite a long debate, she quitted, reminding herself and I – "I'm here to study new things, not to prove wrongs". Indeed. But it's a two-way street – because just as she's there to study new things, I'm there not to suggest that my knowledge is necessarily superior – rather, I'm there to study as much as I am there to teach. I would be a far lesser teacher if I should not understand that.
The vastness of the desert is sometimes not to be explained, not through words, sounds or images. As someone who was born inside the desert and grew up amidst it (Beersheba), I hold it dear and am amazed by it. It is only thus understood how you can almost clean yourself empty towards this vacuum. There, the sanctity of the new teachings is to be uphold. That principal is very clear for Jethro.
**
Exodus 18:7:
" So Moses went out to meet his father-in-law and bowed down and kissed him. They greeted each other and then went into the tent. "
Ah, again, the translation is quite annoying. Pardon me, but let me try and translate it more closely to the vague meaning in this verse:
" וַיֵּצֵ֨א מֹשֶׁ֜ה לִקְרַ֣את חֹֽתְנ֗וֹ וַיִּשְׁתַּ֨חוּ֙ וַיִּשַּׁק-ל֔וֹ וַיִּשְׁאֲל֥וּ אִישׁ-לְרֵעֵ֖הוּ לְשָׁל֑וֹם וַיָּבֹ֖אוּ הָאֹֽהֱלָה: "
"And moses went out! Towards his father-in-law, and they bowed down, and (he, some-he) will kiss him, and they shall greet each other (asked for the peace of each other); And they went on to the tent".
Now, Here's the cool part. Rashi, Siftei H'achamim, Or Haim, Da'at Zkenim… at least 4 different interpreters, scholars are clueless or just letting go – they all quote Rashi in a way: "I do not know who bowed before who". Now, Rashi and the rest are indeed debating later on regarding the clues there but the main message is – I do not know who bowed. I would like to suggest that when these two amazing, spiritual beings had met – the identity of the self is unimportant. Especially inside the desert, where nothingness prevails and clean you dry. They were two Yous/Thous (in reference to Martin Buber's pivotal writing, I and Thou). The scripture suggests this non-difference between them. Equals as humans, who greet each other, who respect each other. This mutuality is something to remember, which also relates to the earlier story with my student – as a teacher/lecturer, I try not view it all the time as a hierarchical relationship, but rather, a mutual one, almost symmetric – I am a human, my students are human. I, perhaps, hold "more" knowledge. But I am human. I might be wrong. I might learn from the other's experience and knowledge. I must not forget that. We all must not forget it. Through that, more possibilities are exposed, throughout anyone's journey.
**
Lastly, Exodus 18:10:
" He said, “Praise be to the Lord, who rescued you from the hand of the Egyptians and of Pharaoh, and who rescued the people from the hand of the Egyptians. "
It is worth to mention that again, the original text states that the people were rescued from "under the hand of the egyptians". Under. Written there, probably, I would bet, as a way to differentiate between the "you", which Sforno tells us meant Moses and Aharon, and the people of Israel as a whole. Moses and Aharon faced two different adversaries: The Egyptian people AND Pharaoh. Both Sforno and Rashi interpret the "hand of the egyptians" as them being a harsh nation, in relation to when Moses and Aharon inflicted them; the hand of Pharaoh as a harsh king who they compelled; and Under the hand of the egyptians as the act of liberation from enslavement. Thrice to be thankful and full of praise because there are 3 different ways to be liberated. Two are personal: The direct actions of the leaders, between the leader and the people and between the leaders themselves; and one specifically for the passive (sort of) liberation of the whole people. Thus, a possible algorithm for liberation is denoted: First as influencing the enemy, then to compel its head and only then to the whole rescue itself. Perhaps it might give us a clue on how in general change is made – first through the head or what leads us through (through the guidance of our personal leaders) and only then towards a more universal liberation.
**
So, How do I reconcile it all towards nutrition and health.
Firstly, in order to facilitate change one may sometimes resort to a state of nothingness. a Desert/Wilderness Consciousness if you would. It is a possible path for us to partake, at times, and regarding foodstuff – it is also interesting to try new techniques, diet regimes or ideas every now and then, with humility towards the concept of Tabula Rasa – to come as if we don't know nothing.
Same goes towards how we deal with our personal relationships. Indeed, at times, hierarchies are important, and although we are all humans, under certain circumstances it is more than okay not to be whole-heartedly intimate. However, intimacy, as Buber converse and so as the verse earlier – demands this certain indifference, when no importance is held towards the personality of gestures, for it is mutual, symmetrical at times. It is easier thus to facilitate any kind of change once a person comes empty in his cognitive perception, and also empty or devoid of his ego and status.
Lastly, change is gradual. Personal liberty as well. It is not to be done in bangs and booms. It is gradual, and depends largely on the specific counteracting forces regarding the vectors we are trying to assume. In this metaphor, we have the Egyptian nation as one force, Pharaoh as the other and their combination as an Egyptian-Whole – three vectors that face the will of the Israeli nation. This so-called algorithm here started from the actions of leaders – Who is your inner leader? Perhaps, there are some, inside you? What are the counteracting vectors in your life that hold you back from your personal liberation? What kind of miracles do you need in order to prevail?
