Of O.T. Marriage : Va’Etchanan

I, Your Lord, your God, am a jealous God

Exodus 20:5

You shall love the Lord, your God, with all your heart

and with all your soul and with all your might

Deuteronomy 6:5

Is marriage exclusive to humans? Or, is the institution beyond mere mortals?

An interpretation of a single sentence from the Torah Portion Va’Etchanan answers the above-posed questions with a “no” to the first and a “yes” to the second. In essence, is what we accept as marriage arguably merely a subset of something much greater?

The Va’Etchanan passage’s importance extends beyond these two inquiries. It also unlocks a greater understanding of scriptural prophetic language. Accusations of adultery that are rampantly made by the Hebrew Bible Prophets are not exclusively directed towards physicality. Rather, they may include a spiritual component.

Enlightenment’s pathway on this journey begins with an observation of Jewish marriages. In the religion, matrimony is recognized as an agreement. This binding accord is reduced into written contract referred to as a Ketubah. The Ketubah not only memorializes the agreement but also publishes the contract’s terms. Ketubahs are ancient and date back into BCE. It is not uncommon that they are artistically fashioned in calligraphy. They are often framed and placed in the house for public consumption.

With the legalities matrimony in mind, the Torah Portion’s sentence’s significance can now be explored. In Deuteronomy, Moses offers up a moment of instruction. The Children of Israel are once again lectured as to how they are to live their lives as a nation in their country. In this speech, Moses says: “but you cleave to the Lord, Your God.’ Deuteronomy 4:5.

The word “cleave” immediate stands out as an all too familiar word. The word echoes Genesis passage on marriage. Genesis’ famous sentence on the matter is: “Therefore, a man shall leave his father and his mother, and cleave to his wife and they will become one flesh” Genesis 2:24.

While this analysis is through an English translation of the text, the Hebrew matches up. Genesis uses a singular form of the verb, whereas the Deuteronomy passage uses the plural. This makes sense as the Deuteronomy passage refers to a multitude of people.

As far the Genesis 2:24, Richard Elliott Friedman, in his Commentary on the Torah, notes that the passage may be taken as the origin of marriage or of sexual union or both. See P. 20.

Taking into consideration the Genesis passage, we can expand upon Moses’ line from Deuteronomy. Is the relationship between the Children of Israel and the Israelite Deity a marriage? If so, should the Ten Commandments be considered as a marriage contract- a Ketbubah- of sorts?

To tackle this query, we can first examine the parties’ roles. The Israelite Deity assumes the female marriage role while the Children of Israel assume the male role.

Do these role assignments make sense?

There is a credible argument to be made that the Children of Israel truly play the male role. With the Exodus, they were leaving home. Egypt, in the Torah, comes across as a residence of sort. Deuteronomy 7:8, refers to Egypt as a “house” of bondage. As the great Luther Vandross once sang, “a house is a home.”

Taking into account the reality of that not all childhoods are idyllic, Egypt legitimately could be analogized to being a home. In fact, many people have been able to escape abusive family homes to find a better life in matrimony. Thus, it is not an absurd proposition to label the Children of Israel as playing the male role.

This concept is buttressed by passage of the Torah from Exodus onward. The Children of Israel, despite the abuse which included infanticide, remained bonded towards Egypt. They viewed the nation as a source of sustenance. See Exodus 16:3 where they romanced over the fact that in Egypt, there was a pot of meat and bread. During periods of mutinous discussion, this is a common theme.

Going beyond the Torah into other parts of the Hebrew Bible, the Jewish people’s fidelity towards their Deity is couched in terms of marriage “Yet you have committed adultery with many lovers and would now return to me.” Jeremiah 3:1.

In the Millstein Artscroll Edition of Jeremiah, it is noted that “throughout scripture, the relationship of the Jewish people to Hashem (the Lord) is often compared to that of a wife to her husband, and accordingly, Israel’s indulgence in idolatry is described metaphorically as adultery.”

In light of these facts, it is worthy of re-evaluating the Decalogue’s structure. There are many who break the Ten Commandments into two sections: one-half concerning human interaction with the deity, which the other half for human interaction with each other.

In light of the concept of matrimony between the Deity and the Children of Israel, one can argue that some of the Deity-related commandments are divorced from the sense of a treaty but rather include matters of matrimony. Arguably, they also speak of fidelity. Thus, adultery towards a deity in part arise from the commandments that have been identified as being deity-human related.

Metaphor or Reality

There is a strong notion that marriage as we know it is a mere subset of a greater concept of marriage. This expansive concept of marriage arguably allows one to state that Mt. Sinai was truly a marriage of sorts. Our limited thinking prevents us from taking this radical step.

Conclusion

In sum, is the notion of marriage a not a limited concept? Or, is it something greater than what we humans conceive it to be. The Torah Portion Va’Etchanan allows for one to entertain the concept that the Ten Commandments, in one sense, is a marriage contract. The portion suggests that the Children of Israel and their Deity are in a matrimonial relationship. This concept was appreciated by a number of the Prophets. As we see, in the Book of the Jeremiah and discussed by commentators, there is a special relationship exists between the Children of Israel and their Deity which brings to the forefront notions of fidelity.

Be well!!

Please like, follow, share or comment