Is our time in this world fleeting – or eternal? I suppose it depends on what we do with ourselves while we are here. Do we improve the world? Do we leave it better for us having lived in it?
In our own way, each of us can either be a link in a chain – or a dead end. For some of us, our contribution could be through the choices we make, or the words we write. But for every living person, there is a relatively simple binary metric of our surviving legacy: whether or not we have children. This is almost so obvious that it goes without saying: without children, those of us who are not Great Creators/Thinkers create no legacy. But with children, the legacy any of us leaves behind can be theoretically infinite.
At some level, we understand this. A woman who has had children identifies as a mother – it is a key part of who she is. Our identity, of course, is very important to our self-perception while we live.
There is a word for “identity” in the Torah – it is the word used for “sash,” p’til. This word is found in the collateral Tamar demands from Judah (signet, sash/p’til, and staff), and in the priestly garments (binding the 12 tribes to the priest – Ex. 28:28, and the “Holy to G-d” gold plate to the head of the priest – Ex 28:37, as well as in our own blue-fringed garments – Num 15:38). The meaning of this word is consistent and unambiguous: the p’til is how Judah and the high priest and every Jew identify, for themselves and others, who they are. The p’til is a mark of office, status, and function.
This word is also found in the name of a son Rachel has through her servant, Bilhah. This son is Naftali, containing within his name the same root word p’til, meaning “identity.” And indeed, Rachel says as much. The normal translation of G. 30:8) is And Rachel said, “A fateful contest I waged with my sister; yes, and I have prevailed.” So she named him Naphtali. But this is mostly gloss. A more textual (if unwieldy) translation would be: And Rachel said, “My creative identity I have identified with my sister, and I [have proven] able. So she named him, “I have identified.” And what is Rachel’s desired identity, above all else? To be the mother of children!
Thus when she has her own firstborn child, she names him “Joseph” – which essentially translates as, “He will add.” Rachel makes her identity all about her fertility, because she is doing everything possible to be a part of the future. She knows that procreation is the key to her legacy.
So we have two brothers, Naftali and Joseph, both named for fertility. Names have meaning. And so it is not too surprising that in the blessings they receive (from both Jacob and Moses), both are uniquely blessed to be fertile, biologically reproductive – phrases like “blessings of the breast and the womb” and “a wild hind who gives lovely fawns” are used.
These two sons Naftali and Joseph, named for fertility, are uniquely blessed to be ratzon, which seems to be a kind of blessing. Which is where it gets very interesting, indeed. Because the first mention of this word ratzon is used in anger. Jacob curses Simeon and Levi: “In their ratzon they castrated a bull.”
Why does this matter? Because castration is removing the ability to have a future! And that is precisely what Simeon and Levi did to Shechem when they murdered the town: they took life, and they removed the future.
So we have two sons who, with ratzon, took life – and removed the future of an entire family.
And we have two sons who are blessed with ratzon, and whose blessings are all about fertility and an open-ended future!
See the difference? Those who take life while ratzon are connected to stealing the future of other people. While those who are blessed with ratzon are, measure for measure, given enormous procreative blessings.
Why is this important throughout the text? Because the word ratzon is found specifically relating to the animals we bring as offerings to ask G-d for His blessings, to find favor, ratzon, in His eyes.
And what are the animals supposed to be? Thanks to the connection from Simeon and Levi’s blessing, we know that the primary blemish that concerns the text is that the animals must not be castrated! Examples:
When any person … presents an elevation offering …it must, for ratzon, be a male without blemish.(Lev 22:19
… make your offering a male without blemish. You shall bring it … for ratzon before G-d. (Lev. 1:3)
We learn from this that the offering must be related to what we seek: if we seek to achieve a fertile future for ourselves and our children, ratzon, then we must bring an animal that itself would otherwise have that future: it must be capable of procreation. The animal you bring must have potential – the ability to procreate is the ability to have a future. The sky is the limit as long as reproduction is possible. Without reproduction, we are biological dead ends – there is no ratzon.
Wheat is much like an animal – it is both a food, and a seed, representing future potential. And so it is not surprising that we find the same idea here (L: 23:11): When you enter the land that I am giving to you and you reap its harvest, you shall bring the first sheaf of your harvest to the priest. He shall elevate the sheaf before G-d for ratzon in your behalf.
Ratzon is all about Big Picture blessings: how we can each connect to the infinite, the timeless, to be part of the future chain of life for the world. We want to be blessed like Naftali and Joseph.
And so does the High Priest – doing a divine service that is all about being timeless, the priest must be no more or less than his job function – which is defined by the frontlet/tzitz “Holy For G-d.” Hence the connection between ratzon and p’til in this verse:
You shall make a frontlet of pure gold and engrave on it the seal inscription: “Holy for G-d.” Suspend it on a p’til of blue, so that it may remain on the headdress; it shall remain on the front of the headdress. And it shall be upon Aharon’s forehead, that Aharon may bear the iniquity of the holy things, which the children of Yisra᾽el shall hallow in all their holy gifts; and it shall be always upon his forehead, that they may be ratzon before the Lord. (E. 28:38)
P.S. The blessing of fecundity is not just about the offered animal – it is connected to our actions.
And if you do listen to my mishpatim [civil laws] and guard and do them …You shall be blessed above all other peoples: there shall be no sterile male or female among you or among your livestock. [the word for sterile is the one used for what Simeon and Levi do to the bull/Shechem – and it also describes Sarah, Rivka, and Rachel when they were unable to have children.]
Note: email me at iwe@religiousliberalism.org to receive future work by email.