La L-Word

A colleague got Tali and I into a private party at the Brooklyn Historical Society where there was a body-painter on call to paint anyone. We didn't get a chance to get painted but others did and it was quite a sight.

Tali and I had some opportunity to dance and I suddenly dropped it. Not my pants but something far more revealing. I looked into her dreamy eyes and told her I loved her. I put it out there with confidence that I'd get the RETURN. Instead, she said "I know." Reminiscent of the time she said I have a nice ass and I responded, "I know."

Later that night, her friend berated her for that Seinfeldian remark. (Recall the episode where George had to say 'I love you' a second time to his girlfriend because the first time he said it into her deaf ear, only to find out she did indeed hear him the first time but didn't respond). I, on the other hand, took it in stride for the simple reason that I knew by her body language, gaze, and demeanor that she too had fallen in love. The same is true of my behavior but I chose to withhold it, not using the L-Word in vain. I didn't want to be cavalier with it, abuse it, or diminish its emotional significance. For at least I month now, I said things like 'I REALLY LIKE you', a LOT! Divorce has made me cautious but I could no longer deny the reality of it all.

So I hear my friends, who are dating, wondering whether to have a conversation about 'where is this going' or agonize how you tell if the person is right for you, I smile to myself and consider how lucky I am. I went out with Tali with the intent of having fun and connecting. When it's right, you just know it. You shouldn't have to negotiate it. You should certainly discuss the ramifications, practicality, and consequences but you're just gonna know. You can't miss it when you see it. I hope you all find it soon and keep it alive. In the meantime, three thumbs up, folks!

Oh, and by the way, I love Tali!
(Get your finger out of your throat, please)

Triple X

How much thought do people actually put into the complimentary close when corresponding? Some people write, "Sincerely", others, "TTYL" but when it comes to a budding relationship a veritable minefield opens up. Rarely should you say "Love," early on. Perhaps, "Yours Truly" would be ok. Somehow "xox" seems safe but affectionate while one is getting closer but not ready to commit.

If you have been following the blog, you would know but not necessarily care that I have been seeing a lovely lady I met on Frumster and things are progressing. There is a lot of emotional language being exchanged in our eye contact and subtle body language.

Then it happened. She sent me a general e-mail but concluded with "xxxo, Tali." Now, what do I do with that? It's not the simple xox I have always imagined. This is far more serious. For crying out loud, it's a TRIPLE X O! My response:

"This was the first time I ever got a triple-x-o from anyone. A part of me felt really moved to think about it. I always wondered exactly the proper balance of x's and o's when signing off. How much of it is mood oriented, message based, relationship defined, or 'say it or you'll pay the price'? And what if you o before you x? Should both parties strive to achieve an o together and for God's sake, should the x really be involved? That's just too much! Is there a personal rhythm that needs to develop like a staccato of x's progressing to a crescendo of o's? Or perhaps the strokes of your fingers should decide the outCome? However this obsessive rant ends, it most certainly will be Xcellent!
xox,
Smoo"

Cherub's Again

In a recent post, I discussed the Cherubs. I sent letters to Richard Elliot Friedman and William G. Dever and both were kind enough to respond. Letter from REF is the following text.

Dear Mr. xxxx,
Many thanks for your letter and your compliments to my work, which mean a lot to me. To get right to the point, I have to tell you that that translation that you read is simply wrong. The phrase in Hebrew does not contain the word "turned" — or any verb. In my Commentary on the Torah, I translated it quite literally: "and their faces each towards its brother." The most thorough and brilliant commentary on Exodus ever done, in my judgment, is William Propp's two-volume Exodus for the Anchor Bible. He, too, translates it literally: "and their faces (each) man toward his brother." See also his discussion of the issues on pp. 323 and especially 391-392.

In the Silbermann translation that you mentioned, which accompanies his translation of Rashi, the word "turned" is printed in italics. As he explains in the Preface to his Genesis volume, italics are used for words that do not actually appear in the Hebrew. So, in this case, it is only Silbermann's opinion that he is expressing, and there is no basis for it in the text.

The problem of why the arrangements of the ark cherubs and the Temple cherubs differ is an old one, and I admit I don't have a great answer. It would be easier to answer if we knew which came first. If the ark arrangement is the earlier one, then it fits with my idea that the Temple cherubs have to be arranged so that their wings meet flat in the middle of the Holiest of Holies; that is, the Temple cherubs had to be turned to accommodate the Tabernacle space under their wings. If the Temple arrangement is the earlier one, then there may be some other practical reason. For example, when the ark is carried on the two poles by men, it would not be symetrical if the two cherubs faced outward to one side or the other. Alternatively, as Propp suggested, perhaps the idea was to have them both looking downward (toward center) rather than up at God enthroned above them.

I hope this helps. With good wishes,
Richard Elliott Friedman
Davis Professor of Jewish Studies, University of Georgia
Katzin Professor of Jewish Civilization Emeritus, University of California, San Diego

------------------------
Ok to click on this image now!

Dever's key points are that the Biblical description is "vague" and that the seat of God "was only symbolic, a literal reading or picture is irrelevant."

In Dever's book did God Have A Wife, I found a picture of two human-like cherubs facing opposite each other with their wings extended out symbolizing the divine presence of Horus (who is depicted there). This is from a 9th century Syrian relief, so perhaps after my whole long megillah, we can imagine the cherubs on the Ark of the covenant as human-like, facing each other. Perhaps we only have to accept that they represent the divine presence not necessarily actually physically depicting an actual throne of God. As Dever writes in the above letter, "a literal reading or picture is irrelevant."

Now if we accept Dever's non-literal approach, does this impact on REF's innovative idea that the space underneath the wings of the Temple cherubs had the exact dimensions of the tabernacle (which he then used as support for his contention that P was written during the first temple era not the second)? Or are all the other aspects of his proofs sufficient to prove his case regardless of whether his conception of the wings of the cherubs are correct? For instance, P emphasizes ark, cherubs, urim v'tummim, and tablets which weren't in the second temple. Also, why would P write that sacrifices could only take place at the entrance to the Tabernacle (re:temple) forever if it was to be destroyed! Also, REF's analysis of the dimension of the tabernacle are compellingly correlated to that of the first temple. So why would a second temple source focus on first temple aspects which were only memories but not current realities? I'm still considering this and trying to make sense of other writers like Gabriele Boccaccini who dates P to second temple period based on political realities that in his approach jives well with the priestly class overshadowing the old monarchic rule. (More on this in the future).

-

Meeting The Parents

It came upon me too soon, which oddly enough is something I hear all too often. I have been dating Tali now for just over a month, which is usually way too early to have an official night out on her parents dime. What was interesting was that her parents mentioned the idea to her but she rejected them, in hopes, she claimed, they would forget about the whole thing. But cease and desist they did not and so dinner was on the menu for the evening. Curiously, I didn't mind, which probably had something to do with there being steak involved. But a confession is in order, I like Tali, a lot. 'Like' is the only 'L'-word I'm ready to use now. That is unless Oreo cheese cake made just right could possibly push me over the edge. In fact there are many women looking to push me over the edge but not in the way I always imagined.

Returning to the dinner at the steak house, I sat down next to Tali and directly opposite her mother. I'm sure they picked up on the fact that my right hand was not visible on the table. It, like other body parts, has a mind of its own. And it was seeking other like-minded individuals. Truth be told, I limited its adventure because her parents are very religious and I didn't want to send them into shock. The fact that her dad had a steak knife that made Mr. Dundee envious also played a role there.

Then came the interrogation. Her dad served in the military so he was no stranger to dealing with hostile forces. I know the rules of engagement so I hunkered down and prepared for a war of attrition. But it never came. They were polite and made pleasant conversation. I was almost disappointed. It was too easy...hmmm...is this part of some elaborate scheme to lure me in a sense of false security? What really happened to their last son-in-law? How come I have never actually physically seen or heard him? What was the purpose of the duffle bag with duct tape and a chain saw? What is wrong with this image?

Because every man reading this is curious, I'll let you know. The steak was just right. Tender, juicy and mucho grande. Ladies, take the imagery wherever you so choose.

I think the greatest potential for conflict will arise from dessert. Tali and her mom both love dessert. In fact, dessert should be the main course in their opinion. I am from a very different school where the main dish should be double-sized leaving no room for even considering dessert. The only glimmer of hope for reconciliation here is that I can partake of her entree and she can have my dessert. More of what we each like, for each of us.

Tali related the story of my outing. I'm embarrassed to say, I did go shopping for clothes with Tali. For me. She told her parents that she liked my biceps when she saw me in a t-shirt we were looking to buy. Without missing a beat I said to Tali that I have to come out and confess, I'm bi-ceptual. She laughed but her mom didn't. You see, I like to make puns, some great, some horrible, most fall somewhere between the extremes. But no matter what, and to the chagrin of those I'm with, I never hold it back. My Achilles heel if you will. I do like heels, while we are on the subject but they do look better on Tali. I made some other less memorable puns that night. Her mom just gave me a look like you gotta be kidding, right? My response was that those looks just encourage me more, so she had better get used to it (said in a polite and light manner). Tali thinks me incorrigible.

Overall it went well, I wasn't mortally wounded, nothing spilled, the only stains were from an unrelated incident. So far no feedback but the sheriff ain't on my tail so I just keep on chasing tail.

Oh, by the way, did I mention that I like Tali?

-