The Blasphemer and the Wood Gatherer Literary Parallels and Moral Lessons
Torah Papers | May 17, 2025
Print This Article
View Original PDF

The Blasphemer and the Wood Gatherer Literary Parallels and Moral Lessons

Torah Papers | June 27, 2025

Towards God for the difficult predicament he finds himself in and the oppression that he faces.

Despite the difficult choice made by Moshe, the comparison seems disingenuous since in the case of the blasphemer, he is the victim and the outsider, while Moshe is an insider with privilege who is acting to defend the oppressed individual. Nevertheless, the Torah reveals Moshe’s integrity even when the roles are reversed. After fleeing to Midyan to escape execution, where he is an outsider with no home and nothing to his name, Moshe once again demonstrates his true colors when he takes a moral stand and intercedes to save the daughters of the Priest of Midyan from the injustices of the local shepherds. In that story, strangely enough, the daughters of Re’u’el identify Moshe as an Egyptian man (יִ֔רְצִמ ישִׁ֣א), strengthening the literary parallel and contrast to the reaction of the blasphemer.

These two themes are further supported by contrasting the story of the wood-gatherer (מקושש עצים) with that of the blasphemer. There are many parallels between the narratives, but there are two key differentiating points between the stories that stand out. One is the centrality of Moshe (הֶ֑שֹׁל־מֶא וֹ֖תֹא יאוִּ֥בָיַּו) in the story of the blasphemer as opposed to Moshe, Aharon and the entire assembly (וֹ֔תֹא יבוִּ֣רְקַיַּו...ל־ֶֽאְו֙הֶשֹׁל־מֶא הָֽדֵעָל־הָכּ לֶ֖אְו ןֹ֔רֲאַה) in the case of the wood-gatherer. This emphasis reinforces the Torah’s desire to have one focus their attention on Moshe, both in paralleling it with the earlier story in Shmot as well as highlighting the contrasting behaviors and reactions in the two incidents. The second distinction lies in the need for those that witnessed the blasphemy, as opposed to the wood gathering, to “lean their hands upon his head (וּ֧כְמָסְו וֹ֑אשֹׁל־רַע םֶ֖יהֵדְת־יֶא יםִ֛עְמֹשַּׁל־הָֽכ).” S’micha is typically associated with complicity or culpability which suggests that, in the case of the blasphemer, the broader community shares in the guilt of that which transpired.

The Torah appears to not only indict the blasphemer himself, but also the silent majority as being guilty of an act of commission that requires atonement. They are held accountable for the grievous blasphemy both because they heard the terrible utterance, but even more so because they were the impetus for the crime by allowing an act of oppression to go unanswered and remaining silent in the face of mistreatment. Their failure to act against the injustice renders them morally complicit in the tragic outcome.

Lastly, the unsung heroine in the story of the blasphemer might be his mother Sh’lomit. Remarkably, she is the only party identified by name in Emor. In the Torah, the general reason for disclosing an identity is because there is something unique or significant about such an individual – both for good or bad. If it is the latter, then it might be that her consorting with an Egyptian could be viewed as a treacherous act of assimilation, avoided by others, which in the end produced a blasphemer. On the other hand, given the strong literary parallels to the story in Shmot where the only party identified is the protagonist Moshe, it might imply a more positive view of Sh’lomit as a woman, who similar to Moshe, went against the grain. Despite the hardship of bearing an unwanted Egyptian child from a difficult and likely coercive union, she fostered him with care as if her own, but her good intentions were undermined by a community that ostracized and rejected such an individual.

In the end, the story of the blasphemer sits between the Mitzvot that relate to the sanctity of God (Shulchan, Menorah and Holidays) and those that espouse the sanctity of each individual (Killing and Injuring others). Its placement reiterates the messages we noted above. Every person is created in the image of God (םֶלֶ֥צְבּ לֱֹאִ֖קים) and we therefore need to be equally zealous in our pursuit of justice and sensitivity towards our fellow man and their dignity as we are in our devotion to God and our religious ideals.

Shabbat Shalom

שלימה לרפואה ,ישראל בארץ ל"ז הנרצחים נשמת לעילוי ושמירה והצלחה ,ולשבוים לנעדרים קרובה לגאולה ,לפצועים ובמיוחד ישראל כלל לכל ונחמות וישועות טובות ובשורות העומד ל"צה לחייליאלקינ וערי ארצנו משמר על יםו

Towards God for the difficult predicament he finds himself in and the oppression that he faces.

Despite the difficult choice made by Moshe, the comparison seems disingenuous since in the case of the blasphemer, he is the victim and the outsider, while Moshe is an insider with privilege who is acting to defend the oppressed individual. Nevertheless, the Torah reveals Moshe’s integrity even when the roles are reversed. After fleeing to Midyan to escape execution, where he is an outsider with no home and nothing to his name, Moshe once again demonstrates his true colors when he takes a moral stand and intercedes to save the daughters of the Priest of Midyan from the injustices of the local shepherds. In that story, strangely enough, the daughters of Re’u’el identify Moshe as an Egyptian man (יִ֔רְצִמ ישִׁ֣א), strengthening the literary parallel and contrast to the reaction of the blasphemer.

These two themes are further supported by contrasting the story of the wood-gatherer (מקושש עצים) with that of the blasphemer. There are many parallels between the narratives, but there are two key differentiating points between the stories that stand out. One is the centrality of Moshe (הֶ֑שֹׁל־מֶא וֹ֖תֹא יאוִּ֥בָיַּו) in the story of the blasphemer as opposed to Moshe, Aharon and the entire assembly (וֹ֔תֹא יבוִּ֣רְקַיַּו...ל־ֶֽאְו֙הֶשֹׁל־מֶא הָֽדֵעָל־הָכּ לֶ֖אְו ןֹ֔רֲאַה) in the case of the wood-gatherer. This emphasis reinforces the Torah’s desire to have one focus their attention on Moshe, both in paralleling it with the earlier story in Shmot as well as highlighting the contrasting behaviors and reactions in the two incidents. The second distinction lies in the need for those that witnessed the blasphemy, as opposed to the wood gathering, to “lean their hands upon his head (וּ֧כְמָסְו וֹ֑אשֹׁל־רַע םֶ֖יהֵדְת־יֶא יםִ֛עְמֹשַּׁל־הָֽכ).” S’micha is typically associated with complicity or culpability which suggests that, in the case of the blasphemer, the broader community shares in the guilt of that which transpired.

The Torah appears to not only indict the blasphemer himself, but also the silent majority as being guilty of an act of commission that requires atonement. They are held accountable for the grievous blasphemy both because they heard the terrible utterance, but even more so because they were the impetus for the crime by allowing an act of oppression to go unanswered and remaining silent in the face of mistreatment. Their failure to act against the injustice renders them morally complicit in the tragic outcome.

Lastly, the unsung heroine in the story of the blasphemer might be his mother Sh’lomit. Remarkably, she is the only party identified by name in Emor. In the Torah, the general reason for disclosing an identity is because there is something unique or significant about such an individual – both for good or bad. If it is the latter, then it might be that her consorting with an Egyptian could be viewed as a treacherous act of assimilation, avoided by others, which in the end produced a blasphemer. On the other hand, given the strong literary parallels to the story in Shmot where the only party identified is the protagonist Moshe, it might imply a more positive view of Sh’lomit as a woman, who similar to Moshe, went against the grain. Despite the hardship of bearing an unwanted Egyptian child from a difficult and likely coercive union, she fostered him with care as if her own, but her good intentions were undermined by a community that ostracized and rejected such an individual.

In the end, the story of the blasphemer sits between the Mitzvot that relate to the sanctity of God (Shulchan, Menorah and Holidays) and those that espouse the sanctity of each individual (Killing and Injuring others). Its placement reiterates the messages we noted above. Every person is created in the image of God (םֶלֶ֥צְבּ לֱֹאִ֖קים) and we therefore need to be equally zealous in our pursuit of justice and sensitivity towards our fellow man and their dignity as we are in our devotion to God and our religious ideals.

Shabbat Shalom

שלימה לרפואה ,ישראל בארץ ל"ז הנרצחים נשמת לעילוי ושמירה והצלחה ,ולשבוים לנעדרים קרובה לגאולה ,לפצועים ובמיוחד ישראל כלל לכל ונחמות וישועות טובות ובשורות העומד ל"צה לחייליאלקינ וערי ארצנו משמר על יםו

PDF Preview