Spirituality in the Talmud? (San 17)

Today the Talmud blew me away. I seriously felt for a few seconds like I had just finished reading Mishkan Tefilah or the Women's Torah Commentary. W0w.

So far, The arguments have remained in the realm of legal constructs...The rabbis are trying to figure out the proper way to act and judge actions, as opposed to figuring out the proper way to be and judge states of being. Today the daf starts out in this realm of legality and then suddenly out of nowhere seems to take a turn into the modern realm of dare I say it, spirituality...

So, we're talking about how Moses went about putting together the first great Sanhedrin of 70 members. There are twelve tribes, so if Moses picked 5 from each tribe he would only have 60 members.... but if he picked 6 from each tribe he would have 72....What to do??

Cast lots, of course.

Moses brings 6 from each tribe and everyone chooses a lot. Seventy lots say zakein (elder) and two are blank... As the story goes, two of the chosen men, Eldad and Meidad, decide not to pick lots at all...Why?

The Tanna Kamma says they didn't pick because they were afraid of being rejected... R' Shimon says that they didn't pick because of their humility. The Tanna Kamma holds that since they didn't pick, there were two lots left "in the hat" with the word zakein written on it, which were intended for Eldad and Meidad...R Shimon, however, holds that the lots intended for Eldad and Meidad were blank (17a2 footnote 11).

This, to me, is a perfect example of how the Talmud is caught up in this world of legal constructs---When you try to impose reason and values the whole thing doesn't make sense.

In my opinion, fear of rejection is not a valid state of being, whereas humility is. Therefore, humility could have altered Eldad and Meidad's fate so that even if they originally had blank lots, their humility should elevate their status and enable them to become members of the Great Sanhedrin. On the other hand, fear of being rejected could have altered their fate so that if they originally had zakein lots, their fear altered their fate so that they are no longer worthy of serving in the Great Sanhedrin.

Why then does the Talmud present the exact opposite argument? Simple. It is based on the legal construct that everything is presupposed in heaven. Fate is fate. God had already chosen who would receive each lot so it didn't matter if they opted out of the lottery or not.

SO, given all of this - I was shocked to read this footnote on the following page which explains how Joshua intended to destroy Eldad and Meidad...

Joshua did not seek Eldad and Meidad's demise, but the cessation of their powers of prophecy. He suggested that they be encumbered with the responsibilities of the community. Since that would certainly cause them distress, they would no longer be receptive to the Divine Presence (a prerequisite for prophecy), for the Divine Presence rests upon someone only when he is happy (Tosafot) (17a3 footnote 25).

What? WHY? What? Responsibility is bad? The simple life is good? Also, umm...since when is happiness a prerequisite for prophecy? Every moment of prophesy in the Bible that I can think of comes precisely from a moment of distress... So, what does this teach us?

Really, I don't know.

But I can tell you what it feels like... A sneak peak of a moment of modern spirituality in the Talmud. The passage seems to be screaming that we must turn inward in order to experience God. We must relieve ourselves of the burdens of this world and invite the Divine Presence into our lives. I think more than anything else, this passage reminds me to look beyond the legality of the text and be more open to the possibility that the rabbis of the Talmud had what we think of as personal relationships with God.