Shelah Lekha (Haftarot)

The haftarah for Shelah Lekha is the chapter about with the spies spent by Joshua to reconnoiter the town of Jericho (Joshua 2:1-24), the very first town on their way to conquer the Land of Israel. The connection to the Torah portion, the bulk of which deals with the spies sent by Moses (Numbers 13-14), is obvious: spies and spies. But while the spies in the Torah portion are seen as a sign of fear, weakness, and lack of trust in God, and their sending becomes cause for a serious Divine punishment, the spies mentioned in the haftarah were sent by Joshua for the natural and legitimate military purpose of gathering information about the enemy. Several of the more superficial, colorful aspects related to the story are well known: the figure of Rahab the harlot (presumably a lady with Rubinesque body, a real “broad”—which I would assert as arguably the peshat of her name); the role of Jericho as the “gateway” to the land of Israel; the subsequent conquest of Jericho, in which the Israelites march around the city for seven days blowing ram’s horns, and seven times on the last day, followed by its miraculous fall (Josh 6). Anyone who has grown up in America is familiar with the Negro spiritual, “Joshua fi’t the battle of Jericho.”

But upon closer reading the story presents several difficulties: first and foremost, the behavior and personality of the aforementioned Rahab, who is the central figure in the whole story. We read in the very first verse that Joshua sent two men “secretly,” and went directly to the home of Rahab, who gave them lodging. She does two important things to help them:

She engages in active disinformation (twice, in fact!) to protect the spies. When they come—and the king of Jericho seems to know immediately that they are in her house—she tells his men that they have been and gone, retreating to their own camp, when in fact she hides them under some bundles of stalks of flax on her roof; later, when they leave, she tells them to go towards the mountains (i.e., to the West), knowing that the soldiers will naturally head toward the Jordan River (i.e., East).

Second, she is a valuable source of information about the mood of her own people. In a long monologue (vv. 9-13), when she comes up to the roof to talk to them before they go to sleep, she reports to them candidly about the state of mind of the inhabitants of the city. Basically, she says, everyone is frightened to death of them: they know that God has given them the land, they had heard about the splitting of the Red Sea and of their own victories over the two Canaanite kings of Transjordan, Sihon and Og (an incident celebrated repeatedly in various biblical retellings of this early history, alongside the Exodus and its surrounding events). All she wants is one thing; protection for herself and her family—her parents and brothers and sisters. The spies duly agree, stipulating only that she put a sign in the window of her house -- a scarlet cord—so that the army can identify the place. And in fact, the saving of Rahab and her family is a central feature in the description of the fall of Jericho (see Josh 6:22-23, 25—but note that there they seem to find the house without the assistance of the scarlet thread) amidst the general destruction (vv. 21,24).

The question is: Why was Rahab, of all the people in Jericho, so kindly disposed towards them? A midrashic view might see her as a heroine, as acknowledging the chosenness of Israel and the fact that God has destined them to have this land. In this view, she is a figure rather similar to Moses’ father-in-law, Jethro, who was also deeply moved by the miracles God wrought for Israel and cam,e to acknowledge him as his won God, together with their standing as a covenant people (see Exodus 18).

Alternatively, a more secular, realpolitik interpretation would see her as a kind of turncoat or traitor, ready to betray her own people in exchange for favors and protection by what looks like the winning side in the expected military confrontation. She is the sort of person for whom narrow personal interest takes precedence over group loyalty.

And what role, if any, is played by the fact of her being a harlot? (There are views in the tradition that try to deny this aspect, and claim that zonah here means an “innkeeper” [based on the fact that she let out rooms] or “a provider of food,” from the verb root zw”n rather than zn”h, but this sounds like exegetical acrobatics; the fact that she had neither husband nor children reinforces her identity as a sexual outlaw.) Perhaps there is a certain paradox intended here: that this woman, practicing a profession that is deeply stigmatized in most societies, was the one to act most kindly toward Israel.

A side question: what is the significance of the tikvat hut hashani, the scarlet cord or thread she placed in her window? It is reminiscent of the red strings so popular these days in Israel, connected with Sephardic folk religion and itinerant holy men, worn as good luck charms by all and sundry.

Another difficulty: What was the whole point of this mission on the part of the spies, anyway? What information of value did they gain as a result? The later description of the battle is of a supernatural operation, accomplished through God’s direct intervention accompanied by quasi-magical or theurgic acts by Joshua’s army. Perhaps the knowledge that the Jerichoans were disheartened, in and of itself, gave them the courage to expose themselves for seven days while performing their circumambulations of the city.

There are many more issues we could discuss here: the meaning of these processions around Jericho per se and, most difficult issue of all: how are we to relate to the total annihilation of the population of this and other Canaanite cities whose conquest is described in the Book of Joshua? The bloody nature of these battles rings very harsh to modern ears; indeed, there were have been those who have gone so far as to suggest excising the book from the Israeli school curriculum. But a proper treatment of these questions must wait for another occasion.