Whenever someone brings up the beit hamikdash the first visions of my mind are of the offerings. How R. Paltiel happily described the enormous sound of heavy flesh being slapped on a fire and R. Erenberg telling us seminary girls that we had skewed visions of holiness.
"Clean, white rooms with marble pillars?"
Soft light, muted footsteps, high ceilings that reached the heavens. Yeah, that seemed like holiness to us.
"That's just the crap Hollywood likes to feed you. Envision sweaty men, blood everywhere, smoke, loud animals being tugged around. This is holy. Doesn't seem so pretty, eh?"
So when Professor Silberstein directed a question at me regarding the Beit Hamikdash, this immediately came to mind. First he confirmed that my name was due to a Jewish affiliation, and then he asked me where the most important part of the holy temple was.
Completely shocked, I asked if he was talking about the alter where the offerings were brought. (See what happens when your immediate thoughts are of those loud, messy offerings the teachers keep talking about?) But immediately I knew this was wrong.
"No, no the kodesh hakedoshim. Um, Holy of holies."
Why the hell is this being brought up in a chemistry class? A moment ago he was talking about the seers of ancient Greece and how they used to sniff the fumes issuing from a crack in the earth, and would then foresee futures for the thousands who went to them for advice. According to him, what they were sniffing though made them high. And I had cracked up, thinking it was all pretty funny. Getting serious advice from someone high as a kite.
So I'm thinking of like trying to take over this country and pillaging homes and raping a bunch of women.
Whoah, like yeah man! Wow, Zeus has got some seriously awesome sandals. Look at those things! But uh, yeah like follow your dreams, you know?
But now he's talking about Yom Kippur and I know where this is going. He's talking about the High Priest entering on Yom kippur and getting "wasted". Wasted on the fumes from the incense.
This is different from the seminary version. In this version there was a rope tied around his foot. Because if he wasn't the great man he was garbed to be, he would die. And it had nothing to do with the incense.
The teacher goes on talking about Indiana Jones, a point of reference for the rest of the class. Not really one I can relate to, I saw it when I was maybe ten and barely made the biblical connection. I barely made any connections as my hands were stretched over my eyes in terror. But back to the classroom.
Now I knew the teacher was Jewish the moment he started talking. I was fairly certain from his name and it became more obvious from his mannerisms and his strong accent. He has the accent kids use when they want to imitate a New Yorker.
After that he started using random Hebrew words, maspik? with an expectant look. So when he started talking about the origin of the snake being wrapped around a staff as a symbol of medicine I was sure he would mention the old story of Moshe making a copper snake to wrap around a pole and using it to heal the folks who gazed upon it. I mean that's just obvious right? But no, he says something about Egyptians looking at snakes as a symbol of healing because they shed their skins, blah blah blah. Truth is, it's snakes are a popular reference also seen with Greek mythology, Hermes and Asclepius had staffs intertwined with snakes, along with a few other references but I'll let you wiki those on your own time.
I just really thought he'd keep up with the Jew-streak and mention it. I mean I've already been called upon to talk about the Dead Sea, I was half-expecting him to ask if I was fasting.
But no, he just wants me to talk about intermolecular forces. Which is honestly just fine with me.
*Sorry about the lousy editing.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)

7 comments:
A. Why was this being discussed in chem?
B. There was a rope tied around his ankle in the seminary version too.
A. Well he originally was talking about radon, so I guess while on the subject of dangerous gases...
B. That's my lousy editing, I was saying that in the seminary version there was a rope involved.
A, again. I was also wondering why he was bringing it up.
You wrote this? It doesn't sound at all like your writing style.
It's me when I'm writing at 4 in the morning, don't ask why. How is it that diff?
To answer questions like that, people spend years studying literature.
cop out...
See the next post, this classroom situation gets funnier.
Post a Comment