Ba'ahaloscha

Chana is doing about 40 Rashis on this parsha.  I estimate she knows the general idea of 80-90% and not very much of the vocabulary.  I think she would be able to read more than half and remember what they are generally about.

I made a choice in the story of Miriam's lashon hara about Moshe to just do pshat.  Chana didn't question extensively about the Kushite woman that Moshe married.  I did remind her that we had learned about Moshe's wife and that she was from Midian.  She did ask what that had to do with Miriam saying that they are all prophets.  But she didn't seem overly curious so I didn't give her more information.

In the last few days, I forgot to do Pirkei Avos with her (Did I mention that I decided to do a little bit of Pirkei Avos every day after Chumash?).  I put it away last week and I forgot about it.  She reminded me to do it today.  That's a good sign--it means that I'm doing it in a way that is pleasant enough to her that she asked to do it.

Sometimes she asks questions but doesn't have much patience for the answers. She asked, for example, what it means to make a fence around the Torah but she didn't really feel like thinking about what the possibilities could be.  Today I asked her what fences are for.  All the reasons she gave didn't seem relevant to a fence for Torah.

The main reason I chose to do Pirkei Avos is because many times in life I find myself thinking about personal development or about a political or interpersonal situation and some words of Pirkei Avos seem relevant to me.  So therefore it seems to me that if Chana is familiar with the words of Pirkei Avos, they might seem relevant to her in some of life's situations.

homeschooling is teaching me

Usually I don't prepare for chumash.  We just open the chumash and go.  Ever since the Mishkan, I've needed English.  6:23 completely stumped me and even the English didn't help me; I had to open R' Hirsch.

"All Chatas (korbanos) that are brought from its blood to the ohel moed to atone in the kodesh shall not be eaten; it shall be burnt in fire."

Wha???  Is it the korbanos that shouldn't be eaten?  Is the blood not allowed in?  (I admit I have not been paying attention to where each korban is shechted and where the blood is sprinkled or poured or what.)  Rashi (even English Artscroll Rashi) wasn't any help.

R' Hirsch explained that in 4:12 and 4:21, where the chatas of the leaders is described, the entire korban is burnt.  Usually with a chatas, a portion is burnt on the mizbeach and a portion is designated to the kohanim.  This signifies (according to R' Hirsch) that once the blood and fats are on the mizbeach, the spiritual nature and inner desires have found their right place before Hashem.  Then every self-seeking action, such as enjoying a good meal, is raised to a priestly degree.

However, when our leaders sin, the one who represents the Jew who has achieved this Ideal is lacking in the nation.  So there is nobody who can represent this lesson (of elevating our ordinary actions) to the kohen or sanhedrin.  So all of the meat of the Chatas that is not burnt on the mizbeach is NOT eaten by a kohen, but rather burnt outside the camp in a makom tahor.
Those are called Chataos Penimiyos, inner korbanos chatas.

What does this have to do with pasuk 23?

Apparently the other Chatas's, of regular people, have the blood spilled only on the outer (copper) mizbeach.  The Chatas of the leaders have the blood spilled in the outer mizbeach and sprinkled on the paroches (the curtain dividing the kodesh and the kodesh kodashim) and on the horns of the inner (gold) mizbeach.  (I missed this nuance when I was doing this with Chana.)

So.  Any blood of a regular Chatas that is brought inside (when it's supposed to only be outside on the outer, copper mizbeach) renders the Chatas korban not to be eaten (by the kohanim) and it should be burnt.

This is an odd detail to me.  It would seem like this is exactly the kind of thing that could be left to torah she-baal peh.

But at least I think I understand the basic meaning of the pasuk.

to buy or not to buy?

yesterday we finished chazara.  today i wanted to review shvi'i one more time, since there was a lot of hesitation and words that she asked for.  she objected, and by the time we got around to chumash she was excited about doing new pesukim and i forgot that i planned to have her review shvi'i again until she finished.  i let her choose however many new pesukim to do, and she did 7.

then i wanted to review all the rashis w/o nekudos.  we took a break and then she did all but 7 rashis.  we will convene to do the rest later.

i would still like to review shvi'i, but will have to figure out a way to present it to her that will be agreeable.

in other news, i've been contemplating the purchase of the little midrash says set for navi. (the family midrash says.)  first, i was disappointed that it only is for nevi'im rishonim.  but then i thought, let me not get ahead of myself.  right now chana doesn't know all that much of any navi.  let her do all nevi'im rishonim and then i can think about neviim achronim and ketuvim. 

i borrowed a volume from another homeschooler.  it is very readable. the problem is that there is a combination of pshat and midrash.  it is not clear that the midrashim are midrashim.  they are presented as part of the basic story.  although i don't object to the choices of midrashim (they seem to be the types i would choose, similar to rashis i choose), i do have a problem with them being enmeshed like that.  i like my students to be able to distinguish between pshat and not pshat. 

i have to weigh the extreme readability plus the fact that they very well might be picked up on their own (an advantage if i unschool the boys) against the fact that i am opposed to my kids learning without being able to distinguish between pshat and midrash.  (plus they are expensive: over $20 a volume, though if they were just pshat i would purchase them in a heartbeat as an investment.)

in other other news, i've started having chana recite birchas hatorah before we do chumash.  she only does the brachos, and not the mishnayos etc that come after them.

other than rashi

i liked the layout of chumash today. we started in the morning during aharon's nap. we did rashi. i like to start with rashi, and chana likes to end with rashi. for some reason she didn't argue when i said we are just doing rashi now, and we did the big one from vayishlach about reuven switching the bed, and then 3 little ones in vayeshev.

then a few hours went by. we reviewed rishon by ideas, pausing on phrases or pesukim that i thought needed a vocab review. that went nicely.

then chana chose how many new pesukim to do. she looked it over and chose 3. i would have preferred more, but the new me lets her choose. or tries to. so she did 3. overall, a pleasant day of learning.

the pasuk says that they hated yosef because of...
and i said to chana: what 2 reasons did they hate yosef?
and she answered: because of the dreams and because of yaakov's favoritism
but we noted that the pasuk says because of the dreams and because of his words.
at first i didn't know what yosef's words were. i said it was what he said about the dreams.
chana rightly said that if he just had the dreams but didn't say anything, then the brothers wouldn't know. surprisingly, rashi says it is the bad reports that yosef brought to yaakov. i wonder if anyone else says something.

often, i find myself searching for other mefarshim who have a slightly more pshat approach than rashi to explain the basic meaning of certain phrases or pesukim. sforno or rashbam, for example. sometimes r' hirsch.