. . . Although everything said so far is logically sound and true to the spirit of Exodus chapter 13, even a sympathetic reader could be forgiven for thinking to themselves, "
But what ornament could possibly capture the essence of what the bar mitvah sees when he looks privately at the sign of his entry into the covenant?"
And without paraphrasing the rabbis for the umpteenth time implying that circumcision (revealed at bar mitzvah) somehow returns the Jew to the prelapse status of Adam in the Garden, or else once again quoting the Talmud, Sanhedrin 38b, implying that Adam's great sin was epispasm, covering up the previously circumcised flesh, we can say in all joy and amazement that the revelation uncovered in uncovering the totapot reveals not only the nature of the prelapse body in the Garden, and the nature of the epispasmic cover-up, but also those who will eternally be held accountable for protecting the cover-up, versus those who will sing and shout for joy when the cover-up is finally uncovered (Psalm 132:13-18):
For the LORD hath chosen Zion; He hath desired it for his habitation. 14 This is my rest for ever: Here will I dwell; for I have desired it. 15 I will abundantly bless her provision: I will satisfy her poor with bread. 16 I will also clothe her priests with salvation: And her saints shall shout aloud for joy. 17 There will I make the horn of David to bud: I have ordained a lamp for mine anointed. 18 His enemies will I clothe with shame: But upon himself shall his crown flourish.
כִּֽי־בָחַ֣ר יְהוָ֣ה בְּצִיּ֑וֹן אִ֝וָּ֗הּ לְמוֹשָׁ֥ב לוֹֽ׃ 14 זֹאת־מְנוּחָתִ֥י עֲדֵי־עַ֑ד פֹּֽה־אֵ֝שֵׁ֗ב כִּ֣י אִוִּתִֽיהָ׃ 15 צֵ֭ידָהּ בָּרֵ֣ךְ אֲבָרֵ֑ךְ אֶ֝בְיוֹנֶ֗יהָ אַשְׂבִּ֥יעַֽ לָֽחֶם׃ 16 וְֽ֭כֹהֲנֶיהָ אַלְבִּ֣ישׁ יֶ֑שַׁע וַ֝חֲסִידֶ֗יהָ רַנֵּ֥ן יְרַנֵּֽנוּ׃ 17 שָׁ֤ם אַצְמִ֣יחַ קֶ֣רֶן לְדָוִ֑ד עָרַ֥כְתִּי נֵ֝֗ר לִמְשִׁיחִֽי׃ 18 א֭וֹיְבָיו אַלְבִּ֣ישׁ בֹּ֑שֶׁת וְ֝עָלָ֗יו יָצִ֥יץ נִזְרֹֽו׃
John
. . . The primary distinction between a sacred (hieroglyphic) script versus a demotic (profane script) is the distinction between a script retaining graphic elements associated with the spirit of the script, versus a script that doesn't. -----In a general sense, a hieroglyphic script is made up of holy (hieros) pictures (glyphs).
The "holiness" of hieroglyphic script is related to the fact that when it speaks of divinity, you can see the divine "between your eyes." -----The holy script is a
picture of the divine (e.g. the the mark the bar mitzvah places "between his eyes").
A demotic script loses the unity of picture and meaning so that a demotic script allows the reader to conjure up his or her own idea (picture) in their mind. There's no pictographic element retained in the script. It's stripped of the pictographic glyphic element. It gives great leeway to the reader to interpret according to his or her own spirit, since the pictographic spirit of the author has been sacrificed (so to say):
Demotic writing developed around 600 BC. It was derived from Hieratic writing, but developed into a highly cursive form so that the pictographic element of some symbols was lost. Although many single symbols were still used to write whole words or concepts,
the symbol did not necessarily visually resemble the concept it represented. As Demotic writing gained popularity, it began to replace Hieratic writing in the administrative context, though Hieratic continued to be used in religious texts. Demotic writing was used until roughly 400 AD, when all three scripts began to fall from use in favour of the Coptic alphabet.
The Relationship between Hieroglphic, Hieratic, and Demotic (Emphasis mine).
In the totapot narrative, Exodus chapter 13:9-16, the text speaks first of a mark (glyph) being memorialized "between the eyes" of the bar mitzvah (13:9). The bar mitzvah looks right at the actual fleshly sign/glyph immediately after the father tells him what he (the bar mitzvah alone) is looking at: i.e., the mark directly associated with leaving Egypt (what was required of the father to eat the Passover and leave Egypt).
But then in Exodus 13:16 this hieratic fleshly mark, the mark of circumcision, is made into a public ornament (totapot) that's still a hieroglyph of the actual mark of circumcision. And we don't even have to guess about what this totapot/ornament "between the eyes" looks like since scripture interprets scripture.
We have a second Passover narrative in Ezekiel chapter 9 with all the same players. Angels of death are going to pass through the land, just like the original Passover, and destroy anyone who doesn't wear the mark required to survive this Passover, i.e., the mark associated with the first Passover.
A "cross" (ktav ivri tav) is placed on the forehead of the fathers who are going to be spared the second Passover. The same mark that was uncovered at the first Passover, but was only for private viewing, is revealed at the second Passover (Ezek. 9).
What possible hieroglyph could capture what the bar mitzvah looks at in privacy after his father initiates him into the covenant by explaining the mark of initiation he received on the eighth day but whose meaning was withheld til bar mitzvah (the 13th year)?
The mark explained to the bar mitzvah retains its status as a holy glyph even at the second Passover (Ezek. 9) ---- Which is to say it doesn't become merely a demotic mark (the shel rosh), allowing anyone to interpret it as they wish (thereby covering up the "sacred" in most of the interpretations).
I will cloth its priests with salvation, and its devoted ones shall ever shout for joy. There I shall cause David's horn to sprout; there I have set in order a lamp for My anointed. His enemies I will cloth with shame, but upon him a priestly coronation will spring up and blossom
Psalms 132:17-18.
The Hirsch Tehillim uses four or five pages to associate Psalm 132 with not only Isaiah chapter 61, but with the sacred ornament that's Israel's priestly jewelry, the tefillin. Rabbi Hirsch associates the clothing of Messiah's priests with the sacred clothing spoken of in Isaiah chapter 61, which Rabbi Hirsch associates with the tefillin.
With that said, we can see, in Psalms 132, precisely the danger of the demotic standing in for the sacred since in the English translation of the Hebrew, the word for the "shame" (that will be worn by Messiah's enemies) is covered up precisely as Messiah's enemies use demotic allusions to cover-up the primary revelation associated with the Tanakh.
The Hebrew word for the "shame" associated with Messiah's enemies is (beit-shin-tav) בשת. This mightn't seem particularly remarkable until we realize that the word speaking of being clothed in "shame," i.e., Messiah's enemies being clothed in "shame" (so that they can be spotted by Messiah's priests), is constructed of the very cover-up associated with Messiah's enemies.
In other words, the premise of this thread is that Messiah's enemies misinterpret Exodus chapter 13 to cover-up the revelation that's found there. -----They represent the totapot with the shel rosh, the head tefillin, when surely they know that the black box that's the shel rosh is called the "beit" ב? And surely they know a "shin" ש is emblazoned on the outside of the "beit," such that if the "mark" that's supposed to be "between the eyes," (as revealed in the second Passover account) is a tav, as Ezekiel chapter 9 claims it is, then the beit and the shin literally cover up the "mark" associated with Passover in Ezekiel chapter 9.
This cover-up is such that the very words we see when we see the hieroglphic meaning of the shel rosh, i.e., the head tefillin, reveals not just the "shame" of trying to hide the revelation of Messiah, but precisely how he's hidden, and who hides him.
If we take the beit (the bayit) the shin (emblazon on both sides of the bayit) and the tav (which we know from Ezekiel chapter 9 is the true mark of totapot), we see that these three letters spell the word (beit-shin-tav) בשת, which is the very word Psalms 132 claims represents the "shame" that will cloth Messiah's enemies. And the beit ב and the shin ש are specifically used to cover-up the tav ת that's hidden beneath the shel rosh, the head tefillin (on the forehead).
According to Psalm 132, Messiah's enemies will cover up the true mark of Passover, which is the true mark of circumcision (the tav on the forehead), by clothing themselves with a beit and a shin that covers up the tav on the forehead. The shel rosh covers the tav that's all that would be on the forehead without the covering provided by the bayit ב and the shin ש.
When they do this, they're literally wearing (clothing themselves) with "shame" (bayit-shin-tav). The batim and the shin that make up the shel rosh cover the tav revealed in Ezekiel chapter 9, thereby revealing Messiah's enemies as those people who cloth themselves with "shame," which, when we discard with demotic cover-ups, can easily be seen to be the shel rosh:
Indeed, the symbolic dimension of Hebrew, as it appears in the sacred texts, disappears for the benefit of a purely utilitarian use of language. To be sure, in our desacralized world it is no longer a matter of consciously manipulating the magical virtualities of language in order to derive from it some personal gain. But when an entire society hijacks the language of its religious tradition to purely material ends, when it makes it into a mere instrument in the service of its immediate interests, it returns, without knowing it, to the attitude of the sorcerers of old. A "crude imitation" of the sacred text's language, modern Hebrew has emptied out the ancient words of their symbolic and religious signification in order to reduce them to mere indices of material reality.
Stephane Moses, Professor Emeritus at Hebrew University Jerusalem, quoted in Derrida's Acts of Religion.
Anyone who drains the hierogyphic element of sacred Hebrew for ethnicity publicizing purposes clothes themselves in shame and become enemies of Messiah; enemies of his revelation; enemies who claim he hasn't come, and may never come. Why should he. His enemies have things fully under-control when they present themselves as him, undercover, when they cover him, under their demotic denunciation that's their proud cover-up of the sacred.
John