As a math major, I often look at the world as numbers. Information can be presented through probability and data, and in the past ten years the field of collecting and interpreting the numbers in our world has exploded, affecting sports and politics and everything in between.
Jews have focused on numbers for a long time. We have gematria, we have significant recurring numbers that are ascribed significance such as 7 representing nature or 8 representing beyond nature, and of course, we are in the season of numbers as we stand just past half way point in sefirat haomer as we count the days until Shavuot.
Less than a month ago we sang about the numbers of Judaism. And I would like to bring your attention to one of those numbers. The Shisha Sidrei Mishna, the six orders of the Mishna. These six orders, as we may know, create the entire framework of Torah Shebaal Peh, the oral law. But while I’ve studied mishan for almost twenty years, it was not until this week that I came across a startling question,
The six orders are
Zeriam (literally seeds, containing mostly the laws related to planting in Eretz Yisroel)
Moed (literally holiday, containing the laws of Shabbat and the holidays)
Nashim (literally women, teaching laws related to women including marriage and divorce)
Nezikin (literally damages, teaching laws of interpersonal conduct, mostly financial)
Kodashim (literally Holy things, teaching laws of sacrifices and the Beit Hamikdash)
Taharot (literally purities, teaching the laws of ritual impurity)
Note that five of these orders are named in the plural form. Zeraim, Nashim, Nezikin, Kodashim, Taharot. But “Moed” appears in the singular form.
Why the discrepancy? Why not the expected word “Moadim”?
I came across a beautiful answer to this question by the 17th century Rabbi Naphtali HaKohen Katz, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naphtali_Cohen a Russo-German rabbi and kabalist, in his sefer Semichat Chachamim, an introduction to Mishna which he took so much pride in that he asked to be buried with. http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=20141&st=&pgnum=11
Rabbi Katz explains that the sages were highlighting the singularity of each holiday. He explains in a technical sense: there is an obligation to study the laws of a holiday in advance of the holiday. Do not think that the holidays all merge together and I can study the laws of any holiday I would like. Rather, each holiday is distinct, and therefore Chazal used the term “moed” to demonstrate and highlight that the holidays do not blend together.
I am not too concerned that you will all be studying the laws of Lulav and Etrog to prepare for Shavuot. But perhaps we can build on his answer in a less technical sense on our need to anchor ourselves to the holidays and to calendar.
In a previous era, the holidays naturally aligned with moods of the agricultural seasons. But for us non-farmers, we must try to connect to the themes of each holiday. Shavuot is an easy holiday to look past: it is the shortest Biblical holiday, it does not have a special mitzvah or detailed halachot, and you don’t even need to register for seats. But this easy holiday lends itself most to falling into autopilot “moadim” mode, missing out on the entire moed. The Moed of Shavuot is one of strengthening our connection to Torah. Whether that means sharing words of Torah at the table, finding something to learn on a regular basis, or showing up for learning Shavuot night, we have an opportunity to morph our celebration of the moadim into a celebration of each moed.
(See https://baisdovyosef.com/511-what-is-wrong-with-seder-moed/ for other approaches as to why it’s called seder moed.)
No responses yet