PART 2: Why did Harry Potter's boggart effect him like a dementor? (Beshalach)

In part one I introduced two (fictional) magical creatures from Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban: boggarts and dementors. In short, boggarts are shape-shifters that take on the form of whatever will scare the person nearby, and dementors are creatures that suck all the happiness from nearby people, leaving them feeling only despair. In the Harry Potter stories, the thing that Harry most fears is a dementor, so boggarts near him take the form of dementors. Surprisingly, they then effect him like a dementor, leaving him feeling despair. This leads to the question of why Harry's boggart should effect him like a dementor, since boggarts only take the form of the feared thing, they don't become the feared thing.

Obviously there is no discussion in Torah literature about boggarts and dementors, since (to my knowledge) these creatures are purely imaginary. But we can ask a more general question: if something has the ability to magically take the form of something else, would it have the essence of that thing, or only the form of that thing?

In the Torah we learn of the manna ("mon" in Hebrew) that Divinely fell from the sky when the Jews were in the desert after leaving Egypt. The Midrash (Shmot Raba) says that the manna contained the tastes of all foods, and that it magically tasted like whatever the person eating it wanted it to taste like. Someone who wanted pizza would eat manna that tasted magically like pizza. Someone who wanted steak would have manna that tasted magically like steak.

Rephrasing our question from above, did the manna in the desert remain essentially manna, and simply taste like steak or pizza, or did it actually take on the essence of the pizza or steak? To explore this, we can consider a few discussions in Torah literature in which this distinction between taste and essence is important.

Suppose on Passover in the desert the Jews had taken manna and desired it to taste like matza, the unleavened bread eaten at the Passover Seder. Could they then have eaten this manna/matza at their Seder and fulfilled the commandment to eat matza? The Ritva commentary on the Talmud (Kiddishin 38a) describes the sequence of events when the Jews arrived in the Land of Israel after the forty years in the desert. Ritva says that the Jews ate manna until the 16th day of the Jewish month of Nissan, as described in the Torah, but that on Seder night, on the 16th day of Nissan, they ate matza made from new crops of wheat. (This is significant in the Talmud's understanding some of the Torah's laws about agriculture.) This implies that the manna could not be eaten to fulfill the Seder's requirement of matza, and that the Jews had to instead eat from the new wheat crop. We can infer from this that according to the Ritva the manna did not take on the essense of the food being desired, only the taste.

Other Torah sources, however, are of the opposite opinion. The Igra De'kalla (*) is reported to have been of the opinion that manna could have been eaten as matza, and the appropriate Blessings could have been said exactly as if regular matza were eaten.

Suppose someone took a piece of manna and desired that it taste like a cheeseburger, a pork chop, or another non-Kosher piece of food. Would the manna have the non-Kosher taste, and would the eater transgress the Kosher laws by eating it? This too is the subject of a disagreement among Torah authorities. The Chiddushei HaRim (*) (from the Gerrer chassidic dynasty) stated that the manna would not take on the forbidden taste, implying that the manna does take on the essence of the desired food, and that G-d prevented it from causing a transgression. But the Chida (*) stated that the manna could in fact taste like forbidden foods, and that it was permitted to eat it, the obvious implication being that the manna adopted the taste but not the essence of the desired food.

Like many areas of Torah literature, we're left with a Rabbinic disagreement over whether manna adopted the essence or just the taste of the food that was desired. While Rabbinic disagreements in practical areas are most often decided conclusively, since people need to act in accordance with one of the opinions, in non-practical areas of Torah thought there is often no conclusive answer. This appears to be one of those times.

Returning to our original question, it appears that the Chiddushei HaRim and the Igra De'Kalla are of the opinion that something that magically takes on the form of something else also takes on the actual essense of the thing. This is analogous to Harry Potter's boggart effecting him like a dementor. But the Chida and the Ritva seem to say no, taking on attributes of something doesn't mean taking on the essense of the thing. In the analogy to Harry Potter, this would lead us to conclude that Harry's boggart should not have effected him in this way.

Obviously these analogies are meant for fun, to make us think about Torah concepts in new and interesting ways, and should not be taken too far. (See the preface of Harry Potter and Torah for more on this.) That said, we have seen some Torah thought that seems very analogous to the issue in Harry Potter, and this Torah thought is also something that many of us have not previously considered.

So if anyone reading this comes across some manna right before Passover, I do not suggest eating it as matza at your seder. And if you want to know more about boggarts taking the essence of the things they imitate, you'll have to wait for J. K. Rowling to finish the final book of Harry Potter. But if you're reading Harry Potter (or anything else), and some interesting thoughts come to mind, remember this: Somewhere, somehow, Torah literature has discussed the subject.


Torah sources marked with an (*) are those that I have not yet seen in the original, but were quoted in secondary sources. For more in-depth coverage of this subject, see the fascinating article in English by Rabbi Ari Zivitofsky, "Bacon bits and non-Kosher taste."

...

"Without a Torah oath" (and Harry Potter unbreakable vows)

A few readers asked me what I mean when I promise to donate 10% of my book proceeds to Israeli schools "without a Torah oath."

I wrote this as a translation of the Hebrew phrase "bli neder." The idea is that while I'm promising to make this donation, and in fact I'm about to make the first one, I don't want to make this promise be an oath from the perspective of Torah law. Torah law takes oaths (swearing to do something or swearing not to do something) very seriously, and people are discouraged from making oaths even if they intend to keep them because of the seriousness involved. Basically taking an oath is seen by Torah law as creating an obligation that's as binding on the person as any Torah law is.

A Torah oath is actually similar in many respects to an "unbreakable vow" as described in Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince.

So to be clear, I fully intend to make the donations, despite wanting on principle to avoid binding my soul in an oath.

Reminders: Parshas Bo and a bookstore in Teaneck

In case anyone didn't see these previous messages:

1. Harry Potter themes in the Torah portion of Bo, read on Shabbat Jan 27, 2007, can be found here.

2. Harry Potter and Torah is now for sale in Judaica House, in Teaneck, NJ. (Of course, it's still for sale on-line here.)

Why did Harry Potter's "boggart" effect him like a "dementor?" (Parshat Beshalach)

I'm starting to develop and write a new thought on Harry Potter and Torah that relates to the Torah portion of Beshalach, which is read this year on Shabbat Feb 3, 2007. This doesn't appear in Harry Potter and Torah, I'm just thinking out the idea as I write it up now. But it's similar in style to chapters in the book.

I'd like to start with a question from Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (the 3rd book and movie):

Why did Harry Potter's "boggart" effect him like a "dementor?"

As background to the question, "boggarts" and "dementors" are both fictional magical creatures from the Harry Potter stories. Each one has magical powers that we learn about in the 3rd book.

Dementors are introduced in chapter ten, as Professor Lupin explains to Harry: "Dementors are among the foulest creatures that walk this earth... they drain peace, hope and happiness out of the air... get too near a dementor and every good feeling, every happy memory, will be sucked out of you... you'll be left with nothing but the worst experiences of your life...."

Boggarts are introduced in seven, as Hermione answers in Defense class: "(A boggart) is a shape-shifter... It can take the shape of whatever it thinks will frighten us most." As the story continues, the boggart proceeds to take the forms of whatever will most frighten the student closest to it. When Harry Potter faces a boggart in chapter twelve, it takes the form of a dementor, and, as dementors do, it causes Harry to relive the worst experiences of his life.

But this brings us to a question: Boggarts only take the form of whatever will frighten us, they don't actually become those things. The boggart facing the defense class didn't actually become Neville's grandmother or a mummy, it just looked exactly like them. So when Harry faces the boggart that looks like a dementor, why should it effect him like a dementor does?

Believe it or not, we can see a perspective on this question from the Torah. Obviously beggarts and dementors aren't real, but the Torah does talk about things that are analogous to shape-shifting creatures in Harry Potter. I think we're going to find a disagreement between the Chiddushei HaRim and the Chida on the subject, but I'm still researching it. I'll start writing about it early next week. For now I'll just give you a hint -- it's related to the Torah portion of Beshalach, not this Shabbat's parsha but next Shabbat's parsha.

If you're reading this on the web and haven't subscribed to the blog, just click on the subscribe link to receive blog updates by e-mail. That way you won't miss each message as this idea is developed.

I hope everyone has a good Shabbos and a fun weekend.

PART 2 CAN BE READ BY CLICKING HERE

Daniel Radcliffe apparently Jewish!

Breaking news: Daniel Radcliffe, the actor of Harry Potter, told an interviewer on Australian TV that his mother is Jewish, although intermarried with his Protestant father.

See the whole interview at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qp7IIvZuGdU

Book for sale at Judaica House in Teaneck

Harry Potter and Torah is primarily for sale on-line, but is now also available at Judaica House bookstore in Teaneck, NJ. Get it while they last! Other bookstores, and Amazon, are coming soon.

Fedd free to e-mail comments and questions to author@harrypottertorah.com or add them as comments on the blog. I enjoy your comments, and plan to answer questions from readers on this blog soon.

To receive blog messages like this in your e-mail, click here to subscribe!

Harry Potter themes in Parshat Bo: Magic Wands & Unity

This week's Torah portion, Parshas Bo, for the week leading up to Shabbat Jan 27, 2007, is referred to several times in Harry Potter and Torah, relating to two different themes. One is magic wands, the other is unity.

The Torah portion starts out with the final plagues. In the eighth plague, locusts, G-d tells Moses to "raise your hand over the land of Egypt, and locusts will rise over the land" (Ex 10:12). What does Moses do? The Torah continues "And Moses raised his staff over the land of Egypt..." (Ex 10:13). Why did Moses raise his staff and not just his hand? His Divine command hadn't referred to the staff! Commentaries say that Moses and Aaron knew, even without being told by G-d, that staffs were critical to their enacting miracles (Ha'amek Davar and Ibn Ezra on Ex 9:22-23).

Why are the staffs needed? The full explanation is in the chapter on magic wands in Harry Potter and Torah. In a nutshell, Chassidic writings teach that staffs and sticks and wands are all symbols of the first step in the creation of the world, when G-d first created the 3-dimensional universe, and after that created the "stuff" that He put in that universe. A staff or stick or wand symbolizes the creation of the first dimension, which we know in geometry is in the form of a straight line. Think of a staff or wand as a physical X-axis, which channels some of the powers of creation from G-d's creation of the world. Since miracles essentially involve changing creation, stepping outside of the rules of nature, they need the power of G-d's creation to be enacted. This power is brought in by a staff, stick, or wand. (This is a complicated idea, see the book for a more complete explanation.)

Before the tenth and final plague, the Torah tells us of the preparations that the Jews were commanded to do for the first Passover, when G-d "passed over" their houses and killed the firstborn Egyptians. They sacrificed sheep and dipped branches into the animal's blood to paint it on their doorposts. Rabbi Matisyahu Solomon explains the symbolism of this action in terms of Jewish unity. Several generations earlier Joseph's brothers sold Joseph into slavery and then dipped his coat (the "coat of many colors") into blood to convince their father that Joseph had been killed. Now, in Egypt, the Jews had to perform the same action, dipping (in blood), not in animosity but in unity. The action of hatred was replaced by an action of unity. This is the lesson of the "dipping twice" at the Passover Seder, that things we do can cause disunity and hatred or can cause unity. Hatred caused the exile in Egypt, unity caused the redemption. We should choose unity.

This theme of unity is seen in the Harry Potter series, where Dumbeldore says that in fighting the evil Voldemort, "we are only as strong as we are united, as weak as we are divided." As the sorting hat sings, "we must unite inside her (the school) or we'll crumble from within." Magical strength, like Jewish strength, comes from unity. "Differences of habit and language are nothing at all if our aims are identical and our hearts are open."

Harry Potter and Torah has twelve pages of examples of the importance of unity in the Torah.

I'll post more later this week, including the first installment of some more new material that wasn't ready for the book. Stay tuned... (click here to subscribe to this blog by e-mail.)

New! Subscribe to this blog by e-mail

On the right side of this blog you'll now see a link titled "subscribe to blog." If you click on this, you can fill in your e-mail address and receive blog updates by e-mail.

[ADDED JAN 23: OK, so those of you who subscribed on Monday got a copy of this message in your mailboxes Tuesday morning telling you that you can subscribe.... Sort of silly. Ignore it, your subscriptions will bring more useful messages from now on...]

Enjoy!

Chapter on aish.com site

Another chapter from Harry Potter and Torah is now available on-line.

In the book it's titled Nicolas Flamel and the Children of Keturah, and on the aish.com web site it's titled Harry Potter and the Children of Keturah.

Haven't bought the book yet? You can buy it here!

Harry Potter themes in the Torah portion of Va'era

The book Harry Potter and Torah discusses a Torah perspective on magic wands, many examples of which appear in this week's Torah portion, Va'era:

Moses's staff is used to perform many of the plagues in Egypt, similar to a magic wand's performing magic. This staff is referred to as "the staff of G-d" which Onkolus's interpretive translation calls "the staff by which G-d worked miracles" (Ex 7:9). Moses also uses his staff to perform magic in front of Pharoah.

In several of the plagues G-d commands Moses or Aaron to raise their hands, but the Torah says that they raised their staffs. Clearly they knew that the staff was an inherent part of their ability to perform the miracle. (See Ibn Ezra on Ex 9:22 and Ha'amek Davar on Ex 9:23.)

We'll see more miracles from Moses's staff in next week's Torah portion, as the plagues continue, and then at the splitting of the sea as the Jews leave Egypt.

For more on magic wands and other Torah perspectives on themes from Harry Potter, see Harry Potter and Torah.

Moses, the Egyptian, and the Killing Curse (complete)

Here is a complete version of the essay developed last week about Biblical killing curses. I may add more material to this at a later time, but this is essentially a complete first draft of a chapter just like the ones in my Harry Potter and Torah book.

Moses, the Egyptian, and the Killing Curse

In the first chapter of Harry Potter and Torah I discuss at length that the "killing curse" in Harry Potter, Avada Kedavra, is the only incantation in the Harry Potter series that's based not on Greek or Latin words but on words from Hebrew and Aramaic. In Hebrew avada means "I will destroy," and kedavra means "as I will speak," so the killing curse in Hebrew means "I will destroy as I will speak," a fitting translation.

We learn about the Avada Kedavra curse in chapter 14 of Goblet of Fire:

'Ah," said Moody... 'Yes, the last and worst. Avada Kedavra ... the
killing curse.'

He put his hand into the gladd jar, and almost as though it knew what was
coming, the third spider scuttled frantically around the bottom of the
jar.... but he trapped it, and placed it upon the desktop....

Moody raised his wand... 'Avada Kedavra!' Moody roared.

There was a flash of blinding green light, and a rushing sound, as though a
vast invisible something was soaring through the air - instantaneously the
spider rolled over onto its back, umarked, but unmistakably dead....

Might killing curses appear in the Torah?

The Torah tells us that Moses, who had been raised in Pharoah's house but knew that he was Jewish, saw an Egyptian beating a Jewish man (Ex 2:12). When he saw that there was noone coming to help the Jewish man, Moses killed the Egyptian. The next day he saw two Jewish men fighting with each other, and asked one why he was beating up the other. The man responded "Who made you our judge? Are you saying you'll kill me as you killed the Egyptian?" (Ex 2:14)

The Midrash and many commentaries (Rashi, Ramban, Rabbeinu Bechaya) explain the wording of the Jewish man's retort to Moses, "are you saying you'll kill me," to mean literally that Moses might kill him by talking, "saying he'll kill," and had done so to the Egyptian. In the original Hebrew this is clearly a grammatically correct reading of the sentence.

As commentaries elaborate, if the man had said to Moses, "are you planning to kill me," we wouldn't have any reason to think that Moses killed him through speech. But the use of the word "saying" implies killing by speech. Commentaries also elaborate that the man must have seen the Egyptian man drop dead without Moses touching him.

When Jewish commentaries discuss performing magical acts through speech, the words spoken are not incantations or curses, but rather various names of G-d. Even though the Avada Kedavra curse in Harry Potter has its roots in the Hebrew language (as is discussed in Harry Potter and Torah), the Torah's magical incantations are all names of G-d. The magic which is performed, in this case killing the Egyptian without touching him, is not an independent magical act by Moses, but is rather carrying out G-d's plan for the world.

As a side note, the Midrash says that the Egyptian was beating up the Jewish man because he was enamored with the Jewish man's wife, who was named Shlomit. This will be relevent later when we look at other examples of killing curses in the Torah.

So far, we've seen killing curses in the Torah described a lot like those in Harry Potter, causing a person to drop dead on the spot without being touched. But rather than carrying out the decision of a wizard, like Avada Kedavra, the Torah's killing curses are names of G-d, and carry out His decisions for the world.

This story helps us understand a somewhat strange sequence of events that happens later in the Torah during the Jews travels in the desert. In Leviticus (24:10-14) the Torah tells us:

"The son of a Jewish woman and an Egyptian man went out and had an argument with a Jewish man in the camp. The Jewish woman's son then used G-d's Name to curse. The people brought him to Moses. His mother's name was Shlomit, daughter of Divro, from the tribe of Dan. They kept him in custody until G-d could explain what to do."

The Torah continues that G-d specified the death penalty for the man, which raises an obvious question: what's going on here?

Rashi's commentary, based on the Midrash quoted previously (Shmos Raba 1:28-29), explains that this man, the "son of a Jewish woman and an Egyptian man," was the son that was born from the relationship between the Egyptian man and the Jewish man's wife. This man wasn't simply cursing the way people curse nowadays, he was trying to kill the other man the same way Moses had killed his father (the Egyptian). This explains why the Torah connected his cursing to an argument with another Jewish man, and why he received such a serious punishment. This wasn't just cursing, this was attempted murder. And it wasn't a circumstantial action on his part, it was his carrying on in his fathers footsteps, and expressing anger against society for his father's being killed.

Killing curses gives us a new perspective on these Biblical stories. Rather than a series of disjointed events that don't fit together, the stories give us a clear progression across time and generations. At the same time, the Biblical perspective on killing by speech is different from the notion in Harry Potter. Biblical killing curses don't require the venemous hatred that avada kedavra requires, otherwise Moses's would have failed and the son of the Egyptian's would have succeeded. Rather, it requires the killing to be carrying out the will of G-d, to save a man from being killed rather than to express anger at society. In the Torah, the true source of magic, of events that transcend the natural order of the world, is always Divine.

Moses, the Egyptian, and the killing curse - part 2

Moses, the Egyptian, and the killing curse - part 2
Harry Potter and Torah - Parshat Shmot

In the first chapter of Harry Potter and Torah I discuss at length that the "killing curse" in Harry Potter, Avada Kedavra, is the only incantation in the Harry Potter series that's based not on Greek or Latin words but on words from Hebrew and Aramaic. In Hebrew avada means "I will destroy," and kedavra means "as I will speak," so the killing curse in Hebrew means "I will destroy as I will speak," a fitting translation.

In part one of this new on-line chapter we saw that Moses used a Divine Name of G-d as a "Biblical killing curse" to kill an Egyptian who was beating up a Jew and trying to kill him. (If you haven't read part one, read it now before continuing here.)

This story helps us understand a somewhat strange sequence of events that happens later in the Torah during the Jews travels in the desert. In Leviticus (24:10-14) the Torah tells us:

The son of a Jewish woman and an Egyptian man went out and had an argument with a Jewish man in the camp. The Jewish woman's son then used G-d's Name to curse. The people brought him to Moses. His mother's name was Shlomit, daughter of Divro, from the tribe of Dan. They kept him in custody until G-d could explain what to do."

The Torah continues that G-d specified the death penalty for the man, which raises an obvious question: what's going on here?

Rashi's commentary, based on the Midrash quoted previously (Shmos Raba 1:28-29), explains that this man, the "son of a Jewish woman and an Egyptian man," was the son that was born from the relationship between the Egyptian man and the Jewish man's wife. This man wasn't simply cursing the way people curse nowadays, he was trying to kill the other man the same way Moses had killed his father (the Egyptian). This explains why the Torah connected his cursing to an argument with another Jewish man, and why he received such a serious punishment. This wasn't just cursing, this was attempted murder. And it wasn't a circumstantial action on his part, it was his carrying on in his fathers footsteps, and expressing anger against society for his father's being killed.

Killing curses gives us a new perspective on these Biblical stories. Rather than a series of disjointed events that don't fit together, the stories give us a clear progression across time and generations. At the same time, the Biblical perspective on killing by speech is different from the notion in Harry Potter. Biblical killing curses don't require the venemous hatred that avada kedavra requires, otherwise Moses's would have failed and the son of the Egyptian's would have succeeded. Rather, it requires the killing to be carrying out the will of G-d, to save a man from being killed rather than to express anger at society. In the Torah, the true source of magic, of events that transcend the natural order of the world, is always Divine.


As always, questions and comments are always welcome, either as comments on this blog message or at e-mail to author@harrypottertorah.com

Other aspects of the Torah portion of Sh'mot that relate to Harry Potter themes include Moses's carrying out magical acts with his staff, one of the dozen Biblical examples of magic wands listed in the book. In addition, the story of Moses and the burning bush is cited in the chapter on magical protection.

Moses, the Egyptian, and the killing curse - part 1 - Harry Potter and Torah for Parshat Shemot

Moses, the Egyptian, and the killing curse - part 1

Harry Potter and Torah - Parshat Shmot

In my previous blog message, and in the epilogue of Harry Potter and Torah, I mentioned an incident in the Torah (in this week's Torah portion, Shmot) that relates to a theme from Harry Potter, killing curses, that is not elaborated in the book. Today I'm writing the first part of the story.

The Torah tells us that Moses, who had been raised in Pharoah's house but knew that he was Jewish, saw an Egyptian beating a Jewish man (Ex 2:12). When he saw that there was noone coming to help the Jewish man, Moses killed the Egyptian. The next day he saw two Jewish men fighting with each other, and asked one why he was beating up the other. The man responded "Who made you our judge? Are you saying you'll kill me as you killed the Egyptian?" (Ex 2:14)

The Midrash and many commentaries (Rashi, Ramban, Rabbeinu Bechaya) explain the wording of the Jewish man's retort to Moses, "are you saying you'll kill me," to mean literally that Moses might kill him by talking, "saying he'll kill," and had done so to the Egyptian. In the original Hebrew this is clearly a grammatically correct reading of the sentence.

As commentaries elaborate, if the man had said to Moses, "are you planning to kill me," we wouldn't have any reason to think that Moses killed him through speech. But the use of the word "saying" implies killing by speech. Commentaries also elaborate that the man must have seen the Egyptian man drop dead without Moses touching him.

When Jewish commentaries discuss performing magical acts through speech, the words spoken are not incantations or curses, but rather various names of G-d. Even though the Avada Kedavra curse in Harry Potter has its roots in the Hebrew language (as is discussed in Harry Potter and Torah), the Torah's magical incantations are all names of G-d. The magic which is performed, in this case killing the Egyptian without touching him, is not an independent magical act by Moses, but is rather carrying out G-d's plan for the world.

As a side note, the Midrash says that the Egyptian was beating up the Jewish man because he was enamored with the Jewish man's wife, who was named Shlomit. This will be relevent later when we look at other examples of killing curses in the Torah.

So far, we've seen killing curses in the Torah described a lot like those in Harry Potter, causing a person to drop dead on the spot without being touched. But rather than carrying out the decision of a wizard, like Avada Kedavra, the Torah's killing curses are names of G-d, and carry out His decisions for the world.


This idea will be developed more later this week. As always, comments or questions are welcome.

Parshat Sh'mot's many Harry Potter related themes

This week Torah portion starts the book of Sh'mot (Exodous), and transitions from the Patriarchs to the story of the Jews in Egypt and their redemption by G-d via Moshe (Moses).

The parsha of Sh'mot contains a number of references related to Harry Potter themes:

1. We see Moshe performing miraculous acts (a.k.a. magic) with his staff, one of the many Biblical stories of magic wands that are discussed in the chapter on Magic Wands in Harry Potter and Torah.

2. The story of the burning bush is one of the examples of magical protection, discussed in the book chapter by that name, and posted on this blog last week and on the book's Web site as a sample chapter.

3. In the story of Moshe killing the Egyptian man who was beating up the Jewish man, commentaries say that Moshe killed him by saying a magical Name of G-d. In Harry Potter terminology, this is one of the earliest examples of a killing curse in action. This is not discussed at length in the book, and I'll post more about this on the blog later this week. For those interested in looking it up, the citations to start with are Rashi, Ramban, and Rabbeinu Bechaya on Ex 2:12 and 2:14, and Midrash Shmos Raba 1:34.

Have a good week everyone!

Harry Potter's Magical Protection -- a book excerpt for Parshat VaYechi

The following is excerpted from the book Harry Potter and Torah and is posted here for this week's Torah portion, parshat VaYechi:


At the end of Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone we learn of the magical protection that Harry received from his mother's love, particularly from her having sacrificed her life to save his:

"Why couldn't Quirrell touch me?" [Harry asked].

[Dumbeldore answered] "Your mother died trying to save you. If there is one
thing Voldemort can't understand, it is love. He didn't realize that love
as powerful as your mother's leaves its own mark. Not a scar, no visible
sign ... to have been loved so deeply, even though the person who loved us is
gone, will give us some protection forever." (Harry Potter and the
Sorcerer's Stone, chapter 17)

This concept is described later, in the fourth book, by the evil Voldemort himself:

"You all know that on the night I lost my powers and my body, I tried to kill
him. His mother died in the attempt to save him - and unwittingly provided
him with a protection I admit I had not foreseen ... I could not touch the
boy.
...
His mother left upon him the traces of her sacrifice ... this is
old magic, I should have remembered it, I was foolish to overlook it ...."
(Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, chapter 33)

We see this discussed throughout the books, how Harry has magical protection imprinted on him from his Mother's act of love and self-sacrifice.

Might anything like this "old magic" appear in the Torah?

We see an interesting analogue to this kind of magical protection at the end of the book of Genesis. After the death of Jacob, Joseph's brothers were afraid that Joseph would take revenge on them for having sold him into slavery. He comforts them by reiterating that all the events had been orchestrated by G-d to bring him to Egypt for a Divine purpose:

"You decided to do bad to me, but G-d thought of it for good, to cause the events on this very day, to keep the nation alive."[i]

What does Joseph mean by "on this very day?" The most straightforward understanding is that Joseph went to Egypt as part of a Divine plan for the entire region to be saved from the famine, and for the Jewish family to be able to relocate there.

The commentary Be'er Moshe, however, presents a very interesting alternative explanation, perhaps not as a literal understanding but as an allegorical lesson. The phrase "on this very day" is used in only one other place in the Torah's story of Joseph and his brothers, during Joseph's temptation by the wife of his master Potifar:

"And it came to pass, on this very day, that he went to the house to do his work, and none of the men of the house were home, that she (Potifar's wife) grabbed him by his cloak, saying 'come with me.' And he left his cloak in her hand and escaped, running outside."[ii]

What does Joseph's temptation by Potifar's wife have to do with Joseph's going to Egypt? Be'er Moshe explains:

"The righteous Joseph (in his reassurance to his brothers, that G-d had sent him to Egypt to keep the Jewish nation alive) wasn't referring to physical survival, for G-d had already promised (Abraham) that they would have a remnant (that would always survive). Rather he was telling them an amazing thing, that the hidden purpose for which he had been brought to Egypt first... was to face the enormous challenge (with Potifar's wife), ... because by withstanding the temptation he established the purity of life of all the Israelites, that they could resist the impurity of Egypt."[iii]

Rabbi Matisyahu Solomon[iv] uses this to illustrate a fascinating principle. Anytime a person overcomes a temptation to violate a Torah commandment, and manages to act in accordance with the Torah despite the temptation, he infuses his location, the ground or area he's on, with a spiritual energy that will help others succeed in carrying out G-d's will in that location.

Joseph was sent to Egypt by G-d so that he would face a strong temptation to do something immoral, and overcome it, thereby infusing Egypt with enough spiritual energy to enable the Jews to survive 400 years of slavery with their Jewish morality intact.

In fact, the Midrash says that when the Jews left Egypt, the splitting of the sea happened in the merit of Joseph. One of the Psalms that we say in the Passover Seder (and the Hallel prayer service) says that "the sea saw and fled." What did the sea see? The Midrash says that the sea saw the remains of Joseph that the Jews were transporting for burial in Israel. Because Joseph fled (VaYanas in Hebrew) from temptation, the sea fled (VaYanos) when the Jews needed it to. Because Joseph overcame human nature, the sea defied nature and split. Because of the continuing merit of Joseph's moral strength, the Jews were worthy of a miracle.

This same principle explains a number of other incidents throughout the Torah. For example, in Parshat Lech Lecha, when Abraham is seeing the Land of Israel for the first time, the Torah says that he "passed into the land as far as Shechem, to the plain of Moreh."[v] Rashi's commentary says that the significance of Shechem, mentioned as a point on Abraham's traveling to Moreh, is that he went there not just to see it, but "to pray for the children of Jacob who would later battle in Shechem." Similarly, Abraham then went and built an altar in Beit El, and Rashi[vi] says that he chose the location because "he had a prophecy that in the future his descendents would fall to temptation with the sin of Achan."[vii] In each case, Abraham prayed in a specific place to give spiritual protection to his descendents who would need help in the future at that very place.[viii]

We also see this concept in the famous story of Moses and the burning bush. Moses sees the burning bush and turns off his path to investigate. G-d then tells him to stop walking, because the ground around the burning bush was too holy for him to walk on, and to take off his shoes, because the ground he's already standing on is holy[ix]. What is the reason for the two levels of holiness, one in which he cannot stand and one in which he can stand but only with shoes removed? Rabbi Solomon explains that the area immediately around the bush was inherently holy, so Moses couldn't go there, and the area where Moses was standing had not originally been holy. But after Moses left his path to explore the burning bush, which he did with awareness of G-d's presence, the land on which he walked became holy as well. His religiously-inspired action infused the ground he was on with so much holiness that he had to remove his shoes.

As a final example, folklore tells us that the site of the Holy Temples in Jerusalem was selected because of acts of tremendous love and self-sacrifice between brothers that happened on that spot.[x]

We see that this little-known principle, that our good deeds infuse a location with positive spiritual energy, is a common denominator in all of the stories above. This same principle also can be seen in practical Jewish law.

The Shulchan Aruch[xi] rules that it is preferable in general to pray in a large synagogue rather than a small one, since "a large gathering is an honor to the King." The exception[xii] is that when the choice is between a small synagogue in which a lot of Torah study and good deeds are done throughout the day, and a large synagogue used only for prayer, the smaller one is preferable. Why? Isn't the larger crowd still an honor to the King? Rabbi Solomon explains that the influence of the spiritual energy from the study and good deeds done in the smaller synagogue will help our prayers, and this outweighs the larger size crowd of the other.

The Shulchan Aruch also rules on the value of a person's establishing a "makom kavu'ah le'tefilato," a designated place to pray in synagogue.[xiii] While doing so has many benefits, such as improved concentration, the primary reason is that a person's regular prayer will give spiritual power to the location, which will improve the power of future prayers there.

From all of these sources we see a tremendous but little-known Torah principle, that the good deeds that we do have a tangible effect on our surroundings that will give spiritual energy and protection to other people in those surroundings.
Could this kind of spiritual energy attach to a boy's skin instead of the ground in a particular place? Jewish sources do not seem to discuss it. Is this the "old magic" that protected Harry Potter, that Voldemort did not foresee? Even J.K. Rowling may not know. But if we pay attention to our surroundings, and to the mitzvot that have occurred there in the past, we may feel some of this spiritual energy in our daily lives.


For more about HARRY POTTER AND TORAH, see http://www.harrypottertorah.com/

[i] Gen 50:19-20
[ii] Gen 39:11-12
[iii] Be'er Moshe parshat VeYechi chapter 25
[iv] Scholar in Gateshead, England, and Lakewood, New Jersey, in the booklet Avita Nifla'os Mi'Torasecha, introductory chapter
[v] Gen 12:6
[vi] Rashi on Gen 12:8
[vii] Joshua chapter 7
[viii] In Beit Elokim (Sha’ar HaTefila chap 18), the Mabit discusses Abraham’s having engaged in all these prayers as part of his then-new role as patriarch of the Jewish nation.
[ix] Ex 3:2-5
[x] This story does not appear in any primary Midrashic sources, but is quoted heavily in modern books of folklore.
[xi] Shulchan Aruch Orach Chayim 90:18
[xii] Mishna Berurah 90:55
[xiii] Shulchan Aruch Orech Chayim 90:19