By Yonatan Gordon
It was the talk of the town. The new iPad was announced. It has a stunning Retina display, 5MP iSight camera and ultrafast 4G LTE, but when it comes to the name … well, is this the iPad3 or not? Can we really ascribe the appellation “new” to an iteration of an existing product?
In the Torah, the existence and essence of something being “new” is connected to the renewal of kingship. All concepts called new in the Torah—whether a new king, offering, wife or house—all relate to kingship.
There is a difference of opinion whether the King of Egypt who enslaved the Jews was a new king, or just the same old king with new decrees. From this debate we see an opening to call something essentially old as new. According to this line of reasoning, if this new iPad has enough bells and whistles added to it, perhaps simply calling it “new” would be enough.
This fits the statement from Apple’s CEO Tim Cook during the release ““The iPad brand is so powerful that we don’t even need to bother coming up with fancy names like our competitors do.” Meaning: If you see yourself to be the king, then it’s good enough to be called the “new” king if something changes.
Another factor to the newness of something is time. The previous version was released a year ago, but since then much time has passed. In Torah, the word for “new” and “month” share the same word. So something can be new just by virtue of it be released now in contrast to some time in the past.
That being said, why do people still feel the need to call this iPad by a name unto its own?
That has to do with our desire to appoint someone specific as king. Starting with the personal appointment of ourselves as leaders in our own right.
To be continued G-d willing….