Shabbat-B'Shabbato – ParshatVa'eira

No 1558: 26Shevat5775 (17January2015)

AS SHABBAT APPROACHES

"And I will Take you Out... And I will Bring You"- by Rabbi Mordechai Greenberg, Rosh Yeshiva, Kerem B'Yavne

"And I also heard the cries of distress of Bnei Yisrael... and I remembered My covenant" [Shemot 6:5]. Rashi writes that this is a reference to the Covenant between the Pieces. This corresponds well to the five different descriptions of the redemption, since as part of the covenant it is written, "You should know that your offspring will be strangers in a land that is not theirs, and they will enslave them and persecutethem for four hundred years" [Bereishit 15:13]. This sequence goes from the simple to the harsh. First the people are temporary residents, then they will become slaves, and in the end they will be tortured. In this week's Torah portion the Holy One, Blessed be He, promises to release the people from this decree, and this will therefore take place in reverse order, from the harsh situation to the simple one. First they will be freed from the harsh suffering – "I will take you out of the suffering in Egypt" [Shemot 6:6]. Then they will be released from slavery – "I will save you from their slavery" [ibid]. In the end, they will be rescued from their being strangers – "I will redeem you" [ibid].

However, the goal of the redemption was not merely to bring them out of slavery and give them their freedom, because if that were the case there would not have been any need to send them down to Egypt and to release them, since the decree of the Covenant of the Pieces was not meant as a punishment but rather as a means of spiritually raising up the people. As the Maharal wrote, "Every novel experience must be preceded by a lack of something else." An example is the fact that a seed becomes rotten before a new plant grows out of it. In order for Yisrael to reach the level of a "Kingdom of priests and a holy nation" [Shemot 19:6] and an exalted sign for all nations, it must first pass through a melting pot. And this is the fourth level, "And I will take you to Me to be a nation" [6:7]. This refers to the revelation of the Shechina within Bnei Yisrael.

But there remains one additional element without which the Shechina will not be revealed, and that is Eretz Yisrael. As the Ramban writes in the Torah portion of Acharei, "He differentiated us from all the other nations... by giving us the land, so that He will be our G-d and we will be dedicated to His name. And now, here is the land which we were given, a Divine heritage." And this is the fifth language of redemption that appears in our Torah portion: "And I will bring you to the land" [6:8].

This corresponds to the first command given to Avraham: "Go for your own good from your land to the land which I will show you, and I will make you into a great nation" [Bereishit 12:1-2]. A "great nation" is not in the sense of a large population but rather in terms of what the Midrash notes, from the passage in another place: "... For which nation is so great and has G-d so close to it, like our G-d, whenever we call out to Him?" [Devarim 4:7]. And G-d can be close only in Eretz Yisrael.

That is why the sages taught us at the end of the Tractate of Ketuvot that "anybody who lives outside of the land is like one who does not have a G-d." The Baal Hahafla'ah writes that the use of the phrase "is like one" is problematic, because it seems to imply that one who lives abroad has a G-d and merely appears as if he does not have one, while one who lives in the land does not have a G-d but only appears to have one?!

The answer is that we are talking about two different people, a righteous one who lives abroad and an evil one who lives in the land. "The one who lives abroad, even though he studies Torah and performs mitzvot, is like one who does not have a G-d, since he is lacking the mitzva of living in the land, and outside of the land he is under the control of the government and the signs in the Zodiac. But the one who lives in Eretz Yisrael, even if the only mitzva that he has is that of living in the land, appears as if he does have a G-d, since his life is directly under the guidance of the Holy One, Blessed by He."

POINT OF VIEW

"How will Pharaoh Listen to Me, even though My Lips are Sealed?" - by Zevulun Orlev

A Leader without Rhetoric Skills

Moshe fails time after time to convince Pharaoh, using wonders and signs and terrible plagues, to "send out My people." In our generation, we would most probably blame this on the fact that Moshe had "a heavy mouth and a heavy tongue" [Shemot 4:10], and on his claims that "I am not a man of many words" [ibid] and "my lips are sealed" [6:12].Would anybody today consider choosing a leader or a public official whose main task is to explain and talk (such as an ambassador or even a mere receptionist) who is lacking in rhetorical skills, who has a speech impediment (physical or cultural), "a stutterer" (Rashi), "one who has not mastered the language" (Rashbam), one who feels that he is "not qualified to speak to a great king" (Ramban), or one who cannot enunciate specific letters correctly (Avraham Ibn Ezra)? Would this be possible at all? Is the fact that Moshe has trouble talking the reason for Pharaoh's stubborn reaction? And does the appointment of Aharon as a spokesman for Moshe solve the communications-advocacy problem?

Why then didn't the Holy One, Blessed be He, from the beginning choose for the mission a brilliant master of propaganda, an expert in marketing, a charismatic leader, or a media personality who could draw crowds of enthusiastic listeners? At first glance Moshe's appointed task seems to be impossible– to convince the leader of the world's strongest power to release his slaves based on religious considerations, and to convince despairing slaves to form into a nation, to receive the Torah, and to wander for forty years in the desert in order to arrive in an unfamiliar land! The RAN replies to this in his sermons as follows: "His ability to speak clearly was taken away from him so that the credit for his ability to convince the people would not be given to the force of his words. As is often said - that a lie told by a person who speaks in a clear way will be accepted as the truth. And the opposite is also true – the truth will not be accepted from one who has trouble speaking but rather he will be mocked." [Sermon Number 3, somewhat condensed]. That is, what was wanted was for Moshe to be accepted as a leader who spoke the truth, and not oratory enveloped in a colorful, clear, and convincing wrapping.

Some commentators have a different approach, explaining that the Torah rejects leaders who have an "external language" without any real and internal meaning in their words. Rav Kook writes that it is important to differentiate between the internal elements and the external speech, and that some people can speak well but without any depth of meaning at all.

The sages tell us that in fact Moshe's stuttering helped him to convince the people to accept the Torah, but if he had been a brilliant orator the way would have been open for nonbelievers to claim that Moshe used his powerful skills to convince them to accept the Torah, which was not truly given by the Holy One, Blessed be He. Moshe's speech impediment showed that the Shechina was talking through his throat, and therefore Bnei Yisrael fully accepted that Torah and even said, "We will do and we will listen" [Shemot 24:7].

The Content is Important, not the Packaging

The fact that Moshe's speech problem is mentioned three times and that the mission is given to him in spite of it show us that the important element is not the speech but rather the content. Not telling but taking action! It is not the marketing skills and ability to give a clear explanation that is important in imparting a message but rather the essence of internal and ethical values. The internal traits of a person, his actions and behavior, are what faithfully reflect his personality, his character, his leadership abilities, the values of his behavior, and our ability to believe in him and to have confidence in him.

The appointment of Aharon as Moshe's spokesman shows us that the man chosen is not as important as the one who decides what will be said, when, and to whom. The Holy One, Blessed be He, promises Moshe that the message will be received successfully: "I will accompany your mouth, and I will command you what to say" [Shemot 4:12]. And in this week's Torah portion: "See I have made you a god for Pharaoh, and your brother Aharon will be your prophet. You will say everything that I tell you to, and your brother Aharon will speak to Pharaoh." [7:1-2].

We are living in an era when there is competition in all walks of life: for our hearts, for our money, for our choice of candidates in elections, and much more. In politics, as in business, we tend to be drawn to the best and most convincing speaker, to the one who is clearest, to the one most skilled in marketing techniques, to the best orator, to the one who knows how best to take advantage of the new media, to those who make the best videos, to those whose ideas can draw our attention, to those with the best polling skills, to the ones who have the most resources to be used in marketing their wares, and to those who are most active and most efficient in the use of social networks, communications media, and the virtual realms.

In commercial enterprises, the owner, the chairman, or the general manager is not directly involved in marketing and sales activities, but rather the marketing managers. They hire professionals – advertising and marketing experts, actors, and people who know the ins and outs of social networks. The same is true in the realm of politics, there is no difference between them!

The choice of Moshe reflected the fact that the contents and the essence are the most important factors and not marketing and propaganda skills. In our generation, which is under heavy attack by the artillery of propaganda and marketing and other unconventional media weapons, the principles are many times more important than ever before. Therefore, limitations in marketing and advertising resources in addition to speech impediments are not relevant for the choice of who can be trusted, who can be believed, and who should be elected.

A WOMAN'S ANGLE

Sin and its Punishment - by Terza Frankael, a teacher in "Tehilla" – Evilena de Rothschild, Jerusalem

This week's Torah portion, Va'eira, has something of a theme of "Sin and its Punishment" for Pharaoh, as managed by G-d and as arranged with the help of Moshe and Aharon. The main sin is Pharaoh's refusal to set Bnei Yisrael free. However, every punishment and plague brings with it Pharaoh's request for forgiveness and seeming repentance. He then sins by hardening his heart, is punished again, and the cycle is repeated. As we know, the Torah (and in its wake our sages) considered this repeated ritual as a process instigated by heaven, as a way of enhancing the name of G-d in the world and increasing the knowledge of Bnei Yisrael and all of humanity about the power of G-d and His full control over the world. However, this story leads me to educational considerations about the essence and effectiveness of direct punishment as a way ofcoping with sinners and sins.

Clearly today, when prophecy and Divine revelation no longer exist, direct and clear punishment of the type mentioned in the Torah portion and in many other events which appear in the Tanach is no longer to be found. But the method is still continued through us, the human beings, and we often make use of it both in the judicial system and in the relationship between a person and the government and its laws, and also in the educational realm, as one of our main tool for changing positions and behavior which do not follow the proper path. On the other hand, it seems to me that with respect to our Jewish religious approach the method of punishment remains abstract and somewhat mystical, part of our beliefs, but not felt to be an integral part of everyday living and relevant for the relationship between the typical person and the Creator.

The use of punishment as an educational tool has been discussed at length, and it has undergone substantial changes especially during the twentieth century, now that theconcepts of the rights and status of the child have led to complete banning of the use of physical punishment and restricted punishment to tools that do not contain any elements of humiliation. When I was growing up it was still permissible to strike a wayward child, certainly to make him or her stand in a corner, or to write a statement of surrender many dozens of times, and so on. But today parents and educators must be much more creative and sophisticated in order to find proper tools, which do not use the physical or verbal power of the adult or his status.

As far as I am concerned, this is a sign of a blessed progress of the world, first of all because of the serious and essential injustice to children in the previous world – children who just like us were created in the image of G-d, in spite of some difficult elements of their behavior. In addition, I have a feeling that the technique of direct punishment has outlived its usefulness and is no longer justified, since it has lost its effectiveness. Do not misunderstand, I am not promoting educational anarchy. In my work I am often amazed at the collapse of parental authority which has taken place in the last generation. However, in my opinion the authority of adults and an educational influence on our children and adolescents should not be based on fear of punishment but rather on personal examples set by the adults, setting and maintaining strict limits, and developing a constant mode of dialogue which is open, honest, and educational between adults and children. It goes without saying that this presents a great challenge to us. It is often holy labor which is exhausting, despairing, and disappointing. But any success using these methods is deeper, of greater essence, and – most important – causes less damage as compared to the older techniques.

I assume that there is nobody among my readers more than forty years old who doesn't have some memories of a humiliating experience that he or she was put through by adults. I am also quite sure that most of the adults who acted in this way believed in their hearts that they were treating the child in the correct and proper way. They did not act out of a feeling of evil. However, today's education by dialogue, if it is done properly, without giving up on boundaries and general rules, provides an education that is better, more loving, and warmer, and that it leads to adults who are healthier and more complete than in the past. As far as I am concerned this approach is also more in tune with Judaism, which already abandoned physical punishment as a legitimate tactic.

Now, when the teachers are in the midst of preparing midterm report cards and the parents are getting ready to read the reports about the many hours their children spend in school, remember to discuss them with your children – what the goals and principles of education are, and about any problems. Don't punish them, not with their marks, and not by the way you react to them.

FROM THE TREASURY OF CHASSIDIC STORIES

The Journey of Matityahu the "Cossack" to Hell- by Zev Kitzis, Kibbutz Hadati Yeshiva and Bar Ilan University

He was called Matityahu "Cossack," because he walked in the world of the Holy One, Blessed be He, with power and faith, and with an enlightened face of happiness and joy, more than other people. The people who were familiar with his traits searched for an allegory for this figure, but the only comparison they could come up with was to call him a "Cossack." That is: Just like the Cossacks in the regiments of the terrible Nikolai the First, who have no possessions or worries and who have no fears except the fear of their king – so Matityahu Cossack was a member of the legion of the Holy One, Blessed be He, who had no fear other than a fear of the King of the Universe.

* * * * * *

These are the opening words of one of the most beautiful Chassidic stories,which was written by my grandfather, Eliyahu Ki-Tov. The story is "The Dreams and the Actions of Matityahu Cossack." It first appeared in the fifties in my grandfather's book, "As the Point of a Needle" (Jerusalem, 1955). The book consisted of long stories, where my grandfather described figures from the Kotzk Chassidic courtyard, interweaving sayings and traditions which belong to this Chassidic branch, of which he was very fond. During those years he wrote other books, including other Chassidic stories. All the books were later compiled into two volumes by the name of "Chassidim V'Anshei Maaseh."