JHI Dvar Torah for the Passover Seder

GRATTITUDE - TO G-D AND TO MAN

Maggid is the section of the Hagaddah that retells the story of our sojourn in Egypt – our slavery and subsequent redemption. In considerable detail, Maggid describes the great events of The exodus, a time when G-d demonstrated His Awesome Power for all to see. Those Revelations were unique in the history of the world, and the Torah wants Jews to never forget them. To this day, The Exodus is mentioned twice daily is our prayers, as well as in the Friday night Kiddush (benediction over wine).
At the end of Maggid, after the story has been retold, the Hagaddah continues: “Therefore it is our duty to thank, praise, honor, bless, and acclaim Him, Who performed all these miracles for our forefathers and us.”
The Commentary of the Rashbatz on the Hagaddah explains that not “thanking, praising, honoring...” The Almighty would be ungrateful. The Rashbatz is thus saying that after reliving the story of G-d’s miracles, the emotion of gratitude (or the avoidance of ingratitude) should be the primary motive for “thanking, praising, honoring...” G-d.

The subject of the different Hebrew words in our prayers and classical Torah texts that praise Hashem (G-d) is most challenging. There are probably very few people currently alive who truly understand the difference in meaning between the Hebrew words for, “praise, honor, bless, and acclaim,” as they relate to The Almighty. Seemingly, they correlate to different Aspects of The Divinity that are being lauded differently. Attempting to comprehend those Heavenly Attributes is a difficult study.
The rare individuals who understand these words are likely thoroughly conversant with every aspect of the Torah – especially the secrets of Kabala. Those rare and G-dly individuals swim in the depths of the Torah’s revealed and hidden wisdom and see The Heavenly Throne as a reality.
How would such spiritually developed people react after reading the Maggid section of the Hagaddah? Seemingly, they would wax euphoric - “praising, honoring, blessing, and acclaiming” The Almighty anew based on their deeper insights into G-d’s Greatness. Yet, the Rashbatz is teaching us that even for such exalted people, their primary motive for praising G-d after reading Maggid should be to avoid ingratitude. This principle of the Rashbatz can be better understood through the following:
Imagine a musical prodigy at the violin who earned a PHD in music from a prestigious university. Yet, despite being so over qualified, the only job the student could land was being a music teacher in an inner city public school. Sometime later, that teacher invited a world famous violinist to perform for free for the students in the public school, and the great musician acquiesced. While the performance was appreciated by all present, it was only the teacher who was fully capable of appreciating its genius.
Upon the completion of the show, the teacher was asked by the principal to respond publically to what had transpired. The instinctive reaction of the teacher would likely be to note how the violinist brilliantly interpreted and performed the music. The Rashbatz, however, is saying that the morally correct response is for the teacher to first shower the great violinist with thanks for performing at the school for free.
So too, the first response to the story of Maggid should be one of gratitude, even from one who can actually comprehend the essence of G-d’s miracles that were manifestly visible during The Exodus.
This demonstrates the supreme importance that the Torah attaches to gratitude. It is more important to say “Thank you” to The Almighty than it is to knowledgeably extol His Miraculous Greatness.
Gratitude is not only due The Almighty, but to other humans as well…and that is a never-ending obligation. Almost by definition, living among family and friends involves a constant exchange of favors and kindness. Every ‘good deed’ received begets a new obligation to be grateful. (And obviously, the greater the favors received, the greater the obligation to be grateful in kind. In fact, the commentaries explain that supreme importance the Torah attaches to parental honor (It is one of the Ten Commandments.) is due to the enormous and everlasting gratitude owed to those who gave us our lives.)
The concept of the Rashbatz is that the responsibility to act gratefully toward others is not merely componnent of some vague obligation to be a ‘nice person’ – something they teach Boy Scouts. Rather it is a religious duty of towering significance. Even if one could praise G-d’s greatness in the most knowledgeable and holiest manner, it is more important to first express one’s gratitude. We fulfill this obligation when acting with the appropriate measure of gratitude toward each other.
If people would acknowledge this ever-present moral imperative and act accordingly, our lives and our communities would be blessed with a tremendous increase of interpersonal good will.

Chag Someach

JHI Dva Torah on the Passover Haggadah

In honor of the upcoming Passover holiday, we are doing this week’s Dvar Torah on the well-known section of the Hagaddah that deals with The Four Sons.

THE PASSOVER HAGADDAH – GROUP INSTRUCTION

The Hagaddah recounts the following reactions of The Four Sons to the Passover story:

“The wise son - what does he say? ‘What are the testimonies, decrees, and ordinances which Hashem, our G-d, has commanded you?’ Therefore, explain to him the laws of the Passover offering: that, ‘One may not eat dessert after the final taste of the Passover offering’ (Talmud, Pesachim 119b)”.

“The wicked son - what does he say? ‘Of what purpose is this work to you’ (Shemot, Bo 12, 26)? He says ‘To you,’ thereby excluding himself. By excluding himself from the community of believers, he denies the basic principle of Judaism. Therefore, blunt his teeth and tell him, ‘It is because of this that Hashem (G-d) did so for me when I went out of Egypt’ (Shemot, Bo 13:8). ‘For me, but not for him - had he been there, he would not have been redeemed’.”

“The simple son - what does he say? ‘What is this?’ Tell him: ‘With a strong hand did Hashem take us out of Egypt, from the house of bondage’ (Shemot, Bo 13:14).

“As for the son who is unable to ask, you must initiate the subject for him as it is stated, ‘And you shall tell your son on that day, saying: It is because of this that Hashem did so for me when I went out of Egypt.’ (Shemot, Bo 13:8). ”

A father is retelling the story of the Exodus to his four distinctly different sons. The first three sons ask different questions, and the father initiates the dialogue with the fourth son. The father responds differently to each of the sons, based on specific sentences found in the Chumash (Bible).

The Commentary of the Ritvah explains that G-d was very eager to have each son learn about the Exodus. G-d therefore included in His Torah four different phrases on the subject that teach four separate and unique responses that are tailor-made for each type of son.

In a modern classroom setting, someone instructing this type of group would likely present a single general lesson that is directed at the center of the group. Theoretically, all of the students will acquire knowledge from the single lesson on the subject. This system, though, is far from ideal. What would result from educating all four sons on the Exodus this way?

In all likelihood, this would not serve the best interests of the insightful wise first son or the fourth son who cannot even ask a question. They are at polar opposite spectrums of the learning curve…both are far from the middle. Furthermore, when students at such widely disparate levels are hearing the same exact lecture, it will be more difficult to establish group dynamic that elicit a meaningful give-and-take – even from those in the middle range. Everyone will acquire some education, but none of them will be learning optimally.

The educational model in the Haggadah is to present four different customized approaches to the same story of the Exodus. This encourages each son to absorb and question the story at his own level, and each is responded to accordingly. This is the ideal paradigm for group instruction.

However, there are considerations that seemingly mitigate in favor of NOT responding each son individually.

1. The father is not addressing his sons privately. Rather, all are sitting together, and they hear everything the father says. Hence, the customized lesson to the fourth son affirms to all present that he is incapable of even initiating a discussion on the subject. Though true, this could possibly prove uncomfortable to the young man.

2. Educators and parenting experts typically recommend dealing with young people in a positive manner, thereby making them feel good about themselves. Relegating this forth child to the lowest rung of the scholastic ladder would seemingly poison that good feeling. Furthermore, branding the fourth son this way and branding the second son as evil might lead them to see these traits as an inescapable failing in their characters. This in turn can become a self-fulfilling prophecy. The wise son could be harmed as well, for the advanced lesson he receives signals to all that he is on a pedestal above the others. This might cause him to wax arrogant.

3. If only the middle of the group is being taught, all of the time allocated for study can be dedicated to teaching all of the sons. However, in the four-lesson system, each student will mainly benefit from only 25% of the total instruction time. The father might loose the attention of every son altogether while 75% of the time is being spent on the others.

Yet, the instruction of the Hagaddah was set up in this fashion, despite these four significant drawbacks. This further demonstrates the tremendous importance that The Almighty attaches to individualizing the study of Torah - teaching each student according to his or her own abilities.

This text also teaches that although children should be infused with a positive self-image, they must nevertheless be made aware of their limitations and potential. It is, in fact, a disservice to the third and forth sons to give them the impression that their abilities are one and the same as the wise son. Doing so can foster unrealistic hopes and consequent frustrations. Many adults suffer psychic pain because the unattainable childhood expectations of their parents left them feeling forever inadequate and unfulfilled.

The wise son as well should be made aware of his special talents. He needs to be challenged at his intellectually superior level. His academic goals must be extended beyond the middle level of the students. Finally, the evil son must be informed that his parents recognize his improper behavior and that it is unacceptable.

These ideas do not imply that a person of less than outstanding ability is doomed to a lifetime of mediocre achievement. In fact, there have been many notable instances of people of average talent who became enormously accomplished. One example from the world of Torah is that of Rabbi Naftali Tzvi Yehudah Berlin (1830-1892), who was known as the Netziv (the Prince) of Volozhin. He was a person of ordinary intellect. Yet, through extraordinary diligence and piety, he became one of the most outstanding Torah scholars of his era. He was eventually named the head what was then possibly the world’s greatest Yeshiva.

The Netziv, however, did not attain this greatness through being deluded that he was enormously gifted. Had he been convinced as a child that he fit the profile of the wise son, his achievements would have likely never been realized. Rather, the Netziv understood his limitations. So, he worked mightily, and he overcame them.

A classical debate among educators concerns whether or not schools with parallel classes should group the students by ability. Should there be separate classes for the more and less gifted students at every grade level? Rabbi Moshe Feinstein reputedly discouraged the practice because it could foster poor character traits, especially among those placed in the higher levels. Seemingly, the Ritvah’s advocacy of individualized education contradicts the logic and ruling of R. Feinstein.

A closer examination of the issue reveals that there is no conflict. The scenario of the Hagaddah is an intimate family setting where the teacher is a father who deeply loves all of his children. Under those ideal conditions, the potential downside of demarcating people by ability is minimized. The same sensitivity, however, cannot be expected in a larger and more impersonal institutional setting. What works at home will not necessarily work at school.

Educators, however, must never forget that their charges are not identical ‘blobs’ that were produced on the same factory assembly line. Each student is unique. As such, each child will do best when offered an individually tailored educational program…to whatever extent possible.

JHI Dvar Torah on Parshat Vayakhel

PARSHAT VAYAKHEL – RIGHTEOUS WRONGDOING

Parshat Vayakhel describes the construction of the Mishkan (Tabernacle). The Mishkan was extraordinarily miraculous and sacred – even more so than the two Temples that would later be built in Jerusalem (Commentary of Sforno on Parshat Pekudei). For example, the Midrash writes that someone who entered the inner sanctum of the Mishkan who looked upward would somehow see the Heavens.

The primary builder of the Mishkan was Bezalel. He was chosen from the entire Jewish Nation as the person most qualified to be its primary architect. Regarding Bezalel, The Almighty said, “See that I have called by name Bezalel, son of Uri, son of Chur” (Vayakhel, 35:30). What these words refer to is unclear; Bezalel already had his name. What does it mean that G-d ‘called him by name?’

The Midrash Rabbah (48:7) explains that the words allude to a specific incident. After Bezalel completed this fabulous structure, the people began to extol him for what he had accomplished. However, their tribute included acco­lades that should have been directed instead to Hashem (G-d), the real source of Bezalel's greatness. This made their accolades excessive to the point of being improper. With the phrase, “See that I have called by name Bezalel, son of Uri, son of Chur” G-d was pointing out that the degree of praise for Bezalel was inappropriate.

To explain the point, the Midrash provides an example of a doctor's disciple who cured a disease utilizing the skills he was taught. People then heaped lavish praises upon the student for being able to cure the disease. These praises were inaccurate; they should have been directed, at least in part, to the teacher whose wisdom the disciple had utilized.

So too, indeed, the acclaim for Bezalel was richly deserved. His great wisdom and understanding deemed him even more qualified to construct the Mishkan than Moshe (Moses). However, it would have been proper to direct a part of the praise toward Hashem. This means that Bezalel was being praised with accolades applicable only to Hashem. One can thus infer that the Jews were beginning to invest Bezalel, a human being, with G-d - like qualities. What was transpiring was therefore the beginning of idolatry; the praises accorded Bezalel, a mortal human, were in fact appropriate only to The Almighty.

One might wonder, if giving honor to a sanctified Torah Scholar such as Bezalel is so commendable and idolatry is so profane, how can it be that one can lead to the other? What is the connection between the two? The motivation to perform a righteous deed emanates from the nobility and holiness within the human, while sin is an expression of the profane. It nevertheless appears that honoring Bezalel shifted the Jews toward the beginnings of idola­try. What was originally an unintentional error while in the midst of a noble pursuit could have eventually evolved into apostasy.

This phenomenon can be observed through the example of someone rushing a heart attack victim (G-d forbid) to the hospital. The driver would not bother with the niceties of red lights and stop signs whenever possible. Similarly, the urgency of noble deeds fosters a tendency to ignore the proper parameters of human conduct. Left uncorrected, even the most noble of deeds can result in significant wrongdoing.

This type of problem can beset almost any everyday human activity. Following are some illustrations of basically praise­worthy activities gone awry.

Many have observed a group undertaking exalted projects (such as the building of a synagogue or yeshiva) where the end results were dreadful. Differences of opinion on how to accomplish the task rapidly became personal, and great disputes arose. Best friends become enemies; communities that were once tranquil were torn by strife and rancor. Why did this happen? The original intent was so high-minded. The problem is often that the dedica­tion and passion for the task were not accompanied by the addi­tional safeguards required for this type of effort.

It is normally the responsibility of parents to provide for the family. The dedication to this task, however, can be readily carried to improper extremes. It can become so all encompassing that it results in a virtual personal abandonment of that same family that he or she is providing for.

Discipline of young children is certainly vital to their well being. However, when unchecked, discipline can evolve into emotional if not physical abuse. Conversely, the unre­strained urge to nur­ture and help one's younger or even adult children can foster unwholesome dependency.

On a governmental level, many if not most of the 19^th Century early Communists sincerely sought to create a ‘worker’s paradise’ that would bring dignity and prosperity to all. But principles behind the cause deemed it too vital to be hindered by all of the ‘niceties’ of proper conduct. What resulted was tragic. It is estimated that the 20^th Century Communists in both Russia and China each killed far people than the WW II Germans. And unlike the Germans, the Communists murdered the very same people that they ostensibly came to help.

This same idea seems to be playing itself out in the great debate over nationalized health care that is presently going on as these words are being written. Aside from the issue of the merit of the legislation itself, the zeal in some quarters for its passage appears to be fostering a disdain for first carefully examining the many problems that this bill might create before voting on it.

Undertaking good deeds is noble and virtuous. Doing them enthusiastically is even more honorable. However, passionate idealism can easily morph into passionate wrongdoing.

JHI Dvar Torah on Parshat Ki Tissa

PARSHAT KI TISSA – EMBEDDED THOUGHTS

Parshat Ki Tissa tells the story of the sin of the Golden Calf.

Briefly: On the day still celebrated as the holiday of Shavuot, Moshe (Moses) ascended to heaven where he was presented with the Ten Commandments. The entire nation heard Hashem (G-d) Himself speaking the first two commandments on the Oneness of Hashem and the prohibition against idolatry. Moshe remained in ‘the Above’ for 40 days during which time he was taught the entire Torah. While in heaven, Moshe was presented with two stone tablets upon which the Ten Commandments were inscribed.

The Jews then erred. They mistakenly calculated that Moshe was expected back by a certain time. When he did not arrive by then, they assumed that he would never return. They therefore created a Golden Calf, which they thought could somehow act as their intermediary to Hashem in lieu of Moshe. The situation then somehow devolved into outright worship of the Calf. In truth, Moshe was not due back until a somewhat later time.

Hashem told Moshe who was still on the mountain, “Go descend – for your nation that you brought up from Egypt has become corrupt. They have strayed quickly from the way that I have commanded them; they have made themselves a molten calf, prostrated themselves to it and sacrificed to it and they said, “This is your G-d, O Israel, which brought you up from the land of Egypt” (Ki Tissa 32:8,9).” Moshe descended from the mountain, and upon observing their debauchery, he cast the tablets from his hand, breaking them.

Hashem considered destroying all of the Jews and rebuilding the nation from Moshe’s progeny. Moshe responded by ascending to Heaven for two successive 40 day periods to pray for their forgiveness. Hashem accepted his prayers, and presented Moshe with a second set of the tablets. The day of Moshe’s final return with the tablets was the 10^th of Tishrei, a date has since been celebrated as Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement.

Parshat Tetzaveh describes that when Moshe appeared with the second tablets on Yom Kippur, there was an intense emanation of the Divine Presence upon his face. In fact, it was so awe inspiring, that the Jews were afraid to look at him. From then on, Moshe donned a veil when he interacted with the people. And when Moshe entered the Tabernacle to speak with Hashem, he removed the veil.

Why did Hashem bestow His emanation upon Moshe at that time?

The commentary of the Daat Zekenim Mibaalei Hatosafot (Ki Sissa 34:30) explains that it was to correct their mistake of attributing divinity to the Golden Calf. The Divine Presence upon his face confirmed that it was Moshe and not the Calf that spoke on behalf of Hashem.

It is hard to understand why the people had to be reminded that the Calf was a sham. As the Midrash Rabbah (51:6) on Parshat Pekudei explains, their basic attitude was to believe in Hashem. Their worship of the Calf was a temporary aberration from which they quickly repented – in full. Furthermore, when Moshe came upon the scene he forcefully demonstrated that the Calf was a bogus deity. He burned it and then ground it up and cast it into water, which he made the Jews drink (Ki Tissa 32:20). Moshe also organized the Tribe of Levi who killed the 3,000 Jews who committed outright idolatry with the Calf.

Seemingly, all of this indicates that the remaining Jews were totally disabused of the error of their Calf-worship. If so, was it necessary to ‘light up’ Moshe’s countenance to demonstrate that worshiping the Calf was a mistake?

This demonstrates that once a mistaken idea takes hold in a person’s mind, it becomes embedded and very hard to totally uproot. It is like a lingering disease that might ‘seem’ to be cured but whose traces remain in the body, only to surface at a later date in full force. Hashem, who sees our inner thoughts, knew that despite all that transpired after Moshe’s return and despite their sincere repentance, lingering ruminants of their idolatrous beliefs remained alive and well within them. And like a disease, those latent beliefs could later blossom into full fledged idolatry. So, to help further remove those beliefs, Hashem performed the miracle of the emanation upon Moshe’s face.

‘In a word:’

This teaches the need to be wary of exposure to beliefs that are antithetical to traditional Torah values whenever possible. For example, it might be necessary for one’s work or studies to interact with individuals whose morals and ethics are sorely lacking – but that doesn’t mean that, if possible, those people shouldn’t be avoided socially. “Business is business,” but needlessly comparing ideologies over dinner could leave a harmful and enduring mental imprint.

In a similar vein, it would be best if parents could monitor the TV and movies watched by their children. (This might be a caricature, but) a present day incarnation of ‘wholesome’ family media might feature a separated married couple with children where the father has another girlfriend with children who is separated from her husband and ditto the mother and her boyfriend. What makes it ‘wholesome’ is that they all get along happily.

Leaving religion aside, the basic notion that infidelity in marriage is really ‘wholesome’ becomes an unseen poison pill carried into adulthood that can eventually ruin any marriage. Even good marriages tend to have periods of difficulty. If those periods are toughed out, many more years of marital bliss can ensue. But believing that it is really OK to relieve the tension at home through an adulterous tryst could lead to going down that path. That, in turn, could wreck the marriage and inflict permanent emotional harm on one’s children.

Once unwholesome ideas become embedded into one’s psyche, they are most difficult to completely remove.