JHI Dvar Torah on Parshat Beshalach

PARSHAT BESHALACH:
PART I – DOING GOOD BY ROTE, PART II – THE NARROW BIDGE

BESHALACH 14, 9-11
9) The Egyptians pursued them and overtook them, encamped by the sea - all the horses and chariots of Pharaoh, and his horsemen and army - by Pi Hachirot, before Baal Tzefon.
10) Pharaoh approached, and the children of Israel raised their eyes, and behold, Egypt was journeying after them; and they were very frightened; and the children of Israel cried out to Hashem (G-d).
11) And they said to Moshe (Moses), “Were there no graves in Egypt that you took us to die in the wilderness? What is it that you have done to us to take us out of Egypt?”

COMMENTARY OF RASHI 14, 10 and the children of Israel cried out to Hashem: They seized upon the trait of their forefathers. (i.e. they prayed. Rashi then proceeds to list instances recorded in the Bible where all three of the Forefathers prayed to The Almighty.)

COMMENTARY OF RABBI YITZCHAK ABUHAB ON RASHI They seized upon the trait of their forefathers The meaning of this is that their prayer was not with purity of heart, but a custom of their fathers as a mitzvat anashim melomda, a mitzvah done by rote. For it is not the custom of one who prays and beseeches to be abrasive (critical) and to say “Are there no graves?”

PART I
Pharaoh finally released the Jews from slavery after Egypt was devastated by the plague of the firstborn. The Jews traveled eastward toward the Red Sea and the desert beyond. Pharaoh, however, soon regretted his decision. So, he pursued them with an army, reaching them as they were encamped by the sea. The situation for the Jews was desperate; they were trapped between Pharaoh’s army on one side and the sea on the other.

The Jews cried out in prayer. Rashi explains that they adopted the practice of their three great forefathers who prayed to G-d in times of travail. Yet, immediately following this prayer, they complained to G-d’s emissary, Moshe saying, “Were there no graves in Egypt that you took us to die in the wilderness?”

How could they first turn their hearts in prayer to G-d and at the next moment, accuse Moshe of leading them from Egypt so that they would die? Aren’t these two responses incompatible and contradictory? Could they both sincerely pray to G-d and also level this terrible accusation at Moshe who acted on His behalf?

The Commentary of Rabbi Yitzchak Abohab explains that their prayers were lacking. Rashi’s words, “they seized upon the trait of their forefathers” has a negative connotation. The three Forefathers indeed prayed when threatened – and utterly sincerely. Hence, the Jews who left Egypt were likely conditioned from earliest childhood that prayer is the proper response to difficult and dangerous situations. Their prayer was therefore a mitzvat anashim melomda – a mitzvah done by habit and by rote, without true purity and focus.

It is therefore understandable how they could have first prayed to The Almighty and then shortly afterward, complained bitterly about what His emissary Moshe did. Their prayers were not entirely heartfelt. They adhered to the tradition from their forefathers automatically and out of habit, without fully focusing on what they were actually doing.

That people do mitzvos unthinkingly in everyday scenarios is readily understandable. For example, a man could mechanically don tefillin and pray with a minyan for years on end without hardly ever thinking about what he is doing and saying.
What would happen though if that same person would suddenly find himself praying for his own life? Seemingly, at that moment those prayers would anything but automatic. Instead, they would be altogether heartfelt. The secular wisdom on such moments is that, “There are no atheists in a foxhole.” When facing possibly imminent death, most people turn to the Almighty, and with absolute sincerity, they beg Him for their lives.

That was the situation of the Jews at that time. There appeared to be no possible escape. Their only recourse was to pray to Hashem, and that is what they did. Yet, their prayers were deficient. The dynamic of mitzvat anashim melomda prevented them from properly beseeching G-d for their own lives.

This illustrates the incredibly destructive power of mitzvat anashim melomda. Once doing things by rote is one’s modus operandi, the pattern might very well continue – even when one’s life is at stake. It can “glue up the works” of virtually any good deed done at any time. People must constantly refresh and rededicate their attitude to the observance of Torah. Otherwise, enthusiasm can wane, and performance of even the most important of mitzvot can become mostly automatic and unthinking.

Presumably, the psychodynamic of mitzvat anashim melomda can also rob many other daily human interactions of their integrity and meaning. Constantly utilized pleasantries such as, “How are you?” or, can be repeated many times for many days to many different people without hardly ever giving a thought to what is being said.

The Ramban (Rabbi Moshe ben Nachman 1194-1270) begins his famous ethical letter with the advice, "Be constantly careful to speak all of your words to all people with gentleness/sweetness." Ramban then explains the supreme importance of speaking this way. Even the tone with which everyday words are spoken is enormously significant.

Similarly, saying “Have a good day” by rote and saying those same words with heartfelt emotion and kindness are two entirely different events. They also impact upon the person being spoken to very differently.


PART II
This idea of this Dvar highlights a very challenging paradox.
Sincere Torah observant Jews consider it important to live and raise children in an environment where Torah values are paramount. Such parents also seek to inculcate their children with the principles of Torah Judaism from the earliest moment possible.

In fact, the halachah (Torah law) stipulates that when children begin to speak, they should be taught to say “Shema Yisroel…” and the Hebrew words for, “The Torah that Moshe commanded us is the heritage of the Congregation of Jacob” (Yoreh Deah 245, 5). Such parents also attempt to teach very young children to recite blessings over food before it is eaten. Thus, from early life and onward, many Jewish children are enveloped by a Torah environment and by training to observe Torah.

However, a serious problem can arise out of this “early intervention” on behalf of Yiddishkeit. Children with this background know no other way and will observe the Torah almost automatically as they mature. That pattern, in turn, can continue into adulthood. Hence, the same exemplary Torah upbringing can create a lifelong attitude to Torah observance of mitzvat anashim melomda. Being at least aware of this challenge to sincere Torah observance should inspire one to try to counteract this harmful tendency.


This calls to mind the phrase that was popular in the great yeshivot of pre-WW II Eastern Europe, “Haolam hazeh gesher tzar meod (The world is like a very narrow bridge).” One who traverses a very narrow bridge is in constant peril of falling, either to one side or the other. In the context of this Dvar, if one does not inculcate children with Yiddishkeit from early on, they are not being raised in accordance with halacha and its master-plan for the well-being of the child. Yet, a halachically exemplary upbringing creates the danger that for the rest of their lives, those children will perform mitzvos automatically and without proper focus. A conscientious parent must try to prevent the children from gravitating to this natural tendency.

There is no quick and easy solution to this dilemma. It is a circumstance of life – both in this instance and in numerous others. One must always be wary of erring – to either one side or the other - i.e. “falling off the bridge.”


To help defray the cost (in time) of its production, and as a way of supporting our Jewish outreach organization in Cambridge, we are asking people to consider sponsoring this weekly email Dvar Torah. It is a meaningful way to note an occasion such as a graduation, birthday, anniversary, yahrzeit, etc.
The “cost” is $120, but amounts greater than $120 will of course be gladly accepted. The sponsorship will be noted in the Dvar. Thank you in advance! (Should the situation arise, we consider it acceptable to have more than one sponsor per Dvar.)