A Thought on the Parasha
Feel free to download and print
the Parashat
Yitro sheet and share it with your friends and family.
Time to Grow Up
When Bnei Yisrael receive the Torah, it is much more than a
passive act; they actively enter into a brit, a covenant,
with God. The brit preceded the giving of the commandments and was its framing:
And now, if you will listen to My voice, and keep My covenant,
then you shall be unto Me a treasured possession from all the nations...And
Moshe came and called to the elders of the nation, and he placed before them
all of these things that God had commanded him. And the entire nation answered
together and said, 'Everything that God has said we will do'" (Shemot,
19:5-8).
The brit also comes after the Ten
Commandments, in the opening of Parashat Mishpatim:
"And these are the laws which you shall place before them" (Shemot,
21:1). This echoes the "placing before them" found in Shemot 19:7,
the intention being to place the laws before the people for their approval and
willing acceptance, which we find at the close of the same parasha:
And Moshe came and he related to the people all of the words of
God and all the laws [the "words" presumably referring to the aseret ha'devarim and the "laws"
to the mishpatim, the civil laws] and the entire
nation responded as one voice and said, all the words which God has spoken we
will do ... And he took the book of the covenant and he read it to the people,
and they said: everything that God has spoken we will do and we will hear. And
Moshe took the blood and he sprinkled it on the people and he said,
"Behold the blood of the covenant which God has made with you concerning
all these commands" (Shemot, 24:3-8).
The laws are placed before the people, and they accept them,
entering into a brit with God, a binding,
two-sided covenant. Thus Bnei Yisrael are not simply commanded; they actively
and freely accept the commandment of God and enter into a brit with God.
Why, we might ask, does commandedness not suffice? Would the
people not be obligated to follow God's command even if they had not entered
into a brit? In fact, the shift
from unilateral commadedness to a two-sided brit occurs much earlier, at the
beginning of Breishit. Adam and Chava were given a unilateral Divine command,
and they violated it. The next time God commands, God does so in the framework
of a brit, a relationship: "And I will establish my brit with you, and you
will come into the ark..." (Breishit, 6:28), and again when Noah and his
family exit the ark:
One who spills the blood of man, by man shall his blood be
spilled, because in the image of God God made man ... And I, behold I will
establish my brit with you and with your seed after you ... And I will
establish my brit with you and no more will all flesh be destroyed from the
waters of a flood, and there will no longer be a flood to destroy the land
(Breishit, 9:6, 8, 11).
While the brit with Noah relates to the protection of the human
species and the world and not to the keeping of mitzvot per se, the mitzvot
are, nevertheless, given in the context of this committed relationship and are
not merely dictated unilaterally from the all-powerful Lawgiver.
The significance and specificity of brit deepens when
God commands Avraham to inscribe in his flesh the sign of the brit and commands him in the brit milah. Here, the
purpose of the brit is not merely the survival of
species but "an everlasting brit between Me and
you, and between your children after you for all generations, to be to you as a
God and to your children after you" (Breishit, 17:7). Here, the brit
establishes the very relationship between God and the children of Avraham. And
now, in Parashat Yitro, the brit deepens even further. With
this brit, God chooses the nation of Bnei Israel, and our part
is not simply one of identity. Rather, we agree to live up to a code of
standards, to do "all the words and all the laws."
What is the difference between being commanded unilaterally and
accepting the commands as part of a brit? It is the difference between being a
child and being an adult. Adam and Chava in Gan Eden were like children; they
had no real, mature opinions of their own, no real values of their own, and no
autonomy. They were unilaterally commanded, and all that was asked of them was
obedience. All they could do to assert their autonomy was rebel, to refuse to
follow God's command. Only once they rebelled and were kicked out of Gan Eden,
out of the parental home, did they become autonomous beings able to make their
own value judgments: "you will be like God, knowing good and evil."
Now, in the post-Edenic world, to reenter a relationship with God we must do so
as adults. To be commanded and to follow are not enough. We must bring the
entirety of our will, our personality, our values, and our autonomy willingly
and freely into a relationship with God. God wants more than followers; God
wants partners.
This is a religion of adulthood, not of blind faith and obedience.
It is not only one of Commander and commanded, but of parties in a brit. It is a
religion in which, through our free acceptance of the mitzvot and our
role in interpreting and applying them, in the very enterprise of Torah
she'b'al peh, the Oral Torah, we are partners with God. Only parties to a
brit can be both deeply and passionately committed to its full observance and
at the same time say, "Why should our father's name be lost to his clan
because he had no son?" (Bamidbar, 27:3), or, "Why should we be
excluded from bringing God's sacrifice in its appointed time together with Bnei
Yisrael?" (Bamidbar, 9:7). To be in a bilateral relationship is to be
fully committed to participating with the totality of one's personality,
without silencing the part of one's soul that asks, "How does this make
sense? How is this just?" At the same time, to be a party to a brit is to accept that one must work to find answers
within the context of the brit.
To be a party to a brit also means
that we do not discharge our obligation simply by doing what is commanded of
us. If we are truly partners, then we must internalize the commitments and
values of the brit; we must follow the
na'aseh (we will do) with the nishma (we will
listen, and internalize). We must share and participate in the brit, in its
visions and its goals. We must see ourselves as partnering with God in all
aspects of our lives, and we must work to bring the world to a better place, to
a fuller realization of the values and vision of the Torah and the brit.
In many ways, we have largely abdicated these responsibilities
of brit and regressed to living a religion of mere
commadedness, living our religious lives as children rather than adults. We
find ourselves afraid to ask the questions that deeply trouble us, and if we
do, we are often not willing to put in the hard work required to find answers
within Torah, to find answers while holding fast to the brit. We don't want to
be troubled to do more than keep the mitzvot; we don't want to be told
that we need to bring Torah values into our day-to-day (secular) life; and we
certainly don't want to accept the responsibility of internalizing a Torah
vision within our own, defining our ambitions and our place in the world on the
basis of such a brit. Perhaps we are afraid that this would require a total
submerging of our own identity, but that is not the nature of a brit. The true
brit is a fusing of the fullness of our own personality with the demands,
commands, and vision of God and Torah. This is our challenge. Will we continue
living the religion of Gan Eden, of simple commadedness, or will we be able to
face the challenge of living the religious life of an adult, the religious life
of the Torah of Har Sinai, the Torah of a brit?
Shabbat Shalom!
Comments
Post a Comment