When In An Argument...

In the parsha, the forefather in question is named Avram until his name change at his circumcision. Following the adjudication of Berachot 13a, he is referred to as "Avraham" in this article.

Parshat Lekh Lekha

The King of Egypt discovers the woman he has brought into his chambers is married to a different man, and he makes all kinds of accusations. "What have you done to me? Why didn't you tell me she is your wife? Why did you say she is your sister, leading me to take her as a wife? Now – take your wife and go!" Paraoh then commanded and sent him and his wife out of the land. (12:18-20)

            

Avraham's response to this is silence. Either he is not given a chance to respond, or perhaps more likely, he recognized that responding, whether truthfully or in anger, would go nowhere. Avraham knew that having the last word was not only unnecessary, but were it be the wrong word, it may come back to bite him. After all, he did come to Egypt looking for help. He should be grateful he is going free (with many gifts!) with merely a tongue lashing.

            

The king of Sodom arrogantly tells Avraham, who has just saved him and his people at tremendous peril and self sacrifice, that Avraham should give him the POWs as he gives Avraham permission to keep the booty that is rightfully Avraham's.

Avraham does have the last word as he tells the king that he does not intend to keep anything beyond what his men have already eaten. Sometimes you need to give the swift kick and end the conversation. Especially since the gratitude should have come in the other direction – from King of Sodom towards Avraham. (14:17-24)

            

In both cases, Avraham does not have nor does he intend to pursue a longer term relationship with these kings. Though the reason for each encounter likely contributes to how Avraham chooses to deal with the person in question.

Let us look, however, at the two arguments Avraham has with people for whom he does care deeply.

          
When Avraham's shepherds argue with Lot's shepherds, Avraham is the one who intervenes saying, "Let there not be an argument between me and you, and between my shepherds and your shepherds, for we are brothers."

          
He gives Lot a very generous offer – You pick where you want to be. Stay here or pick a direction. Whatever you choose, I will go the other way. (13:8-9) That Lotchooses to go to Sodom is aseparate factor. But they part in peace and Avraham has achieved his objective.

          
After Sarah gives her maid to Avraham, demonstrating tremendous self-sacrifice and concern for her husband so he could have a son, Hagar denigrates her mistress who has been suffering with infertility for years. "I am angry at you," she says to Avraham, "because I gave you my maid, she has become pregnant, and I have become denigrated." (16:3-5)

          
It is ironic that Avraham is blamed for doing exactly what his wife told him to do. But note how he does not say, "Why are you yelling at me? It's YOUR fault! You asked for this! What do you expect of me? I did what you told me! I'm going to be the father I always wanted to be. I'm going to have a child – something you could never provide for me!"

He does say, "Here is your maid. Do to her what is best in your eyes." (16:6) Radak says Avraham did this for the sake of Shalom Bayis (to preserve peace in their home), so Sarah can feel good about herself again one day.

There is a much longer conversation to be had about how Hagar was treated in this incident. The commentaries are split over the choices made here - Ramban is critical of both Sarah and Avraham on account of her treatment of Hagar, the Riva defends them both. Radak says though we normally learn model behavior from the forefathers, here we learn how not to treat someone from the way Hagar is treated.

The question here is, do Avraham and Sarah respect one another in this exchange? It's not like with the kings where you either ignore the person or tell him off. Even more than he cared for Lot Avraham cared for his wife. And as his demonstration of compromise played out with Lot, it played out even moreso with his wife, with whom he intended to live for the rest of his life.

And it is completely in character for Avraham. Remember how he resolved the dispute with Lot. You choose. You decide. I don't need to have the last word. I don't need to be the one sitting on top, sitting on the gold mine, with the choice land or property. I want YOU to be happy. I want YOU to find peace.

It's hard to judge Sarah. She is a woman who has suffered terribly – with infertility, her maid's mistreating her, and her maid getting pregnant right away while Sarah remains barren.

But Avraham certainly teaches us a few things about the "rules of engagement" in an argument.

Ben Zoma concludes a listing of a few important rhetorical questions (Avot 4:1) by asking, "Who is honored? Who is honorable? One who gives honor to all of God's creatures." Certainly the first place to begin is with one's loved ones. Treat them with respect. Preserve their dignity at all times. Don't argue in front of other people.

A person must not say. "You were wrong and I was right. You always do this. You don't care about me. Nothing that matters to me matters to you. Your choices disgust me. I would never do the things you do, treat others the way you do, talk about myself the way you do, or think so highly of myself that I could never admit I might be wrong. But YOU. All the time – always the same. When will you ever learn?"

A person needs to think in the following way. "I am going to express my needs. What I have done, my reasoning, why I did it. I will explain where I am coming from. I will explain my choices. I will emphasize my commitment and dedication to this relationship. I care about you. I care about us. Above all, I want there to be peace between us. I want to hear your side, I want to hear your perspective, and really want us to come to a resolution."

As long as communication is done respectfully, resolution is attainable with dignity, honor, respect, and love. After all, "Who is most honored?" Those who want the best for one another, and demonstrate it through treating one another with the utmost respect.

When to Name a Jewish Child

I dedicate this week's dvar torah to the memory of a friend, Jason Botnick, (see here), who tragically passed away this past weekend (In November 2011) after losing his battle with Leukemia. 

Parshat Vayetze

by Rabbi Avi Billet 

The Torah never addresses when a newborn is to be named; just about every Biblical figure who is introduced at birth is named right away. This would not come as much of a shock in a pre-Avraham and pre-Bris era. But the fact that Yitzchak, Yaakov, Eisav, and all of Yaakov's sons (chapters 29-30) (perhaps with the exception of Binyamin's second name in 35:18) are named the moment they are born (or so it seems) stands to leave open the idea that in Biblical times, boys were named before the bris.

In a pre-Sinai world, certainly girls were not named when the new father received an aliyah to the Torah – Dinah, for example, seems to be named at her birth.

Why do we name our children when we do: the boy at the bris, and the girl at a Torah reading? Is there significance to the public display of naming a baby?

Avram received his new name after his bris, yet Yitzchak received his name the minute he was born, if not before he was born. Yitzchak's circumstance can be taken off the table, however, because his name was given to him by God, before he was even conceived. But Yitzchak's sons and Yaakov's sons are still an argument pro pre-bris naming.

Yossele Weisberg z"l, one of the most prominent mohels in Jerusalem until his passing around 10 years ago, dedicated a chapter of his magnum opus on the laws and practices of the Bris Milah experience, "Otzar Habris," to the customs surrounding when we name both boys and girls.

He records 4 reasons for why a boy is named at his bris:

1. At the time we are involved in blessing the child (ie. we say a "mi sheberach" after the bris), it is appropriate to refer to him by name. This would imply that the bris is the latest we can name a boy.
2. Until his bris, he carries the name of an "arel" ערל (uncircumcised), which must be changed to a proper Jewish name as soon as possible after his circumcision.
3. When we give the name with the formula of "Kayem" קיים את הילד הזה לאביו ולאמו ויקרא שמו בישראל... (establish this baby to his mother and father with the following Jewish name…), we are asking for the name to carry with it "God's approval," which would surely be most forthcoming once the child is circumcised.
4. Once he is circumcised, and has arrived at his personal physical "completion" (shlemut), it is the right time for him to be given his name.

The book Matamim, which explains the reasons for many customs, includes an explanation that focuses on the verse in Bereshit 2:19 – וכל אשר יקרא לו האדם נפש חיה הוא שמו - "Whatever the man called each living thing [would] remain its name." He quotes a thought from the book Toras Emes who points out that an acronym of the first five words of this phrase are the letters of the name Eliyahu/Elijah - אליהו. The first letters of the next three words, Nun, Chet and Heh have a numerical value of 63 (50+8+5), which is the same value as the word Navi – נביא – prophet.  The last word is "Sh'mo" (it's name), Thus, when Elijah the Prophet is present, that is when "his name" [the child's, that is] is proclaimed. The only problem with this teaching is that the verse pre-dates any practice of including Elijah at the bris. As nice as it is, it can not be used in practical terms to explain why the baby is named at his bris, and not before his bris.

When it comes to naming girls, Yossele Weisberg records 6 different customs as to when it could be done: 1. the day she is born, 2. on the first Torah-reading day closest to her birth, 3. the Shabbos immediately after her birth, 4. to wait at least five days from her birth (unless her 3^rd or 4^th day is Shabbos), 5. on the 2^nd Shabbos of her life, 6. 30 days after her birth.

Rabbi Shabtai Lipschitz of Orsziwa (Galicia) wrote a book called Bris Avos, in which he explains this last custom (waiting a month) based on a known connection women have to the moon and Rosh Chodesh. Just as the moon has a monthly cycle, women have a monthly cycle. The Rosh Chodesh connection is deeper, but no one suggests she be named specifically on Rosh Chodesh.

Rabbi Lipschitz's final point is that just as the father provides the name of his son to the one who announces it at the bris, he should verbally say his daughter's name to whomever (Rabbi, gabbai, chazzan, etc) will be announcing it along with a "Mi Sheberach."

There might be room to suggest Yaakov's sons were named after they were circumcised, but in the end, it does not matter whether they were or were not. Giving a name to a child is a significant event in and of itself. So significant, in fact, that Rabbi Jacob Emden declared "it is a mitzvah to rejoice and have a celebratory meal at the time one names his newborn daughter."

It would seem, therefore, that the naming of a boy at his bris, and a girl on a Torah reading day, particularly on Shabbos, would become a matter of convenience. The significance of the naming itself is a cause for celebration – so our tacking it onto a party we're making in honor of a bris, or in honor of Shabbos (or even any Torah-reading day) makes sense from a practical point of view – have one major expense at a time we'd be celebrating anyway.

May our children grow to fulfill our dreams and wishes for them, no matter when they are named. And may we merit to help them realize their potential in the best possible way.

ps. In the event that a baby's bris is delayed for a significant period of time on account of health concerns, most authorities recommend naming the child (some say to name him even before his eighth day - when his bris might have otherwise taken place) so prayers can be offered on his behalf in the proper fashion: utilizing his Jewish name.