Community Problems - Simple Solution

Parshat Mishpatim 

by Rabbi Avi Billet

Being in touch with the various Jewish media outlets, which include newspapers, online magazines and blogs, one is never at a loss for conversation. Topics that appeal specifically to Jewish interests keep us all on our toes.

 Last week I came across a few items that struck chords, mostly because they are all reminiscent of how Albert Einstein defined insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

 The first item: the so called-Shidduch crisis, in which Jewish girls past age 22 are no longer considered a “good catch,” in certain Jewish communities, leading to a “crisis” of thousands of wonderful young women who simply can’t find husbands.

 The second (though this one has a better chance of success with the talented Allison Josephs being the brains behind solution attempts): that people who leave the Orthodoxy of certain right-wing communities often drop all measures of religious life in lieu of finding perhaps a more centrist or even left-leaning halakhic lifestyle as an alternative.

 The third: a study of where Orthodox singles who are engaged in amorous activity fit in the Jewish community.

 The fourth: a viral video of Rabbi Jeremy Stern of the Organization for the Resolution of Agunot (ORA) insisting an 18-year get-withholder leave a maariv minyan at the YU Seforim Sale.

 I believe that all of these are representative of problems which require a simple (though perhaps romantically naïve) solution: Follow what the Torah says!!!!!

 A man whose marriage has ended has a commandment (see Maimonides mitzvah 222, and Sefer HaChinukh 579): write a get (or have it written), and hand it to your wife (Devarim 24:1). Your marriage together is over, demonstrate it through giving her a get and move on with your lives. That any rabbis support get-withholders, for any reason, is shameful. There will sadly be fights over money, property, child-custody. But the chaining of a woman to a non-existent marriage has zero halakhic validity.

 The Torah tells us (Shmot 22:15) “If a man seduces a virgin who is not betrothed, he must pay a dowry and must marry her.” I don’t want to get into whether this is a punishment, penalty, or responsibility. The Torah does not say a crime has been committed – it tells us that an act has consequences. In the Jewish community, we look at the act of marital intimacy as a sacred connection that binds two people together in marriage. It is a stain on our singles community that society at large has infiltrated values counter to our values, in effect justifying bed-hopping. The Torah says if you went so far, it is time to marry one another.

 I once heard a very experienced rabbi suggest that there is a singles “crisis” because the singles don’t follow the Torah – which says to get married. While the statement is an extremely sweeping generalization, at least with respect to marriage it has much truth in it.

 The marriage commitment is not easy, and many people need help and guidance, even after they take the so-called plunge. There is a world of people who earn a living writing books, speaking, or counseling about how to improve marriage. God bless them. But the fact that people hold off, sometimes for 15 plus years after reaching marriageable age/maturity is a frightening statistic.

 Of course there are people who “aren’t ready” or who “did not find the right person.” There are always exceptions, and there are always explanations. But for a man who is told “It’s not good to be alone,” (Bereshit 2:18) and who has a mitzvah to have children (#1, according to Sefer HaChinukh), there has to be a better way than dating every girl on the Upper West Side without finding one to marry. And it begins with education – towards marriage, commitment, communication – at a younger age.

 I am choosing to address the remaining two items together because they demonstrate that the problems are only getting worse inside a community that digs its hole ever deeper without considering Albert Einstein’s wisdom.

 I promise that the case from our parsha mentioned above did not come about because a shadchan introduced two people. They met on their own. They talked on their own. And the man seduced the woman, leading to his obligation to marry her. And while I certainly believe the act they commit together is only appropriate after chuppah and kiddushin, it is the way they met and communicated which seems to be a much more natural form of leading to marriage.

 A system in which young people are not permitted to meet naturally and without chaperones, in which parents have so much say as to who their marriage-age children can date (without giving any credit or respect to the choices their age 20-something children might make on their own), in which the communication after a date is through a third party always, is not going to lead to people actually building a relationship and working their way – positively – through their differences. Going on five dates in 4 weeks doesn’t mean you’re ready to get married any more than dating someone for 5 years means you’re ready to get married. [Though to the 5-years people, what are you waiting for?]

Being ready for marriage means being ready to commit to a relationship both people will work at through giving to the other, and always putting the other person first. Of course, finding one another attractive, being able to communicate, and being able to have a good time together are important. And so are shared values. But the successful marriage focuses on the relationship building side - because without that, everything else can quickly fade away.

 I believe the dating game example is a microcosm, one minor example, of what causes people who leave the religious community to abandon it altogether. People need to have choices. They need to be made aware that the halakhic system wears many hats, and that there is a place for everyone who respects it within its very wide spectrum. Nothing is only black and white. Grey, with reference to halakha, is a beautiful color.

 May our community be blessed to see the beautiful rainbow that different approaches to serving God within the boundaries of halakha has to offer. As long as we understand that following what the Torah and halakha actually have to say is our baseline (not twisted to meet our pre-conceived ideas, but what it actually says) our community will be in a much better place in dealing with all of these issues.

He Laughs, She Laughs

Parshat Vayera

by Rabbi Avi Billet

Avraham and Sarah are both given the same information.

                

A child will be born when you are 100 and 90, respectively.

                

He laughs in 17:17 and is told, “It’s true! It is really going to happen.”

                

In 18:12, when Sarah is given her version of the message, she too laughs, but is criticized. God asks, “Why is this that Sarah is laughing…?” (18:13-14)

                

If they both have the same response, why are the reactions to their responses so different? Avraham’s seems to be supported by God, while Sarah’s response is rejected, requiring her to even defend her natural reaction.

                

To strengthen the question, we can further wonder why Avraham seems to bear the brunt of the critique against Sarah? Rashi teaches us (21:12) that Sarah was greater in prophesy than Avraham. Why then did God’s criticism of her reaction come through Avraham’s prophesy and not hers, namely to her directly?

                

Rabbi Yehuda ben Eliezer, the 14^th century Riva, writes that there’s a simple explanation for the difference between Avraham and Sarah's laughter reactions and the news of having a baby in the near future. Quoting Rav Elyakim, he notes that Avraham received the information directly from God, and his laughter was therefore of the joyous type – completely accepting God’s promise, while overcome with emotions that uncontrollably cause laughter.

                

Sarah, on the other hand, heard the promise indirectly, through an angel that dressed up as a wanderer, which caused her to be skeptical.

                

The Or HaChaim takes a different viewpoint, noting that Avraham laughed when he heard the news, while Sarah laughed not on the hearing of the news, but only after her body began to show signs that birthing was to be a real possibility. In other words, for Avraham, the message was convincing enough. For Sarah, the message was not convincing enough – it didn’t cause her to believe anything – only body changes could convince her that something was going to happen.

                

Perhaps this is a knock on Sarah’s faith. But in all honesty, I still find it unconvincing, in light of the comments of the Riva with which we opened. It is not God who is speaking to her. It is a stranger that her husband randomly stopped from his journey on the road.

                

Which is why the Chizkuni’s take on the matter is so significant. Chizkuni compares what happens here to a woman who wants to criticize her daughter-in-law, but instead criticizes her own daughter in front of the daughter-in-law, hoping the message will penetrate without the insult.

                

God wanted to criticize Avraham for his laughter, but instead God confronted Avraham (God did not confront Sarah!)  about Sarah’s laughter, hoping Avraham would understand that his own laughter was inappropriate.

                

The fact that Sarah felt the need to defend herself may indicate that Avraham indeed confronted her about her laughter – which means he either “got” the message or he did not. If he did not “get it,” then his critique is ever so much more disturbing – how can you ask your wife about her laughter when you did the same thing?

                

But I think there’s a more profound message that we can take from this story.

                

If the chronology of these parshas is such that Avraham had his bris in chapter 17, and chapter 18 is his healing period which followed that surgery, then he was certainly aware of the promise of a child by the time the men/angels came to his door.

                

Why wasn’t Sarah? Her name is so prominently featured in the context of Avraham having this child (see 17:16,19,21) one would think Avraham would have told her of the joy which would come to their lives, of the promise that would clearly come true, as he had been told this directly by God! Especially since she will play such a significant role in its coming about.

                

And yet he did not. She hadn’t a clue. She was completely unaware of any promise. Perhaps this is why when she overheard through the tent, and her husband didn’t react, she also laughed, perhaps thinking that Avraham is really in bad shape because he doesn’t see the humor in this traveling man’s strange “promise.” Avraham, on the other hand, did not react because he already knew.

                

It seems this translates to a communication problem. We can view Sarah’s response however we want, but the bottom line is that the messenger was so unconvincing, that she gets a pass on not accepting the promise as being true. Avraham, on the other hand, is criticized for her laughter, a side-swipe at himself for his own laughter, and also at him for not informing his wife of this important change that will soon take place in their lives.

                

Spouses have to share the most important things that develop in their lives. Avraham didn’t and bore double responsibility – for his laughter, and for not communicating with his wife.