home | contact 
 

REFLECTIONS

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sign up here to receive 'Reflections' on the weekly Torah portion
 

 
 

 
 

Reflections

To view the archive of past 'Reflections' click here

YITRO

22nd Shevat 5770 ~ 6th February 2010

Shabbat begins in London at 16.42 and ends at 17.48

By Vicky Fox

This week’s sedra describes one of the most important, seminal moments in Jewish history - the giving of the Ten Commandments at Mount Sinai.  So it is interesting to ponder the significance of the sedra being named after Moses’ father in law – Yitro – who opens the sedra with his advice on establishing a system of justice.

When Yitro sees large numbers of people bringing their disputes to Moses from morning until night he asks him why he alone is the judge. Moses explains that he acts both as judge to deal with the disagreements and as teacher, instructing the people in God’s laws. Yitro tells Moses that he is wrong and sets out instructions to establish a judicial system based on precedent, with judges appointed from the people and Moses as the senior judge.

The rabbinic commentators note Yitro’s deep concern when he sees Moses acting as sole judge from morning to night.  What concerns them is not that Moses is overworked and at risk of exhaustion, but that Moses is exhausting the people.  By insisting that he is the only one who can solve the disputes, he is forcing the people to wait for many hours waiting for him to reach their case. The Ramban comments that the trouble with Moses’ decision to hear all the disputes himself was not simply the frustration it caused the people, but the danger of increasing violence and injustice amongst them. As the people lost faith in Moses’ ability to hear their cases, they would start to take the law into their own hands. Rough justice would be the result.

Yitro’s advice to delegate authority and share the leadership meant that justice could be dispensed more quickly with the result that the people would be less frustrated and more willing to have their cases heard. The system established the rule of law and most legal systems today are loosely based on Yitro’s counsel to Moses. 

This judicial system delegates and shares leadership amongst the people and puts responsibility on them to establish a fair system. The establishment of a judiciary drawn from the people leads to a more egalitarian system, with maximum access and "ownership" of the Torah by the people. Having a strong and wise leader such as Moses is important, but so is having people to help, because without all of that combined help, Moses’ efforts alone could not succeed.

I suspect it is no coincidence that we are reminded of the importance of justice and our responsibility in maintaining that system just before the revelation at Sinai. The order of this sedra suggests that we had to first establish and accept Yitro’s idea of a society based on a justice system before we were ready to enter the covenant with God. We had to acknowledge the fundamental principle of human responsibility to establish and maintain a fair and equitable justice system.  Supporting such a justice system allows us to live a moral life and makes us worthy of our relationship with God.

Vicky Fox is a member of NNLS


Torah Sparks

By Rabbi Joyce Newmark

 
  • "You shall not swear falsely by [literally, lift up/carry] the name of the Lord your God; for the Lord will not clear one who swears falsely by His name." (Exodus 20:7) Note: Traditional translation: You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain; for the Lord will not hold him guiltless that takes His name in vain.

     

  • “You shall not swear falsely by My name” (Leviticus 19:12) What need was there for this text, when it has already been stated: “You shall not swear falsely by the name of the Lord your God”? You might have thought that one is not culpable except when His specific name [the Tetragrammaton] is involved. From where do we learn that the prohibition applies to all the names of God? The text adds: “By My name” – whatever name I have. (Sifra)

     

  • In any case, one who invokes God and does not keep his promise is as if he is denying God’s existence. For the point of mentioning God’s name is to say, “Just as God is truth, so is my word.” (Rabbi Abraham Ibn Ezra, 1092-1167, Spain)

     

  • The text has been interpreted by our Sages to mean that it is forbidden to swear by the hallowed Name in vain, as for example, he that swears that something is or is not so, where the matter is self-evident – that the pillar is made of marble and he is standing by, and all can see that it is so. (Ramban [Rabbi Moses ben Nachman, 1194-1270, Spain])

     

  • The text also implies that he should not bear the name of the Lord who is his God in vain, indicating to all that he is a Jew and a servant of the Lord implying that he is one of His servants – when such is not the case. This prohibition also includes the one who regards himself as more righteous than he really is. (Or HaHayyim [Rabbi Hayyim Ibn Attar, 1696-1743, Morocco and Israel])

     

  • Do not take God’s name in matters which are in vain or false. Do not place an imprint of holiness on things which are totally repulsive, which appear as positive commandments but which are in reality serious sins. Indeed, it is the way of the Evil Inclination to deceive people by depicting grievous sins as the most sanctified commandments. Our Sages said (Shevuot 39a) that the entire world trembled when God said at Sinai, “You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain,” because all the most terrible crimes and murders are carried out under the cloak of truth, justice, and uprightness. (Duda’ei Reuven [Rabbi Reuben Katz, 1880-1963, Lithuania, United States, and Israel])

     

Sparks for Discussion
 

The translation of this verse found in Etz Hayim limits the commandment to the prohibition of false oaths, but our commentators understand it much more broadly. Surely false oaths are prohibited, but so are meaningless ones. Why? How is pretending to be more righteous than one actually is “carrying” God’s name in vain? Duda’ei Reuven warns against presenting sins as if they were mitzvot. How do you understand this? What examples can you think of?

From: United Synagogue for Conservative Judaism. More can be found on their website http://www.uscj.org

To view the archive of past 'Reflections' click here


home | contact | legal info