Parshat Yitro - 5764

Two Fathers-in-Law

Byline Palace of the “Pharaoh who did not know Yoseph” (Shemot 1:8), circa 3500 B.C.E .; where Pharaoh is searching for a solution to his “Jewish Problem,” whereby the Jews are multiplying and thriving in the Province of Goshen. One of his trusted advisors, the Prophet Bilaam, suggests the idea of drowning the Jewish male babies in the Nile. Iyov, another advisor, recognizes the plan as genocidal, but cannot bring himself to actively oppose it, and remains silent. Yitro, a third advisor, registers his protest by fleeing Egypt. Each advisor receives his due “reward;” Bilaam, death by the sword, Iyov, a rigorous test of his faith and Yitro, appointment first as Priest of Midian, later becoming the father-in-law of Moshe and finally, by conversion to Judaism.

Earlier, ca. 3650 B.C.E., the Chumash tells us of another father-in-law, Lavan, who was the father-in-law of Yaakov. The Pesach Haggadah has some very harsh things to say about him, namely that he was worse than Pharaoh, who only wanted to destroy the Jewish males whereas Lavan wanted to “uproot everything.” Let us look at how these individuals acted, in their respective roles as fathers-in-law of Yaakov and Moshe.

Lavan cheated Yaakov repeatedly and viewed him essentially as his slave, as mentioned earlier in this column. That is why he objected strenuously to Yaakov’s departure with his family, for he knew at least one principle of Torah, “What a slave acquires, belongs to his master.” He did not recognize the separate identity of his son-in-law, nor in his great spiritual potential. Lavan was an inveterate sinner and although Yaakov would later say, “I lived in the house of Lavan, yet observed all the commands of the Torah,” Lavan took no notice of the greatness of his son-in-law, nor did he attempt to learn from his ways. Lavan had seen an example of kindness in the hospitality of Avraham, and empathy for human suffering in Avraham’s attempt to head off the destruction of Sodom. And he was aware of the great spiritual act performed by Avraham and Yitzchak at the “Akeidah.” He knew that his own sister, Rivkah, favored Yaakov as the spiritual heir of Yitzchak. Yet he rejected the G-d of Avraham, Yitzchak and Yaakov and attempted to enslave Yaakov, one of the “Avot” of the Jewish People.

This week’s Parashah begins “And Yitro, Priest of Midian and father-in-law of Moshe, heard...” (Shemot 18:1) The Midrash asks, “What did Yitro hear, in particular, that attracted him to the Jewish People?” And the Midrash answers, “He heard of the splitting of the Sea of Reeds and of the destruction of Amalek.” (Mechilta) But the Midrash knows, from earlier events described in the Torah, of the beginning of his relationship with Moshe, how Moshe had come to the aid of his daughters at the well, displaying empathy with the weak and great courage. We know that Yitro so valued those sterling qualities that he chastised his daughters, “How could you leave such a man!?” (Shemot 2:20), and gave one of them, Tzipporah, to Moshe as his wife. Yitro knew that Moshe had been summoned by G-d Himself to go to Egypt to lead his people, downtrodden and oppressed slaves, out of that land. And when Moshe came to him respectfully to ask his permission to take his family with him as he left on that mission to save his brothers, Yitro responded, “Go in peace.” (Shemot 3:18)

We see in the text of the Torah how each took pride in the other. As Chazal point out, in Parashat Shemot, Moshe took honor in being the son-in-law of Yitro, as it says (Shemot 4:18), “And Moshe went and returned to Yeter, his father-in-law...” while in Parashat Yitro, the father-in-law took pride in the son-in-law, for in today’s Parashah he is described as the “father-in-law of Moshe.” (Shemot 18:1)

Far from rejecting the Torah and its Author, Yitro actually added a section to it. It was he who suggested the idea of a multi-tiered judicial system to Moshe, and told him “I am giving you this advice, and may G-d be with you.” (Shemot 18:19), which the Midrash interprets as “Go to the Almighty, and seek confirmation of the idea.” Earlier we find “And Yitro said, ‘Blessed is HaShem, for He saved you from the hand of Egypt and from the hand of Pharaoh...’ ” and “Now I know that HaShem is greater than all the gods...” (Shemot 18:10-11)

Lavan had the example of the righteous Yaakov before him for many years, and was blind to it. Yet it took Yitro only one incident at a well to become joined in love with his future son-in-law and with the G-d of Israel.

Men who will become fathers-in-law or who have already reached that exalted status would do well to appreciate the maxim “We haven’t lost a (son or daughter), but have rather gained a (daughter or son)!” And would also do well to model their behavior after that of Yitro, rather than after the mis-behavior of Lavan.

Rabbi Pinchas Frankel
Rabbi Frankel is an Educational Coordinator at the OU

Archive