Social media is an interesting place.<\/p>\n
Ok, done; that\u2019s all I wanted to say.<\/p>\n
Just kidding.<\/p>\n
I\u2019m often intrigued to see how discussions go on Facebook, where it\u2019s so easy to share perspectives on anything with a click of a button. Many people consistently offer consistent opinions on whatever topics matter to them, whether it\u2019s approaches to parenting, religion, current events, how to live a healthy lifestyle, etc. So many of us have opinions and stick to them, which is often a virtue \u2013 but of course, those opinions we\u2019ve already formed run the risk of blinding us to new evidence or to the details of specific cases. This concern itself seems to be discussed a lot, with some of the same people who have those strong views also sharing articles about increased polarization of modern discourse and even the possibility that social media feeds that polarization.<\/p>\n
(This is not an essay about social media \u2013 though I might write one of those one day.)<\/p>\n
The question of how our general perspectives might affect our reactions to specific instances reminds me, naturally, of one of my favorite passages in Rav Hirsch\u2019s commentary, conveniently located at the beginning of parshat Lech Lecha.<\/p>\n
We\u2019ll have to start with Ramban, though, who somewhat famously (except among those who skip this one because they disapprove of criticizing our holy ancestors) makes a bold statement about Avraham\u2019s trip to Egypt in Bereishit 12:10. (Note: His name at the time was Avram, and his wife\u2019s was Sarai, but I will refer to them as Avraham and Sarah anyway.)<\/p>\n
Know that Avraham Avinu sinned a great sin, unintentionally (\u05d1\u05e9\u05d2\u05d2\u05d4), in bringing his righteous wife into a stumbling-block of sin because of his fear that they would kill him. He should have trusted in Hashem\u2026 Also his departure, because of famine, from the land about which he had been commanded in the first place, was a sin that he committed [cf Hoshea 12:9], because G-d would redeem him from death by famine. And because of this incident, exile in Egypt, at Pharoh\u2019s hand, was decreed upon his descendants\u2026<\/em><\/p>\n Wow, Ramban! Avraham Avinu committed a double sin, and it was so bad that thousands of his descendants had to suffer for hundreds of years as punishment?<\/p>\n (This is also not an essay about reward and punishment. Nor is it an essay about whether biblical heroes were perfect or fallible, though it may look like one.)<\/p>\n Many later scholars take issue with Ramban\u2019s statement, either because of the specifics of the case \u2013 for instance, Avraham had only recently \u201cmet\u201d G-d, and had no reason to assume He would protect him \u2013 or because of a general aversion to the very notion that our Patriarchs could have sinned, especially a \u201cgreat sin.\u201d (Ramban does include the word \u201cunintentionally,\u201d but some are perhaps not sure what he means by the caveat, or don\u2019t think it\u2019s enough.)<\/p>\n Likely, some argue with Ramban for both reasons: If one has a general aversion to the very notion that our Patriarchs could have sinned, one might be more inclined to interpret the specifics of the case in Avraham\u2019s favor. It is, indeed, really difficult to remove ourselves from our general perspectives and examine any particular case with a truly open mind.<\/p>\n Myself, I\u2019m partial to Rav Hirsch\u2019s approach, but not for the obvious reasons.<\/p>\n For two long paragraphs, Rav Hirsch offers a diatribe against those who can\u2019t accept the possibility that a biblical hero sinned:<\/p>\n \u2026The Torah never hides from us the faults, errors and weaknesses of our great men. Just by that it gives the stamp of veracity to what it relates\u2026. Were they without passion, without internal struggle, their virtues would seem to us the outcome of some higher nature\u2026 no model that we could hope to emulate\u2026. Did we not know that [Moshe] could also fly into a passion, his meekness and modesty would seem to us to be his inborn natural disposition, and lost to us as an example\u2026 gives his [humility] its true greatness, shows it to us as the result of a great work of self-control and self-ennoblement which we all should copy because we all could copy\u2026 never be our task to whitewash the spiritual and moral heroes of our past\u2026 They do not require our apologies, nor do such attempts become them\u2026<\/em><\/p>\n All this resonates very deeply with me. As a student, I always cringed when a teacher would explain biblical stories in terms of our heroes not being \u201con our level,\u201d as if they were superhuman, even angelic. I could understand respect, I could understand putting them on pedestals and learning from their virtues \u2013 but I couldn\u2019t understand not<\/em> learning from their mistakes too, if the Torah chooses to share those mistakes. (And here I recommend checking out Radak\u2019s comments on 16:6.) I couldn\u2019t relate to extreme, blind hero-worship.<\/p>\n Finding these two paragraphs in Rav Hirsch\u2019s commentary was like a breath of fresh air \u2013 but that\u2019s not the real reason I\u2019m so enamored with his approach to the story of Avraham and Sarah in Egypt. Because this is not an essay about the fallibility of our biblical heroes; instead, it\u2019s an essay about how we think about that or any issue, in general or in specific instances.<\/p>\n It\u2019s really Rav Hirsch\u2019s next sentence that I think is so crucial, as a model that I, along with anyone generally inclined towards one perspective or the other, must remember: \u201cBut before we come to this decision, let us consider more closely the facts which are told us of this event.\u201d<\/p>\n Just like those who are averse to the very notion that our Patriarchs sinned might be predisposed to interpret Bereishit 12 in Avraham\u2019s favor \u2013 so too, those who are averse to whitewashing the Patriarchs might be predisposed to interpret the account as portraying his guilt. I might recoil at attempts to whitewash the sins of biblical heroes, while others might be horrified by the idea that biblical heroes ever sinned like mere humans – and either perspective could easily color our readings of any particular story. Most of us have some bias, in some direction, that makes intellectual honesty a real challenge.<\/p>\n To achieve that honesty, we have to consider the facts and what makes the most sense \u2013 and also, I think, why <\/em>we think one viewpoint makes more sense than another. Do I assume Avraham had a perfectly pious, ingenious plan because I\u2019m predisposed to a view of patriarchal perfection, or because that\u2019s the reading that makes the most sense? Do I jump to accept Ramban\u2019s critique because I find it logically and textually compelling, or because it thrills me to find a traditional commentator condemning a biblical hero?<\/p>\n Rav Hirsch emphatically supports the notion that Avraham could have <\/em>sinned \u2013 yet also reminds us that the fact that he could have<\/em>, doesn\u2019t mean everything he did was a sin. If Rav Hirsch believes those inclined to believe in patriarchal perfection are making a mistake \u2013 it is no less a mistake for those inclined to believe in patriarchal fallibility to assume that he did do wrong in any one incident.<\/p>\n Ramban himself, I\u2019m fairly certain, was not motivated by a lack of respect for Avraham\u2019s virtues \u2013 and neither should we be, in deciding we \u201clike\u201d his view. Ramban and Rav Hirsch may have helped legitimize views of patriarchal fallibility, but the way Rav Hirsch flips his discussion in that key line reminds us the first two paragraphs presented only a general truth, not a license to condemn whomever we want, whenever we want.<\/p>\n In a related instance, Rav Hirsch prefaces his comments on the sale of Yosef by saying we must \u201clook, if not for a justification, still for an explanation for the event which now follows\u201d (comment on 37:11-12). Rav Hirsch doesn\u2019t feel the need to justify<\/em> the brothers; perhaps what they did was indeed entirely wrong. But he does want to explain<\/em> it. \u201cAfter all, we have not to do with a band of robbers and murderers who would lightly commit murder for the sake of a coat.\u201d Maybe they were not so angelic as to be incapable of sin \u2013 but it simply doesn\u2019t make sense<\/em>, as Seforno points out on 37:18, that those whose names would later be inscribed on the priestly garments in the Holy Temple would have done something quite so awful without at least thinking <\/em>they had a reason.<\/p>\n Seforno and Rav Hirsch, remind us we must consider all<\/em> the evidence \u2013 the fact that G-d chose all 12 of Yaakov\u2019s sons and indicates love for them, alongside the fact that most of them plotted first to kill and then to sell their brother, together with the fact that the Torah labels their emotions as \u201cjealousy\u201d and \u201chatred\u201d \u2013 and make the best sense we can of it all.<\/p>\n It\u2019s not about whether we are more comfortable viewing Avraham as perfect or fallible. It\u2019s about the reasons we feel more or less comfortable with one view or the other, the basis for those reasons in general, and how all that interacts with the facts of the particular case. It\u2019s about making sense of each story with all the tools the Torah gives us.<\/p>\n Getting back to Facebook \u2013 I am actually sometimes pleasantly surprised to see my more activist-minded friends share thoughts that don\u2019t seem to line up with opinions they have previously expressed. Even as many people are (rightly) concerned about excessive polarization in many areas of modern discourse, is still possible to consider each situation on its own merits, maybe coming to a conclusion in line with our general perspectives and maybe not.<\/p>\n Like Rav Hirsch, we can acknowledge our general inclinations \u2013 even expound on them for paragraphs at a time \u2013 yet still question which view makes the most sense in a given instance and \u201cconsider more closely the facts\u201d of that case.<\/p>\n In that way, we can hold fast to the veracity Rav Hirsch stresses we find in the Torah, and settle for nothing less than veracity in today\u2019s world.<\/p>\n Sarah C. Rudolph is a Jewish educator and freelance writer. She has been sharing her passion for Jewish texts of all kinds for over 15 years, with students of all ages. Sarah\u2019s essays have been published in a variety of internet and print media, including Times of Israel, Kveller,\u00a0Jewish Action<\/a>, The Lehrhaus, TorahMusings, and more. Sarah lives in Cleveland with her husband and four children, but is privileged to learn online with students all over the world through\u00a0www.TorahTutors.org<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0www.WebYeshiva.org<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Social media is an interesting place. Ok, done; that\u2019s all I wanted to say. Just kidding. I\u2019m often intrigued to see how discussions go on Facebook, where it\u2019s so easy to share perspectives on anything with a click of a button. Many people consistently offer consistent opinions on whatever topics matter to them, whether it\u2019s<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":133529,"featured_media":60796,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_cloudinary_featured_overwrite":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[85],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-60795","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-inspiration"],"yoast_head":"\n
\n