~ Parashat Yitro is very important, in part, because we read the Aseret HaDibrot, the so-called Ten Commandments. But today I want to focus on the relationship between Moshe and his family. What do you imagine has happened? How do you understand that relationship? How does it compare to Yaakov's relationship with his family?
I'm going to read a description of one of the heroes of the Torah, and I want you to tell me whom I am referring to.
After growing up in a privileged and sheltered environment, the hero runs away from a more powerful member of his household, who has made clear his intention to kill him. The hero goes east and ends up by a well, where his future wife faces an obstacle in watering her sheep. He removes the obstacle and waters the sheep for her. Quickly the shepherdess’s father hears about this and takes in the hero, giving him his daughter as a wife and making him a shepherd over his flock. Eventually, after having children, he tells his father-in-law that he wants to return home. God speaks to the hero and he subsequently returns home to become leader of his clan. On the way back, he meets an otherworldly stranger who attacks him but ultimately relents. This is followed by a reunion with his older brother who markedly embraces him, in spite of the fact that the hero’s return spells a threat to the older brother’s position of leadership.
(R. Francis Nataf, Redeeming Relevance, Exodus, Chp. 3)
~ Moshe and Ya’akov share a intense personal exile. They are in foreign lands, marry into (ultimately) foreign families, work with property that doesn’t belong to them and live alongside unfamiliar cultural values. Remember, for instance, Lavan's explanation for marrying Leah to Yaakov first: this is what is done in OUR place - and Yaakov accepts it, underscoring his alien status. Exile, feeling alienated and lonely are all formative of those two Jewish leaders. But let's notice what is very different between them: their relationships with the wife or wives and children.
~ How frequently are Yaakov's wives mentioned?
~ What is the relationship between Yaakov and Leah and Rachel?
~ What happens when Yaakov feels he is about to die?
Note the difference between Moshe and Yaakov: Moshe dies without his children. And Tziporah's name appears only three times in the Torah, even though she's mentioned five times:
~ The story of Yaakov's marriages are detailed, and that is also because we understand he has an attachment to Rachel from the get go, an attachment so deep that he mentions her several times after she dies, and he eventually forms an attachment to Leah at the end. He has an attachment to all his children, and exploring those relationships are a hefty part of studying Genesis. The children are described and talked about, even the ones we do not talk very often about, let's say, Asher or Zevulun. [Of course you can give all sorts of explanations, the Four Document Theory has several, but let's focus on the craft of the story itself today]
~ Moshe, on the other hand, has nothing like that. His sons are an afterthought almost, he does not even circumcise one of them - it falls to Tziporah to do that. And his relationship with Tziporah is based on something that no other relationship in the Torah is: distance.
~ Tziporah lives her name: she is rarely visible, and only speaks regarding the circumcision. There are those who believe she is speakign to Moshe, and those who believe she is speaking to the child. If the last case is true, never in the narrative we see her talking directly to Moshe.
~ Look closely to the opening scene of our portion:
(1) Jethro priest of Midian, Moses’ father-in-law, heard all that God had done for Moses and for Israel His people, how the LORD had brought Israel out from Egypt. (2) So Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law, took Zipporah, Moses’ wife, after she had been sent home, (3) and her two sons—of whom one was named Gershom, that is to say, “I have been a stranger in a foreign land”; (4) and the other was named Eliezer, meaning, “The God of my father was my help, and He delivered me from the sword of Pharaoh.” (5) Jethro, Moshe's father-in-law, brought his sons and his wife to Moshe in the wilderness, where he was encamped at the mountain of God. (6) He sent word to Moses, “I, your father-in-law Jethro, am coming to you, with your wife and her two sons.” (7) Moses went out to meet his father-in-law; he bowed low and kissed him; each asked after the other’s welfare, and they went into the tent. (8) Moses then recounted to his father-in-law everything that the LORD had done to Pharaoh and to the Egyptians for Israel’s sake, all the hardships that had befallen them on the way, and how the LORD had delivered them.
~ Eliezer is only mentioned by name here. Gershom was mentioned before. Note how they are described: her sons. Moshe does not go to meet his family. He only goes to meet Yitro. It is as if the family really does not exist for Moshe: he has no attachment to them now - the boys were described as his before he goes to focus on his mission. Now, that he has his mission, they are described as "hers". Even if you say that they are described as "his" on verse 5, there are commentators that call our attention to the fact that "his" can refer back to Yitro, and that the text is being unclear on purpose.
~ The Torah does not tell us anything about the boys themselves, it is as if only their names and the explanations are relevant - the rest is not. They have done nothing so important to merit mentioning, but remember, other characters that did nothing still get to be mentioned, even if it is because of their status on the tribe.
~ Even the opening of our portion is surprising: we, readers or listeners, had no idea Moshe did not have his family with him. Because the last time they were mentioned, they were all going down to Egypt with him! And he also represents the first break in what was the default so far: the family stays mostly together up to now in the story.
~ There is an explanation that affirms that the Torah is not at all interested in Moshe's family simply because there are more Jews at this moment, and with Yaakov his family, as large as it was, is still the only "Jewish people" one had. That is certainly a possibility, but it does not explain the exile and alienation of Moshe, and why this is important in terms of receive Torah and passing it on.
~ In a way, Moshe's relationship with God is so intense as to blur the distinctions between human and divine, and this is complicated at best. How could Torah, a document about living life in this world, as humans, be given to someone above humanity? How could we expect it to be applicable to us, if it were some sort of document just for super-humans? Incidentally, this is what the angels in the midrash oppose: how can You, God, give Torah to this Moshe, who is born of a woman?
~ And I think it is telling that Moshe is seen as "ish", a man in a few times: the text is trying to remind us, and maybe Moshe himself, that he is a person.
~ I think Moshe needed to get married simply because he needed to be reminded of being human, since we know that he is going to become more than human through his prolonged contact with God. Marriage is an important part of human life and a person who does not know it from the inside cannot properly lead other people in living their lives.
~ Also, on a very basic level, a person has to grow into his or her calling. One develops as one lives. The Moshe who married Tzipporah was not the same Moshe who would later separate from her.
~ Going back to Yaakov, his calling is not that - he is at best a prototype of Moshe, someone who builds the necessary basic blocks, but does not give the complete moral foundation of Jewish behavior. While Yaakov's alienation is partial, and he indeed finds connection in the family he creates, Moshe's alienation needs to be total. Apparently, even keeping a marriage and a connection to children is counterproductive to what Moshe needs to become and do. The question is why.
~ On one plane we can understand that it is the bonds that we have with people that gives us identity and meaning. But we know that there is a darker side to these bonds, meaning, we care more about our people than other people. We tend to see things through our group's eyes, and this might prevent us from seeing things from other people's perspectives. It is impossible, if we are honest, to uphold two different narratives if one of them is the narrative of our group. But Moshe does, and the midrash has him as the basic force behind the inclusion of the erev rav in the Jewish people.
(ו) לֶךְ רֵד כִּי שִׁחֵת עַמְּךָ, הָעָם אֵין כְּתִיב כָּאן אֶלָא עַמְּךָ, אָמַר משֶׁה רִבּוֹן הָעוֹלָם מִנַּיִן הֵם עַמִּי, אָמַר לוֹ הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא עַמְּךָ הֵם, שֶׁעַד שֶׁהָיוּ בְּמִצְרַיִם אָמַרְתִּי לְךָ (שמות ז, ד): וְהוֹצֵאתִי אֶת צִבְאֹתַי אֶת עַמִּי, אָמַרְתִּי לְךָ שֶׁלֹא לְעָרֵב בָּהֶם עֵרֶב רָב, אַתָּה שֶׁהָיִיתָ עָנָו וְכָשֵׁר אָמַרְתָּ לִי לְעוֹלָם מְקַבְּלִים הַשָּׁבִים, וַאֲנִי הָיִיתִי יוֹדֵעַ מַה הֵם עֲתִידִין לַעֲשׂוֹת, אָמַרְתִּי לְךָ, לָאו, וְעָשִׂיתִי רְצוֹנְךָ, וְהֵם הֵם שֶׁעָשׂוּ אֶת הָעֵגֶל, שֶׁהָיוּ עוֹבְדִים עֲבוֹדַת כּוֹכָבִים וְהֵם עָשׂוּ אוֹתוֹ וְגָרְמוּ לְעַמִּי לַחֲטֹא. רְאֵה מַה כְּתִיב אֵלֶּה אֱלֹקֵינוּ אֵין כְּתִיב כָּאן, אֶלָּא (שמות לב, ד): אֵלֶּה אֱלֹקֶיךָ, שֶׁהַגֵּרִים שֶׁעָלוּ עִם משֶׁה הֵם עֲשָׂאוּהוּ וְאָמְרוּ לְיִשְׂרָאֵל אֵלֶה אֱלֹקֶיךָ, לְכָךְ הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא אָמַר לְמשֶׁה: לֶךְ רֵד כִּי שִׁחֵת עַמְּךָ.
"Go down because your people has sinned" - it is not written here "the people", rather "your people". Moshe said to the Holy One: "why are they my people?" The Holy One responded: "they are your people because even while they were in Egypt I told you "I will bring My people out by order" (Shemot 7:4) and I said to you not to have the mixed multitude with them, but you, who are humble and kasher, said to Me: "we always receive those who return!" and I told you I knew what was going to happen, that they were idolaters and would do the Golden Calf, but still I did what you asked, and here, they made the people sin. ...
~ After the mixed multitude is identified as the group who worshiped the golden calf, Moshe is castigated for his lack of proper judgment. Still, the midrash approves of Moshe’s motivation to the point that it tells us that God accepted his argument. In doing so, the midrash reiterates the monumental significance of his stance – a stance born of exile and alienation.
~ Moshe needs to be above those connections so he will be a leader to all. He is supposed to be a universal leader, and identify equally with people from his family and not his family, with his tribe and people not of his tribe - how many of us even recall that Moshe is a Levite, but not a Cohen? - with Jews and non-Jews. That is why the midrash has Moshe bringing the erev rav, the mixed multitude.
~ And we can defend the need for MOshe to be who he is, and how he is. Because his source, and Torah's source are the same: Torah is not exclusively a Jewish text. We are supposed to be a kingdom of priests and a holy nation, we are supposed to bring light to the nations.
~ Torah has this dual identity: it speaks about one people, but addresses all peoples. Our responsibility is to spread the ideas of acceptance and tolerance in the world. Even as the Torah brings specific laws for us, its ethical and spiritual vision is for all humans. This is why I have insisted many times: the Torah opens with the affirmation that we are all children of God. All of us. And that is why we need to receive Torah through someone who is above the particulars of a people, someone who can criticize our people objectively.
~ This is also why the portion that has the revelation is named after Yitro, a non-Jew. This is also significant.
~ And this is why both Yaakov and Moshe need to feel alienated and experience exile before they lead the people, in its different levels of development. Yaakov needs to realize that for the family to survive Egypt he himself needs to have a history of exile, loss, resilience and survival. Moshe needs to be able to identify with those who suffer, and remind us that even though we do not suffer ourselves, we need to empathize with those who suffer, whether they are Jewish or not. More than any other nation, we are called to be transnational as well. We are called to learn how to walk the balancing act of keeping our identity while defending those oppressed who do not share our identity.
~ We have, historically, maintained our own identity in exile, learning as we go to accept a few cultural trappings of our societies, and even leading those societies, without forgetting our uniqueness.
The Jew is called to emulate Moshe and somehow try to hear the national narratives of others – to be above his own culture while he lives within it. In the post-nationalist world of today, the Jewish take on nationalism is extremely useful. For in truth, contemporary post-nationalism is only one side of today’s equation. Although increasingly permeable national borders result in their taking on less importance, nationalism is still not entirely a thing of the past. Nor is it likely (or even desirable) that it will completely disappear in the foreseeable future. The problem raised by the vestiges of nationalism in an increasingly multicultural global community is how to simultaneously cling to the meaning given by one’s own particular identity and still be able to work with others who don’t share it. Hence, the unique Jewish model just explained could make a singular contribution. Properly understood, Jewish duality represents the notion of a people comfortable with its own tradition yet sufficiently alienated from it to listen to competing narratives. Such a paradigm allows for the grounding influence of one’s own culture while leaving room for other visions of the good.
~ It is only those who are confident in their identity and their knowledge of their tradition that can see the other as non-threatening. May we dedicate ourselves to Torah and mitzvot, and good deeds, in the upcoming week as a form of strengthening our connections to our people, our families and all of our communities, Jewish and non-Jewish.