While in Israel, our twelve year old daughter, during moments
of frustration would state her preference for her friends rather than her
parents. “I wish I was with my bunk at camp.” “I want to be at camp with my
friends”. My wife was hurt, here we were
in Israel celebrating our twelve year old daughter’s bat mitzvah and she
preferred to be with her friends. I could totally appreciate our daughter’s preference. While going to Israel is a tremendous experience;
there is something special about traveling around the country with one’s peers
as opposed to one’s parents. So when I
listened to our daughter’s complaint I asked her why she felt this way. Her
answer not only indicated that she was maturing, but she hinted at a tension
that is deeply profound. She explained that while she prepared for her bat
mitzvah and did a Chesed Project (a social action project) for this trip to
Israel; she could only share the experience with us however she was the only
one having this individual experience. With her friends, she could have a more
communal experience. If she travelled to Israel as part of group, she would
have a more shared experience and shared perspective than she does while
travelling with her parents or her younger siblings. I was so proud that she could share with me
her insight. Our daughter had begun to sense the tension between the importance
of the individual and the importance of the community.
This Shabbat we read from Parshah
Pinchas. Pinchas was the grandson of Aharon, the first Kohen Gadol and the son
of Elazar, the second Kohen Gadol.
Because of Pinchas’ zealous behavior and his killing a prince from the
tribe of Shimon and a Moabite princess thus ending a plague; Pinchas received a
“Brit Shalom” as well as Priesthood. Now that this final plague has abated, a
second census is taken in order to determine the number of people who would be
entering into Eretz Canaan. After this
census is taken, Moshe Rabeinu outlines all the offerings that are to be made:
the daily offerings, the Festival offerings, the Shabbat offerings, the
Additional offerings, the offerings that occur during the intermediate days of
holidays, the offerings that correspond to Rosh Hashanah, and Yom Kippur.
Between the narrative about the census and the re-iteration
of the sacrificial offerings that the community would bring in order to celebrate
certain days, there is a narrative about the Bnot Tzelophchad, the daughter of
Tzelophchad. The five daughters
approached Moshe and explained that when their father died, there was no male
heir to inherit their father’s tribal land. The daughter argued that they
should inherit their father. Hashem instructs Moshe: Kein Bnot Tzelophchad Dovrot Naton Titen Lahem Achuzat Nachala B’Toch
Achei Aviehem v’Ha’Avarta et Nachalat Avihen Lahen – The daughters of Tzelophchad speak properly. You shall surely give them
a possession of inheritance among the brothers of their father, and you shall
cause the inheritance of their father to pass over to them (27:7). The
instruction seems to make sense. The daughters should inherit the father as
there are no other rightful heirs.
However, it seems rather odd that the Torah uses the word V’Ha’Avarta-
and you shall cause to pass over to them instead of Natan – give. What is the
difference between “causing something to pass over” to the daughter and “giving”
to the daughter? Rashi, the 11th century French Rabbi, explains V’Ha’Avarta
Al Shem Sh'Habat Ma’Averet Nachala Mishevet l'Shevet Sh'Bnah u’Va’Ala Yorshin
Otah – Ha’Avarta is used because the daughter causes an inheritance to pass
over from tribe to tribe for her son and husband (who may be from another
tribe) inherit from her. Rashi teaches us that two issues are involved. First
the daughters, as individuals, should inherit the father when there are no
other heirs. However because the inherited land is part of the tribal lands,
there needs to be a way to insure that the individual inheritance still remains
part of the appropriate tribe. The word
Natan suggests “giving” to the male heir in which case he is already part of
the appropriate community or tribe. The
term “HaAvarta” suggests the tension involved when the daughter inherits. She
needs to still be part of her father’s tribe. At that time, the daughters
remained part of the father’s tribe by marrying within the father’s tribe/community.
Certainly in modernity, much has changed vis a vis the laws
of inheritance and the fact there are not the same type of tribal issues as
there were in biblical times. However the tension between the individual rights
and communal rights, the tension that an individual experiences as he/she tries
to find a community and to be part of a community exists to this very day. When our children are young, their family is
their community. As they get older and their world expands to school and friends,
their community grows. When our daughter realized that there is something
special and significant about sharing powerful moments with her community, and
by “her community” she was not talking about her mom and dad, I became
incredibly aware that our daughter had just taken another step towards growing
up.
Peace,
Rav Yitz
No comments:
Post a Comment