Seeking out the hidden talent

Writing in his Eternal Ethics From Sinai, R’ Yaakov Hillel speaks out on every issue that troubles him. Since he pulls no punches, this makes for reading that is always entertaining, generally stimulating and sometimes extremely discomforting. It also highlights points of conflict and inconsistency within our own thinking.

A case in point is Avot 1:13, where Hillel teaches נְגַד שְׁמָא אֲבַד שְׁמֵהּ. R’ Hillel, who renders this as “One who seeks a big name for himself will lose his own name”, makes no secret of his scorn for people who are only in the world of Torah for the fame, the glory and the self-seeking adulation that accompanies, in particular, the use of the electronic media as a means of promoting the word of God—be this the radio or the social media. In principle I do not think that this position can be faulted. The only problem, as usual, as with the practice. The use of the electronic media to promote Torah attracts attention, praise and celebrity whether the rabbis concerned seek it or not. Even before the era of the internet, rabbis who wrote sefarim, books of profound Torah wisdom, were adulated by readers whom they had never met, the Chafetz Chaim being an obvious example of a man whose scholarship and devotion to Torah brought him celebrity status which he had never desired and for which he had never sought.

But then R’ Hillel writes this:

“Until recently, our people were guided by the daat Torah of distinguished Torah luminaries. The elder Torah scholars of past generations recognized the caliber and potential of their younger peers. … Times have changed, and not for the better. Now, it is the billboards, magazines, leaflets, and direct mailings [note: R’ Hillel does not mention the internet, which is probably the most effective means of promulgating information on the planet] that brought their successors to the notice of the public, giving them the stamp of authority and reliability. For a fairly modest sum, these forums are readily available even to the most unreasonable and unreliable individuals. …

As a result, scholars who are fluent in Talmud and the writings of the halachic authorities are disregarded without a qualm, while a charismatic ignoramus [no name is mentioned] wheedles his way into broadcasting a daily mix of halachic rulings and personal opinion. What do these speakers know of halachah, and what are their opinions worth? Precious little. But the masses are not monitoring out-of-the-way batei midrash to see who is learning Torah through the night—they follow the newspapers and street placards. May G-d spare us, but this is how influence is established nowadays: advertising is everything”.

Strong words indeed. But there is plenty to say in mitigation of this position. Let us consider the following:

•          There is an unprecedented explosion of Torah scholarship both in Israel and the diaspora, as the number of people who dedicate their lives to Torah study increases. As this continues, the number of Torah scholars with impeccable credentials is bound to increase. This makes it increasingly difficult to achieve any sort of consensus as to who are the gedolim baTorah, the great Torah scholars, of our generation.
  
  
•          More and more people seek to learn Torah through means such as the social media, which were not available to previous generations. These new avenues for the promulgation of Jewish scholarship and values cannot be ignored.
• 
  
•          R’ Hillel rightly praises those who learn in out-of-the-way places and dedicate their lives to sincere and committed Torah study. But how are we to find them when they do so? We can hardly be blamed for ignoring them when we have no means of even discovering their existence, R’ Hillel praises those exceptional individuals whose modesty leads them to hide their learning and their piety from the light of day (he cited R’ Tzvi Michel Shapira as an example of a tzaddik who strove never to be caught performing a mitzvah)—but how are we to learn from tzaddikim and scholars who do this?
  
  
•          In any event, with so many people far removed from Torah observance, there is much to be said in favour of even the popular ignoramus. In absolute terms, a scholar who knows 100 things is far superior to one who knows only five. But in practical terms, we benefit from a man who knows five things and teaches all five of them than from one who knows 100 but shares only three.

So, while R’ Hillel is right to condemn those who seek self-glorification and to mourn our inability to home in on the genuinely best and most sincerely committed Torah scholars, I do not believe that it is possible to go back to the old days or to pretend that the social media do not exist. In any event, the problem is not new. The cases of Boethus, Tzadok and Shabbetai Tzvi demonstrate that rabbis of lesser quality or with their own misleading agendas were fully capable of causing havoc, and sometimes irrevocable damage, without any printed or electronic media to promote them. At least now the social media can be put to good use in correcting errors, unmasking charlatans and providing links to correct and authoritative Torah sources.

What do you think?

For comments and discussion of this post on Facebook, click here.

Iniquitous names and Torah titles

This piece was originally posted on the Judaism Reclaimed Facebook Group.

There exists a grey area in Jewish learning, which lies between the Torah shebek’tav (the Written Torah) and the Torah shebe’al peh (the Oral Torah). This is the area of speculation as to their interface. To what extent does the written word foreshadow the oral tradition, and how might the oral tradition find its roots in the Tanach? In areas of halachah the interfaces are usually quite easy to spot, even if their extent and significance require extensive Talmudic analysis. In the field of mussar and middot—moral guidance—the connection between the written and spoken Torah is often much less clear.

Parashat Shelach Lecha opens with a summons to Moshe: God tells him to send forth men to spy out the land. Even after describing them as leaders, the Torah double-underlines their importance by describing them as anashim (“men of significance”) and rashei benei Yisrael (“heads of the Children of Israel”). In no other place in the Torah is the importance, the status, of the tribal heads described in such deliberately laboured terms.

Now that we fully understand how important are these men who are being tasked with spying out the land, the Torah gives the name of each of them together with his tribal affiliation. Unusually this list is book-ended with two apparently superfluous statements. Before identifying them the Torah states: “These are the names…”, though this fact is plain to the reader. At the conclusion of the list the Torah adds, again without any apparent need, the words “These are their names…”.  Two of the named leaders—Yehoshua and Kalev—excel in the discharge of their duties. The rest fail, are disgraced and immediately receive the severest punishment.

To the traditional Torah scholar it is axiomatic that no word is unnecessary: apparently excess verbiage cannot be dismissed as the product of sloppy editing or as evidence of multiple authorship. Instead, extra words must be construed and understood in the light of their context in the narrative of the Torah and in accordance with a long-standing inherited portfolio of religious and cultural norms that together comprise the Jewish religion. So how might we address the issue of what the Torah is seeking to teach us here?

The Torah text appears to be performing in literary format the task of placing the nominated spies on a pedestal and shining a spotlight on them. For them, anonymity is not an option; this is no secret mission. They are entrusted with a responsibility of monumental magnitude, that of surveying the Promised Land before the imminent entry to it of those whom they lead.  This mission, instigated by God Himself and placed in their hands by Moshe, is unprecedented.

The oral Torah does not ignore this list of names either. In the course of a lengthy discourse on the spies and their conduct, the Talmud (Sotah 34b) records the following in the name of the Amora Rabbi Yitzchak:  

“We possess a tradition from our forefathers that the spies were named after their actions, but only with one [name] has it survived with us: Setur ben Michael: Setur because he undermined [satar] the works of the Holy One, blessed be He; and Michael because he suggested that God [El] was weak [mach]”.  

Rabbi  Yochanan adds: 

“We can also explain Nachbi ben Vophsi: Nachbi because he hid [hichbi] the words of the Holy One, blessed be He; and Vophsi because he stepped over [pasa] the attributes of the Holy One, blessed be He”.

The Torah Temimah comments that there is no doubt that the fathers of these two spies did not name their sons on account of their future misconduct. That would be simply impossible. Rather, the spies’ names caused them to err. He does not explain how this might happen but we are left to assume that even a relatively tenuous connection between a person’s name and his future conduct might enhance or facilitate the doing of good (or in this case bad) deeds.  This phenomenon is not confined to the columns of the Torah. Examples in real life include the late neurologist Lord Brain, New York-based litigation lawyer Sue H. Yoo and the principal engineer at the UK’s Water Research Centre, Andy Drinkwater. 

We do not know how the original explanations of the names of the other failed spies were lost and we are not invited to create our own. This rather suggests that the identification by name of these spies, and the Torah’s deliberate emphasis of their names and their status, is a practical example of Hillel’s teaching at Avot 1:13 that: “A name made great is a name (or reputation) destroyed”.  However, I have yet to find a commentator on Avot who links the spies to this mishnah. 

The success of the two good spies, Yehoshua and Kalev, is also recorded in the Torah by reference to their names. Yehoshua’s original name is Hoshea but he is “rebranded” though a prefix, the letter yud, which has the effect of incorporating God’s name into his own. The clue to Kalev’s success however lies in his father’s name, listed variously in written and oral sources as Yephunneh, Chetzron and Kenaz.  According to the Yerushalmi (Yevamot 7:10), his father’s name is both Yephunneh and Chetzron; the Talmud Bavli (Temurah 16a) then explains Yephunneh as indicating that Kalev turned (panah) from the counsel of the other spies.

It is obvious that the names of Yehoshua and Kalev, so strongly promoted with the narrative of spies, are not made great in order to illustrate Hillel’s maxim that a name made great is a name destroyed. A later teaching in Avot 2:8 and coincidentally also by Hillel, is that one who acquires a good name acquires it for himself alone, while one who acquires Torah acquires life in the world to come. This second mishnah could very well be applied to Yehoshua and Kalev. Both had great leadership qualities and outstanding reputations for honesty and integrity, yet when they died they could not take their reputations with them—and neither had a son who might be said to inherit it from him.

A name made great...

At Avot 1:13, Hillel teaches that a name made great is a name destroyed (there are many nuanced translations of the original words, but this is their gist).

I have been reading today that Eric Lander, head of President Biden's Office of Science and Technology Policy, has stepped down from his important and high-profile position in the wake of the findings of a White House review that he had mistreated staff.

Although Lander was well-known in his field of expertise, genetics, he was unknown to many of us until June 2021, when he was sworn in on a 500-year-old edition of Pirkei Avot in preference to the more conventional choice of a bible. This decision attracted a great deal of publicity, and indeed much approval too. For, while the bible is a closed book to many people today, the choice of Avot -- a treatise on ethics and good behaviour -- sent out a message of commitment to its content.

While Avot calls for us to treat other people with respect and to control our anger, the findings of the White House review are reported to have found that Lander's conduct did not match up to those standards.

Now, sadly, the name of Eric Lander is all over the internet. He is not merely a high-placed official who has left his post on account of work-related issues. While the mainstream media do not pick up on Lander's commitment to Jewish ethics (or at least have not yet done so to my knowledge), the Jewish media have been quick to do so. Thus, for example,

• "Lander, who is Jewish, was sworn into office on a 1492 edition of Pirkei Avot ... and has spoken about Jewish values guiding his work" (Times of Israel)
• "White House science advisor who was sworn in on book of Jewish ethics steps down after review finds he mistreated staff" (Jewish Telegraphic Agency).

What should our response be? Avot tells us not to be hasty to judge others (1:1), to look on the conduct of others favourably where it is possible to do so (1:6) and to remember that we are not in the position of the person we judge (2:5). Had we been so, are we so sure that we would have done any better? This is not to condone any acts of wrongdoing, but rather to help us to focus on judging the acts and not the entirety of the person who commits them -- and also to strengthen our own commitment to compliance with the standards set by Avot whenever we are able to do so.

"A name made great...": some notes on Avot and celebrity failure

The following is a short review of some of the provisions of Pirkei Avot that are relevant to the Chaim Walder affair and other instances of well-known personalities whose reputations have been tarnished. It does not seek to condemn or to condone.

Until recently, Chaim Walder was almost universally regarded as the epitome of a good Jew: caring, compassionate, learned and religiously committed, his books sold in the tens of thousands. Now he is dead, having apparently taken his own life, and will not face trial for any of the many accusations involving sexual abuse that have mounted against him. The need for probity and integrity among Jewish role models, and the need to call offenders to account for their crimes, are issues that demand action from both the Jewish community and society at large. But what can we learn about these issues when we examine them from the point of Pirkei Avot? Let us briefly mention some of the more obvious points.

A name made great is a name destroyed (Avot 1:13)

Sadly sexual abuse, breach of trust and manipulation of positions of power and responsibility are evident today in society at large. The media inform us of teachers, employers, social workers, law enforcement officers and sports trainers who are accused, charged and more often than not convicted of activities such as those of which Chaim Walder was accused. From the perspective of the victim, the suffering and the consequences may be the same, but most perpetrators are relatively anonymous and suffer no loss of reputation. The greater the fame of the accused, the greater the embarrassment and the greater the loss.

The degree of loss suffered by a reputation is however not consistent. Thus Rabbi Shlomo Carlebach’s name is still spoken of by many with warmth and affection, notwithstanding the allegations made against him. His tunes are still regularly sung in many synagogues, while Chaim Walder’s books are fast becoming unacceptable. The two cases can be contrasted, though: Carlebach was not accused of abusing children, and the accusations mounted after his death rather than during his lifetime.  It also seems that sex-related claims damage a reputation more than other sorts of claim. Thus Roald Dahl’s books can be found in many Jewish households today even though he was an acknowledged antisemite, and the reputation of that complicated character Robert Maxwell was by no means destroyed by revelations of his fraudulent financial conduct.

Some names appear to be harder to destroy than others. Convictions for both sex offences and fraud, for example, have not lessened the loyalty and admiration of followers of Rabbi Eliezer Berland. Likewise, Rabbi Aryeh Deri’s conviction for bribery, fraud and breach of trust did not bring an end to his political career. The bringing of similar charges against former Prime Minister BinyaminNetanyahu may have intensified criticism among those who already opposed him but his popularity remains more or less unabated.

To avoid sin, remember that everything a person says and does is noted and recorded Above (Avot 2:1)

A religious Jew should bear in mind that he cannot avoid being observed by an omniscient and all-seeing God. It is therefore hard to regard anyone who imagines they can hide from God as being a sincerely religious person. If a person wouldn’t commit a crime in front of a human audience, why should they think it is preferable to commit it before a divine one?

To avoid sin, remember that everyone must give an account of himself before God (Avot 3:1)

Before engaging in any wrongful activity, a helpful exercise is to construct an imaginary dialogue in which a person seeks to explain to God why he or she has, for example, sexually abused a child. That should be capable of stopping a would-be offender from going further.

Whoever desecrates the name of Heaven in private – they will punish him in public (Avot 4:5)

The threat of being publicly shamed may be a greater deterrent than that of receiving Heavenly punishment – or even of being tried in a terrestrial court. Not just Chaim Walder but Jeffrey Epstein and Robert Maxwell ended their lives before the process of public humiliation was allowed to complete its course, and Zaka’s founder Yehuda Meshi Zahav came close to taking his life too.

Death provides no escape from final judgment (Avot 4:29)

The course of taking one’s own life is futile, Avot explains: the yetzer hara (evil inclination) entices a person to end it all and thereby flee from retribution. In reality, far from escaping it, one brings it about more speedily for the obvious reason that, the sooner a person dies, the sooner he will be made to give an account of himself before God.

We should not judge others until we are standing in their place (Avot 2:5) and, when we do judge them, we should seek to judge them favourably (Avot 1:6)

These two maxims are hard to apply at the best of times, and particularly difficult to put into practice for two reasons. First, we receive so much information from the news and social media, and it is bound to affect our assessment of the legal liability and moral culpability of a fallen celebrity. Secondly, it is so much easier – and more painful – to identify and empathise with a victim or the victim’s family than to put oneself in the position of a perpetrator of actions that one cannot imagine oneself committing.  The difficulty of applying these maxims does not mean that we can ignore them, but they do remind us that, at first instance, liability should be established by due legal process and that the ultimate outcome lies in the hands of God, who knows the thoughts and feelings of people whom we do not understand.

Beloved is man, for he is made in God’s image (Avot 3:18)

Avot reminds us that we all have something of the divine in us and it is therefore incumbent on each and every human to accord an appropriate degree of respect to fellow humans. This works in several different directions. For example, the complaints and the suffering of actual and alleged victims should be treated with understanding and sympathy; their physical and psychological needs must be met even where a perpetrator is no longer alive. It also means that those bereaved through the loss of someone whose reputation is destroyed are entitled to be comforted and assisted through their own time of difficulty, and that those who seek to comfort them should not be called out and criticised for endorsing criminal activity by doing so. When famous and respected personalities go astray and damage others in the process, we are all the losers and, as human beings, we are all obliged to do what we can to minimise the damage and prevent its repetition.

************************************

 There is much more that can be said on the relevance of Avot here, and readers are invited to offer their own thoughts and comments.