- Presenting Torah within a context that conflicts with its own content is remarkable and calls for understanding the ambivalence in the דרך ארץ vs Torah relationship expressed here. But, strikingly, the central element of Yithro’s questioning was not simply behavioral, taking advantage of his father-in-law status; it was actually a direct questioning of Moshe himself and his spiritual/psychological status. This is reflected in the clear confluence of the concern for אשתך ושני בניה with the concern for לא טו"ב לבדיך of the משפט. These concerns address the deepest expression of the ambivalence in the תורה דרך-ארץ relationship within Moshe’s life, a problem manifested in אכן נודע הדבר-לא יאמינו לי, ויואל משה, לא איש דברים, הצל לא הצלת ופסל מיכה, שלח נא ביד תשלח, טענות אהרן ומרים and more. There is a major difference between a דרך ארץ that is קדמה תורה 26 דורות and a נח שלא היה נחשב לכלום as opposed to a אם אין דרך ארץ אין תורה אם אין תורה and a נח who כל שכן בדורו של אברהם. Either the ד"א is subsumed by-- and thus can subsume, as here—Torah, or we are left with a level of דרך ארץ which is the concern only for the solipsism of משפט. The nature of true משפט is actually מי גוי גדול אשר לו חוקים טובים. This is why the resultant rejection of Moshe as the בשגם הוא בשר that actually puts him together with that self-same נח is expressed in the misuse of Yithro’s arguments: טוב הדבר!

Ver todos los episodios