GO UP TO

THE TOP OF THE HILL AND

LIFT UP YOUR EYES WESTWARD AND NORTHWARD AND SOUTHWARD AND EASTWARD AND SEE

WITH YOUR EYES, FOR YOU SHALL NOT CROSS THIS JORDAN.

(Devarim

3:27)

Seeing with Pleasure and

Seeing with Sorrow

And the Lord said to him:

"This is the land…"

(Devarim

34:4)

R. Eliezer says: He gave strength

to Moses' eyes, and he saw from one end of the world to the other. And so you

find among the righteous those who see from one end of the world to the other,

for it is said: The King in His beauty shall your eyes behold; [they

shall see [from] a distant land] (Isaiah 33:17).

So you imply: there are two kinds of seeing, one is seeing with pleasure and

the other is seeing with sorrow. By Abraham, he said: Please raise your eyes

and see, from the place where you are (Bereishit

13:14) – this is seeing with pleasure. By Moses, He said: Go

up this Mount Avarim (Devarim 32:49)

Go up to the top of the hill (Devarim 3:27)

– this is seeing with sorrow.

(Sifrei Bamidbar 136)

From the Other Side

Rahel

The heart's attentiveness. The ear listens:

There – no one comes.

Does he come? Will he come?

Every watchful expectation

Contains the sorrow of Nevo.

Each facing the other – the two shores

Of one river.

The stone decree:

Forever apart.

Spread your arms. Look from the other side.

Each man and his Nevo

Upon the broad earth.

Respect for the Elder

Sister

Yael Levin

This article is devoted to the question of

whether a woman is obligated to respect her older sister.¹ In

itself, this question is not explicitly discussed in the halakhic sources. As a

result, our study of this topic will have to be built upon the foundation of

halakhot relating to the obligation to honor an elder brother. Interestingly,

analysis of the sources leads us to the conclusion that that a woman is not

obligated to honor her older sister. This constitutes an unusual instance in

which the hierarchy of relationships between women is less strict than that

holding between men. This difference also opens the way for study of some of

the philosophical aspects of this matter

The halakha regarding respect for the elder

brother is mentioned in a braita of the Talmud:

Honor you father and your mother – your

father refers to your father's wife; and your mother – that is your

mother's husband. The extra letter vav [and] comes to include

your older brother. These words apply during life, but not after death. (Ketuvot 103a)

This braita learns from the additional letter

vav in the word ve'et [and] that one is required to honor

one's older brother. Some of the rishonim, including the RaMBaN, interpret the

braita as saying that one must honor one's father's wife, mother's husband, and

older brother only so long as the father is alive; the obligation ends with his

death.² In contrast, other rishonim, including the RaMBaM,

understand the braita as saying that one must honor one's father's wife only

while the father is alive and must honor one's mother's husband only while she

is still alive, while the obligation to honor an older brother is permanent

(RaMBaM, Hilkhot Mamrim 6:15). The last sentence of the braita constitutes the

crux of this disagreement; does it apply to all of the categories mentioned in

the braita, or only to the first two?

According to the RaMBaM, the commandment to

respect the older brother is of merely rabbinic origin, while the commandments

to honor a step-mother during the father's life and a step-father during the

mother's life are scriptural [de'oraita] (RaMBaM, loc cit). The notion

that honoring the elder brother is a lesser obligation than honoring parents

gives rise to several halakhic consequences. Firstly, there is no obligation to

honor an older brother if he is wicked, while a son must honor his father even

if the latter is wicked. Secondly, the prohibition upon calling one's parents

by their first name does not seem to apply to an older brother. Thirdly, while

the older brother must be honored, he need not be "feared" [mora].³

Kiddushin 31b sets out the difference between "honor" [kavod]

and "fear": "The Rabbis taught: What is fear and what is honor?

Fear: That he not stand in his [his father's customary] place, not sit in his

controversy. Honor: Feeds him, gives him drink, dresses and covers him, brings

him in and takes him out."

The Talmudic braita explicitly treats the

honor due an older brother, but does not directly touch upon honor due an older

sister. This issue came up for discussion in several sources, including R.

Yaakov Reischer's (1660-1733) responsa to the question of whether the braita

also applies to an older sister.⁴ R. Yaakov Reischer states that

there is no obligation to honor an older sister. Furthermore, he warns that the

adoption of such a law, which is mentioned nowhere in the Talmud or in the

writings of any halakhic decisor, would constitute a transgression of the

prohibition do not add [to the laws of the Torah

of your own volition]. He writes: "I did not know how it occurred to you

to supplement the scriptural and rabbinic commandments with something

unmentioned by the Talmud or by any of the early or late decisors." R.

Yaakov Reischer suggests the possibility that the person who asked the question

had seen the midrash according to which Rachel died before her sister because

she had spoken up before her sister.⁵ The author of Shevut Yaakov

does not want to learn a law from this midrash, claiming that it should be

understood as saying that one should not speak up before one greater than

oneself. A similar idea can be found in the dictum of Pirkei Avot 5:7 that a

wise man does not speak up before one greater than him in wisdom.

The HIDA (1724-1806)⁶, for

example, rejects the Shevut Yaakov's opinion and states that one is

obligated to honor all one's older brothers and sisters. The HIDA writes that a

basis for the duty to honor an older sister can be found in the notion that

just as a man's younger sister is required to honor him as her older brother,

so too a younger brother is required to honor his older sister. The HIDA

compares this to the law requiring one to stand up before an elderly woman.

Since the woman herself is required to stand up before an old man, others are

similarly required to honor her.⁷

The sources contain no explicit and direct

treatment of the question whether a woman is required to honor her older sister.

However, we can use R. Yaakov Reischer's responsa as the basis for the

discussion of this issue. This scholar states that a man is not required to

honor his older sister because of the prohibition do not add; the same

reasoning could explain why a woman is not required to honor her older sister

The duty of a woman to honor her older sister is not explicitly mentioned in

the Talmud or later halakhic texts and we must not invent a new halakhah. R.

Yaakov Reischer view is further supported by his interpretation of the midrash

about Leah and Rachel. He understands it as teaching that no one should speak

up before someone greater than they making the midrash irrelevant to the

question of respect between sisters.

It is important to mention the following points

in connection with our approach and our parasha: Talmudic law concerning

respect towards an older brother assumes as self-evident that both men and

women are required to honor their older brother. R. Yaakov Reischer's approach,

which frees men from honoring their older sisters, sets up a lack of halakhic

equality in the matter of honor of an older sister in comparison with the honor

due an older brother. The argument from the principle "do not add"

attempts to mobilize a formalistic approach which results in a lenient ruling

that creates gender inequality.

Nonetheless, we are entitled to depend on the

conceptual foundation of this approach and develop it in another direction in

order to deduce from it more broadly a different law, a law that frees a woman

from the obligation to honor her older sister. The hidden significance of this

conclusion is subject to various interpretations. As far as the younger sister

is concerned it is definitely a lenient ruling, while the older sister is apt

to see it differently. In any case, we have here a halakhah that is more

lenient than the parallel halakhah in the male domain – the halakhah requiring

a man to honor his older brother.

It seems that one reason why the Sages were

more lenient regarding the honor due to an older brother than they were

regarding the honor due to parents is their view that one should concentrate on

honoring one's parents – a most imposing commandment.⁸ However,

RaMBaM states that even though one is obliged to fear and respect his father

and mother, parents must not be overly strict with their children. They must

not be punctilious regarding their own honor, for that creates a stumbling

block for their children. Instead, parents should be forgiving and not take

notice, since when parents relinquish the obligation to honor them, the

obligation is set aside.⁹

It appears possible to contend that it would

be proper to adopt a similar approach regarding relations between siblings in

general, while we have pointed out a foundation for dismissing the duty of a

woman to honor her older sister. The lack of an obligation upon a woman to

honor her older sister, and the leniency involved there in comparison to the

obligation to honor an older brother seems to make room for more sisterly

relations between sisters. Joined together not by a structured hierarchy, but

rather by true friendship, sisters can direct their best abilities and efforts

towards more positive and constructive dialogue and action.

The existence of this lenient halakhah

concerning the honor due an older sister by a younger sister, that springs from

the Shevut Yaakov's approach as a lekhat'hila [correct from the outset]

rather than a bedi'avad [circumstantially correct] law, sets before us

the halakhic challenge to continue studying it and its array of significance as

an unusual and perhaps unique law, and to infuse it with proper and correct

content in a manner that will realize and not miss out on its potential and the

positive options associated with it and hidden in its foundations.

[1] I was partially aided

in the preparation of this article by HaRav Ovadiah Yosef's book, Halikhot

Olam, part 8, He'a'rot ve'he'arot al Sefer Ben Ish Hai, second year,

Devarim, Jerusalem, 5762, pp. 161-164.

2 Sefer HaMitzvot le'ha'RaMBaM im Hasagot ha'RaMBaN,

Chavel edition, Jerusalem 5741, Ikkar ha'Sheni, pp. 29-31; HaRav Ovadia

Yosef, op cit, pp. 163-4.

3 HaRav Ovadiah Yosef, op cit pp. 162-3).

4 Shevut

Yaakov, part I, section 76.

5 Bereishit

Rabba, 74:4; Theodore Albeck edition pg. 861.

6 Birkhei

Yosef, Yoreh De'ah, 240:17.

7 See

Beit Lehem Yehuda, Yoreh De'ah 28.

8 J.

Peah 1:5 (15d).

9 RaMBaM

Hilkhot Mamrim 6:8. This halakhah has no earlier source, and it seems that

RaMBaM learns it from the law regarding the spanking of adult sons (Beit

Yosef on Tur Yoreh Deah 240:19)

Dr. Yael Levin has published research and

studies that deal mostly with very aspects of women in Judaism. She has also

authored prayers, including most lately, "A Prayer for the liberation of agunot

who have been refused divorce."

You are to do

what is right and what is good

You are to do what

is right and what is good in the eyes of God – What is good – in the eyes

of Heaven; What is right – in the eyes of man. This is the view of Rabbi

Akiva. Rabbi Yishmael says: Even

that which is right in the eyes of Heaven.

(Tosefta, Shekalim 2:3)

What is right and

what is good –This refers to compromise lifnim meshurat hadin — beyond

the strict requirements of the law.

(Rashi, Devarim 6:18)

Rabbi Yohanan said: "Jerusalem was destroyed only because judgment

was rendered strictly according to the Torah." Were they then to have

judged in accordance with the laws of swindlers?! But say thus: Because they

based their judgments [strictly] upon scriptural law, and did not rule lifnim

meshurat hadin – beyond the requirements of the law.

(Bava Metzia 30b)

You are to do what is right and what is good

The Book of Bereishit is called by the prophets "Sefer HaYashar"

– "The Book of the Upright". R. Yohanan explains: This is the book

of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob who were called upright, as is written Let

my soul die the death of the upright. Jews of the Second Temple

period were tzaddikim [righteous], devoted to Torah study, but they were

not yesharim – [upright] in worldly affairs. Because of groundless

hatred, they suspected whoever feared God in a fashion different from their own

of being a Sadducee and a heretic, and this led to bloodshed and all the evils

of the world, until the Temple was destroyed, for The Holy One, Blessed Be He, is upright and he cannot tolerate this

kind of tzaddikim. [He prefers] only those who walk in the

straight path also in worldly matters, and not crookedly, even though [the crooked behavior] is

for the sake of Heaven, for this

leads to the destruction of creation and the devastation of civilization.

(From the NeTziV of

Volozhin's commentary Ha'Amek Davar, preface to the Book of Bereishit).

After mentioning that one should observe these three categories of

commandments (Mishpatim/regulations, eidot/testimonies, hukkim/laws)

and not test the Holy One, Blessed Be He, with regard to any of them, He

decreed (according to the midrash) in favor of compromise on matters on which

the Torah did not rule, saying – You are to do what is right and what is good. And because it [compromise] will lead to peace, He called it What is

right and what is good in the eyes of God.

(Rabeinu

Bahayey, Devarim 6:17)

It would seem that the admonition that the Torah adds to all

of its laws, You are to do what is right and

what is good in the eyes of the Lord, is superfluous. All of the laws are

directed towards that goal, in order to show man the straight path. However, there

are some things which are legally permissible but which were prohibited solely

on the basis of You are to do what is right… Judaism does not stop at

limiting deeds of actual evil – it also tries to root out potential evil from

the human soul. That is why there are special admonitions that address that

which is in our hearts.

(The "Admor He'Halutz" –

R. Yeshayahu Shapira z"l, as quoted by Nehama Leibowitz)

"Peace in His Celestial

Heights" Depends Upon "Peace On Us"

And thus we are to understand For who else is such a

that has laws and regulations so equitable… I had intended to explain, in

Parashat Shekalim, the passage Now these are the regulations that you are to

set before them. The purpose of regulations is to prevent people from

swallowing each other alive; if there will be peace between man and his fellow,

aside from the hidden import of the subject which is beyond human

comprehension, when there will be peace below — between man and his

fellow – then will there be peace above.

(Yetiv Panim II,

P. 219b)

Comfort, comfort you my people;

A Conditional Promise or a

Spiritual Challenge?

…The chapter of the Haftara (of Shabbat

Nahamu) is cut off at verse 26, and the four concluding verses are not recited,

lest they – Heaven forbid – adversely affect the pleasant feeling radiated by

the preceding verses of consolation and mission, verses coveted by the human soul, ideas with which the soul

amuses itself.

From the words of the prophets we derive that consolation and the mission

of redemption are not a given reality or an event due to occur in the

future. They are talking about a direction and a goal towards which one must

strive, and this is, in effect, the meaning of all prophecies that contain

promises.

Careful study, without prejudgments regarding the redemption and the

return to Zion, which are actually the content and the main subjects of the

"Seven Prophecies of Comfort," will reveal – to our surprise- their

true meaning: they are always interwoven with presentations of demands; were

this not so, they would be devoid of any religious significance, and it would

have been able to relate to them as pronouncements of the Oracle, fortune

tellers, and diviners of idolaters, which existed from days of yore until this

very day.

In contrast to one opinion of the Sages, which claims that there are only

prophecies of misfortune and that they do not materialize because of penitence

that is capable of nullifying the decree, there is no denying the fact (which

we tend to ignore) that there are to be found many prophecies of consolation

that were never realized. On this subject, too, Talmudic literature, midrashim,

and aggadot make forceful statements, such as those great consolations

which Jeremiah predicts for Ephraim and the ten tribes, and for our mother

Rachel who announces the future return of her sons. But we all know that the

sons did not return, and the Kingdom

of Israel has long passed

from the world, despite all these prophecies.

Similarly, Amos

prophesied that Israel will be exiled from its land, and in that same

generation there arose in Israel Yoravam son of Yoash, the powerful leader and

conqueror' who restored the territory of Israel from Levo-hamaath to the sea

of the Arabah (II Kings 14:25), and

achieved victories and conquests hitherto unparalleled, but one generation

later, the Kingdom of Ephraim ceased to exist.

(Y. Leibowitz, Sihot al Haggei Yisrael U'Moadav,

pp.146-147)

If you enjoy Shabbat Shalom, please consider contributing towards

its publication and distribution.

·       

Hebrew edition distributed in

Israel $700

·       

English edition distributed via

email $ 100

Issues may be dedicated in honor of an event, person, simcha, etc.

Requests must be made 3-4 weeks in advance to appear in the Hebrew, 10 days in

advance to appear in the English email.

In Israel, checks made out

to Oz VeShalom may be sent to Oz VeShalom-P.O.B. 4433, Jerusalem 91043.

Unfortunately there is no Israeli tax-exemption for local donations.

US and British tax-exempt contributions to Oz VeShalom may be made

through:

New Israel Fund, POB 91588, Washington, DC 20090-1588, USA

New Israel Fund of Great Britain, 26 Enford Street, London W1H 2DD,

Great Britain

PLEASE NOTE THAT THE NEW ISRAEL FUND IS NO LONGER ACCEPTING DONATIONS

UNDER $100.

PEF will also channel donations and provide a tax-exemption. Donations

should be sent to P.E.F. Israel Endowment Funds, Inc., 317 Madison Ave.,

Suite 607, New York, New York 10017 USA

All contributions should be marked as donor-advised to Oz ve'Shalom, the

Shabbat Shalom project.

About

us

Oz Veshalom-Netivot Shalom is a movement dedicated to the advancement of

a civil society in Israel.

It is committed to promoting the ideals of tolerance, pluralism, and justice,

concepts that have always been central to Jewish tradition and law.

Oz Veshalom-Netivot Shalom shares a deep attachment to the land of Israel and it no less views peace as a

central religious value. It believes that Jews have both the religious and the

national obligation to support the pursuit of peace. It maintains that Jewish

law clearly requires us to create a fair and just society, and that co-existence

between Jews and Arabs is not an option but an imperative.

5,000 copies of a 4-page peace oriented commentary on the

weekly Torah reading are written and published by Oz VeShalom/Netivot Shalom

and they are distributed to over 350 synagogues in Israel and are sent overseas via

email. Our web site is www.netivot-shalom.org.il.