Date: August 5th 2022

The book of Devarim opens with a broad ranging rebuke that Moshe delivered to the Jewish nation prior to his death. Rashi explains that Moshe withheld his admonishment to the Jews for his entire tenure as their leader and only reprimanded them just before his passing. This timing was because of a lesson he learned from Yaakov Avinu who also rebuked his sons just before he died. Yaakov withheld from chastising his children because he feared that if he did so earlier Reuvain might have left his family and joined his wicked brother Eisav. Moshe understood from this that he should not admonish the Jews for their mistakes until the end of his life so that they too would not veer away from the path of the Torah.

How could it be that a great tzaddik such as Reuvain could possibly be susceptible to such a drastically self-destructive path as a result of Yaakov’s rebuke? How does waiting until the end of his life prevent these dire consequences? The Sifri offers four explanations as to why we do not give rebuke until close to one’s death, two of which are quoted by Rashi.

The first reason is that if a person gives someone rebuke earlier on in his life, he will only address part of the person's shortcomings at one time and he would spread it out over several different occurrences. Therefore, Yaakov waited until the end of his life so he would be forced to deliver the entire message to his children at one time.

The second reason given, is that after a rebuke is given, every time the person sees the one who chastised him he is reminded of his errors and will feel the shame of his mistakes. Yaakov therefore waited until close to his death to spare Reuvain from the experience of having to live with that constant reminder of his shortcomings.

The Sifsei Chachamim expands on the first reason of Rashi. He explains that if Yaakov had rebuked Reuvain several times instead of all at once he would perhaps believe that his father was criticizing him out of a certain degree of hatred. *

On the surface, it is difficult to understand how a person of Reuvain’s character could react in this way. He was a great tzaddik and prophet and a man of impeccable character and great strength. He was the father of one of the 12 tribes, he was considered a leader to his brothers and one of the towering figures of Jewish history. We are not capable of fully understanding this but, by way of explanation, we can posit the following potential ideas. Chazal say that the greater a person is, the greater his evil inclination. In this way the pull that someone of Reuvain’s great stature would feel to ally himself with the likes of Eisav is beyond our imagination. In addition, commensurate to his great level and sensitivity to holiness, he would likely understand the eternal ramifications of his errors and feel a depth of shame over lost spiritual opportunities far more than we can relate to.

Even in light of this potential explanation, we can learn a tremendous lesson about the incredibly destructive power of criticism. If Yaakov would have delivered a rebuke to his son it certainly would have been conducted with great wisdom, sensitivity, and love. It certainly would only have been for the right reasons and intended as constructive feedback. On the other end, Reuvain was a person who surely gave his entire being over to self-perfection. Surely a person of his spiritual stature would welcome any opportunity for growth and self-perfection. Apparently, even when given in the best way, with the best intentions, and under the best circumstance, constructive criticism is so difficult to receive that it could have resulted in disaster for Reuvain, firstborn of Yaakov. On some subtle level he would have wrongly felt that his great father Yaakov harbored a small degree of hatred for his own son.

In addition to this, any concern of his reacting negatively was only a potential concern. Presumably, the likelihood was that Reuvain would have accepted rebuke from Yaakov and utilized it as a vehicle for growth. From this we can learn an additional lesson. Criticism is so dangerous, that it was deemed more worthwhile to forego the potential growth and character development that could have resulted from Yaakov’s chastisement in order to avoid the potential damage that could be done by delivering the criticism earlier on. We learn from here how careful a person must be and how measured must one’s words be when dealing with any form of criticism.

One way we can apply these ideas in our lives is to appreciate the unique destructive power of hurtful speech. It seems from the words of the chazal that criticism, indicating to a person that they have a flaw or that they have done something wrong, is uniquely painful to the point where it could cause someone to do something massively self-destructive. In fact we see this in the world every day. Invariably, depression and low feelings of self-worth originate in negative interactions with others. Of course, it is appropriate and even necessary at times to give criticism, as Moshe Rabbeinu demonstrated. In these instances great care and forethought needs to be given to ensure that it is delivered in the most carefully measured way and at a time that will diminish the possibility of shame and embarrassment.

We also need to be aware that even if these measures are taken, there is still a very strong negative side to consequence and it can potentially harm a relationship no matter how close that relationship may be. This concept translates directly to any interaction with another person where we are conveying a negative opinion of them or something they have done. We might grimace at a barber who gives us a bad haircut, or a waiter who messes up our order. That criticism can cause a far greater psychological wound than we appreciate.

And of course, this concept applies exponentially with those in a subordinate position- a child, a student, an employee, as in the case with Yaakov and Reuvein. If a teacher yells at a student, or expresses displeasure in some non-verbal way, for not doing an assignment on time or for behaving badly in class or any other transgression, that interaction can cause significant psychological harm to the child. A kind of cost benefit analysis must be carried out very carefully by any teacher before they convey any kind of negative feedback to a student, especially a young child. If Reuvein could have gone off the derech from getting criticized by Yaakov, how much more so would this dynamic manifest in the teacher-student scenario.

Now, you might question as you read this- must teachers really be SO careful? Is that taking the idea too far? But think about how many people talk about their experiences in school with pain. It’s a huge number. It's real pain and it has long term consequences.

This idea resonates with the lessons of Tisha Ba’av where we learn that the conflict and cruelty between Jews caused the destruction of our Temple and the exile of our people. Fights tend to be about macro issues, and those of course must be resolved in a sensitive and cordial matter. But the real harm comes in the micro level, in the way we treat people and in the way we talk to them; in our level of sensitivity to the feelings of others and the way that our words and deeds affect them.

* The Sifsei Chachomim asks that the Torah obligates a person to rebuke his fellow Jew if he sees him doing something wrong. He answers that, indeed, it is proper to correct someone when they are in the midst of doing something wrong but this case was discussing criticism after the fact.


--
You are subscribed to Jewish Heritage Initiative using example@example.com

You may automatically unsubscribe from this list or change your subscription
by visiting http://www.jhicambridge.com/mail/mail.cgi/list/parsha

For more information, visit http://www.jhicambridge.com or send mail to jhi@jhicambridge.com
__________________________________

Mailing List Powered by Dada Mail
http://www.jhicambridge.com/mail/mail.cgi/what_is_dada_mail/