blogs/rabbigoldberg

Va-Ethannan 2018

Ben Bowling was this year's valedictorian of Bell County High School in Pineville, Kentucky. Pineville is in the heart of coal country and overwhelmingly supported President Trump in the 2016 election, especially after he promised to bring coal jobs back to America.

Playing to the crowd, Ben said in his graduation remarks, “This is the part of my speech where I share some inspirational quotes I found on Google. ‘Don't just get involved. Fight for your seat at the table. Better yet, fight for a seat at the head of the table.'” He then gave the source of that inspirational quote: “Donald J. Trump.”

The crowd burst into applause, reflecting the President's continuing popularity in that area. But Ben wasn't finished. “Just kidding,” he added. “That was Barack Obama.” The cheers stopped abruptly. The room went silent, save for a lone boo.

It turns out that quote actually comes from a commencement address that President Obama gave at Barnard College in 2012. In that speech, he encouraged the all-female graduates of Barnard to take their rightful place in shaping the destiny of our nation and of the world. Ben found that quote and liked it, but he knew that the crowd was not the friendliest to President Obama. So he decided to be a bit playful with his audience and their reactions.[1]

In our increasingly polarized society, this whole episode could have been repeated in reverse at a different graduation. Perhaps some of you too had a gut reaction to that rather prosaic advice that had little to do with its content, but rather its supposed source.  This happens all the time. I've seen all kinds of quotes attributed to famous figures like Mark Twain or Albert Einstein that on further inspection are misattributed. For instance, perhaps you've heard the Einstein quote “Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.” Problem is, Einstein never actually said it. On a website called Quote Investigator, an intrepid fellow named Garson O'Toole tracks down the actual provenance of such quotations.

Who says something matters a great deal, just as much as, if not more than, what is said. The same exact information or idea can come across in totally different ways depending on who says it and in what context. Many women, in particular, often notice that their ideas are not taken seriously until they are repeated by man. On the positive side, someone's reputation on a given issue can lend their ideas about it added credibility. It is in this sense that it is said that only Nixon could go to China.

We find this phenomenon in our Torah reading, Parashat Va-Ethannan. This portion includes the second version of the 10 commandments, which different in some slight and some significant ways from the version we read earlier in the Book of Exodus. We also get a longer version of the story of the people's reaction to encountering God's revelation. Unlike in the version in Exodus, in this version it appears that the people heard at least part of the 10 Commandments directly from God. “The Lord spoke those words…to your whole congregation at the mountain” (Deut. 5:19), we read.

But then, the Torah continues, the people grew afraid of the potential dangers of encountering God so directly. “For what mortal ever heard the voice of the living God speak out of the fire, as we did, and lived?” they ask Moses. “You go closer and hear all that the Lord our God says, and then you tell us everything that the Lord our God tells you, and we will willingly do it” (5:24).

So, from this version of the story, it seems that initially the people heard some of the 10 Commandments directly from God, but at a certain point, Moses alone heard them and then relayed them to the people. There may even be a hint of this in the text of the 10 Commandments themselves. Notice that at the beginning, God speaks in the first person: “I the Lord am your God” “You shall have no other Gods besides me,” and “For I the Lord your God am an impassioned God.”

But then, at what is traditionally counted as the third commandment, the text switches to talking about God in the third person: “You shall not swear falsely by the name of the Lord you God.” And so on: “Observe the Sabbath day and keep it holy, as the Lord your God has commanded you.” And “Honor your father and your mother, as the LORD your God has commanded you.” Perhaps, then, the people heard the first two commandments directly from God, and then Moses took after for the other eight.

Maimonides, in his epoch-making philosophical work Guide for the Perplexed (2:33), finds a philosophical distinction between the first two and the other eight commandments, corresponding to this shift of person. Maimonides points out that Moses and the people received the first two commandments in the same manner. These two commandments, concerning the existence and unity of God, can be arrived at through reason alone. The people, in other words, could conclude independently that there exists precisely one God. They do not require a prophet to reveal this to them.

The remaining commandments, Maimonides continues, are of an “ethical and authoritative character,” not affirmations of universal truths that a person could discover through reason. These commandments concern social and ethical conventions that, at a certain level, are arbitrary. For example, honoring parents or not stealing depend on social conventions of family and property that are not necessarily so on a philosophical level. Rather, they are mere conventions that allow society to operate justly. These conventions could have been different. For this reason, a prophet had to convey them to the people.

So, there are significant differences between the first two and the latter eight commandments. In terms of form, the first two are phrased as coming directly from God, whereas the latter speak of God in third person. In terms of content, the first two address philosophical questions about the nature of God, whereas the latter address ethical norms that govern society.

Given these differences, it makes sense why the people would have heard the first two commandments from God directly and the latter through the prophecy of Moses. In order to impress upon the people the reality of God that is the basis for all other commandments, they experienced a direct revelation, complete with overwhelming sensations of light and sound, in order to instill reverence among the people. This mass revelation to the entire people became the basis of all of Judaism, so God pulls out all the stops, as it were.

But the remaining commandments address ethical norms, how people should relate to one another. Even the commandment about Shabbat is given an ethical explanation in this version of the commandments. Here Shabbat is not in remembrance of the creation of the world, but of the Exodus from Egypt, and its purpose is to allow everyone, including the Israelites' own slaves and servants, to rest once a week. Since these commandments are about human relations, it follows that they would be given by God, but mediated through Moses's human voice.

Chizkuni, a 13^th century French commentator, suggests that Moses spoke these commandments “pleasantly, in Moses's own voice, so [the people] would be able to hear it” (Chizkuni on Deut. 5:24). These laws about human relations, laws that require people to give up something and act with restraint, were conveyed in a human way. A human voice commands other humans to behave ethically to each other. It's as if Moses is saying, “I know these laws are somewhat arbitrary. I know they are asking you to restrain your baser impulses and show respect for others at your own expense. But please, I ask you, as one person to another, this is how God wants us to behave.”

We don't need an overwhelming experience of God to know how to treat one another. We just need the pleasant voice of another person. As we begin to look forward to the High Holidays and the season of repentance, may we always hear that pleasant human voice, and experience God speaking to us through it.