Clarifying Values

Pinchas, the son of Elazar, the son of Aharon, the kohen, turned-back my anger from the Children of Israel with his zealotry on My behalf among them and I did not completely destroy the Children of Israel in My zealotry. (Sefer BeMidbar 26:11)

1. The daughters of Moav

Parshat Pinchas continues and completes the narrative that began in Parshat Balak. Bnai Yisrael was camped at Shittim. The nation of Moav sent young women into the camp of Bnai Yisrael. The mission of these young women was to seduce the men of Bnai Yisrael. Once they succeeded in their seduction, they were to induce their paramours to engage in idol worship. The strategy was successful. The men were seduced and then, persuaded to engage in idolatry.

Hashem responded by bringing a plague upon the people. He also directed Moshe to assemble the courts and act against the violators. Moshe was engaged in convening the courts when Zimri – a leader of the tribe of Shimon – presented himself with Kazbi – a princess of Midyan – and publicly demonstrated his intention to liaison with her.

Pinchas, the son of Elazar the kohen and the grandson of Aharon, stepped forward and executed Zimri and Kazbi while they were intimately engaged.

Parshat Pinchas continues the narrative. Pinchas is rewarded. Hashem grants him the status of kohen.[1] Hashem also bestows upon him His covenant of peace.

Hashem then commands Moshe to wage war against Midyan. Midyan helped Moav develop their strategy and supported it by sending one of their princesses – Kazbi – to participate in the seduction.[2]

And you will take their daughters for your sons. Their daughters will stray after their gods and lead astray your sons after their gods. (Sefer Shemot 34:16)

2. The path to idolatry

What caused the men of Bnai Yisrael to succumb to this ploy? Rav Ovadia Sforno addresses this issue. He explains that the Torah prohibits such liaisons. One would expect that this prohibition should have protected the men from responding to the wiles of these seductresses. However, in the above passage, the Torah explains the prohibition. It reveals that these liaisons are prohibited because of their potential to encourage idolatry. The men concluded from the Torah’s treatment of the prohibition, that these liaisons are not inherently inappropriate. Their prohibition is intended solely to discourage idolatry. These men were sure of themselves and confident that regardless of the intensity of their relationships with these women, they could never be induced to engage in idolatry. Their confidence was misplaced. They were persuaded to participate in some form of idolatry.[3]

3. Assessing oneself

Why were these men incorrect in their calculations? How did they so seriously misjudge themselves? Rav Yisrael Chait explained this phenomenon. When a person makes an initial assessment of how one will act in an anticipated situation, one considers one’s character and values at present – at the time of the decision. The men of Bnai Yisrael evaluated the likelihood that they would engage in idolatry before liaising with their paramours. They knew themselves and the strength of their commitment to the Torah and concluded that they would not involve themselves in any form of idol worship.

There is no reason to doubt the accuracy of their assessment. At the time they made their decision, they were firmly and sincerely committed to the Torah. Based on their self-analyses, they decided to proceed with their liaisons.  

Their error was that they did not understand that their decision would be transformative. Once they entered into more intense relationships with their paramours, they were not able to dismiss their suggestions, pleadings, or intimations that they participate in their ceremonies. In other words, the person who made the initial decision to enter into the relationship was transformed. It was the emergent personality that had to resist his partner’s overtures concerning idolatry.[4]  

4. “Off the derech”

Recently, I was asked to comment on the state of Modern Orthodox youth and the frequency of our yeshiva-educated youth abandoning observance. Do I have any suggestions for how this problem might be addressed?

Before responding, three premises must be put forth.

·      My perception – shared by many others – is that we are losing too many of our children. They are abandoning observance, going “off the derech”. However, I am not familiar with the actual statistics. A statistical analysis of the phenomenon and more specifically of trends will help develop a more thorough analysis and response.

·      Any solution that is proposed to a problem is implemented in a dynamic and complex environment. Even if the solution is successful in addressing the issue it targets, it may have other unanticipated, and unwelcome consequences. Therefore, it is not wise to prescribe fixed solutions. Any proposed solution must be implemented cautiously, monitored, and revised or discarded based upon observed outcomes.[5]

·      Finally, the development of a solution begins with an analysis of the problem and its causes. If we wish to respond to our children’s abandonment of observance, we must understand the causes.

5. Crisis of faith

Two challenges confront our young people when they move on to college and into their careers. First, they move from an environment that encourages observance into one that is hostile toward it. This is true of virtually every secular university. The richness of Jewish life on the campus is not, in itself, a solution to this issue. The overwhelming message of the university campus is negative toward religion. The existence of an island oasis of Jewish life does not counter this powerful influence. Our yeshiva and day-school graduates are not prepared to respond to the questions that will arise. They begin to question. They do not have adequate answers. They enter into a crisis of faith. A year or two in yeshiva or seminary in Israel will not much alter their vulnerability.

Part of any solution must be focused upon the education we provide to our children. It is inadequate for preparing them for the challenges that they will encounter when they leave their day-school or yeshiva for college and enter their careers. Improvements to their education that we should consider require a separate discussion. However, these adjustments will not assure their continued commitment to the Torah. This is because a second challenge confronts our young people.

6. Crisis of identity

Our children are exposed to a culture whose values are antithetical to Torah observance. Contemporary culture has moved away from traditional religious values. The pursuit of pleasure and career advancement are the most evident and emphasized values. These are intensely seductive. Enormous commitment to observance is necessary to resist them. Most of our young people are not prepared to confront this challenge. They become confused unsure of their values and their very identity.

7. Questions that are excuses

The impact of this second challenge should not be underestimated. We should not be misled by explanations proffered by our children for their abandonment of observance. Very often, they will cite a crisis of faith, issues with the Torah’s theology, or even doubt in the existence of Hashem as their reasons for abandoning observance. In some cases, this is an accurate assessment. However, how many of these young people sought answers to their questions, turned to Torah scholars, and intensely studied these issues? Too few. In many cases, the actual motivation behind forsaking observance is the allure of a self-indulgent lifestyle. The questions are an excuse, not the reason, for abandoning observance.[6]

Questions can serve two very different functions. They can be the catalyst for a crisis of faith and if unanswered lead to forsaking observance. Questions can also be a response to a crisis of identity. They provide a rationalization for rejecting Torah.

8. The lesson of the incident of Shittim

We must improve the education we provide to our children. We must also acknowledge that we often facilitate our children’s crises. How are we doing this? Let’s consider one example.

We tell our children that we care about their observance. We send them to day-school and yeshiva. Then we encourage them to strive to get into the finest universities. We are confident that they have the strength to resist the influences of the environment. We know our children and we have given them a strong foundation in Torah learning and observance. We believe that they are intensely committed. Often, we are correct! Our children return from a year or two in yeshiva or seminary unequivocally committed to observance. But that student is also the contemporary expression of the men who succumbed to the daughters of Moav at Shittim! The campus environment is transformative. The student who returns from a year or two of Torah study is not the same person after a year on the campus. In my experience, virtually every one of our children graduates from university somewhat less committed than when entering and too many have completely abandoned Torah. We are sending our children into a hostile environment without a realistic and tested strategy for protecting them from its influences.[7] This suggests that we are either naïve or ambivalent in our values. We must clarify our priorities and live by them.

9. Exposure to the outside

This is an element of a much more encompassing dynamic. The Modern Orthodox world has broken down virtually all barriers between ourselves, our children and contemporary culture. We inundate our homes with contemporary culture and its values. Television, music, internet communicate a pervasive message. The message is indulgent, pleasure-seeking, and seductive. Our children are constantly exposed to all these. Can we expect that our children will not be influenced and that their values will not be impacted? But we are reluctant to battle our children over access to media. We are even more threatened by the realization that we – the parents – must model for our children our expectations and restore some of the barriers between ourselves and contemporary culture.

Some elements within the Orthodox community have foresworn the internet. Most Modern Orthodox families regard these people as extremists – our version of fundamentalists. However, we need to acknowledge that they are responding to a real problem. Extreme solutions tend to be unrealistic or counter-productive. However, rejecting an extreme solution does not make the problem disappear. If the extreme solution is unacceptable, then an alternative is required.

In conclusion, the challenges confronting our children reflect our confusion. We must improve the Torah education we provide to our children. However, we must also clarify our priorities. We must translate our commitment to observance into an effective strategy to protect our children from the environmental influences that will inevitably challenge and likely compromise their commitment to Torah.

[1] Rashi (26:13) explains that before this incident Pinchas was not a kohen. The status of kohen was previously bestowed upon Aharon and his children. Their subsequent descendants would inherit the status. However, only children born after the appointment of the kohanim would inherit their parents’ status. The status did not extend and could not be inherited by children of Aharon’s sons who were alive at the time of the appointment. Pinchas was born before the status was granted to Aharon and his sons. Therefore, before receiving the reward for his zealotry, he was not a kohen.

[2] Rabbaynu Moshe ben Nachman (Ramban / Nachmanides), Commentary on Sefer BeMidbar 25:18.

[3] Rabbaynu Ovadia Sforno, Commentary on Sefer Devarim 4:2-3.

[4] Rav Yisrael Chait, my notes.

[5] An example will help illustrate this consideration. Modern Orthodoxy’s embrace of university education was based upon the premise that we must integrate our commitment to Torah with our participation in the contemporary economy and society. University education provided the opportunity to fully achieve this integration. However, as we will discuss, today’s university environment presents enormous challenges for our children. These challenges are an unforeseen outcome of the decision to embrace university education.

[6] This phenomenon is illustrated by an interesting story. A student of the Volozhin Yeshiva abandoned the Torah. He devoted himself to the study of philosophy and joined the Haskala movement. The student had occasion to visit his former yeshiva. There, he met with Rav Chaim Soloveitchik Zt”l who was serving as Rosh HaYeshiva.

Rav Chaim asked the young man to share his reasons for abandoning the life of Torah and pursuing other endeavors. The young man was shocked by Rav Chaim's confrontational tone. After recovering, he explained that he was troubled by various doubts and questions regarding the Torah. He could not find answers to his questions. So, he abandoned the Torah.

Rav Chaim told the young man that he was willing to answer every one of his questions. However, the young man must first agree to answer a single question. Rav Chaim's asked, "When did these various questions occur to you? Was it before you experienced the taste of sin or afterward?”

The young man was embarrassed. He responded that only after committing a serious sin had he begun to be bothered by questions.

Rav Chaim responded, "If that is the case, these are not questions. Rather, they are answers you use to excuse your evil actions."

Rav Chaim continued, "I am sure that if you merit to achieve old age, your desires and yetzer harah will diminish. Then you will realize that you do not have any questions. So, why not repent now?" (Rav Y. Hershkowitz, Torat Chaim, p 64)

[7] On occasion, I discussed this issue with individual students. I asked them to make a bargain with themselves. “Pick an aspect of observance that you regard as absolute and which you will not compromise. I don’t care what you pick. Let it be the observance of Shabbat, Kashrut, anything. You decide. Promise yourself that if you find yourself at the verge of violating that observance, you will seriously reconsider your decision to attend the university you have selected.” Inevitably, this bargain made sense to the student and he or she agreed. But only in a single instance did a student report back to me that he kept the bargain. The reason many students were unable to keep their bargain is because of the “Shittim dynamic.” The person who made the bargain was transformed. The new emergent personality did not feel bound to a bargain made by a former self.