FAMILY RELATIONSHIPS IN THE BIBLE

Instructor: Barbara Sutnick
sutnick@internet-zahav.net

Week 7
THE PARENT-CHILD RELATIONSHIP: BIBLE BECOMES LAW

In this lesson we will be taking a somewhat different approach from the one used to date. Rather than reading biblical texts first and then studying the commentaries on them; we will first look at some laws and see how they pull together biblical verses on our subject. Thus, we will see the biblical view of the parent-child relationship through the eyes of Jewish law. (The lectures that follow will handle this same subject more anecdotally and midrashically.)

To explain the difference between midrashic (explanatory) comments and halakic (Jewish legal) texts we must keep in mind the end point towards which each one works. The halaka attempts to define a behavioral norm; the midrash attempts to learn as many valuable lessons as possible from the biblical source. Phrased differently, the midrash is characterized by "indeterminacy of belief:" on the same page of a midrashic work you can have a number of opposing views with none being rejected. In more legalistic texts, however, opposing legal views are contrasted until one can no longer stand. Why our interest in halakic matters now, aside from the quest for variety? Two reasons: 1) as we look at the Bible beyond Genesis, we will begin to encounter the commandments as a central concern. 2) of all the family relationships, it is the parent-child relationship about which we find the most biblical legislation.

DUTIES OF THE PARENT:

Most parents would like to have a book to consult which could define appropriate parenting for each situation. In fact, many have been written--regretably with little agreement among them! This course has good news and bad news on this subject: beginning with the Bible, Jewish legal sources contain many clear directives for appropriate parenting. The bad news is that not all situations are covered. We will look at some specifics and some generalities.

The Talmud (Kiddushin 29a) offers a list of the obligations of the father towards the son (at this level of the law, women are exempt.):

"Said Rav Judah: 'This is in accordance with what our Rabbis taught elsewhere: the father is bound to circumcise his son, to redeem him (if a first-born), to teach him Torah, to take a wife for him and to teach him a craft. Some say, also to teach him to swim.' Rabbi Judah said: 'He who does not teach his son a craft teaches him banditry.' 'Banditry, really? (the text asks rhetorically)' 'It is as though he taught him banditry, for having no occupation, he must take to thievery.'"

Before we raise the natural objection that this is a pretty skeletal approach for a parenting manual (Dr. Spock's Introduction is longer than this!), let us examine Rav Judah's remark for its clear intent and its biblical precedents. First, "BOUND to circumcise ..." is a powerful legal statement. In biblical times and in talmudic times, indeed in many places up until the modern period, Jewish courts had the power to enforce laws when legislation called for it. "BOUND to circumcise..." means here that in the event that the father did not carry out his obligations, the Jewish court could summarily force the father to pay to have his son circumcised, to pay to redeemp his first born from Temple service, to pay for his son's education, etc. (Hagahot Maimoniyot on Rambam). Thus we see that the court could involve itself in certain matters of parenting. Since only the father is mentioned specifically in the Talmud, it became the halakha that he (and not the mother) was the parent responsible for the above-mentioned list. We should note that although the mother is not technically "BOUND," if she were a single parent she would be expected to provide for her children in the manner of the father (however, the court may not distrain against her to the extent that it could against the father. If she were needy, the community would help her to meet her obligations.)

The sources for the list and their reasons are clear. Ritual circumcision comes to us from the Genesis narrative and is repeated in Leviticus; redemption of the first-born on the 30th day after birth is defined in Numbers 18; teaching ones child Torah derives from Deuteronomy 11. The Talmud (Kiddushin 30b) in the discussion following the passage quoted above cites Jeremiah 29:6, "take wives for your sons and give your daughters to husbands". Regarding "teach him a craft", the Talmud cites Ecclesiastes 9:9 as a source. These last two, like "teaching him to swim", are explained by the phrase: "his life depends on it". These are important matters which effect the moral quality of a person's entire life. The father is obliged to involve himself in finding a proper match for his children and in providing his daughter with an attractive (material) dowery. Likewise in teaching a craft -- the material and the moral overlap. If the son has no means of supporting himself, he may turn to criminality. In teaching one's child to swim, a parent gives him the necessary skill to survive should the occasion arise.

Now, is this list sparse in its formulation but large in its content; or is it purposely sketchy? The Talmud raises this question in an interesting formulation: "To what extent does he have to teach him Torah [under the tennets of the law]?" In terms closer to us, does he have to pay to send him to nursery school, high school, college, medical school, a post-doctoral fellowship? When can this poor parent stop paying before the Jewish court will leave him alone?!? Furthermore, the Talmud asks: "Does his father marry him off first, or does he provide for his Torah education first?" In temporal terms, if the father must continue paying for his son's education up until the time he is married, then the wedding marks the end point of a sort; but if he must continue paying for his son's Torah education even after marriage, the time-table of Rav Judah's statement can be very, very long! Alternatively, we might say that a formulation like this leaves maximum freedom of interpretation to the parents, as if to say all family situations cannot be addressed in the same dictum. In fact, as we see elsewhere in the Talmud, there are "three partners" in the creation of the child, father, mother and God: two thirds of the numeric equation belong to the human participants!

However, no matter how we understand all this, the end point is clearly indicated by several well set-out details. The parent's obligations are to help shape a human being whose practical concerns and moral qualities overlap. This entails parental participation from the earliest stages of the child's Jewish life, through both his moral and practical education, right on through to the establishment of his own family. And legally, the father's responsibilities can be enforced by the Jewish Court.

DUTIES OF THE CHILD:

What of the child's obligation to the parent? The earliest mention and most famous source for the child's obligation to the parents is Exodus 20:12:

"Honor your Father and your Mother that your days should be long upon the land which the Lord your G-d gives to you."

The rational basis for all other commandments (1) concerning a child's behavior can be found in the command to honor. But what does this little commandment actually command?

Rashi concerns himself with the Bible's explicit reward for honoring one's parents. "If you honor them, then your life will be long; if not, it will be shortened!" Rashi bases this statement on the fact that the commandment to honor one's parents is found among the Ten Commandments, which are all CAPITAL cases. For example, for "thou shalt not steal," Rashi comments that the specific type of "stealing" meant here is kidnapping, which we know from context, since all cases in the Ten Commandments are capital cases. However, unlike the obligations of the parent to the child which can be enforced by the Jewish court, here the resultant length or brevity of the child's days is Heaven enforced.

The command to honor parents is the fifth one, which places it in the first half of the Ten. Thus it is grouped with the other commandments that deal with a person's relationship with God. (The latter five deal with societal laws.) From this it is learned that a child's relationship with his/her parents sets the tone for relationships with all authority figures right up to and including God. After all, a small child cannot really begin to learn to relate to so abstract a Being as God; however by learning to relate appropriately to parents s/he will be better able to make the transfer at a later stage. Further, as modern-day parenting wisdom tells us, if parents do not set standards of behavior for their children in the home, then it will be unrealistic to expect those children to behave appropriately in school or in society at large.

A second verse in the Bible, similar to Ex. 20:12, helps round out the body of laws on everyday parent-child interaction: "Every one of you shall revere (literally "fear") his mother and his father" (Lev. 19:3) The Rambam (Mishneh Torah, Mamrim 6:3) derives two sets of childrens'obligations from these two verses:

"What does reverence imply? What does honor imply? REVERENCE requires that the son should not sit in the place in which his father usually stands, or sit in his seat, or contradict his words, or decide against his opinion, or call him, living or dead, by his name. When referring to his father, he should say, 'My father, my teacher'...

"What does HONORING parents imply? It means providing them with food and drink, clothing and covering, the expense to be borne by the father. If the father is poor and the son is in a position to take care of his parents, he is compelled to do so. He must support his parents in accordance with his means ... he rises before him."

And how long does the duty to honor one's parents remain in force? Even after the parent's death! (Ibid., 6:5)

A remarkable picture of family-based piety emerges from the laws quoted above. The parent, as one of the three formative partners in the creation of the child, is entitled to treatment which has nothing to do with how good or loving a parent he is. The honor and reverence due parents is identified with the honor or fear due God. Honor and reverence are not earned and they are not part of an emotional exchange.

It is also interesting to note that there are ways in which these obligations apply even after the parent passes away. For example, the recitation of KADDISH, the prayer said after the death of a parent, finds its biblical support in the law to honor the parent.

Keeping in mind that the honor (and reverence) due a parent is a right guaranteed by Jewish law, we may wonder if there is not the possibility for abuse. We hear so much today about child abuse--is this possibly encouraged by the presumption of power the parent has over his child? Whether in the name of discipline, education or related justifications, most parents resort at one time or another to physically punishing their children. The Rambam writes:

"If a man beats a grown-up son, he is placed under the ban (i.e. a form of excommunication), because he transgresses the negative commandment, "Do not put a stumbling block before the blind--Lev. 19:14." (Ibid., 6:9) In other words, by beating the child, the parent could be provoking the child to strike back--a serious offense for a child. Thus the reality is that the parent has power over the child, but along with this comes a tremendous responsibility to curb that power.

Summing up, we can note a certain similarity between the description of the duties of the parent and the duties of the child: both find their expression in a limited number of commandments which, as understood by the rabbis of the Talmud, hint at a broad application. The time table of obligations of the parent to the child covers many years; that of the obligations of the child to the parent lasts the entire lifetime of the child.

THE PARENT-CHILD METAPHOR

We have already seen (Lesson 6) that marriage is a well-used biblical metaphor for the relationship between God and the people of Israel. This process of metaphorizing is also used to liken God to a parent and a parent to God. The Psalmist writes:

"As the father pities his children, so the Lord pities those who fear him." (Psalms 103:13)

"Pity" -- in Hebrew, RaCHeM -- contains the nuances of both mercy and of love. In fact, when we hear the verb RaCHeM in Hebrew, we cannot help but think of the noun ReCHeM, meaning womb/uterus, with all its overtones of unconditional motherly love and protection. (Please note that although the form of the legal texts is to speak of fathers and sons, the motherly undertones of the term RaCHeM lead me to envision a gender-inclusive parent! "Fear," as we have seen above, bears the specific nuance of reverence, but particularly the reverence due the parent from the child. With what we have learned, this verse can be understood to mean that those who approach God with the child's reverence for the parent will receive in return the parent's love and mercy from God. "As the father pities the children..." is a theme which figures prominently in the Rosh Hashanna and Yom Kippur service as well as in the penitential prayers (Selichot) said throughout the year. Surely this is the FATHER OF ALL METAPHORS!! If you think I am overstating...the Jewish people are commanded to "Be holy, because I the Lord your God am holy" (Lev.19:2). This is a logical application of a divine model to human religious aspirations. (i.e., If you perceive that the source of holiness is God and you want to be holy, you immitate God.) However, the psalmist takes this a step further, saying in essence, we can expect that IN RETURN for our reverence for the Divine Parent, God will mirror the human parent's compassion. This is certainly a rather confident brand of theology!

But wait--what of love? None of the laws we studied above mentioned love at all. Indeed we find no Jewish law requiring parents and children to love one another. Yet, if God's mercy is to be likened to the love of the parent, then we must assume that the love of the parent is a singularly powerful and emblematic emotion. For the psalmist (and for most of us, I hope) the parent's love held just such truth.

The Talmud in Sotah 49a describes the pattern of parental love: "The love of the father is directed to his children; the love of the child is directed to his own children."

Thus parental love is not meant to earn in return the love of the child. Parental love and the child's love are not the same -- the exchange is not even. But strong parental love engenders in the child the ability to bring the mercy of the parent in turn to HIS/HER own children. The cycle of parental love and the child's honoring, both in their human manifestation and in their broader religious meaning, is completed through transmission to the next generation.

(1) There are other commandments which deal specifically with the relationship between the child and the parent, e.g. "he who strikes his father or mother" (Exodus 21:15), "he who curses his father or mother" (Ex. 21:17) and "the stubborn and rebellious son" (Deuteronomy 21:18). The Bible calls for the death penalty for all of these offenses. As Jewish law developed, the strict applicability of these laws was drastically reduced so as to effectively eliminate such executions. However, the absolute intolerance for disrespectful behavior towards parents which is expressed in these harsh verses cannot be lost on the biblical reader!

QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION

1. The Rambam implies that if the parent has financial means, the child will provide for his elderly parent using the parent's money. For the Rambam this is absolutely consistent with "honoring the parent". How so?

2. Compare Exodus 20:12 and Leviticus 19:3. You will notice that the mother and father are mentioned in a different order in each one. How would you explain that?

[Previous] [Home] [Homepage] [Next]