[Avodah] Vayichad Yisro - Disparaging Non-Jews

[Michael Orr via Avodah]

On 01/27/2016 10:49 AM, Michael Orr via Avodah wrote:

>Rashi brings another interpretation of "vayichadYisro" from the gemara
>(Sanhedrin 94a) where Shmuel says it meansthat Yisro's flesh "pricked
>up" in discomfort, with goosebumps, onhearing of the suffering and
>destruction of the Egyptians. The gemara, asquoted by Rashi, immediately
>explains and extends this idea: "As Rav[or more likely Rav Pappa --
>per Gra and Torah Temimah] stated, this isas the popular saying has it:
'>Do not disparage a non-Jew [Aramai] beforea ger [convert] unto the
>tenth generation'."

> Rav Steinsaltz in his notes on Sanhedrin94a cites the Gra who explains
> that only after the tenth generation ofdescendants is the non-Jewish
> blood less than a one thousandth, which isthe most stringent standard for
> bitul/nullification.

Zev Sero:             This doesn't seem tenable to me, because if his non-Jewish"blood"
is less than 100% then he is no longer ager.  The proverb must refer
to a tenth-generation ger, i.e. all of hisancestors for the last
ten generations were gerim.  


 
MO:  It is notnecessary to resort to such a far-fetched interpretation.  

A much more natural meaning is that the term “ger... untilthe 10th generation” includes the issue/zera of the actual ger "upuntil the 10th generation."


 

> MO:  Nowadays,almost any Jewish audience of a significant size, (whether at a shiur orlecture, in a shul, or any class in a Jewish school)
> is quite likely to have gerim or childrenor grandchildren of gerim
> among it. Certainly when we extend thosewho we must be concerned not
> to offend to include all who have any gerforebear within the previous
> ten generations, it would have to beassumed that this principle should
> be applied when addressing virtually anyJewish setting.

ZS:  Ifthis is the case today then surely it must have been even more so
in Chazal's day, when giyur was so popular thathistorians tell us at
one point 10% of the Roman empire wasJewish.  And yet they limited the
proverb to the presence of a known ger. Kal vachomer nowadays.



MO:  As per my previous point, they do not limit thisprinciple of proper speech to an actual known ger but include speech to theissue/zera of a ger up to the 10th generation.

> But speaking disparagingly about non-Jewsis not just likely to hurt the
> feelings of gerim and their descendants.Making negative generalizations
> about a large class of people (in this casealmost the entire human
> race!) is also unlikely to be true, andlikely to sound crude, not just to
> gerim and their descendants, but also toanyone who is uncomfortable with
> painting all non-Jews with the samenegative brush.

ZS:  Andyet Chazal had no problem with doing so, and did so all the time.
They didn't worry that there might be a ger inthe audience.  It also
seems to me that it doesn't apply at all todivrei torah, i.e. passing
on Chazal's worldview, because gerim need tohear that too.  Nor did
it apply to a conversation such as Moshe's withYisro; he must have
known that Yisro would not rejoice at hearingwhat happened, but he
didn't refrain from telling him.

So when does it apply?  Perhaps only to acasual conversation with no
to'eles, i.e. when one wouldn't be allowed tosay loshon hora about a Jew.
In such a case, if one is talking to a ger, thenthe rules of loshon hora
should be extended to goyim as well, indeference not to their reputations
but to his feelings.

MO:  I agree that where there is alegitimate to’eles, that may well override the prescribed sensitivity, to theextent necessary.   But I think we alsoneed to be careful about how we interpret what Chazal say about non-Jews.  It may not always be as categorically anduniversally negative as it sounds on its surface.  We have to interpret this in light of theoverall purpose of Torah in bringing about the geula of the whole world, as discussed below.


 

MO: > But it is difficult to see how this cancome about, and why Hashem
> would even want it to come about, if itwere correct that non-Jews
> are by their nature irredeemable,(incapable of participating fully
> in the ge'ula to come).

ZS:  Whatdo you mean by "participate fully"?  The nevi'inm tell us what
the goyim's role will be in the geulah:"And strangers will rise and
tend your sheep", "And kings will beyour nannies and their princesses
your wetnurses".  Their role in thegeulah will be as support staff
so that we can learn Torah all day.  Andgiyur will no longer be
available to them.  I don't know if thatfits your definition of
"full participation".


 
MO:  This is a keyquestion you are raising here and I really should have developed the answer tothis question further as a foundational point.


 
The mere fact that the entire Jewish people will return tothe land of Israel in the geulah seems like an important key to understanding anumber of things.   First, it helps us understand that the non-Jewishnations will not become Jewish, (since if they did they would need to go to EYalso).  Second, it seems to show that thenon-Jewish nations will continue to be the overwhelming majority of the earth’spopulation, (unless you make the depressing assumption that the rest of theworld will be rendered desolate in some way, chas vashalom).  Further, it seems to show, from the merelogistics, that the “support” role of those nations will generally not beservile, as real nannies and cleaning help generally have to live close.  


 
The term “mamleches kohanim” seems to be a clear key tounderstandinjg the relationship of Jews and non-Jews in the time of geula.  Within the Jewish people we have kohanim andhedyotos/laymen, and the kohanim perform certain functions in enabling thepeople to come close to, and to serve, Hashem. Similarly, the entire Jewish people will perform the function of kohanimwith respect to the other nations in the time of geula.  This is not a relationship of inferior andsuperior or of overlords and subordinates. In the time of geula, the Jewish people and every one of the non-Jewishnations can be expected, or at least hoped, to reach its full potential inserving Hashem who created them for this very purpose.  
I am not going to start trying to address thehundred of verses from Tanach that teach us, not always in a very clear way,about the nature of the ultimate geula. But the very verse you cited about Kings being nursemaids/nurturers(vehayu m’lachim omanayich – Is. 49:23), for example, is associated (homiletically)in the gemara (Zev. 19a) with the concept of the non-Jewish royalty supportingour role as mamleches kohanim, but in a way that does not undermine the statusor dignity of that non-Jewish royalty, but that rather suggests that therelationship will be one of mutual friendship and respect.  That is one of the main chapters mentioning theJewish people being a light to the nations, which seems possible and worthwhileonly if  the non-Jewish nations areactually worthy of redemption, or can become so.


 




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20160204/460c2ade/attachment-0008.html>