Moses said to Hobab son of Reuel the
Midianite, Moses’ father-in-law, “We are setting out for the place of which the
Eternal has
said, ‘I will give it to you.’ Come with us and we will be generous with you;
for the Eternal has
promised to be generous to Israel.”
“I will not go,” he replied to him, “but will
return to my native land.”
He said, “Please do not leave us, inasmuch as
you know where we should camp in the wilderness and can be our guide (literally,
“eyes”).
So if you come with us, we will extend to you
the same bounty that the Eternal grants us.” (Numbers
10:29-32)
On the assumption that “Hobab son of Reuel” is indeed Jethro/Yitro – who was familiar with the story of the exodus from Egypt and the wonders that God did for the people (see Exodus 18:1) – Why doesn’t he agree to continue with Moses and the people of Israel? Why not stay with his daughter, grandchildren and the people that God has chosen? Many commentators attribute his hesitancy to personal considerations. For example, Rabbi Ovadia Sforno (Italy, 16th century) wrote, “So that in his old age he would not have to adjust, to the different climate and food in a country he had not grown up in.” Although this sounds logical, it does not explain why his departure marks the beginning of deterioration in the Israelite’s situation.
Rabbi Aryeh Bernstein[*]
(Chicago,
21st century) sees the deeper problem, specifically with the style
and content of Moses’ request. As he understands it, Jethro does indeed have
great respect for the mission of the people of Israel but the promise made by
Moses “We will be generous with you; for the Eternal has
promised to be generous” doesn't interest him. Jethro has a
homeland of his own. Moses tries again and emphasizes that the Israelites need
his assistance, “As you know where
we should camp in the wilderness and can be our guide.” Jethro doesn't
even respond to this suggestion. What was so insulting? Rav Aryeh explains:
I imagine Yitro hearing this and
thinking, “Really? That’s what you think I’ve been doing for you? I’m the map
guy? Oh, ok, see ya.” Yitro knows well that his real contribution was his
mission-focus and the spiritual orientation of listening and social
intelligence. He paid meticulous attention to Israel’s structural composition,
able, with the aid of a little critical distance, to see the diverse members of
the community as activists and not passive, broken slaves… Moshe had a tendency to rage, burnout, and
alienation from the people; it was Yitro who showed him how to create a
sustainable, efficient, and accessible judicial system.
According to this reading, Moses
misunderstood the true contribution the Jethro had made and it could be that Jethro
was not only insulted but began to doubt his friendship with Moses and whether
they could continue working together. He wasn't interested in starting a new
journey under those conditions. It is also possible that Moses did indeed
understand Jethro’s true value but didn't take sufficient care to express himself
clearly. Rav Aryeh concludes:
Whether Moshe misunderstands and underappreciates Yitro, or he
just doesn’t take care in communicating with him remains ambiguous, and I can’t
help but wonder whether that ambiguity is the authorial intention. So often,
the origins of our relationship breakdowns elude us and we don’t even know why
we have bad feelings or how to mend them. On this reading, the Torah is
dramatizing that dynamic for us by scripting two old friends talking past each
other, parting ways without closure, and, as a result of the alienation of our
most insightful mentor and adviser, the Israelite community and Moshe its
leader crumbling into social disarray.
What really happened? We have no way
of knowing. However the Torah’s method of leaving gaps in the text gives us an
opening to look more deeply into our lives and communities.
May we have the will to truly
appreciate each other’s best traits and communicate with precision.
.jpg)
