출애굽기 18:21의 무사르

Yitro's words "עתה ידעתי" "now I know," (Exodus 18,11) reflect this new-found knowledge of Yitro (Cain). Cain had murdered because he did not believe that G–d is a judge, that there is justice in the world, and that there is life after death. The Targum Yonathan says that the word "עתה" represents Yitro's new found insight, and that this is the reason that this portion about the installing of a broadly based system of judges was added at Exodus 18,21. (I have not been able to find this in the Targum Yonathan. Ed) The reason Yitro had entrusted (given) his flock to Moses (Exodus 3,1) was that it was symbolic of the sheep he had stolen from his brother Abel in his previous incarnation, the latter having been a shepherd (Genesis 4,2). Moses had not wanted to accept this flock, believing it to be rightfully Yitro's. The Rabbis do not like someone tending the property of an idol worshipper, since the chances are that such property may have been acquired as payment for services rendered to idols. The Torah therefore stresses צאן יתרו, that the flock was not derived from such sources.

We have a Midrash Tanchuma in Shoftim according to which Moses dedicated his soul to Torah, דינין, judgments, and to Israel. "Torah" refers to the Ten Commandments. They represent the letter י. "Judgments" refers to the letter ו, seeing that the world is based on דינין, dispensation of justice; the בנין originates in the 6th emanation תפארת. "Israel" is the mystical dimension, i.e. כנסת ישראל, which forms the ד, fourth leg, of G–d's מרכבה. The reason Moses was so totally dedicated to these three concepts was that his prophetic powers were of the אספקלריא מאירה level. Having explained how Yitro -by the addition of the letter Yud spelled י-ו-ד- gained fame so that a whole portion of the Torah bears his name, we may also see some mystical dimension in the letter ד of that Yud. Exodus 18,2-3 describes Yitro as bringing with him Moses' wife Tzipporah as well as her two sons. We must ask whether these sons were not also Moses' sons? If so, why were they not described as such? The Torah phrases it thus in order to show that Yitro, in addition to meriting the distinction of the letter ו (in the paragraph starting with ואתה תחזה in 18,21) also merited the distinction of the letter ד as a reward for having placed himself under the protection of the wings of the שכינה. Yitro's arrival in the camp of the Israelites included four persons; he himself, Tzipporah and her two sons. In Jewish law the children's nationality is determined by the nationality of their mother. Moses' paternity was irrelevant then for the moment. This is why in this instance the children are described as being Tzipporah's. The Zohar adds as an additional reason that it was the children's mother who raised them while their father Moses was busy looking after the Jewish people, i.e. מסר עצמו על ישראל, in the words of our Midrash. Later on, when Moses had obtained permission from the שכינה to take time out in order to welcome his wife and children as well as his father-in-law, these children are referred to as בניו, "his children" in 18,4. This concludes our presentation of some of the mystical aspects of מתן תורה, the gift of the Torah presented to the Jewish people during the revelation at Mount Sinai.

Concerning the first of the five qualities of judges, that of "קשוט עצמך," i.e. "straighten yourself out, etc.," we find in Exodus 18,21 that Yitro gave certain guidelines to Moses regarding these qualities. Beginning with the first one, i.e. "you shall look for אנשי חיל," "you shall look for men of courage," these are a list of qualities which the judge expects those facing him to possess. Courage in this context would be the preparedness to give testimony regardless of unpleasant social or financial consequences for the witness. For this very reason, the very same steadfastness of character is expected of the judge himself, who must not be influenced by flattery, attempts to bribe, etc.When the judge expects a witness to be ירא אלוקים, G–d fearing (the next qualification in that list), the practical meaning is that a witness must not swear to something he is not absolutely sure of (i.e. something that only G–d can be sure of). Similarly the judge must be certain in his own conscience that he has no ulterior motive when arriving at his decision (seeing only G–d can evaluate his conscience).