<HTML>Rabbi Bieler asks about teaching thorny topics to Day School students. In
broad terms, one has to decide a) whether to try and give a universal
answer that will try and respond to all (or most) of these issues, or b)
attempt to explain them one by one.
a) The suggestion that explaining Torah laws as sociological and
appropriate for the time in which it was written is rejected by Rabbi
Bieler because that seems to negate the view that the Torah=92s laws are
eternal. Nevertheless, it is an approach that has been suggested by the
Rambam, for example, in explaining animal sacrifice (Moreh Nevuchim
III:32). At the same time, the Rambam clearly believes that in the time of
Mashiach, animal sacrifice will be restored (Mishna Torah, Hilkhot
Melakhim 11:1). I always understood that to mean that although we strive
to understand reasons for mitzvot - and sociological explanations are
reasonable explanations - we do not believe that we have a complete
understanding of the mitzvah. God's command may very well be beyond our
ken. (That idea is stated clearly by the Rambam in Hilkhot Meila 8:8 and
Hilkhot Temurah 4:13)
=20
b) If we want to try and deal with Eved Kena'ani as a specific mitzvah, I
recommend a brief passage by Rav Kook. In his Ein Aya (a commentary on the
Aggadic portion of Gemara, recently published from manuscript) on the
Gemara in Brakhot (16b) discussing the Halakha that the laws of aveilut do
not apply to Avadim, Rav Kook argues that human nature is such that
society always looks down on "lower classes". If the "upper classes" see
no advantage to themselves in the health and well-being of those "lower
classes", they will let them die of disease or starvation (I suggested
reading Jonathan Swift's "Modest Proposal" to get a sense of that,
although I imagine that all of our students have seen "Titanic", and
should understand the message). The Torah recommends creating a
relationship where it is to the advantage of the "upper classes" to
support and care for their Avadim, as they see that such behavior is in
their own financial best interests.=20
It might not be "politically correct", but it might be true, nonetheless
(a point I make to my students when we learn this).
Rabbi Shalom Berger, Ed.D.
Lookstein Center
Midreshet Lindenbaum</HTML>
