WHOSE IS THE PROGENY AFTERALL?
The Antics Of Displaced Credit
By Rabbi Yoseph Kahanov, Jax., FL
Unable to afford a first rate tailor, a young peasant employed the services of a substandard craftsman to sew him an outfit for his impending wedding. One glimpse at the dismal result brought tears to the young man’s eyes.
"How do you expect me to wear a coat with the right sleeve four inches shorter than the left," cried the distraught groom. "It’s not that big a deal,” replied the tailor. “Just pull-in your right arm a bit."
"And what about the pants," demanded the shaken groom. "The left leg is six inches longer than the right!" "You’re being overly fussy,” retorted the poor-excuse-for-a-tailor. “All you need to do is bend your right knee slightly and it will be alright." And so it went. Every problem with the bungled workmanship was corrected with another modification in the wearer’s posture.
At the wedding, the assembled gasped in shock as the sorry looking groom hobbled down the aisle; his figure contorted so as to fit the suit. "What a disfigured young man," remarked one guest. "Oy, Ah Rachmunis!" sighed another, “he’s Epes a cripple.”
Amidst all the sympathy for the apparent handicapped groom and his unlucky bride, it dawned upon one of the spectators how well the suit appeared to fit, despite the groom’s hunched-backed and deformed figure.
Upon this discovery, he exclaimed in fervent amazement. “But the tailor . . . he has got to be the most extraordinary craftsman on earth! An absolute genius!” “Indeed,” cried the others: “An absolute genius!”
Reb Mendel of Riminov once pointed upward and proclaimed, "This heaven that you behold with your very eyes, through skepticism it is possible to entirely deny, even prove its inexistence."
Everyone these days seems to have an opinion about Chabad and its surprising success. On the one hand it is flattering to behold that the organization, of which I am a part – a movement once labeled "sectarian" and "ultra" orthodox – has found its way into the minds, hearts and mouths of the broader Jewish community and often non Jewish world as well.
On the other hand, some of the ideas ascribed to the movement’s inexplicable success are often distorted and perplexing. Equally baffling are the sources whence some of these critiques stem.
I never did quite understand why in America, the farther removed one is from a given subject the more credibility and weight his observations seem to carry. I'm told that the reason for this is because the person who is close or involved with an entity, is suspect – he is assumed to be "biased." The outsider, on the other hand, is ostensibly neutral and hence more credible. I'm sorry, but to me this logic just doesn’t add-up.
To begin with, the so called, “outsider” – be it an academic sitting in his proverbial ivory tower, or a journalist whose supposed desire is only to report the facts – knows far less about the facts than the person who is intricately involved. It hence makes perfect sense to give at least as much credence to the one who has firsthand knowledge as to the one who has not.
More importantly however, it is highly doubtful whether the so called objective outsider is in the end that objective after all. Does anyone really believe that the academic possesses no bias in his postulations? Has the columnist no agenda? Who are we kidding? Show me a man with a functional brain and I'll show you a man with a bias heart, especially on issues which he or she feels compelled to speak-out. Still, society tends to worship the voice of the self-proclaimed impartial expert – the voice of the outsider.
If it's any consolation, this phenomenon is not entirely new. In fact, in one form or another this absurdity – as implied in the first verse of our Parsha – traces all the way back to the primitive culture of our father Avraham: “And these are the offspring of Yitzchak son of Avraham – Avraham begot Yitzchak." – Genesis 25:19.
The reason for the redundant declaration of Avraham's relationship with Yitzchak is a topic that has captured the imagination of many Torah commentaries; beginning with Rashi:
Because the scoffers of that generation claimed that Avimelech fathered Yitzchak – a tale spurred by the fact that Sara had been married to Avraham for many decades without a child and has given birth only after being taken by the Philistine king – therefore the Holy One, blessed be He, formed the countenance of Yitzchak to resemble Avraham so that all had to admit, "It was indeed Avraham who begot Yitzchak!"
Who are these scoffers and why have they chosen this particular moment to defame the saintliest man to grace our planet – to cast aspersions vis-à-vis the legitimacy of his offspring? Yitzchak was after all a man of sixty by now, married with a family of his own.
The Alshich asserts that the birth of Yaakov and Esav presented a unique opportunity for the skeptics to disparage Avraham whilst creating the illusion that they were out to defend his very honor and reverence.
"It cannot be," argued the mockers, "that the son of a righteous man like Avraham should be the progenitor of someone the likes of Esav. It is a disgrace to the honor of this sage to allow it to be assumed that this little tyrant is truly his grandchild. Now that the children were born, the truth has finally come to light! Yitzchak is evidently not the son of Avraham; he obviously belongs to Avimelach. Just take one look at his child's errant genetic streak. The proof is in the pudding!"
In classic scorn tradition, the skeptics attempted to spin the exciting news of Avraham's propagation and perpetuation into an Achilles heel – to undermine its very legitimacy and impact, even as they guised themselves in a cloak of good intentions and righteous indignance.
The notion that Yitzchak has propagated – perpetuating thereby the legacy of Avraham and the Jewish people – was obviously more than they could take. This development had stirred-up the "cynics of that generation."
As long as there were no grandchildren – no perpetuation – the scorners laid-low; they didn't mind that Yitzchak was the son of Avraham. But now that the legacy of Avraham and Yitzchak had taken hold and become secured, it was time to resurrect the rumor-mill.
“Yes, you can be the miracle child of Avraham and Sara; as long as your existence doesn't signify a sense of permanence. However, when your existence represents something real and enduring – perhaps even more real than my own ideology and creed – that cannot be tolerated."
How non-coincidental it is that this is the week in which the international conference of Chabad Shluchim (emissaries) was held in NY. The week in which over 3000 Chabad Rabbis and educators – representing almost every corner of the globe where there is a semblance of a Jewish community – gathered in an awesome celebration of Jewish renaissance and vitality.
During this remarkable event the incredible success and power of the Chabad – Lubavitch movement and the profound vision of its Rebbe was showcased to the world. Not unlike the cynics alluded to in our Parsha, this success tends to rouse the "cynics of our generation," as well.
When Chabad was a small organization, with little promise for a real future, the cynics and scorners didn't seem to mind. They'd even praise the good work of the "ultra Orthodox" fringe group. However, now that Chabad has become a global phenomenon, growing exponentially – outpacing every Jewish organization – now that Chabad and its teachings have penetrated the so-called "main stream" and is poised for a bright and promising future, the nisht farginers are stirred.
Not that anyone has anything bad to say about the tireless work and vigorous efforts of the Chabad movement on behalf of Jewish continuity and their tireless global outreach campaign. To the contrary, they praise its success and suggest that others learn from Chabad. They're even willing to admit that the success of Chabad is nothing short of a modern day miracle, yet they tend to suggest that the child is from Avimelech.
Much of the commentary on the Chabad phenomenon tends to sell it short where it really counts: "the reason for its success."
After heaping wonderful praise on the organization, the pundits deftly credit its phenomenal success, not to its timeless message that resonates with Jews across all lines; not because people sense higher truth in the teachings – something for which their starved souls yearn – but rather to inconsequential and mundane phenomena.
These “objective experts” do not see in all this the real spiritual renaissance that it is, but rather wish to chalk it all up to relatively trivial matters, such as “Chabad's extraordinary administrative expertise,” (Hu?) or the "tireless dedication of their Rabbis and their charm."
One ought to realize that such praise is not much better than that of the defenders of Avraham, who were eager to ascribe his progeny to a foreign entity.
Yet, as Rashi points out, the Almighty saw fit to personally intervene in dispelling the prevailing myth, by making it obvious that Yitzchak was the son of Avraham and not Avimelech.
G‑d will certainly dispel the current myths as well. He will make it clear for all to see that it is the Divine will and blessing that has given birth to the current renaissance and revival – a thirst for genuine G‑dliness and spirituality – and not some marketing magic, or other superficial gambits. As in the case of Yitzchak, the actual product will bear testimony to this reality, with the coming of Moshiach speedily in our time.
