In Gen 18:19 God explains why Abraham was entitled to a role in the
Divine conduct of the world. It was because of what he would teach his
children, and who they would become - compassionate, shy and generous. The
Mishna in Pirkei Avot says, having a good eye, being of humble spirit and
having an undemanding soul (focused on the spiritual) makes one a disciple of
Abraham and having the opposite traits makes one a disciple of the evil Bilaam.
From this we see that educating children should impact on the character and
traits of the child and their actions should be an expression of their deeper
selves and values.
There is discussion as to
the legal potency and the weight of mitzvoth – commandments performed by
children who have not reached the age of 12 for girls and 13 for boys. It is
for sure a logical and moral responsibility for parents to educate their
children. The question is whether we consider the mitzvah of chinuch, becoming
educated an obligation of the son and the father is there to support the child
and facilitate the performance of the commandments or is
it the obligation of the father to make sure that the child does the mitzvoth.
Where the obligation is on the son, the mitzvah has legal weight and potency to
the extent that the son can act on behalf of someone else and enable them to fulfill
the mitzvah. Where the obligation is on the father, the son's actions don't
have the same weight and potency.
The philosophical difference can be learned from the following story. John Souza was giving his daughter and
nephews a tour of Hawaii. They stood in a parking lot when John noticed that
most probably one of his nephews had opened his door a bit too enthusiastically
and had made a deep dent into the door of an expensive and newish car. For a moment
he thought he could get the kids into the car, drive away and no one would be
the wiser. Then a similar scene which
would take place 10 years later flashed through his mind. The scenario was of
his nephews and daughter, having damaged a vehicle in a car park driving away to
avoid the consequences of their actions, laughing and saying – we totally got
away with that. It was in that moment he realized that in order to increase the
likelihood of these impressionable youth taking responsibility for their
actions in the future he had to take
some responsibility for his nephew’s
actions and could guide him through the
process of reparation and being
accountable. He decided not to tell the family of what happened because in his family, so often when a child makes a mistake
it seems that each adult must take a turn giving the child feedback
(some not always constructive). This can be overwhelming and confusing to
a child. So in a very discreet way
he spoke to his nephew careful be non-judgmental, but supportive. He explained he was there to help him take
responsibility for his actions and engage in the moral act of reparation. His
nephew said he would write a note, leaving a telephone number, apologizing for
the damage and saying the damage would be repaired. When the car owner called, John explained his
intention to help the kid take responsibility for his actions. The owner was
not so happy about his car. Later he called to say that a friend who had heard
of the story was so impressed of how he was helping his nephew take
responsibility that he got the story published in the newspaper. Then John shared the newspaper story with the
family, who responded with love and admiration that the boy had acted with so
much integrity.
From experiences like
this and many years of parenting and
being a family therapist John Souza concludes that while we certainly raise our kids , kids are equally responsible
for raising us and teaching us. If we see our parenting as being obligated to
get the kids to comply with our demands and do the mitzvoth, we are less likely to
be aware of ourselves and to focus on our contribution to the educational mix. But if we see
the 'mitzvah of chinuch ' as an obligation to do the commandments = mitzvoth
that rests also on the child we are more likely to be aware of ourselves and
how we contribute to the parent-child dynamic and educational mix. We
understand that education is not motivating a child to be compliant and to do
the mitzvoth, but creating an environment where the child is inspired and is
able to motivate himself. Instead of '
doing to a child' , leading with power -
making him' wanna do what he is told by using assertive language ,rewards, praise and
consequences , we can ' work with ' the child, leading with greatness of
character , helping him reflect and make meaning of his obligations. In this
way the parent and child can focus on the character traits and values underlying the
mitzvoth and thus support the autonomy of the child so he feels self-directed
in the way he conducts his religious life. The mitzvoth were given to refine ourselves .So
the mitzvah of chinuch , educating a
child , setting an example etc are
not only necessary for the child's education but crucial for our
own personal growth. If we set an
example just for the kids, when they leave the home or are not around we will
revert old behaviors and lower standards. If we become aware of ourselves in
raising our kids, our kids will play a part in ' raising' us too.
Joshua in our Parasha was given the power of a king –give him some
of your honor= hod and the ability to influence as a teacher –place your hand
on him , giving him the responsibility to give over the religious tradition. We don't pray for power of a
' policeman ' but we pray that our judges and counselors will be restored as
first. By being the ' guide by the side' we can not only raise our kids, but
together with them we can raise ourselves.
