Did Moshe Need Yitro's Advice/2/en

Did Moshe Need Yitro's Advice?

Exegetical Approaches

Overview

The Akeidat Yitzchak notes that in trying to understand this story, one is caught between a rock and a hard place. If Yitro's plan was an obvious and appropriate corrective for a difficult situation, then Moshe looks foolish for not solving the problem on his own. On the other hand, if Yitro's plan was unhelpful or unnecessary, then why would Moshe implement it at all? There are three basic approaches to understanding the thought processes of Yitro and Moshe, and they paint differing portraits of the two protagonists and their interaction.

Moshe Needed Help

Moshe needed help in correcting his system, and Yitro was able to provide him with an outsider's insight and perspective.

Sources:Ibn EzraBemidbar 10:31About R. Avraham ibn Ezra,¹ RalbagShemot 18 Toelet 12Shemot 18 Toalot 14-15About Ralbag,² Ibn KaspiTirat Kesef 5 (p.140)About Ibn Kaspi, Tzeror HaMorShemot 18:24About Tzeror HaMor, R. S"R HirschShemot 18:24About R. S"R Hirsch

Critique of Moshe's ivory tower leadership – Ralbag explains that Moshe's great spirituality and closeness to Hashem caused him to make errors of judgment in mundane matters, and thus he needed Yitro to guide him in setting up an effective judicial system.³ See Moshe's Character for a more general discussion of Moshe's leadership and possible leadership flaws.⁴ Ralbag tempers his criticism with strong praise of Moshe's wisdom and the completeness of his personality, presenting his willingness to listen to advice and correct his actions as a shining example to be emulated. Nevertheless, his position aroused the ire of Abarbanel who heatedly disputes Ralbag's assertion (calling it a "lie"). Abarbanel maintains that Moshe had superior administrative skills, noting that it would be impossible that Hashem had not instructed Moshe in basic knowledge and common sense.⁵ Interestingly, R. S"R Hirsch's criticism of Moshe's legislative and administrative skills is even sharper than Ralbag's.⁶

Chronology – While many exegetes explain that Yitro visited in the first year in the wilderness, Ralbag maintains that Yitro arrived and offered his advice only in the second year – see Chronology of Shemot 18. By this point in time, civil laws had already been given and Moshe would have already had ample opportunity to put a judicial system into place. For Ralbag, this magnifies Moshe's administrative shortcomings and highlights that he did not think of Yitro's advice on his own.⁷

Yitro's inspiration – R. Avraham Saba in his Tzeror HaMor commentary focuses not on a possible administrative deficiency of Moshe, but rather on the Divine inspiration which Yitro possessed allowing him to see even what Moshe did not – see Yitro's Religious Identity. He explains that Yitro merited this inspiration because of his good deed in coming to bless the Children of Israel.

Why Hashem didn't command Moshe – Ralbag does not explain why Hashem worked through the agency of Yitro and did not previously advise Moshe to appoint judges. See Ralbag's Exegesis for Hashem utilizing man and nature. Tzeror HaMor proposes that Hashem waited to advise Moshe on this matter so that Yitro would receive credit for making the suggestion and the entire nation would understand why Moshe married Yitro's daughter.⁸ See also Or HaChayyim who suggests that Hashem wanted to demonstrate that there is much wisdom among Gentiles, and that He did not select the Children of Israel because of their intellect.

Ideal and reality – In a private conversation, Prof. Uriel Simon suggested that Moshe's system was a model for an ideal world, but Yitro's plan was designed to account for a reality in which the demands on Moshe's time were simply too great.

Yitro the consultant – R. Eitan Mayer presents a variation of this approach employing a "corporate metaphor" which portrays Moshe as the CEO of the not-for-profit organization of the Children of Israel, and Yitro as the outside management consultant. According to him, Yitro is the outsider who brings a fresh perspective to the insiders who have become accustomed to the status quo.

Moshe and Yitro Were Both Correct

Moshe was making the best of a difficult situation, but Yitro correctly advised him that there was a need for God to fix the underlying cause of the problem by giving a code of civil law.

R. Yitzchak Arama in his Akeidat Yitzchak charts this middle ground in attempting to portray both Moshe and Yitro in the best possible light.

Sources:Akeidat Yitzchak43About Akeidat Yitzchak

Why had Moshe not already appointed judges – The Akeidat Yitzchak explains that by the time of Yitro's advice, the people had only received some basic laws at Marah. Therefore, until the people received the body of civil law in Parashat Mishpatim, Moshe needed to adjudicate all disputes, as both Moshe and the nation did not trust anybody else to judge fairly. And thus, there is no fault to be found in Moshe's leadership, as he was doing the best that could be done with the hand that God had dealt him.

If Moshe was acting correctly, what was Yitro suggesting? According to R. Yitzchak Arama, Yitro (like Moshe) realized that there could be no effectively functioning judiciary without first having a code of civil law,⁹ and therefore he attempted to address the root of the problem by proposing that the nation receive a Divine civil law code.¹⁰ Thus he understands that Yitro's words "and God will command you" ("וְצִוְּךָ אֱ-לֹהִים") in 18:23 refer to the necessary condition of God giving Moshe the laws¹¹ (rather than to God commanding Moshe to appoint the judges).¹² According to the Akeidat Yitzchak, Yitro was also well aware of the impending revelation, as Zipporah and her sons had come to participate in the experience – see Chronology of Shemot 18.

Divine civil law: Yitro's revolutionary concept – The Akeidat Yitzchak suggests that until Yitro's advice, Moshe did not realize that Hashem was planning on bequeathing a Divine code of civil law, and that Yitro was the first to conceive of this concept and recognize its desirability.¹³ While at first blush, this approach may be difficult to digest, in truth, the Torah was the first corpus to combine ritual prescriptions with civil legislation; all other Ancient Near Eastern codes of civil law were established by the king and were separate from matters of religious worship. Thus, the Akeidat Yitzchak is proposing that Moshe originally thought that in civil matters, the nation would conduct themselves like all other nations, i.e. there would be a separation of church and state.¹⁴ Cognizant of the novelty of his approach,¹⁵ R. Arama concludes by pointing to parallel cases where Torah laws are given as the result of new circumstances,¹⁶ and where it appears that Moshe had been previously unaware of the need to institute them.¹⁷

Chronology – In order to understand both Moshe and Yitro, Akeidat Yitzchak needs to posit that Yitro gave his advice before the Decalogue but that it was implemented only in the second year once the nation had received the laws – see Chronology of Shemot 18.¹⁸ However, he does not explain why Yitro would have given his advice already before the Decalogue, knowing that it could not yet be implemented, and given the likelihood that Moshe on his own could have figured it out when the time was ripe.

Perspectives on Moshe and Yitro – The Akeidat Yitzchak depicts both Moshe and Yitro as capable leaders possessing administrative competence and insight. According to him, Yitro was a wise man¹⁹ whose advice was fundamentally sound, and he praises Moshe for implementing Yitro's advice as given, citing the verse from Mishlei 12:15 "but he who is wise listens to counsel."

Yitro's Advice was Unnecessary

Moshe's system was the best possibility for the time being, and Yitro's advice was unnecessary or unhelpful. There are a number of distinct variations of this possibility,²⁰ but they all agree that the appointment of judges which ultimately occurred was not directly connected to Yitro's advice (see Chronology) and took place only significantly afterwards:

Long lines were an anomaly

The long line for judgment was a one-time aberration on the day of Yitro's visit, while in general there was no need for additional judges.

Moshe had been away

According to the Mekhilta DeRabbi Yishmael and Rashi, Yitro observed Moshe judging the people on the day after Yom HaKippurim (when he descended from Mount Sinai with the second tablets) – see Chronology. If Moshe had spent the last four months on Mount Sinai, one can readily understand why a huge backlog of cases had accumulated in his absence.

Sources:Mekhilta DeRabbi YishmaelYitro Amalek 2About Mekhilta DeRabbi Yishmael, RashiShemot 18:13About Rashi

Moshe had taken the previous day off when Yitro visited

Chizkuni, in explaining why the Torah notes that "it happened on the next day" posits that on the day of Yitro's arrival Moshe was busy with Yitro and had not judged the people. This might explain why he needed to work overtime on the following day.²¹

Sources:Chizkuni18:13About Chizkuni

Newly acquired wealth

R. Medan offers an alternative predicated on the assumption that most of the Yitro story appears in chronological order – see Chronology, and that Yitro arrived and observed Moshe shortly after the battle with Amalek. According to him, the division of the spoils with Amalek caused significant strife and was responsible for Moshe's heavy caseload on that particular day.²² R. Medan posits that shortly thereafter things settled down and while the nation was encamped at Mount Sinai there was little need for additional judges. Only in the second year, when the nation resumed their journey, did complaints spike once again and Moshe again needed assistance – compare opinion cited in Hoil MosheHoil Moshe Devarim 1:9About Hoil Moshe and see Appointing Moshe's Assistants.

Sources:R. Yaacov Medan²³

Recent water shortage

R. Medan offers an additional possibility that Moshe's busy schedule resulted from the need to allocate the water which the nation had just received.²⁴ According to this explanation, the people's complaints and the need for more judges arose only while they were in transit and not during the year they were at Mount Sinai.

Sources:R. Medan²⁵

There were additional prerequisites

There was a consistent need for additional judges to assist Moshe, but additional preparatory steps needed to be taken before they could be appointed:

The nation needed to first receive the laws

Sources:AbarbanelShemot 18About Abarbanel²⁶

Why had Moshe not already appointed judges – According to Abarbanel, Moshe had already thought of Yitro's suggestion by himself and was planning to implement it as soon as it would be viable. He explains that although Moshe himself had received the Torah's civil laws already at Marah, it was not until Parashat Mishpatim that he was instructed to transmit the laws to the people. Thus in the meantime Moshe could not yet entrust cases to other judges.²⁷ Abarbanel's explanation of why Moshe had not already selected judges is thus almost identical to the Akeidat Yitzchak above.²⁸ They differ significantly, however, in their assessment of what Moshe was planning and what Yitro was suggesting.

What was Yitro thinking? While the Akeidat Yitzchak assumes that Yitro knew about the upcoming revelation and conditioned the appointment of judges on the nation's first receiving the laws, Abarbanel disagrees and thinks that Yitro knew nothing of the imminent revelation or the giving of a law code²⁹ and erroneously thought that Moshe was planning to continue indefinitely as the sole judge.³⁰ According to Abarbanel's understanding, Yitro recommended that Moshe appoint judges immediately (without the nation first receiving any of the laws), who would then render verdicts based on their own common sense.³¹ Consequently, Abarbanel concludes that Yitro's advice was both ill-timed ("ויתרו אכלה פגה העצה הזאת") and reflective of a Midianite model of justice rather than a Divine one.

Chronology – Like the Akeidat Yitzchak, Abarbanel needs to claim that Yitro gave his advice before the Decalogue but that Moshe selected judges only in the second year once the nation had received the laws – see Chronology of Shemot 18.³²

Perspectives on Moshe and Yitro – It is likely that Abarbanel's position reflects his instinctive recoil (see above) from the suggestion of Ralbag that Moshe's administrative skills were lacking and that he was in need of Yitro's advice.³³  In response, Abarbanel tries to demonstrate not only Moshe's wisdom but also the flaws in Yitro's advice. Thus, Abarbanel emphasizes that Moshe's ultimate implementation was not a result of Yitro's suggestion,³⁴ that it differed from Yitro's advice in several critical respects, and that Moshe by himself had already thought of whatever positive aspects Yitro's plan contained.³⁵ Abarbanel adds that for these reasons Moshe does not even credit Yitro for the suggestion in his retelling of the story in Devarim 1.³⁶ This is all in stark contrast to the Akeidat Yitzchak (see above) who portrays Yitro and his advice in a very positive light.³⁷

Moshe needed to build support

Initially, Moshe needed to judge the people himself in order to win over their hearts so that they would accept the Torah and its commandments.

Sources:Shadal18:24About Shadal

Why Hashem didn't command Moshe – Shadal thus explains why Hashem had not yet commanded Moshe to appoint judges.

Implementation – It is unclear according to Shadal here how long a period was necessary until Moshe could begin to delegate responsibilities, but according to one possibility in Shadal Shemot 18:1Shemot 18:1About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto Moshe implemented the advice before the Decalogue. See Chronology of Shemot 18.

¹ Ibn Ezra cites this opinion in the name of others.  While this opinion does not critique Moshe, it maintains that Yitro possessed insight which Moshe did not have, and that this was one of the reasons Moshe asked Yitro to remain with the nation.

² Toelet 14, the passage which contains the sharpest formulation, is not found in the Venice edition of Ralbag's commentary, but does appear in the recent annotated editions. See Ralbag's Exegesis that this is a later addition of Ralbag to his commentary. Ralbag is the first exegete to frontally address our issue, and his position influenced subsequent Spanish commentators. Abarbanel'sShemot 18About Abarbanel diatribe (see below) is apparently directed against this opinion of Ralbag. See Abarbanel and Ralbag for more on their relationship.

³ Ibn Kaspi and Tzeror HaMor also make clear that Yitro was able to provide insight that Moshe did not have on his own, but their formulations are much less sharp than Ralbag.

⁴ Ralbag, throughout his commentary, is consistent in acknowledging Moshe's imperfections while attributing them to his great spirituality. See Moshe's Speech Impediment and Moshe's Character for discussions of Ralbag's interpretations of Moshe's speech impediment and occasional displays of anger.

⁵ See below for an analysis of Abarbanel's own position.

⁶ A polemical motivation is readily apparent in the remarks of R. Hirsch.

⁷ Dating Shemot 18 to the beginning of the second year also places it in close proximity to the story in Bemidbar 11 in which Moshe similarly appears overwhelmed and understaffed, and needs Hashem to charge him with appointing assistants.

⁸ See here regarding Moshe's marriage to Zipporah. The idea of giving Yitro credit is based in part on Sifre Bemidbar 78 which explains that Moshe was already commanded at Mount Sinai regarding the judges, but the implementation eluded him, in order that Yitro would get credit. The Sifre appears to place at least the second half of Chapter 18 after the Decalogue – see Chronology. See also R. Saadia Shemot 18:23.

⁹ Compare to Abarbanel's position below that Yitro had no idea that laws would be given, and was recommending that the judges decide cases based on their own intuition, like in the Midianite system.

¹⁰ See Structure of Sefer Shemot for the possibility that Chapter 18 constitutes an introduction to the Covenant unit of the Book.

¹¹ See Literary Analysis for Mekhilta DeRabbi Yishmael, Rashi, and Abarbanel's alternative interpretations of these words.

¹² The difficulty with the Akeidat Yitzchak's approach is that this most central aspect of Yitro's advice is mentioned only as part of the summation at the tail end of Yitro's words, rather than being stated at the outset as the necessary foundation upon which his entire proposal is dependent. [Yitro's earlier words in verse 20 about Moshe communicating the laws to the people do not break any new ground and merely reflect what Moshe had already said in verse 16 (and thus R. Arama does not point to them as a support for his thesis).]

¹³ R. Arama writes: "ובא יתרו והעיר על צרכה, וגם רוח המקום נוחה הימנו, כדי שירגישו תועלת החלק הזה מהמשפטים היותו א-להי, נוסף על שאר התועלות שיזכרו בפרשת משפטים (שער מ"ו) ב"ה." In Chapter 46, he expounds at length on this theme. Cf. the Midrash in Pesikta DeRav Kahana 12:11 which may be a reaction to the possibility later formulated by the Akeidat Yitzchak. A significantly more radical position is put forth by R. Chaim HirschensohnSeder LaMikra pp.133-134About R. Chaim Hirschensohn in his work Seder LaMikra Vol. II (Jerusalem, 1932): 131-137. He proposes that the entire code of civil law found in Shemot 21-22 (Parashat Mishpatim) was all part of Yitro's advice.

¹⁴ Akeidat Yitzchak seems to consider both the possibility that Moshe thought that there wouldn't be a civil law code at all, as well as the option that there would be a code of civil law, but humanly legislated. Even regarding ritual law, one may consider the possibility that Moshe did not yet know that Hashem was planning on presenting the nation with a set of rules. Until this point, Moshe had heard only that the nation would "worship" God on Mount Sinai (Shemot 3:12), and he may have learned that Hashem would also speak only in Shemot 19:9.

¹⁵ In his own words: "והנה אם יקשה לבך על זה, תאמר איך יתכן שעל פי עצתו של יתרו נתנו הדינים לישראל, והלא התורה כלה כהוייתה קדמה לעולם תתקע"ד דורות".

¹⁶ Such as the inheritance of daughters (Bemidbar 27) and Pesach Sheni (Bemidbar 9), and the cases of the blasphemer (Vayikra 24) and the mekoshesh (Bemidbar 15). See Moshe for further discussion.

¹⁷ See the Akeidat Yitzchak's formulation: "וכבר היה משה בלתי חושש לחסרונה, כמו שלא היה מקפיד על הדינים ההם, עד שבא לו הצורך אליהם, ובא יתרו והעירה על צרכה".

¹⁸ See the discussion there regarding R. Arama's position that Moshe waited to appoint judges until the second year, its motivations, difficulties, and alternatives.

¹⁹ See Yitro's Character for more regarding Akeidat Yitzchak's portrait of Yitro.

²⁰ A radical expression of this position appears in Philo's work On Drunkenness X:37. In this work, Philo presents an exceedingly negative portrait of Yitro (see here) and goes so far as to say that Yitro in his arrogance 'proposes laws contrary to those of nature.' However, it is difficult to find any textual basis for his tirade, and Philo himself praises Yitro's proposal in The Special Laws IV:XXXIII:173-175.

²¹ Cf. R. Saadia in his Commentary to Shemot 18:13 who says that Moshe only judged the people on certain assigned days, and thus did not judge them on the day Yitro came.

²² Cf. Lekach Tov and Sekhel Tov 18:13 who attribute the workload to disputes regarding the spoils from the Egyptian army, and Chizkuni's note (18:13) that this would not make chronological sense.

²³ In his article, "איפה ואיפה – עיון בפרשיות נדודי ישראל במדבר", Megadim 17 (1992): 79-80.

²⁴ This is an extension of the suggestion he develops (pp. 62-64) that despite the miraculous nature of the manna and water, supplies were not unlimited – see Life in the Wilderness.

²⁵ In footnote 67 of the same article.

²⁶ See Moshe's Duties and Yitro's Advice for a discussion of Abarbanel's alternative suggestion in his commentary to Devarim 1. There he offers that the need for additional judges came about only in the second year as the nation prepared to conquer and settle the land of Israel.

²⁷ Abarbanel does not explain why Moshe could not have taught civil law to the nation already at Marah, and thereby have avoided the unmanageable workload.

²⁸ They also concur in the need to split Shemot 18 into two different time periods – see below. There are numerous near verbatim parallels between their commentaries, and this is not by chance. See Akeidat Yitzchak and Abarbanel regarding the relationship between these two commentators.

²⁹ Abarbanel adds that Moshe did not share this information with Yitro. In contrast, according to the Akeidat Yitzchak, Moshe was unaware that Hashem planned to give a civil law code, while Yitro assumed that this would happen.

³⁰ Cf. Akeidat Yitzchak who suggests that this may have in fact been Moshe's plan until Yitro gave his advice.

³¹ In other words, according to the Akeidat Yitzchak the essence of Yitro's advice was that there was a need for a code of law (to enable an effective judicial system), while according to Abarbanel it was to appoint judges (even without a legal code).

³² See the discussion there as to why Moshe waited until the second year.

³³ Abarbanel, who spent much of his life in a diplomatic/political role, was probably inclined to assume that Moshe also was skilled in these areas.  Little information is known about Ralbag's life, but some of his works give an impression that their author was more of an ivory tower scholar than a person engaged with the masses.

³⁴ According to Abarbanel, though, it is unclear why the Torah chose to record Yitro's advice, and why the Torah would make it appear that Moshe followed it to the letter. Abarbanel attempts to explain that Moshe, out of respect for his father-in-law, told him that he would implement his advice. However, see R. Eliezer Ashkenazi in Ma'asei Hashem, Ma'aseh Torah 5, who rejects Abarbanel's argument, noting that it is not Moshe himself who states that he followed Yitro's advice, but rather the Torah in its narrative voice recording that Moshe did so.

³⁵ Thus the Akeidat Yitzchak and Abarbanel have a fundamental difference of opinion on what might have happened had Yitro not given his advice. According to Abarbanel, the eventual outcome would have been the same, while according to the Akeidat Yitzchak, Moshe might never have appointed judges.

³⁶ R. Eliezer Ashkenazi in Maasei Hashem critiques Abarbanel's position and argues for an alternative explanation that in Devarim 1 Moshe is concerned only with the implementation and not the genesis of the idea and therefore doesn't mention Yitro. He points out that in similar fashion, Moshe doesn't always mention that an instruction came from Hashem. Additional approaches can be found in Ramban Devarim 1:18 – see Chronology – Shemot 18 and Appointing Moshe's Assistants.

³⁷ See Yitro's Character for further comparison of the views of Akeidat Yitzchak and Abarbanel.