Aren't the residual effects of brotherly hatred sadly evident to this day in many regions of the world?
My essay in the Home News Tribune (published on 3/26/09) discusses the Bible, an area in which I claim no expertise. But I always find the story of the brothers to be a compelling one and so I discussed it in my monthly column. I believe there is more to learn from the story than the repercussions of sibling rivalry.
After reviewing the biblical story of Joseph and his brothers, I am not convinced that the main lesson is about sibling rivalry. Let me preface this by claiming no expertise in Bible study; rather, a long-time fascination with the details of this story about a father, a favorite son and his jealous brothers. My curiosity is motivated by the following questions: Do any of the parties fully accept responsibility for their actions? What lessons are there in this story for modern-day families?
The brothers' animosity begins with Joseph's tattling on his brothers to their father Jacob. This caused his brothers to hate him and this was exacerbated by not one but two dreams, each of which Joseph repeated verbatim to his family. The dreams, which described how his brothers would bow down to Joseph, further infuriated his brothers.
Their father, Jacob, according to the Bible, "Loved Joseph more than all his sons" and made him a unique gift, a coat of many colors. The Talmud (Tractate Sabbath, page 10, side 2) states, "A man should never single out one son among his other sons, for on account of the silk which Jacob gave to Joseph in excess of his other sons, his brothers became jealous of him and the matter resulted in our forefathers' descent into Egypt." The Talmud is unambiguous in its critique of favoritism.
But, is sibling rivalry a justification for homicide? Clearly not. The brothers plotted to kill Joseph, then threw him in a pit, and despite his cries for mercy, the brothers broke bread together. This was followed by the staging of his death, from the attack of a vicious animal. Upon hearing of Joseph's fate, Jacob tore his garments and mourned the loss of his son.
One specific comment by historian and biblical scholar Rabbi Berel Wein got me thinking. He explains that Judah is the one who changes the course of events by offering himself as a guarantor for Benjamin's safety. In so doing, Judah "accepts responsibility," an important new theme in this story. The brothers do recognize the consequences of their own erroneous actions, explaining, "We saw his heartfelt anguish (Joseph's) when he pleaded with us and we paid no heed; that is why this anguish has come from us."
But biblical commentaries do not let the brothers off the hook. One commentary (Sforno) states that the brothers found no cause for remorse in the sale of their brother, only for hard-heartedly ignoring Joseph's pleas for mercy. Further, in the Yom Kippur prayers, there is a description of the tragedy of the Ten Martyrs, which was precipitated by the sale of Joseph by his 10 brothers, who never did ask for forgiveness. And, aren't the residual effects of brotherly hatred sadly evident to this day in many regions of the world? Therefore, the answer to my opening question is no, since no one in this story fully accepts responsibility.
And I believe that taking responsibility for one's actions is one of the most useful lessons we can role-model for our children and give over to them. We must enable our children to make decisions for themselves and give them an awareness of the consequences. More than just a tale of sibling rivalry, the timeless lessons of Joseph and his brothers provide meaningful insights into parenting and responsibility.
"Be Counted" columnist Dr. Alan Singer is a marriage therapist in Highland Park. Respond to this column via his Web site http://www.familythinking.com/
Showing posts with label Talmud. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Talmud. Show all posts
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
Taking Responsibility Trumps Sibling Rivalry in Biblical Brothers Story by Dr. Alan Singer
Labels:
Alan Singer,
Bible,
favoritism,
Home News Tribune,
Joseph and Brothers,
responsibility,
sibling rivalry,
sibling support,
Talmud
Thursday, August 23, 2007
Time With Grandparents Most Priceless of Gifts by Dr. Alan Singer
When Robin read my column on middle children, she related the "favoritism" of siblings to her parents' extravagant treatment of her nephew. This column appeared in the Home News Tribune on 08/22/07
Home News Tribune reader Robin e-mailed me with this comment: "After reading your column on middle children, and how they feel neglected because the oldest child and youngest child get so much attention, I want to point out to you that a grandchild creates an even bigger problem. I can't believe the attention that my parents have showered on my nieces and nephews. Can you imagine that my nephew received a $300 video iPod from my parents when the most expensive gift they ever got me as a child was $50?"
Robin makes an excellent point, which falls under the rubric of favoritism. It is detrimental to children, whether they are toddlers or adults, and it is harmful to children, whether it relates to their siblings or their nieces/nephews. The Babylonian Talmud poignantly describes the damage that can result from favoritism. Tractate Sabbath (10B) states, "It was because of what Jacob gave to Joseph in excess of his other sons, that his brothers became jealous of him." The Talmud concludes, "The matter resulted in our forefathers' descent into Egypt."
Don't expect this entire column to discuss favoritism, because it is not one of those issues that can be presented from two points of view. There is no formidable pro-favoritism lobby out there, and there is no scholarly research I know of that has tested favoritism's harm, using a control group. Parents who care about their children cannot make one of them the center of their universe, nor can they do that to a grandchild. Dr. William Doherty of the University of Minnesota explained to his own children, "In the solar system of our family, our marriage is the sun and the children are the planets, rather than the other way around."
I have chosen to use the remaining space here to discuss some important issues that face America's 56 million grandparents that came to light in a poll of 1,419 parents and 1,209 grandparents, which was conducted by Child magazine in December 2006. While it is encouraging to know that 80 percent of the nation's grandparents had visited or spoken with their grandchildren by phone in the past month, according to AARP, it is a bit disheartening to know that 62 percent of grandparents want more time with their grandchildren, and only 47 percent of parents would welcome the extra bonding time. Contact with grandparents is seen as a disruption of the weekly routine and the culprit appears to be overscheduling.
The author of the Child magazine article, Jessica Brown, quotes a grandfather named Doug, who lives 2 1/2 hours away from his son and grandchildren and complains, "I'd love to see my three grandchildren more often, but they have something to do every weekend, basketball, dancing, soccer, you name it." Sadly Doug adds, "The fault is with my son, not the kids, because he should be going out of his way to make time for visits."
With many households facing the dilemma of overscheduling, I'd like to pose these questions: Do parents believe that soccer is a more worthwhile use of their child's time than interaction with his/her extended family? Can the benefits of dancing compare to the priceless conveyance of values, affection, and history that occurs in multigenerational bonding with grandparents?
The survey indicates that the biggest obstacle to closeness is physical distance. Among the respondents, parents and grandparents lived an average of 235 miles from each other. Psychiatrist Arthur Kornhaber, M.D., encourages families to exchange photos and video mail to keep the emotional attachment going. "And if you need to save more money for visits to keep the generations close," he remarked, "consider it spiritual currency."
The Child magazine survey describes discipline as "a hot-button" issue. Brown states that when it comes to critiquing their child's parenting style, 36 percent of grandparents wish they didn't have to bite their tongues. Eighty-one percent of parents think grandparents applaud the tactics they use. In fact, however, only 63 percent of grandparents give their seal of approval.
Does the video iPod that began this column constitute spoiling? Brown indicates, "Only 34 percent of grandparents feel they spoil their grandkids more than the parents do. Instead, a surprising 56 percent of parents own up to playing the role of the chief spoiler." The article quotes Amy, whose mother-in-law brings her 4-year-old a present on each visit: "I understand her desire to do so, but I want my daughter to appreciate gifts, not expect them."
This column is dedicated to our first grandchild, David, born July 19.
"Be Counted" columnist Dr. Alan Singer is a marriage therapist in Highland Park. He can be reached at DrAlanSinger@aol.com. He blogs at www.familythinking.com.
Home News Tribune reader Robin e-mailed me with this comment: "After reading your column on middle children, and how they feel neglected because the oldest child and youngest child get so much attention, I want to point out to you that a grandchild creates an even bigger problem. I can't believe the attention that my parents have showered on my nieces and nephews. Can you imagine that my nephew received a $300 video iPod from my parents when the most expensive gift they ever got me as a child was $50?"
Robin makes an excellent point, which falls under the rubric of favoritism. It is detrimental to children, whether they are toddlers or adults, and it is harmful to children, whether it relates to their siblings or their nieces/nephews. The Babylonian Talmud poignantly describes the damage that can result from favoritism. Tractate Sabbath (10B) states, "It was because of what Jacob gave to Joseph in excess of his other sons, that his brothers became jealous of him." The Talmud concludes, "The matter resulted in our forefathers' descent into Egypt."
Don't expect this entire column to discuss favoritism, because it is not one of those issues that can be presented from two points of view. There is no formidable pro-favoritism lobby out there, and there is no scholarly research I know of that has tested favoritism's harm, using a control group. Parents who care about their children cannot make one of them the center of their universe, nor can they do that to a grandchild. Dr. William Doherty of the University of Minnesota explained to his own children, "In the solar system of our family, our marriage is the sun and the children are the planets, rather than the other way around."
I have chosen to use the remaining space here to discuss some important issues that face America's 56 million grandparents that came to light in a poll of 1,419 parents and 1,209 grandparents, which was conducted by Child magazine in December 2006. While it is encouraging to know that 80 percent of the nation's grandparents had visited or spoken with their grandchildren by phone in the past month, according to AARP, it is a bit disheartening to know that 62 percent of grandparents want more time with their grandchildren, and only 47 percent of parents would welcome the extra bonding time. Contact with grandparents is seen as a disruption of the weekly routine and the culprit appears to be overscheduling.
The author of the Child magazine article, Jessica Brown, quotes a grandfather named Doug, who lives 2 1/2 hours away from his son and grandchildren and complains, "I'd love to see my three grandchildren more often, but they have something to do every weekend, basketball, dancing, soccer, you name it." Sadly Doug adds, "The fault is with my son, not the kids, because he should be going out of his way to make time for visits."
With many households facing the dilemma of overscheduling, I'd like to pose these questions: Do parents believe that soccer is a more worthwhile use of their child's time than interaction with his/her extended family? Can the benefits of dancing compare to the priceless conveyance of values, affection, and history that occurs in multigenerational bonding with grandparents?
The survey indicates that the biggest obstacle to closeness is physical distance. Among the respondents, parents and grandparents lived an average of 235 miles from each other. Psychiatrist Arthur Kornhaber, M.D., encourages families to exchange photos and video mail to keep the emotional attachment going. "And if you need to save more money for visits to keep the generations close," he remarked, "consider it spiritual currency."
The Child magazine survey describes discipline as "a hot-button" issue. Brown states that when it comes to critiquing their child's parenting style, 36 percent of grandparents wish they didn't have to bite their tongues. Eighty-one percent of parents think grandparents applaud the tactics they use. In fact, however, only 63 percent of grandparents give their seal of approval.
Does the video iPod that began this column constitute spoiling? Brown indicates, "Only 34 percent of grandparents feel they spoil their grandkids more than the parents do. Instead, a surprising 56 percent of parents own up to playing the role of the chief spoiler." The article quotes Amy, whose mother-in-law brings her 4-year-old a present on each visit: "I understand her desire to do so, but I want my daughter to appreciate gifts, not expect them."
This column is dedicated to our first grandchild, David, born July 19.
"Be Counted" columnist Dr. Alan Singer is a marriage therapist in Highland Park. He can be reached at DrAlanSinger@aol.com. He blogs at www.familythinking.com.
Labels:
favoritism,
grandparenting,
Home News Tribune,
middle child,
parenting,
spoiling children,
Talmud
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)


Saving Marriages Strained By The Recession
Does size matter? For today's families it does
Shaky Economy Means Bye-Bye Baby for Some