הדרכה במשנת החינוך
Direction in proper chinuch
וַתֵּלֶד עָדָה אֶת־יָבָל הוּא הָיָה אֲבִי יֹשֵּב אֹהֶל וּמִקְנֶה: וְשֵּם אָחִיו יוּבָל הוּא הָיָה אֲבִי כָל־תֹפֵּשׂ כִנּוֹר וְעוּגָב: וְצִלָה גַם־הִוא יָלְדָה אֶת־תוּבַל קַיִן לֹטֵּש כָל־חֹרֵּש נְחֹשֶת וּבַרְזֶל וַאֲחוֹת תוּבַל־קַיִן נַעֲמָה: (ד, כ - כב)
And Adah bore Yaval, he was the father of those who dwell in a tent and with livestock. The name of his brother was Yuval, he was the first of all who handle the harp and flute. And Tzila, too, she bore Tuval-kayin, sharpener of any shaper of copper and iron. And the sister of Tuval-kayin was Naamah. (4: 20-22)
When we again begin the Torah from Bereishis it is fitting to speak about the proper mindset that we must have when we come to the stories in the parshiyos of the Torah. It is prohibited to entertain that the Torah’s intent is to just tell us stories, this does not teach the person anything. The main purpose of the Torah is to teach the person how to act, and all the incidents hint at the foundations and paths of the Jewish person. Therefore, when the person studies these parshiyos it is incumbent on him to see the teaching that will bring him to act. With every incident, he must consider that perhaps he will find a hint that will teach him the way in avodas Hashem.
Among the events that call out ‘search me’ are the three posukim before us, for we see how the Torah goes to lengths and describes the crafts of the three sons of Lemech. The question arises, what does the Torah want us to hear from this? Why would we think about how each one earned his living?
Perhaps the Torah wanted to inform us with this tat it is prohibited for a father or teacher [mechanech] to compare one brother to another. Sometimes, brothers have slightly similar qualities, so the father or teacher also compares their talents and all their qualities. When one of them is blessed with amazing talents and he sees blessing in his learning, they demand the second one to show his strength in Torah like his brother. And when we see that he does not follow in the footsteps of his brother, we disparage him, and even if he explains that it is beyond his ability, he is not believed since his talented brother shows that his words are not true...
The reason for this perception is because the reality is that there are brothers who are alike in everything, so when we also see brothers who are only somewhat similar in their talents, we expect them to be alike in all aspects. However, the truth is that this is not at all accurate, sometimes they are only alike in some things, and sometimes they are not alike at all, so we should not expect one brother to be like his brother in all aspects.
This is what the Torah reveals to us in these posukim. The Torah tells us there were three brothers who were not at all like one another, each one involved in a different field from his brothers, because their talents and abilities were different. We have to compare other families to this family, and to understand that the reality is that the talents of brothers can be completely different from one another, and it is not possible to compare the strengths of one brother based on his brother. Therefore, it is up to the father or the mechanech to stimulate all his children and students to all matters in avodas Hashem Yisbarach, but not to demand more of them than they are capable. Rather, he has to assess the ability of each child or student and determine his ability and strengths. Then he will know who he must encourage more for Torah because Hashem has graced him and prepared him for this, and whose success is dependent in other aspects of avodas Hashem and encourage him accordingly. As Shlomo HaMelech taught us in his wisdom (Mishlei 22:6) 'חנוך לנער על פי דרכו' – ‘Train the youth according to his way’, that is, according to his strength and ability, and through this he will merit to see blessing with his hard work and 'גם כי יזקין לא יסור ממנה' – ‘even when he grows old, he will not swerve from it’.
We find a support for this topic by Yaakov Avinu as well. This happened when his son Reuven rearranged his bed when his mother was insulted. The Torah states (35:22) 'וישמע ישראל ויהיו בני יעקב שנים עשר' – ‘and Israel heard, the sons of Yaakov were twelve’. We smallminded people have no concept at all of the actions of Reuven, [as Rashi explains that even after this incident, all the tribes were equal in righteousness, for Reuven did not sin]. But we see (49:4) that before the death of Yaakov, he rebuked Reuven for his actions, proving that according to the level of Reuven, this was a small sin. But at the time of the deed, we do not see that he was rebuked, and from the language of the Torah we can also see that he was not rebuked then. It says, ‘and Israel heard’ and the Torah does not go on to tell us what he did when he heard this. It is obvious from this that the Torah wanted to reveal that even though he heard about this he held himself back from rebuking. We can say that Yaakov had ‘a general rule’ not to rebuke immediately after the deed, perhaps he will blend in some anger with the rebuke. However, on the other hand we see (34:30) that when Shimon and Levi killed the sons of Shechem, they immediately felt the rebuke of Yaakov [aside from the rebuke they received close to his death], and it shows that he did not have this general rule, [just the opposite, we can determine was not angry then as it says ‘and Israel heard’ and we know that this name indicates ‘greatness’ and teaches that Yaakov was in greatness at that time, and if he earned greatness, then he was removed from anger], so why did he not rebuke Reuven? This is why the posuk continues, ‘the sons of Yaakov were twelve’, that is, Yaakov knew that he had twelve sons, and the nature of this one was not like the nature of the other. Therefore, he assessed the talent of each of his sons, and he knew that Shimon and Levi were prepared to be reprimanded, but not Reuven. We see that even with rebuke, we cannot compare one brother to another.
We find another hint to this in the Haggadah when speaking about the father’s obligation to relate the exodus from Egypt by saying, ‘The Torah spoke regarding four sons’, meaning that the Torah gave this commandment using different expressions in order to teach that the obligation for the four sons is different one from the other. Since the mitzvah of ‘sippur yetzias Mitzrayim’ is incumbent on the father, it would have better to say ‘The Torah spoke regarding four fathers’, for the father has to relate in a different way to fulfill the mitzvah, so why is the commandment on the sons?
We can understand this based on what we have said, for the Haggadah is not talking about four types of fathers, rather, all fathers must know that they are fathers to four types of sons. The father should not say that all his sons are one type, more or less, and just like I taught the oldest, so I will teach the rest. Rather, he must know that each son is a world unto himself, and the nature of one is not like the nature of the other, and the person has to find his way into the hearts of each of his children, how to make an impression regarding the exodus from Egypt.
