Overlap, Part 2: The Therapeutic Horse

Let us use the famous story of Shammai, Hillel and the three converts (Shabbos 31) to demonstrate the fusion of Halacha and Aggadah,: A gentile once came to Shammai, and wanted to convert to Judaism. But he insisted on learning the whole Torah while standing on one foot. Shammai rejected him, so he went to Hillel, who taught him: "What you dislike, do not do to your friend. That is the basis of the Torah. The rest is commentary; go and learn!" Another gentile who accepted only the Written Torah, came to convert. Shammai refused, so he went to Hillel. The first day, Hillel taught him the correct order of the Hebrew Alphabet. The next day he reversed the letters. The convert was confused:"But yesterday you said the opposite!?" Said Hillel: "You now see that the Written Word alone is insufficient. We need the Oral Tradition to explain G-d's Word." A third gentile wanted to convert so he could become the High Priest, and wear the Priestly garments. Shammai said no, but Hillel accepted him. After studying, he realized that even David, the King of Israel, did not qualify as a cohen, not being a descendant of Aaron...

-Hillel, Shammai and the Three Converts
Saratogachabad.org

Bilateral Ecclesiology and the Gentiles Series

This is probably the story from Talmud that everyone, even many non-Jews, know about Hillel and Shammai and while it paints a rather rosy picture of Hillel in terms of his patience and compassion, it tends to cast Shammai as rather harsh and uncompromising. This commentary gives us more insight into the motives of both men, starting with Shammai:

But Shammai took people at face value. From his perspective, he rightfully rejected them. Shammai's original stern attitude helps us appreciate his statement (1:15): "Welcome everyone with a pleasant face." Shammai honestly conceded that Hillel's approach was proven right by the three converts. Yet, even while changing his personal attitude, Shammai refuses to relax his principles. He insists:"Set yourself a time for Torah study;" i.e. Torah cannot be learned in a rush, while on the run. Do not attempt to learn Torah while standing on one foot.

Shammai is not "bad" in comparison to Hillel's "goodness". Both men represent important aspects of how Jews are to approach God, Torah, and other men, including non-Jews. That said, the important lesson I get from this integral part of the Talmud is that, if you want a person who is sincere but misguided to change, instead of rejecting them out of hand, let them study (under your subtle guidance) until they learn their errors.

So, for proper ongoing dialog to take place and for healthy lasting relationship to be build, just as Christians in churches are expected to deal with their suppersessionism and anti-Judaism, so should Gentiles in congregations under the "Messianic" umbrella be expected to develop respect for the unique nature of Jewish identity and traditional Jewish norms, including appropriateness of appropriation of certain Jewish ritual, garb and life cycle events (like brit-milah and bar-mitzvah). A "Judaicaly informed" congregation should be expected to be informed regarding these things, to understand and respect the Jewish understanding of these Jewish matters.

Gene Shlomovich's comments from my
Overlap blog post.

I hope Gene won't mind me picking on him a little bit, but I'm trying to illustrate some of the difficulties that Messianic Judaism (MJ) is having developing relationships with other believing groups, including the church and particularly "Messianic" One Law congregations, especially as MJ attempts to apply the ideals of Bilateral Ecclesiology (BE). While it's understandable that Jews who were raised in ethnically and religiously observant Jewish homes would find it distressing or offensive to see non-Jews wearing tzitzit, laying tefillin, and speaking Hebrew prayers, is it reasonable to expect such groups to abandon practices they are quite used to in an instant and before establishing relationship with their Jewish "mentors"?

Consider Hillel vs. Shammai again and see the differing results. Each convert, through their own studies, realized their errors and humbled themselves. But what would have happened to these three men if, after Shammai rejected them, they gave up on their desire to convert and went in some other direction? Shabbos 31a records the answer:

One day the three met and said: "The sternness of Shammai sought to drive us from this world [and the world to come], Hillel's humility and gentleness brought us under the wings of the Divine Presence."

Many years ago, when I was in graduate school (I have an M.S. degree in Counseling), one of my classes was studying the therapeutic and hypnosis techniques of pioneer psychotherapist Milton H. Erickson. Erickson had a unique perspective on how to achieve therapeutic change in patients that defies reduction down to a "method" (although my graduate program did a very good job of trying). One story Erickson is said to have told stuck in my mind. I can't quote it verbatim, but I'll do my best to retell it from memory:

You are on the back of a runaway stallion. The horse has been panicked and is galloping out of control. You have the reins in your hands but any attempt to suddenly stop the horse will result in you being violently thrown from his back and with the horse escaping into the unknown distance.

Although you can't stop the horse, you find that if you gently pull the reins, the horse will turn direction slightly. You turn the horse, still at full gallop, first a bit to the left and then a bit to the right. You slowly but persistently continue to turn the speeding steed in one direction or the other, and it becomes a little easier to control your mount each time you gently tug the reins. After much time and patience, you find you can slow the horse down a bit. You allow him to speed up again, then slow him down a bit more. You repeat your actions, gaining an increasing amount of control with each slow, and steady move.

Finally, after many such maneuvers, the horse becomes calmer and responds in greater measure to your directives, finally slowing to a canter and then a slow walk. You can now turn him back to the stables and he acts in full cooperation with you.

I'm sure Erickson could have told the story better, but you get the idea.

Of course, my use of Erickson's metaphor assumes that the Jews in Messianic Judaism are in "the driver's seat" and in control of access to the community of the Messiah, even above the Christian church. While in the time of Paul, Peter, and James, the Jerusalem Council was in direct control of the admission of formerly pagan non-Jews into the community of God, nearly 2,000 years of relational division have broken that tie. While Gentiles who align themselves with the Messinaic movement are more "dependent" on their Jewish counterparts than the church, a direct mentor-disciple relationship between the two groups doesn't exist and thus, Messianic Judaism isn't positioned to "drive the horse" to any destination they desire, at least not in any abrupt or "parental" manner. Like Shammai, all they'll accomplish is to chase us away with a stick.

Like Hillel, the observant Jews in Messianic Judaism, in order to achieve their goals, must understand the different groups of people in which they are in relation, and allow those groups who are willing (and not all groups will be), to discover their own answers, while learning under the "Messianic umbrella". This is what Hillel understood and the rest of us need to learn to achieve. From the Saratogachabad.org commentary:

The convert was not just acting silly by standing on one foot; he was actually symbolizing his quest for true unity. This gentile had left behind a confusing plethora of pagan gods and multiple deities. He searched and finally found Monotheism, One Torah and One G-d, wanting to live by a single unifying principle, the 'one foot' on which all else stands. Hillel taught him that the underlying principle that unites all is Jewish Love. The second convert, had rejected the other man-made religions as human concoctions, was attracted to the Divine Torah, which consisted solely of G-d's word. He was shocked to find that we follow a Rabbinical tradition. He wasn't being rebellious, but sincerely asking a valid question; "I wish to observe G-d's word alone, not any human additions." Hillel creatively showed him that the two Torahs are not two separate systems, but are one and the same. The written word and the oral traditions complement each other. It is as basic as the Aleph Bais, where you can't have one without the other. Indeed, the Torah itself bids us to follow the enactments of the sages. The third convert, disillusioned with pagan shallowness, aimed for a higher meaning to life. He yearned to reach the highest level, assuming that being a High Priest is the ultimate spiritual fulfillment.

How can we deny anyone from coming into acceptance under the wings of the Divine Presence and drive them from unity with the larger body of the Messiah? The horse must be willing, but the guidance must be humble and gentle.