Parsha Perspectives
a project of the
Bais HaVaad Institute of Talmudic Law
Join Our Mailing List
Tel: 888.485.VAAD (8223)                     Email: [email protected]

Parshas Chayei Sarah:

The Mystery of Max Feinberg's Grandchildren
 
By: Rabbi Tzvi Price
 

 

 
This week's Perspective is dedicated in memory of:
HaRav Moshe Aaron ben HaRav Tzvi Hersh z"l
may the Torah studied through this publication be an eternal zechus for his Neshama 

******************************************* 
 
THE MYSTERY OF MAX FEINBERG'S GRANDCHILDREN
 
            Who was Max Feinberg? From what can be gathered from the news blurb he was a simple Jew, a dentist, who lived in Chicago. Max died in 1986, and his wife died some time after. Although there is nothing in the news clip that describes what Max and his wife were like, chances are they were lovely, simple people; the kind of cute old couple you would want to have as your grandparents.
           
In fact, Max and his wife did have grandchildren, and it is due to them that the Feinbergs became newsworthy. Max and his wife had five children, and it seems that they did not have too much nachas from them. Of the five Feinberg children, four of them married non-Jews.
           
In their wills, both Max and his wife wrote wills that disinherited those grandchildren that were born from inter-marriage. The grandchildren who had been disinherited contested the wills claiming that Illinois law does not allow discrimination based upon religion. Therefore, they argued, the wills were illegal and thus void. Making the headlines, the suit eventually came before the Illinois Supreme Court, and on September 24, 2009, the court upheld the Feinbergs' right to disinherit their half-Jewish grandchildren. Wouldn't you think that what Max and his wife had done to disinherit their grandchildren would win a hearty rabbinical endorsement? A great victory for Yiddishkeit?
           
This week's Parsha provides us with another example of a father that disinherited his offspring because they did not follow in his religious ways. About Avraham's servant Eliezer's trip to Aram Naharayim to find a wife for Yitzchok, the pasuk says, "And the servant [Eliezer] took ten camels from the camels of his master [Avraham] and he went, and all the good of his master was in his hands and he went to Aram Naharayim to the city Nachor." Rashi explains that all the good of his master should be taken somewhat literally. Avraham had given Eliezer a document that bequeathed all of Avraham's wealth to his son Yitzchok. With this document in hand, Eliezer would find that concluding negotiations with any potential marriage prospect to be significantly smoother. In effect, Avraham had disinherited his other son, Yishmael.
           
Many commentators ask why Avraham was allowed to disinherit Yishmael. It would seem that what Avraham did was not in line with the mishna in Bava Basra 133b, "[With regard to ] someone who writes a will which gives his property to another and leaves nothing for his sons, what he has done , he has done (i.e. it is a valid will). However, it does not cause the spirit of the Sages to rest well...." Furthermore, the gemarah quotes Shmuel's statement that a judge should not preside over the writing of a will which gives a greater portion of an inheritance to a good son over a bad son. These halachos are codified in Choshen Mishpat, 282:1, and there the Rema states that there is no better way to arrange one's estate than to allow one's legal inheritors to inherit one's property according to the Torah's prescribed guidelines (i.e., no playing favorites, no matter how bad the kid is).
           
The S'dei Chemed (chelek 3, ma'areches lamed, klal 3, sief 6) deals with this question at length. Some commentators explain that included in Sarah's demand that Avraham drive out Yishmael from the house was the further demand that Yishmael not inherit Avraham's wealth along with Yitzchak (Breishis 21:10). The words of Hashem, "...All that Sarah says to you listen to her voice, because through Yitchok offspring will be called yours," now take on an added significance. When Hashem said the word All, he was referring to Sarah's demand to disinherit Yishmael. When Hashem tells you to do something, you do it, even if it is not normative halacha. However, this answer begs the question a bit. Now, one should ask, "Why did Hashem tell Avraham to disinherit Yishmael?"
           
Other commentaries look to the reasoning behind the prohibition to disinherit for the answer to Avraham's actions (and their answer can also serve as an explanation for Hashem's directive). The Torah's attitude toward disinheriting a wayward child can be summed up as follows, "You never know."
 
You never know if that child might turn his life around and repent. The Torah goes further. Even if that son will die without seeing the evilness of his ways, he might have children that are righteous. It is true that a person's wealth should go to those children who will use it for good things, but you never know who that will be. Our generation that has seen so many Jews return to Yiddishkeit in spite of their irreligious ancestors is proof of that. The lesson is a hopeful one. Never give up on the eventual good that will come out of one's children. Hashem doesn't.
           
Although Yishmael did repent before his death, his turnaround was too little, too late. Yishmael did not merit that any of his descendants would follow a righteous path. Through prophecy, Avraham knew all of this. "You never know" must be our attitude towards are inheritors, but Avraham knew. Therefore, for Avraham the disinheriting of Yishmael was not forbidden. And according to some commentaries, Hashem even commanded it.
           
So, did Max Feinberg and his wife do the right thing? The answer is, unfortunately, no, they did not. Hashem's ways are too mysterious for a simple man like Max. Max and his wife wrote off their Jewish grandchildren (those children that were born to the Feinberg daughters who had inter-married; those that were born to the Feinberg sons and thus have non-Jewish mothers are considered by halacha to be non-Jews). They should have realized that in those children there lies a mystery. That mystery has as its source Hashem's promise to Avraham that each and every Jew carries in him the power to come back. Let us hope and pray that Max's grandchildren, along with all of those that have lost their way, will find their way back. You never know.


********************************************
 
To dedicate an issue of the Perspectives or for other dedication opportunities, please contact the Bais HaVaad at [email protected]

Quick Links