From The Other Side Of The Bench

Can you just imagine if in biblical Egypt there were primaries? On one hand you would have Pharaoh (no last name necessary—like Mitt or Newt), and on the other side of the ticket Moshe and Aharon (once again no last name required due to extensive name recognition).
Pharaoh—the capitalist who built his fortune on the backs of others, controlled the world economy by saving in the years of plenty and then jacking up the prices for food during the seven lean years. Then we have Moshe and Aharon, the “little people’s” representatives who will rescue the oppressed, complete with a food subsidy program called “Manna.”
Truth be told, the Torah’s perspective is not manna from heaven for everyone from cradle to grave—although a look at certain communities and lifestyles might suggest that to be the case. I will leave that discussion for a later time.
Watching the results of the Florida primary left me with some distinct impressions. The electorate wants to embrace Romney because they know he will fare better against Obama. The difficulty is that he still does not talk the talk of a true conservative like Gingrich does. Gingrich says all the right things with the passion that fires up the base. His problem is that, like the airlines, you only get one free bag. Gingrich has so much baggage that he needs a porter, not a speechwriter.
Someone needs to put Newt’s substance into Mitt’s package and I think we would have a winning ticket. The answer is probably a vice president like Chris Christie or Marco Rubio, sort of like the Moshe-Aharon ticket of thousands of years ago. Balance is the key in every successful relationship—be it family, business, or politics.
The Torah mentions Moshe and Aharon’s names numerous times, sometimes listing Moshe first and sometimes Aharon first. Rashi explains that in doing so the Torah wanted to convey that the two of them were equal. But was that really the case? Doesn’t our liturgy say that “no one in Israel ever arose like Moshe”?
I saw two beautiful answers to that most legitimate question. Rashi’s phrase is not that they were equal. Rather Rashi says, and I paraphrase, “they were weighed as one,” which can be interpreted to mean weighed simultaneously.
The Nachlos Tzvi explains that to mean that each had a unique personality and perspective in dealing with people and both of them were needed simultaneously to deliver a message that would resonate first to Pharaoh and then to the Jewish people.
Moshe grew up in the house of Pharaoh; he was the hometown favorite. So when it came time to presenting to Pharaoh, Moshe was front and center—if not in manner, at least in substance. Aharon grew up amongst the Children of Israel and they therefore related better to him. They knew him better, he was one of them. The Nachlos Tzvi adds another element explaining that Moshe personified the trait of strength while Aharon mastered the trait of kindness. In order for the Children of Israel to place their trust in a message of redemption, which was a foreign concept, they needed to have it delivered to them with a mixture of strength and softness. It was just too scary, too overpowering to go from slaves to free men led by a leader who was so powerful that he could speak to G‑d. There had to be a human component to it.
The best message, if delivered too forcefully, will fall upon deaf ears. The best message, if delivered by a suspect messenger, will be returned to its sender as undeliverable. Parents, teachers, and politicians must always strike that balance in the way they relate to those entrusted to their care. Man is a creature of habit and rarely can change his DNA.
The concept therefore of two parents (brilliant on G‑d’s part, I add), one to infuse discipline and the other compassion simultaneously, is the proper path in raising our children. My wife and I do not see eye to eye on all matters relating to child-rearing, and my business partner and I are complete opposites. And thank G‑d for both of them. Where I am deficient they pick up the slack and vice versa, or so I hope.
Over time, the other spouse or business partner begins to absorb the traits of his counterpart so that he or she is not at a total loss in functioning. But it is crucial to remember that in most situations, that second voice, that Aharon (and l’havdil), Chris Christie, or Marco Rubio, is crucial if optimal success is desired.
Years ago I was involved in a child custody case. The judge asked the 14-year-old boy with whom he wanted to live. The boy said his mother. The judge asked him why. The teenager began to list all the wonderful freedoms his mother bestowed upon him. When the lad was finished, the judge said, “Thank you. You will be residing with your father.”
That child needed strength and freedom, but his mother was only providing the freedom. Presently that “boy” is a psychologist counseling children from broken homes. He has the judge to thank for that. Balance should be our “primary” concern.

David Seidemann is a partner with the law firm of Seidemann and Mermelstein and serves as a professor of business law at Touro College. He can be reached at 718-692-1013
or ds@lawofficesm.com.