VA’ESCHANAN – INSIGHTS IN RASHI – USING THE YETSER TOV FOR THE GOOD

Devarim, 6:5 “You shall love HaShem, your G-d, with all our heart, with all your soul, and with all your resources.” Rashi, 6:5, sv. With all your heart: With both of your inclinations. Va’eschanan features the first paragraph of the Shema, where we are told to serve HaShem with all our hearts. The word, heart in hebrew, is leiv, and ‘your heart’ is לבך which is normally with one ‘beis. However, in the Shema it is spelt with two beisim ((לבבך. Rashi explains that the phrase, ‘with all your heart’ refers to the two inclinations: the positive and the negative. The commentaries explain that Rashi is coming to answer why the Torah used two ‘beis’ on this occasion – the ‘beis’ alludes to the heart and the two ‘beisim’ allude to the two forces that determine the heart – the positive and negative inclinations. Many commentaries discuss what it means that we should serve HaShem with our yetser ra, however, Rav Moshe Feinstein zt”l also notes a difficulty with the fact that the Torah exhorts us to serve HaShem with our yetser tov. He asks why it was necessary to tell us to love HaShem with our yetser tov; surely that inclination automatically directs a person to doing good deeds. He answers that in fact this is not the case; were the yetser tov left to its own devices it will not necessarily direct a person to perform ratson HaShem. Without the guidance of the Torah as the ultimate source of morality, one may come to define what is good and evil according to his own logic, and thereby develop a warped sense of right and wrong. In this way, writes Rav Feinstein, the yetser tov can cause a person to do actions that go against the Torah’s definition of right and wrong. He gives the example of charity; the yetser tov directs a person to want to give money to others, however there are occasions when he may want to give to inappropriate causes. My Rebbe Rav Berkovits shlita, expands on this example, arguing that at times it is not right to give charity to a person. For example if it will only engender more dependence on others, or if the money will be used for unhealthy purposes, then it may not be correct to give in this form. In order to accurately perform ratson HaShem in this delicate issue a person must turn to the Torah’s words for guidance. This often means asking a competent Torah authority who can be trusted to transmit daas Torah. Another example that Rav Feinstein mentions is misplaced rachmanus (mercy). This includes feeling remorse for evil people; this is a flaw that has affected great people in Jewish history. Perhaps the foremost example is the great Shaul HaMelech. On HaShem’s command he was commanded to destroy the whole nation of Amalek. including the women, children, and animals. Shaul defeated the Amalekim in the subsequent battle, and did kill everyone with the exception of the Amalekite King, Agag, and a few animals. The gemara offers an explanation for Shaul's reluctance to kill all the Amalekim. It tells us that Shaul made a kal v'chomer ; he noted the mitzvo of egla arufa - this is a solemn ceremony that takes place upon the murder of a person in between two cities. It demonstrates the Torah's concern with regard to a single death, and its emphasis on the value of human life. Shaul reasoned that if a single human life had so much value, all the more so that is the case with regard to a whole nation. The gemara further tells us that in reaction to Shaul's 'merciful' reasoning, a Bas kol (Heavenly voice) came out, and said, "do not be overly righteous". As a result of his failure to listen to HaShem due to his feelings of mercy, he was punished with the loss of his Kingship. What were the consequences of this mistake? Agag begot offspring and one of his descendants was Haman. Thus Shaul’s act of ‘mercy’ nearly led to the destruction of the Jewish nation. These are just two examples of how even a person’s yetser tov can direct him away from ratson HaShem. A particularly relevant application today is in present day society when many disparate groups within Orthodoxy seem to preach highly different and often opposing messages in a number of areas, such as the roles of Torah learning, working, the use of technology and so on. How can one know when his particular belief is based on the Torah’s definition of morality or merely the personal leanings of his yetser tov ? There is no simple answer to this question, but as we mentioned above, the most sure way of discerning the truth is to turn to those people most well-versed in the Torah outlook – the Gedolim and talmidei chachamim who are most able to follow their guidance and clarify application of such guidance in specific cases. Without such direction a person is at risk of failing to follow the Torah’s exhortation to use his yetser tov in the way that the Torah intended. May we all merit to use both our inclinations to perform ratson HaShem.

DEVARIM – INSIGHTS IN RASHI – SELF-SACRIFICE FOR THE TORAH

Devarim, 1:9: I (Moshe) said to you at that time, saying: ‘I cannot carry you alone’. Devarim, 1:13-14: Provide for yourselves distinguished men, who are wise, understanding and well known to your tribes, and I shall appoint them as your heads. And you answered me and said, ‘The thing that you have proposed to do is good’. Rashi, Devarim, 1:14: sv. And you answered me: You decided the matter according to your own pleasure. You should have answered: ‘Our teacher Moshe, from who is it pleasant to learn – from you or your students?! Is it not from you who suffered over it?!...” Parshas Devarim begins with a series of rebukes from Moshe Rabbeinu. One of them involves the incident when Yisro suggested that other people help relieve Moshe’s burden of teaching the people, and how the people willingly accepted his suggestion. Moshe chastised them that they should have demanded that they only learn from him – Rashi explains that Moshe’s maaleh (advantage) over everyone else was that he suffered (mistaer) over the Torah. The first question that must be asked is what kind of suffering does Rashi refer to? It seems there are two possible interpretations of this term; the first is discussed by Rav Moshe Feinstein zt”l. He asks why Rashi did not simply say that they should have wanted Moshe to teach them because he was more learned than everyone else – what is the necessity of the added point that he suffered over the Torah? He answers that sometimes a less learned person can be a more effective teacher than one more learned than himself, therefore simply being more learned would not have been a valid reason why they should have only wanted to learn from Moshe. The more significant factor is the degree to which the person exerted himself in order to attain complete clarity in his learning. Thus, Rav Feinstein understands that the suffering here means that Moshe worked incredibly hard with mesiras nefesh (self-sacrifice) to attain clarity in the Torah that he learned. Because he reached such a high level of clarity through his intense efforts, the people should have desired to have learnt only from him. Maran HaRav Shteinman shlita, explains the suffering that Moshe Rabbeinu endured in a different way. He focuses on the forty days that Moshe spent on Har Sinai being taught the Torah. In that time he did not eat or drink – Rav Shteinman writes that we learn from Rashi that even though HaShem miraculously gave him the ability to survive so long without food and water, nonetheless he did feel the hunger and discomfort that normally accompanies fasting. Thus the reason that the people should have wanted to learn directly from Moshe was that he endured suffering in the process of his Torah learning. According to Rav Shteinman, why does the fact that he endured physical discomfort explain why they should have desired to learn only from him? It seems that the answer is that the fact that Moshe was prepared to experience physical discomfort in the process of learning Torah demonstrated his great dedication to grasping the true understanding of Torah. Because he went through more mesiras nefesh than everyone else, it can likewise be presumed that he exerted himself in order to gain clarity so it was only correct to want to learn from him alone. We learn from Rav Shteinman that there is great value to Torah learnt in difficult situations. Rav Chaim Pinchas Scheinberg zt”l placed great emphasis on the value of such effort. He would say that many students would only learn if everything was ‘just right’ – they needed comfortable rooms, good air conditioning and so on, and if everything wasn’t right then they couldn’t learn. The outstanding students were the ones who would function in all circumstances. He explained that this fulfills the Mishna in Avos; “Such is the way of Torah; bread in salt shall you eat, water in measure you shall drink, and on the earth you shall sleep.” This doesn’t mean that a person must live like this in order to learn, but that he must be able to learn even in such adverse circumstances. As Rav Scheinberg stated, only a person on that level can attain true greatness in Torah. He added that the reward for such learning was extremely great. He quoted Rav Yerucham Levovits zt”l that if a person trudges through the mud to learn, he will bring that mud with him to Gan Eden at the time of his death, and he will receive reward for the mud that dirtied his boots, as well as the aggravation it caused him. Rav Scheinberg taught this idea through his own example in addition to his teachings. When his yeshiva, Torah Ore, was in Bensonhurst, there were times in the summer when it was scorching hot and the students would struggle to continue learning (there were no fans, let alone air conditioning!). Yet they would see him with his tefillin on his head, his many layers of tzitsis, and in his kapota, and yet he was learning with tremendous energy. It would seem that this does not only apply to men and their Torah learning, but also to women in their own spiritual efforts in learning and prayer. Moreover, the mesiras nefesh that a woman endures to enable her husband and children to learn is surely included in this lesson and the harder it is, the greater their reward. May we all merit to learn from the examples and the lessons of our Gedolim and apply these lessons to our own lives.

THE CONNECTION BETWEEN CALMNESS AND BITACHON - DEVARIM

Parashas Devarim begins with Moshe Rabbeinu rebuking the Jewish people for the various sins that they committed in the desert. One of the first sins that he addresses is that of the spies. Moshe recalls the events that led to this tragic occurrence. “And you all approached me and said, ‘let us send men ahead of us who will spy out the land for us, and they will tell us the way which we should go in it, and which cities we should come to’.”

Given that all of Moshe’s words involve some kind of rebuke, the question arises, what exactly is the criticism found in these words? Rashi explains that the way in which they approached Moshe was inappropriate. “You all approached me in an irbuvia, the children pushing ahead of the elderly, and the elderly pushing ahead of the leaders.”

The simple understanding of this criticism is that Moshe was rebuking them for a lack in derech eretz (respect) and kavod HaTorah (respect for Torah). Rav Yaakov Kamenetsky zt”l writes that it is difficult to say that this was the focus of Moshe’s reproof. It is clear from the account of the spies in Parashas Shelach, that the main failing of the spies was a lack of bitachon (trust in HaShem). This caused them to be fearful of the mighty people living in Eretz Yisroel, and to mourn their perceived inability to conquer the land. Accordingly, what is the connection between the fact that the people approached Moshe in an inappropriate manner, with the lack of bitachon that was the true cause of the sin?

Rav Kamenetsky explains that indeed, the lack of bitachon was the cause of the sin of the spies; the lack of derech eretz displayed was merely a symptom of that lacking. Had they had the appropriate level of trust, then they would have calmly approached Moshe, in the correct order. However, since they felt a great deal of anxiety about entering the land, they acted with behala (ie. in an agitated fashion), and broke the conventions of who should approach Moshe first. In this way, their lack of bitachon was the cause of their agitated behavior.

Rav Kamenetsky uses this idea to answer a pressing question in the story of the spies. In Parashas Shelach, the order of the spies is not in the same order as anywhere else in the Torah. Normally, they are written according to their age, but here they are not. The commentaries offer various suggestions as to the reasoning behind the order. Rav Kamenetsky suggests that there is no reasoning to the order of the spies in this instance; the spies, with the exception of Yehoshua and Calev, felt the same anxiety as the people, therefore they also approached their entry to Eretz Yisroel in a state of behala. Behala results in a lack of order, accordingly, it is appropriate that the spies are mentioned in no specific order as a reflection of their agitated attitude.

We have learnt from the principle of Rav Kamenetsky,that when a person acts in an agitated, or hurried fashion, there is a strong possibility that his behavior stems from a lack of trust in HaShem. A person who has such trust, will feel no sense of panic when he needs to do something, and will have no sense of impatience when events do not take place as quickly as he would like them to. Rather, he recognizes that HaShem is constantly guiding him, and any tests that he undergoes are HaShem’s way of giving him opportunities to grow. However, when a person does not have the security that bitachon provides, he feels no sense of calmness (menucha), and may feel eager to make events happen quicker than they should.

The first lesson that one can take from this idea is to be aware of situations when he may have a tendency to be impatient or agitated. When he is aware that he is in this state, he should make every effort to refrain from any action that he may later regret. Rather, he should try to step back and take a measured view of the situation at hand. Secondly, he should understand that his behavior may well stem from a lack of bitachon, and he should try to internalize that which intellectually he knows to be true – that HaShem is with Him and therefore, there is no need to get agitated.

May we all merit to develop the bitachon that will enable us to live with menucha.

HONESTY IN MONEY MATTERS - DEVARIM

“Do not be afraid of any man because the judgement is to Hashem. ” The Torah instructs judges that they should not be intimidated by powerful people when they are deciding a Din Torah, the reason being that ‘the judgement is to Hashem’ - what does this mean? Rashi explains that when a person unjustly takes money from his fellow there is an injustice that needs to be fixed. Therefore Hashem must direct the hashgacha in such a way that the money will be returned to its true owner. In this way the judgement has been ‘placed’ in Hashem’s hands, forcing Him to correct the injustice done. Why is this so serious? Hashem deliberately limits Himself from too much obvious intervention in our lives so as not to interfere with our free will. If His presence was so obvious it would be much more difficult to sin and the balance of bechira would be effected. By causing Hashem to intervene to reimburse the victim of an injustice a person is indeed effecting this delicate balance.

There is another interesting point that we can learn out from this Rashi: When a person commits an aveira in diney mamonos he is not only transgressing in the realm of Bein Adam LeChaveiro but also in that of Bein Adam LeMakom. This point is of significance because there seems to be a tendency to approach Bein Adam LeMakom mitzvos with a different attitude from Bein Adam Lechaveiro mitzvos: When an observant Jew is offered a plate of food he would normally inquire as to the hechsher of the food before he eats it. If he is unclear as to the standards of the hechsher he will ask a shilo. In contrast, it is quite common that when a person is faced with a question as to paying taxes, for example, he is more likely to proceed without looking into the halachic validity of his actions. Perhaps the realisation that mamonos issues also involve Bein Adam LeMakom can motivate us to be more careful in them.

The Gemara supports the idea that mamonos is an area of natural human weakness; “Rav Yehuda in the name of Rav says, most people sin in the area of gezel.. ” This Gemara seems hard to understand - do most Jews go around stealing from others?! The Rashbam explains that the Gemara is not referring to outright stealing such as pick-pocketing or shoplifting. Rather it is referring to much more subtle and insidious forms of stealing in which people justify that what they are doing is mutar. The Gemara may also include forms of ‘gezel’ that come as a result of sheer carelessness. For the remainder of this article we will discuss some of those areas of halacha in monetary matters that are often neglected and observe how our Gedolim conducted themselves in these areas.

A classic example of carelessness is not returning borrowed items. It seems to be an all-too-common occurrence that people lend sefarim out and never see them again! Unless the lender intends to forgive failure to return the sefer, this constitutes a form of gezel. Of course people do not purposely intend to steal, but such negligence surely stems from a lack of respect for other people’s property. Rav Yaakov Kamenetsky zt”l was a living example of how to act in this area. On one occasion he was filling in a kesubah and used the chassan’s pen and forgot to return it to him amidst the hectic nature of the wedding. TWO YEARS later he met again with the pen owner and handed him the pen .

Another area in which there is a great yetser hara to be moreh heter is using other people’s items without express permission. There are many instances in which it is forbidden to assume that the owner will be mochel for someone to use his item without asking first. The ease at which one can be nichshal in this area is demonstrated in the following story. Rav Leib Chassid was the famous tzaddik of Kelm. In his later years he went out for a walk on the road between Kelm and Tavrig. One day a teenage boy driving a wagon passed by and offered him a ride. Reb Leib asked him if the wagon was his, and the by replied that it belonged to his father. “Did he give you permission to take passengers?” Reb Leib asked. The boy admitted that he had never discussed it with his father, adding, “Do I really need his permission for that?” “Yes”, said Reb Leib, “since you have not asked permission you would be a thief if you took any passengers into the wagon. ” It is such sensitivity that is required in order to avoid erring in these halachos.

Avoiding paying taxes to non-Jewish governments is something which one can easily find justification for, however, this is often a violation of Dina d’Malchusa dina . A woman once asked Rav Kamenetsky why her family should not lie about their income in order to obtain food stamps when there was widespread cheating among other ethnic and racial groups to establish eligibility. “Simple” said Reb Yaakov, “they did not stand at Har Sinai, you did.” This answer is the first and most important step in beginning to be more zahir in areas of mamonos. A person can find numerous reasons to justify various hanhagos in monetary areas but he must remember that ultimately everything a Jew does should be based on what Hashem taught us on Har Sinai. Rav Yisroel Reisman Shlita devotes an entire shiur to conveying the message that whenever one is faced with an opportunity to make or save money he must first and foremost look to the words of Shulchan Aruch to determine whether or not this form of behaviour is allowed . This often means asking a shilo and not presuming that it is okay to cheat the taxes or go back on a monetery agreement. And even if it is common practise among ‘observant’ Jews to act in a certain questionable manner this is not an iron-clad proof that it is mutar to act in such a way.

A second step to avoid aveiros in mamonos is to be aware of the tremendous yetser hara of chemdas hamamon. The Gemara in Chagiga states that gezel is something that people have great taiva for . Because of this great yetser we must be extra careful and place fences that protect us from faltering. We learn just how far one must go to do this from Rav Yisroel Salanter zt”l. He once visited a wealthy man and was alone with him in a room. The man was called out for a few minutes but when he returned he was shocked to see that Rav Yisroel was not in the room. He looked everywhere for him and, to his great surprise was Rav Yisroel standing outside the house. Rav Yisroel explained that Chazal teach us that a minority of people sin in arayos whilst a majority sin in gezel : We know that it is forbidden to be alone in a room with an erva lest our yester hara overcome us. If the yester hara for gezel is stronger than that for arayos then we must learn out a kal v’chomer that it is assur to be alone with someone elses’ uncounted money ! Rav Yisroel was of course the last person that one would expect would be nichshal in gezel, yet he made fences to protect him from its snares, surely we should emulate him.

We currently find ourselves in the nine days - a time of intense mourning for the Churban and the hester panim that accompanies it. Rav Mattisyahu Salomon Shlita suggests that carelessness in mamonos is a direct cause of hester panim: The Torah commands us to use accurate and honest weights and measures . Directly following this parsha comes the parsha of Amalek ? What is the connection between these seemingly disparate inyanim?
The Netsiv explains that cheating in business undermines the basic tenets of Emuna and Bitachon. One who trusts that Hashem will provide for his parnosa will have no desire to break the Torah laws in order to acquire money. However, a person who is willing to cheat and be moreh heter in order to support himself demonstrates that he is not living with a belief that G-d is looking over him. Mida ceneged mida, Hashem says, ‘if you are acting as if I am not around then I will no longer be in your midst and protect you.’ Without heavenly protection we are open prey to our enemies.

Thus we have seen how negligence in diney mamonos is not just a transgression of our relationships with others, but also shows a severe lacking in one’s relationship with Hashem - one who feels the need to ‘bend the rules’ in order to gain or save money is ignoring the basic tenets of bitachon in Hashem. Let us learn from our Gedolim and try to be more zahir in at least one of the areas discussed here - whether it be, being more careful in returning borrowed items or not using other people’s items without permission, or being honest in business. But the most important aitsa is that which Rav Reisman stressed so much - every area of our lives is decided by Shulchan Aruch and we must always verify that our actions accord with its instructions.

What is the reward for zehirus in mamonos? The Yerushalmi in Makkos states that since the yetser hara to steal is so great, the reward to overcome this desire is proportionally great. “One who separates from [stealing] he and his descendants will benefit for every generation till the end of days. ” May we all be zocheh to end the hester panim and bring Hashem back into our lives.

GIVING REBUKE - DEVARIM

Parshas Devarim consists largely of Moshe Rabbeinu’s tochacha to the Jewish people. The Parsha begins with Moshe mentioning a number of place names that do not appear anywhere else in the Torah . Chazal tell us that these names were in fact allusions to places where the Jews had sinned; Moshe did not explicitly state that the Jews had sinned here, rather he chose to hint to their transgressions. Rashi explains that he did so “because of the honor of Israel ” - even though the Jewish people needed to be rebuked, to explicitly mention their sins would have been too much of a pgam on their kavod. Rav Chaim Shmuelevitz zt”l derives a vital lesson about tochacha from Rashi’s explanation he writes, “we learn from here how incumbent it is upon the rebuker to worry about and be fearful for, the honor of the person being rebuked. ”

This teaches us that the key factor that determines whether a rebuke will have a positive or negative effect is one’s motivation for rebuking. Moshe maintained his love and concern for the Jewish people in the midst of speaking to them very harshly. Indeed, it seems clear that this love was the very reason that he was rebuking them - it was purely an act of kindness. In doing so he was able to maintain a sensitivity to their honor whilst simultaneously criticizing them.

The Gemara tells us that it is exceedingly difficult to rebuke someone in an effective way . Nonetheless, this does not mean that we are exempt from the mitzvo, and there are times when one can do a great kindness by clarifying the correct hanhago to someone who is likely to listen. We learn from Moshe that the rebuker must care about the other person, and empathize with him, trying to understand where he is coming from and how is the best way to influence him for the good. Conversely, rebuke can be extremely damaging when it emanates from anger and a lack of concern for the spiritual well being of the other person. In such instances the rebuker will make no effort to try to understand why the other person is acting in such a way and may therefore have unreasonable expectations of him.

The following story, told over by Rav Dovid Kaplan Shlita, demonstrates his point: “Raised modern Orthodox, Devoras’s parents instilled in her a respect for rabbis but a critical eye toward chareidim. When she got older, she decided to check it out for herself and davened at the Ponevezh Yeshiva during the Yamim Nora’im. She went back for Simchas Torah. Everything was fine until one of the girls present said to her in a loud voice in front of a crowd of girls, “you don’t come to daven here without wearing stockings!” Devora stormed out. If this was how chareidim behaved she was not interested. However, due to her respect for rabbis, she decided to go speak to Rav Shach zt“l. When she arrived at his door, there was a long line of men waiting to go in. When the door opened and the person inside left, they called here in, explaining that women had higher priority. Pleasantly surprised, she related the shocking story to the gadol hador. “They did a big aveirah.” Rav Shach told her. “Maybe it was unintentional, but they are still obligated to ask your forgiveness.” He spoke to her for a long time about how careful we must be to be sensitive to others. She decided during this talk to become more religious. Today she is married to a Rosh Yeshiva and her sons and son-in-laws are talmidei chachamim. ” This story teaches us how much damage one wrong statement can do it and how much good can be achieved with caring words. How did the girl who spoke harshly to Devora come to commit such a serious sin when she surely meant to defend shemiras hamitzvos? The answer is that she made no effort to understand Devora’s background and level. Consequently, her rebuke did not only fail to change Devora for the good but it very nearly alienated this girl from chareidi Jewry and prevented her from becoming more observant.

In contrast, tochacha that is motivated out of concern for one’s fellow will lead us to measure our words carefully before correcting someone else’s behavior. Rav Yehonasan Eibeschitz zt”l says that the greatest way of fulfilling the mitzvo of ‘love thy neighbor’ is by caring about the spiritual well being of one‘s fellow Jew - this attitude manifests itself in the right form of tochacha . This lesson is very pertinent to Tisha B’Av; Chazal tell us that the Second Temple was destroyed because of sinas chinam (baseless hatred). Rav Eibetschitz continues that the sinas chinam was the fact that the people refrained from rebuking each other. As a consequence, the numerous groups of apikorsim were allowed to grow and adversely influence the Jewish people. According to this explanation, hatred is not limited to active adversity, it also includes apathy . Such apathy indicated a severe lacking in the bein adam lechaveiro of the people at the time of the Second Beis HaMedrash.

Chazal tell us that any generation in which the Beis HaMikdash is not rebuilt, is considered as if they destroyed it. This means that the present generation is still effected by sinas chinam, defined by Rav Eibetschitz as not caring enough about one’s fellow to want to help him improve his Avodas Hashem. Whilst we have seen that rebuke can be very damaging when done in the wrong way, nonetheless, if it emanates from a true feeling of ahava then it can surely be used to greatly help our fellow Jew.

HONESTY WITH MONEY - DEVARIM

“Do not be afraid of any man because the judgement is to Hashem. ” The Torah instructs judges that they should not be intimidated by powerful people when they are deciding a Din Torah, the reason being that ‘the judgement is to Hashem’ - what does this mean? Rashi explains that when a person unjustly takes money from his fellow there is an injustice that needs to be fixed. Therefore Hashem must direct the hashgacha in such a way that the money will be returned to its true owner. In this way the judgement has been ‘placed’ in Hashem’s hands, forcing Him to correct the injustice done. Why is this so serious? Hashem deliberately limits Himself from too much obvious intervention in our lives so as not to interfere with our free will. If His presence was so obvious it would be much more difficult to sin and the balance of bechira would be effected. By causing Hashem to intervene to reimburse the victim of an injustice a person is indeed effecting this delicate balance.

There is another interesting point that we can learn out from this Rashi: When a person commits an aveira in diney mamonos he is not only transgressing in the realm of Bein Adam LeChaveiro but also in that of Bein Adam LeMakom. This point is of significance because there seems to be a tendency to approach Bein Adam LeMakom mitzvos with a different attitude from Bein Adam Lechaveiro mitzvos: When an observant Jew is offered a plate of food he would normally inquire as to the hechsher of the food before he eats it. If he is unclear as to the standards of the hechsher he will ask a shilo. In contrast, it is quite common that when a person is faced with a question as to paying taxes, for example, he is more likely to proceed without looking into the halachic validity of his actions. Perhaps the realisation that mamonos issues also involve Bein Adam LeMakom can motivate us to be more careful in them.

The Gemara supports the idea that mamonos is an area of natural human weakness; “Rav Yehuda in the name of Rav says, most people sin in the area of gezel.. ” This Gemara seems hard to understand - do most Jews go around stealing from others?! The Rashbam explains that the Gemara is not referring to outright stealing such as pick-pocketing or shoplifting. Rather it is referring to much more subtle and insidious forms of stealing in which people justify that what they are doing is mutar. The Gemara may also include forms of ‘gezel’ that come as a result of sheer carelessness. For the remainder of this article we will discuss some of those areas of halacha in monetary matters that are often neglected and observe how our Gedolim conducted themselves in these areas.

A classic example of carelessness is not returning borrowed items. It seems to be an all-too-common occurrence that people lend sefarim out and never see them again! Unless the lender intends to forgive failure to return the sefer, this constitutes a form of gezel. Of course people do not purposely intend to steal, but such negligence surely stems from a lack of respect for other people’s property. Rav Yaakov Kamenetsky zt”l was a living example of how to act in this area. On one occasion he was filling in a kesubah and used the chassan’s pen and forgot to return it to him amidst the hectic nature of the wedding. TWO YEARS later he met again with the pen owner and handed him the pen .

Another area in which there is a great yetser hara to be moreh heter is using other people’s items without express permission. There are many instances in which it is forbidden to assume that the owner will be mochel for someone to use his item without asking first. The ease at which one can be nichshal in this area is demonstrated in the following story. Rav Leib Chassid was the famous tzaddik of Kelm. In his later years he went out for a walk on the road between Kelm and Tavrig. One day a teenage boy driving a wagon passed by and offered him a ride. Reb Leib asked him if the wagon was his, and the by replied that it belonged to his father. “Did he give you permission to take passengers?” Reb Leib asked. The boy admitted that he had never discussed it with his father, adding, “Do I really need his permission for that?” “Yes”, said Reb Leib, “since you have not asked permission you would be a thief if you took any passengers into the wagon. ” It is such sensitivity that is required in order to avoid erring in these halachos.

Avoiding paying taxes to non-Jewish governments is something which one can easily find justification for, however, this is often a violation of Dina d’Malchusa dina . A woman once asked Rav Kamenetsky why her family should not lie about their income in order to obtain food stamps when there was widespread cheating among other ethnic and racial groups to establish eligibility. “Simple” said Reb Yaakov, “they did not stand at Har Sinai, you did.” This answer is the first and most important step in beginning to be more zahir in areas of mamonos. A person can find numerous reasons to justify various hanhagos in monetary areas but he must remember that ultimately everything a Jew does should be based on what Hashem taught us on Har Sinai. Rav Yisroel Reisman Shlita devotes an entire shiur to conveying the message that whenever one is faced with an opportunity to make or save money he must first and foremost look to the words of Shulchan Aruch to determine whether or not this form of behaviour is allowed . This often means asking a shilo and not presuming that it is okay to cheat the taxes or go back on a monetery agreement. And even if it is common practise among ‘observant’ Jews to act in a certain questionable manner this is not an iron-clad proof that it is mutar to act in such a way.

A second step to avoid aveiros in mamonos is to be aware of the tremendous yetser hara of chemdas hamamon. The Gemara in Chagiga states that gezel is something that people have great taiva for . Because of this great yetser we must be extra careful and place fences that protect us from faltering. We learn just how far one must go to do this from Rav Yisroel Salanter zt”l. He once visited a wealthy man and was alone with him in a room. The man was called out for a few minutes but when he returned he was shocked to see that Rav Yisroel was not in the room. He looked everywhere for him and, to his great surprise was Rav Yisroel standing outside the house. Rav Yisroel explained that Chazal teach us that a minority of people sin in arayos whilst a majority sin in gezel : We know that it is forbidden to be alone in a room with an erva lest our yester hara overcome us. If the yester hara for gezel is stronger than that for arayos then we must learn out a kal v’chomer that it is assur to be alone with someone elses’ uncounted money ! Rav Yisroel was of course the last person that one would expect would be nichshal in gezel, yet he made fences to protect him from its snares, surely we should emulate him.

We currently find ourselves in the nine days - a time of intense mourning for the Churban and the hester panim that accompanies it. Rav Mattisyahu Salomon Shlita suggests that carelessness in mamonos is a direct cause of hester panim: The Torah commands us to use accurate and honest weights and measures . Directly following this parsha comes the parsha of Amalek ? What is the connection between these seemingly disparate inyanim?
The Netsiv explains that cheating in business undermines the basic tenets of Emuna and Bitachon. One who trusts that Hashem will provide for his parnosa will have no desire to break the Torah laws in order to acquire money. However, a person who is willing to cheat and be moreh heter in order to support himself demonstrates that he is not living with a belief that G-d is looking over him. Mida ceneged mida, Hashem says, ‘if you are acting as if I am not around then I will no longer be in your midst and protect you.’ Without heavenly protection we are open prey to our enemies.

Thus we have seen how negligence in diney mamonos is not just a transgression of our relationships with others, but also shows a severe lacking in one’s relationship with Hashem - one who feels the need to ‘bend the rules’ in order to gain or save money is ignoring the basic tenets of bitachon in Hashem. Let us learn from our Gedolim and try to be more zahir in at least one of the areas discussed here - whether it be, being more careful in returning borrowed items or not using other people’s items without permission, or being honest in business. But the most important aitsa is that which Rav Reisman stressed so much - every area of our lives is decided by Shulchan Aruch and we must always verify that our actions accord with its instructions.

What is the reward for zehirus in mamonos? The Yerushalmi in Makkos states that since the yetser hara to steal is so great, the reward to overcome this desire is proportionally great. “One who separates from [stealing] he and his descendants will benefit for every generation till the end of days. ” May we all be zocheh to end the hester panim and bring Hashem back into our lives.

DEVARIM - GIVING REBUKE

Parshas Devarim consists largely of Moshe Rabbeinu’s tochacha to the Jewish people. The Parsha begins with Moshe mentioning a number of place names that do not appear anywhere else in the Torah . Chazal tell us that these names were in fact allusions to places where the Jews had sinned; Moshe did not explicitly state that the Jews had sinned here, rather he chose to hint to their transgressions. Rashi explains that he did so “because of the honor of Israel ” - even though the Jewish people needed to be rebuked, to explicitly mention their sins would have been too much of a pgam on their kavod. Rav Chaim Shmuelevitz zt”l derives a vital lesson about tochacha from Rashi’s explanation he writes, “we learn from here how incumbent it is upon the rebuker to worry about and be fearful for, the honor of the person being rebuked. ”

This teaches us that the key factor that determines whether a rebuke will have a positive or negative effect is one’s motivation for rebuking. Moshe maintained his love and concern for the Jewish people in the midst of speaking to them very harshly. Indeed, it seems clear that this love was the very reason that he was rebuking them - it was purely an act of kindness. In doing so he was able to maintain a sensitivity to their honor whilst simultaneously criticizing them. The Gemara tells us that it is exceedingly difficult to rebuke someone in an effective way . Nonetheless, this does not mean that we are exempt from the mitzvo, and there are times when one can do a great kindness by clarifying the correct hanhago to someone who is likely to listen. We learn from Moshe that the rebuker must care about the other person, and empathize with him, trying to understand where he is coming from and how is the best way to influence him for the good. Conversely, rebuke can be extremely damaging when it emanates from anger and a lack of concern for the spiritual well being of the other person. In such instances the rebuker will make no effort to try to understand why the other person is acting in such a way and may therefore have unreasonable expectations of him.

The following story, told over by Rav Dovid Kaplan Shlita, demonstrates this point: “Raised modern Orthodox, Devoras’s parents instilled in her a respect for rabbis but a critical eye toward chareidim. When she got older, she decided to check it out for herself and davened at the Ponevezh Yeshiva during the Yamim Nora’im. She went back for Simchas Torah. Everything was fine until one of the girls present said to her in a loud voice in front of a crowd of girls, “you don’t come to daven here without wearing stockings!” Devora stormed out. If this was how chareidim behaved she was not interested. However, due to her respect for rabbis, she decided to go speak to Rav Shach zt“l. When she arrived at his door, there was a long line of men waiting to go in. When the door opened and the person inside left, they called here in, explaining that women had higher priority. Pleasantly surprised, she related the shocking story to the gadol hador. “They did a big aveirah.” Rav Shach told her. “Maybe it was unintentional, but they are still obligated to ask your forgiveness.” He spoke to her for a long time about how careful we must be to be sensitive to others. She decided during this talk to become more religious. Today she is married to a Rosh Yeshiva and her sons and son-in-laws are talmidei chachamim. ” This story teaches us how much damage one wrong statement can do and how much good can be achieved with caring words. How did the girl who spoke harshly to Devora come to commit such a serious sin when she surely meant to defend shemiras hamitzvos? The answer is that she made no effort to understand Devora’s background and level. Consequently, her rebuke did not only fail to change Devora for the good but it very nearly alienated this girl from chareidi Jewry and prevented her from becoming more observant.

In contrast, tochacha that is motivated out of concern for one’s fellow will lead us to measure our words carefully before correcting someone else’s behavior. Rav Yehonasan Eibeschitz zt”l says that the greatest way of fulfilling the mitzvo of ‘love thy neighbor’ is by caring about the spiritual well being of one‘s fellow Jew - this attitude manifests itself in the right form of tochacha . This lesson is very pertinent to Tisha B’Av; Chazal tell us that the Second Temple was destroyed because of sinas chinam (baseless hatred). Rav Eibetschitz continues that the sinas chinam was the fact that the people refrained from rebuking each other. As a consequence, the numerous groups of apikorsim were allowed to grow and adversely influence the Jewish people. According to this explanation, hatred is not limited to active adversity, it also includes apathy . Such apathy indicated a severe lacking in the bein adam lechaveiro of the people at the time of the Second Beis HaMedrash.

Chazal tell us that any generation in which the Beis HaMikdash is not rebuilt, is considered as if they destroyed it. This means that the present generation is still effected by sinas chinam, defined by Rav Eibetschitz as not caring enough about one’s fellow to want to help him improve his Avodas Hashem. Whilst we have seen that rebuke can be very damaging when done in the wrong way, nonetheless, if it emanates from a true feeling of ahava then it can surely be used to greatly help our fellow Jew.