UNDERSTANDING THE TRUE MEANING OF CHESED - KEDOSHIM

In the latter part of the Parsha the Torah enumerates the various forbidden relationships and their punishments. Towards the end of this list the Torah states: “A man who takes his sister, the daughter of his father, or the daughter of his mother, and sees her nakedness, it is a chesed and they shall be cut off in the sight of the members of their people; he will have uncovered the nakedness of his sister, he shall bear his iniquity.[1]” There is a glaring problem with this passuk - the description of an incestuous relationship as being a ‘chesed’. Chesed is normally translated as kindness - what kindness is involved in arayos?!

In order to answer this question it is necessary to alter our understanding of what ‘chesed’ actually entails. It seems that chesed is more appropriately understood as a mida that is characterized by overflowing and lack of boundaries. One significant outgrowth of this is kindness in that chesed causes a person to want to unabashedly share with others, breaking his boundaries of selfishness. However, that is just one manifestation of chesed, and like all midos, chesed has negative, as well as positive, apects. One negative manifestation is that a person can lose his appreciation of a proper sense of boundaries. Arayos involves ignoring the Torah’s assertion that certain relationships break the appropriate boundaries. Consequently, the Torah describes arayos as chesed;

Two prominent characters in the Torah represent negative aspects of the mida of chesed; Yishmael and Lot. Chazal tell us that Yishmael was deeply involved in arayos[2] and thievery[3]. Both of these emanated from his distorted chesed which broke the acceptable boundaries. An attitude of ‘what is mine is yours and yours is mine’ causes a person to believe that he has the right to infringe on other people’s wives and material possessions. Lot grew up in Avraham Avinu’s home and therefore became habituated to doing chesed with others, as is demonstrated by his great hachanasos orchim in Sodom. However, Lot clearly developed a warped sense of chesed. For example, when the people of Sodom threatened to abuse his guests he preferred to offer them his own daughters! He wanted to do chesed with his guests at the expense of his own daughters[4].

Why did Yishmael and Lot so badly misapply the mida of chesed? The answer is that their chesed was not acquired through avodas hamidos based on the Torah‘s guidelines, rather it came as a result of genetics and upbringing. Even a generally positive mida such as chesed has undesirable offshoots if it is not applied in the correct way. For example, a person with a natural inclination to chesed may do kindness in the wrong way or quantity. He may be overflowing with chesed to friends, but forget about sufficiently caring for his own family. Another example is that a ‘chesed’ person may have a difficulty with making appropriate boundaries for himself in various aspects of life; he may find it hard to be punctual or reliable because he finds it difficult to set limits on his time. Further if a person does not have well-defined boundaries then he may have a nisayon of avoiding sheker because honesty requires the ability to adhere to the boundaries of truth.

The epitome of the correct balance of chesed is Avraham Avinu. He certainly had a natural propensity for chesed, however he did not merely allow his natural inclinations lead him blindly, rather he harnessed and even negated his chesed when necessary. On many occasions throughout the Torah, Avraham was placed in situations where he was forced to curtail his chesed[5]. Avraham succeeded in these difficult nisyonos, thereby showing that his chesed was not directed by natural inclinations but by Yiras Hashem and Avodas HaMidos.

Another common failing of a person naturally endowed with doing chesed is that he expects people that he helps to be equally giving to him. Consequently he may not hesitate to request that others do significant favors for him because he would do the same for them. However, whilst demanding that we give in great abundance, the Torah requires that we strive not to rely on the kindness of others. This is demonstrated in Shlomo HaMelech’s assertion that “one who hates gifts will live.[6]” Our Gedolim were overflowing with chesed and yet they often refused to take anything from anyone else. A striking example of this is the Brisker Rav. When he was the Rav of Brisk, there were a number of children whose father’s identities were unknown and whose mother were unable to raise them. No one wanted to assume the tremendous responsibility of caring for these children. What did the poor mothers do? They would come in the middle of the night and place their children on the Brisker Rav’s doorstep. When morning came and the Rav found a crying child outside his door, he brought him inside. He took upon himself the task of finding someone to take care of the child. If he was unsuccessful, then he himself took care of all the child’s needs.[7]

Whilst he was overflowing in helping others the Brisker Rav was extremely careful never to accept gifts of any kind, even under the most difficult of circumstances. When he first arrived in Palestine in 1941, along with the Mirrer Rosh Yeshivah, Rav Eliezer Yehuda Finkel, they were detained in the passport control offices. The delegation awaiting the two Gedolim was told that they did not have the money with which to pay the poll tax of one-half to a full-lira (approximately 80 shekels) and it was forbidden to allow entry to anyone who had not paid. One of the heads of the Jewish Agency offered to pay the tax for the Brisker Rav, but he staunchly refused, saying, “Never in my life did I take money from anyone.” After much deliberation, an old resident of Brisk had an idea - he entered the office and approached the Brisker Rav, “The members of the Brisker Community who have come to Eretz Yisroel want the Rav to continue serving as our Rav. We will pay the Rav a salary just as we did in Brisk. Therefore, I want to either give or lend the Rav the money to pay the tax, which will then be deducted from his salary.” “That’s an offer I can accept,” agreed the Brisker Rav and he accepted the money[8]. The Brisker Rav may or may not have been naturally endowed with the mida of chesed. Regardless of his natural inclinations he excelled in the correct form of chesed and simultaneously avoided its negative aspects.

We have seen that chesed does not simply mean kindness, rather it represents the propensity for overflowing and lack of boundaries, and this can be utilized for the good or bad. Moreover, there is a striking difference between a person who has the mida of chesed through genetics or habit, as opposed to someone who develops his chesed within the lens of the Torah. May we all use the mida of chesed only for the good.


[1] Kedoshim, 20:17.
[2] Rashi, Vayera, 21:9.
[3] Rashi, Lech Lecha, 16:12.
[4] See Ramban, Vayera, 19:8.
[5] For example, when he is told to send his son Yishmael away, and even more so when he is commanded to kill his son Yitzchak.
[6] Mishlei, 15:27.
[7] Lorinz, “In Their Shadow.”
[8] Lorinz, “In Their Shadow,” p.261-2.

EVIL ENVIRONMENTS - ACHAREI MOS

Before detailing the list of forbidden relationships the Torah instructs us: “Do not perform the practices of the land of Egypt in which you dwelled; and do not perform the practices of the land of Canaan to which I bring you..[1]” Rashi writes that Mitzrayim and Canaan were the most morally decadent nations and in particular those parts in which the Jews dwelled were the worst sections of these countries. Why did Hashem deliberately place the Jewish people in the most corrupt places on Earth?

Rav Dessler zt”l answers this question in an essay in which he discusses how one should react to negative surroundings[2]. He observes that negative society can have a very detrimental effect on a person. However, if he is strong enough so that the negative influences do not effect him, then, it can actually strengthen him in his Avoda. How is this so? Rav Dessler explains that when he sees the surrounding evil it becomes more disgusting in his eyes because he attains a greater recognition of its chesronos, this enables him to strengthen himself even further in his appreciation of good. Based on this understanding of human nature, Rav Dessler makes a historical observation that can explain why Hashem deliberately placed the Jewish people in the most degenerate places on Earth.

“Every time where there was a necessity for a tzaddik to rise to an extremely high level the tzaddik was flung into the most lowly and degenerate environments so that he could learn from them the lowliness of evil and strengthen himself in good to the opposite extreme.[3]”

Hashem deliberately placed the Jewish people in Mitzrayim so that they could develop an intense hatred of its tuma which, he writes, was indeed their motivation for crying out to Hashem to free them from this terrible place. This intense disgust enabled them to rapidly rise from being on the 49th level of tuma to reaching the level of being able to receive the Torah. Had they found themselves in a less immoral environment then they would not have been able to rise to such a high level.

This too would seem to explain why the Jewish people had to go to a similarly abhorrent land. Seeing the highly immoral behavior of the Canaanite nations was intended to intensify their disgust at evil and in turn, heighten their appreciation of Torah morality[4].

Rav Dessler uses this yesod to help understand another passage discussed in the parsha - the Seir l’Azazel. On the most holy day of the year, Yom Kippur, Hashem commands us to take a goat through the desert and throw it off a cliff. What is the significance of leading the goat through the desert? Rav Dessler explains that the desert is the makom where people sacrifice goats to sheidim. By leading the goat through this tamei place and being exposed to its tuma on Yom Kippur, the people become further strengthened in Avodas Hashem.

Rav Dessler’s yesod also helps us understand some inyanim relating to Pesach. We begin the Haggadah discussing our ancestors who worshipped idols. Rav Dessler asks, how is this connected to the story of leaving Mitzrayim? He answers that through being surrounded by such negativity, Avraham Avinu rose to such a high level of kedusha to the extent that its power would never be nullified. The geula from Mitzrayim sprouted directly from this kedusha.. Therefore, we talk about our idol-worshipping ancestors to highlight that it was directly as a result of their tuma that Avraham emerged to reach such an incredibly high level and it was his greatness in turn that planted the seeds for yetsias Mitzrayim.

We can now gain a deeper understanding of why the Haggaddah goes to considerable length to discuss the negative influences that include our idol-worshipping ancestors, the Mitzrim and Lavan. Perhaps this is intended to arouse our disgust at such immoral people and in turn, heighten our appreciation of Hashem for freeing us from them and giving us the Torah.

In today’s world, the nisayon of secular influences is unavoidable. Even if we live in observant neighborhoods, the myriad negative influences bombard us daily. It is of course highly advisable to strive to reduce their influence as much as possible but nonetheless it is impossible to completely eliminate any exposure to them. Rav Dessler’s yesod can help us deal with these influences and perhaps even use them for the good. By observing the obvious chesronos of the secular world we can enhance our appreciation for the beauty of the Torah lifestyle. May we all merit to protect ourselves from negative influences and instead to use them to grow closer to Hashem.

[1] Acharei Mos, 18:3.
[2] Michtav M’Eliyahu, 1st Chelek, p.157-160
[3] Ibid. p.158.
[4] Of course, the Jewish people had bechira as to whether they chose to completely reject the ways of the Canaanim or to accept them as neighbors an thereby be influenced negatively. History shows that they did not completely destroy their neighbors and in time they came to be negatively influenced by the Canaanim.

PURIYING OUR SPEECH - TAZRIA-METSORA

The Parshios of Tazria and Metsora discuss in length the spiritual malaise of tzoraas whereby a person is afflicted with white blotches on his skin. He must then experience a period of isolation and finally undergo a process of purification. Chazal tell us that this affliction comes about because of a person's sins, in particular that of lashon hara (negative speech)[1]. The process that the metsora must undergo is intended to demonstrate to him the destructiveness of his sin and teach him how to improve himself in the future so that he avoid sinning in such a way again.

It seems that there are two lessons in particular that one who speaks lashon hara is taught during the period of his tzoraas: Firstly, Chazal tell us, "he caused separation between man and his friend [through his lashon hara] and therefore the Torah said that he must sit alone.[2]" Speaking negatively about others inevitably causes friendships to break apart and people to distance themselves from each other. Therefore, measure for measure, one who speaks lashon hara is forced to live alone for a period of time, separated from others. This teaches him the pain that he causes by breaking up relationships. Secondly, the blotches themselves act as a potent demonstration of the damage that one who speaks lashon hara does to his neshama (soul). Tzoraas is not a regular physical illness, rather it is the physical manifestation of a spiritual malaise that offers indisputable evidence to the sinner that he has greatly damaged himself in a spiritual sense and is in desperate need of spiritual improvement[3].

Nowadays there is no tzoraas, and superficially this may seem like a good thing. However, the commentaries point out the exact opposite; tzoraas was a chessed (kindness) of Hashem in that He communicated very clearly to the sinner of his transgression and the need to do teshuva. Without this gift, it is immeasurably more difficult for a person to recognize when he has sinned. And yet, it is very clear that the sin of lashon hara remains as one of the most difficult to avoid. Indeed the Gemara writes that whilst a minority of people stumble in arayos[4], and a majority stumble in certain forms of theft; "everyone [stumbles] in avak lashon hara.[5]" Given the apparently widespread transgression of lashon hara, what replacement is there for tzoraas - how can a person recognize the spiritual damage one causes himself when he speaks lashon hara and the extent of the damage that negative words can have on other people?

Rav Alexander Moshe Lapidus in his sefer, Divrei Emes answers this question[6]. He notes that a person who had tzoraas had to go to a Kohen who would guide him through the process of teshuva. Now, there remains a Kohen who continually guides us how to rectify the sin of lashon hara - that is the Chofetz Chaim zt"l, whose sefarim on this topic[7] are the ultimate authorities in the laws and Torah outlook about guarding ones speech. They teach a person about the damage he causes other when he speaks lashon hara and they show at length the harm that one who speaks lashon hara does to himself. The Chofetz Chaim himself writes in the name of the Maharsha, that when the Gemara says, everyone sins in avak lashon hara, it refers to everyone who does not make a conscious effort to improve his speech[8]. However, if a person learns the laws and outlook about guarding one's speech then he will be able to avoid this pernicious sin. Whilst nobody in this generation is afflicted with tzoraas, it is apparent that everyone who does not work on himself in this area will inevitably speak at least avak lashon hara. Thus, the insight of the Divrei Emes teaches us that it is incumbent upon everyone to learn about the laws of lashon hara from the Chofetz Chaim.

One still may ask, why is it necessary to learn the laws of lashon hara, wouldn't it be sufficient to learn mussar about the damage it does, and thereby one would develop enough yiras Hashem (fear of Hashem) to avoid speaking lashon hara. The Chofetz Chaim addresses this issue in his introduction to his mussar[9] sefer, Shemiras Halashon. He writes that it is not sufficient to learn this work alone, rather one has to also learn his halacho sefer, Chofetz Chaim: "What is the benefit of all the mussar in the world that speaks of the severity of the prohibitions of lashon hara and rechillus[10], since he has permitted himself saying that this thing is not included in lashon hara, or that the Torah did not prohibit speaking lashon hara about this kind of person, therefore one must know which things do fall in the category of lashon hara.[11]" Thus, the Chofetz Chaim teaches us that without knowing the laws of lashon hara a person will inevitably stumble because he is not aware what constitutes forbidden speech.

A second reason for the importance of learning the laws of lashon hara can be derived from a teaching of Rav Yisroel Salanter: He taught that learning about a particular area of halacho is an excellent way of developing an awareness of ever stumbling in that specific area. Accordingly, when he would find himself in a situation that could potentially lead to transgression of yichud[12] he would immerse himself in learning about it, thus ensuring that he would maintain constant vigilance in this area. In a similar vein, one Rav who taught beginners the laws and hashkafa of Shabbos, noted that far more people began keeping Shabbos as a result of his halacho classes than from those in hashkafa. He explained that when a person is learning about the laws of a melacha[13], it is far more difficult for him to blatantly transgress that very melacha on the following Shabbos. Similarly when a person is constantly learning the laws of lashon hara he is far more likely to be able to maintain awareness of his speech and ensure that he speaks no forbidden words.

Based on the constant test of speaking lashon hara and the Gemara's assertion that no one is free from this sin, it seems that the only way to improve in this area is through constant study of the laws and hashkafa of shemiras halashon (guarding ones speech). Accordingly, many Gedolim[14] signed a document urging everyone to set aside a time to learn both Sefer Chofetz Chaim and Sefer Shemiras Halashon. Moreover, they instructed every institution head[15] to try to include classes about guarding ones speech in the regular learning schedule[16]. In this vein, the Manchester Rosh Yeshiva, Rav Yehuda Zev Segal zt"l developed a daily calendar for learning these two sefarim, and shortly before his passing, he asked the Chofetz Chaim foundation to produce the sefer, 'A Lesson a Day' which constitutes a short daily section on halacho and hashkafa[17]. These Gedolim recognized that constant learning about shemiras halashon was the only way to ensure avoiding transgressing the severe prohibition of lashon hara.

In earlier times, one who spoke lashon hare was inflicted with tzoraas and guided by the Kohen in his teshuva process. Now, a person is not blessed with such a clear message, and therefore, and he must turn to the words of the great Kohen, the Chofetz Chaim to guide himself how to improve his speech through constantly learning his great sefarim. May we all be blessed with the ability to avoid all forms of negative speech.

[1] Arachin, 15b-16a.
[2] Arachin, 16b.
[3] See Rav Shimshon Raphael Hirsch zt"l who proves at length that tzoraas is not the same as the physical sickness of leprosy.
[4] Translated as immorality.
[5] Bava Basra, 165a. Avak literally means 'dust'. Avak lashon hara is known as the 'dust' of lashon hara in that it does not constitute the Torah prohibited lashon hara, but it represents a number of forms of speech that are forbidden by the Rabbis because of their resemblance to lashon hara or their likelihood in leading one to speak the lashon hara that is prohibited by the Torah. See Sefer Chofetz Chaim, Hilchos Lashon Hara, Klal 9 for a thorough outline of avak lashon hara.
[6] Quoted in Lekach Tov, Parshas Tazria, p.107.
[7] The sefer, Chofetz Chaim discusses the laws of lashon hara and Shemiras Halashon outlines the Torah's outlook about lashon hara.
[8] Shemiras Halashon, Ch.15.
[9] The word, 'mussar' is usually translated as growth, although the root of the word comes from the same root as yissurim, which means suffering, teaching that the process of self-growth can be a painful one.
[10] 'Rechillus' is another form of prohibited speech in which Reuven informs Shimon of how Levi spoke badly about Shimon, thus causing great damage to their relationship.
[11] Introduction to Shemiras Halashon, p.17.
[12] Yichud (literally meaning alone) is the prohibition to be alone with a member of the opposite gender in certain circumstances.
[13] A creative form of activity that is prohibited on Shabbos.
[14] Including, Rav Chaim Shmuelevitz zt"l, The Steipler Gaon zt"l, the Beis Yisroel zt"l, Rav Wosner Shlita and many others.
[15] Including the Rav of a community, a head of a Yeshiva katana or a head of a Seminary.
[16] Kriah Gedolah found at the beginning of 'A Lesson a Day'.
[17] Also found at the beginning of 'A Lesson a Day'.

A NEW START - METSORA

Parshas Metsora outlines the purification process for a person struck by tzoraas. One of the essential stages of this process is tevila in a mikva. The Sefer HaChinuch suggests a reason for the significance of tevila as a key part in the teshuva process which the metsora is undergoing. He explains that the world was full of water before man was created and therefore symbolizes a return to the beginning of creation. Dipping into water is a gesture of leaving behind past aveiros and starting afresh[1].

When a person sins and then recognizes his failure, there is a natural tendency to feel guilt-ridden and low. This can be directed in a positive way, motivating him to avoid such sin in the future, however, often it has a very undesirable effect, causing the person to fall into a downward spiral of spiritual failing. When a person feels low about what he has done, he may become disconcerted and lose the strength to continue in his Avodas Hashem as before. In this way the ’fall-out’ from a sin can actually be far more damaging than the sin itself. Toivelling in a mikva after a sin symbolizes that the person is saying that he will not be bound by his past errors and will not let them bring him down further.

Rav Chaim Shmuelevitz zt”l notes many examples in Tanach where a person sinned or failed in one area and as a result, suffered a great yerida that destroyed their spiritual standing. A striking case is that of Orpah, the daughter-in-law of Naomi. When Naomi was returning to Eretz Yisroel, both Ruth and Orpah were determined to stay with her and convert to Judaism. At this point, Orpah was on the same lofty level as the great Ruth., equally willing to leave her homeland to join the Jewish people. However, after Naomi’s supplications for them to return, she could not withstand the test and gave in and went back to Moav. It would seem logical that after this single lapse Orpah would still stand on a high spiritual level, just a little lower than that of Ruth. However, Chazal tell us that on the very night when she left Naomi, she sunk to the lowest levels of depravity[2]. How could it be that she fell in such a dramatic way in one night? Rav Shmuelevitz explains that when she saw that she failed in the great nisayon to join the Jewish people, she could not leave her sin behind and start afresh. She was greatly effected by her inability to stand up to challenges, and consequently lost all sense of balance and fell to the powers of the yester hara[3].

Rav Shmuelevitz cites another maaseh in Tanach in which a great man failed a nisayon and recognized the danger he was in of falling into the trap of being completely ensnared by the yetser hara. Shmuel HaNavi instructed Shaul HaMelech to destroy all of Amalek, however Shaul left some animals and the Amalekite King Agag alive. Shmuel confronted him and told him that he had forfeited his right to the kingdom with this aveiro. After failing to exonerate himself Shaul admitted his guilt but then made a very strange request of Shmuel. “Please now honor me in front of the Sages of my people and the people of Israel...[4]” What was the purpose of this request, it was surely not merely an attempt by Shaul to feel better about himself. Moreover, Shmuel acceded to the request, indicating its validity. Rav Shmuelevitz explains that Shaul did not merely want honor, rather he knew that he was in danger of suffering a great fall and he realized that he needed to strengthen himself immediately so that he would not be adversely effected by his sin. Therefore, amidst this great fall in madreigo he asked Shmuel to honor him and thereby help him maintain his sense of equilibrium and start afresh[5]. It seems that Shmuel, despite his displeasure with Shaul, consented to his request because he recognized its importance.

We also learn from the actions of Shaul an aitso of how to prevent failure having a disastrous effect. When a person fails, he is likely to feel bad about himself and lose his sense of self-respect. When a person feels that he is a failure he may give up and let himself fall badly. In order to avoid this he must maintain his self-image after failure and recognize that even though he made a mistake he can do teshuva and start again.

Shlomo HaMelech makes this very point in Mishlei when he writes: “A tzadik falls seven times but he gets up.[6]” The Malbim and Metsudos David explain that despite a tzaddik’s setbacks he rises up again. Indeed, a big part of what makes a person a tzaddik is his ability to recover from failure or mistakes. The tevila of the metsora teaches us the same lesson - even though he sinned he need not be doomed to perpetual downfall. If he can put his past behind him he can make a fresh start.
[1] Sefer HaChinuch, Mitzvo 173. It seems that the sybmolism of a new start applies to other processes that require tevila such as conversion whereby a person becomes a briah chadasha.
[2] Ruth Rabbah, 2:20.
[3] Sichos Mussar, Maamar 55, p.236.
[4] Shmuel 1, 15:28-30.
[5] Ibid. p.237-8.
[6] Mishlei, 24:16.

REACTING TO YISSURIM - TAZRIA

Parshas Tazria discusses the various forms of negaim and the process by which a person can be healed. Since the destruction of the Beis HaMikdash the laws of negaim no longer apply[1]. Given this, how is this parsha relevant to our daily lives? The Sefer HaChinuch answers this question: He writes that the tuma of a metsora comes about because of a person's aveiros. The suffering that a person endures is not coincidental - it comes from Hashem. The metsora must go through a wrenching process of seclusion in which he is supposed to reflect on his behaviour and come to a recognition of how he erred. This message is of course highly relevant in every generation[2]. We no longer suffer from negaim but we are afflicted by many other forms of yissurim. Tumas negaim teaches us that we should not ascribe such suffering to coincidence, rather we should see it as Hashem's way of communicating to us.

There is another mitzvo related to negaim which further teaches us to how we should and should not react to yissurim. The Torah tells us that one form of negaim is a nesek. If a person finds a nesek on his body he goes through a process of seclusion and examination by a Kohen. If, after one week of seclusion, the nesek has not spread, then the person must shave the area around the nesek. However, he is strictly forbidden from shaving the hair that is on the nesek[3]. The Sefer HaChinuch explains the significance of this prohibition. "This mitzvo teaches us that every person should accept whatever pain or punishment that Hashem sends to him; he should not kick out against them, and he should not think that he has the ability to nullify them and hide them from people..[4]" The Chinuch teaches us that there are two incorrect ways in which people react to yissurim which are symbolized by shaving off the nesek sent by Hashem. Firstly, a person may "kick out" against Hashem when he suffers, questioning Divine justice. A person may be above blaming Hashem for their pain but may adopt another incorrect approach. He may try to remove the suffering without learning the lessons that it represents. Moreover, a person may be more concerned about what people think and primarily focus on hiding the yissurim, rather than using them as an opportunity to grow. The prohibition of removing the nesek teaches us that we should not ‘put our head in the sand’ when we endure difficulty, rather we should strive to grow through them.

The Mashgiach of Slobodka, Rav Avraham Grodzinski zt”l elaborates on the message of yissurim at length in his sefer Toras Avraham[5]. He writes that the main purpose of prophecy was to communicate to the people how they were erring. Even when, ostensibly they were doing nothing wrong, the prophet would delve deep into their hearts and pinpoint an area in which they were lacking. He asks, in the post-prophecy era how does Hashem communicate to us to tell us what we are doing wrong? He answers that ‘yissurim’ are the replacement for prophecy. When a person is in pain, no matter how small, Hashem is communicating to him in some way that he needs to grow. Thus, yissurim are a tremendous gift - they provide us with an opportunity to mend our ways. The Gemara says that suffering doesn’t just refer to great afflictions, rather even minor difficulties; it gives the example of when a person tries to take out three coins from his pocket and he only picks up two. In this way Hashem is constantly communicating with us through yissurim.

The obvious question that we are faced with is, ‘it was very easy in the time of the Beis HaMikdash when people suffered from afflications such as negaim that arose when specific aveiros such as lashon hara were committed. But nowadays, how can a person know what message Hashem is trying to tell him through the yissurim?” Of course it is impossible to be certain but The Toras Avraham brings a yesod from Chazal that Hashem punishes a person mida ceneged mida for his aveiros. For example, The Mishna in Sotah tells us that Shimshon sinned with his eyes, therefore he was punished that the Plishtim took out his eyes, and Avshalom was arrogant about his beautiful hair, therefore his hair was the cause of his death when it got tangled up amongst the branches of a tree[6]. Therefore it is recommended that a person look for a cause that is somehow connected to the form of suffering. For example if someone experiences pain in his mouth then perhaps he should first assess whether he transgressed in an area connected with speech. There is, ironically a very good example of this idea in relation to Rav Grodszinski’s life himself. He suffered from a noticeable limp and when a shidduch was first proposed to Rav Ber Hirsch Heller’s daughter Chasya, she rejected it because of his limp. Shortly thereafter she fell down the stairs to the cellar, breaking her leg. She concluded that this was a sign not to reject the match because of Rav Grodzinski’s bad leg and they did indeed marry[7].

However, more important than whether we find the ‘correct’ aveiro or not is that we search for it at all. In the previous example, if the person’s pain in his mouth comes as a result of lying but he works on lashon hara then he has achieved the main tachlis of the yissurim - trying to grow. This is an extremely important point because there is a common trend that when a person experiences suffering he looks for different segulos in order to end the pain. However, this seems to contradict the lesson of the Chinuch that we should not merely strive to nullify our pain. Hashem does not send us yissurim merely so that we can do some kind of segulo (even if it is effective in ending the pain), rather he wants us to grow. This does not necessarily mean that all segulos are negative but one should not forget the tachlis of the yissurim - that Hashem is telling us to grow[8]. The parshas of negaim are indeed highly relevant to all of our lives - they teach us how we can utilize yissurim to become better people. May we all be zocheh to grow from the yissurim Hashem sends us.
[1] See Derech Sicha by Rav Chaim Kanievsky Shlita which discusses why this is the case.
[2] Sefer HaChinuch, Mitzvo 169.
[3] Tazria, 13:31-34.
[4] Sefer HaChinuch, Mitzvo 170.
[5] Toras Avraham, p.14-26. He was the father-in-law of Rav Wolbe zt”l and Rav Kreiswert zt”l and the brother-in-law of Rav Yaakov Kamenetsky zt”. He wrote the sefer whilst living in Europe at the time of the Nazi rise to power. He was eventually murdered by the Nazis.
[6] Sotah, 9b.
[7] Rosehblum, ‘Reb Yaakov,’ p.80.
[8] Even getting brachos from Gedolim, whilst being perfectly acceptable, should not distract a person from the ikar point of the yissurim.

CHAYECHA KODMIM - SHEMINI

Among the list of non-kosher birds in Parshas Shemini is the interestingly named ‘Chasida’. Rashi quotes the Gemara in Chullin that explains that this bird is renowned for its trait of chesed because it shares it’s food with its friends.[1] The Rizhiner Rebbe zt”l asks that if this bird is endowed with such a favorable mida, why is it considered non-kosher[2]? He answers that the Chasida only does chesed with its own kind, but does not display any kindness to other species of birds. This form of chesed is not compatible with the Torah outlook, indeed it is a ‘treif’ form of chesed, consequently, it is listed among the non-kosher birds.

The implication of the Rizhiner Rebbe’s answer is that the ‘kosher’ form of chesed is to bestow kindness equally to all people, not just those closest to us. However, this does not seem to actually be the case: The Gemara discusses a case in which two people find themselves stranded in a desert and one of them has a bottle of water that can provide enough water for one of them to survive until they reach civilization. The Tannaim argue as to the correct hanhago in this case; Ben Peturah says that the one in possession of the bottle should share it with his friend even though it is very likely that as a result both men will die. Rebbe Akiva argues, introducing the concept of Chayecha Kodmim, which teaches that a person should look after his own needs before those of his friend. Consequently, the man in possession of the bottle should keep it for himself and thereby assure himself of his own survival despite the sad results this behavior will have for his friend[3]. The halacho follows Rebbe Akiva and applies to many aspects of our lives. The halacho states that that a person must provide for his own needs before those of others. Moreover, there is a list of priorities in the laws of charity, whereby a person must provide for those closer to him before others[4]. The Chofetz Chaim zt”l writes that these priorities do not just apply to charity, but to all forms of chesed[5]. It could seem that this concept of chayecha kodmim does not seem so different from the actions of the chasida; both seem to embody the attitude that it is acceptable to give to one’s own kind[6] at the expense of others.

In truth, there are two crucial differences between Chayecha Kodmim and the chasida. Firstly, the chasida only does chesed with its own kind, to the total exclusion of all other creatures. In contrast, chayecha kodmim does not preclude giving to all kinds of people, rather it simply makes a list of priorities but does not exempt us from the obligation of helping those less close to us[7]. Moreover there is a very significant factor that limit’s the effect of chayecha kodmim. The poskim write that it applies in a situation where two people have identical needs, for example they both need bread to eat. In such a case, chayecha kodmim instructs us to give to the person closer to us. However, if their needs are not the same, and the more distant person is more needy then we are obligated to provide for him first because he is more lacking For example, if the closer person has bread but lacks meat, and the other does not even have bread, then we are obligated to provide him with bread ahead of giving meat to the person closer to us[8].

There is a second, even more crucial difference between the chesed of the chasida and the Torah outlook of chesed. That is the attitude behind giving priority to those closer to us. The root of the chasida’s limited chesed is the fact that it only cares about its own kind but has no concern for other species. The chasida is essentially a selfish bird whose sense of self extends to its own species but stops there. In stark contrast, we are obligated to care equally about all other Jews. Given this fact, what is the reasoning behind chayecha kodmim? The answer is that chayecha kodmim is based on a sense of responsibility, not selfishness; the reason that we must give to ourselves and family before others is that we have more responsibility for their well-being. Thus, a person is required to provide for the financial needs of his family before other families because he is the person most responsible for their well-being. The implication of this is that chayecha kodmim is not a privilege whereby I am allowed to look after myself before others because I am more important than them. Rather, it is an obligation - I am duty-bound to look after myself before others and neglecting this duty is no different from failing to observe any Torah requirement.

We have seen that the chesed of the chasida is treif according to Torah because it is based on selfishness. In contrast, chayecha kodmim is based on a sense of responsibility for those closest to us. It does not in any way take away from the need to care about every Jew, and it does not preclude doing chesed for all Jews, rather it teaches us a list of priorities. It is no easy task to decide how much time and effort should be allotted towards the various groups of people in one’s life, ranging from ones wife and kids. To his other family, friends, community members and strangers. Moreover, each person has a different level of responsibility in each area based on his own personal circumstances.

Whilst there is no single ‘correct’ hanhago in this area, in a general sense it seems that one must be careful to strike a right balance - on the one hand providing enough , financial physical and emotional support to his immediate family whilst also fulfilling his obligations to the wider community. Over-emphasizing one area can have dire consequences in another. The story is told of a ten year old boy from an observant home who had already strayed from the Torah derech and was involved in highly undesirable activities. A certain organization that specializes in such cases decided that this boy needed to develop a close connection with a warm and caring family, something that he was obviously lacking. They made a thorough search and finally found a family renowned for their overflowing chesed to members of the community. To their absolute shock, they discovered that this dysfunctional child was a member of this family! This boy’s parents were so interested in helping others that they neglected the person whom they were most obligated to provide for. This is a challenging nisayon for anyone who wants to help the community at large. On the other hand, this does not mean that a person should completely neglect those outside his immediate family. Many people have shown that there need not be any contradiction between providing for one’s family and simultaneously helping others. Indeed doing chesed with others can be a tremendous tool in educating one’s own children in midos such as generosity and empathy. If the right balance can be struck then a person can fulfill all his various responsibilities to everyone.


[1] Rashi, Shemini, 11:19.
[2] Quoted in Artscroll Stone Chumash. The ultimate reason that certain animals are kosher and other are treif, is of course a Gezeiras Hakasuv and is beyond our intellectual reasoning. Nonetheless, like all mitzvos, there are taamim for the laws of kosher from which lessons can be derived. For example, carnivorous animals are generally non-kosher. In this vein, the Rizhiner Rebbe’s question is valid.
[3] Bava Metsia, 62a.
[4] See Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh Deah, Simun 251.
[5] Ahavas Chesed, 1st Chelek, Ch.6, Sif 14.
[6] Which in this context refers to family members.
[7] Heard from Rav Yitzchak Berkovits Shlita.
[8] Pischei Teshuva Yoreh Deah, simun 251, sk,4. Igros Moshe - Even Haezer, Chelek 4, Simun 26, Os 4 See also the Gemara in Nedarim,80b,81a with the commentaries of Ran, Rosh and Tosefos, where the extent of chayecha kodmim is subject to a machlokes among the tannaim.

ACQUIRING A FRIEND - SHEMINI

The Parsha begins with the joyful celebrations of the Inauguration of the Mishkan (tabernacle), however this joyous occasion becomes a time of mourning with the sudden deaths of Aaron’s two oldest sons, Nadav and Avihu. "The sons of Aharon, Nadav and Avihu, each took his fire pan, they put fire in them and placed incense upon it; and they brought before Hashem an alien fire that He had not commanded them. A fire came forth from before Hashem and consumed them, and they died before Hashem.[1]"

Chazal offer a number of explanations as to the exact wrongdoing of these two great men which caused them to receive such a strict punishment. The Toras Kohanim[2] writes: “...Nadav and Avihu did not seek advice from Moshe.. and each man went on his own accord and they did not seek advice from each other.” This Midrash teaches us that Nadav and Avihu did not actually go to offer the incense together, rather they each had the same idea and went alone to offer the incense in the Mishkan. They are criticized because they did not seek advice from their Rebbe, Moshe Rabbeinu, before undertaking this bold act, and also because they did not seek advice from each other. Rav Berel Soleveitchik zt”l asks that this Midrash is very difficult to understand; it is obvious why they should have consulted Moshe Rabbeinu because he would have surely advised them to not offer the incense, however why are they criticized for not consulting with each other? They both evidently believed in the correctness of their plan and so what benefit would have been gained from consulting each other - surely they would have merely confirmed that the plan was a good one?!

Rav Soleveitchik answers that we learn from here a fundamental principle in human nature; A person may want to commit a certain sin and yet he may simultaneously see the flaw in such an action when his friend is about to commit the very same sin. This is because each person is greatly influenced by his yetser hara which prevents him from making decisions with objectivity. Rather, the yetser hara clouds his reasoning and causes him to rationalize that it is acceptable to undertake certain forbidden actions. However, when this same person looks on his friend about to perform the very same sin he is able to take a far more objective attitude towards his friend’s actions. This is because with regard to others a person is not clouded by a desire for self-gratification and he can more accurately assess the validity of his friend’s plans. Accordingly, had Nadav consulted Avihu about his plan (or vice versa) then there would have been a good chance that Avihu would have seen the flaw in his brother’s reasoning despite the fact that he planned to do the very same act! That is why they are criticized for not consulting each other despite the fact that they both planned to do the same sin[3].

Rabbeinu Yonah brings out this principle from the teaching in Avos: “...Acquire for yourself a friend.[4]” He writes that one of the benefits of having a friend is that he can help you in observing Mitzvos. “Even when a friend is no more righteous than him and sometimes he even acts improperly, nonetheless he does not want a friend to do the same [action], because he has no benefit from it.[5]” He then brings as a proof to this idea the principle that “a person does not sin on behalf of someone else.” This means that a generally observant person usually sins because he is blinded by some kind of desire for pleasure, however with regard to someone else we presume that he is not blinded in the same way and therefore we do not suspect him of sinning on behalf of others. This idea is applied in a number of places throughout the Gemara[6]. Rabbeinu Yonah thus teaches us the importance of acquiring at least one friend who can act as an objective onlooker towards our own actions, and that this friend need not necessarily be on a higher level than ourselves.

We learn from these ideas a very important life lesson; a person should not rely on his own assessments of his actions - it is impossible to be purely objective when making decisions because of one’s natural subjectivity that causes him to rationalize the validity of doing certain aveiros. Rather, he must realize the necessity of finding a friend who will be prepared to offer advice and even rebuke when necessary when he sees that his friend is blinded by his desires. May we all merit to acquire true friends who can help us find the true path of Avodas Hashem.


[1] Shemini, 10:1-2.
[2] Toras Kohanim, 1:32; this is a Midrashic work written specifically on the book of Vayikra.
[3] Quoted by Tallelei Oros, Parshas Shemini, p.165-6.
[4] Avos, 1:6.
[5] Rabbeinu Yonah, Avos, 1:6.
[6] Bava Metsia, 5b, Kiddushin, 63b, Shevuos, 42b, Arachin, 23a.