TAMIM TEHIYEH - SHOFTIM

The Torah tells us “You should go with innocence before Hashem, your G-d .” Rashi explains that a person should accept the lot that Hashem gives him without trying to discern the future, rather he should accept everything with love and innocence. The Chofetz Chaim zt”l would make an inference from the passuk; it says that one should act with innocence with Hashem, but not with other people. During a person’s dealings with others he should use great wisdom and thought and not let himself be duped by untrustworthy people. The example he would bring was that of Yaako Avinu, who was called an ‘ish tam’ and yet acted with great cunning in his dealings with Lavan. On one occasion a number of B’nei Torah complained to the Chofetz Chaim about how they had been tricked out of a large amount of money by dishonest merchants. He told them this passuk and noted that since they had spent so much time in Yeshiva they had become used to going in temimus with Hashem. Their error, however, was that they had thought that it is also possible to go in temimus with their fellow man as well .

This lesson of the Chofetz Chaim zt”l seems very logical, however it needs to be reconciled with the mitzvo of “b’tzedek tishpot es amisecha:” This mitzvo teaches us that we must strive to judge our fellow man favorably, even when it seems that he is acting in a negative way. How is it possible to judge people favorably whilst simultaneously being suspicious of their righteousness? One could answer simply that we must, in our minds, judge our fellow favorably, but at the same time, be careful to take practical precautions to avoid being harmed in the eventuality that the other person is not trustworthy . There are two problems with this approach: Firstly, it seems almost impossible to adopt such a seeming contradictory attitude to the same person - how can a person be expected to genuinely judge his fellow favorably and simultaneously treat him in a suspicious manner ? Secondly, it seems difficult to say that the Torah should command us to give the benefit of the doubt to people of whom there is genuine reason to treat with distrust.

In order to reconcile these concepts it is necessary to analyze the mitzvo of “b’tzedek tishpot es amisecha” on a deeper level. There are many stories in which a person seemed to be acting in a clearly negative way and yet in truth there was some wild explanation for their behavior. Such stories imply that the mitzvo to judge favorably requires that we always strive to find the benefit of the doubt even when doing so seems to defy logic. In truth, this does not seem to be an accurate understanding of what this mitzvo involves.

The Rishonim write that there are different categories of people for whom there are different requirements of judging favorably . There is the ‘tzadik’, the ‘beinoni’, the ‘rasha’ and the ‘eino makiro’, (stranger): The tzadik is someone who hardly ever commits a sin - with regards to him we must judge him favorably even if his actions lean very strongly to a negative interpretation: The beinoni is a person who generally avoids sin but on occasion does falter - we must judge him favorably in situations that could be perceived equally in a positive and negative way, however when his actions seem negative we are not commanded to judge him favorably . The rasha regularly sins and as a consequence we need not judge him favorably even when his actions seem positive. Indeed, Rabbeinu Yonah says that we should judge him unfavorably ! An eino makiro is someone that we do not know - there is no obligation with regards to judging him .

What is difficult about all the above gedarim is that there is no allusion to them in the Torah or Chazal - the Torah makes no differentiation between different people, it simply tells us to judge our fellow favorably, implying that this applies equally to every Jew. Where did the Rishonim see such chilukim between different kinds of people?! My Rebbe, Rav Yitzchak Berkovits Shlita explains that the mitzvo of judging favorably does not mean that we should irrationally judge every act in a positive way, rather it is telling us that we should judge people in a logical, reasonable and fair manner; a person may have a tendency to judge others in a harsh manner and not give them a fair judgement, the Torah comes and tells us that this is wrong, however it does not instruct us to judge people in an illogical fashion. Based on this understanding it becomes clear why the Rishonim gave different gedarim to different people: With regard to a tzaddik, even if he does something that seems like an aveiro is logical to assume that he did not do anything wrong. For example, if one sees a person who is known to be very strict on eating kosher, going into a non-kosher restaurant, it is logical to assume that he is not going in, in order to eat non-kosher food. Furthermore, even if we see him putting the food into his mouth it is more logical to say that he needs to eat in order to save his life and therefore it is permitted for him to eat this non-kosher food at this time. In contrast, when a rasha does something that seems positive, it is nevertheless logical that there is a negative way of interpreting his behavior. The same logic applies to the other categories - when it is logical to judge someone favorably the Torah requires that we do so, but when it is not, then there is no Torah obligation to judge favorably and there are even times when one should judge his fellow unfavorably.

With this understanding we can now reconcile the mtizvo of judging favorably with the Chofetz Chaim’s teaching that people should not be naïve. The mitzvo does not tell us to be naïve, in contrast it instructs us to be realistic and at times tells us that we should judge people in an unfavorable manner. Thus, when we are dealing with people in business, for example, ‘b’tzedek tishpot’ teaches us that we should not be naïve, rather we should judge people fairly and accurately. As we noted before, it is important to remember that this in and of itself is no easy task - a person’s natural leaning may be to judge people in a unfair fashion. This, the Torah tells us, is wrong, rather we should strive to see people in a fair light.

OUR INFLUENCE ON OTHERS - SHOFTIM

“Who is the man who is fearful and faint-hearted? Let him go and return to his house, and let him not melt the heart of his fellows to be like his heart. ” The Torah commands anyone who is afraid of going to war to leave the battlefield because of the negative influence his behavior will have on his fellow soldiers. They will be effected by his fear and consequently become more fearful themselves which will have a detrimental session . The Ramban brings the opinion of the Behag that this is one of the 613 Mitzvot . Rav Chaim Shmuelevitz says that the root of this Mitzva is that it is forbidden to act in such a way in any area of life that will negatively influence onlookers. This applies even if the action is justified but can still be interpreted in a negative way - thus he warns of the care a person studying in Yeshiva must take in not missing the study sessions, even when he has a valid reason, because everyone else may not know of this reason and will come to learn to be less strict in keeping to their own studies . Rav Shlomo-Zalman Auerbach applied this principle in Jewish law. He was asked by someone who had a choice of two Shacharis (the morning service) minyanim (quorum); one was far slower than the other, allowing for more concentration, but if he would pray in it he would have to leave before the end. Rav Auerbach answered that he should pray in the slower minyan even though he would have to leave early. However, he told the person that he should make known the reason for his early departure so as to avoid other people learning from his actions and in the incorrect way . Even though the questioner was following the law by leaving early, nevertheless he had to be aware of the possible consequences that this could have on others .

One may ask, why should a person be judged by how his actions influence others if there is nothing intrinsically wrong with them - we are commanded to keep the 613 Mitzvot; if a person does that then why should he suffer from others imitating him in a negative way? Rav Chaim of Volozhin zt”l writes that in the Shemoneh Esrei of Rosh Hashana we say that Hashem judges the “maaseh ish upekudaso”. Maaseh ish means a person’s own actions, but what does ‘pekudaso’ refer to? He explains that each person has a sphere of influence beyond himself, which includes his family, his students, and any people that come into contact with him. The way he influences these people through his own actions is ‘pekudaso’ and he is judged in that area as well. If, by observing his behavior, they learn to improve their Avodas Hashem (Divine Service) then he will receive much reward but if the opposite occurs then he will be judged for his part in their sins just as he is judged for his own . A person’s actions do not take place in a vacuum, we are always being noticed by others, consequently we must constantly be aware of the possible effect we can have on others without even directly communicating with them.

We can benefit from this form of reward through the positive effect we can have on our fellow: One way in which to do this is by being a positive example in our own behavior and thereby inspire those around us to emulate us . Rav Aron Kotler notes that it is very difficult to rebuke someone effectively without embarrassing him. He suggests that one way to help him grow without fear of causing pain is rebuke by example; acting in such a way that inspires others to emulate his behavior . Someone who, for example consistently arrives on time for Shacharis can influence his roommates to want to do the same; a person who works all day but is careful to be learn Torah for a fixed time every day is an example to those who can’t find the time to learn regularly. Or a person who is careful not to speak lashon hara makes it difficult for those around him to do so by his mere presence. Rav Kotler adds that if a person deliberately excels in a certain area of Avodas Hashem in order to effect onlookers, then he has fulfilled the Mitzva of rebuke in this fashion. And the greater a person is, the more he can influence others in this way. A resolution to bring all of Jewry back to the Torah was found in the satchel of the righteous Rav Naftali Amsterdam. When asked how he planned to carry out this resolution, he replied, “I have resolved to keep all the laws of the Shulchan Aruch strictly. In this way I will serve as a living Shulchan Aruch and anyone who wants to keep the Torah will be able to see in me a living example of a complete Jew and learn from me how to return to the Torah .”

Rav Shmuelevitz goes so far as to argue that causing others to fulfill a Mitzva is considered greater than doing the Mitzva oneself. One of his proofs is a Gemara in Sotah : The Gemara says that Yehuda’s body did not find rest until Moses prayed for him and mentioned one of his merits; Moses said to God, “who caused Reuven to confess to his sin [of moving his father’s bed]? Yehuda [when he confessed about the incident with Tamar].” Rav Shmuelevitz points out that the only merit that Moses mentioned in his prayer is that Yehuda caused Reuven to confess. Why didn’t he mention the great merit of Yehuda’s own confession, an act of great courage that saved the lives of three souls?! We are forced to answer that benefitting our fellow in his spirituality is greater than our own deed in and of itself and therefore the effect his deed had on Reuven was greater than the deed itself !

A person can never know when his deeds can influence others, even the smallest actions can have great effect as is demonstrated in the following true stories: Expecting a large crowd in shul on Yom Kippur, Rav Elya Dushnitzer occupied himself by tearing pieces of toilet paper for public use in the large Petach Tikva shul’s bathroom. A secular Israeli stopped to watch what appeared to him as somewhat peculiar. “Why are you doing that,” he asked. “Tomorrow there is going to be a big crowd, and I don’t want anyone to be inconvenienced.” After becoming a baal teshuva, the Israeli explained what moved him to make a life change. “It was that rabbi. Every rip of paper made a tear deep in my heart. ”

Unsure of whether to attend yeshiva or not, young Moshe decided to go to a yeshiva and see what the guys were like. As he was walking through the lunchroom, someone bumped into him, causing Moshe to spill his coffee on another boy seated at a table. Without a moment’s hesitation, the boy jumped up and called out, “Hey, Shimon, quickly bring another cup of coffee for Moshe!” Moshe decided that if this is what yeshiva bachurim are like, then he’s going to stay. He went on to become Rav Moshe Shwab, the mashgiach (spiritual overseer) of Gateshead Yeshiva .

The people in these stories who were the catalyst for the great changes people made in their lives, do not merely gain reward for their single action. The Mishna in Pirkei Avot writes that a person who benefits others receives incredible benefits ; It begins by saying that ‘sin will not come to his hand,’ - many commentators explain this to mean that he will receive great Heavenly assistance to avoid sin . The Mishna then describes Moses as an example of a mezakeh d’rabim (one who benefits many) and says that he receives reward for all the Mitzvot that he caused to be done as if he fulfilled them himself. Thus, Rav Aaron Kotler notes that one who causes others to perform Mitzvot receives incredible reward for his deeds. “one can not imagine the great gain a person receives through this; he merits extra heavenly protection to not stumble in sin and also to a great number of merits, something which would have been impossible for him to achieve through his own free will . He writes further that this can help us in Heavenly Judgment; The Gemara says that the Books of Life and of Death are opened on Rosh Hashana. Tosefot explains that the dead are also judged . For what are they judged? Rav Kotler answers that even after a person’s death, the actions he committed in the world can still effect others , both positively or negatively. Thus, if a person helps others in such a way that the benefits are long-lasting, he can continue to reap the reward for this even after his own death .

THE IMPORTANCE OF A SMILE - RE’EH

The parsha discusses the mitzvo of tzedaka and promises a special bracha to one who fulfils this mitzvo b’simcha: “You will surely give to him [the poor man] and you should not feel bad in your heart when giving him, because of this thing (davar hazeh) Hashem, your G-d will bless you in all your deeds and your every undertaking. ” The Gemara elaborates on the number of brachos one receives when he gives tzedaka: “Rebbi Yitzchak says, ‘one who gives a prutah to a poor person is blessed with six brachos and one who speaks kindly to him [whilst giving the prutah] is blessed with [an additional] eleven brachos .” The Gra explains that these 17 brachos are alluded to in the passuk - the Torah says that a person will receive the blessing, “because of davar hazeh” - the word hazeh is gematria of 17, thus alluding to the maximum amount of brachos one can receive if he gives tzedaka in the optimum manner .

However, this Gemara seems difficult to understand. It says that a person receives nearly double as many brachos for speaking in a friendly manner as for giving money. Being friendly is a good hanhago (form of behaviour) but why does the Gemara consider it so much greater than providing a poor person with the money he so desperately needs?! There is an Avos d’Rebbi Nosson which discusses a similar issue that can help us answer this question. It says, “one should greet every man with a friendly countenance… if a person gives to his friend all the gifts in the world, but his face is sullen, it is considered as if he gave nothing. But one who greets his fellow with a friendly countenance, even if he gave him no gifts, it is considered as if he gave him all the best gifts in the world. ”

The Sifsei Chaim explains that what people want more than anything is for others to show an interest in and care about them. A gift is merely an indication that the giver thought about the needs of his fellow and how he could give him joy. However, without an accompanying show of warmth the main purpose of the gift is lost because the person does not feel as if he is being genuinely cared about. In contrast when a person is friendly to his fellow even without giving any gifts, then he is providing him with his primary need, the desire to feel cared about . This explanation can also be used to answer our question. A person who gives tzedaka with a friendly attitude is giving much more than money, he is nourishing the poor man with a sense of importance by showing that he is cared about.

We learn from here how showing an interest in our fellow is one of the greatest possible acts of kindess that we can perform, even surpassing giving charity. There are numerous sayings of Chazal that stress the importance of being friendly. The Gemara tells us that Rav Yochanan Ben Zakkai greeted everyone before they could greet him, even the non-Jew in the market-place . Rav Dan Roth Shlita explains what we can learn from this Chazal. Rav Yochanan Ben Zakkai was the greatest Sage in his time and was the Nasi (Prince), the highest ranking position amongst the Jewish people. And yet, despite his high rank and prestige, he never failed to greet other people first. He recognized the power of a friendly greeting. Wishing someone ‘good morning’ shows that you acknowledge who he or she is. In a world where people are often not appreciated enough, by greeting someone we show that we see him as something of worth. This applies to non-Jews and especially to those people that we tend not to notice or acknowledge such as taxi drivers, street cleaners and security guards . The following true stories demonstrate how important it is to learn from Rav Yochanan Ben Zakkai.

A Jew was working in a meat-packing plant in Norway. Towards the end of the day he went into one of the freezers to do an inspection. The freezer door slipped off its safety latch and closed, trapping the man in the freezer. He tried banging on the door and yelling but no avail. Most of the workers had already gone home and the sound was muffled anyway by the heavy freezer door. He was in the room for five hours and on the verge of death. Suddenly the door opened. The security guard put his head in and came to his rescue and saved his life. The security guard was later asked why he thought to open that freezer door. He explained, “I have been working here for thirty-five years. Hundreds of workers come to this plant every day. This Jew is the only one who says hello to me in the morning and good-bye in the evening. All the other workers treat me as invisible. Today he said hello, but I never heard the good-bye. I wait for that hello and good-bye every day. Knowing I never heard it, I realised that he must be somewhere in the building so I searched for him. ’’ A simple ‘hello’ and ‘goodbye’ were so important to this security guard that he waited for them every day. We should strive to be like the Jew who greeted him so regularly and NOT like everyone else who treated him as if he didn’t exist.

It should be noted that being friendly does not merely constitute a praiseworthy act, rather it is an obligation that is incumbent upon every Jew. Rav Dessler zt”l points out that the Mishna in Avos which tells us to greet people in a friendly manner is said in the name of Shammai. It would have seemed more appropriate for Hillel, who is associated with chesed to express this idea, than Shammai who is known for his midos hadin . Rav Dessler explains that this comes to teach us that greeting our fellow in a friendly way is a chiyuv gamoor . Moreover, the Gemara states that anyone who knows that his friend regularly greets him should strive to be the one to initiate the greeting. Moreover, if his friend greeted him first and he does not return the greeting then he is called a thief . Rav Dessler explains that when one refrains from returning his friend’s greeting, he is stealing his self-worth and this is a terrible sin. Indeed, when one is doing teshuva for the various forms of stealing he should include the aveiro of ’gezeilas shalom’ and commit to being more friendly in the future.

We have seen how there is a clear obligation to show warmth in our interactions with our fellow man and that by doing so we can give him a true sense of self-worth. How can a person strive to improve in this vital area of avodas Hashem? It is recommended to notice anyone in our neighborhood who does not seem to know many people and to try to befriend them. This applies especially to new members of the community who naturally feel unknown and unimportant in their new neighborhood. But it is even worthwhile to say a friendly word to anyone in the community with whom we have thus far not made any effort to do so.

May we all merit to treat our fellow in the way that he deserves.

HOW TO GIVE TO OTHERS - RE’EH

This week’s Parsha is the source of the mitzvo to give tzedaka. The Torah tells us that we should give a person “enough for his lack which is lacking to him. ” Chazal learn out from the words, “to him” at the end of the passuk that we must give according to each individual’s specific needs. For example, if a person who was wealthy and used to an extravagant lifestyle then became poor, we must try to give him to the extent that he can live according to his previous standing . In this vein, Chazal tell us of a man who had been accustomed to traveling on a carriage with servants running in front of him. When he lost his money, Hillel HaZaken ensured that he have a carriage to ride and even ran in front of the carriage himself !

This concept teaches us a fundamental principle in chesed - that we must give according to the specific needs of the other person. A significant part of the avoda of chesed is to discern each person’s unique requirements and strive to fulfill them. This is not an easy task because each person views the world through his own eyes and one can easily project his own desires and needs onto others. Consequently he may provide them with what would be important to the giver but is not so important to the receiver. For example, if a person likes apples he may presume that others also do and therefore he will feel he is doing a great chesed by giving them apples. However, the recipient of his ‘chesed’ may prefer oranges, thus the giver did not truly satisfy his friend’s needs because he presumed that he had the same tastes as himself.

This concept, however, seems to contradict the most fundamental mitzvo in bein adam lechaveiro; that of ‘love your neighbor like yourself’. Hillel interpreted this mitzvo to primarily mean, ‘‘that which is hateful to you do not do to your friend”. This teaches us that the mitzvo is to treat one’s friend in the same way that one would like to be treated himself. This implies that one does not have to try to understand his fellow’s specific needs, rather the mitzvo is limited to treating the receiver according to the giver’s own personal preferences. This would indicate that if a person likes apples then he should give apples to his friend because he would like his friend to do the same to him, and the fact that his friend actually prefers oranges is irrelevant.

The Chofetz Chaim zt”l raises this question in the context of hilchos lashon hara : He writes that some statements are not objectively lashon hara, rather they depend on the subject of discussion. For example, to say that Ploni learns 4 hours a day could be a positive statement or a transgression of lashon hara. It depends about who is being spoken about. If one would say that a working man learns 4 hours a day, then that would be a praiseworthy statement, however to say the same thing about an avreich would be lashon hara. The Chofetz Chaim then says that one may ask the aforementioned kasha; a person who works himself may argue that he would like people to say about him that he learns 4 hours a day, therefore it should be permissible to say the same thing about someone who is supposed to learn the whole day. The proof of this argument is Hillel’s statement that it is only forbidden to do to someone what we would not like him to do to us, but in this case we would very much like to be spoken about in such a way. The Chofetz Chaim answers that when Hillel said, “that which is hateful to you do not do to your friend”, he meant that if you were on his level or in his situation, then this would be hateful to you, even if it is not actually hateful to you at your present standing. This teaches us that the mitzvo of ‘love your neighbor as yourself’ does not in fact contradict the concept of doing chesed according to the other person’s needs. Rather it means that, just like we would like our fellow to do what is beneficial in our eyes, and avoid what it hateful in our eyes, so too, we must treat him in a way that is beneficial in his eyes.

Rav Yisroel Salanter zt”l taught and demonstrated the importance of understanding other people’s needs and situations throughout his life. On one occasion, a talmid saw Rav Salanter conversing with someone about mundane matters, which was very out of character for him, because he would generally only speak words of Torah. Later, during a discussion on idle speech, the talmid asked Rav Salanter why he was speaking about such mundane matters. He explained that the man with whom he was speaking was dpressed and it was a great chesed to cheer him up now. Said Rav Salanter, “how could I cheer him up? With talk of Mussar and fear of G-d? The only way was with light, pleasant conversation about worldly matters. ” He understood the needs of this man and acted accordingly.

We have seen how the foundation of true chesed is understanding our fellow’s needs and trying to fulfill them, rather than presuming that that which is important to us is also important to them. This avoda occurs constantly in every kind of relationship. In marriage, it is very common that husband and wife have different interests; for example, when the wife talks about something that is important to her, the husband may not feel a great deal of enthusiasm in this particular topic. However, he or she should recognize that this is important to the other one and therefore express interest in that which is important to her. Similarly, children have very different interests than their parents and their parents may not be so fascinated by the childish pursuits of their children. Nonetheless it is essential that they do not dismiss their children’s enthusiastic discussion because to do so shows a severe lack of empathy and concern with their children’s needs. There are countless likewise situations throughout our lives and it is vital to work on this area in order to become genuine baalei chesed.

MOURNING: THE BODY AND THE SOUL - RE’EH

In Parshas Re’eh, the Torah outlines certain acts of mourning that were practiced by the non-Jews in those times. Some would make cuts in their body, whilst others would tear out hair between their eyes. The Torah forbids such actions, saying: “You are children of G-d, do not cut yourselves, nor tear out hair between your eyes over a death.” Similarly, in Parshas Kedoshim, the Torah tells us: "You should not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead, nor print any marks upon you; I am Hashem." These mitzvos teach that it is wrong to make a cut in one's body as a sign of mourning. In contrast, there is a positive commandment to tear one's clothing on the occasion of the death of a close relative (this is known as kriah). The Shulchan Aruch states: "Someone whose relative has died, (if it is a relative that one is required to mourn over), must tear [their garment] for them." It is striking how very similar actions of tearing are regarded so differently in Jewish law, to the extent that cutting one's flesh is forbidden and yet, tearing one's clothing is obligatory?

In order to understand the difference between cutting one's body and cutting one's clothing, it is necessary to analyze the first event in the Torah in which clothing plays a role - that of the chet (sin) of Adam Harishon. The Torah tells us that before the chet, Adam and Chava did not wear any clothes, yet they felt no shame. However, after they ate from the fruit, they then realized that they were naked and they wore clothes to cover their shame. What change took place as a result of the sin? We know that man is comprised of two, contrasting features; a body and a soul. It seems that it was always understood that it was inappropriate for one's essence to be exposed, and therefore there was the necessity of some kind of 'covering', or clothing. Before the sin, Adam primarily identified himself as a soul, and his body took on the role of a kind of 'clothing' for the soul. Accordingly, there was no need for garments to act as clothing for the body, because the body was a kind of clothing in and of itself. However, after the sin, man's primary identity shifted to being that of a body. Once he viewed his body as being the ikar , he felt embarrassed when it was uncovered. Accordingly he needed clothing to cover himself.

With this insight into the relationship between body and soul, we can now gain a deeper understanding of the significance of tearing one's clothing or cutting one's body. Since the chet of Adam Harishon, man lives his life primarily focusing on himself as a body. Thus, when a person dies, one could mistakenly think that his whole being is gone forever. However, this is a serious mistake - he has only lost his body, but his soul remains extant. Accordingly, he is commanded to tear his clothing to remind him in his time of grief, that his loved one's essence has not disappeared. Only his body, which was the clothing for his soul, has been lost, however his soul is intact. This explains why it is forbidden to make a cut in one's flesh. To do so indicates a belief that this person ceases to exist in all forms.

The Torah's directives about mourning teaches not only about the correct attitude to death but also to how one should approach his life as well. With regard to death, we learn that death is not the end of a person's existence. We recognize that a person’s loved one has moved on to a higher plain of existence. Making cuts in one's body symbolizes a belief that the deceased ceases to exist in any form. Accordingly, it is a totally inappropriate action.

With regard to life, these lessons remind a person that he should not lose sight of the fact that his soul is the primary source of his identity and his body is a temporary vessel whose job is to facilitate the well-being of the soul. Accordingly, whilst one must provide for the basic physical needs of the body, he should not do so as an end in itself, rather to strengthen himself to be in a healthy physical state to embark on his spiritual endeavors. This is very difficult, given the state of man after the sin of Adam Harishon, however, the more one strengthens his recognition of the primacy of the soul, the more he will be able to put this lesson into practice.

May we all merit to understand the Torah approach to life and death.

YIRAS HASHEM - EIKEV

“You shall fear Hashem, Your G-d.” The mitzvo to fear G-d is one of the most fundamental mitzvos in the Torah and is one of the ‘shesh mitzvos temidius’, the six constant mitzvos that one must fulfill at any moment . This mitzvo would seem to contradict another of the ‘mitzvos temidius’, Ahavas Hashem. The mitzvo of Ahavas Hashem teaches us that G-d is all giving and loving. If that is the case then how can we be expected to fear Him; people generally fear things or beings who do not have their best interests at heart. The commentaries explain that the fear required in the mitzvo of yiras Hashem cannot be equated to fear of something that is trying to cause us harm, rather, at it’s most basic level, it consists of fear of the consequences of our actions. Yiras Hashem teaches us that Hashem is not a vatran , He has placed a system in the world whereby if a person commits a spiritually negative action then, as a consequence he will be spiritually damaged.

Chazal take this point further by explaining what exactly we should and should not be afraid of: The Gemara in Brachos notes a seeming contradiction about fear between passukim in Tanach . Shlomo HaMelech writes in Mishlei; “fortunate is the man who is constantly afraid. ” In contrast, Yeshaya HaNavi says; “those from Zion who are afraid are sinners. ” The Gemara explains that the passuk in Mishlei is referring to ‘divrei Torah’. My Rebbe, Rav Yitzchak Berkovits Shlita explains that ‘divrei Torah’ can be understood to refer to spiritual matters. We only have control over our free will in spiritual pursuits - thus, The Gemara is telling us that it is correct to fear one’s own failure in the spiritual realm because we have control over it and have the ability to falter. However, in all other areas we know that Hashem is in total control and since He is all-giving and all-powerful, it is foolish and wrong to be afraid that ‘bad things’ will happen to us - when Hashem is in control nothing genuinely ‘bad’ can happen, it may seem that way at the time, but we know that ultimately there is nothing to be afraid of when Hashem is directing matters . The only thing we need to be afraid of is ourselves and the damage we can do to ourselves.

Another Gemara shows further how important it is to fear the consequences of our actions: The Gemara in Gittin recounts the famous story of Kamtza and Bar Kamtza and how the sinas chinam in that story caused the chain of events that ended with the tragic destruction of the Beis HaMikdash. As an introduction to this tragic episode the Gemara quotes the aforementioned passuk in Mishlei that extols the virtues of fear . How is the inyan of fear connected to the events of the Kamtza and Bar Kamtza episode? Tosefos explain that the people who sinned in the story should have been more fearful of the consequences of their actions such as allowing Bar Kamtza to be embarrassed in public without interceding. Had they been more vigilant about the results of their actions they would have realized that they should act differently. We see from here the significance of fearing ourselves - it was their lack of such fear that enabled the tragic mistakes to unfold.

These Gemaras teach us that whenever we have free will in a situation we must be fearful to not stumble but when there is nothing that can be done then it is wrong to have fear, and we should place our trust in Hashem. The Brisker Rav zt”l was famous for his fear of not performing mitzvos properly but at the same time, he remained remarkably calm when there was nothing he could do. Rav Shlomo Lorincz Shlita tells over that during the siege of the Yerushalayim in Israel’s War of Independence the Brisker Rav would stay very calm even whilst the city was being bombarded with shells. Yet, when the shelling ceased, he would immediately become very agitated with concern for those far away. Asked to explain the contrast in his behavior, he responded that when the shells were falling nearby, he was in a position of an ones and thus freed from any obligation to assist others. Since he had not responsibility, he had no tension. But when his neighborhood was not being shelled, he could not stop thinking about what he might be able to do for those in danger, and the matter gave him no rest . The Brisker Rav was in tune with the appropriate times to be fearful and to be calm, when there was nothing he could do then he was very calm, but whilst a responsibility lay upon him he would not relax.

This lesson is very pertinent as we approach Elul. Throughout the year a person may develop a sense of security about his spiritual standing, feeling that Hashem will ’overlook’ his transgressions and failings. However with Yom HaDin approaching, we are reminded that Hashem is not a vatran and that there are serious consequences to our actions. The Mitzvo of Yiras Hashem teaches us that we cannot sit back and have a false trust in G-d that everything will be alright. We have the great gift of free will but that is accompanied by the fact that we cannot rely on G-d to force us to make the correct decisions. Our control over our actions is cause of great fear - it means that we can ignore the opportunities that Hashem gives us, misuse our talents and generally fail to fulfill our potential in life - that is worthy of fear.

THE BENEFITS OF YISSURIM - EKEV

“And you should know in your heart that just as a father punishes his son, Hashem punishes you. In this short sentence the Torah is teaching us the most basic tenet of bitachon. Just as a father only punishes a son because of his love for him and for his ultimate benefit, so too any punishments that Hashem sends to us also emanates from His great love for us and is only for our good. When a person finds himself in a painful or challenging situation he should realize that it is ultimately for the good. However, there is another life lesson that we learn from this comparison of Hashem to a father. A good father punishes his son in such a way that the son is intended to learn from his mistake and improve his behaviour. If the son continues to err even after the punishment then he has not enabled the onesh (punishment) to reach its desired purpose. So too, when Hashem punishes us He is, in most instances, trying to show us that we need to improve in some aspect of our behaviour . This idea is not a chiddush to most people, however it is usually discussed in a very vague way - that when bad things happen we need to ‘do teshuva’. This approach, whilst commendable, often seems to be unproductive because of its vagueness. In this article, the role of ‘yissurim ’ in our lives will be discussed, and hopefully will provide a clearer picture of how we can best utilise them.

The Mashgiach of Slobodka, Rav Avraham Grodzinski zt”l discusses the inyan of yissurim at length in his sefer, Toras Avraham . 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 does not merely 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. And the Gemara states further that if a person feels absolutely no suffering for forty days then he is destined for Gehinnom . This is because Hashem has given up hope for him to improve his ways, and therefore refrains from even trying to communicate with him .

The obvious question that we are faced with is, ‘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 cites a principle from Chazal that Hashem punishes a person measure for measure 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 . 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 reject the match because of Rav Grodzinski’s bad leg and they did indeed marry .

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 is connected to false speech but he works on lashon hara then he has achieved the main purpose 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. My Rebbe, Rav Yitzchak Berkovits Shlita points out that this is somewhat missing the point. 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 .

There is a second point with regards to how we react to yissurim. When a person is in the midst of suffering there is a tendency to ‘put his head in the sand’ until the pain goes away and then resume his life. We reconcile ourselves with the fact that we realise this is from Hashem but we still wait for it to end so that we can ‘resume’ our lives. This is understandable but, just like a father doesn’t want his son to react to punishment by moping, so too Hashem doesn’t want us to simply wait for the yissurim to end. We can continue to grow in our Avodas Hashem. Rav Pam zt”l experienced the most difficult period in his life in his early twenties when he had no source of parnasa and had no idea what the future had in store for him. Did he regress in his learning in this time? On the contrary - Rav Yisroel Reisman Shlita once asked him when he learnt Seder Kodshim. He answered that it was in this very period when his life was in such turmoil tat he undertook to learn on of the most difficult sections of the Torah.

Indeed, times of yissurim are often opportunities to grow more than in more comfortable times. For example, a person’s tefillos are often far more effective when he feels in need than when everything seems fine. Moreover, history has proven that many of the greatest works of our Rabbis were written at times of great suffering. This does not seem to be a co-incidence; when a person is deprived of physical comforts his only refuge is in ruchnius, thus when our great ancestors were suffering from great poverty and oppression their learning reached new heights.

Hashem loves us more than a father loves his son; When He deems it necessary to cause us suffering we often do not understand why we deserve such pain. In Olam Hazeh we may never know the answer but the one thing we can be sure of, is that Hashem is communicating with us, He wants us to hear His ‘voice’ through the yissurim and use them to grow closer to Him.

CLINGING TO THE WISE MAN - EIKEV

In Parshas Eikev, the Torah commands the people to go in the ways of HaShem, and to”cling to Him”. The Sifri , quoted by Rashi, asks how it is possible to cling to HaShem, given that He is described in another place in the Torah as an “all-consuming fire” ? The Sifri answers that the Torah is instructing us to cling to Talmidei Chachamim and their students; by doing that it is considered as if we cling to HaShem himself. The Rishonim derive from here an obligatory Mitzvo to learn from Talmidei Chachamim and try to develop a connection with them, in order to learn Torah with the correct understanding. A person might understand that it is a good hanhago (mode of behavior) to cling to Chachamim, however it is essential to recognize that it is a Torah obligation. Moreover, the Sefer HaChinuch writes very strongly about the importance of keeping this Mitzvo. He says; ”One who transgresses this and does not cling to them [Chachamim]…transgresses this positive Mitzvo, and his punishment is very great, because they are the [basis of] the existence of Torah, and a strong foundation for the salvation of souls, and anyone who is with them a great deal, will not come to sin..”

The Mesillas Yesharim also discusses the importance of learning from Talmidei Chachamim, particularly with regards to personal growth. He writes that one of the main strategies of the yetser hara is to confuse people so that they do not recognize the difference between good and evil. Accordingly, they believe they are acting correctly, when in truth they are being tricked by their yetser hara. How can a person avoid this trap? He answers with an analogy. A person finds himself in a very complicated maze, and there is only one path that leads to the exit, however, most paths do not lead anywhere, and in fact take him away from his destination. The person has no way himself of finding the correct path because the possible paths look identical to each other. The only way to escape such a maze is to take advice from someone who has already been through the maze and arrived safely at the other side. He can advise the person stuck inside which is the correct path to take. So too, a person who has not yet mastered his yetser hara will find it impossible to overcome it without the guidance of Talmidei Chachamim who have spent many years refining their characters.

We have seen how essential it is for one’s spiritual well-being to learn from Chachamim. However, a person may argue that this is an overly difficult Mitzvo because a significant amount of effort and persistence is required to attach oneself to Chachamim due to their busy schedules and the fact that already many people flock to them. The answer to this point is found in the words of the greatest Chacham, Moshe Rabbeinu. In Parshas Devarim, he recounts the episode when Yisro suggested that Moshe refrain from ruling on every matter of law, rather, other wise men should be appointed to guide the people in certain questions. The practical reason for this was in order to lessen the burden for Moshe and for the people who had to wait a long time for Moshe to be available. Moshe agreed to the suggestion and instructed the people to appoint Chachamim. The people gladly agreed to this request. Rashi points out that in his recollection of this incident, Moshe rebuked the people for their enthusiasm for Yisro’s idea. Moshe was telling them, “you should have answered, Rabbeinu Moshe, from who is it better to learn, from you or from your students, is it not [better to learn] from you, who suffered over it [the Torah]?!” Moshe rebuked them for not wanting to learn from the greatest Chacham, despite the fact that they would have to endure significant hardships in order to do so. We see from here how important it is to be willing to be moser nefesh to learn from Chachamim.

This lesson is borne out by a teaching of Chazal, that a person who learns a great deal of Torah but does not cling to Talmidei Chachamim is considered an am ha’aretz (ignorant person). Rav Chaim Shmuelevitz zt”l explains that one who learns alone only relies on his own understanding and does not turn to wise people for guidance. Because he does not verifiy his understanding with Chachamim, it is inevitable that he will come to make serious mistakes in his learning. In contrast, one who clings to Chachamim can achieve great levels in his wisdom.

The Alter of Novardok zt”l expressed this point when extolling the greatness of Rav Chaim Ozer Grodzensky zt”l. “His wisdom and genius is so great and of so much depth and breadth, because when he was young he was always to be found in the presence of the Gedolei Hador (greatest Rabbis). He never said to them, ‘accept my opinion’, rather he made himself into a ‘vessel’ who would listen and absorb all the opinions and explanations of all the Gedolim there. He absorbed into his very being all the wisdom that he heard and his wisdom became purified and elevated by the greatness of many generations that became embedded in his mind. ” When we discuss the greatness of Rav Chaim Ozer we generally focus on his incredible natural genius and ability to think of many things at the same time. We see from the words of the Alter that the key to his greatness was his willingness to learn from Talmidei Chachamim.

We have seen how essential it is for one to learn from Chachamim. The Sefer HaChinuch points out that this Mitzvo is also incumbent upon women. He writes, “This Mitzvo is in place in every place, at all times, for men, and it is also a Mitzvo for women to hear the words of Chachamim so that they will learn how to know HaShem.” It is interesting to note that the Sefer HaChinuch also writes that women are not obligated in the Mitzvo of Talmud Torah (learning Torah) Nevertheless, they are obligated to seek out Chachamim to guide them in their Avodas HaShem.

It is clear from the sources discussing this Mitzvo that both men and women must strive to learn from Chachamim. This is a particularly relevant lesson to people who grew up in more secular environments. In the secular world, the concept of ‘asking the wise man’ for guidance in life issues is almost unheard of. This is partly because intelligence and life wisdom have no necessary correlation. As a result of this, a baal teshuva may find it unnatural to ask life questions to Rabbis. Rav Noach Weinberg zt”l addressed this issue – he pointed out that in the secular world, people spend many years on studying in order to attain a certain qualification. However, with regard to basic life issues, such as marriage, child rearing, and life satisfaction, people spend almost no time studying how to succeed. The results of this failing are clear to see, with the divorce rate skyrocketing, family relationships consistently failing, and general life dissatisfaction commonplace. The Torah teaches that in all such issues it is essential that we learn from Chachamim, people who understand the Torah approach to life challenges. May we merit to keep the Mitzvo of ‘clinging to the

STRIPPING AWAY THE ILLUSION - TISHA B’AV

Chazal say that since Churban Bayis Sheini we should really be in a permanent state of mourning. However, we could not permanently live that way so for most of the year we conduct our lives as if everything is normal and how it should be. For three weeks of the year, culminating with Tisha b’Av we face the reality of our situation and adopt the customs of aveilim. We recognize that things are not as they should be - there is no Beis Hamikdash, we are in galus and we live in a time of hester panim when Hashem’s hashgacha over us is not evident to the eye. On Tisha b’Av in particular we focus on the events in Jewish history that reflect this hester panim as a way of internalizing the terrible state of affairs.

It seems that in different eras the hester panim manifests itself in different ways. For generations its main expression was through anti-Semitism. Jews steadfastly kept to the traditions of their ancestors and often had to give up their lives for it. More recently with the Holocaust, Jews were murdered merely for being Jews. The untold suffering that we have endured is something that people rightfully focus on a great deal on Tisha B’Av - by reading about such events we feel more aware of the terrible consequences of heseter panim. Whilst this hanhaga is certainly commendable, it seems that the ikar manifestation of hester panim in the present era is not anti-Semitism. Take out five seconds and think yourself what it is……..

I imagine that most of you answered that today the main manifestation of hester panim is the desperate state of Torah observance in Klal Yisroel today. We all have a vague, intellectual awareness that things are not as they should be but how bad is it? The intermarriage rate in USA in 1950 was 6%, by 1990 it was 52% and rising. 2 million Jews of Jewish origin do not identify themselves as Jews. 2 million self-identified Jews have no Jewish connection whatsoever. For every wedding between two Jews, two intermarriages take place. 625,000 US Jews are now practicing other religions. 11% of US Jews go to shul . Every day dozens of intermarriages take place which means that in the time it took you to read this, some Jews were lost forever. These statistics make the situation a little more real to us but it is still far from our hearts. A couple of years ago I had to go to a plastic surgeon in Mevasseret on Tisha B’Av when my son got a bad cut on his mouth. I found myself in a Kanyon and was met by a scene of what chillonim do on Tisha B’Av; they go about their lives as normal. I saw Jews eating in a Macdonalds, acting as if everything was normal. What’s more, is that the exact same scene would great you on Shabbos. We all know that chillonim don’t keep Shabbos but to actually experience it! Baruch Hashem we have no idea of what it means to have no Torah, no Shabbos, no relationship with Hashem, no direction in life … but this is the lot of our brothers and sisters - and what’s the difference between us and them? Simply that we were born into a Torah-observant family and they were not - that’s it.

So back to the initial point - This is the time of year that we strip away the illusion that everything is okay - EVERYTHING IS NOT OKAY. We have to face the truth - and what’s more is that we have to accept the responsibility for the way things are, and, on Tisha B’av in particular, we must feel the pain, we can’t hide from it. Chillul Shabbos is EVERYWHERE, inter-marriage is EVERYWHERE. And the most important thing to remember is how Hashem ‘feels’ about it. Just to make that idea more real - Imagine that you had 10 children and you brought them all up to be fully Torah-observant Jews. Nine of them follow the path that you hoped they would but one is slightly lax in this observance. How would you feel? Ask any person who has experienced such a thing and he will tell you that it caused him considerable distress. What if that one child was not just slightly lax but had abandoned Torah completely? Of course that would cause the parents untold grief. Imagine if not one but two children went astray, how much additional pain that would cause. If over half the children totally abandoned Yiddishkeit and of the remaining few only one was fully observant, you would feel unbearable anguish.

All Jews are banim l’Makom - Hashem is their father, and this is the state of Hashem’s ‘family’ - let us take this one day and face the reality - this is what the galus is about today and to end the galus this is what must be dealt with. Hashem is hidden, his children don’t see him, they barely even know he exists - there is certainly plenty to mourn. May this be the last Tisha B’Av of sadness and may it be transformed into a day of rejoicing when ALL Jews know what it means to be Banim l’Makom.

THE ULTIMATE MITZVO - VAESCHANAN

“And you shall teach them thoroughly to your children and speak of them while you sit in your home, while you walk on your way, when you retire and when you rise. ”
This passuk is the source of the mitzvo of Talmud Torah, the mitzvo that is described as being equal in value to all the others combined. It is surprising that the source for Talmud Torah does not say ‘you shall learn’, rather ‘you shall teach.’ - why is this the case?

The Ksav Sofer notes that the passuk does actually instruct us to learn (vedibarta bam) but only after telling us to teach first (veshinantam). The order should be reversed - a person learns before he teaches?! He answers that that the Torah is alluding to us that one’s own learning must be done with the ultimate goal of teaching others . This also explains why the ikar source for the mitzvo of Talmud Torah is teaching - because the ultimate tachlis of learning is to be able to give it over through teaching.

Of course learning Torah is not merely a means to be able to teach, a person needs Torah to be able to develop a relationship with Hashem, and without learning this is impossible. Nonetheless, it is clear from the commentaries that learning without teaching is a great lacking in the fulfillment of the mitzvo of Talmud Torah. This is why Chazal teach us that ‘lilmod al menas lelamed’ is an essential requirement of our focus in our learning. Moreover, the Meiri and Maharal both write that a person who learns but does not teach cannot reach shleimus .

We now understand why the Torah stresses teaching ahead of learning. However, the choice of word it used needs understanding; usually ‘you will teach’ is translated as ‘limadtem’, but here the Torah says, ‘veshinantam’. Rashi explains that this usage has an added meaning; it implies a high level of clarity so that one if someone asks a question, you can answer it without stumbling. From here we learn that a person can gain more clarity in his learning if it is in preparation to teach. A person who learns a Gemara knowing that people will challenge him on his understanding and explanations of it has a great incentive to learn with greater diligence. According to some commentators, this is the explanation of the Gemara: “Rebbi says, ‘I learnt a great deal of Torah from my teachers, more from by friends, and the most from my talmidim .” Students force a teacher to attain a higher level of understanding

This idea was stressed by Gedolim: An avreich was not succeeding in his learning so he asked the Steipler Gaon zt”l if he should continue in kollel or begin teaching. The Steipler answered that in the past everybody wanted to teach, and a person who did not find a position in teaching continued to learn in kollel. He then said, “That every Gadol Hador of the past grew greatly from giving shiurim. ” Teaching is also a great tool in helping one remember his learning. The Steipler once advised another avreich to teach a shiur in Yeshiva katana, and explained that when one teaches others a piece of learning it is equivalent to learning it twenty times. He said further, “I know from my own experience that that which I learnt myself I have forgotten, but that which I taught to others I remember it to this very day. ”

Thus far we have seen how teaching on a high level can greatly help one’s own learning. However, it would seem that teaching people on a lower level would not have the same effect. However, a number of commentaries understand the Gemara that ‘I learnt the most from my talmidim’ in a different way. The Chasam Sofer makes an extraordinary point in his hakdama to his Teshuvas on Yoreh Deah in an essay entitled ‘Pisuchey Chosam’. He speaks at length about the importance of giving over of one’s self for the sake of helping the spirituality of his fellow. He focuses on how Avraham Avinu devoted his time and effort to teaching the uneducated masses about Emuna rather than focus on his own growth. He then exhorts us to emulate Avraham and teach people even if they are on a low level of understanding. He addresses an argument against this approach. “If the Eved Hashem would say, ‘my soul craves closeness to Hashem and I want to get close to him. How can I do this and reduce my own learning and self-perfection in order to perfect my fellow’s soul?!’ The answer to this is found in Chazal; ‘… I learnt the most from my students’. Is it beyond Hashem to make up to you the growth that you forsook for the sake of His Kavod?! You should do what Hashem commanded you - to teach the people - and He will fulfil His role…. He will make it possible for you to attain the shleimus in a small time and you will be able to attain lofty heights beyond your own sechel. ” One who teaches people that are on a low level of learning will receive a great deal of siata dishmaya which will enable him to attain greater heights than humanly possible .

There is another benefit for teaching those on a lower level, particularly in areas of emuna and hashkafa. Rav Yaakov Kamenetsky zt”l greatly encouraged yungerleit who were considering careers in Jewish education. He once spoke to them for a three hour question-and-answer session on this subject. One expressed his concern about the bitul Torah involved in teaching. Rav Yaakov pointed out that teaching often forces one to obtain greater clarity in one’s own learning. He then added, “And if you have to learn a little Chumash and Nach, it won’t be such a terrible thing. ” When a person teaches those who lack a basic understanding in such vital areas of Torah as Chumash and Nach he is forced to delve into them on a far deeper level than ever before. The great educator, Rav Yitzchak Kirzner zt”l elaborated on this point in discussing the benefits of teaching people lacking the basic tenets of Yiddishkeit. He said that in order to be able to present the Torah outlook on life a teacher needs familiarity with such works as Derech Hashem and Mesillas Yeshvarim. Unfortunately such works are often neglected amidst the pressure to devote all one’s time to Gemara, but by teaching over basic Torah hashkafa an observant Jew can develop his own understanding of Judaism and relationship to Hashem.

We have thus far seen how teaching Torah is a fundamental aspect of the mitzvo of Talmud Torah and that it reaps untold benefits. However, there may still be a temptation to treat it differently from other chiyuvim and look at it more as a ‘mitzvo kiyumis’ than as an obligation. This would seem to be an incorrect attitude: On one occasion the Chazon Ish zt”l saw that in Ponevezh there were a number of younger bochrim who were struggling in their learning. He ordered the older bochrim to spend some time each day learning with the younger bochrim. He was told that they could not find the time in which to teach their struggling contemporaries because of their busy learning schdules. To this he instructed that the following message should be relayed to the older boys: “Do you put on tefillin?! How can you do so, there is no time, you need to learn! Rather, you find the time to put on tefillin because it is a positive mitzvo - there is another mitzvo that is of no lesser value than tefillin - to set apart time to help the younger bochrim. ” The Chazon Ish taught that teaching Torah should be viewed as a chiyuv just like any other mitzvo and that the argument that ‘there is no time to teach’ is baseless.

So how can a person know how much time he must spend teaching? Obviously this is not a simple issue and it varies according to the many factors in the life of each person. However, the Gedolim seem to universally agree that bnei Torah must give some of their time to teaching others, especially those who are lacking in their Torah observance . Rav Moshe Feinstein zt”l sums up the approach very well. In a talk to yeshiva students he argued that just like we are required to give over at least 10% of our time to tzedaka, so too, a ben Torah “must spend one tenth of his time working on behalf of others, bringing them close to Torah.” He further stated that, “if one is endowed with greater resources he must correspondingly spend more of his time with others. ”

We have discussed much about the maalos of teaching Torah. Why exactly is it considered so great to the extent that the Eglei Tal writes that it is on an even higher level than learning Torah ? There are a number of reasons for this but one can be found in the passuk we have discussed. The Torah says, “you will teach it to your children.” Chazal learn out this does not only refer to one’s genetic children, but also to one’s students. Why doesn’t the Torah just tell us to teach students? The answer is that the Torah is showing us that teaching Torah is similar in a certain aspect to having children. When a person brings a child to the world he is giving him the tremendous gift of life. When a person teaches someone Torah he is giving him the opportunity to gain eternal life. Thus by teaching Torah you are acquiring the quality of parenting - giving life. This is why students are referred to as children. Indeed teaching Torah to a child is considered an even greater chesed than giving birth to him as the Mishna in Bava Metsia states; “If a person sees the lost objects of his father and his teacher, the teacher takes precedence.” Why? “Because his father brought him to Olam Hazeh but his teacher who taught him wisdom, brings him to Olam Haba. ” Teaching Torah is the ultimate chesed that one can do - may we all be zocheh to fulfil it.

GOING BEYOND THE LETTER OF THE LAW - VA’ESCHANAN

“And you will do that which is right and good in the eyes of Hashem so that He will do good to you and you will come and inherit the land which Hashem promised to give to your forefathers .”

The commentaries write that this passuk, that appears towards the end of the Parsha, is the source for the principle of ‘going beyond the letter of the law. ” This teaches us of the necessity to avoid being medakdek (exacting) in matters of law and to be mevater (forgiving) what is rightfully ours in certain situations. Examples of this are; when a person finds a lost object that halachically he is allowed to keep, but he knows the identity of the original owner - Chazal tell us that even though it is technically permitted to keep the object, he should nonetheless give it back . Another example is when a piece of property is for sale - the prospective buyers should give precedence to the person who lives next to that property because he stands to gain the most by buying this particular property . In truth, however, there are numerous instances when one should go beyond the letter of the law - the Ramban writes that the Torah did not want to explicitly state them all, rather we should learn from this passuk that we must constantly strive to treat people in an understanding fashion and avoid always treating them according to the strict letter of the law . The Gemara tells us that the Beis HaMikdash was destroyed because people were makpid on each other and treated them according to the strict letter of the law . This seems very difficult to understand - it would have seemed that the whole concept of going beyond the letter of the law is something of a stringency and that failing to follow it would not deserve such a strict punishment. Why were the Jewish people treated so harshly for being medakdek on each other?

It seems that failure to treat people ‘beyond the letter of the law’ reflects a deep flaw in a person’s attitude to Avodas Hashem. My Rebbe, Rav Yitzchak Berkovits Shlita explains, (based on the Ramban on this passuk) that ‘v’asisa hayashar vehatov’ is the bein adam lechaveiro equivalent of ‘kedoshim tehyu’: The Ramban in Parshas Kedoshim explains that a person can keep all of the mitzvos and yet be a menuval b’reshus HaTorah.’ - this means that he is careful not to transgress any mitzvos but at the same time he has no interest in elevating himself in areas of reshus such as eating and sleeping. The underlying reason behind his lifestyle is that he believes that the Torah is true and therefore must be observed, but he does not subscribe to the true Torah outlook - he has no interest in elevating himself spiritually, rather his goals are very much ’this-worldly’, involving such aims as fulfilling his physical desires and attaining wealth. Because of his recognition of the truth of Torah, he will never deliberately commit aveiros, nevertheless he will show no interest in elevating himself in areas that he is not technically obligated to do so .

Similarly in the realm of bein adam lechaveiro, a person may recognize the necessity of following the laws of the Torah, however he has no desire to integrate into himself the hashkafos behind them. Thus he will always adhere to the strict letter of the law but whenever he has the opportunity to make a financial gain in a technically permissible fashion he will not hesitate to do so. The Torah tells this person that he is making a serious hashkafic error by instructing him to “do what is right and good”, to act ‘beyond the letter of the law’, to treat people in a merciful fashion, and not be medakdek on every case. The Torah is instructing us that we should develop a genuine sense of ahavas Yisroel and thereby treat our fellow Jew in the same way that we would want them to treat us - to be forgiving and compassionate. Thus, for example, when someone has lost a valuable object a Jew should not hesitate to return it even if he is not obligated to do so or when a poor person finds himself owing you a large amount of money, a person should act with a degree of flexibility and compassion.

This helps understand why there was such a strict punishment when the Jews treated each other in a strict fashion - they missed the lesson of ‘hayashar b’hatov’ , that it is not right to treat one’s fellow Jew in a harsh and unforgiving manner this does not adhere to the spirit of bein adam lechaverio that theTorah espouses.

The commentaries find another difficulty with the Gemara saying that the Beis HaMikdash was destroyed because the people were strict with each other. Other Gemaras give different reasons for the destructions, such as murder, idol worship, immorality and baseless hatred . Rav Yitzchak of Volozhin answered this question when he was witness to the following incident. Someone had slandered his fellow and now came on Erev Yom Kippur to ask for forgiveness. The victim refused to forgive him, pointing to the halacho that one does not have to forgive slander. Rav Yitzchak asked him about the aforementioned contradiction in Gemaras. He explained that the Batei HaMikdash was destroyed because of the terrible sins enumerated in the other Gemaras. However, he pointed out that Chazal tell us that when people treat each other beyond the letter of the law and are not makpid on every nekuda, Hashem acts measure for measure and is forgiving for even the most serious sins. However, when |Hashem saw that the people were treating each other in a strict fashion, He acted accordingly and chose not to be forgiving for their other sins. So too, Rav Yitzchak said to the unforgiving person, if you treat your fellow in such a medakdek way then you should expect that Hashem will treat you in the same way. The man heard the lesson and forgave the slanderer.

May we all be zocheh to treat each other how we would like to be treated ourselves and that Hashem should react in a similar fashion.

THE TWO TABLETS - VA’ESCHANAN

Parshas Va’eschanan contains a repetition of the Ten Commandments, with a few minor changes. The Mabit makes a remarkable observation about the two luchos on which the Commandments were inscribed. Chazal explain that the two luchos were focusing on different areas of the Mitzvos: The first luach consisted of Mitzvos that relate to the realm of bein adam leMakom (between man and G-d), such as belief in G-d, and observing Shabbos. The second luach consisted of Mitvos that relate to bein adam lechaveiro (between man and his fellow), such as the prohibitions not to kill, and loh sachmod (not to covet).

The Mabit points out that there were far more words on the first luach than on the second. Accordingly, there was much less space to fit all the words on the first luach than on the second. Therefore, it must be that the words in the first luach were written far smaller than those in the second. This, the Mabit argues, was done deliberately by HaShem so that the side that discussed the bein adam lechaveiro Mitzvos would be more noticeable than the side that focused on bein adam leMakom. The Mabit continues that this is because the yetser hara is strongest in the area of bein adam lechaveiro. HaShem wanted people to focus more on the Mitzvos that relate to bein adam lechaveiro, because extra effort is required to overcome the yetser hara in this area.

It would seem that a Gemara in Bava Basra provides evidence supporting the Mabit’s argument. The Gemara discusses various sins in which people stumble. It tells us that a minority of people stumble in arayos (forbidden relationships), a majority stumble in gezel , and everyone stumbles in avak lashon hara. Forbidden relationships generally fall in the area of bein adam leMakom , whereas stealing and lashon hara both clearly fall within the realm of bein adam lechaveiro. Thus, the Gemara is telling us that people are more prone to sin in certain Mitzvos that pertain to bein adam lechaveiro.

The following story also supports this point: Rav Chaim Soloveitchik zt”l was asked to rule on the kashrus of an animal to ascertain whether it was treif. He ruled that it was indeed treif, causing the butcher involved a significant loss. The butcher accepted the ruling with equanimity. A few months later, the same butcher was involved in a monetary dispute with someone else, over a far smaller amount of money. Rav Chaim ruled against him. On this occasion, however, the butcher was furious, and insulted Rav Chaim for his ruling. Rav Simcha Zelig Reeger, zt”l asked Rav Chaim why the butcher was calm when he lost a far larger amount of money and so angry about the smaller sum. Rav Chaim explained that on this occasion, he ‘lost’ to someone else – it was the fact that another person ‘beat’ him that angered him so much.

The question remains, what is the reason (or reasons) as to why people are more prone to stumbling in bein adam lechaveiro. It is possible to suggest the following: The Vilna Gaon zt”l writes that every Mitzvo stems from a particular good character trait (midda), and every aveiro stems from a bad trait. Nonetheless, it seems that it is possible for a person to have certain bad middos and yet observe many Mitzvos. For example, a person who has a tendency to lose his temper, will not necessarily be hindered by this bad trait, in his observance of Shabbos, kashrus, and many other Mitzvos in the realm of bein adam LeMakom. However, he will be tremendously hindered in the area of bein adam lechaveiro. Every time he raises his voice in an inappropriate fashion, he will very likely transgress the prohibition of onaas devarim (hurtful words) and if he shouts at someone in front of others, he will transgress the extremely serious sin of embarrassing someone in public. Similarly, a person who has an ayin ra (he focuses on the bad in people), will still be able to pray three times a day, and learn Torah, however he will very likely stumble in lashon hara and judging others favorably.

There are obviously certain middos, which also make it very difficult to observe Mitzvos in bein adam Makom, such as laziness. However, it is important to note, that such traits will also greatly harm one’s observance of bein adam lechaveiro related Mitzvos. For example, a lazy person will not be willing to help his/her spouse in the work that needs to be done around the home, causing problems in the relationship. Even the trait of taiva (lust) can be the cause of great failings in bein adam lechaveiro. For example, a person who is overly attached to his/her food, will very likely react in an inappropriate fashion to his/her spouse if they serve food that he does not appreciate, again resulting in a transgression of onaas devarim.

The obvious lesson to derive from the Mabit is that extra effort is required in bein adam lechaveiro. Moreover based on the explanation that the root cause of the failing in this area is bad middos, it is essential to work on traits such as anger, jealousy, and ayin ra. Indeed, the Maharsha points out that when the Gemara said that everyone stumbles in avak lashon hara, it was only referring to people who do not make an effort to improve in this area. However, one who makes an effort to improve his speech by learning the laws relating to it and improving his traits, is not destined to speak avak lashon hara. This surely applies to all the Mitzvos bein adam lechaveiro; if one makes a strong and consistent effort to improve then he will overcome the yetser hara’s attempts to make his stumble.

LOVING HASHEM AND THE TORAH - THE THREE WEEKS

Chazal tell us with regard to any generation in which the Beis HaMikdosh was not rebuilt, it is viewed as if it was destroyed in that very generation . Rav Yaakov Weinberg zt"l explained that this means that had the Beis HaMikdosh been extant in that generation, then it also would have been destroyed as a result of the people's actions. Accordingly, it is clear that the actions that caused the initial destructions are still very much relevant to the present generation.

The Gemara in Nedarim offers one explanation as to why the first Beis HaMikdash was destroyed. It tells us that after the destruction of the first Beis HaMikdosh and the galus (exile) that followed, the Chachamim and Neviim did not know what was the cause of such a terrible punishment, until Hashem himself told them that it was because “they left My Torah. ” Rav explains that this does not mean that they were not learning Torah, rather that they did not make Birchas HaTorah before they would start learning . The commentaries find a number of difficulties with this Gemara . Why were the people punished so severely for the relatively minor sin of not saying Birchas HaTorah? Moreover, this Gemara seems to contradict the Gemara in Yoma, which states that the first Beis HaMikdosh was destroyed because of murder, idol worship, and immorality .

The Maharal addresses these problems . He writes that it is impossible to understand the Gemara literally, that they were not saying Birchas HaTorah. Rather the Gemara means that they did not say the bracha with the proper intentions. He explains that when a person says Birchas HaTorah, he should focus on his great love and gratitude towards Hashem for giving him the tremendous gift of the Torah. The chachamim of the generation did say the bracha and moreover, did not merely say it out of rote, however they did not focus sufficiently on their love of Hashem when saying it. He continues to explain how this subtle failing was the root cause of the terrible sins that led to the destruction of the Beis HaMikdosh. If a person focuses sufficiently on Hashem in the process of his learning then he merits to have tremendous siyata dishmaya that makes it much easier for him to avoid sin, and even if he does falter, it enables him to do teshuva without great difficulty. Rav Hutner zt”l writes that this is what Chazal mean when they say that ‘the light of Torah returns a person to good’. However, if he does not connect to Hashem through his learning then he loses that special siyata dishmaya and if he falters he is far more likely to become trapped in a downward spiral of sin .

Based on this explanation we can resolve the contradiction between the Gemaras in Nedarim and Yoma. The Beis HaMikdosh was destroyed because of the terrible sins enumerated in Yoma. However, the failure to say Birchas HaTorah with the proper attitude was the root cause that enabled the deterioration of the Jewish people to the point where they were sinning so greatly. Because they did not connect to Hashem properly they lost siyata dishmaya and consequently fell prey to the powerful temptations of the yetser hara. The Maharal offers a fascinating and somewhat surprising explanation of the reasons why a person may fail to show the proper love of Hashem in his Birchas HaTorah. He argues that it is impossible to love two entities at the same time, and consequently focusing on love of one thing will reduce the focus of the love for something else. Based on this, he writes that there are two possible ‘loves’ that one can express when saying Birchas HaTorah, love of Hashem or love of the Torah, and that it is not possible to feel love for both at the same time! When a person says this bracha he is more likely to express his love for the Torah more than his love for Hashem! He warns that, “one must be very careful that he make the blessing on the Torah with all his heart and soul. ”

This explanation of the Maharal may seem to contradict the approach of Rav Chaim Volozhin zt”l in Nefesh HaChaim. He emphasized that when one learns Torah they should not be thinking lofty thoughts about Hashem, rather they should delve as deeply as possible into the Torah that they are learning. He argued that this approach is the optimal way through which a person can become close to G-d. The Maharal’s distinction between love of Hashem and love of Torah seems to clash with the Nefesh HaChaim’s emphasis on Torah as opposed to thoughts of Hashem. However, on deeper analysis it seems that there is no disagreement; the Maharal did not say that a person should focus on his love of G-d during his learning. Rather before he begins to learn and says Birchas HaTorah, then he should be careful not to lose focus of G-d. The Nefesh HaChaim himself makes a very similar point with regard to one’s attitude before learning. He writes, “whenever one prepared himself to learn, it is proper for him to spend, at least, a small amount of time, contemplating a pure fear of G-d with a pure heart .” He even argues that at times one should take a small break during his learning in order to rekindle his yiras Hashem .

Thus, it seems that there is agreement amongst these two Gedolim that before a person learns, he must be very careful not to lose sight of whose Torah he is learning. Whist, with regard to the actual time of learning, there is no reason to say that the Maharal will not agree with the Nefesh HaChaim’s approach that one should not be thinking lofty thoughts about Hashem.

The Three weeks is a time to reflect on the various causes of the Churban; a key area of avoda is to maintain a constant awareness of Hashem during one's fulfillment of Mitzvos and learning Torah. By doing so, the Maharal teaches us that each of us will have great siyata dishmaya in avoiding the others sins that caused the churban. May we all merit to see the rebuilding of the Beis HaMiikdosh speedily in our days.

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.