Thursday, February 11, 2010

REMEMBERING THE EVIL OF AMALEK - PARSHAS ZACHOR



Throughout history, many nations have tried to destroy the Jewish people. However, we are commanded to permanently remember the attack of only one of these nations; that of Amalek, when they attacked the Jewish people shortly after the splitting of the Sea.

In order to gain a deeper understanding of the danger that Amalek poses to the Jewish nation, it is instructive to closely analyze the commandment to remember Amalek's heinous deed: "Remember what Amalek did to you, on the way when you were leaving Egypt; that he happened upon you on the way. and he struck those of you who were hindmost, all the weaklings at your rear, when you were faint and exhausted, and he did not fear G-d."[1]

The majority of the verse focus on Amalek's despicable actions, such as how they attacked us when we were weak and tired. However, the end of the verse points out the main negative characteristic that Amalek displayed - that they did not fear G-d. Rav Moshe Sternbuch shlita notes that Amalek are known to be the epitome of evil, and surely possess numerous terrible traits and beliefs. Accordingly, he asks that it is difficult to understand why the Torah focused in particular on the seemingly mild flaw of lacking in ‘yiras Shamayim’?

He explains that the Torah is teaching us that the root cause of Amalek’s evil character was his lack of yiras Shamayim.[2] Why is this the case? One significant aspect of Yiras Shamayim is that one who fears G-d is aware of Hashem’s involvement in the world. He sees Divine Providence in everything that takes place. But a mere awareness does not suffice; he takes this awareness and uses it to understand how HaShem is communicating to him. This greater recognition brings one who fears G-d closer to fulfilling His will.

In contrast, one who lacks yiras Shamayim is blind to the events around him. He does not see G-d’s hand in the most miraculous events, rather he irrationally ascribes it to the random laws of nature. Thus, he is not moved by anything, no matter how remarkable. Such a person will never come closer to the truth because nothing effects him. Amalek epitomized this trait. They were aware of the remarkable miracles of the Ten Plagues and the splitting of the Sea, yet they paid no attention to the logical consequences of these events - that there is an All-Powerful Being who was guiding the Jewish people. They refused to recognize any sense of uniqueness about the Jewish people and flagrantly attacked them. In this way, their lack of ‘yiras Shamayim’ was the source of their evil actions.

This idea is further described by the Torah: It explains how Amalek “happened upon” the Jewish people. The hebrew word used here is ‘korcha’. Chazal teach us that the root of korcha is similar to the word for ’cold’ - ‘kor’ - Amalek cooled down the world’s fear of the Jewish people that they felt after the miracles of yetsias Mitzrayim. They bring an analogy of a boiling hot bath, that is so hot that no person can go inside. Then, one person jumps inside it. He burns himself but he cools it down for the other people to be able to go in it. Similarly, the non-Jewish nations were attack to fight the Jewish people after all the miracles that they had experienced. Amalek paid no heed to these miracles and attacked. Even though they greatly damaged themselves, they also reduced the fear of the other nations towards the Jews.

Why did Amalek respond differently from the other nations, to the miracles of yetsas Mitzrayim. The non-Jews worshipped false G-ds but they believed in the idea of a power guiding a nation. Accordingly, they believed in the 'G-d of the Jews' and paid heed to His protection of the Jewish people. Amalek, in contrast, seem to have been atheists. They believed in no force, therefore they attributed all of the wondrous events of yetsias Mitzrayim to chance. Accordingly, they could ignore all the signs and jump into the boiling bathtub.

We have seen that the root of Amalek's evil was their belief in the randomness of events and the accompanying total rejection of a Higher Being. This caused them to react 'coldly' to everything that they witnessed, and even to cause other nations to 'cool down' their fear of the Jewish people. This attitude is something that is unique to Amalek amongst all the nations, and in a certain sense, poses more of a danger to Torah observance than the idolatrous beliefs of the other nations. It causes 'believing' Jews to lose their sense of wonder about the miracles that surround them, and to even subconsciously attribute them to chance. Moreover, it prevents a person from learning from events around him, making him immune to the lessons that Hashem sends him. in this vein, Rav Sternbuch writes that a person who merits to see the salvations of HaShem and His wonders, yet remains are blind to what goes on around him, and is not aroused to fear Hashem; he should know that he is surrounded by impurity and is under the influence of Amalek.[3]

When we read Parshas Zachor we should focus on the lack of yiras Hashem that characterized Amalek. Through this contemplation may we merit to remove the power of Amalek from the world.
[1] Ki Seitsei, 25:17-18.
[2] Taam v’Daas, Devarim, Ki Seitzei,25:18, p.163. Also see Ayeles Hashachar of Rav Aryeh Yehuda Leib Shteinman shlita, Ki Seitzei, 25:18, for a similar approach.
[3] Ibid.

Sunday, February 7, 2010

EMES AND SHEKER - MISHPATIM

“Distance yourself from falsehood.[1]”

It is well known that honesty is one of the most important midos and that it’s antithesis, falsehood, is one of the most undesirable. The Chinuch speaks very strongly about how disdainful it is to lie: “falsehood is abominable and disgraceful in everyone’s eyes, there is nothing more disgusting than it, and curses come to the home of those who love it.. Therefore the Torah exhorts us to greatly distance ourselves from falsehood, as it says, ’distance yourself from falsehood’[2]” He then explains that the Torah does not use the language of ‘distancing’ with regard to any other negative mitzvo which indicates its severity. Moreover, this teaches us that we should distance ourselves from even the slightest possibility of falsehood. Given the severity of lying, it is worthwhile to clarify what is included within the prohibition of ‘midvar sheker tirchak‘.

It is instructive to analyze the following scenario: Reuven owes Shimon money and the date for repayment has already passed. Shimon phones Reuven to request his money, but Reuven’s wife answers the phone. Reuven does not want to speak to Shimon but he also does not want his wife to lie and say that he is not home when he really is. Therefore Reuven steps just outside his house and instructs his wife to tell Shimon that Reuven is not home - this is technically true, Reuven is now not in the house, even though he could speak to Shimon if he so desired. One may think that this does not constitute falsehood because no false words were spoken. Is this indeed the case?

The Gemara in Nedarim discusses a case in which a man was owed some money so he brought the borrower before Rava’s Beis Din and said to him: “Pay me back.” The borrower responded: “I already paid you.”
Rava said to the borrower: “In that case, you must swear an oath that you have given him the money.”
The borrower went to get his cane, hid the money he owed inside its hollow, and leant on the cane as he returned to the courtroom. He said to the lender: “Hold this cane in your hand,” ostensibly in order to free his own hands to take hold of the Torah scroll. He then took a Torah scroll and swore that he had already given the money into the lender’s hand. The lender, incensed at the man’s chutzpah, broke the cane. Suddenly all the money inside spilled to the ground and it emerged that he had indeed sworn the technical truth!”

The borrower was obviously guilty of terrible midos but did he actually commit a genuine transgression?
The Gemara concludes that he did because an oath taker must adhere not only to the plain definition of his words, but also to the meaning they are meant to convey as well. Consequently, he was guilty of swearing falsely by taking an oath that was technically truthful but deceptive[3].

We learn from here that saying words that are technically true does not mean that a person can deceive others by saying true words with a misleading message. Therefore, it would seem that Reuven’s strategy of standing outside the house does not help avoid the transgression of ‘midvar sheker tirchak.” The words that he is not home may be true but the message is not - Shimon is not interested in the technical location of Reuven; he wants to know if Reuven is present so that Shimon can speak to him. Thus, by saying that he is not present is a misleading message. One may argue that the case in Nedarim was that of an oath, but that in day to day life, perhaps it is allowed to deceive others on condition that words we say are technically true.

The Gemara in Shevuos disproves this theory: The Gemara discusses a number of cases that involve a transgression of ‘midvar sheker tirchak’. One is the case where a talmid chacham claims that someone owes him money but he does not have any witnesses to support his claim. Accordingly he tells his talmid that the ‘borrower’ is clearly lying so he suggests a plan to influence the borrower to admit to the truth. He asks his talmid to come with him to court so that he would appear to be a witness to the loan. The borrower, seeing the prospective witness will realize that he can not escape from the truth and will admit that he does indeed owe the money. The Gemara says that the talmid transgresses, ‘midvar sheker tirchak’ by his actions[4]. In this case, the talmid did not even say anything - he merely walked in with his Rebbe and sent an unsaid message to the borrower that he was a witness to the loan. Moreover, in this case, there is no oath being taken and nevertheless it is an example of falsehood. This proves that even if a person does not even say anything but his actions imply a false metsius then he is considered to be lying. This is all the more so the case where a person says words that are technically true but are also misleading[5].

However, if we analyze one of the most famous incidents in the Torah it would seem that saying technically truthful words is allowed. When Yaakov Avinu pretends to be his brother, Esav, Yitzchak asks him for his identity and he answers, “I am Esav your firstborn.” Rashi explains that he meant by this, “It is I who bring this to you, Esav is your firstborn.” Consequently his words were technically true although Yitzchak could only understand their simple meaning - that he was claiming to be Esav. This would seem to strongly question the premise that has been thus far established. My Rebbi, Rav Yitzchak Berkovits Shlita explains that Yaakov’s deft wording in and of itself did not justify lying to Yitzchak. Rather, the commentaries explain that Yaakov was justified in deceiving Esav because Esav himself was a trickster and it is allowed to use deceit in order to overcome a deceitful person[6]. Why then did Yaakov need to resort to the ’word games’? The Orchos Tzaddikim writes that even when it is permissible to lie it is still nonetheless preferable to say words that are technically true. As a consequence, Yaakov did not want to release false words from his lips.

Nonetheless we should not be mistaken into thinking that saying words that are technically true justifies misleading others when there is no valid justification to do so and it constitutes a clear violation of midvar sheker tirchak. It is very important to educate our children on this point so that they realize that the prohibition to lie is not avoided by clever wording[7]. Moreover, it is necessary for us to clarify the gedarim of this easily misunderstood mitzvo. The Chinuch stresses that Hashem is a ‘G-d of Emes’ and that bracho only comes to a person who strives to emulate Hashem. May we all succeed in living lives of genuine emes.




WHEN SHEKER IS EMES

The Gemara in Kesubos discusses the case of a wedding where the chassan asks his friend of his opinion about the kallah. Beis Hillel argues that he should not say the brutal truth about the kallah, rather he should praise her even if he does not really believe in what he is saying. We learn from here there are times when it is permissible and even correct to lie. A friend recently pointed out to me one area in which there is a common tendency amongst people to be ‘honest’ in a situation where it would be kinder to hide the truth.
Very often a person may be telling over a dvar Torah, story or a piece of good news and he will be interrupted by the listener who proudly informs him that he has already heard it before. Consequently the speaker feel somewhat deflated that he was not able to share useful information. It would seem from the Gemara in Kesubos that it is permissible to lie in such a case and pretend that we have never heard this before, thereby enabling the speaker to derive pleasure from being the source of new information. Moreover, it would seem that one should lie in such an instance. There is a ‘maaseh rav’ that supports this argument. Rav Chaim Ozer Grodzensky zt”l was once in a meeting with other Rabbeim when a bachur suddenly came in and told him a piece of good news. Rav Chaim Ozer showed great joy and thanked th bachur for being the source of such good news. A few minutes later a different bachur entered and told over the same information, unaware that Rav Chaim Ozer had already been told. Nonetheless, Rav Chaim Ozer pretended that he had not heard it before and warmly thanked the bachur. This happened again a number of times. The Rabbeim with him asked him why he persisted in acting as if he had never heard the news. He explained that each bachur would gain great pleasure from being the person who could tell him this pleasant news and that it would deflate them if he would tell them that he already knew it. We learn from here that there are times when hiding the truth can be the right way to act.

[1] Mishpatim, 23:1.
[2] Sefer HaChinuch, Mitzvo 74.
[3] Nedarim, 25a, based on the translation and explanation of Reb Howard Jackson Shlita.
[4] Shevuos, 30b.
[5] See also the Maharal’s explanation of the episode with Avraham and Sarah in which Hashem is meshaneh for darchay shalom. The Maharal explains that although Hashem’s words were technically true, Chazal nonetheless describe them as constituting a shinui because their message was misleading. (Vayeira, 18:13, Gur Aryeh, Os 40.
[6] See Emes Le Yaakov, Toldos, 27:12. It is important to be aware that this principle should not be used without prior clarification from a competent halachic authority. It is quite easy to be moreh heter and decide that anyone against us constitutes the kind of person that we are allowed to deceive.
[7] It is important to note that this concept also teaches that there are times when we may say words that are technically inaccurate but their message is not misleading. For example, in a place where weddings regularly start an hour later than the announced time, it does not constitutes sheker to call the chupa for 7.00pm even though it will really begin at 8.00pm. This is a delicate area in halacho and it is advisable to learn the details of ‘midvar sheker tirchak so that one can know what is permissible and forbidden.

CHESED B'SHLEIMUS - MISHPATIM

In Parshas Mishpatim the Torah instructs us with regard to lending money to our fellow in need. The Torah states: "When you lend money to My people, to the poor person who is with you, do not act toward him as a creditor; do not lay interest upon him. If you take your fellow's garment as security until sunset, you shall return it to him. For it alone is his clothing, it is his garment for his skin - in what should he lie down? - so it will be if he cries out to Me, I shall listen, for I am compassionate.[1]"

On superficial analysis these Mitzvos seem to be fairly straightforward and easy to understand, however Rav Chaim Shmuelevitz zt"l derives a very important insight about the Torah's attitude to the chesed from these passukim[2]: This passage is dealing with a person who fulfills the great kindness of helping his friend by lending him money, and yet the Torah gives him a number of Mitzvos to ensure that he perform this chesed in the most optimum way and not diminish its effect. It is instructive to analyze these passukim more carefully to note their common theme:

"Do not act toward him as a creditor." Rashi, based on the Mechilta, explains that this means that if the lender knows that the borrower is, at present, unable to pay back the loan, then the lender should not make him feel pressured about it, rather he should behave as if the loan never took place, so as not to embarrass the borrower. "Do not lay interest upon him." This refers to the issur of lending money with interest (ribbis). Rav Shmuelevitz brings a number of Maamrei Chazal that emphasize the seriousness of lending with interest; for example he brings a Medrash that for every sin there are Malachim in shamayim who try to find a merit for the sinner, the one exception to this case being that of ribbis. Rav Shmuelievitz points out that the severity for lending with interest is difficult to understand. It is clear that even one who lends with a small amount of interest, is doing a great chesed to the borrower who is in urgent need of money immediately and is prepared to pay the extra interest at a later date. Nonetheless the Torah treats this person very strictly.

"If you take your fellow's garment as security until sunset, you shall return it to him." When the borrower is unable to pay back the loan the lender is permitted to take his personal items as collateral to ensure payment of the loan. However, he must return the items when they are needed by the borrower. For example, clothing is needed in the daytime, therefore the lender may only keep it in the night and must return it in the day so that the borrower can use it. This law seems to nullify the whole function of collateral, for if the borrower can still use it when he needs it, he will be far less motivated to pay back the loan. Nonetheless, the Torah demands that the lender respect the borrower's basic needs.

Rav Shmuelevitz explains that the common denominator of these laws is that they stress the importance of doing chesed in as complete a manner as possible, without lessening the effect of the chesed. Consequently, even though it is a great Mitzvo to lend someone money, the lender must be extremely careful not to diminish the effect of his kindness through pressuring the borrower in any fashion. Rav Shmuelevitz says further that the greater a person's appreciation of the importance of chesed, the more strictly he is treated when he fails to act according to his recognition. Thus, one who lends and yet charges interest, is treated particularly harshly because he appreciates the value of helping the borrower, and nonetheless he chooses to charge him with interest.

Rav Moshe Sternbuch Shlita derives a similar lesson from a very puzzling Gemara. The Gemara says that a person who begins a Mitzvo but does not complete is, is punished very severely[3] - this seems difficult to understand - there is no such punishment for one who does not perform a Mitzvo at all, and yet one who at least begins a Mitzvo is punished so badly! Rav Sternbuch answers that this Gemara teaches us a big chiddush; one who starts a Mitzvo demonstrates that he has an appreciation of the value of the Mitzvo, consequently, if he fails to complete it, he is treated more harshly because of his heightened appreciation of the need for the Mitzvo. In contrast, one who does not even begin the Mitzvo is not punished because he is on a lower level an therefore is judged in a more lenient manner according.

We learn from the Mitzvos relating to lending money that when a person is doing a chesed for his fellow it is essential that he strive to maximize the positive effect of his chesed and not let it be tainted in any way. This applies in many instances in our daily lives; very often a person is approached to do some kind of favor; he may agree to do it, but with a reluctance that makes the person in need feel uncomfortable about inconveniencing him. Rather, the giver should strive to be as positive as possible about helping his friend. This greatly enhances the actual positive benefit at results, because, as well as being helped, the person in need is not made to feel guilty about his request. Similarly when one gives tzedoko he can do it with a smile or with a sour face. Chazal tell us that one who gives with simcha, receives no less than 17 brachos for his Mitzvo, whereas one who gives unenthusiastically only receives 6 brachos[4]. One does a chesed with a lack of enthusiasm greatly diminishes the effect of his kindness.

One final example is when one asks someone else to do a chesed in a particular way and he agrees but he giver may not take care to do it according to the requirements of the one in need. For example, a wife may ask her husband to clean the house of the mess that has accumulated. He may well have a different conception of a 'tidy' house from that of his wife and only tidy up according to his assessment of what is required. In truth, however, he knows that his wife would like him to clear up according to her level of tidiness. In order to do this chesed properly he should strive to do it in the manner that she requires.

We have seen that the Mitzvos with regard to lending teach us the importance of doing chesed in as complete a manner as possible. May we all merit to help others in the most effective way possible.

[1] Mishpatim, 22:24-26.
[2] Sichos Mussar, p.191-197.
[3] The Gemara cites the example of Yehuda who began the Mitzvo if saving Yosef but did not complete it - he was punished by losing his wife and two sons!
[4] Bava Basra, 9b.

Monday, February 1, 2010

THE ART OF LISTENING - YISRO

One of the striking features of Parshas Yisro is the juxtaposition of the portion about Yisro’s advice to Moshe Rabbeinu with Matan Torah. Reb Tzadok HaKohen provides an interesting insight to this in the name of his Rebbe[1]. He begins by discussing the section in which Yisro advises Moshe to change the judicial system and Moshe accepts his advice. This seems quite unremarkable but on reflection a tremendous mida of Moshe Rabbeinu is displayed in his reaction to Yisro’s advice. Yisro may have been a wise man but he was surely far below the level of his great son-in-law and, moreover had no exposure to the wisdom of Torah. Moshe could have easily heard out his advice and then politely reject it without really considering its application. Instead he listened attentively and gave great thought to the advice and ultimately decided to follow it. Reb Tzadok’s Rebbe says that we learn from Moshe that a person should listen to the words of a hedyot and that this is an aspect of learning from every man. He then explains the juxtaposition with Matan Torah by saying that this lesson is the introduction to Matan Torah because an essential part of learning Torah is the ability to learn it from everyone.

One may ask that the ability to listen to others may be of some benefit in learning Torah but surely it is not of such great significance that it should be the main introductory lesson leading up to Matan Torah. Rav Elyah Lopian zt”l answers this question: He writes, “there are people who are masmidim and who toil in Torah, but they do not have the ability to listen to others and to connect with their friends in Torah learning, rather, they are totally engrossed in themselves and their own ‘daled amos’. Such people are not only punished severely, but moreover they will not succeed in their learning whatsoever.” He goes on to explains why the lack of the ability to listen hinders one’s learning so badly. “A person is naturally favorably biased towards himself and is blinded to anything that goes against his opinion. He cannot clarify anything accurately if he won’t listen to what anyone else says.[2]”

It seems that man’s innate inability to hear views that contradict his own can even prevent a talmid from listening properly to those more learned than himself. There is a particular tendency to want to argue with whatever they say. In consequence the talmid can never really understand and absorb what his superior is telling him. In contrast, the ability to wholeheartedly listen and comprehend what others are saying is one of the keys to Gadlus. 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 Gedoley Hador. He never said to them, ‘accept my opinion’, rather he made himself into a ‘vessel’ which 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 daas became purified and elevated by the greatness of many generations that became embedded in his mind.[3]” 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 take in everything that he heard.

Whilst there is a challenge to give our full attention to our Rabbeim it is far more difficult to listen effectively to our peers. Often when we hear that a certain person is about to say over an idea or dvar Torah we mentally ‘switch off’ and think about what we want to say next. Apart from showing a lack of derech eretz, such an attitude severely hinders a person’s ability to grow in wisdom.

The ability to accept someone else’s opinion, especially when it contradicts one’s own, is an all too rare quality. At one seudas preida, one of the speakers was extolling the virtues of his friend - he told over that they were once having a heated debate about a certain issue and seemed to end the conversation ‘agreeing to disagree’. Later on, he came to his friend and said that he heard where he was coming from and had now changed his opinion on this matter because of their conversation. There are two striking things about this story - one is the person’s gadlus in hearing out a contradictory view and accepting it when it made sense. The second is that this mida is obviously so rare that it was the one chosen to describe the maalos of this person. In truth, this should not be the case - it should be a matter of course that when we are involved in a discussion with someone that we actually ‘listen’ to what they are saying and try to learn from them even if it goes against our original way of thinking.

Even more difficult than hearing out our peers is effectively listening to those on a lower level than ourselves. One senior bachur in a yeshiva was troubled by the Mishna in Avos[4] that tells us that the very definition of a wise man is one who can learn from every man, not just Gedolim - he asked a distinguished posek, that there is surely nothing to learn from those on a far lower level of learning. To this, the posek answered that he had taught Mishna Berurah to baaley teshuva who had been learning Torah for about one year. He said that they approached the halachos from angles that he had never experienced before which made him seriously rethink many yesodos that he had come to accept as sacred.

We learn from Parshas Yisro that listening to others is one of the very foundations of wisdom. Many commentaries say that this is what the second of the 48 devarim is referring to when it says that ‘shemias haozen’ is a way of acquiring Torah. May we all gain the ability to genuinely listen to what our teacher, friend, or talmid is saying and this should help us learn and understand the Torah.

[1] Quoted in BeShem Amroo, Sefer Shemos, p.281.
[2] Lev Eliyahu, Emor, quoted in Mishel Avos, 3rd Chelek, Ch.6, Mishna 6.
[3] ‘Hameoros Hagedolim’, quoted in Mishel Avos, ibid.
[4] Avos, 4:1.

Sunday, January 31, 2010

YISRO AND RAV NOACH WEINBERG ZT"L


"I am the Lord, Your G-d, who took you out of the land of Mitzrayim from being slaves.[1]"

The First of the Ten Commandments is the Mitzva of Emuna, to believe in the one G-d as the first cause of all existence, who constantly creates and sustains all of creation[2]. There is another fundamental concept that is connected to Emuna, that of Bitachon, trust in G-d. Is trusting in G-d a part of the Mitzva of Emuna or is it a separate concept that is not included in any specific Mitzva? The Chazon Ish zt"l explains that Bitachon is not separate at all, rather it is the natural outgrowth of genuine Emuna; The obligation to have Emuna requires that one believe in the fundamental tenets about G-d such as First Cause and Hashgacha (Divine Providence), whereas Bitachon is applying that belief in practice. If a person cannot do this then it reveals that his Emuna is severely lacking. The Chazon Ish gives an example of Reuven who is constantly expressing his Emuna and how everything that he has is from Hashem; he proclaims his recognition that his livelihood emanates purely from Hashem and that there is no need for anxiety. However, when someone else opens a business that rivals that of Reuven, suddenly, all his Emuna fades away and he worries constantly over the future. Reuven's Emuna seemed to be strong when everything was going smoothly, but when he was put to the test he failed to show sufficient Bitachon. This in turn demonstrates that his Emuna was never genuine[3].

We learn from the Chazon Ish that an essential aspect of Emuna is bitachon, which means applying one's Emuna to real life situations. The Nesivos Shalom zt"l develops our understanding of Bitachon by explaining that there are two levels of Bitachon. There is an inactive kind of Bitachon and there is a proactive Bitachon. Inactive bitachon applies when one finds himself in a difficult situation in which there is nothing he can do - in such circumstances his Avoda is to trust that everything that happens will ultimately be for the good. Proactive bitachon becomes necessary when a person is required to do something that demonstrates his trust in Hashem. He cites the example of Krias Yam Suf (the splitting of the Sea of Reeds); Moshe Rabbeinu and the Jewish people were crying out to Hashem to save them from Pharaoh's advancing army. In response, Hashem told them to stop praying and to go into the sea. The Nesivos Shalom explains that in order for the Jewish people to merit Hashem transcending nature through Krias Yam Suf they had to demonstrate a trust in Hashem that transcended the normal laws of nature. They had to believe that if the Ratson Hashem (will of Hashem) was for them to cross the sea then they should trust that He had the ability to enable them to do so, even if they had no idea how it was possible. Accordingly, their stepping into the raging sea before it split was a display of proactive bitachon that earned them the right to the great miracle of Krias Yam Suf[4].

By combining the lessons of the Chazon Ish and Nesivos Shalom we conclude that genuine Emuna can only manifest itself in a person who is willing to act with an unswerving trust in G-d; a belief that if Ratson Hashem dictates that he act in a certain way, then he can and must take the required action, and that Hashem will enable him to succeed in whatever he endeavors to do. Rav Noach Weinberg zt"l epitomized this attribute to a great degree. He is most well-known for his incredible feats in kiruv rechokim (outreach) however, as one of his closest friends[5] pointed out, all his accomplishments emanated directly from his deep Emuna and Bitachon.

I merited to learn in Yeshivas Aish HaTorah for four years, and in that time I was fortunate to experience Rav Weinberg's greatness first-hand. I never forget how he made a bracha - he spoke to Hashem as if He was really in front of Him, a demonstration of 'shivisi Hashem kenegdi tamid' (I constantly place Hashem in front of me)[6]. When he talked about trusting in G-d, it deeply influenced his listeners, not because he said anything so unusual, but because he lived such Bitachon and the fact that he internalized it so greatly enabled it to rub off on others just by observing him.

Because his Emuna was so genuine he was able to apply it in practice and thereby express the high level of proactive Bitachon that the Nesivos Shalom described[7]. He used to say that if we see problems in the world there is no reason that we shouldn't go out and tackle them if we believe that Hashem so desires. Hashem is willing and able to help us achieve his Ratson even if it demands superhuman achievements. If we demonstrate proactive Bitachon then Hashem could make miracles happen for us. This is exactly what took place in Rav Weinberg's life. At a time when kiruv was virtually unheard of, he saw a dire need to bring back the countless Jews who knew nothing of Torah observance. Many people mocked his dreams as being completely unrealistic and called him a fool. Nevertheless, his conviction that he was fulfilling Ratson Hashem enabled him to overcome numerous setbacks and perform miracles in creating a movement that saved thousands upon thousands of unaffiliated Jews from begin totally lost to Judaism[8]. His son, Rav Hillel Weinberg Shlita described how he began his quest with three young men in a small room in Kirayt Sanz. No-one could have imagined how those humble beginnings could culminate in Aish HaTorah and its offshoots. No-one, that is, except for Rav Noach himself; those closest to him testify that he genuinely believed that he would bring Moshiach through his efforts - his extensive achievements were small in his eyes because he knew that Hashem wanted so much more. At the funeral, his son, Rav Hillel, told us what Rav Weinberg would tell us if he were standing in front of us. He would say that we could be bigger than him, we could be as big as Moshe Rabbeinu! Chazal's words to this effect were not some vague saying, rather they were real and should be taken seriously.

I heard an incredible story about how Rav Weinberg put his Emuna into practice; At the shiva his daughter told over that once a chess champion came to Aish, learned for a few days, and decided to leave. Rav Noach challenged him to a game of chess, on the basis that if the student won, he could leave, but if Rav Noach won, he would stay. Rav Noach won. When asked how he could have had the audacity to propose such a deal, he said that he knew Hashem wanted the young man to stay, so he trusted that Hashem would make him win[9].

It is appropriate to end with one of his oft-told stories, one that I have discussed before, but one that should never fail to arouse us. Many years ago, Rav Shach zt"l came to Aish HaTorah for a bris. Upon seeing numerous baalei teshuva, people who had come from the most distant backgrounds, Rav Shach told over an idea that he had never expressed before[10]. He quoted the Navi, Hoshea; "Return, Yisroel, to Hashem, your G-d because you have stumbled in your sin[11]." He asked that the Navi implies that the reason that Yisroel should return to Hashem is because they stumbled in sin - why is the stumbling in sin the reason that Yisroel should return to G-d? He answered by explaining that we know that however powerful evil is, the power of good is greater. Accordingly, the very extent to which Yisroel sinned is the proof that they have the power to do teshuva, because however powerful a person's yetser hara, their yetser tov is greater. Based on this, Rav Shach said, that if one man can destroy six million lives, then one man can save six million lives. He was clearly aroused to express this idea by the remarkable feats that Rav Weinberg had already performed. Rav Hillel added, that the man who caused so much destruction, Hitler, yemach shemo, was not a particularly talented or intelligent person and yet he was able to do so much harm. Therefore, each of us, no matter how ordinary we consider ourselves, have the potential to do more good than the evil that he perpetrated. How can we achieve this? By learning from Rav Noach and developing an Emuna and Bitachon that will strengthen us with the belief that we can achieve incredible feats if Hashem so wills it.

It seems difficult to aspire to the level of Emuna and Bitachon that Rav Noach Weinberg attained. However, his greatness in this and all areas did not come about as a result of his natural talent - it was a result of years of hard work in developing his relationship with Hashem. He constantly exhorted us to learn about and internalize the Six Constant Mitzvos, the Mitzvos that encapsulate a Jew's relationship with Hashem. An appropriate way of remembering him would perhaps be to listen to his teachings and strengthen ourselves in our relationship with Hashem through learning about these Mitzvos, beginning with Emuna[12]. This is the key to achieving the level of proactive Bitachon that the Jews reached at Krias Yam Suf and that Rav Noach Weinberg epitomized throughout his life. May we all merit to learn from Rav Noach Weinberg and ensure that his dreams are fulfilled and that every Jew will return to his Father in Heaven.


[1] Yisro, 20:2.
[2] See Rambam, Sefer HaMitzvos.
[3] See Emuna and Bitachon of the Chazon Ish, Ch.2, Part 2.
[4] Nesivos Shalom, Parshas Beshalach.
[5] Rav Chaim Uri Freund, Rosh Yeshivas Toldos Aharon.
[6] See Rema, Orach Chaim, Simun 1, sif 1.
[7] Incidentally, Rav Noach was a great-grandson of the first Slonimer Rebbe, the Beis Avraham, and a cousin with the Nesivos Shalom.
[8] Included amongst his achievements are; His establishment of the thriving Aish HaTorah Yeshiva in the Old City opposite the Western Wall; over 25 branches throughout the world spanning five continents, including places such as Moscow, Australia and Chile; the Fellowships program which have brought 10,000 secular Jews on inspiring trips to Israel; the Discovery Program which teaches the evidence of the validity of Torah to skeptical Jews, this is attended by nearly 10,000 people each year; the Aish HaTorah website which has 260,000 subscribers, and receives over 2 million hits per month, making it the largest Jewish website in the world.
[9] Heard from Rbsn Gila Manolson.
[10] This fact was heard directly from Rav Weinberg himself.
[11] Hoshea, 14:2.
[12] Here are suggested sources to begin learning about the 'shesh mitzvos': The Sefer HaChinuch is the source of the concept that there are Six Mitzvos that a person is constantly obligated to fulfill. The Chofetz Chaim zt"l in the second Biur Halacha of Mishna Berurah, discusses the importance of these Mitzvos. In addition excellent shiurim by Rav Weinberg himself and ybl"c, my Rebbe Rav Yitzchak Berkovits Shlita, can be obtained in the Aish HaTorah tape library.

Wednesday, January 27, 2010

TU B'SHVAT

The first Mishna in the gemara of Rosh Hashana informs us of various 'new years'. These are times of the year that are considered the beginning of the annual calendar with regard to various laws. The Rosh Hashana for trees is the fifteenth day of the month of Shvat, more famously known as 'Tu B'Shvat'. Any tree that begins to take root before this date is deemed to have lived for one full year when Tu B'Shvat arrives, even if it only took root a few days before that date. This day is considered a festive day, therefore the prayer of tachanun (supplication for forgiveness) is not recited. Further, there is the universal custom to make blessings on, and, eat a variety of fruit. The overall focus of the day is to thank HaShem for the gift of trees to the world and to recognize the wonders of nature.

Rav Yaakov Weinberg zt"l asks, why is there no similar concept of a celebratory day for the 'birthday' of vegetables?. There is also a date for the new year for vegetables which has halachic (legal) ramifications. That being the case, why is there no festivity on their 'birthday'[1]? He explains that there are numerous remarkable aspects about nature, that merit contemplation of the wonder of creation. Many 'miracles' occur with regard to both vegetables and trees. For example, the taking root of a seed and its development into a tree, bush or vegetable is truly miraculous - it is only its regularity that takes away from our wonder at this astonishing occurrence. Moreover, the process of photosynthesis that enables plant life to use the energy from the sun is another miracle that demonstrates the complexity of nature.

However, there is an additional miracle that is found specifically with trees. The process of nourishment for a vegetable is relatively straightforward; it is drawn directly from the ground into the vegetable itself. In contrast, the process of nourishment for a tree is far more complicated. The tree needs to be able to take the nourishment from the ground, draw it all the way up the trunk to its branches, and then to the fruit. Rav Weinberg explains that every stage in a plant's development is a miracle, therefore we are instructed to be thankful for HaShem's numerous gifts in this area. Since trees are subject to more miracles than vegetables, it is appropriate that their 'birthday' is considered more worthy of celebration than that of vegetables.[2]

Rav Weinberg's explanation reminds us of the importance of focusing on the details of creation - it is very easy to ignore the numerous miraculous aspects of all of the natural world. Tu B'Shvat awakens us to the importance of appreciating HaShem's gifts, particularly in the form of fruit. It is instructive to offer one small example of this, in order to arouse us to take note of the numerous miracles that surround us.

When a person eats a peach, he pays little attention to the hard stone that lies beneath the tasty fruit. However, Rav Avraham Katz shlita teaches us about the great significance of this seemingly bland aspect of nature.[3] Like all fruit, the peach has a great problem - that is, how to ensure its continuity. Since it is completely immobile it has no way of spreading its seed so that it can procreate. Therefore, the peach seed develops a tasty flesh that surrounds it. This will cause humans and animals to eat the peach, thereby transferring it to other locations where it may be able to take root. However, there remains the difficulty of how the seed will not be consumed by its eater along with the rest of the fruit. Accordingly, the peach seed surrounds itself with a very hard casing that can not be broken by the strongest teeth. In this way, the precious seed is safe. Nevertheless, the problems do not end there. If the casing is so strong, how will the seed be able escape so that it can take root? The remarkable answer to this, is that the casing is lined with a seam running along its length, which is bounded by a powerful adhesive. Not even a metal hammer is able to crack it. And yet, when the case falls to the ground, there is a special enzyme in the soil that dissolves the glue and allows the seed to exit its casing! This mundane seed is the subject of numerous miracles, and if any of them did not take place, then the peach would cease to exist. This is just one example of the testimony to the wonders of HaShem's creation.

On Tu B'Shvat we take numerous fruits and say blessings on them before we eat them. This custom can help us focus on the numerous acts of kindness that HaShem performs for us in ensuring the creation of these wonderful fruit. As a person goes through his daily routine, it is very easy for him to inadvertently close his eyes to the wonders around him. The analogy is given of a person who visits the Louvre art gallery, and complains that all the paintings look like yoghurt. After some time, he takes of his glasses, only to realize that they had yoghurt on them! He was unable to appreciate the beauty of the paintings because his vision was blocked. So too, a person can go through life with the proverbial 'yoghurt' blocking his vision, causing him to be blind to the numerous marvels that surround him. Tu B'Shvat gives us the opportunity to open our eyes and appreciate some of HaShem's wonderful gifts.


[1] The Rosh Hashana for vegetables happens to take place on the first of Tishrei, the day that is most well known as Rosh Hashana. Thus, one may answer that the 'birthday' of the vegetables is completely overshadowed by the seriousness of Rosh Hashana. Nonetheless, it does not seem to be coincidental that no specific celebration is made with regard to vegetables.
[2] Taken from an article based on Rav Weinberg's teachings, that was written by Rav Yirimiyahu Benyowitz shlita.
[3] This comes from his remarkable book, "Designer World" which discusses numerous miracles of nature. The section about the peach seed, is found on p.7-13.

Monday, January 25, 2010

PERSISTENCE - BESHALACH

The Torah tells us that when the Jewish people were preparing to leave Mitzrayim, Moshe Rabbeinu was being osek in the mitzvo of taking the remains of Yosef Hatzadik to be buried in Eretz Yisroel. The Gemara in Sotah quotes a passuk from Yehoshua which seems to contradict the Torah’s account here; the passuk there states that the Jewish people, not Moshe, brought the bones of Yosef to Eretz Yisroel. The Gemara answers with a principle that if a person begins a mitzvo and does not complete it but then someone else does so, then the Torah credits the completer (‘gomer’) with having fulfilled the mitzvo. Moshe only began the mitzvo of burying Yosef but did not complete it, therefore it is not credited to him, rather to the Bney Yisroel, who completed it.

There is another Medrash that seems to contradict this concept: The Medrash Shocher Tov says that David HaMelech is credited with building the Beis HaMikdash as it says in Tehillim, “Mizmoor shir Chanukas habayis leDavid,[1]” even though David only began the building but did not complete it. This implies that the main credit is attributed to the ‘beginner’, (‘maschil’) not the ‘gomer’[2]. Rav Moshe Feinstein zt”l resolves this contradiction: He writes that if the maschil did not complete the mitzvo through no fault of his own then he is credited with it even though he did not finish it. However, if he bears even the slightest guilt for not completing the mitzvo then it is credited to the gomer. David HaMelech bore absolutely no responsibility for his inability to complete the binyan Beis Hamikdash. Hashem told him that he could not do so, therefore, its binyan is attributed to him. In contrast, Moshe Rabbeinu could not complete the mitzvo of buying Yosef because he did not enter Eretz Yisroel. He did not enter Eretz Yisroel because of the chet at Mei Meriva, consequently his inability to complete the burial of Yosef was somewhat due to his actions. This explains why the burial of Yosef is not attributed to him[3].

Moshe Rabbeinu’s guilt in this instance is minimal, and yet it is sufficient to deny him the merit of the mitzvo of the burial of Yosef. The same is surely true of situations in our lives when we have the opportunity to complete some kind of mitzvo but we fail to do so because of our lack of persistence. This applies greatly to learning - when a new shiur begins there are often large numbers of people present but as the weeks go on, gradually less and less appear. Rav Yaakov Kamenetsky zt”l noted this phenomena with regard to daf yomi - he joked that many people being the new cycle with Berachos, but by the next Masechta, ‘ba Shabbos ba menucha’.

Another common area of failing in persistence is growth. For example, on certain occasions such as the Aseres Yemay Teshuva or times of suffering, people are inspired to make kabbalos to grow in a certain way. However, with the passage of time, these kabbalos often become distant memories. What aitsos are there that can make it more likely that we will be able to persist with our commitments?

The Chofetz Chaim zt”l wrote the Mishna Berurah over the course of twenty-five years - during this time he suffered many tribulations which hindered the writing of the sefer. The vast majority of people would have capitulated under such travails, seeing them as a simun that this undertaking was not meant to succeed. However, the Chofetz Chaim realized that all the challenges were all sent by the yetser hara to prevent the Mishna Berurah being written. Accordingly, he persisted and succeeded in writing one of the most important sefarim of the past hundred years. He was able to persist because he recognized the vital importance of what he was trying to do - this enabled him to overcome all the challenges and complete the Mishna Berurah. This provides us with one aitsa of how to succeed in our undertakings - if we can remain focused on the significance of what we are trying to do then we will have more chance of persisting.

One may argue that we do indeed have moments of inspiration where, like the Chofetz Chaim, we recognize the significance of our projects. However, with time it is difficult to maintain this level of inspiration and we are unable to persist. Rav Chaim Shmuelevitz zt”l addresses this problem[4]. He discusses the case of Palti ben Layish. David married the daughter of Shaul HaMelech but Shaul believed that it was an invalid kiddushin and he gave Michal to be married to Palti. Palti suspected that David’s kiddushin was valid and therefore undertook not to touch Michal. Right at the beginning of their ’marriage’ he stuck a sword between them and said that anyone who acts improperly should be struck by this sword[5]. Rav Shmuelevitz asks, what exactly did this act achieve? If his yetser would overcome him how would the sword stop him? He was the one who stuck the sword and he could remove it whenever he wanted.

Rav Shmuelevitz explains that at the beginning of this nisayon Palti attained a powerful recognition of how terrible it would be to do such an impropriety. However, he feared that over the course of time this clarity would weaken and he may fall to the temptations of the yetser hara. In order to prevent his from happening, at the very moment of inspiration he stuck the sword in between them and that sword would serve as a reminder of the power of his initial convictions.

In a similar vein, Rav Yisroel Reisman Shlita tells a story of a bachur in Volozhin Yeshiva who was known as being fluent in Shas. On one occasion he was eating a meal, and a friend came in asking for the location of a certain opinion. Whilst the bachur was struggling with this question someone else pointed out that Tosefos explicitly expressed this opinion. The bachur was so shaken by the fact that he missed an open Tosefos that he immediately left in the middle of the seudah and ran to the beis medrash. He continued learning with super-human hasmada, never leaving the beis medrash for the next 7 years and he became a Gadol. Someone present at the time noticed that the bachur left his meal so quickly that he did not bentsch! He asked Rav Chaim Volozhin zt”l if it was mutar to not bentsch in such a scenario. He answered that he could not say whether it was mutar or not, but that had the bachur bentsched and not left the seudah immediately then he would not have become a Gadol. At that moment he was struck by a deep sense of pain at his lack of knowledge and he utilized the power of this moment to begin learning on a new level. Had he waited even a few minutes he would have lost that inspiration forever.

So too in our lives we experience moments of inspiration where we attain a heightened sense of awareness of an important inyan. But the inspiration often wears away - we see from the above stories that one way of maintaining the inspiration is by doing a concrete act right away, and hopefully this act will help keep the momentum. An example of this is when we hear a powerful piece of mussar that we should act upon it by immediately beginning to put it into action. Another example is when we attain a heightened sense of closeness to G-d that we try to do something to help remember and tap into that moment. Rav Noach Orlowek Shlita suggests taking an internal ‘photograph’ of that moment so that you can always ‘look at it’ when you want inspiration and tap into that powerful moment. These are possible ways in which we can strive to not just begin endeavors but to complete them as well.


[1] Tehillim, 30:1.
[2] Medrash Shocher Tov, 122:1.
[3] Igros Moshe, Choshen Mishpat, 1st Chelek, Simun 49, Anaf 2, dh:uleanitus daati. See there for the answer of Shevus Yaakov and Rav Feinstein’s kashas on it. Also see Otsros Megadim, Beshalach, for a third approach.
[4] Sichos Mussar, Maamer 11, p.46.
[5] Sanhedrin 19b.