Parshas Vayikra enumerates many korbanos, including those that must be given for inadvertent sins. Why must a person give a korban for a sin that he did not flagrantly intend to commit? The commentaries explain that the fact that he allowed himself to commit such a sin, even inadvertently, demonstrates an element of carelessness. Had he been more zahir, he would never have allowed himself to get to the point where he could sin. The Torah goes even further and requires that a person who has a doubt as to whether he committed a sin that requires a korban, is required to bring an asham talui . The Sefer HaChinuch explains that this korban does not atone for the actual sin (if it was indeed committed), rather it serves as an atonement for the carelessness that caused the safek .
It still needs to be understood what is the root cause of the carelessness that leads to inadvertent sins and why bringing korbanos helped atone for it. In order to answer this, it is instructive to compare how we conduct ourselves in the physical world with how we act with regard to spiritual matters. If a person is aware that a poisonous substance may be present in the food that he intends to eat he would be extremely careful to avoid any remote possibility of consuming the poison. This is because he is well aware of the dire consequences of eating poison. Just as there are natural consequences to our actions in the physical world, there are also natural consequences to actions in the spiritual world. Therefore, a person who is faced with the possibility of eating food that is forbidden, such as chelev, should have the same level of zehirus to avoid doing something that will cause him grave spiritual damage. When a person stumbles and sins inadvertently or puts himself in a position where he is in doubt as to whether he sinned, he demonstrates a lack of sensitivity to the spiritual consequences of his actions; he is not fully cognizant of the spiritual reality that negative actions inevitably have negative results.
There seem to be two main reasons as to why it is far more difficult to attain the same awareness of cause-and-effect in the spiritual world as in the physical world: Firstly, the physical world is completely tangible to us - we can easily see the results of our actions, for example, when a person eats poison, he is visibly damaged. In contrast, the spiritual world is not tangible and we cannot see the results of our actions - for example, a person is less aware of the spiritual consequences of breaking Shabbos b’shogeg, because he has never visually seen them. If he could see what happens in the spiritual realm for turning a light on, forgetting that it is Shabbos, then he would surely never allow himself to commit that sin b’shogeg.
Giving a korban for committing such an aveiro helped a person metaken this flaw of not being real with spiritual consequences. He had to go through a lengthy and expensive process of paying for, and bringing a korban to Yerushalayim, and go through the dramatic process of offering up the korban and seeing its blood. This process surely made it very clear that there are dramatic consequences to one’s actions.
The second reason why it is difficult to live with the awareness that there are consequences to all our actions in the spiritual world, is that we are so familiar with Hashem’s ‘mida‘ of Rachamim that it is easy slip into the trap of thinking that Hashem will automatically forgive us for our sins. As a result, a person will be less fearful of the consequences of sinning. The Gemara in Chagiga observes that there is a natural yetser hara to presume that there is automatic forgiveness for sinning - it states, “If the yetser hara will tell you, ‘sin and Hashem will forgive you,’ do not listen to him. ”
The Mesillas Yesharim addresses this attitude at length and stresses that it is incorrect - Hashem is a ‘Kel Emes’ who judges every action. Hashem’s rachamim does not contradict the concept of reward and punishment: Rachamim does three things; it delays the punishment from taking place immediately giving a person a chance to do teshuva; it causes the onesh to be handed out in smaller, more manageable doses; and it gives us the opportunity to do teshuva and thereby gain complete forgiveness. There is, nonetheless, judgement for every outcome and an awareness of this should cause a person to be far more zahir from sinning . Offering a korban also helped rectify the attitude that Hashem is a vatran. By going through the arduous process of offering the korban, the person would see that he could not gain forgiveness without teshuva.
We do not have the opportunity to offer korbanos for our inadvertent sins, and as a result we do not have this essential tool to help make us aware of the reality of chet. How can we engrain this into ourselves? There are many accounts of Gedolim who saw the spiritual world as tangibly as the physical world: On one occasion, Rav Moshe Feinstein zt”l was asked to leave the Beis Medrash in order to take an important phone call from another country, but he could not get to the phone because somebody was davenning the Shemoneh Esrei in front of the door and his ‘dalet amos’ was blocking the exit. When asked why he would not leave for such an important and costly call, he said that there was a wall blocking him and he could not walk through a wall. For Rav Moshe, ‘dalet amos’ was not some vague concept, it was a clear reality. His Gadlus in Torah was surely the cause of such a tangible sense of Yiras Shamayim - it was not just that he knew all of Torah, but that he allowed it to become so much a part of him that it became so real in his mind. A person can learn Torah in an intellectual way and not let it filter into his being - that kind of learning will probably not be so effective in increasing one’s yiras Shamayim - learning with an appreciation that it is discussing reality and trying to apply it to our lives will hopefully enable a person to be more real with the spiritual world.
A second aitsa is that of Rav Yisroel Salanter - that if a person wants to develop more of a sensitivity in a certain area of halacho, he should learn that area in depth - this will naturally bring him to a much greater awareness of his actions in that area. For example, whenever Rav Yisroel would find himself in a situation that could lead to yichud, he would learn the sugyas of yichud in great depth, in this way assuring himself that he would maintain constant awareness of any possibility of yichud. One particular area where this principle is very important is that of lashon hara: There is such a constant nisayon to speak lashon hara that without learning the laws of lashon hara it is extremely difficult to avoid the numerous pitfalls that arise. By learning the laws, as well as knowing what constitutes forbidden speech, a person will develop a far greater sensitivity in his speech.
There is one final exercise that can help increase our level of zehirus: Imagine if someone offered a Torah observant person $100 to speak lashon hara - the person would immediately refuse. What if he offered $1000, or $10,000 or $1000,000?! A person with a clear Torah hashakfa will refuse any amount of money rather than commit a sin because he is intellectually aware that the onesh for speaking lashon hara will be infinitely greater than anything finite. And yet, a person may often speak lashon hara for no money at all! The difference between the two situations is that when a person is clear that what he will do is an aveiro he has intellectual clarity that this is very bad for his neshama. However, without such clarity, b’shaas maaseh, a person rationalizes that what he is about to say is not really lashon hara and allows himself to say it regardless of the possible consequences of such a severe sin. We see from here that a person has the strength to withstand sin when he has total clarity that what he is about to do constitutes an issur. Developing a sense of clarity and intellectual honesty as to when we are committing an aveiro will enable us to tap into this koyach and give us the strength to withstand sin.
We do not have the gift of korbanos anymore, but the lessons that we learn from them can help us develop a strong sense of yiras shamayim that can prevent us from the damage of chet.
Sunday, March 18, 2012
THE RIGHT KIND OF JEALOUSY - VAYIKRA
During its outline of the various korbanos (sacrifices), the Torah forbids bringing offerings of leaven and honey . It then immediately tells us that, in contrast, we must include salt in all the meal-offerings. What is the difference between salt with honey and leaven, to the extent that salt is obligatory, whilst the other two substances are forbidden?! The commentaries point out that there is great symbolism in the korbanos, and that each of these three substances represent various character traits – by analyzing their symbolism we can answer this question.
The Sefer HaChinuch writes that honey represents base physical desire (taiva) because it is a sweet tasting food. The prohibition from adding honey to the offerings teaches us that one should refrain from chasing after sweet tasting foods, and should focus only on eating food that is necessary for his sustenance and well-being. The Chinuch continues that leaven is symbolic of arrogance because it rises up. With regard to arrogance, he brings the verse in Mishlei that states: “The haughty of heart is an abomination to HaShem.”
The Chasam Sofer zt”l continues in the same vein as the Chinuch with regard to honey and leaven. He then discusses the symbolism of salt. He alludes to the well-known maamer Chazal (saying of the Sages) that provides the background behind the obligation to include salt with the meal offerings. On the second day of Creation, HaShem separated the waters into two, bringing part of the water up to Shamayim and leaving part on the Earth. The lower waters complained that they also wanted to go up to the exalted Heavens rather than remain on the lowly Earth. HaShem appeased them by telling them that in the future the salt that is found in the water would, in the future, be offered up on the Altar along with the korbanos.
Based on this Midrash, the Chasam Sofer explains that salt represents the trait of jealousy because it is offered as a result of the jealousy of the lower waters towards the upper waters. He continues that honey, leaven, and salt represent the three basic negative traits; kina (jealousy), kavod (desire for honor) and taiva. However, he argues that jealousy is very different from the other two: There is no place for them in the Mishkan, and, by extension, in all Avodas HaShem (Divine Service), Therefore, there is no place for honey and leaven with the korbanos. He writes that jealousy, in contrast, does have a place in Avodas HaShem. We see this from the Gemara that says, ‘kinas sofrim tarbeh chachma’ – jealousy amongst those learning causes an increase in wisdom. This means that there is a benefit to jealousy in the spiritual realm because it can motivate a person to grow in his spirituality when he sees others performing on a higher level than himself. In this vein he explains that the jealousy of the lower waters for the upper waters was an example of a valid type of jealousy – the lower waters wanted to be as close to HaShem as the upper waters. Their reward was the salt that would be offered up. Accordingly, this salt remains as an eternal reminder of the praiseworthy form of jealousy.
The Chasam Sofer’s explanation teaches us that when the generally negative trait of jealousy is used in the right way, it can enhance one’s Avodas HaShem. It is instructive to analyze the difference between jealousy in the spiritual realm and jealousy in the physical realm. It seems that there are two main differences: Firstly, the motivation of the two types of jealousy varies greatly. Jealousy in the material realm often has a particularly abhorrent aspect – it is not limited to wanting the same things the other person, rather the jealous person wants that the other person to not have that thing as well. Indeed, the Torah prohibition that relates to jealousy, loh sachmod (do not covet), only applies when Reuven wants to have Shimon’s item itself, whereas if he only wants the same item as Shimon, there is no Torah prohibition. In contrast, the Baalei Mussar point out that jealousy in the spiritual realm is only acceptable when the jealous party does not begrudge his fellow of his success, rather he uses his friend’s success as a tool to help motivate himself to achieve similar heights. However, if he begrudges his friend his success then his jealousy is again considered totally unacceptable because it is clearly not driven by pure motivations.
The second difference is brought out by the Ibn Ezra’s explanation of the Mitzvo of loh sachmod. He offers an analogy of a peasant who desires to marry a princess. The peasant should realize that she is simply not in his domain, and that he has no right to expect to gain her hand in marriage. So too, each person is allotted exactly what they need in the material world. Anything that someone else owns is totally irrelevant to them and outside of their domain. They have no reason to desire it, because HaShem provides each person with exactly what they need. The reasoning of the Ibn Ezra only applies to jealousy in the material realm, because no amount of hishtadlus (effort) will alter a person’s possessions – that is completely in HaShem’s Hands. The one area in which HaShem stands back, so-to-speak, is spirituality. In the spiritual realm there is no predestined limit to what a person can achieve. It is completely dependent upon his own free will. Accordingly, it is not fruitless to desire to emulate someone else’s spiritual achievement; through personal effort, a person can attain more in ruchnius.
Bearing these two points in mind – that kinas sofrim induces a person to emulate his fellow without begrudging him his own success; and that one has the right to try to attain more than he presently has – we now have a deeper understanding of the role of jealousy in our lives. The Chasam Sofer teaches us that, whilst in many circumstances, it is a negative trait, when utilized in the right way, it can help us grow closer to HaShem, and in that way emulate the lower waters whose burning desire to get close to HaShem bore fruits.
The Sefer HaChinuch writes that honey represents base physical desire (taiva) because it is a sweet tasting food. The prohibition from adding honey to the offerings teaches us that one should refrain from chasing after sweet tasting foods, and should focus only on eating food that is necessary for his sustenance and well-being. The Chinuch continues that leaven is symbolic of arrogance because it rises up. With regard to arrogance, he brings the verse in Mishlei that states: “The haughty of heart is an abomination to HaShem.”
The Chasam Sofer zt”l continues in the same vein as the Chinuch with regard to honey and leaven. He then discusses the symbolism of salt. He alludes to the well-known maamer Chazal (saying of the Sages) that provides the background behind the obligation to include salt with the meal offerings. On the second day of Creation, HaShem separated the waters into two, bringing part of the water up to Shamayim and leaving part on the Earth. The lower waters complained that they also wanted to go up to the exalted Heavens rather than remain on the lowly Earth. HaShem appeased them by telling them that in the future the salt that is found in the water would, in the future, be offered up on the Altar along with the korbanos.
Based on this Midrash, the Chasam Sofer explains that salt represents the trait of jealousy because it is offered as a result of the jealousy of the lower waters towards the upper waters. He continues that honey, leaven, and salt represent the three basic negative traits; kina (jealousy), kavod (desire for honor) and taiva. However, he argues that jealousy is very different from the other two: There is no place for them in the Mishkan, and, by extension, in all Avodas HaShem (Divine Service), Therefore, there is no place for honey and leaven with the korbanos. He writes that jealousy, in contrast, does have a place in Avodas HaShem. We see this from the Gemara that says, ‘kinas sofrim tarbeh chachma’ – jealousy amongst those learning causes an increase in wisdom. This means that there is a benefit to jealousy in the spiritual realm because it can motivate a person to grow in his spirituality when he sees others performing on a higher level than himself. In this vein he explains that the jealousy of the lower waters for the upper waters was an example of a valid type of jealousy – the lower waters wanted to be as close to HaShem as the upper waters. Their reward was the salt that would be offered up. Accordingly, this salt remains as an eternal reminder of the praiseworthy form of jealousy.
The Chasam Sofer’s explanation teaches us that when the generally negative trait of jealousy is used in the right way, it can enhance one’s Avodas HaShem. It is instructive to analyze the difference between jealousy in the spiritual realm and jealousy in the physical realm. It seems that there are two main differences: Firstly, the motivation of the two types of jealousy varies greatly. Jealousy in the material realm often has a particularly abhorrent aspect – it is not limited to wanting the same things the other person, rather the jealous person wants that the other person to not have that thing as well. Indeed, the Torah prohibition that relates to jealousy, loh sachmod (do not covet), only applies when Reuven wants to have Shimon’s item itself, whereas if he only wants the same item as Shimon, there is no Torah prohibition. In contrast, the Baalei Mussar point out that jealousy in the spiritual realm is only acceptable when the jealous party does not begrudge his fellow of his success, rather he uses his friend’s success as a tool to help motivate himself to achieve similar heights. However, if he begrudges his friend his success then his jealousy is again considered totally unacceptable because it is clearly not driven by pure motivations.
The second difference is brought out by the Ibn Ezra’s explanation of the Mitzvo of loh sachmod. He offers an analogy of a peasant who desires to marry a princess. The peasant should realize that she is simply not in his domain, and that he has no right to expect to gain her hand in marriage. So too, each person is allotted exactly what they need in the material world. Anything that someone else owns is totally irrelevant to them and outside of their domain. They have no reason to desire it, because HaShem provides each person with exactly what they need. The reasoning of the Ibn Ezra only applies to jealousy in the material realm, because no amount of hishtadlus (effort) will alter a person’s possessions – that is completely in HaShem’s Hands. The one area in which HaShem stands back, so-to-speak, is spirituality. In the spiritual realm there is no predestined limit to what a person can achieve. It is completely dependent upon his own free will. Accordingly, it is not fruitless to desire to emulate someone else’s spiritual achievement; through personal effort, a person can attain more in ruchnius.
Bearing these two points in mind – that kinas sofrim induces a person to emulate his fellow without begrudging him his own success; and that one has the right to try to attain more than he presently has – we now have a deeper understanding of the role of jealousy in our lives. The Chasam Sofer teaches us that, whilst in many circumstances, it is a negative trait, when utilized in the right way, it can help us grow closer to HaShem, and in that way emulate the lower waters whose burning desire to get close to HaShem bore fruits.
Tuesday, March 13, 2012
FULFILLING OUR POTENTIAL - VAYAKHEL
In the midst of its account of the building of the Mishkan that Torah states that, “Every man whose heart inspired him came.. ” The Ramban writes that this refers to those who came to do the work of weaving, sewing and building. Where did these people learn how to perform such skilled crafts? The Ramban answers that they found deep within their teva the ability to do them. These formerly hidden powers came about as a result of their deep desire to fulfill the ratson Hashem by helping to build the Mishkan. As a result of their burning desire, Hashem gave them the ability to do things that they had never been taught!
There is a well-known principle that Hashem grants us a unique set of talents with which they can fulfill their potential in life. Whilst this is certainly true it seems that it can be somewhat misapplied: As we grow up we naturally become aware of our strengths and weaknesses - there is the tendency that we can limit our activities to areas in which our strengths lie and ignore those fields in which we fell less able. For example, a person may feel that he is adept at speaking in front of small groups but that he cannot speak in front of large audiences. Thus, even when there is a necessity for someone to speak in such a setting, he will shy away from the responsibility because he has ‘pigeon-holed’ himself as being unable to speak in front of many people. We learn from the Ramban that this is an erroneous attitude - the people who stepped forward to work in the Mishkan had no awareness that they were able to perform such skilled crafts - however, as a result of their devotion to Hashem they found hitherto untapped talents that could be used to fulfill ratson Hashem. So too, in our own lives there may be times when there is a need for a certain task to be performed and we may feel that we are unable to perform it - however, the Mishna in Avos tells us that, “in a place where there are no men, be a man.” The Mishna does not qualify its exhortation by saying that you should only stand up where there is no man in an area where you feel highly capable. Rather, the only criteria that we should examine is whether there is anyone else who can perform the required task as well as we can. And if there is not, then if we dedicate ourselves to doing ratson Hashem then surely Hashem will bring out in us hidden talents.
There are many examples of people who were inspired to bring out hidden talents and consequently achieved great things; one of the most remarkable is that of the Netsiv zt”l. When he completed his commentary on the Sheiltos, he made a seuda, partly because that is the custom when one completes a sefer, but there was another, more personal reason as well. He related that when he was a boy he was not particularly serious about his Torah studies. His parents made every effort to help him change his attitude but to no avail. One day he overheard them discussing his lack of success in Torah learning - they decided that he had no prospect of becoming a Talmid Chacham and therefore he should learn to become a cobbler. They hoped that at least he would be a yirei shamayim who would go about his work with honesty and dedication. When he heard this, it greatly shocked him and he decided to take his Torah studies seriously - this incident has such an impact on him that it led to a complete change in his attitude and he became a Gadol. How did he achieve so much? Because he developed a desire to be great in learning - it was through this desire that he found in his teva hitherto undiscovered ability to learn Torah to a very high level.
One may respond to this story by arguing that not everybody can become such a great Talmid Chacham, however Jewish history shows that we need not necessarily be a Gadol to achieve great things - sometimes there are other areas of expertise which are required in order to bring about a fulfillment of ratson Hashem. Reb Dovid Dryan zt”l provides us with an excellent example of such a case. He was a pious shochet known for his adherence to shemiras halashon. However, there is one more thing that makes him stand out - he was directly responsible for the founding and running of the Gateshead Yeshiva and played a significant role in the formation of the Gateshead Kollel and Seminary. To a significant degree, his dedication is responsible for the fact that Gateshead is known as the greatest Torah center in Europe through which thousands of boys and girls have received a high level Torah education. How did Reb Dovid Dryan achieve this? When he came to live in Gateshead he found that there was no Yeshiva there. He said to himself, “how can I live in a place where there is no Yeshiva?!” This may be a question that many of us would ask in a similar situation. However, he did not suffice with just asking the question - he took action; he devoted much time and effort to achieve a seemingly impossible task in the face of considerable opposition. He took on many tasks which were not necessarily within the areas of his expertise, including fundraising and administration. He could have easily felt that he was a shochet and that was where his responsibilities to the community ended. Instead he motivated himself to do what was needed and Hashem granted him the ability to succeed .
Despite these inspiring stories one could still argue that he has in the past made an effort in certain fields and not been successful - consequently he feels that he is exempt from taking responsibility in these areas. The Chofetz Chaim addresses this claim; he points out how much effort we invest into our own interests. For example, if a business venture is not going well, a person will not simply give up, rather he will constantly think how he can improve the situation - he will seek advice from other businessmen and eventually he will often succeed. So too, he writes, “If Ratson Hashem was of equal value to a person as are his own personal affairs, he would seek advice and strategies how to build up Torah so that it does not weaken, and surely Hashem will help him find ways to succeed… however we do not do so in heavenly matters. When one sees that there is no way to improve the situation he immediately gives up and exempts himself from having to do anything. ” If we were willing to apply the same effort in Avodas Hashem as in our financial interests then we could surely rise above our accepted limits.
There is a remarkable present day example of a person who lives these words of the Chofetz Chaim. Rav Meir Shuster Shlita is naturally a shy person who is most happy in the Beis Medrash learning or davenning. However, many years ago, he recognized a need in Klal Yisroel - every day dozens of secular Jews would visit the Kotel and return back to their lives empty of Torah. He saw the necessity to approach these people and offer them accommodation in a hostel that could serve as the base with which to encourage the visitors to go to Yeshiva or Seminary. Consequently, he took it upon himself to go against his teva and walk up to these strangers and engage them in conversation. After doing this for many years, it is impossible to know how many hundreds of lives have been changed by his bold decision to do something against his teva because he felt it was Ratson Hashem. But it is clear that had he limited himself to his natural areas of strength then the world would have greatly suffered for it.
The people who raised up their hearts to fulfill Ratson Hashem found powers that they could never imagine they possessed. We too have the ability to break beyond our limits and achieve the seemingly impossible.
There is a well-known principle that Hashem grants us a unique set of talents with which they can fulfill their potential in life. Whilst this is certainly true it seems that it can be somewhat misapplied: As we grow up we naturally become aware of our strengths and weaknesses - there is the tendency that we can limit our activities to areas in which our strengths lie and ignore those fields in which we fell less able. For example, a person may feel that he is adept at speaking in front of small groups but that he cannot speak in front of large audiences. Thus, even when there is a necessity for someone to speak in such a setting, he will shy away from the responsibility because he has ‘pigeon-holed’ himself as being unable to speak in front of many people. We learn from the Ramban that this is an erroneous attitude - the people who stepped forward to work in the Mishkan had no awareness that they were able to perform such skilled crafts - however, as a result of their devotion to Hashem they found hitherto untapped talents that could be used to fulfill ratson Hashem. So too, in our own lives there may be times when there is a need for a certain task to be performed and we may feel that we are unable to perform it - however, the Mishna in Avos tells us that, “in a place where there are no men, be a man.” The Mishna does not qualify its exhortation by saying that you should only stand up where there is no man in an area where you feel highly capable. Rather, the only criteria that we should examine is whether there is anyone else who can perform the required task as well as we can. And if there is not, then if we dedicate ourselves to doing ratson Hashem then surely Hashem will bring out in us hidden talents.
There are many examples of people who were inspired to bring out hidden talents and consequently achieved great things; one of the most remarkable is that of the Netsiv zt”l. When he completed his commentary on the Sheiltos, he made a seuda, partly because that is the custom when one completes a sefer, but there was another, more personal reason as well. He related that when he was a boy he was not particularly serious about his Torah studies. His parents made every effort to help him change his attitude but to no avail. One day he overheard them discussing his lack of success in Torah learning - they decided that he had no prospect of becoming a Talmid Chacham and therefore he should learn to become a cobbler. They hoped that at least he would be a yirei shamayim who would go about his work with honesty and dedication. When he heard this, it greatly shocked him and he decided to take his Torah studies seriously - this incident has such an impact on him that it led to a complete change in his attitude and he became a Gadol. How did he achieve so much? Because he developed a desire to be great in learning - it was through this desire that he found in his teva hitherto undiscovered ability to learn Torah to a very high level.
One may respond to this story by arguing that not everybody can become such a great Talmid Chacham, however Jewish history shows that we need not necessarily be a Gadol to achieve great things - sometimes there are other areas of expertise which are required in order to bring about a fulfillment of ratson Hashem. Reb Dovid Dryan zt”l provides us with an excellent example of such a case. He was a pious shochet known for his adherence to shemiras halashon. However, there is one more thing that makes him stand out - he was directly responsible for the founding and running of the Gateshead Yeshiva and played a significant role in the formation of the Gateshead Kollel and Seminary. To a significant degree, his dedication is responsible for the fact that Gateshead is known as the greatest Torah center in Europe through which thousands of boys and girls have received a high level Torah education. How did Reb Dovid Dryan achieve this? When he came to live in Gateshead he found that there was no Yeshiva there. He said to himself, “how can I live in a place where there is no Yeshiva?!” This may be a question that many of us would ask in a similar situation. However, he did not suffice with just asking the question - he took action; he devoted much time and effort to achieve a seemingly impossible task in the face of considerable opposition. He took on many tasks which were not necessarily within the areas of his expertise, including fundraising and administration. He could have easily felt that he was a shochet and that was where his responsibilities to the community ended. Instead he motivated himself to do what was needed and Hashem granted him the ability to succeed .
Despite these inspiring stories one could still argue that he has in the past made an effort in certain fields and not been successful - consequently he feels that he is exempt from taking responsibility in these areas. The Chofetz Chaim addresses this claim; he points out how much effort we invest into our own interests. For example, if a business venture is not going well, a person will not simply give up, rather he will constantly think how he can improve the situation - he will seek advice from other businessmen and eventually he will often succeed. So too, he writes, “If Ratson Hashem was of equal value to a person as are his own personal affairs, he would seek advice and strategies how to build up Torah so that it does not weaken, and surely Hashem will help him find ways to succeed… however we do not do so in heavenly matters. When one sees that there is no way to improve the situation he immediately gives up and exempts himself from having to do anything. ” If we were willing to apply the same effort in Avodas Hashem as in our financial interests then we could surely rise above our accepted limits.
There is a remarkable present day example of a person who lives these words of the Chofetz Chaim. Rav Meir Shuster Shlita is naturally a shy person who is most happy in the Beis Medrash learning or davenning. However, many years ago, he recognized a need in Klal Yisroel - every day dozens of secular Jews would visit the Kotel and return back to their lives empty of Torah. He saw the necessity to approach these people and offer them accommodation in a hostel that could serve as the base with which to encourage the visitors to go to Yeshiva or Seminary. Consequently, he took it upon himself to go against his teva and walk up to these strangers and engage them in conversation. After doing this for many years, it is impossible to know how many hundreds of lives have been changed by his bold decision to do something against his teva because he felt it was Ratson Hashem. But it is clear that had he limited himself to his natural areas of strength then the world would have greatly suffered for it.
The people who raised up their hearts to fulfill Ratson Hashem found powers that they could never imagine they possessed. We too have the ability to break beyond our limits and achieve the seemingly impossible.
SHABBOS - VAYAKHEL
The Parsha begins with an exhortation to observe Shabbos: "For six days work will be done and the seventh day shall be holy for you, a day of complete rest for Hashem, whoever does work on it shall be put to death. " The commentaries ask that the wording of the Torah in this passuk needs explanation; it should have said, "for six days you will do work" in the active sense, rather than saying that work will be done in the passive form .
They explain that the Torah is teaching us about the attitude a person should have that will enable him to have the fortitude to refrain from doing melacha (prohibited activity) on Shabbos: Throughout the week a person is required to work in order to earn his livelihood, he cannot sit back and expect G-d to provide for him if he puts in no effort. He is required to put in hishtadlus because of the decree that Hashem placed upon mankind after the sin of Adam HaRishon. However, in truth , all his hishtadlus (effort) is not the reason for his success, rather Hashem is its sole Source. On Shabbos, Hashem commands us to refrain from creative activity to acknowledge this and that all the work we do in the week is only part of the gezeiras hishtadlus (decree to work). However, if one comes to believe that his physical efforts are in fact the cause of his livelihood then he will find it very difficult to refrain from working on Shabbos; he thinks that the more he works the more he will earn and therefore it is logical for him to work on Shabbos as well as the rest of the week. In response to this erroneous attitude, the Torah tells us that one should view the work that he does in a passive sense - that in truth he does not do the work, rather that it is done for him. Hashem, so-to-speak, does the work and provides for each person's livelihood. If one recognizes this then he will find it far easier to refrain from working on Shabbos because he realizes that in truth his work is not the cause of his livelihood .
It seems that this lesson is not limited to avoiding the 39 melachas that are forbidden by the Torah. There is a Rabbinical prohibition of speaking about melacha that one plans to do in the rest of the week . Doing so also shows a level of lack of appreciation of the lesson of Shabbos that Hashem provides one's livelihood. Moreover, whilst it is technically permissible to think about melacha on Shabbos, it is nonetheless praiseworthy to avoid such thoughts completely . Such a level reflects a true appreciation of how Shabbos is a reflection on the fact that Hashem runs the world, and that one's own thoughts of melacha are of no benefit.
This idea is brought out in the Gemara in Shabbos: The Gemara tells of a righteous man who saw that there was a hole in the fence of his field on Shabbos. He thought about fixing it after Shabbos, and then remembered that it was Shabbos and felt guilty about thinking about melacho on Shabbos. As a show of regret he then decided never to fix that fence and as a reward a miracle occurred and a tzlaf tree grew from which he was able to support himself and his family . There are two difficulties with this Gemara: Firstly, why did he refrain from ever fixing the fence - what was the benefit of doing so and how could it rectify his initial mistake? Secondly, what was the significance of the reward he received, how was that a measure for measure response to his decision never to build the fence?
It seems that we can answer these problems through the principle we are discussing. When this righteous man saw the fence, he thought about fixing it, momentarily forgetting the lesson of Shabbos, that Hashem is the Source of one's livelihood and that man's efforts are worthless without Hashem's help. In order to rectify this 'error' he decided to never fix the fence to demonstrate that he did indeed recognize that his own efforts were not the cause of his livelihood. As a reward for this attitude, Hashem showed him measure for measure that he was correct, and provided him with a new source of income, the tzlaf tree without any input from the man himself! This proved that Hashem can provide a person with his livelihood regardless of his hishtadlus.
Throughout the week it is very difficult to see through the illusion that man's hishtadlus is not the true cause of his livelihood, and that Hashem is the sole Provider. Shabbos provides man with the opportunity to see clearly that all his hishtadlus is ultimately unnecessary . On Shabbos whilst the rest of the world continues striving to earn their living through effort, observant Jews rest from such activity, recognizing that Hashem runs the world without needing man's input. As we have seen, this attitude does not only express itself through avoidance of melacha, it even extends to refraining from speaking about melacha. The highest level is to even avoid thinking about melacha that needs to be done. All these prohibitions are supposed to instill in us the realization that all our accomplishments throughout the week only come about because Hashem so desires. May we all merit to observe Shabbos free of action, speech and thought about melacha.
They explain that the Torah is teaching us about the attitude a person should have that will enable him to have the fortitude to refrain from doing melacha (prohibited activity) on Shabbos: Throughout the week a person is required to work in order to earn his livelihood, he cannot sit back and expect G-d to provide for him if he puts in no effort. He is required to put in hishtadlus because of the decree that Hashem placed upon mankind after the sin of Adam HaRishon. However, in truth , all his hishtadlus (effort) is not the reason for his success, rather Hashem is its sole Source. On Shabbos, Hashem commands us to refrain from creative activity to acknowledge this and that all the work we do in the week is only part of the gezeiras hishtadlus (decree to work). However, if one comes to believe that his physical efforts are in fact the cause of his livelihood then he will find it very difficult to refrain from working on Shabbos; he thinks that the more he works the more he will earn and therefore it is logical for him to work on Shabbos as well as the rest of the week. In response to this erroneous attitude, the Torah tells us that one should view the work that he does in a passive sense - that in truth he does not do the work, rather that it is done for him. Hashem, so-to-speak, does the work and provides for each person's livelihood. If one recognizes this then he will find it far easier to refrain from working on Shabbos because he realizes that in truth his work is not the cause of his livelihood .
It seems that this lesson is not limited to avoiding the 39 melachas that are forbidden by the Torah. There is a Rabbinical prohibition of speaking about melacha that one plans to do in the rest of the week . Doing so also shows a level of lack of appreciation of the lesson of Shabbos that Hashem provides one's livelihood. Moreover, whilst it is technically permissible to think about melacha on Shabbos, it is nonetheless praiseworthy to avoid such thoughts completely . Such a level reflects a true appreciation of how Shabbos is a reflection on the fact that Hashem runs the world, and that one's own thoughts of melacha are of no benefit.
This idea is brought out in the Gemara in Shabbos: The Gemara tells of a righteous man who saw that there was a hole in the fence of his field on Shabbos. He thought about fixing it after Shabbos, and then remembered that it was Shabbos and felt guilty about thinking about melacho on Shabbos. As a show of regret he then decided never to fix that fence and as a reward a miracle occurred and a tzlaf tree grew from which he was able to support himself and his family . There are two difficulties with this Gemara: Firstly, why did he refrain from ever fixing the fence - what was the benefit of doing so and how could it rectify his initial mistake? Secondly, what was the significance of the reward he received, how was that a measure for measure response to his decision never to build the fence?
It seems that we can answer these problems through the principle we are discussing. When this righteous man saw the fence, he thought about fixing it, momentarily forgetting the lesson of Shabbos, that Hashem is the Source of one's livelihood and that man's efforts are worthless without Hashem's help. In order to rectify this 'error' he decided to never fix the fence to demonstrate that he did indeed recognize that his own efforts were not the cause of his livelihood. As a reward for this attitude, Hashem showed him measure for measure that he was correct, and provided him with a new source of income, the tzlaf tree without any input from the man himself! This proved that Hashem can provide a person with his livelihood regardless of his hishtadlus.
Throughout the week it is very difficult to see through the illusion that man's hishtadlus is not the true cause of his livelihood, and that Hashem is the sole Provider. Shabbos provides man with the opportunity to see clearly that all his hishtadlus is ultimately unnecessary . On Shabbos whilst the rest of the world continues striving to earn their living through effort, observant Jews rest from such activity, recognizing that Hashem runs the world without needing man's input. As we have seen, this attitude does not only express itself through avoidance of melacha, it even extends to refraining from speaking about melacha. The highest level is to even avoid thinking about melacha that needs to be done. All these prohibitions are supposed to instill in us the realization that all our accomplishments throughout the week only come about because Hashem so desires. May we all merit to observe Shabbos free of action, speech and thought about melacha.
ONE DEED REFLECTS ON ANOTHER - VAYAKHEL
The Torah describes how the people eagerly came to donate their prized possessions towards the building of the Mishkan (Tabernacle). “The men came with the women; everyone whose heart motivated him brought bracelets, nose-rings, body ornaments – all sorts of gold ornaments – every man who raised up an offering of gold to HaShem.” The commentaries discuss the meaning of the phrase, “the men came with the women”. Rabbeinu Bechaye explains that the women in fact came first to donate their jewelry, and the men only came after them. This, he explains, demonstrates their righteousness in and of itself but it also reflects positively on an earlier incident involving jewelry – that of the Golden Calf. When the men demanded that Aaron make for them a statue, he told them to remove the women’s jewelry. However, the women refused to give over their jewelry so the men took their own gold and gave that towards the building of the Calf. From the incident of the Golden Calf alone, it is unclear why the women refused to give their jewelry. It was possible that their main motivation was their natural attachment to their jewelry, as opposed to the pure motivation of refusal to be involved with the sin of the Golden Calf. However, in Parshas Vayakhel we see that the women were very willing to donate their jewelry towards the elevated purpose of the building of the Mishkan. This retroactively teaches us about the reason that they did not give their jewelry at the Golden Calf. It was not because of their attachment to gold and silver, because that did not prevent the women from parting with them for the sake of the Mishkan. Rather, their refusal to give towards the Golden Calf emanated from leshem Shamayim (pure) motives - they wanted no part in that terrible sin.
Rav Avraham Pam zt”l derives a very important concept from this explanation. It is known in Hebrew as ‘Maasim shel adam mochichim zeh es zeh’. This means that the actions of a person in one area can reveal something about his actions in another area. In this case, the women’s willingness to part with their jewelry for the Mishka, revealed their pure intentions when refusing to do so for the Golden Calf.
We see another example of this concept with regards to one of the names given to the Third meal that is eaten on Shabbos: Shalosh Seudas – this literally means, ‘three meals’. This is a very strange name to give the third meal, it would be more appropriate to only use its other name – seudah shelishis. Why is this meal also known as ‘three meals’? The answer is that the way a person conducts himself at the third meal reflects retroactively on his intentions during the first two Shabbos meals. There are two possible reasons as to why a person would eat well at the first two Shabbos meals: It could be because of his pure desire to honor the Shabbos by eating delicious food, or it could emanate from his hunger and desire to eat well, because both those meals come at a time when a person is normally hungry and ready to eat well. However, the third meal comes quite soon after Shabbos lunch, therefore a person’s natural hunger will not be high. If he refrains from eating at the third meal despite the fact that it is a Mitzvo to eat then, he retroactively shows that his main kavannah for the first two meals was to fill his stomach more than honor the Shabbos! If, however, he does partake in a delicious meal he demonstrates that his intentions are for the honor of Shabbos, for if it were not Shabbos he would otherwise eat far less or nothing at all. Accordingly, by eating the third meal he retroactively demonstrates his intent for the first two, and at this point it is clear that he ate ALL THREE MEALS with pure intentions. Therefore, the third meal merits the name, ‘three meals’ because, for one who eats the third meal, it is considered as if he ate all three meals with pure intent.
This concept of ‘Maasim shel adam mochichim zeh es zeh’ is of great importance because it is a very effective mechanism in judging the consistency of people’s actions. This idea is brought out by the Beis HaLevi on Parshas Vayigash. When Yosef revealed himself to his brothers he asked them the question; “is my father still alive? ” When the brothers heard this, they were completely speechless and disconcerted. The Medrash compares Yosef’s revelation to his brothers to that of the Day of Judgment. It says that if the brothers could not answer Yosef who was younger than them, then all the more so when HaShem (so to speak) comes and rebukes us, we will be left speechless. The commentaries ask; what exactly is the comparison between Yosef’s revelation to the brothers and the Day of Judgment.
The Beis HaLevi answers by first explaining Yosef’s question about whether his father was alive – it was very clear from the events up to this time that Yaakov Avinu was still alive! He answers that Yosef was in truth giving them a veiled rebuke. Yehuda had just spent a great deal of time arguing that Yosef should not take Binyomin as a slave because it would destroy Yaakov. By bringing up the well-being of Yaakov, Yosef was alluding to them that their purported concern for their father did not seem to be consistent with their actions in selling Yosef so many years earlier. At that time, they had shown no concern for the pain that their father would feel al the loss of his beloved son. In this way, the brothers had contradicted their own arguments through their very actions! The Beis HaLevi then explains the similarity of Yosef’s ‘rebuke’ to that of the Day of Judgment. On that awesome day each person will be asked about his various actions, including his sins and failure to keep Mitzvos properly. He may have excuses, however, these excuses will then be scrutinized by his other actions in that same area. For example, a person might justify his failure to give sufficient money to charity on the basis that he was lacking in his own livelihood. However, his spending in other areas will then be examined – if it becomes clear that in other areas he was all too willing and able to spend large amounts of money, then he himself has ruined his own justification for failing to give charity! In this vein, his actions in spending money for his own enjoyment reflects badly on his spending of money for the Mitzvo of giving charity.
In this vein, the Choftez Chaim once berated a wealthy man for giving insufficient funds to charity. The man answered that he did indeed give away a significant amount. The Chofetz Chaim then worked out the amount of money he gave to charity and compared it to his expenses on his own luxuries. It came out that the man spent more money on his drapery alone than on all the charity that he gave!
We have discussed the concept of ‘Maasim shel adam mochichim zeh es zeh’ and seen its great significance in the process of judgment. The obvious lesson to be derived from this concept, is that it is essential that a person analyze the consistency of his actions. For example, a person who claims that he does not have enough time to learn will have to justify his failure to learn on the Day of Judgment. If it becomes clear that he did have enough time for many other types of activities then his claim that he did not have enough time to learn will be put in serious jeopardy. His actions in other areas show that in truth it wasn’t because he did not have enough time to learn, rather that it was a very low priority in his list of importance. It would be much less disconcerting if we can make our own self-analysis of such inconsistencies and fix them before the Day of Judgment. May we all merit to achieve consistency in all our actions.
Rav Avraham Pam zt”l derives a very important concept from this explanation. It is known in Hebrew as ‘Maasim shel adam mochichim zeh es zeh’. This means that the actions of a person in one area can reveal something about his actions in another area. In this case, the women’s willingness to part with their jewelry for the Mishka, revealed their pure intentions when refusing to do so for the Golden Calf.
We see another example of this concept with regards to one of the names given to the Third meal that is eaten on Shabbos: Shalosh Seudas – this literally means, ‘three meals’. This is a very strange name to give the third meal, it would be more appropriate to only use its other name – seudah shelishis. Why is this meal also known as ‘three meals’? The answer is that the way a person conducts himself at the third meal reflects retroactively on his intentions during the first two Shabbos meals. There are two possible reasons as to why a person would eat well at the first two Shabbos meals: It could be because of his pure desire to honor the Shabbos by eating delicious food, or it could emanate from his hunger and desire to eat well, because both those meals come at a time when a person is normally hungry and ready to eat well. However, the third meal comes quite soon after Shabbos lunch, therefore a person’s natural hunger will not be high. If he refrains from eating at the third meal despite the fact that it is a Mitzvo to eat then, he retroactively shows that his main kavannah for the first two meals was to fill his stomach more than honor the Shabbos! If, however, he does partake in a delicious meal he demonstrates that his intentions are for the honor of Shabbos, for if it were not Shabbos he would otherwise eat far less or nothing at all. Accordingly, by eating the third meal he retroactively demonstrates his intent for the first two, and at this point it is clear that he ate ALL THREE MEALS with pure intentions. Therefore, the third meal merits the name, ‘three meals’ because, for one who eats the third meal, it is considered as if he ate all three meals with pure intent.
This concept of ‘Maasim shel adam mochichim zeh es zeh’ is of great importance because it is a very effective mechanism in judging the consistency of people’s actions. This idea is brought out by the Beis HaLevi on Parshas Vayigash. When Yosef revealed himself to his brothers he asked them the question; “is my father still alive? ” When the brothers heard this, they were completely speechless and disconcerted. The Medrash compares Yosef’s revelation to his brothers to that of the Day of Judgment. It says that if the brothers could not answer Yosef who was younger than them, then all the more so when HaShem (so to speak) comes and rebukes us, we will be left speechless. The commentaries ask; what exactly is the comparison between Yosef’s revelation to the brothers and the Day of Judgment.
The Beis HaLevi answers by first explaining Yosef’s question about whether his father was alive – it was very clear from the events up to this time that Yaakov Avinu was still alive! He answers that Yosef was in truth giving them a veiled rebuke. Yehuda had just spent a great deal of time arguing that Yosef should not take Binyomin as a slave because it would destroy Yaakov. By bringing up the well-being of Yaakov, Yosef was alluding to them that their purported concern for their father did not seem to be consistent with their actions in selling Yosef so many years earlier. At that time, they had shown no concern for the pain that their father would feel al the loss of his beloved son. In this way, the brothers had contradicted their own arguments through their very actions! The Beis HaLevi then explains the similarity of Yosef’s ‘rebuke’ to that of the Day of Judgment. On that awesome day each person will be asked about his various actions, including his sins and failure to keep Mitzvos properly. He may have excuses, however, these excuses will then be scrutinized by his other actions in that same area. For example, a person might justify his failure to give sufficient money to charity on the basis that he was lacking in his own livelihood. However, his spending in other areas will then be examined – if it becomes clear that in other areas he was all too willing and able to spend large amounts of money, then he himself has ruined his own justification for failing to give charity! In this vein, his actions in spending money for his own enjoyment reflects badly on his spending of money for the Mitzvo of giving charity.
In this vein, the Choftez Chaim once berated a wealthy man for giving insufficient funds to charity. The man answered that he did indeed give away a significant amount. The Chofetz Chaim then worked out the amount of money he gave to charity and compared it to his expenses on his own luxuries. It came out that the man spent more money on his drapery alone than on all the charity that he gave!
We have discussed the concept of ‘Maasim shel adam mochichim zeh es zeh’ and seen its great significance in the process of judgment. The obvious lesson to be derived from this concept, is that it is essential that a person analyze the consistency of his actions. For example, a person who claims that he does not have enough time to learn will have to justify his failure to learn on the Day of Judgment. If it becomes clear that he did have enough time for many other types of activities then his claim that he did not have enough time to learn will be put in serious jeopardy. His actions in other areas show that in truth it wasn’t because he did not have enough time to learn, rather that it was a very low priority in his list of importance. It would be much less disconcerting if we can make our own self-analysis of such inconsistencies and fix them before the Day of Judgment. May we all merit to achieve consistency in all our actions.
Sunday, March 4, 2012
A DIRECT CONNECTION TO HASHEM - KI SISA –
Chet haegel is one of the most difficult episodes in the Torah. There is much discussion about how the Dor Deah could commit such a terrible sin so soon after Matan Torah. One less commonly discussed aspect of this terrible incident is the way in which Hashem punished the Jewish people for the chet: Right after it, Hashem says to Moshe Rabbeinu, “..Behold, My angel shall go before you.. ” Rashi explains that this is a punishment; up to this time, Hashem Himself would guide the Jewish people in the desert, but from now on, only an angel would guide them. Chazal teach us that Hashem punishes mida keneged mida, which means that the nature of the punishment can help us understand the nature of the sin. What was the mida keneged mida in this punishment for chet haegel?
In order to understand this we must first briefly discuss how the Jewish people could commit a sin that seems to be avoda zara. The commentaries explain that they did not intend to worship an idol, rather they wanted the egel to be an intermediary between themselves and Hashem: When they thought that Moshe had died they panicked - they believed that they could not have a direct relationship with Hashem, rather they needed an intermediary to communicate with Him on their behalf. This was not a denial of Hashem, rather it was an erroneous belief that some kind of being was needed to represent them before Him and convey His teachings and beneficence to them .
With this explanation we can now understand the root cause of chet haegel. The Jewish people came to this belief that they needed an intermediary because on a subtle level they did not desire a direct relationship with Hashem. This was not the first time in which this failing was apparent; at Matan Torah, after Hashem spoke directly to the people for the first two mitzvos, they asked that Hashem no longer communicate directly with them. Rather, He should tell Moshe and Moshe should pass on what Hashem said to them. In Parshas Va’eschanan, Moshe rebuked them for this seemingly innocuous request: Rashi tells us that Moshe said to them, “I was pained and disappointed by you. Would it not have been better for you to learn directly from Hashem’s mouth than to learn from me?! ” It was this underlying fear of a direct relationship with Hashem that was responsible for the terrible course of events that culminated in chet haegel. The mida keneged mida punishment for this was that there would now be an intermediary Malach guiding them instead of their being under direct guidance from Hashem Himself.
Later in the parsha we see a stark contrast to this in the attitude of Moshe Rabbeinu himself. Having successfully pleaded for Hashem to spare the Jewish people, Moshe saw that it was an ‘eis ratson’ a time when his words were being received. At this moment, he had the opportunity to make any request of Hashem - what did he choose to ask for? “Please show me Your Glory .” He asked for the ability to perceive Hashem on a greater level than even he had ever experienced: Moshe’s primary goal was to gain more awareness of, and closeness to, Hashem.
The incidents in the Torah are not merely there to offer interesting reading - both the positive and negative actions of the people in the Torah provide us with lessons about our own life: On a subtle level, the great Dor Deah were lacking in their desire for a direct relationship with Hashem and as a consequence they became overly reliant upon intermediaries. How does this flaw effect us? The story is told of a Rebbe who once asked one of his chassidim how often he thinks about G-d. The talmid answered, “Rebbe, I wake up every day at 3.00am to learn before davenning Neitz, I then learn uninterrupted till mincha, and after a very brief lunch I continue learning for several hours more. Finally I sleep late at night and wake up at 3.00am the next day to learn - Rebbe, when do I have time to think about G-d?! ”
Sometimes we can be so involved with our Avodas Hashem that we can forget about Hashem Himself. Just like the Dor Deah overly focused on intermediaries we can sometimes ‘miss the forest for the trees’ and be so focused on the means with which we should get close to G-d but we forget that they are just means and not an end in itself. This can even be the case with regard to Talmud Torah. Talmud Torah is so central our lives that we can sometimes forget that it is primarily a means of developing a closer relationship to Hashem. Knowledge of a great deal of Torah is not an end in itself, Torah is supposed to bring us to greater Emuna and Yiras Hashem and if it does not then, there is something amiss.
The Baaley Mussar spoke at length on this inyan and the need to set aside time to focus on developing Yiras Hashem. Even the Nefesh HaChaim, who argued against excessive mussar study, stressed the necessity of spending a short amount of time before learning to contemplate Hashem so that the learning would be infused with the correct attitude. He even wrote that a person can stop in the middle of his learning and reflect on Hashem, “before the yiras Hashem in his heart will be extinguished. ”
Moreover, the Rosh Yeshiva of Novardok, Rav Ben-Tzion Brook zt”l said that it is important to be aware of the context in which Nefesh HaChaim was written in order not to misunderstand his message as a call to focus exclusively on Talmud Torah to the expense of mussar. The Nefesh HaChaim was written as a response to people who were devoting most of their time to mussar sefarim at the expense of Talmud Torah. Consequently, he stressed that it is correct to devote most of one’s time to learning Torah and that this will bring a person to a relationship with Hashem. However, Rav Brook argued, nowadays, the nisayon for most people is very different; a person who has little awareness or understanding of emuna may read Nefesh HaChaim and see it as a heter to avoid working directly on getting closer to Hashem. The Nefesh HaChaim was not talking to this kind of person at all, and whilst it is accepted to spend most of one’s time in regular Talmud Torah, nonetheless it is essential that we realize that the ikar is indeed to increase our emuna .
It is also possible to place performance of mitzvos as the ikar in place of closeness to Hashem. A person can perform a mitzvo with little or no thought of Hashem and think that he has fulfilled the mitzvo to a satisfactory level. With regard to this it is pertinent to remember the words of the Ramban in parshas Bo: “The purpose of all the mitzvos is that we believe in our G-d and that we acknowledge that He is our G-d, and that is the purpose of creation, because there is no other reason for creation, and the only thing that Hashem wants from us is that we know and acknowledge that He created us. ”
There are a number of simple ways through which we can avoid the pitfall of forgetting that the tachlis of all our Avoda is to develop our relationship with Hashem. The most obvious is to learn sefarim that discuss such topics as emuna, bitachon or tefilla. On a more practical level, Rav Dov Brezak Shlita writes that he asked one of the Gedolim how one could work on becoming more aware of Hashem. His simple answer was that we should pray for anything that we want - even for mundane matters, things that may be of no spiritual significance. For example, if we are waiting for a bus and want it to come sooner we should ask Hashem to make it happen. This exercise can help us develop a constant awareness that Hashem is with us. If we possess such an awareness then we are far more likely to remember Hashem during spiritual pursuits such as learning Torah .
It is also very important to note that the degree to which we develop our relationship with Hashem has a tremendous bearing on how our children will develop in their own relationship with Him. If they grow up seeing their parents having a genuine relationship with Hashem then they are far more likely to do the same. We should not underestimate the significance of this in our chinch: Rav Brezak quotes Rav Wolbe zt”l as saying that the reason there are so many rebellious children nowadays is that thy were not taught to have a sensory awareness of Hashem and His deeds .
There are numerous lessons to be learnt from chet haegel. One of the most important is to remember that we do have the ability to have a direct relationship with Hashem and that everything else is secondary to this goal. May we all be zocheh to constantly develop our relationship with Hashem.
In order to understand this we must first briefly discuss how the Jewish people could commit a sin that seems to be avoda zara. The commentaries explain that they did not intend to worship an idol, rather they wanted the egel to be an intermediary between themselves and Hashem: When they thought that Moshe had died they panicked - they believed that they could not have a direct relationship with Hashem, rather they needed an intermediary to communicate with Him on their behalf. This was not a denial of Hashem, rather it was an erroneous belief that some kind of being was needed to represent them before Him and convey His teachings and beneficence to them .
With this explanation we can now understand the root cause of chet haegel. The Jewish people came to this belief that they needed an intermediary because on a subtle level they did not desire a direct relationship with Hashem. This was not the first time in which this failing was apparent; at Matan Torah, after Hashem spoke directly to the people for the first two mitzvos, they asked that Hashem no longer communicate directly with them. Rather, He should tell Moshe and Moshe should pass on what Hashem said to them. In Parshas Va’eschanan, Moshe rebuked them for this seemingly innocuous request: Rashi tells us that Moshe said to them, “I was pained and disappointed by you. Would it not have been better for you to learn directly from Hashem’s mouth than to learn from me?! ” It was this underlying fear of a direct relationship with Hashem that was responsible for the terrible course of events that culminated in chet haegel. The mida keneged mida punishment for this was that there would now be an intermediary Malach guiding them instead of their being under direct guidance from Hashem Himself.
Later in the parsha we see a stark contrast to this in the attitude of Moshe Rabbeinu himself. Having successfully pleaded for Hashem to spare the Jewish people, Moshe saw that it was an ‘eis ratson’ a time when his words were being received. At this moment, he had the opportunity to make any request of Hashem - what did he choose to ask for? “Please show me Your Glory .” He asked for the ability to perceive Hashem on a greater level than even he had ever experienced: Moshe’s primary goal was to gain more awareness of, and closeness to, Hashem.
The incidents in the Torah are not merely there to offer interesting reading - both the positive and negative actions of the people in the Torah provide us with lessons about our own life: On a subtle level, the great Dor Deah were lacking in their desire for a direct relationship with Hashem and as a consequence they became overly reliant upon intermediaries. How does this flaw effect us? The story is told of a Rebbe who once asked one of his chassidim how often he thinks about G-d. The talmid answered, “Rebbe, I wake up every day at 3.00am to learn before davenning Neitz, I then learn uninterrupted till mincha, and after a very brief lunch I continue learning for several hours more. Finally I sleep late at night and wake up at 3.00am the next day to learn - Rebbe, when do I have time to think about G-d?! ”
Sometimes we can be so involved with our Avodas Hashem that we can forget about Hashem Himself. Just like the Dor Deah overly focused on intermediaries we can sometimes ‘miss the forest for the trees’ and be so focused on the means with which we should get close to G-d but we forget that they are just means and not an end in itself. This can even be the case with regard to Talmud Torah. Talmud Torah is so central our lives that we can sometimes forget that it is primarily a means of developing a closer relationship to Hashem. Knowledge of a great deal of Torah is not an end in itself, Torah is supposed to bring us to greater Emuna and Yiras Hashem and if it does not then, there is something amiss.
The Baaley Mussar spoke at length on this inyan and the need to set aside time to focus on developing Yiras Hashem. Even the Nefesh HaChaim, who argued against excessive mussar study, stressed the necessity of spending a short amount of time before learning to contemplate Hashem so that the learning would be infused with the correct attitude. He even wrote that a person can stop in the middle of his learning and reflect on Hashem, “before the yiras Hashem in his heart will be extinguished. ”
Moreover, the Rosh Yeshiva of Novardok, Rav Ben-Tzion Brook zt”l said that it is important to be aware of the context in which Nefesh HaChaim was written in order not to misunderstand his message as a call to focus exclusively on Talmud Torah to the expense of mussar. The Nefesh HaChaim was written as a response to people who were devoting most of their time to mussar sefarim at the expense of Talmud Torah. Consequently, he stressed that it is correct to devote most of one’s time to learning Torah and that this will bring a person to a relationship with Hashem. However, Rav Brook argued, nowadays, the nisayon for most people is very different; a person who has little awareness or understanding of emuna may read Nefesh HaChaim and see it as a heter to avoid working directly on getting closer to Hashem. The Nefesh HaChaim was not talking to this kind of person at all, and whilst it is accepted to spend most of one’s time in regular Talmud Torah, nonetheless it is essential that we realize that the ikar is indeed to increase our emuna .
It is also possible to place performance of mitzvos as the ikar in place of closeness to Hashem. A person can perform a mitzvo with little or no thought of Hashem and think that he has fulfilled the mitzvo to a satisfactory level. With regard to this it is pertinent to remember the words of the Ramban in parshas Bo: “The purpose of all the mitzvos is that we believe in our G-d and that we acknowledge that He is our G-d, and that is the purpose of creation, because there is no other reason for creation, and the only thing that Hashem wants from us is that we know and acknowledge that He created us. ”
There are a number of simple ways through which we can avoid the pitfall of forgetting that the tachlis of all our Avoda is to develop our relationship with Hashem. The most obvious is to learn sefarim that discuss such topics as emuna, bitachon or tefilla. On a more practical level, Rav Dov Brezak Shlita writes that he asked one of the Gedolim how one could work on becoming more aware of Hashem. His simple answer was that we should pray for anything that we want - even for mundane matters, things that may be of no spiritual significance. For example, if we are waiting for a bus and want it to come sooner we should ask Hashem to make it happen. This exercise can help us develop a constant awareness that Hashem is with us. If we possess such an awareness then we are far more likely to remember Hashem during spiritual pursuits such as learning Torah .
It is also very important to note that the degree to which we develop our relationship with Hashem has a tremendous bearing on how our children will develop in their own relationship with Him. If they grow up seeing their parents having a genuine relationship with Hashem then they are far more likely to do the same. We should not underestimate the significance of this in our chinch: Rav Brezak quotes Rav Wolbe zt”l as saying that the reason there are so many rebellious children nowadays is that thy were not taught to have a sensory awareness of Hashem and His deeds .
There are numerous lessons to be learnt from chet haegel. One of the most important is to remember that we do have the ability to have a direct relationship with Hashem and that everything else is secondary to this goal. May we all be zocheh to constantly develop our relationship with Hashem.
'CARRYING SINNERS' - KI SISA
After the terrible sin of Chet Haegel (the Golden Calf) Moshe Rabbeinu pleads greatly for Hashem to forgive the Jewish people. After granting His forgiveness, Hashem then informs Moshe of His 13 Middos of Rachamim (the 13 traits of mercy). He tells Moshe that whenever the Jewish people are in need of mercy they should cry out this prayer.
One of these Middos is that Hashem is "noseh avon v'pesha v'chataas"; this is normally translated as meaning that Hashem forgives iniquity, willful sin and error. However, the literal translation of the word 'noseh' does not mean 'forgive', rather it means, 'carries'. What does it mean that Hashem 'carries' sin? Rav Noach Weinberg zt"l explained with an analogy of how a bank may act with a person who has a mortgage with it . He regularly pays his mortgage on time, but at some point he may hit hard times and struggle to pay for a couple of months. The bank could react in two possible ways: it could come down hard on him, demanding that he pay immediately. Alternatively, it could act with tolerance and patience, recognizing that the borrower is generally a reliable person who is enduring temporary difficulties, and will soon be able to resume payment of the mortgage. Accordingly, the bank will 'carry' the borrower, supporting him patiently, until he is able to recover. Rav Weinberg explained in this vein, that when a person sins, Hashem does not punish him immediately, rather He 'carries' him, enabling him to continue unaffected, giving him a chance to do teshuva .
One of the most fundamental aspects of a person's Avodas Hashem is to emulate Hashem's Middos, because by being 'like' G-d, so to speak we become closer to him. How can a person emulate G-d's trait of 'carrying sinners'? There are many occasions in a person's life when he will encounter people who suddenly experience a significant yerida (worsening) in their behavior This may manifest itself when a child or student starts behaving in an undesirable way. The parent or teacher's natural inclination may be to treat them in a strict fashion in the hope that such treatment will force them to improve themselves. Experience proves that this approach is often unhelpful and on many occasions can be harmful. The root of the mistake in this heavy-handed approach is that it fails to take into account the reason for this person's sudden deterioration. A more constructive approach may be to accept that there is some mitigating circumstance which has caused the change in behavior and to treat him with patience and understanding until the cause has been discovered. One can then address this factor and strive to reduce its harmful effect. In this way, one can emulate Hashem's trait of 'carrying sinners' by avoiding immediate punishment and facilitating an improvement.
The following story illustrates the importance of using this Midda; A bachur in Yeshiva had suddenly began breaking Shabbos in the view of his fellow bachurim. His Roshei Yeshiva decided that there was no other option but to expel him from the Yeshiva. They traveled to Rav Shach zt"l to attain confirmation of the correctness of this approach. Rav Shach asked them what was the financial situation in the boy's home and if there was Shalom Bayis (matrimonial harmony) in the home? The Roshei Yeshiva were surprised by these questions and said, "how should we know what is happening in his home?" Rav Shach suddenly stood up and shouted at them with tears in his eyes, "Rodfim !" Leave my house! I do not want to speak with you, you don't know the situation in his home, you are not thinking about his personal situation, all that you know is to throw him out onto the street!" After investigations it was revealed that the parents of this bachur were divorced a week earlier because of severe financial difficulties ! This incident teaches us of the importance of the Midda of 'carrying sinners'; failure to use this Midda properly could have easily resulted in driving away a boy permanently away from Torah. In truth, all that was needed was an effort to understand the root of his sudden negative behavior.
When a child or student begins consistently acting in a destructive fashion the parent or teacher may instinctively resort to harsh discipline, however the trait of 'carrying' teaches us that it may be more constructive to try to discern the cause of this change in behavior. Similarly a student may experience a downturn in his conduct, but as the Rav Shach story teaches us, it is advisable for the educators involved to seek out the reason for this downturn before punishing him. It seems that the importance of using this Midda is not limited to teachers and parents. Through the course of a person's life he inevitably encounters friends or colleagues who experience a sudden yerida in their behavior. By emulating Hashem's trait of 'carrying sinners' a person can avoid a damaging response to such behavior and instead help the person stem the decline. May we all merit to help each other in times of difficulty.
One of these Middos is that Hashem is "noseh avon v'pesha v'chataas"; this is normally translated as meaning that Hashem forgives iniquity, willful sin and error. However, the literal translation of the word 'noseh' does not mean 'forgive', rather it means, 'carries'. What does it mean that Hashem 'carries' sin? Rav Noach Weinberg zt"l explained with an analogy of how a bank may act with a person who has a mortgage with it . He regularly pays his mortgage on time, but at some point he may hit hard times and struggle to pay for a couple of months. The bank could react in two possible ways: it could come down hard on him, demanding that he pay immediately. Alternatively, it could act with tolerance and patience, recognizing that the borrower is generally a reliable person who is enduring temporary difficulties, and will soon be able to resume payment of the mortgage. Accordingly, the bank will 'carry' the borrower, supporting him patiently, until he is able to recover. Rav Weinberg explained in this vein, that when a person sins, Hashem does not punish him immediately, rather He 'carries' him, enabling him to continue unaffected, giving him a chance to do teshuva .
One of the most fundamental aspects of a person's Avodas Hashem is to emulate Hashem's Middos, because by being 'like' G-d, so to speak we become closer to him. How can a person emulate G-d's trait of 'carrying sinners'? There are many occasions in a person's life when he will encounter people who suddenly experience a significant yerida (worsening) in their behavior This may manifest itself when a child or student starts behaving in an undesirable way. The parent or teacher's natural inclination may be to treat them in a strict fashion in the hope that such treatment will force them to improve themselves. Experience proves that this approach is often unhelpful and on many occasions can be harmful. The root of the mistake in this heavy-handed approach is that it fails to take into account the reason for this person's sudden deterioration. A more constructive approach may be to accept that there is some mitigating circumstance which has caused the change in behavior and to treat him with patience and understanding until the cause has been discovered. One can then address this factor and strive to reduce its harmful effect. In this way, one can emulate Hashem's trait of 'carrying sinners' by avoiding immediate punishment and facilitating an improvement.
The following story illustrates the importance of using this Midda; A bachur in Yeshiva had suddenly began breaking Shabbos in the view of his fellow bachurim. His Roshei Yeshiva decided that there was no other option but to expel him from the Yeshiva. They traveled to Rav Shach zt"l to attain confirmation of the correctness of this approach. Rav Shach asked them what was the financial situation in the boy's home and if there was Shalom Bayis (matrimonial harmony) in the home? The Roshei Yeshiva were surprised by these questions and said, "how should we know what is happening in his home?" Rav Shach suddenly stood up and shouted at them with tears in his eyes, "Rodfim !" Leave my house! I do not want to speak with you, you don't know the situation in his home, you are not thinking about his personal situation, all that you know is to throw him out onto the street!" After investigations it was revealed that the parents of this bachur were divorced a week earlier because of severe financial difficulties ! This incident teaches us of the importance of the Midda of 'carrying sinners'; failure to use this Midda properly could have easily resulted in driving away a boy permanently away from Torah. In truth, all that was needed was an effort to understand the root of his sudden negative behavior.
When a child or student begins consistently acting in a destructive fashion the parent or teacher may instinctively resort to harsh discipline, however the trait of 'carrying' teaches us that it may be more constructive to try to discern the cause of this change in behavior. Similarly a student may experience a downturn in his conduct, but as the Rav Shach story teaches us, it is advisable for the educators involved to seek out the reason for this downturn before punishing him. It seems that the importance of using this Midda is not limited to teachers and parents. Through the course of a person's life he inevitably encounters friends or colleagues who experience a sudden yerida in their behavior. By emulating Hashem's trait of 'carrying sinners' a person can avoid a damaging response to such behavior and instead help the person stem the decline. May we all merit to help each other in times of difficulty.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
