In Parshas Eikev, the Torah commands the people to go in the ways of HaShem, and to”cling to Him”. The Sifri , quoted by Rashi, asks how it is possible to cling to HaShem, given that He is described in another place in the Torah as an “all-consuming fire” ? The Sifri answers that the Torah is instructing us to cling to Talmidei Chachamim and their students; by doing that it is considered as if we cling to HaShem himself. The Rishonim derive from here an obligatory Mitzvo to learn from Talmidei Chachamim and try to develop a connection with them, in order to learn Torah with the correct understanding. A person might understand that it is a good hanhago (mode of behavior) to cling to Chachamim, however it is essential to recognize that it is a Torah obligation. Moreover, the Sefer HaChinuch writes very strongly about the importance of keeping this Mitzvo. He says; ”One who transgresses this and does not cling to them [Chachamim]…transgresses this positive Mitzvo, and his punishment is very great, because they are the [basis of] the existence of Torah, and a strong foundation for the salvation of souls, and anyone who is with them a great deal, will not come to sin..”
The Mesillas Yesharim also discusses the importance of learning from Talmidei Chachamim, particularly with regards to personal growth. He writes that one of the main strategies of the yetser hara is to confuse people so that they do not recognize the difference between good and evil. Accordingly, they believe they are acting correctly, when in truth they are being tricked by their yetser hara. How can a person avoid this trap? He answers with an analogy. A person finds himself in a very complicated maze, and there is only one path that leads to the exit, however, most paths do not lead anywhere, and in fact take him away from his destination. The person has no way himself of finding the correct path because the possible paths look identical to each other. The only way to escape such a maze is to take advice from someone who has already been through the maze and arrived safely at the other side. He can advise the person stuck inside which is the correct path to take. So too, a person who has not yet mastered his yetser hara will find it impossible to overcome it without the guidance of Talmidei Chachamim who have spent many years refining their characters.
We have seen how essential it is for one’s spiritual well-being to learn from Chachamim. However, a person may argue that this is an overly difficult Mitzvo because a significant amount of effort and persistence is required to attach oneself to Chachamim due to their busy schedules and the fact that already many people flock to them. The answer to this point is found in the words of the greatest Chacham, Moshe Rabbeinu. In Parshas Devarim, he recounts the episode when Yisro suggested that Moshe refrain from ruling on every matter of law, rather, other wise men should be appointed to guide the people in certain questions. The practical reason for this was in order to lessen the burden for Moshe and for the people who had to wait a long time for Moshe to be available. Moshe agreed to the suggestion and instructed the people to appoint Chachamim. The people gladly agreed to this request. Rashi points out that in his recollection of this incident, Moshe rebuked the people for their enthusiasm for Yisro’s idea. Moshe was telling them, “you should have answered, Rabbeinu Moshe, from who is it better to learn, from you or from your students, is it not [better to learn] from you, who suffered over it [the Torah]?!” Moshe rebuked them for not wanting to learn from the greatest Chacham, despite the fact that they would have to endure significant hardships in order to do so. We see from here how important it is to be willing to be moser nefesh to learn from Chachamim.
This lesson is borne out by a teaching of Chazal, that a person who learns a great deal of Torah but does not cling to Talmidei Chachamim is considered an am ha’aretz (ignorant person). Rav Chaim Shmuelevitz zt”l explains that one who learns alone only relies on his own understanding and does not turn to wise people for guidance. Because he does not verifiy his understanding with Chachamim, it is inevitable that he will come to make serious mistakes in his learning. In contrast, one who clings to Chachamim can achieve great levels in his wisdom.
The Alter of Novardok zt”l expressed this point when extolling the greatness of Rav Chaim Ozer Grodzensky zt”l. “His wisdom and genius is so great and of so much depth and breadth, because when he was young he was always to be found in the presence of the Gedolei Hador (greatest Rabbis). He never said to them, ‘accept my opinion’, rather he made himself into a ‘vessel’ who would listen and absorb all the opinions and explanations of all the Gedolim there. He absorbed into his very being all the wisdom that he heard and his wisdom became purified and elevated by the greatness of many generations that became embedded in his mind. ” When we discuss the greatness of Rav Chaim Ozer we generally focus on his incredible natural genius and ability to think of many things at the same time. We see from the words of the Alter that the key to his greatness was his willingness to learn from Talmidei Chachamim.
We have seen how essential it is for person to learn from Chachamim. The Sefer HaChinuch points out that this Mitzvo is also incumbent upon women. He writes, “This Mitzvo is in place in every place, at all times, for men, and it is also a Mitzvo for women to hear the words of Chachamim so that they will learn how to know HaShem.” It is interesting to note that the Sefer HaChinuch also writes that women are not obligated in the Mitzvo of Talmud Torah (learning Torah) Nevertheless, they are obligated to seek out Chachamim to guide them in their Avodas HaShem.
It is clear from the sources discussing this Mitzvo that both men and women must strive to learn from Chachamim. This is a particularly relevant lesson to people who grew up in more secular environments. In the secular world, the concept of ‘asking the wise man’ for guidance in life issues is almost unheard of. This is partly because intelligence and life wisdom have no necessary correlation. As a result of this, a baal teshuva may find it unnatural to ask life questions to Rabbis. Rav Noach Weinberg zt”l addressed this issue – he pointed out that in the secular world, people spend many years on studying in order to attain a certain qualification. However, with regard to basic life issues, such as marriage, child rearing, and life satisfaction, people spend almost no time studying how to succeed. The results of this failing are clear to see, with the divorce rate skyrocketing, family relationships consistently failing, and general life dissatisfaction commonplace. The Torah teaches that in all such issues it is essential that we learn from Chachamim, people who understand the Torah approach to life challenges. May we merit to keep the Mitzvo of ‘clinging to the
Thursday, July 29, 2010
Monday, July 26, 2010
DO NOT STAND OVER YOUR BROTHER’S BLOOD Part 1
We have seen over the course of this series the great sensitivity to others that the Torah engenders through the Mitzvot (Commandments). Another example of this is seen in the area of helping one who is in great need.
In the secular world a person who helps people is considered kind, and one who harms people is considered cruel. A person who neither helps nor harms others is looked at in a neutral fashion - he is neither good nor bad. Moreover, whilst there are numerous laws prohibiting harmful behavior towards others, there are hardly any laws that obligate a person to do kindness to his fellow.
In contrast the Torah sees ‘neutral’ behavior in a negative light - it is not enough to avoid harming others, rather a person must strive to help others and not doing so is considered to be a form of cruelty. Accordingly, there are a number of Mitzvot that obligate us to help our fellow in need.
One of these Mitzvot is: “Do not stand over your brother’s blood. ” The Rabbis teach us that this Mitzva instructs us to help our fellow when he is in a time of need. Included in this is helping him when he is in need in any area, such as if he is in physical danger, faces financial loss, or has some kind of emotional lacking. We will discuss the details of these laws in the coming weeks.
If one sees his friend in physical danger, for example he is in risk of drowning or is threatened by criminals he must do his utmost to save him. The one limit on this law is that he is not obligated to place himself in a situation where he will be in significant risk if he tries to save his friend. So, for example, if a person is being attacked by a number of thugs then stepping will likely not have any positive effect, rather it will likely mean that the friend will also be in great danger. Nonetheless a person should weigh the risk in each situation carefully and not avoid doing this Mitzva if the risk of danger is slight.
The story is told of a great Rabbi, Rabbi Chaim Soloveitzchik, who was witness to a great fire in his neighborhood. He made great efforts to save people who were in the building that was no fire. At one poin he ran into the building and did not emerge for a period of time. However, he finally emerged holding two young children in his arms. He had heard them crying and went in to save them. Whether he was obligated to put himself in such danger is unclear however his actions give a great demonstration of how we should feel when our fellow man is in danger. And even if we cannot act to save them we should develop a feeling of empathy with their pain.
In the secular world a person who helps people is considered kind, and one who harms people is considered cruel. A person who neither helps nor harms others is looked at in a neutral fashion - he is neither good nor bad. Moreover, whilst there are numerous laws prohibiting harmful behavior towards others, there are hardly any laws that obligate a person to do kindness to his fellow.
In contrast the Torah sees ‘neutral’ behavior in a negative light - it is not enough to avoid harming others, rather a person must strive to help others and not doing so is considered to be a form of cruelty. Accordingly, there are a number of Mitzvot that obligate us to help our fellow in need.
One of these Mitzvot is: “Do not stand over your brother’s blood. ” The Rabbis teach us that this Mitzva instructs us to help our fellow when he is in a time of need. Included in this is helping him when he is in need in any area, such as if he is in physical danger, faces financial loss, or has some kind of emotional lacking. We will discuss the details of these laws in the coming weeks.
If one sees his friend in physical danger, for example he is in risk of drowning or is threatened by criminals he must do his utmost to save him. The one limit on this law is that he is not obligated to place himself in a situation where he will be in significant risk if he tries to save his friend. So, for example, if a person is being attacked by a number of thugs then stepping will likely not have any positive effect, rather it will likely mean that the friend will also be in great danger. Nonetheless a person should weigh the risk in each situation carefully and not avoid doing this Mitzva if the risk of danger is slight.
The story is told of a great Rabbi, Rabbi Chaim Soloveitzchik, who was witness to a great fire in his neighborhood. He made great efforts to save people who were in the building that was no fire. At one poin he ran into the building and did not emerge for a period of time. However, he finally emerged holding two young children in his arms. He had heard them crying and went in to save them. Whether he was obligated to put himself in such danger is unclear however his actions give a great demonstration of how we should feel when our fellow man is in danger. And even if we cannot act to save them we should develop a feeling of empathy with their pain.
THE BENEFITS OF YISSURIM - EIKEV
“And you should know in your heart that just as a father punishes his son, Hashem punishes you. In this short sentence the Torah is teaching us the most basic tenet of bitachon. Just as a father only punishes a son because of his love for him and for his ultimate benefit, so too any punishments that Hashem sends to us also emanates from His great love for us and is only for our good. When a person finds himself in a painful or challenging situation he should realize that it is ultimately for the good. However, there is another life lesson that we learn from this comparison of Hashem to a father. A good father punishes his son in such a way that the son is intended to learn from his mistake and improve his behaviour. If the son continues to err even after the punishment then he has not enabled the onesh (punishment) to reach its desired purpose. So too, when Hashem punishes us He is, in most instances, trying to show us that we need to improve in some aspect of our behaviour . This idea is not a chiddush to most people, however it is usually discussed in a very vague way - that when bad things happen we need to ‘do teshuva’. This approach, whilst commendable, often seems to be unproductive because of its vagueness. In this article, the role of ‘yissurim ’ in our lives will be discussed, and hopefully will provide a clearer picture of how we can best utilise them.
The Mashgiach of Slobodka, Rav Avraham Grodzinski zt”l discusses the inyan of yissurim at length in his sefer, Toras Avraham . He writes that the main purpose of prophecy was to communicate to the people how they were erring. Even when, ostensibly they were doing nothing wrong, the prophet would delve deep into their hearts and pinpoint an area in which they were lacking. He asks, in the post-prophecy era how does Hashem communicate to us to tell us what we are doing wrong? He answers that ‘yissurim’ are the replacement for prophecy. When a person is in pain, no matter how small, Hashem is communicating to him in some way that he needs to grow. Thus, yissurim are a tremendous gift - they provide us with an opportunity to mend our ways. The Gemara says that suffering does not merely refer to great afflictions, rather even minor difficulties. It gives the example of when a person tries to take out three coins from his pocket and he only picks up two. In this way Hashem is constantly communicating with us through yissurim. And the Gemara states further that if a person feels absolutely no suffering for forty days then he is destined for Gehinnom . This is because Hashem has given up hope for him to improve his ways, and therefore refrains from even trying to communicate with him .
The obvious question that we are faced with is, ‘how can a person know what message Hashem is trying to tell him through the yissurim?' Of course it is impossible to be certain but The Toras Avraham cites a principle from Chazal that Hashem punishes a person measure for measure for his aveiros. For example, The Mishna in Sotah tells us that Shimshon sinned with his eyes, therefore he was punished that the Plishtim took out his eyes, and Avshalom was arrogant about his beautiful hair, therefore his hair was the cause of his death when it got tangled up amongst the branches of a tree . Therefore, it is recommended that a person look for a cause that is somehow connected to the form of suffering. For example, if someone experiences pain in his mouth then perhaps he should first assess whether he transgressed in an area connected with speech. There is, ironically a very good example of this idea in relation to Rav Grodszinski’s life himself. He suffered from a noticeable limp and when a shidduch was first proposed to Rav Ber Hirsch Heller’s daughter Chasya, she rejected it because of his limp. Shortly thereafter she fell down the stairs to the cellar, breaking her leg. She concluded that this was a sign not reject the match because of Rav Grodzinski’s bad leg and they did indeed marry .
However, more important than whether we find the ‘correct’ aveiro or not is that we search for it at all. In the previous example, if the person’s pain in his mouth is connected to false speech but he works on lashon hara then he has achieved the main purpose of the yissurim - trying to grow. This is an extremely important point because there is a common trend that when a person experiences suffering he looks for different segulos in order to end the pain. My Rebbe, Rav Yitzchak Berkovits Shlita points out that this is somewhat missing the point. Hashem does not send us yissurim merely so that we can do some kind of segulo (even if it is effective in ending the pain), rather he wants us to grow. This does not necessarily mean that all segulos are negative but one should not forget the tachlis of the yissurim - that Hashem is telling us to grow .
There is a second point with regards to how we react to yissurim. When a person is in the midst of suffering there is a tendency to ‘put his head in the sand’ until the pain goes away and then resume his life. We reconcile ourselves with the fact that we realise this is from Hashem but we still wait for it to end so that we can ‘resume’ our lives. This is understandable but, just like a father doesn’t want his son to react to punishment by moping, so too Hashem doesn’t want us to simply wait for the yissurim to end. We can continue to grow in our Avodas Hashem. Rav Pam zt”l experienced the most difficult period in his life in his early twenties when he had no source of parnasa and had no idea what the future had in store for him. Did he regress in his learning in this time? On the contrary - Rav Yisroel Reisman Shlita once asked him when he learnt Seder Kodshim. He answered that it was in this very period when his life was in such turmoil tat he undertook to learn on of the most difficult sections of the Torah.
Indeed, times of yissurim are often opportunities to grow more than in more comfortable times. For example, a person’s tefillos are often far more effective when he feels in need than when everything seems fine. Moreover, history has proven that many of the greatest works of our Rabbis were written at times of great suffering. This does not seem to be a co-incidence; when a person is deprived of physical comforts his only refuge is in ruchnius, thus when our great ancestors were suffering from great poverty and oppression their learning reached new heights.
Hashem loves us more than a father loves his son; When He deems it necessary to cause us suffering we often do not understand why we deserve such pain. In Olam Hazeh we may never know the answer but the one thing we can be sure of, is that Hashem is communicating with us, He wants us to hear His ‘voice’ through the yissurim and use them to grow closer to Him.
The Mashgiach of Slobodka, Rav Avraham Grodzinski zt”l discusses the inyan of yissurim at length in his sefer, Toras Avraham . He writes that the main purpose of prophecy was to communicate to the people how they were erring. Even when, ostensibly they were doing nothing wrong, the prophet would delve deep into their hearts and pinpoint an area in which they were lacking. He asks, in the post-prophecy era how does Hashem communicate to us to tell us what we are doing wrong? He answers that ‘yissurim’ are the replacement for prophecy. When a person is in pain, no matter how small, Hashem is communicating to him in some way that he needs to grow. Thus, yissurim are a tremendous gift - they provide us with an opportunity to mend our ways. The Gemara says that suffering does not merely refer to great afflictions, rather even minor difficulties. It gives the example of when a person tries to take out three coins from his pocket and he only picks up two. In this way Hashem is constantly communicating with us through yissurim. And the Gemara states further that if a person feels absolutely no suffering for forty days then he is destined for Gehinnom . This is because Hashem has given up hope for him to improve his ways, and therefore refrains from even trying to communicate with him .
The obvious question that we are faced with is, ‘how can a person know what message Hashem is trying to tell him through the yissurim?' Of course it is impossible to be certain but The Toras Avraham cites a principle from Chazal that Hashem punishes a person measure for measure for his aveiros. For example, The Mishna in Sotah tells us that Shimshon sinned with his eyes, therefore he was punished that the Plishtim took out his eyes, and Avshalom was arrogant about his beautiful hair, therefore his hair was the cause of his death when it got tangled up amongst the branches of a tree . Therefore, it is recommended that a person look for a cause that is somehow connected to the form of suffering. For example, if someone experiences pain in his mouth then perhaps he should first assess whether he transgressed in an area connected with speech. There is, ironically a very good example of this idea in relation to Rav Grodszinski’s life himself. He suffered from a noticeable limp and when a shidduch was first proposed to Rav Ber Hirsch Heller’s daughter Chasya, she rejected it because of his limp. Shortly thereafter she fell down the stairs to the cellar, breaking her leg. She concluded that this was a sign not reject the match because of Rav Grodzinski’s bad leg and they did indeed marry .
However, more important than whether we find the ‘correct’ aveiro or not is that we search for it at all. In the previous example, if the person’s pain in his mouth is connected to false speech but he works on lashon hara then he has achieved the main purpose of the yissurim - trying to grow. This is an extremely important point because there is a common trend that when a person experiences suffering he looks for different segulos in order to end the pain. My Rebbe, Rav Yitzchak Berkovits Shlita points out that this is somewhat missing the point. Hashem does not send us yissurim merely so that we can do some kind of segulo (even if it is effective in ending the pain), rather he wants us to grow. This does not necessarily mean that all segulos are negative but one should not forget the tachlis of the yissurim - that Hashem is telling us to grow .
There is a second point with regards to how we react to yissurim. When a person is in the midst of suffering there is a tendency to ‘put his head in the sand’ until the pain goes away and then resume his life. We reconcile ourselves with the fact that we realise this is from Hashem but we still wait for it to end so that we can ‘resume’ our lives. This is understandable but, just like a father doesn’t want his son to react to punishment by moping, so too Hashem doesn’t want us to simply wait for the yissurim to end. We can continue to grow in our Avodas Hashem. Rav Pam zt”l experienced the most difficult period in his life in his early twenties when he had no source of parnasa and had no idea what the future had in store for him. Did he regress in his learning in this time? On the contrary - Rav Yisroel Reisman Shlita once asked him when he learnt Seder Kodshim. He answered that it was in this very period when his life was in such turmoil tat he undertook to learn on of the most difficult sections of the Torah.
Indeed, times of yissurim are often opportunities to grow more than in more comfortable times. For example, a person’s tefillos are often far more effective when he feels in need than when everything seems fine. Moreover, history has proven that many of the greatest works of our Rabbis were written at times of great suffering. This does not seem to be a co-incidence; when a person is deprived of physical comforts his only refuge is in ruchnius, thus when our great ancestors were suffering from great poverty and oppression their learning reached new heights.
Hashem loves us more than a father loves his son; When He deems it necessary to cause us suffering we often do not understand why we deserve such pain. In Olam Hazeh we may never know the answer but the one thing we can be sure of, is that Hashem is communicating with us, He wants us to hear His ‘voice’ through the yissurim and use them to grow closer to Him.
Sunday, July 25, 2010
YIRAS HASHEM - EIKEV
“You shall fear Hashem, Your G-d. ”
The mitzvo to fear G-d is one of the most fundamental mitzvos in the Torah and is one of the ‘shesh mitzvos temidius’, the six constant mitzvos that one must fulfill at any moment . This mitzvo would seem to contradict another of the ‘mitzvos temidius’, Ahavas Hashem. The mitzvo of Ahavas Hashem teaches us that G-d is all giving and loving. If that is the case then how can we be expected to fear Him; people generally fear things or beings who do not have their best interests at heart. The commentaries explain that the fear required in the mitzvo of yiras Hashem cannot be equated to fear of something that is trying to cause us harm, rather, at it’s most basic level, it consists of fear of the consequences of our actions. Yiras Hashem teaches us that Hashem is not a vatran , He has placed a system in the world whereby if a person commits a spiritually negative action then, as a consequence he will be spiritually damaged.
Chazal take this point further by explaining what exactly we should and should not be afraid of: The Gemara in Brachos notes a seeming contradiction about fear between passukim in Tanach . Shlomo HaMelech writes in Mishlei; “fortunate is the man who is constantly afraid. ” In contrast, Yeshaya HaNavi says; “those from Zion who are afraid are sinners. ” The Gemara explains that the passuk in Mishlei is referring to ‘divrei Torah’. My Rebbe, Rav Yitzchak Berkovits Shlita explains that ‘divrei Torah’ can be understood to refer to spiritual matters. We only have control over our free will in spiritual pursuits - thus, The Gemara is telling us that it is correct to fear one’s own failure in the spiritual realm because we have control over it and have the ability to falter. However, in all other areas we know that Hashem is in total control and since He is all-giving and all-powerful, it is foolish and wrong to be afraid that ‘bad things’ will happen to us - when Hashem is in control nothing genuinely ‘bad’ can happen, it may seem that way at the time, but we know that ultimately there is nothing to be afraid of when Hashem is directing matters . The only thing we need to be afraid of is ourselves and the damage we can do to ourselves.
Another Gemara shows further how important it is to fear the consequences of our actions: The Gemara in Gittin recounts the famous story of Kamtza and Bar Kamtza and how the sinas chinam in that story caused the chain of events that ended with the tragic destruction of the Beis HaMikdash. As an introduction to this tragic episode the Gemara quotes the aforementioned passuk in Mishlei that extols the virtues of fear . How is the inyan of fear connected to the events of the Kamtza and Bar Kamtza episode? Tosefos explain that the people who sinned in the story should have been more fearful of the consequences of their actions such as allowing Bar Kamtza to be embarrassed in public without interceding. Had they been more vigilant about the results of their actions they would have realized that they should act differently. We see from here the significance of fearing ourselves - it was their lack of such fear that enabled the tragic mistakes to unfold.
These Gemaras teach us that whenever we have free will in a situation we must be fearful to not stumble but when there is nothing that can be done then it is wrong to have fear, and we should place our trust in Hashem. The Brisker Rav zt”l was famous for his fear of not performing mitzvos properly but at the same time, he remained remarkably calm when there was nothing he could do. Rav Shlomo Lorincz Shlita tells over that during the siege of the Yerushalayim in Israel’s War of Independence the Brisker Rav would stay very calm even whilst the city was being bombarded with shells. Yet, when the shelling ceased, he would immediately become very agitated with concern for those far away. Asked to explain the contrast in his behavior, he responded that when the shells were falling nearby, he was in a position of an ones and thus freed from any obligation to assist others. Since he had not responsibility, he had no tension. But when his neighborhood was not being shelled, he could not stop thinking about what he might be able to do for those in danger, and the matter gave him no rest . The Brisker Rav was in tune with the appropriate times to be fearful and to be calm, when there was nothing he could do then he was very calm, but whilst a responsibility lay upon him he would not relax.
This lesson is very pertinent as we approach Elul. Throughout the year a person may develop a sense of security about his spiritual standing, feeling that Hashem will ’overlook’ his transgressions and failings. However with Yom HaDin approaching, we are reminded that Hashem is not a vatran and that there are serious consequences to our actions. The Mitzvo of Yiras Hashem teaches us that we cannot sit back and have a false trust in G-d that everything will be alright. We have the great gift of free will but that is accompanied by the fact that we cannot rely on G-d to force us to make the correct decisions. Our control over our actions is cause of great fear - it means that we can ignore the opportunities that Hashem gives us, misuse our talents and generally fail to fulfill our potential in life - that is worthy of fear.
The mitzvo to fear G-d is one of the most fundamental mitzvos in the Torah and is one of the ‘shesh mitzvos temidius’, the six constant mitzvos that one must fulfill at any moment . This mitzvo would seem to contradict another of the ‘mitzvos temidius’, Ahavas Hashem. The mitzvo of Ahavas Hashem teaches us that G-d is all giving and loving. If that is the case then how can we be expected to fear Him; people generally fear things or beings who do not have their best interests at heart. The commentaries explain that the fear required in the mitzvo of yiras Hashem cannot be equated to fear of something that is trying to cause us harm, rather, at it’s most basic level, it consists of fear of the consequences of our actions. Yiras Hashem teaches us that Hashem is not a vatran , He has placed a system in the world whereby if a person commits a spiritually negative action then, as a consequence he will be spiritually damaged.
Chazal take this point further by explaining what exactly we should and should not be afraid of: The Gemara in Brachos notes a seeming contradiction about fear between passukim in Tanach . Shlomo HaMelech writes in Mishlei; “fortunate is the man who is constantly afraid. ” In contrast, Yeshaya HaNavi says; “those from Zion who are afraid are sinners. ” The Gemara explains that the passuk in Mishlei is referring to ‘divrei Torah’. My Rebbe, Rav Yitzchak Berkovits Shlita explains that ‘divrei Torah’ can be understood to refer to spiritual matters. We only have control over our free will in spiritual pursuits - thus, The Gemara is telling us that it is correct to fear one’s own failure in the spiritual realm because we have control over it and have the ability to falter. However, in all other areas we know that Hashem is in total control and since He is all-giving and all-powerful, it is foolish and wrong to be afraid that ‘bad things’ will happen to us - when Hashem is in control nothing genuinely ‘bad’ can happen, it may seem that way at the time, but we know that ultimately there is nothing to be afraid of when Hashem is directing matters . The only thing we need to be afraid of is ourselves and the damage we can do to ourselves.
Another Gemara shows further how important it is to fear the consequences of our actions: The Gemara in Gittin recounts the famous story of Kamtza and Bar Kamtza and how the sinas chinam in that story caused the chain of events that ended with the tragic destruction of the Beis HaMikdash. As an introduction to this tragic episode the Gemara quotes the aforementioned passuk in Mishlei that extols the virtues of fear . How is the inyan of fear connected to the events of the Kamtza and Bar Kamtza episode? Tosefos explain that the people who sinned in the story should have been more fearful of the consequences of their actions such as allowing Bar Kamtza to be embarrassed in public without interceding. Had they been more vigilant about the results of their actions they would have realized that they should act differently. We see from here the significance of fearing ourselves - it was their lack of such fear that enabled the tragic mistakes to unfold.
These Gemaras teach us that whenever we have free will in a situation we must be fearful to not stumble but when there is nothing that can be done then it is wrong to have fear, and we should place our trust in Hashem. The Brisker Rav zt”l was famous for his fear of not performing mitzvos properly but at the same time, he remained remarkably calm when there was nothing he could do. Rav Shlomo Lorincz Shlita tells over that during the siege of the Yerushalayim in Israel’s War of Independence the Brisker Rav would stay very calm even whilst the city was being bombarded with shells. Yet, when the shelling ceased, he would immediately become very agitated with concern for those far away. Asked to explain the contrast in his behavior, he responded that when the shells were falling nearby, he was in a position of an ones and thus freed from any obligation to assist others. Since he had not responsibility, he had no tension. But when his neighborhood was not being shelled, he could not stop thinking about what he might be able to do for those in danger, and the matter gave him no rest . The Brisker Rav was in tune with the appropriate times to be fearful and to be calm, when there was nothing he could do then he was very calm, but whilst a responsibility lay upon him he would not relax.
This lesson is very pertinent as we approach Elul. Throughout the year a person may develop a sense of security about his spiritual standing, feeling that Hashem will ’overlook’ his transgressions and failings. However with Yom HaDin approaching, we are reminded that Hashem is not a vatran and that there are serious consequences to our actions. The Mitzvo of Yiras Hashem teaches us that we cannot sit back and have a false trust in G-d that everything will be alright. We have the great gift of free will but that is accompanied by the fact that we cannot rely on G-d to force us to make the correct decisions. Our control over our actions is cause of great fear - it means that we can ignore the opportunities that Hashem gives us, misuse our talents and generally fail to fulfill our potential in life - that is worthy of fear.
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
THE TWO TABLETS - VA’ESCHANAN
Parshas Va’eschanan contains a repetition of the Ten Commandments, with a few minor changes. The Mabit makes a remarkable observation about the two luchos on which the Commandments were inscribed. Chazal explain that the two luchos were focusing on different areas of the Mitzvos: The first luach consisted of Mitzvos that relate to the realm of bein adam leMakom (between man and G-d), such as belief in G-d, and observing Shabbos. The second luach consisted of Mitvos that relate to bein adam lechaveiro (between man and his fellow), such as the prohibitions not to kill, and loh sachmod (not to covet).
The Mabit points out that there were far more words on the first luach than on the second. Accordingly, there was much less space to fit all the words on the first luach than on the second. Therefore, it must be that the words in the first luach were written far smaller than those in the second. This, the Mabit argues, was done deliberately by HaShem so that the side that discussed the bein adam lechaveiro Mitzvos would be more noticeable than the side that focused on bein adam leMakom. The Mabit continues that this is because the yetser hara is strongest in the area of bein adam lechaveiro. HaShem wanted people to focus more on the Mitzvos that relate to bein adam lechaveiro, because extra effort is required to overcome the yetser hara in this area.
It would seem that a Gemara in Bava Basra provides evidence supporting the Mabit’s argument. The Gemara discusses various sins in which people stumble. It tells us that a minority of people stumble in arayos (forbidden relationships), a majority stumble in gezel , and everyone stumbles in avak lashon hara. Forbidden relationships generally fall in the area of bein adam leMakom , whereas stealing and lashon hara both clearly fall within the realm of bein adam lechaveiro. Thus, the Gemara is telling us that people are more prone to sin in certain Mitzvos that pertain to bein adam lechaveiro.
The question remains, what is the reason (or reasons) as to why people are more prone to stumbling in bein adam lechaveiro. It is possible to suggest the following: The Vilna Gaon zt”l writes that every Mitzvo stems from a particular good character trait (midda), and every aveiro stems from a bad trait. Nonetheless, it seems that it is possible for a person to have certain bad middos and yet observe many Mitzvos. For example, a person who has a tendency to lose his temper, will not necessarily be hindered by this bad trait, in his observance of Shabbos, kashrus, and many other Mitzvos in the realm of bein adam LeMakom. However, he will be tremendously hindered in the area of bein adam lechaveiro. Every time he raises his voice in an inappropriate fashion, he will very likely transgress the prohibition of onaas devarim (hurtful words) and if he shouts at someone in front of others, he will transgress the extremely serious sin of embarrassing someone in public. Similarly, a person who has an ayin ra (ie. He looks at the bad in people), will still be able to pray three times a day, and learn Torah, however he will very likely stumble in lashon hara and judging others favorably.
There are obviously certain middos, which also make it very difficult to observe Mitzvos in bein adam Makom, such as laziness. However, it is important to note, that such traits will also greatly harm one’s observance of bein adam lechaveiro related Mitzvos. For example, a lazy person will not be willing to help his/her spouse in the work that needs to be done around the home, causing problems in the relationship. Even the trait of taiva (lust) can be the cause of great failings in bein adam lechaveiro. For example, a person who is overly attached to his/her food, will very likely react in an inappropriate fashion to his/her spouse if they serve food that he does not appreciate, again resulting in a transgression of onaas devarim.
We have seen how the Mabit pointed out that the Ten Commandments were laid out in such a way as to teach that there is more of a yester hara in bein adam lechaveiro than bein adam LeMakom. The following story illustrates this point: Rav Chaim Soloveitchik zt”l was asked to rule on the kashrus of an animal to ascertain whether it was treif. He ruled that it was indeed treif, causing the butcher involved a significant loss. The butcher accepted the ruling with equanimity. A few months later, the same butcher was involved in a monetary dispute with someone else, over a far smaller amount of money. Rav Chaim ruled against him. On this occasion, however, the butcher was furious, and insulted Rav Chaim for his ruling. Rav Simcha Zelig Reeger, zt”l asked Rav Chaim why the butcher was calm when he lost a far larger amount of money and so angry about the smaller sum. Rav Chaim explained that on this occasion, he ‘lost’ to someone else – it was the fact that another person ‘beat’ him that angered him so much.
The obvious lesson to derive from the Mabit is that extra effort is required in bein adam lechaveiro. Moreover based on the explanation that the root cause of the failing in this area is bad middos, it is essential to work on the traits such as anger, jealousy, and ayin ra. Indeed, the Maharsha points out that when the Gemara said that everyone stumbles in avak lashon hara, it was only referring to people who do not make an effort to improve in this area. However, one who makes an effort to improve his speech by learning the laws relating to it and improving his traits, is not destined to speak avak lashon hara. This surely applies to all the Mitzvos bein adam lechaveiro; if one makes a strong and consistent effort to improve then he will overcome the yester hara’s attempts to make his stumble.
The Mabit points out that there were far more words on the first luach than on the second. Accordingly, there was much less space to fit all the words on the first luach than on the second. Therefore, it must be that the words in the first luach were written far smaller than those in the second. This, the Mabit argues, was done deliberately by HaShem so that the side that discussed the bein adam lechaveiro Mitzvos would be more noticeable than the side that focused on bein adam leMakom. The Mabit continues that this is because the yetser hara is strongest in the area of bein adam lechaveiro. HaShem wanted people to focus more on the Mitzvos that relate to bein adam lechaveiro, because extra effort is required to overcome the yetser hara in this area.
It would seem that a Gemara in Bava Basra provides evidence supporting the Mabit’s argument. The Gemara discusses various sins in which people stumble. It tells us that a minority of people stumble in arayos (forbidden relationships), a majority stumble in gezel , and everyone stumbles in avak lashon hara. Forbidden relationships generally fall in the area of bein adam leMakom , whereas stealing and lashon hara both clearly fall within the realm of bein adam lechaveiro. Thus, the Gemara is telling us that people are more prone to sin in certain Mitzvos that pertain to bein adam lechaveiro.
The question remains, what is the reason (or reasons) as to why people are more prone to stumbling in bein adam lechaveiro. It is possible to suggest the following: The Vilna Gaon zt”l writes that every Mitzvo stems from a particular good character trait (midda), and every aveiro stems from a bad trait. Nonetheless, it seems that it is possible for a person to have certain bad middos and yet observe many Mitzvos. For example, a person who has a tendency to lose his temper, will not necessarily be hindered by this bad trait, in his observance of Shabbos, kashrus, and many other Mitzvos in the realm of bein adam LeMakom. However, he will be tremendously hindered in the area of bein adam lechaveiro. Every time he raises his voice in an inappropriate fashion, he will very likely transgress the prohibition of onaas devarim (hurtful words) and if he shouts at someone in front of others, he will transgress the extremely serious sin of embarrassing someone in public. Similarly, a person who has an ayin ra (ie. He looks at the bad in people), will still be able to pray three times a day, and learn Torah, however he will very likely stumble in lashon hara and judging others favorably.
There are obviously certain middos, which also make it very difficult to observe Mitzvos in bein adam Makom, such as laziness. However, it is important to note, that such traits will also greatly harm one’s observance of bein adam lechaveiro related Mitzvos. For example, a lazy person will not be willing to help his/her spouse in the work that needs to be done around the home, causing problems in the relationship. Even the trait of taiva (lust) can be the cause of great failings in bein adam lechaveiro. For example, a person who is overly attached to his/her food, will very likely react in an inappropriate fashion to his/her spouse if they serve food that he does not appreciate, again resulting in a transgression of onaas devarim.
We have seen how the Mabit pointed out that the Ten Commandments were laid out in such a way as to teach that there is more of a yester hara in bein adam lechaveiro than bein adam LeMakom. The following story illustrates this point: Rav Chaim Soloveitchik zt”l was asked to rule on the kashrus of an animal to ascertain whether it was treif. He ruled that it was indeed treif, causing the butcher involved a significant loss. The butcher accepted the ruling with equanimity. A few months later, the same butcher was involved in a monetary dispute with someone else, over a far smaller amount of money. Rav Chaim ruled against him. On this occasion, however, the butcher was furious, and insulted Rav Chaim for his ruling. Rav Simcha Zelig Reeger, zt”l asked Rav Chaim why the butcher was calm when he lost a far larger amount of money and so angry about the smaller sum. Rav Chaim explained that on this occasion, he ‘lost’ to someone else – it was the fact that another person ‘beat’ him that angered him so much.
The obvious lesson to derive from the Mabit is that extra effort is required in bein adam lechaveiro. Moreover based on the explanation that the root cause of the failing in this area is bad middos, it is essential to work on the traits such as anger, jealousy, and ayin ra. Indeed, the Maharsha points out that when the Gemara said that everyone stumbles in avak lashon hara, it was only referring to people who do not make an effort to improve in this area. However, one who makes an effort to improve his speech by learning the laws relating to it and improving his traits, is not destined to speak avak lashon hara. This surely applies to all the Mitzvos bein adam lechaveiro; if one makes a strong and consistent effort to improve then he will overcome the yester hara’s attempts to make his stumble.
Monday, July 12, 2010
STRIPPING AWAY THE ILLUSION - TISHA B'AV
Chazal say that since the destruction of the second Beis HaMikdash, we should really be in a constant state of mourning. But we cannot live that way, so for most of the year we conduct our lives as if everything were normal and as it should be. For three weeks of the year, however, culminating in Tishah b’Av, we face the reality of our situation and adopt the customs of mourners. We recognize that things are not as they should be: There is no Beis HaMikdash, we are in galus, and we live in a time of hester Panim, when Hashem’s involvement in our lives is concealed. On Tishah b’Av in particular, we focus on the events in Jewish history that reflect this hester Panim, so we can internalize the terrible state of affairs.
It seems that in different eras the hester Panim manifests itself in different ways. For generations, its main expression was anti-Semitism. Jews steadfastly preserved the traditions of their ancestors and often gave their lives for them. More recently, with the Holocaust, Jews were murdered merely for being Jews. The untold suffering we have endured is something on which people rightfully focus a great deal on Tishah b’Av. By reading about such events, we feel more aware of the terrible consequences of hester Panim. While this practice is certainly commendable, it seems that the principal manifestation of hester Panim nowadays is not anti-Semitism. Take five seconds, and think what it is…
Most of you probably answered that the main manifestation of hester Panim today is the desperate state of Torah observance. We all have a vague, intellectual awareness that things are not as they should be, but how bad are they?
In 1950, the intermarriage rate in the U.S. was 6%; by 1990, it was 52% and rising. Two million Jews do not identify themselves as such. Two million self-identified Jews have no Jewish connection whatsoever. For every wedding between two Jews, two intermarriages take place. Some 625,000 American Jews practice other religions. Only 11% of Jews in the U.S. go to shul. Every day dozens of intermarriages take place, which means that in the time it took you to read this, some Jews were lost forever. These statistics make the situation a little more real to us, but it is still far from our hearts.
A couple of years ago, my son got a bad cut on his mouth on Tishah b’Av, so I had to take him to a plastic surgeon in the Jerusalem suburb of Mevasseret. The surgeon’s office was in a mall, and there I saw what secular Jews do on Tishah b’Av: They go about their lives. I saw Jews eating in a McDonald’s, as if everything were normal. What’s more, the same scene would have greeted me on Shabbos. We all know some Jews don’t keep Shabbos, but to actually experience it! Baruch Hashem, we have no idea what it means to have no Torah, no Shabbos, no relationship with Hashem, no direction in life… but this is the lot of our brothers and sisters. And what’s the difference between us and them? Simply that we were born into Torah-observant families, and they weren’t.
So this is the time of year in which we strip away the illusion that everything is okay. Everything is not okay. We have to face the truth. What’s more, we have to take responsibility for the way things are. On Tishah B’Av in particular, we must feel the pain, not hide from it. Shabbos desecration is everywhere; intermarriage is everywhere. And the most important thing to remember is how Hashem “feels” about it. Just to make that idea more real: Imagine you had ten children, and you brought them all up to be fully Torah-observant Jews. Nine of them follow the path that you hoped they would, but one is slightly lax in his observance. How would you feel? Ask any person who has experienced such a thing, and he will tell you that it caused him considerable distress. What if that one child were not just slightly lax but abandoned Torah completely? Of course, that would cause the parents untold grief. Imagine if not one but two children went astray; how much additional pain would that cause? And if over half the children abandoned Judaism, and only one was fully observant, you would feel unbearable anguish.
All Jews are children of Hashem, and this is the state of His “family”!
Let us take this one day and face reality: This is what the galus is about today; and to end the galus, this is what must be dealt with. Hashem is hidden; His children don’t see Him, and they barely even know He exists. There is certainly plenty to mourn.
May this be the last Tishah b’Av of sadness, and may it be transformed into a day of rejoicing, when all Jews know what it means to be Hashem’s children.
It seems that in different eras the hester Panim manifests itself in different ways. For generations, its main expression was anti-Semitism. Jews steadfastly preserved the traditions of their ancestors and often gave their lives for them. More recently, with the Holocaust, Jews were murdered merely for being Jews. The untold suffering we have endured is something on which people rightfully focus a great deal on Tishah b’Av. By reading about such events, we feel more aware of the terrible consequences of hester Panim. While this practice is certainly commendable, it seems that the principal manifestation of hester Panim nowadays is not anti-Semitism. Take five seconds, and think what it is…
Most of you probably answered that the main manifestation of hester Panim today is the desperate state of Torah observance. We all have a vague, intellectual awareness that things are not as they should be, but how bad are they?
In 1950, the intermarriage rate in the U.S. was 6%; by 1990, it was 52% and rising. Two million Jews do not identify themselves as such. Two million self-identified Jews have no Jewish connection whatsoever. For every wedding between two Jews, two intermarriages take place. Some 625,000 American Jews practice other religions. Only 11% of Jews in the U.S. go to shul. Every day dozens of intermarriages take place, which means that in the time it took you to read this, some Jews were lost forever. These statistics make the situation a little more real to us, but it is still far from our hearts.
A couple of years ago, my son got a bad cut on his mouth on Tishah b’Av, so I had to take him to a plastic surgeon in the Jerusalem suburb of Mevasseret. The surgeon’s office was in a mall, and there I saw what secular Jews do on Tishah b’Av: They go about their lives. I saw Jews eating in a McDonald’s, as if everything were normal. What’s more, the same scene would have greeted me on Shabbos. We all know some Jews don’t keep Shabbos, but to actually experience it! Baruch Hashem, we have no idea what it means to have no Torah, no Shabbos, no relationship with Hashem, no direction in life… but this is the lot of our brothers and sisters. And what’s the difference between us and them? Simply that we were born into Torah-observant families, and they weren’t.
So this is the time of year in which we strip away the illusion that everything is okay. Everything is not okay. We have to face the truth. What’s more, we have to take responsibility for the way things are. On Tishah B’Av in particular, we must feel the pain, not hide from it. Shabbos desecration is everywhere; intermarriage is everywhere. And the most important thing to remember is how Hashem “feels” about it. Just to make that idea more real: Imagine you had ten children, and you brought them all up to be fully Torah-observant Jews. Nine of them follow the path that you hoped they would, but one is slightly lax in his observance. How would you feel? Ask any person who has experienced such a thing, and he will tell you that it caused him considerable distress. What if that one child were not just slightly lax but abandoned Torah completely? Of course, that would cause the parents untold grief. Imagine if not one but two children went astray; how much additional pain would that cause? And if over half the children abandoned Judaism, and only one was fully observant, you would feel unbearable anguish.
All Jews are children of Hashem, and this is the state of His “family”!
Let us take this one day and face reality: This is what the galus is about today; and to end the galus, this is what must be dealt with. Hashem is hidden; His children don’t see Him, and they barely even know He exists. There is certainly plenty to mourn.
May this be the last Tishah b’Av of sadness, and may it be transformed into a day of rejoicing, when all Jews know what it means to be Hashem’s children.
REDEFINING SINAS CHINAM - TISHA B'AV
As we approach Tishah b’Av, we strive to find ways of improving ourselves, so we can ensure that this will be the last year without the Beis HaMikdash. The famous gemara in Gittin about Kamtza and Bar Kamtza teaches us a great deal about the cause of the destruction of the Beis HaMikdash and what we need to rectify in order to bring about its rebuilding.
The gemara tells us that Yerushalayim was destroyed as a result of Kamtza and Bar Kamtza. An unnamed man was a sworn enemy of Bar Kamtza but friendly with Kamtza. He sent his servant to invite Kamtza to a banquet, but the servant mistakenly invited Bar Kamtza. When Bar Kamtza came to the affair, the furious host demanded that he leave. Embarrassed, he offered to pay for his own meal in order to be allowed to stay. After that offer was refused, he volunteered to pay half the cost of the whole banquet, but instead he was thrown out. There were a number of rabbis in attendance, who remained silent throughout this unpleasant incident. Indignant at their passivity, Kamtza proceeded to slander the Jewish people to the Roman authorities, which began the course of events that ended with the destruction.
The Iyun Yaakov, ztz”l, asks why Kamtza is apportioned some of the blame for these events, since he did nothing throughout the whole story. The Ben Ish Chai, ztz”l, answers by suggesting that Kamtza was actually present at the banquet and witnessed how Bar Kamtza was treated. He could have prevented what happened by explaining the misunderstanding with the invitations. There is a principle that if someone can protest a wrongdoing but does not, it is considered as if he himself committed it. The Ben Ish Chai continues that this answer is even more compelling according to the Maharsha, who writes that Bar Kamtza was the son of Kamtza. Accordingly, Kamtza was surely aware of the feud between his son and friend, yet he did nothing to make peace between them. Because of his passivity, Kamtza is held partly responsible for the destruction.
Furthermore, the rabbis also seem to be held partially responsible for the course of events, because they did nothing to prevent Bar Kamtza’s humiliation. Thus, there seems to be a common theme running through this story: Inaction and apathy allowed such terrible consequences to take place. Had any of the people involved strived to prevent the injustices that took place, the Beis HaMikdash may not have been destroyed. Their indifference to the surrounding tragedies resulted in their passivity.
This lesson, that apathy destroyed the second Beis HaMikdash, seems somewhat contradictory to the Gemara in Yoma, which states that sinas chinam (baseless hatred) was the ultimate cause of the destruction. However, on deeper analysis it seems that sinas chinam is not limited to active hatred; it can also include apathy. We see this from the first time the root of the word sinah (hatred) appears in the Torah: In parashas Vayetzei, after Yaakov Avinu marries Rachel and Leah, the Torah tells us, “Hashem saw that Leah was senuah (literally, “hated”).” The commentaries have great difficulty in understanding that Yaakov really hated Leah. Accordingly, the Ramban explains that when one has two wives, the one he loves less is called senuah—he does not hate her, but he loves her less than his favorite. Therefore, says the Ramban, Yaakov did not hate Leah; rather, his love for her was lacking. And therefore we can understand that the word sinah does not necessarily imply an active hatred; rather, it can indicate a lack of sufficient care and love. Thus, the sinas chinam described in Yoma need not have been a virulent hatred; it could also have included apathy and lack of concern for one’s fellow.
In a similar vein, Rav Yehonasan Eibschutz, ztz”l, writes that the sinas chinam described in the Gemara refers not to active hatred, but to disinterest in preventing others from slipping into heretical views. He notes that many heretical sects had grown in that period, because people were not willing to rebuke them. He exclaims, “Do you have a greater hater than this: one who sees his friend drowning in a river [of sin] and does not protest?!” Based on this redefinition of sinah, it is clear that there is no contradiction between the story of Kamtza and Bar Kamtza and the gemara in Yoma. The sinas chinam referred to in Yoma involves not only active hatred; it also includes apathy toward the pain of one’s fellow, and a refusal to help him grow spiritually.
The fact that the Beis HaMikdash has not been rebuilt means that these flaws are still very prevalent today, and they apply to many areas of our lives, whether it be in the realm of sharing another’s pain, trying to help those less fortunate than ourselves, or reaching out to the many people who are distant from Torah. This is a time of serious soul searching to assess our performance in these areas and strive to improve in some way.
May this be the last Tishah b’Av or mourning that we endure.
The gemara tells us that Yerushalayim was destroyed as a result of Kamtza and Bar Kamtza. An unnamed man was a sworn enemy of Bar Kamtza but friendly with Kamtza. He sent his servant to invite Kamtza to a banquet, but the servant mistakenly invited Bar Kamtza. When Bar Kamtza came to the affair, the furious host demanded that he leave. Embarrassed, he offered to pay for his own meal in order to be allowed to stay. After that offer was refused, he volunteered to pay half the cost of the whole banquet, but instead he was thrown out. There were a number of rabbis in attendance, who remained silent throughout this unpleasant incident. Indignant at their passivity, Kamtza proceeded to slander the Jewish people to the Roman authorities, which began the course of events that ended with the destruction.
The Iyun Yaakov, ztz”l, asks why Kamtza is apportioned some of the blame for these events, since he did nothing throughout the whole story. The Ben Ish Chai, ztz”l, answers by suggesting that Kamtza was actually present at the banquet and witnessed how Bar Kamtza was treated. He could have prevented what happened by explaining the misunderstanding with the invitations. There is a principle that if someone can protest a wrongdoing but does not, it is considered as if he himself committed it. The Ben Ish Chai continues that this answer is even more compelling according to the Maharsha, who writes that Bar Kamtza was the son of Kamtza. Accordingly, Kamtza was surely aware of the feud between his son and friend, yet he did nothing to make peace between them. Because of his passivity, Kamtza is held partly responsible for the destruction.
Furthermore, the rabbis also seem to be held partially responsible for the course of events, because they did nothing to prevent Bar Kamtza’s humiliation. Thus, there seems to be a common theme running through this story: Inaction and apathy allowed such terrible consequences to take place. Had any of the people involved strived to prevent the injustices that took place, the Beis HaMikdash may not have been destroyed. Their indifference to the surrounding tragedies resulted in their passivity.
This lesson, that apathy destroyed the second Beis HaMikdash, seems somewhat contradictory to the Gemara in Yoma, which states that sinas chinam (baseless hatred) was the ultimate cause of the destruction. However, on deeper analysis it seems that sinas chinam is not limited to active hatred; it can also include apathy. We see this from the first time the root of the word sinah (hatred) appears in the Torah: In parashas Vayetzei, after Yaakov Avinu marries Rachel and Leah, the Torah tells us, “Hashem saw that Leah was senuah (literally, “hated”).” The commentaries have great difficulty in understanding that Yaakov really hated Leah. Accordingly, the Ramban explains that when one has two wives, the one he loves less is called senuah—he does not hate her, but he loves her less than his favorite. Therefore, says the Ramban, Yaakov did not hate Leah; rather, his love for her was lacking. And therefore we can understand that the word sinah does not necessarily imply an active hatred; rather, it can indicate a lack of sufficient care and love. Thus, the sinas chinam described in Yoma need not have been a virulent hatred; it could also have included apathy and lack of concern for one’s fellow.
In a similar vein, Rav Yehonasan Eibschutz, ztz”l, writes that the sinas chinam described in the Gemara refers not to active hatred, but to disinterest in preventing others from slipping into heretical views. He notes that many heretical sects had grown in that period, because people were not willing to rebuke them. He exclaims, “Do you have a greater hater than this: one who sees his friend drowning in a river [of sin] and does not protest?!” Based on this redefinition of sinah, it is clear that there is no contradiction between the story of Kamtza and Bar Kamtza and the gemara in Yoma. The sinas chinam referred to in Yoma involves not only active hatred; it also includes apathy toward the pain of one’s fellow, and a refusal to help him grow spiritually.
The fact that the Beis HaMikdash has not been rebuilt means that these flaws are still very prevalent today, and they apply to many areas of our lives, whether it be in the realm of sharing another’s pain, trying to help those less fortunate than ourselves, or reaching out to the many people who are distant from Torah. This is a time of serious soul searching to assess our performance in these areas and strive to improve in some way.
May this be the last Tishah b’Av or mourning that we endure.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
