Rabbi Channina the deputy High Priest said, “Entreat for the welfare of the government because if it were not for its fear, people would swallow each other alive.” (Avos 3:2)
R’ Hirsh explains the motivation behind the juxtaposition of this avowal to the previous mishnah.
It states: “Akavia ben be Mahalalel said, consider three things and you will not approach transgression. Know from where you came, where you are going and before whom you will face judgment and reckoning” (Avos 3:1).
R’ Channina is teaching us that the optimal devout state is to be cognizant of G-d. However, most of us lack such towering devotion. Therefore, one should supplicate the Almighty that at the very least the fear of the government should swathe them.
R’ Hirsh’s revelation that the correlation between these two mishnayos is intentional sheds light upon the commentary of Rabbeinu Yonah (ad locum) on this mishnah. He understands that when a building is destroyed in New York, a tsunami originates in the Indian Ocean, or an earthquake hits in Haiti, one’s consciousness needs to be saturated with concern for the plight of others. The righteous must feels their pain and rejoice in their triumph. Therefore, the mishnah mandates prayer for peace.
What is the connection to the previous mishnah of Akavia’s statement that one must be attentive of G-d’s presence? The answer is that certainly peace should be our priority.
However, it must be within the context of G-d’s existence in the world.
Peace is an ideal which can yield beautiful results provided it is utilized appropriately. For example, the generation of dispersion achieved peace for the purpose of rebellion by building the tower of Babylon G-d (Rashi, Genesis 11:9).
On the other hand, the Jews achieved peace amongst each other to leave Egypt (Aznaim LeTorah, Exodus 12:17) and to receive the Torah (Rashi, Ibid 19:2).
To illustrate the point, the same principle applies to character traits such as stubbornness and love. Rabbi Yosef Zevin (LeTorah U’LeMoadim, 10:1) writes that love is not inherently evil or good. One can love one’s neighbor as oneself (Leviticus 19:18) or love G-d (Deuteronomy 6:5). However, one can also love evil more than good. (Psalms 52:5)
One can be born with a proclivity to see blood. Nevertheless, they can choose to be a doctor, a ritual slaughterer, a circumciser or a murderer (Shabbos 156a).
Hashem provided people with a box full of tools such as love, peace, strength and courage. They encounter constant opportunities to use these tools to grow or to regress.
When presented with the challenge of how to use our tools, how will we respond?
Thursday, Feb. 18
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
Vayaishev: The Life of the Bartender and the Death of the Baker
In this week’s Parsha we encounter Yosef’s experience with two apparently significant folks on the totem pole of the Egyptian monarchy.
One was the chief expert of fine baking and pastry arts on the planet who was the minister of the Tartlet cabinet providing all the delicacies for Pharaoh’s dining encounters. The other was the world’s foremost expert in wine, spirits and beverage science who personally
tended to the kings alcohol hankerings.
These fine gentlemen committed infractions whose repugnant nature resulted in their incarceration in the same penal colony as Yosef. As the story unfolds they both experience rather daunting dreams. Yosef who is a budding expert in dream analysis employs his talents to decipher the perplexities inherent in their visions.
Methodically, Yosef posits that the dreams foretell the eminent death of the baker and the reinstitution of the mixologist to his illustrious post. Yosef’s prognostications turn out to be correct as the events unfold with precise exactitude.
Yosef’s relationships with the two ministers result in his liberty from detention as is told in next week’s Parsha.
Aside from the main thrust of this story a tertiary query arises. Why did the bartender live and baker die? Is there a distinction in their behavior which is apparent in the text of the Torah that reveals the source of their fates?
Truth be told such questions are beyond our comprehension and not within the realm of our judgment as is eloquently elucidated by Rabbi Lipshitz in his commentary on Ethics of Our Fathers (Tiferes Yisrael 4:9).
The Mishnah states, “Rabbi Yonason said, ‘Whoever fulfills the Torah in midst of poverty will fulfill it with wealth. Whoever spurns the Torah in wealth will spurn it in poverty.’”
Rabbi Lipshitz inquires that experience demonstrates that the assurance of the Mishnah is simply not true. There are righteous people who remain poor even though they study Torah and there are evil people who remain rich even though they don’t study Torah?
He answers that the promise of this Mishnah can’t be greater then the pledge of the Almighty in his Torah in the Ten Commandments, “Honor your mother and father in order that you should have long life.”(Exodus 20:12)
The quandary with this pledge is identical to that of the Mishnah? Rabbi Lipchitz answers that we are not privy to all the reckonings of the Almighty. A specific outcome might be generated from a myriad of different variables.
Yes, it is true that honoring one’s parents yields life longevity and studying Torah a change in financial status. However, that is in a binary vacuum. In reality a good child or scholar might not live a long life or gain pecuniary bounty because of some previous infractions or destiny that is their lot.
Therefore, we can’t really authoritatively declare why the bartender lived and baker died. We can only speculate what might have been one of the reasons or contributing factors to their fates.
With that presumption I heard that following explanation to the aforesaid question. In 1992 someone told taught me that a careful analysis of the text will expose the rejoinder.
The Torah states that each of the ministers saw the interpretation of the other’s dream (see Rashi, Genesis 40:5).
That means that the bartender saw that the baker would die. The baker saw that the bartender would live. The bartender didn’t tell the baker that he would die. That was a considerate act of kindness to spare an individual physiological turmoil of his imminent demise.
The baker didn’t tell the bartender that he would live. That was an act of cruelty to leave the bartender in a state of anxiety, travail and worry about his future. Because of the manifest malice of the baker his termination was sealed.
One was the chief expert of fine baking and pastry arts on the planet who was the minister of the Tartlet cabinet providing all the delicacies for Pharaoh’s dining encounters. The other was the world’s foremost expert in wine, spirits and beverage science who personally
tended to the kings alcohol hankerings.
These fine gentlemen committed infractions whose repugnant nature resulted in their incarceration in the same penal colony as Yosef. As the story unfolds they both experience rather daunting dreams. Yosef who is a budding expert in dream analysis employs his talents to decipher the perplexities inherent in their visions.
Methodically, Yosef posits that the dreams foretell the eminent death of the baker and the reinstitution of the mixologist to his illustrious post. Yosef’s prognostications turn out to be correct as the events unfold with precise exactitude.
Yosef’s relationships with the two ministers result in his liberty from detention as is told in next week’s Parsha.
Aside from the main thrust of this story a tertiary query arises. Why did the bartender live and baker die? Is there a distinction in their behavior which is apparent in the text of the Torah that reveals the source of their fates?
Truth be told such questions are beyond our comprehension and not within the realm of our judgment as is eloquently elucidated by Rabbi Lipshitz in his commentary on Ethics of Our Fathers (Tiferes Yisrael 4:9).
The Mishnah states, “Rabbi Yonason said, ‘Whoever fulfills the Torah in midst of poverty will fulfill it with wealth. Whoever spurns the Torah in wealth will spurn it in poverty.’”
Rabbi Lipshitz inquires that experience demonstrates that the assurance of the Mishnah is simply not true. There are righteous people who remain poor even though they study Torah and there are evil people who remain rich even though they don’t study Torah?
He answers that the promise of this Mishnah can’t be greater then the pledge of the Almighty in his Torah in the Ten Commandments, “Honor your mother and father in order that you should have long life.”(Exodus 20:12)
The quandary with this pledge is identical to that of the Mishnah? Rabbi Lipchitz answers that we are not privy to all the reckonings of the Almighty. A specific outcome might be generated from a myriad of different variables.
Yes, it is true that honoring one’s parents yields life longevity and studying Torah a change in financial status. However, that is in a binary vacuum. In reality a good child or scholar might not live a long life or gain pecuniary bounty because of some previous infractions or destiny that is their lot.
Therefore, we can’t really authoritatively declare why the bartender lived and baker died. We can only speculate what might have been one of the reasons or contributing factors to their fates.
With that presumption I heard that following explanation to the aforesaid question. In 1992 someone told taught me that a careful analysis of the text will expose the rejoinder.
The Torah states that each of the ministers saw the interpretation of the other’s dream (see Rashi, Genesis 40:5).
That means that the bartender saw that the baker would die. The baker saw that the bartender would live. The bartender didn’t tell the baker that he would die. That was a considerate act of kindness to spare an individual physiological turmoil of his imminent demise.
The baker didn’t tell the bartender that he would live. That was an act of cruelty to leave the bartender in a state of anxiety, travail and worry about his future. Because of the manifest malice of the baker his termination was sealed.
Thursday, November 26, 2009
Chaya Sarah-Beauty And Purpose
Rabbi Moshe Feinstein (Darash Moshe, Noach) observes that the Torah’s descriptions of the foremothers’ physical beauty are irrelevant from a moral perspective. Sarah’s secondary name was Yiska (Bereishis 11:29) because everyone looked at her beauty (Rashi; one of the meanings of the word Yiska is “to look”). Why is this mundane praise harnessed for a righteous woman?
The instances are numerous: “Now the maiden was very fair to look upon” (ibid., 24:16); “Rachel was beautiful of form and appearance” (29:17). Not only were all her traits, such as eyes and hair, of beautiful form, but also they came perfectly together in appearance. Or, she was beautiful but also possessed grace to the point that all who saw her wanted her (Ohr Hachaim, ad loc).
The Talmud (Megilla 15a) lists the four most attractive women of all time: Sarah, Avigail, Rachav, and Esther. According to the opinion that Esther was as green as myrtle (ibid., 13a), Vashti replaces her on the list. Tosfos (s.v. Arbeh) query that according to Bava Basra (58a), Sarah was like a nonhuman primate compared to Chava; why then is Chava not on the list? They rejoin that the list consists only of women who were women born. Chava was fashioned from Adam’s body.
Why is physical daintiness considered significant?
Rabbi Feinstein answers that G-d expects us to sanctify the corporeal world and manifest His glory in everything that we execute.
The Slonimer Rebbe reads the beginning of the Torah (Bereishis 1:1–3) in harmony with this viewpoint. In the beginning G-d created the heavens, the spiritual part of the universe, and the earth, the physical part of the universe. And the earth was empty and dark with its physicality that causes all to decay. And G-d said let there be light — infuse the universe with the light of spirituality (Nesivos Shalom ad loc).
Beauty, like any other attribute, can be used as a tool in the service of Hashem, especially in the hands of the righteous. This is why the Torah places so much emphasis on it.
This design is explained by Rabbi Mordechai Katz (Be’er Mechokek, Chayei Sarah). The Talmud (Kiddushin 49b) states that ten measures of beauty came down to the world. Nine of them were allocated for Jerusalem. Rabbi Katz explains that since Jerusalem is the spiritual epicenter of the world, it has to be the most aesthetically pleasing locale, because people cannot focus on spiritual matters in an unsightly place.
Rabbi Feinstein explains that this is the simple meaning of the last mishnah in Pirkei Avos: “All that the Holy One … created in His world, He created solely for His glory…” — meaning for us to use for His service, thus infusing our actions with His glory.
The instances are numerous: “Now the maiden was very fair to look upon” (ibid., 24:16); “Rachel was beautiful of form and appearance” (29:17). Not only were all her traits, such as eyes and hair, of beautiful form, but also they came perfectly together in appearance. Or, she was beautiful but also possessed grace to the point that all who saw her wanted her (Ohr Hachaim, ad loc).
The Talmud (Megilla 15a) lists the four most attractive women of all time: Sarah, Avigail, Rachav, and Esther. According to the opinion that Esther was as green as myrtle (ibid., 13a), Vashti replaces her on the list. Tosfos (s.v. Arbeh) query that according to Bava Basra (58a), Sarah was like a nonhuman primate compared to Chava; why then is Chava not on the list? They rejoin that the list consists only of women who were women born. Chava was fashioned from Adam’s body.
Why is physical daintiness considered significant?
Rabbi Feinstein answers that G-d expects us to sanctify the corporeal world and manifest His glory in everything that we execute.
The Slonimer Rebbe reads the beginning of the Torah (Bereishis 1:1–3) in harmony with this viewpoint. In the beginning G-d created the heavens, the spiritual part of the universe, and the earth, the physical part of the universe. And the earth was empty and dark with its physicality that causes all to decay. And G-d said let there be light — infuse the universe with the light of spirituality (Nesivos Shalom ad loc).
Beauty, like any other attribute, can be used as a tool in the service of Hashem, especially in the hands of the righteous. This is why the Torah places so much emphasis on it.
This design is explained by Rabbi Mordechai Katz (Be’er Mechokek, Chayei Sarah). The Talmud (Kiddushin 49b) states that ten measures of beauty came down to the world. Nine of them were allocated for Jerusalem. Rabbi Katz explains that since Jerusalem is the spiritual epicenter of the world, it has to be the most aesthetically pleasing locale, because people cannot focus on spiritual matters in an unsightly place.
Rabbi Feinstein explains that this is the simple meaning of the last mishnah in Pirkei Avos: “All that the Holy One … created in His world, He created solely for His glory…” — meaning for us to use for His service, thus infusing our actions with His glory.
Monday, September 28, 2009
Vzos HaBracha-World Perfect
Perhaps an apocryphal tale is promulgated involving my father-in-law’s insightful teacher Rabbi Noach Weinberg.
Once a man approached the Rabbi; ‘I don’t need to be observant because God loves me.’ ‘How do you know that God loves you?’ asked the Rabbi. ‘I was riding my bike up in the mountains. The speed was too high and I couldn’t navigate a turn. I went flying off the cliff. I thought my life was over. A miracle happened and I landed on a ledge just below the cliff. So you see God saved me because He loves me.’ The Rabbi looked into the eyes of the young man and asked, ‘tell me my son and who threw you off the cliff?’
It is the cornerstone of Jewish belief that there is no such thing as an accident. This idea was echoed by my teacher, Rabbi Weinberg’s brother, Rabbi Shmuel Yakov about fifteen years ago while I was studying in the Ner Israel Rabbinical College.
A man walked into the study hall carrying a paper bag asking to speak to a Rabbi. The first Rabbi that he found was Rabbi Yissachar Frand. As he approached he suddenly drew a knife from the bag and lunged at Rabbi Frand. He was tackled from behind by some students and his attempt failed. Later that afternoon my teacher who was the head of the Yeshiva addressed the students professing to explain why this happened. He began his talk by saying that it is the foundation of Jewish belief that there is no such thing as ‘it just happened’.
This idea is expressed by the Ramban (Exodus 13:16). ‘Through the great open miracles, one comes to admit the hidden miracles which constitute the foundation of the whole Torah, for no one can have a part in the Torah of Moses our teacher unless he believes that all our words and our events are miracles in scope, there being no natural or customary way of the world in them, whether affecting the public or individual.’
This global view is prevalent in the Talmud as well. ‘Rabbi Chanina said, a person doesn’t stub his finger below unless it was decreed above.’ (Chulin 7b)
In this week’s Parsha this concept extends into avenues of reality that at first thought we might not be cognizant off.
The verse states, ‘The Rock, perfect is His work, for all His paths are justice; a God of faith without iniquity, righteous and fair is He.’(Deuteronomy 32:4)
Asks Rabbi Yisrael Salanter (Meshulchan Gavoah, ad locum) why does the Torah state that God is ‘without inequity’? What kind of praise is that? It would not behoove to even extol an average person in such a manner?
He explains that when the Almighty decrees a certain situation for any person He accounts for all the repercussions that will ripple from it. For example, if it is decreed that a certain individual will win the lottery numerous queries surface. Because he will win the lottery certain people such as his wife, children and friends will benefit from the windfall. Do they deserve this benefit? He will probably leave his job. Do his coworkers or company deserve that loss? He will probably buy things that he otherwise would not have bought. Do the vendors deserve to have a customer like that as well as sell the merchandise? There are a myriad of issues that have to be accounted for as the Ramchal (The Way of God, 2:2) explains, that only God can process.
This is the meaning of the aforementioned verse that God is ‘without iniquity.’ Every detail in every situation is decreed in advance and is as it should be.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)