Category Archives: Torah

A documented source for pointing to the Torah with the pinky

There is a very "popular" minhag that when the Sefer Torah is lifted up during hagbah, the whole congregation stands and points to it with their pinky. I had always assumed that there was no source for it, just something that developed over time. According to R'Ari Enkin of Hirhurim, that is in fact not the case. He points to the the Me'am Loez on Parshat Ki Tavo which if not the original source for the minhag, at least documents that this minhag is fairly old (The author of the Me'am Loez began writing in 1730 (from this Wiki article ). If anyone has the full text, could they please post it up into the comments. Many thanks.

The Midrash on Self Perception

"And we were in our own eyes as grasshoppers, and so were we in their eyes" (Num 13:33). The Holy One said to the scouts: You don't know what you have just let your mouths utter. I am ready to put up with you saying "We were in our own eyes as grasshoppers". But I do take offense at your assserting, "and so were we in their eyes". Could you possibly know how I made you appear in their eyes? How do you know but that in their eyes you were like angels?

 

The way I interperet this mishna is as follows. All of us have a perception of ourselves, but more importantly all us make assumptions about how others perceive us. Although empowering giving us a sense of balance and place, this can be very  damaging. We often have a tendency to imagine that people think us of little worth, conjuring up in minds all conversations that people must be having with themselves about something we did or did not do. The reality is that we are often so off the mark with these illusions that we become our worst enemy, making mountains out of mole hills and inflicting apon ourselves endless suffering. 1% of pain comes from reality, 99% of pain comes from ourselves. The mishna is teaching us to assume that people think of us positively, not to do so is not only a sin against ourselves but against Hashem himself. 

 

 

Interesting reading of the fall of man

Of late I have been reading the english version of Sefer Ha-Aggadah , edited by Hayim Nahman Bialik and Yehoshua Hana Ravnitzky. It has been immensely englightening, making me realise how sorely deprived our educational system is in that it does cover midrash in a systematic, sophisticated fashion.

There is an interesting Midrash I came accross from Midrash Rabbah 19:3, that presents in my opinion a rather interesting reading of the fall of man, one that I had not seen or thought of before.

Then the serpent touched the tree with his hands and feet, shaking it until its fruit fell to the ground. The tree then credit out. Villain, do not touch me – "Let not hte foot of pride overtake me, and let not the hand of wicked shake me" (Ps 36:12). The serpent said to the woman, "Look, I touched the tree, yet I did not die. You, too, if you touch it, will not die." Right away, he pushed her and she touched the tree.

When she saw the angel of death coming toward her, she said "Woe is me! I am as good as dead, and the Holy one will make another woman and give her to Adam." Immediately "she took of its fruit and ate; and she also gave some to her husband, and he ate" (Gen 3:6)

 If I am I correct in my understanding, according to this midrash, the eating of the apple was a suicide attempt by a jealous love-struck Eve, who would rather her and Adam die together then leave him for another woman, ala Romeo and Juliet. Perhaps I am reading too much into it, but that appears to be the intent of the midrash in my mind. Interesting isnt it….?

 

 

A valuable lesson from a mishna in Shekalim

Over the chagim I was reviewing some mishnayot and came across a fascinating mishna which I though I would share some thoughts on:

SHEKALIM: CHAPTER 3: MISHNA 2

In three chests of three se’ahs each they withdraw from the chamber, on them were written alef, bet, gimmel. R. Yishmael says: It was written in Greek alpha, beta, gamma. The one who withdrew funds may not enter wearing a hemmed garment, nor with shoes, or with sandals, nor with tefillin, or an amulet; lest he become poor, and that they will say from the sin of the chamber he became poor, or lest he become rich, and they will say from the withdrawal funds of the chamber he became rich; because a person must please people in the same manner that he must please the Almighty, as it states (Num. 32:22), "You shall be guiltless before the Lord and before Israel," and it states (Prov. 3:4), "and find favor and good understanding in the eyes of God and man."

Now pshat is that you cannot enter into the chamber wearing the above mentioned items, because you could steal coins by hiding them in them. But a question remains, one of the items mentioned is tefillin. Surely a person who is walking around with tefillin all day long is not to be suspected of wrong doing, something so base a sin a sin as that of stealing from charity?


Contra to our possible first intuitions, the mishna is coming to teach us a message. By specifying tefillin, the mishna is teaching us that no matter how outwardly pious an individual is, we cannot be naive and assume that he is not capable of sin. The same safeguards that have to implemented for the man in the street have to applied to even the “frum” as well. True, there is a concept of giving people the benefit of the doubt, yet that cannot lead to a kind of blind faith whereby all behavior is unmonitored and it is assumed that all is good and well. A valuable lesson in light of unfortunate incidences in the Orthodox community of late.

As a side issue, see below for real life incidence where tefillin were used to smuggle out goods, and the torah true response of R’ Yaakov Kamenetsky on this matter.

There was a period in the 1970’s when a group of rogues were smuggling valuables in tefillin (phylacteries) and other religious articles that would usually evade inspection; thus the thieves assumed their scheme would be successful. Often they would send these religious articles with unsuspecting pious Jews and asked to deliver them to certain locations near their final destinations. When United States customs officials got wind of this scheme they asked a few observant agents to help crack the ring. In addition to preserving the sanctity of the religious items, the customs authority felt that Jewish religious agents would best be able to mete out knowing accomplices from unsuspecting participants who had been duped into thinking they were actually performing a mitzvah.

The Jewish custom agent in charge of the operation decided to confer with my grandfather, Rabbi Yaakov Kamenetzky on this matter. Though his advice on how to break the ring remains confidential, he told me how he explained how the severity of the crime was compounded by its use of religious items. "Smuggling diamonds in Teffilin," he explained, "is equivalent to raising a white flag, approaching the enemy lines as if to surrender and then lobbing a grenade. That soldier has not only perpetrated a fraud on his battalion and the enemy; he has betrayed a symbol of civilization. With one devious act, he has destroyed a trusted symbol for eternity — forever endangering the lives of countless soldiers for years to come. "These thieves, by taking a sacrosanct symbol and using it as a vehicle for a crime have destroyed the eternal sanctity and symbolism of a sacred object. Their evil actions may cause irreparable damage to countless honest religious people. Those rogues must be stopped, by any means possible," he exclaimed.


Source [http://www.jlaw.com/Articles/mesiralaw2.html footnote 6 ]

Lubavitcher Rebbe regarding the custom not to sleep in the sukkah


Circus Tent
has as posted up some very interesting material regarding the Chabad custom of not sleeping in the Sukkah. Below is an extract of some of that material, please see his site for some more posts and some interesting comments from other readers.


Video of the meeting (large file)
http://video.moshiach.ru/dollars/zvi_kaana.wmv

Transcript of the meeting between R’Zvi Kahana and the Rebbe
(not a perfect transcript)

HRH"G R’ Zvi Kahana: I’d like to ask the Rebbe about the issue that troubles the Bnei Torah in the Yeshiva world regarding the practice in Lubavitch that one doesn’t have to, or is forbidden to, sleep in the Sukka. How should I respond?

Rebbe: You shouldn’t respond at all, because this question is asked by those who only seek to reignite machlokes and sinas chinam, therefore it is best to keep away from them – and certainly not to get involved in responding, explaining, or halachic pilpulim, as if this is even a legitimate shayloh, rather, this is nothing other than a nisayon to create machlokes and sinas chinam. The hanhoga in Lubavitch – which is, by the way, also the hanhoga in Belz – regarding sleeping in the Sukka was well known and mefursam for over a hundred years! Back in the days of the Mitteler Rebbe, who was himself quite a lamdan, this was the practice, and this was what he saw in his father’s home by the Alter Rebbe, the Baal HaTanya & Shulchan Aruch. There is no chutzpa greater than this klape the Alter Rebbe: to come along now, after a hundred years, and come up with shaylos about this practice! And this chutzpa is combined with dishonesty: as if this is some new innovation in our generation – when this is known to have been the practice for generations!

A Gadol b’Yisroel in past generations was once asked regarding the statement in the Gemara (Rosh Hashana (22: ), "Kol milsa davida lagluyei lo mishakrei bo inshei (that people don’t lie about things that are done publically)" – how can the Gemara say this when we clearly see people that lie even about things that are easily verified? And he responded: The Gemara explicitly says "inshei," i.e. those that lie about such things aren’t even in the category of "inshei." And in this case, they lie, not merely about something that was done publicly, but about something that was well-known and common knowledge! I ask you, why associate with such a mechutzaf?!Chazal warn us, "hamisabek im menuval misnavel gam kein."

R’ Kahana: My intention was merely to be meorer the need to explain this for the Bnei Torah .

Rebbe: "Bnei Torah" need to act like talmidim of Moshe Rabbeinu, the first mikabel, as it says in Pirkei Avos "Moshe kibel Torah misinai, umesoroh, etc, vehemidu talmidim harbei." It is important to know if one is a student of Moshe or not; it needs to be contemplated if this behavior is in accordance with Moshe Rabbeinu’s: Moshe sought to create achdus in Klal Yisroel – as we find, when they left Mitzrayim and stood at Har Sinai all twelve shvatim were "K’ish echad b’lev echad." This is the hanhogoh of Moshe Rabbeinu, and this is the hanhogoh of talmidei Moshe Rabbeinu – as we see that the general hanhogoh of all Gedolei haTorah, from all circles, was to bring peace and achdus. R’ Chaim Volozhiner, a talmid of the GR"A, wasn’t a chossid, but he wasn’t a misnaged either – in general, religious Jews weren’t "misnagdim," but there are some mechutzafim that act as shluchim of the Samech-Mem – and it is known how R’ Chaim worked closely with the Mitteler Rebbe, both in matters of halachaaskanus, etc.

Similarly, his son R’ Yitzchok stood together with the Tzemach Tzeddek, both in matters of halacha and askanus, which is well known and verifiable (even non-Jewish sources can attest to this, so you can’t suspect Chassidimgezeira forcing Jewish children to study in secular schools. And in later years, keyodua umefursam, the kesher and the closeness between R’ Chaim Ozer and R’ Lifshitz of Kovno with the Rebbe Rashab and his son the [Previous] Rebbe, and how they worked shoulder to shoulder to defend and strengthen Yiddishkeit in Russia, and how they signed together on many kol korehs, etc. So, after a hundred years of peaceful relationships among gedolei Yisroel from all circles, one Jew stands up, calling himself a "Ben Torah," signs his name "harav," and claims to be carrying on the path of Gedolei Yisroelhatzolas Bnei Yisroel, and what does he do? He ignites machlokes and sinas chinam b’Yisroel!

Such a Jew is not considered a "Ben Torah," because even if he studies Torah, it is apparently not lishma, resulting in his being moreh hepech hahalacha – as the Gemara tells us about one who learns Torah shelo lishmasinas chinam b’Yisroel! Furthermore, not only is the psak hepech halacha, but their entire metziushepech halacha: they become soldiers of the Samech-Mem, hepech halacha. Regarding milchemes Midyan it is written that they stood "keneged klal Yisroel, which is tantamount to opposing HKB"H." It is explained in seforim that the word "Midyan comes from "Madun uMeriva (fighting)," and those who cause fights among Klal Yisroel are messengers of the Samech-Mem, the same one who caused the Ma’aseh Midyan – except that with Midyan the method was through the Midyonite women and now he found a better approach: to involve people called "Bnei Torah" to create machlokes and sinas chinam b’Yisroel. They think that this is something new, but in truth this has already existed – in Midyan. And I say this publicly, and I’m not bothered that it will get out, since this isn’t my chidush – this can be found in seforim.

It is written regarding anyone that makes machlokes and sinas chinam in klal Yisroel – whomever he may be – that even if he acted properly for many years – for 119 years – the Navi Yechezkel states regarding tzidkas hatzaddik: "even one who was a complete tzaddik all his days, but in the end he acts be’ofen hofchi" – and especially in our case, where the individuals creating the machlokes have always sought machlokes, only that in the past they were more cautious and careful with their words that it shouldn’t come out clearly – but I don’t want to continue with what is written in Yechezkel since I am in the business of brochos. They deal with the opposite of brochos, go investigate and decide for yourself what they deserve for their actions. As I said before, I wonder why you associate with them altogether.

R’ Kahana: Nevertheless, they are Bnei Torah…

Rebbe: They aren’t "Bnei Torah." They are mechutzafim who oppose Toras Moshe in that they seek only machlokes and sinas chinam after a hundred years of peace! Regarding chutzpa such as this the Gemora states "at the time preceding Moshiach, chutzpa will abound." Stam chutzpa always existed, but when we see chutzpasiman that we are B’ikvasa De’moshicha, when chutzpa abounds among those who fulfill the will of the Samech-Mem: to bring sinas chinam – the reason for galus – and through that to delay, chas veshalom, the geula ho’amitis vehashleima al yedei Moshiach tzidekeinu! All the "kitzin" have passed, and the fact is that Moshiach has still not come – and the guilty party is those that incite machlokes and sinas chinam b’Yisroel!geula than this!

R’ Kahana: Perhaps it would be appropriate that the Rebbe write something about this for the "Bnei Torah," so that they should understand the issue… that it’s not something new, that it’s an old practice and throughout the years it was accepted with peace and achdus among Gedolim of all types…

Rebbe: They know this already, and it has already been printed in seforim. It is unnecessary to explain things that they know themselves – and you can find proof in megilas Shang-Chai: there they knew to maintain a kesher with Lubavitch, and they had no problem coming to Lubavitch for help, and Lubavitch did everything possible to assist them. Some were brought to Israel and others to America, and there was real achdus and shalom – so much so that it began to erase the sinas chinam that had existed and that had brought galusal pi halacha, if the cause for golus has been removed, Moshiach would have to come and bring Geulah.

So that’s when the Samech-Mem stepped in – and he found Jews with long beards, that learn in Yeshiva, and he shook up what is found in the chalal hasmali (which need not be explained) and caused them "lehoros hepech halacha, " bringing machlokes and sinas chinam. We find that when Moshe took the Bnei Yisroel out of Mitzrayim, Pesel Micha was taken along as well – which was the cause for quite a bit of trouble later on – nevertheless, we cant criticize Moshe Rabbeinu for allowing it to come along – so I’m not surprised that "Pesel Micha" came along from Shang-Chai… Once again, the wonder is why you associate with them. And I wonder about your idea here: that a descendant of the Tzemach Tzeddek, who was named after him, should publicize and be meorer the kesher between his zeide and R’ Yizchok MiVelozhin! Is it necessary for me to do this?! Do they not already know this?! They hide from those facts and pretend not to know merely to make machlokes and sinas chinam.

R’ Kahana: Not everyone knows…

Rebbe: (smiles) If your intention is to be melamed zchus, it’s nice.

R’ Kahana: I myself was not aware.

Rebbe: What didn’t you know? You weren’t aware of the relationship between R’ Chaim Ozer and the [Previous] Rebbe and the Rebbe Rashab?!

R’ Kahana: R’ Chaim Ozer I did know, Baruch Hashem, and I certainly knew of their relationship.

Rebbe: R’ Chaim Ozer was a great lamdan, and chief Rabbi of Vilna. He worked with the [Previous] Rebbe and Rebbe Rashab. Nobody needs to go now and seek permission for their hanhogos from a "chatzaf" keneged Toras Moshe Rabbeinu. Rather, from such chutzpa we must protest – if we remain silent the chutzpa only grows! I don’t want to attack anyone, chas veshalom, but I ask you: In Israel there are many Irgunim shel Rabbonim, how can it be that the mecharcirei-riv do whatever they want and not one opens their mouth to say a word? We say in Shmoneh Esreh, "Es Tzemach Dovid avdecha meheira tatzmiach," but if we only recognize that if we would eliminate machlokes and sinas chinam, Moshiach would already have come!

Chaval on our time discussing this matter… let’s talk about chinuch in Eretz Yisroel. In Israel there are thousands of Jewish children that don’t know the first letter of "Anochi Hashem Elokecha," and from year to year, more and more children – literally tens of thousands bli guzma (haklevai that it should be a guzma) of children don’t get this education. What has been done in these forty years to save the chinuch for these tens of thousands of children? People come with criticism about Sukkah, but they won’t even put their finger in cold water to help these Jewish children and bring them to be able to learn Torah! This doesn’t bother them at all?! But they have no interest in these matters, because their goal is machlokes and sinas chinam – maaseh Midyan.

Midyan was busy with Avoda Zara begilui, but now people are embarrassed of Avoda Zara begilui. They serve Avoda Zara with the egel hazahav: They pay off Rabbonim and Roshei Yeshiva to write what ever they demand (they themselves aren’t talmidei chachomim, their "lomdus" is buying off Rabbonim, etc) and now, now there is an argument over 16 million dollars – no exaggeration – that was earmarked for Yeshivos, and subsequently it came out that a fight ensued for control of the money and it was decided to temporarily keep the money in the USA. Then there was a debate about what bank to put it in, until they found a bank that paid a higher rate and deposited it in someone’s name – and he became in control of the funds. And who benefited from the money? Not the Yeshivos; not even their own Yeshivos!

R’ Kahana: I’d like to apologize to the Rebbe for taking the time.

Rebbe: May we hear besuros tovos, and surely you will excuse the harshness of my words; it’s just that this has gone too far…

R’ Kahana: I know; I know what’s going on there. I have come from there and that’s why I wanted to smooth out the matter.

Rebbe: In this matter nothing can be accomplished coming from here – from the side that is nogeah bedavar. It’s better to find someone from the talmidim of R’ Chaim Ozer, that follows his path, to write and protest against this – and to publicize R’ Chaim Ozer’s letters reflecting his relationship with the Rabbeim, etc, and maybe that will help…

R’ Kahana: I knew R’ Chaim Ozer, and I am aware of the relationship.

Rebbe: Nu!…

R’ Kahana: I would like to ask the Rebbe for a brochoh for deah tzelula

Rebbe: (smiling) Yeah, that’s just what you need…that it get out that you asked me for a brochoh… B’chol ofen, may Hashem help, that you should merit to discuss the coming of Moshiach, and not about the hindrances to his arrival and the chutzpa that prevails from day to day.

R’ Kahana: I need a brochoh that Hashem should grant me deah tzelula.

Rebbe: Certainly your daas is clear enough to explain to them what they need to hear, especially since they already know this deep down.

R’ Kahana: I mean deah tzelula in Limud haTorah, "Vehaer eineinu b’Sorasecha."

Rebbe: We all suffer great pain from the rampant chutzpa of ikvosoh demeshicha, and you want to learn Torahtzilul hadaas and menuchas hanefesh?! This is what Yirmiyahu answered Baruch ben Neriah ( Ch. 45) when he asked why he wasn’t worthy to receive prophecy: "Koh amar Hashem – What I have built I will tear down, and what I have planted I will uproot, I am uprooting all the land, and you seek great things for yourself?!"

(R’ Kahana then introduced his wife as the daughter of the ‘Einayim Lemishpat,’ (Rav Arieli) and she said: "I’d like to ask the Rebbe for a brochoh for my son and my grandson, that they should follow in the path of Torah" – to which the Rebbe responded: "May they have "einayim lemishpat," and by that I mean mishpat amiti.")

Rebbe: May you have besuros tovos in an oifen of keflayim le’toshiah – and, as I said, I hope you weren’t offended (and the Rebbe gave them 2 dollars)

Early letter of the Rebbe on the topic:

7 Cheshvan, 5715 [1954]

Sholom uBrocho,

Rabbi… conveyed to me your question as to why it is not the custom of Chabad Chasidim to decorate the Succah, as well as to sleep in the Succah.

This question calls for a lengthier explanation than this letter would permit. However, I trust the following points may suffice:

Re: Decorations:

Generally, a Mitzvah must be observed on its Divine authority (with Kabolos Ohl) and not on rational grounds, i.e. for any reason or explanation which we may find in it. An exception, to some extent, is the case where the significance of the Mitzvah is indicated in the Torah, and our Sages have connected its fulfillment with it. At any rate, only a qualified person can interpret it more fully.

We have a rule that a Mitzvah should be performed to the best of one’s ability, and as the Rambam explains (at the end of Hilechoth Issurei HaMizbeach). This applies especially to the object of the Mitzvah itself, e.g., a Talis should be the best one can afford, an offering should be the most generous, etc.

Unlike the Sechach [branches covering the top of the Succah] and walls of the Succah, decorations are not an essential part of the Succah, but an external adornment which adds to the enjoyment of the person sitting inside the Succah; they are, as the name clearly indicates, supplementary objects which decorate and beautify the external appearance of the Succah.

The attitude of Chabad Chassidim in this connection, as taught by generations of Chabad leaders and teachers, is that the Succah is to imbue us with certain essential lessons, which are explained in Chassidic literature and Talmudic literature in general. It is expected of Chabad Chassidim that they should be impressed by the essential character of the Succah without recourse to "artificial" make-up; that the frail covering of the Succah and its bare walls, not adorned by external ornaments, rugs or hangings, should more forcibly and directly impress upon the Jew the lessons it is meant to convey.

Re: Sleeping in the Succah

In order to safeguard and inspire a greater feeling toward the Succah, sleeping in it is not practiced by us. The basis for this is two-fold: First, we have a rule that Hamitztaer putter min HaSuccah (suffering exempts one from dwelling in the Succah). Secondly, during sleep a person is not in control of himself, and, furthermore, the very act of undressing and dressing, etc. inevitably creates a common-place attitude towards the place which serves as a bedroom. Such a depreciation of attitude toward the Succah (by sleeping in it, as explained above), from what his attitude should properly be towards the Mitzvoth of G-d whereby He has sanctified all Jews, would be deeply felt by the Chabad Chassid by virtue of his Chassidic teachings and upbringing, and would cause him profound spiritual suffering. The combination of these two considerations, therefore, led to the custom not to sleep in the Succah.

However, if a Jew feels absolutely certain that his sleeping in the Succah will not in the slightest affect his attitude toward the sanctity of the Succah, and is consequently free from any mental pain that might be caused thereby, he is duty-bound to sleep in it, in accordance with the fullest meaning of Taishvu K’ain taduru, to make his Succah his dwelling place to the utmost.

I hope the above will provide an adequate answer to your question, but should you desire further clarification, do not hesitate to write to me.

With blessing,

(Reprinted from L’chaim # 688 (http://www.lchaimweekly.org/lchaim/5762/688.htm#caption5))

Working For A Living 6

Mishna Avot (2:2)

Rabban Gamliel, the son of R. Yehuda HaNassi, says: It is well to combine the Torah study with some worldly occupation, for the exertion that the both entail keeps sin out of ones mind”

Commentary of Rabbi Yosef Yaabetz

This mishna directly follows what [R. Yehuda HaNassi] said with regard to yiras Shomayim (fear of G-d), stating, “Contemplate…. For his son [Rabban Gamliel] saw fit to recommend worldy pursuit and work as the means to sustain ones fear of G-d. Even if the work is inferior and wretched, it is proper to hold on it, love it and be proud of it, since it is a found and root cause of yiras Shomayim – just as the head of Jewish royalty [King David] danced before G-d “like one of the boors,” showing concern only for honor of his Creator and not for his own. Our sages of blessed memory stated (Sotah 49b), “Since Rebbe (ie R Yehuda Hanassi_ passed away, humility and fear of sin have become extinct”. [The reason for this is that] during the days of Rebbe, the desire for Torah was so strong that it alone was sufficient to keep an individual from transgressing, in line with the verse (Prov 2:10-12) “When wisdom enters your heart … to rescue you from the way of evil…” However, after death, there was a need for something else, namely work [to keep [people from sinning]. It is for this reason that [Rabban Gamliel sated that “the exertion that they both entail keeps sin out of one’s mind”. (Above source for Eyes to See: R’ Yom Tov Schwarz)

THE ATTITUDE TOWARDS WORKING PEOPLE
(In All Your Ways, Know Him:
Two Modes of Serving God Harav Aharon Lichtenstein)

The final mishna in Menachot (13:11, 110a) points out that the same phrase, rei’ach nicho’ach (a sweet savor), is used with regard to sacrificial offerings of different value—cattle, birds and flour. From here it derives a principle: “Echad ha-marbeh ve-echad ha-mam’it, u-bilvad she-yekhaven adam et da’ato la-Shamayim—It matters not whether a person offers much or little, so long as he directs his heart to Heaven.” This mishna is quoted in a gemara which every person should learn and apply; it should be hung on the wall of every beit midrash:

A favorite saying of the Rabbis of Yavneh was: I am God’s creature and my fellow man (i.e. a non-scholar) is God’s creature. My work is in the town and his is in the field. I rise early for my work and he rises early for his work. Just as he does not presume to do my work, I do not presume to do his. Will you say, I do much and he does little? We have learnt: “It matters not whether a person does much or little, so long as he directs his heart to Heaven.” (Berakhot 17a)


The Rabbis of Yavneh say that one should have a sense of the worth not only of people who sit in a beit midrash, but also of those who are “in the field,” engaged in building society, culture, economy, country, government—any of the various walks of life whose development is essential if the world of “le-ovdah u-leshomrah” is to be sustained. This is a very clear and direct critique of the kind of condescension towards balebatim (people in non- Torah professions) which unfortunately one sometimes encounters in yeshiva circles. Sometimes, yeshiva students tend to regard themselves as the salt of the earth, while considering other people to be of secondary value. This kind of arrogance has no place in a beit midrash and must be shunned by any ben-Torah. A ben-Torah must believe that Torah is important, but that people engaged in other walks of life are also part of God’s world, and are fulfilling their mission of “le-ovdah u-leshomrah” within that world. He is doing his work and I am doing my work, but what is important is the quality, intensity and scope of a person’s dedication to Heaven. Whatever a person does can be geared ultimately to fostering his relationship with God.

Does this mean that therefore it is irrelevant whether a person is marbeh or mam’it, as long as he directs his heart to Heaven? Surely not! Surely not if we are talking about avodat Hashem generally, and certainly not if we are talking about talmud Torah. Rather, this phrase means that even if a person finds himself in circumstances where he needs to be mam’it—after all, God did not create the world as one tremendous kollel—he should attempt to serve God in whatever he is doing, and others should value his efforts. But to the extent that a person can be a marbeh, of course he is supposed to be a marbeh!

Rambam On Incorporeality

There is a rather interesting comment in Prof Marc Shapiros “The Limits of Orthodox Theology” on page 68 regarding the concept of incorporeality in Judaism. The comment is rather tongue in cheek in my opinion, but in essence raises a very important question regarding tradition, interpretation of texts and the process of education. It brings to mind Hillels dictum in Pirkei Avot (2:3) ‘Do not make a statement that cannot be easily understood on the ground that it will be understood eventually’. I look forward to your comments. [Bold Text is Mine]

One who believes that God is corporeal by definition denies God’s unity and is even worse than some types of idolater. It is irrelevant whether or not this mistaken belief is unintentional.

Having said this, Maimonides must explain why the Torah used corporeal expressions to refer to God. His answer is striking. Since the masses needed to be instructed in God’s existence but could not conceive of the existence of an incorporeal God, it was necessary for them to be led to this belief in a progressive fashion. First they were taught of the existence of one corporeal God, which was an improvement to believing in many corporeal gods or having no belief. Only following this were they taught about God’s incorporeality. (Maimonides does not tell us if this process was accomplished quickly or took a number of generations). As Howard Kreisel has noted: ‘It follows from Maimonides’ remarks that the Torah deliberately misleads the people in the matter of the corporeality of God… The Torah no choice but to compromise with reality in order to educate the people effectively’

Here we are not dealing with the a population that understood the Bible in a corporeal sense rather than turning to the wise men for guidance. Rather, and this what is so significant, it was the Torah which originally intended the masses to accept God’s corporeality. In other words, it is not merely that the Torah ‘misleeds the people’, but rather the Torah that taught them a heretical doctrine. Of course, it must be emphasized that for an ancient Israelite to believe in God’s corporeality was actually an improvement over his earlier state when he had no belief in God. Only when the ancients advanced beyond this state would they be able to understand that the anthropomorphic expressions in the Torah are to be understood figuratively. If one of the ancients died without having rejected a corporeal conception of God, he would suffer the consequences of his heresy, namely, denial of a share in the world to come. Once again, it must be noted that the spiritual consequences of heresy are not to be viewed as a punishment but rather as a necessary outcome of the world’s metaphysical structure. An incorporeal conception of God is a basic necessity for intellectual perfection at all times and places.

UPDATE:

R’David Guttmann wrote a very thoughtful comment in response to the above post. I have therefore included it in its entirety below. Not sure about the last line though “Shabbat Shalom and I hope you have a tylenol at hand to treat the headache.” [Care to explain R’David…?]

Rambam in MN 1:35 reads as follows: That God is incorporeal, that He cannot be compared with His creatures, that He is not subject to external influence; these are things which must be explained to every one according to his capacity, and they must be taught by way of tradition to children and women, to the stupid and ignorant, as they are taught that God is One, that He is eternal, and that He alone is to be worshipped. …When persons have received this doctrine, and have been trained in this belief, and are in consequence at a loss to reconcile it with the writings of the Prophets, the meaning of the latter must be made clear and explained to them by pointing out the homonymity and the figurative application of certain terms discussed in this part of the work. Their belief in the unity of God and in the words of the Prophets will then be a true and perfect belief.

Torah is not teaching falsehoods God forbid. It is by contrasting what one has to believe with what is written one realizes that the written word must be interpreted. That is because:

"The Torah speaks according to the language of man," that is to say, expressions, which can easily be comprehended and understood by all, are applied to the Creator. Hence the description of God by attributes implying corporeality, in order to express His existence: because the multitude of people do not easily conceive existence unless in connection with a body, and that which is not a body nor connected with a body has for them no existence. (MN 1:26).

However when we talk about concepts:

There may thus be a man who after having earnestly devoted many years to the pursuit of one science, and to the true understanding of its principles, till he is fully convinced of its truths, has obtained as the sole result of this study the conviction that a certain quality must be negatived in reference to God, and the capacity of demonstrating that it is impossible to apply it to Him. (1:59)

In other words the process is to first learn that God is incorporeal and when confronted with the written text that says otherwise, one realizes that it is so that existence can be instilled. Being the word of God cannot lie he discovers

R’Moshe Feinstein On Honest Dealings With Government

Concerning the matters of kindness that our government in the United States of America, (that G-d has, in His great kindness toward the survivors of European Jewry and the survivors among the Torah giants and their students, brought us here, and we founded Torah institutions, established ones from Europe, and also new ones,) which through the "Kingdom of kindness”, whose entire purpose is to benefit all its citizens, has made available many programs to help students in all the schools in the country, so that they can learn and grow in their studies, and also Torah institutions receive substantial assistance for their students; certainly all the Roshei Yeshivot and their principals, and the students, appreciate all the benevolence of the government, and bless the welfare of the Nation and all who stand at its leadership with all blessings.
 
And even though there is no suspicion on the Roshei Yeshivot and the principals, who are too fearing of Heaven to violate prohibitions of theft, and of speaking falsehood and untruth and deception, and violation of the law of the land with any type of leniency, for they know of the severity of the prohibitions and the terrible punishments from Heaven, and it is against the whole purpose of the foundation of the yeshivot and the study there, which is for the students to be truly G-d-fearing and to beware of monetary prohibitions in the extreme; even so, it is appropriate to be raise the issue in order to draw attention also to the donors, who bring donations to support the Torah, that they should not cause theft, or a loss of money to the government, not in accordance with the laws of the Torah and the laws of the government, that they should not stumble even unintentionally in these great transgressions. And to all who are very careful, great blessing should come to them, and they should succeed in their Torah institutions, to have many G-d-fearing students; which is a great blessing to the Nation as well, as it is well-known to all that the Yeshiva students are, thank G-d, the most distinguished citizens in their personal traits and good behavior.


(Igros Moshe Choshen Mishpat, II, 29 The translation here is slightly abridged and adapted)

Extract is from "Tzedakah and Tzedek" By R’Daniel Feldman

Working For A Living By R’ Harry Maryles

R’Harry Maryles, a profound and
insightful person whose writings I really respect, has authored a
great piece on the need for Orthodox Jews to work for a living and
the disastrous consequences of not. He clearly shows that the
Hollywood, picturesque representation of a “learning-only”
lifestyle / community as being problem free and a complete paradise,
are clearly inaccurate and misleading. Read it here.



Yishuv Eretz Yisrael according to the Ramban


The impetus for this post was brought about through numerous conversations with a Lubavitch friend of mine. It occurred to me that the halachic underpinnings for Rav Kooks thought as well as those of his followers were not clearly known among the broader Orthodox community. This post and the upcoming ones will hopefully dispel some myths, as well as promote some serious discussion and debate.

If there is one passage that in my opinion sums up the thought of the followers of Rav Kook, it is this passage from the Ramban. The Ramban in his commentary to the Rambam’s "Sefer Hamitzvot" (Positive Commandment #4) notes the following.

"That we are commanded to take possession of the Land which the Almighty, Blessed Be He, gave to our forefathers, to Avraham, to Yitzhak, and to Yaacov; and not to abandon it to other nations, or to leave it desolate, as He said to them, You shall dispossess the inhabitants of the Land and dwell in it, for I have given the Land to you to posses it, (Numbers, 33:53) and he said, further, To Inherit the Land which I swore to your forefathers, (to give them,) behold, we are commanded with the conquest of the land in every generation."
(Footnote 48, Pg 112, "Torat Eretz Yisrael", David Samson)


Rav Tzvi Yehuda Kook extrapolates upon this Ramban:

"People occasionally ask, ‘Where is it written in the Torah we have to build a State?’ Aren’t they familiar with the words of the Ramban, who determines that we are commanded that this Land be in our hands, and not in the hands of any other nation? That it be in our hands in a national sense. Everyone understands that dominion over a geographic section of land demands political sovereignty and government. All of the Poskim (arbitrators of Torah law) both Rishonim and Achronim [1] [2], decide the law in this fashion, on the basis of this Ramban, that the precept of conquering the Land applies in all generations – and all of them agree it is a commandment of the Torah."
(Page 166, "Torat Eretz Yisrael", David Samson)

[1] See Pitchei Teshuva, Even HaEzer, Section 75, Sub-section 6.

[2] The following is a partial listing of the Halachic authorities who state that the obligation to live in Israel is a Torah commandment binding in all times (Footnote 51, Pg 113, "Torat Eretz Yisrael", David Samson):

Rambam Laws of Marriage Ch 3:20
Rambam Laws of Slaves Ch 8:39
Sefer Haredim Ch 7
Maharit Responsa 2:28
Rashbash 1
Knesset Gedolah Even HaEzer 75, Notes To the Beit Yosef 25
Gaon of Vilna Yoreh Deah 267:161
Avne Nezer Yoreh Deah 454
M’il Tzedakah Responsa 26
Rav Yaakov Emden, Mor Uktziah Section 1 Pg 16
Chida Responsa Yosef Ometz 52
Chida Ya’ir Ozen 10:15
Chachmat Adam, Shar Mishpatei HaAretz 11:13
Paat HaShulchan Ch1, Beit Yisrael 14
Chatam Sofer Responsa Yoreh Deah 233, 235
Rav Haim Palagi, Responsa Nishmat Kol Chai, Yoreh Deah 48
Rav Shlomo from Lublin, in his introduction to the book Mitzvah Yishuv HaAretz
Maharam Shik Yoreh Dead 225
Ohr Somayach, Letter for the book Shivat Zion, printed in Kol Yisrael, 5687
Rav Yitzhak Elchanan Spector, Letters, Shivat Zion
Chazon Ish, Letters 175


[3] See this article by Rav David Samson for elaboration on this topic.
[4]
See this article by Rav Hershel Schacter for a halachic analysis of the sources regarding this mitzvah.