Tzav - The Torah and Derech Eretz

Parshas Tzav begins with a discussion of the laws involving the removal of the ash from the altar. There were two aspects to this service (as understood by Rashi). The Torah (Leviticus 6:3) first describes the daily terumas hadeshen, in which a portion of the ashes was removed and deposited near the altar (specifically, on the east side of the ramp leading to the altar).

The next verse describes the intermittent removal of all the accumulated ash from the altar. Unlike the terumas hadeshen, which only involved the removal of a small amount of ash, this was a rather messy job. The verse (6:4) states:

He (the kohein) shall remove his garments, and he shall don other garments, and he shall remove the ashes to outside the camp, to a pure place.

Rashi (based on the Talmud) comments on the opening of this verse:

ופשט את בגדיו: אין זו חובה אלא דרך ארץ, שלא ילכלך בהוצאת הדשן בגדים שהוא משמש בהן תמיד, בגדים שבשל בהן קדרה לרבו אל ימזוג בהן כוס לרבו, לכך ולבש בגדים אחרים, פחותין מהן:

He shall remove his garments: This is not an obligation but derech eretz (literally "the way of the land", i.e. proper behavior), so that he should not make the garments that he regularly uses for the [Temple] service dirty during the removal of the ashes. The garments in which one cooks a pot for his master are not [proper] for serving him a cup [of wine]. Therefore, "he shall don other garments" inferior to [his regular priestly garments].

While there is a great deal of discussion as to exactly what Rashi means when he says that this is not an "obligation" (עיין ברמב"ן ובגור אריה), it is clear that Rashi is basically saying that even though, from the technical perspective of the laws of the Temple service, there is no need to change garments for this service, the Torah instructs us to do so anyways because of derech eretz.

Derech eretz, in its simplest sense, is simply civilized behavior – politeness, cleanliness, responsibility, trustworthiness, and all of the other essential modes of behavior that enable us to interact with our fellow human beings in an effective and pleasant manner. In a broader sense, derech eretz is a general term for all of the middos tovos – positive character traits – that are expected from a Jew. Middos such as humility and modesty, respect and gratitude, kindness and compassion, patience and tolerance, love for one’s fellow and love for God. The ספר מעלות המדות (Rabbeinu Yechiel, 13th century) summarizes this idea:

דרך ארץ הוא שיהא האדם מחשב בלבו הדרכים שיש לו לנהוג ולילך בהן כדי שיתרצה בהן בפני המקום ובפני הבריות.

Derech eretz consists of a person considering the ways he acts and behaves in order that he should find favor before Hashem and his fellow men.

R' Moshe Feinstein

R' Moshe Feinstein (d.1986) writes that we see from this teaching of Rashi that the rules of derech eretz are not simply recommended ways of behavior, but are fully binding laws which we are obligated to obey like all Torah laws. One who fails to properly follow the requirements of derech eretz in his service of God, such as the requirement to be dressed respectfully during prayer, demonstrates a basic spiritual failing.

The Talmudic tractate Avos, which deals with the principles of derech eretz, opens with the declaration, "Moses received the Torah at Sinai." The Bartenura commentary (R' Ovadia m'Bartenura, late 15th century) writes that this is done to tell us that the lessons of proper character and middos that are taught in Avos also originated with Moses at Sinai.

Indeed, one can argue that, at the most basic level, everything in the Torah is based upon the foundation of derech eretz. This is the underlying message in the famous story of Hillel who, when asked to provide an extremely short summation of the entire Torah, replied, "What is hateful to you, do not do to others. This is the entire Torah, everything else is commentary. Go and learn." (Talmud, Shabbos 31a) Properly understood, everything in the Torah, including the commandments between God and man, is based on derech eretz.

One of the most basic aspects of derech eretz is hakaras hatov (gratitude), i.e. the ability to acknowledge the good that another has done for you and the moral obligation that this creates. The Sefer HaChinuch (Mitzva 33) writes that it is this concept that underlies the mitzva to honor and obey one's parents, and from this we learn how great is our obligation to honor and obey our Creator.

As we have written previously, gratitude is the most basic theme of the festival of Pesach. As we say at the conclusion of the Magid section of the haggada, "לפיכך אנחנו חיבים להודות וכו" - "Therefore, we are obligated to give thanks....” In the final analysis, the entire seder night is an exercise in hakaras hatov. Of the four sons of the hagada, the wicked son is the one who excludes himself from the community, as if the activities of the seder night have nothing to do with him. The hagada states that this attitude is kefira b'ikar - basic heresy - for he denies his moral obligation to his Benefactor. The evil of the wicked son is rooted in a failure in derech eretz.

This helps us understand the the famous saying of Chazal, דרך ארץ קדמה לתורה – “Derech Eretz must precede Torah.” Derech eretz is integral not only to our relationships with our fellow men, but also, and perhaps even more so, to our relationship with God.

---

Mishpatim - Our Spiritual Struggles are the Purpose of Our Existence

At the end of Parshas Mishpatim, the Torah returns to the narrative of the Sinai Revelation. (The commentaries debate whether the events described in Exodus 24 took place before or after the revelation of the Aseres Hadibros (Ten Commandments) described in Parshas Yisro.) It is here we find the famous declaration of the Jewish people (Exodus 24:7), "All that God has spoke, we shall do and we shall hear."

Maimonides

Two verses previously, the Torah states, "And he (Moses) sent the youths of the children of Israel and they brought up elevation-offerings and they slaughtered oxen as peace-offerings to God." This was the final step in sealing the covenant of kabalas haTorah - the receiving of the Torah - in which the Jewish people converted to Judaism. As Maimonides writes (Hil. Issurei Biah 13):

Israel entered the covenant through three things: Circumcision, immersion [in a mikva], and korban (a sacrifice). The circumcision took place in Egypt, as it states (Exodus 12:48), "And no uncircumcised man eat of it (the Paschal lamb)." ... Immersion was performed in the wilderness before the Giving of the Torah, as it says (19:10), "Sanctify them today and tomorrow  and they shall wash their clothing." And the korban, as it says, ""And he sent the youths of the children of Israel and they brought up elevation-offerings." They made these sacrifices on behalf of all Israel.

The Giving of the Torah at Mt. Sinai was what made the Jewish people Jewish; it was their conversion to Judaism, and it serves as the model for all later conversion. As Maimonides continues:

And so it is for [future] generations, when a non-Jew wishes to enter the covenant and shelter beneath the wings of the Shechina and he accepts upon himself the yoke of the Torah, he requires circumcision, immersion, and offering a korban. If she is a woman, she requires [only] immersion and a korban. For the Torah says (Numbers 15:15), "As for you, so for the convert," [meaning] just as you required circumcision, immersion, and the offering of a korban, a convert in [future] generations will also require circumcision, immersion, and the offering of a korban. ... And in our time, when we cannot bring korbanos, a convert requires circumcision and immersion, and when the Temple is built he will bring his korban. 

This event was the highest pinnacle of spiritual achievement in the history of the Jewish people. The Talmud (Shabbos 88a) tell us that when the Jewish people declared, "We shall do and we shall hear", six hundred thousand  angels came and set two crowns upon each Jewish man. Yet, just forty days later, the Jewish people sinned with the golden calf, and, the Talmud continues, they lost those crowns that they had earned only a short time before. Ultimately, despite the powerful and transformative experience of their conversion, the Jewish people were still subject to the same challenges and temptations that they had been subject to before they underwent their conversion.

If this was true even for the Jewish nation at Sinai, it is certainly true for converts of later generations. Despite the fact that conversion definitely effects a fundamental spiritual change in the spiritual makeup of the convert, the convert nevertheless retains the same basic personality, with the same spiritual challenges and difficulties that he had before his conversion. Indeed, earlier in this parsha (23:9), we are commanded, "Do not oppress a stranger (i.e. a convert); you know the nature of a stranger, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt." Rashi comments (based on Bava Metzia 59b):

בהרבה מקומות הזהירה תורה על הגר, מפני שסורו רע

The Torah admonishes in many places regarding [afflicting] the convert, because his original nature is bad (and he is therefore more likely to abandon the Torah - Gur Aryeh).

As should be self-evident, this does not mean that converts are inherently "bad" people. There are innumerable sources that speak of the great virtues of converts (including the medrash upon which I based the name of this blog). The point is that, just as that first generation of Jews faced exceptional challenges because of their background in Egypt, a convert also faces spiritual challenges that are far more difficult that those faced by someone who was born a Jew, and we are required to bear this in mind when we interact with a convert. It is also of vital importance for those who mentor converts to be sure to make this clear to a potential convert. It is all too easy for a potential convert to imagine that his conversion will transform him into a new reborn being, without the challenges and difficulties that he had before conversion. This is simply a falsehood, and only sets the convert up for a sense of failure and rejection when it inevitably fails to come true.

The truth is that this principle is relevant not just for converts, but for every Jew. We all face spiritual challenges with which we struggle and we are taught that God helps us in our struggles with the yetzer hara (evil inclination), as in the famous Talmudic passage (Yoma 38b), "בא לטהר מסייעין אותו" - "one who comes to be purified, they (i.e. Heavenly forces) help him." We are even supposed to pray to God for such help, and we find such prayers in the traditional prayer services. People sometimes misunderstand these teachings to mean that if they just try hard enough, at some point God will simply take their yetzer hara away from them. The reality, however, is that God does not - ever - directly change us for the better. As Maimonides states in Moreh Nevuchim (III:32): 

The nature of man is never changed by God by way of miracle.... it has never never been His will to do it and it never will be. If it were part of His will to change the nature of any person, the mission of the prophets and the giving of the Law would have been altogether superfluous.

The sources that describe God's help in our struggles with temptation are telling us only that if a person has truly reached the limits of his ability - so that he literally no longer has the ability to resist succumbing to sin - then God will give him the strength to continue the struggle. God helps us with our struggle, by giving us the strength to keep fighting, but the struggle itself is ultimately entirely our responsibility  and it will end only when we pass on to the next world. (See my previous discussion of this concept: Va'eira - The Hardening of Pharaoh's Heart.)

The Baal Shem Tov ('ספר הבעש"ט לך לך ג) is quoted as saying in the name R' Saadia Gaon, כי עיקר בריאת האדם בעוה"ז הוא לשבר מדות רעות שלו הטבעיות - "The primary purpose for the creation of man in this world is for him to break his natural bad characteristics." The struggle to overcome our natural, inborn urges is the primary purpose of our existence. It is the reason why we are here in this world.

---

Assessing a Yeshiva

The Alter of Novhardok (R' Yosef Yozel Hurwitz, d.1919) used to say:

מדת הישיבה אינה נמדדת כמה טובים וכמה רעים בתוכה, אלא מהו המכונה והנחשב לרע או לטוב. (ספר המאורות הגדולים, ר' יוסף יוזל הורביץ, ר"א)

A yeshiva is not measured by how many good or bad students are in it, but by what the students consider good or bad. (Sparks of Mussar, p.148)

---

On the Popularity of the Mesillas Yesharim

One of the most influential and popular seforim (Jewish religious works) ever written is the mussar (ethical) work, Mesillas Yesharim, by R' Moshe Chaim Luzzatto (d.1747) - popularly known as the "Ramchal". The Mesillas Yesharim is considered a basic text in most yeshivos today and is widely studied by Jews throughout the world (both in the original Hebrew and in translation).

The question, of course, is why - of all the great mussar works written over the generations - this work should have become so immensely popular that it has reached the point of being one of the basic religious works of the Jewish world?

Before we can address the reasons for the immense popularity of this work, we first need to address a concern that is sometimes raised. The Ramchal, who passed away at the young age of 39, had the misfortune of being a rather controversial figure in his lifetime. He was accused - and even threatened with excommunication - of improper involvement in mystical practices and even Sabbatianism (adherence to one of the heretical cults based on the false messiah, Sabbatai Zvi). At first glance it might seem surprising that a work written by such a controversial figure has become such a central text of the Jewish world.

The reality, however, is that the Jewish world has long accepted that these accusations were incorrect. The fact that major figures, most notably, the Vilna Gaon (R' Elijah of Vilna, d.1797), strongly endorsed the Ramchal and his works has served to completely clear any suspicion from his name. The conventional opinion within the Orthodox community is that, as is often the case with complex figures (and the Ramchal was certainly a complex figure), especially those deeply involved with kabbalah and mysticism, the Ramchal was simply misunderstood. (The Ramchal was not unique in this regard; R' Yonason Eibshutz (d.1764) is another example of a major figure accused of Sabbatianism, whose works are fully accepted today, and for largely the same reason.)

The accusations against the Ramchal have, therefore, not been given any credence within the religious Jewish world for well over two centuries, and have long been viewed as just another unfortunate aspect of history.

Of course, the fact that the Ramchal is not viewed as a controversial figure does not, in of itself, explain why the Mesillas Yesharim became so popular. In fact, the Ramchal himself wrote many other works, and while some are fairly popular today, none of them comes close to the extraordinary popularity that the Mesillas Yesharim has enjoyed for more than two centuries.

I don't believe there can be any definite answers to this question. The fact that the Mesillas Yesharim was enthusiastically endorsed by numerous major rabbinic figures over the years (such as the Vilna Gaon and, perhaps most significantly, R' Yisrael Salanter (d.1883), the founder of the Mussar Movement in 19th century Eastern Europe) has certainly played a large role in its popularity. However, asides from the fact that this does not explain why the book received such enthusiastic endorsements in the first place, it also fails to really explain the work's general popularity as well. There have been many works over the years that have been enthusiastically endorsed by major figures that failed to really gain general popularity. (For example, in addition to Mesillas Yesharim, R' Yisrael Salanter also sought to popularize the study of several other mussar works, yet none of these works enjoys anything resembling the popularity of the Mesillas Yesharim, and some, such as the medieval mussar work, Tikkun Middos HaNefesh, by R' Solomon ibn Gabirol (d.1058), remain virtually unknown.) The reality is that it is the popularity of the Mesillas Yesharim that explains why people are aware of the many endorsements it has received, not the other way around.

So what was it about the Mesillas Yesharim that set it apart from all the other classic mussar works?

In my opinion, the most significant factor that sets the Mesillas Yesharim apart from earlier works is that, unlike many earlier mussar works, the Mesillas Yesharim refrains entirely from harsh, condemnatory language directed at the reader.  With many earlier mussar works, it is all too easy for the reader to come away from his studies with a sense of despair and fear. (An elderly - and very religious - woman once told me that she had difficulty studying the classic mussar work Shaarei Teshuva (by Rabbeinu Yona of Gerona, d.1263) because, for her, its uncompromising style was too intimidating and, ultimately, discouraging.) Many older mussar works seem to make a special effort to describe the dreadful fate of the sinner in the afterlife (the Reishis Chochma, by R' Elijah di Vidas, d.1592, is particularly noted for this).

The Mesillas Yesharim entirely refrains from such rhetoric. On the contrary, the work continually stresses that every positive step, no matter how small, is actually a major achievement, and that even one who attains to only the lowest of the levels described in the book has done something extraordinary.

Another significant factor that, in my opinion, distinguishes the Mesillas Yesharim from most earlier works is that he largely refrains from lengthy technical discussions. Many other works are written more in the style of philosophical works than as guides to self-improvement. Perhaps the most dramatic example of this is the classic Chovos Halevovos (by Rabbeinu Bachya ibn Paquda, 11th century), with its often cumbersome lists of proof-texts from Scripture and Rabbinic literature and philosophical arguments that, for the average reader, are often unnecessary. (It should be noted that, despite this issue, the Chovos Halevovos remains quite popular, and is probably the next most popular mussar work after the Mesillas Yesharim.)

Both of these factors point to the single, unique quality that distinguishes the Mesillas Yesharim: The sense that the author is there for you as a supportive and understanding personal mentor. The Ramchal in Mesillas Yesharim never condemns you; he never implies that your spiritual failings mean that you are a bad person or that you just don't care. He never implies that you just need to get your act together and stop doing bad things, as if it were an easy thing to do. And he never attempts to motivate you through fear of punishment. Instead, the Ramchal guides the reader step by step, with practical and inspirational advice, on how to gradually develop oneself and work one's way upwards spiritually. (For an overview of the general structure of the Messilas Yesharim, see my previous post: Who Achieves Divine Inspiration?)

In writing the Mesillas Yesharim in this manner, the Ramchal demonstrated a deep sensitivity to the changes that were taking place in society (both in Jewish society and in society at large). While earlier generations apparently found the older style mussar works effective, in the modern world a very different approach was necessary. The Mesillas Yesharim was thus, in many ways, the first modern Hebrew work. (Indeed, the early maskilim were great admirers of the Ramchal, and the Mesillas Yesharim, for this very reason.)

Given all of the above, it is not surprising that the Mesillas Yesharim was a huge "hit" and became the most popular mussar work of all time.

There is one more issue that is often raised that needs to be addressed. Anyone who has studied the Mesillas Yesharim will quickly recognize that, of the nine levels he describes, few people ever attain much beyond the first two or three. That being so, what is the point of studying the later sections?

Not long ago, I had the opportunity to discuss this topic with my rebbi, who is himself a long-time student of the Mesillas Yesharim. In the discussion, we came to three basic reasons why the later sections of Mesillas Yesharim are relevant to every Jew.

1. "You can't begin a journey if you don't know where you are going." Even when you are still on a lower level, the knowledge of what you are working to eventually achieve on the higher levels still has a major impact.
2. Spiritual growth is usually uneven. There are always some areas in which we are stronger than in other areas. Thus, it is possible that while a person may have only achieved the first or second level in most regards, he is nevertheless on level 5 or 6 in certain specific areas. A person should not restrict his spiritual growth in stronger areas while he waits for his weakest areas to "catch up". On the contrary, it is often the case that as one improves in one area, other areas tend to be "drawn along" and improve as well.
3. It is important for us to understand what true spirituality is, so that we will be able to recognize it (or its absence) in the people around us. Even if we have not achieved the highest levels described in Mesillas Yesharim, if we study them we will at least be able to recognize such greatness when we encounter it in another person, and we will also be able to recognize its absence in those who put on false pretenses of holiness.

---

Originally written in response to a question on an on-line forum.

---

Using the Opportunity of Rosh Hashana

אמר רבי כרוספדאי אמר רבי יוחנן: שלשה ספרים נפתחין בראש השנה, אחד של רשעים גמורין, ואחד של צדיקים גמורין, ואחד של בינוניים. צדיקים גמורין ־ נכתבין ונחתמין לאלתר לחיים, רשעים גמורין ־ נכתבין ונחתמין לאלתר למיתה, בינוניים ־ תלויין ועומדין מראש השנה ועד יום הכפורים. זכו ־ נכתבין לחיים, לא זכו ־ נכתבין למיתה. (מסכת ראש השנה טז:)

Rabbi Kruspedai said, Rabbi Yochanan said, “Three books are open on Rosh Hashana, one for the completely wicked, one for the completely righteous, and one of beinonim (intermediates). The completely righteous are written and sealed immediately for life, the completely wicked are written and sealed immediately for death, and the beinonim are suspended and waiting from Rosh Hashana until Yom Kippur. If they merit, they are written for life; if they do not merit, they are written for death. (Talmud, Rosh Hashana 16b)

The Talmud tells us that the final judgment for the intermediates - the beinonim - is not made until Yom Kippur. If, at that point, they have “merited” - through repentance for their sins - then they will be written for life. Otherwise, they will be written for death. However, this seems to indicate that if a beinoni does nothing at all, he will be written for death. Why should this be so? If he has done nothing at all, then he is still a beinoni!

The Abudarham (14th century commentary on the Siddur written by R' Dovid Abudarham) answers that the failure of the beinoni to use this opportunity to repent for his sins is itself a sin and puts the beinoni into the category of the guilty.

This brings out an extraordinarily important point. The period of the Aseres Yemei Teshuva (Ten Days of Repentance), which begins with Rosh Hashana and ends with Yom Kippur, is an extraordinary opportunity for us to rectify our sins through repentance and regain a proper relationship with God. However, like all opportunities, with this opportunity also comes a responsibility to make use of it. To allow this period to pass by without taking advantage of it is a crime in its own right.

However, this is itself a challenge. Most of us know that we are far from being what we should be, yet year after year goes by and many of our most basic problems remain the same. How are we really supposed to engage in meaningful change?

Self-defeating thoughts of this sort can often prevent us from even trying to make proper use of the opportunities of Rosh Hashana and Yom Kippur, so that we end up just going through the motions, and each year we walk away feeling less worthy than the year before. That is precisely the opposite of how we are supposed to experience Rosh Hashana and Yom Kippur! We find in the book of Nechemia (8:9) that, at the very beginning of the Second Temple period, when the Jews celebrated Rosh Hashana, they began to cry after hearing the Torah reading, for they felt that they were not properly fulfilling the commandments of God. (רש"י שם) Nechemia, Ezra, and the Levites then arose before the people and declared, "Do not mourn and do not cry!" Rather, the Jewish people were told (8:10), "Go, eat rich foods, and drink sweet drinks, and send portions to anyone who doesn't have; for this day is holy to our Lord; and do not be sad, for the joy of God is your strength."

Rosh Hashana is supposed to be a joyous holiday! Yes, we are certainly aware of the significance of this day, in which every creature is brought before God for judgement, nevertheless, we are expected to be happy and confident in our judgement. This would imply that properly utilizing this time, and earning a positive judgement before God, is perfectly feasible for anyone who truly wishes to do so, and that if we use this time correctly, we have no need to be afraid. Clearly, then, the fact that we tend not to feel that way indicates that there is something fundamentally askew in how we view ourselves and in how we view our obligation to repent at this time.

Perhaps the most basic error is in our own self-perception as sinful. The Sages tell us that no matter how sinful you might believe yourself to be, every person is supposed to consider himself a beinoni - a person of intermediate status:

ת"ר: לעולם יראה אדם עצמו כאילו חציו חייב וחציו זכאי, עשה מצוה אחת ־ אשריו שהכריע עצמו לכף זכות, עבר עבירה אחת ־ אוי לו שהכריע את עצמו לכף חובה.... ר' אלעזר בר' שמעון אומר: לפי שהעולם נידון אחר רובו והיחיד נידון אחר רובו, עשה מצוה אחת ־ אשריו שהכריע את עצמו ואת כל העולם לכף זכות, עבר עבירה אחת ־ אוי לו שהכריע את עצמו ואת כל העולם לכף חובה (מסכת קידושין מ.-:)

The Rabbis taught, “A person should always view himself as half guilty and half meritorious, thus, if he does one mitzvah - fortunate is he, for he has turned himself to the side of merit; if he does one sin - woe is he, for he has turned himself to the side of guilt.”

R’ Elazar ben R’ Shimon said, “Being that the world is judged after its majority, and the individual is judged after his majority, if he does one mitzvah - fortunate is he, for he turns himself and the entire world to the side of merit; if he does one sin - woe is he for he turns himself and the entire world to the side of guilt.” (Talmud, Kiddushin 40a-b)

How can we have a rule that a person should always consider himself a beinoni? What if a person knows for a fact that that he has done more sins than mitzvos?

Rav Yisrael Salanter (d.1883) answers ('אור ישראל ח) that one can never truly know whether or not he is a beinoni because only God knows how to judge the value of our actions. Maimonides writes (הל' תשובה א:א-ב) :

כל אחד ואחד מבני האדם יש לו זכיות ועונות, מי שזכיותיו יתירות על עונותיו צדיק, ומי שעונותיו יתירות על זכיותיו רשע, מחצה למחצה בינוני, וכן המדינה אם היו זכיות כל יושביה מרובות על עונותיהן הרי זו צדקת, ואם היו עונותיהם מרובין הרי זו רשעה, וכן כל העולם כולו.... ושקול זה אינו לפי מנין הזכיות והעונות אלא לפי גודלם, יש זכות שהיא כנגד כמה עונות..., ויש עון שהוא כנגד כמה זכיות..., ואין שוקלין אלא בדעתו של א-ל דעות והוא היודע היאך עורכין הזכיות כנגד העונות

Every individual has merits and sins. One whose merits exceed his sins is a tzadik (a righteous person) and one whose sins exceed his merits is a rasha (a wicked person). One who is half and half is a beinoni. The same is true for a country, if the merits of all its inhabitants exceed their sins, it is righteous, but if it is their sins that exceed, then it is wicked. And so it is for the entire world.

This assessment is not made [simply] according to the number of merits and sins, but, rather, according to their significance. A [single] merit may be equivalent to many sins… and a [single] sin may be equivalent to many merits. This assessment can only be made in the mind of the God of Knowledge, and He is the One Who Knows how to value the merits against the sins.

From this we learn that no matter what you may think of your own spiritual stature, even if you think that you are a hopelessly wicked sinner, it is perfectly possible that God considers you a beinoni. (Incidentally, if it is impossible for us to know our own spiritual status, then it is certainly impossible to assess another person’s!)

Rav Yisrael Salanter continues by pointing out that one of the main criteria for determining the significance of a merit or sin is the difficulty or sacrifice involved. As the Talmud (Avos 5:26) says, לפום צערא אגרא – “According to the pain is the reward.” The more difficult it is to do a mitzvah, the more valuable the mitzvah becomes. On the other hand, the easier it is for us to refrain from committing a sin, the more significant that sin becomes. If we fail when faced with a very difficult challenge, this is far less severe than when we sin offhandedly, without even thinking about it.

This concept, concludes Rav Yisrael Salanter, is an extraordinarily powerful one for us at the time of Rosh Hashana and Yom Kippur. Because the “weightiest” sins are precisely those sins that are not difficult for us to refrain from, a minimal effort of training ourselves to be more aware of these “little” sins can have a tremendous impact on our spiritual status when we are judged. By utilizing this simple principle we can shift ourselves dramatically in a positive direction.

It follows from this principle that our first priority in repentance should not be the big challenges that tend to loom large in our minds as overwhelming obstacles. Our first priority in repentance should be the "little" sins, the minor temptations and weaknesses that we can most easily bring under control and that we tend to simply overlook. In the eyes of Heaven, it is these "little" sins that tend to stand out the most as accusations against us. As bad as it might be, the fact that we succumb to a major temptation is, if not excusable, at least, understandable. But what excuse do we have for committing sins that are not real temptations in the first place?

Each year, if we find one or two of these "minor" temptations to work on and to improve, we will find that, as time goes by, temptations that were once overwhelming are now far less challenging, and we can honestly ask God that He grant us longer lives so that we can continue to grow stronger in Torah and mitzvos.

May we all merit to have a kesiva v'chasima tova!

---

From Av to Elul – From Tragedy to Repentance

We are currently in the Jewish month of Av, the month devoted to mourning the destruction of the Holy Temples in Jerusalem – which culminates in the fast of Tisha B’Av – and to our faith that God will eventually comfort us – as expressed in the seven haftaros read each Shabbos between Tisha B’Av and Rosh HaShana. The month of Av is followed by Elul, the month devoted to teshuva (repentance) in preparation for Rosh HaShana and Yom Kippur.

What is the meaning of this sudden shift from the month of tragedy and mourning to the month of penitence and rapprochement between Man and God? To understand this we need to gain a deeper insight into the basic message of Av.

The Midrash (Eicha Raba 1:1) states:

Three [prophets] prophesied using the term “eicha”: Moses, Isaiah, and Jeremiah. Moses said, “How (Eicha) can I bear this people alone…” (Deut. 1:12). Isaiah said, “How (Eicha) has the faithful city become a harlot…” (Isaiah 1:21). Jeremiah said, “Alas! (Eicha) She sits in solitude…” (Lamentations 1:1).

R’ Levi said, “This is analogous to a noble-woman that had three servants, one saw her when she was in comfort, one saw her in her licentiousness, and one saw her in her disgrace. Similarly, Moses saw Israel in their honor and comfort and said, “How can I bear this people alone…”, Isaiah saw them in their licentiousness and said, “How has the faithful city become a harlot…”, and Jeremiah saw them in their disgrace and said, “Alas! She sits alone…”

These verses of Eicha are all read in the month of Av – the verses in Deuteronomy and Isaiah are read on the Shabbos before Tisha B’Av and the book of Lamentations is read on Tisha B’Av – and, taken together, they give us a key to the basic message of Av. The Elef HaMagen (Commentary on the Torah by Rav Eliezer Papo, d. 1824, author of the Pele Yo'etz) draws a connection between these three verses of Eicha and a passage in the Talmud (Yoma 35b):

A poor man, a wealthy man, and a wicked man are brought before [the heavenly court for] judgment. They say to the poor man, “Why didn't you study Torah?” If he responds that he was too poor and was preoccupied with his livelihood, they say to him, “Were you more impoverished than Hillel?” [Hillel the Elder, one of the greatest sages of the Talmud, was also an extremely poor man.] … 

They say to the wealthy man, “Why didn't you study Torah?” If he responds that he was wealthy and was preoccupied with his financial obligations, they say to him, “Were you more wealthy than Elazar ben Charsom?” [Rabbi Elazar ben Charsom was a prominent sage who was also extremely wealthy.]…

They say to the wicked man, “Why didn't you study Torah?” If he responds that he was very good-looking and was [therefore] preoccupied by his desires, they say to him, “Were you more beautiful than Joseph HaTzadik (the Righteous)?” [Joseph, the son of Jacob, was extremely beautiful and was severely challenged in this regard when he lived in the home of Potiphar in Egypt.]…

Thus we find that Hillel obligates the poor, Rabbi Elazar ben Charsom obligates the wealthy, and Joseph HaTzadik obligates the wicked.

The Talmud gives three categories of rationalizations – the excuses of poverty, wealth, and temptation – that people rely upon to deny their responsibility for their moral failures. Almost every excuse that we make for ourselves falls into one of these three categories. These three excuses are paralleled in the three verses of Eicha. Moses spoke of the Jewish people in their time of success, paralleling the challenge of wealth; Isaiah spoke of the Jewish people in their time of sin, paralleling the challenge of temptation; and Jeremiah spoke of the Jewish people in their time of suffering, paralleling the challenge of poverty.

Rav Avigdor Miller

The Midrash (Eicha Raba 1:1) points out the connection between the word Eicha and the word Ayeka (both words are spelled identically) in Genesis 3:8, when, after the sin of eating from the Tree of Knowledge, God calls out to Man, “Ayeka?" - "Where are you?” What exactly was God asking? God certainly knew exactly where Adam and Eve were hiding! Rav Avigdor Miller explains:

Every sinner hides from Hashem… behind self-justifications and self-deceptions. ...all sinners are actually hiding from Him behind their barricades of self-deception and self-justification. ... Hashem calls to the Man: “Where are you?” meaning: Reveal yourself to Me, by removing the barricades of self-justification and false reasoning behind which you attempt to hide from Me.

The cry of Eicha – How can it be! – alludes to that original call of Ayeka – Where are you? – in which God calls us to stop deceiving ourselves and return to Him. The tragedies we mourn in the month of Av are repetitions of that call, intended to shake us out of our complacency and force us to accept responsibility for our actions. The message of Av is precisely this, that it was our failures – failures that we continue to repeat – that brought about these tragedies, and that we must recognize this and acknowledge our own power to change our behavior. We are not slaves to our circumstances; as human beings we are fundamentally free to control our actions, and we therefore bear the responsibility to do so.

Maimonides

Maimonides devotes two full chapters of his laws of repentance to the topic of free-will (Hil. Teshuva 5:1-3):

Free-will is given to every human being. If he wishes to turn himself to the good path and to be righteous, he has the ability to do so, and if he chooses to turn himself to the bad path, and be wicked, he has the power to do so....

Do not think... that God decrees upon a person at the beginning of his existence whether he will be righteous or wicked. It is not so! Rather, every single human being has the ability to be as righteous as Moses our Teacher, or as wicked as Jeroboam....

This concept is a major principle and the pillar of the Torah and the Commandment, as it says (Deuteronomy 30:15), "See, I have placed before you today life and good, and death and evil." And it is written (ibid. 11:26), "See, I have placed before you today blessing and curse."

Maimonides concludes his discussion of free-will stating (Hil. Teshuva 7:1):

Since, as we have explained, every human being has free-will, a man should strive to repent and to cleanse his hands of his sins, so that he should die as a penitent and merit to the life of the world to come.

The recognition of our free-will and responsibility is of fundamental importance as we enter the month of Elul – the month of teshuva (repentance). As long as we deceive ourselves into thinking that our actions are not within our control, teshuva is impossible. It is only after we accept responsibility for our deeds that we can begin the process of teshuva.

---

Devarim - The Rebuke of Moses

Sefer Devarim is primarily made up of speeches given by Moses in the last several weeks of his life in which he admonishes and rebukes the Jewish people in preparation for their entry into the land of Israel. Rashi (Devarim 1:3), citing Sifrei, points out that Moses "did not admonish Israel" until shortly before his death, a practice he learned from Jacob, who rebuked his sons shortly before his death. The Sages gave several reasons why it is proper to reserve the rebuke of others until shortly before one's death:

1. So that a person will not rebuke a person more than once for the same sin.
2. So that the person who will received the rebuke will not meet his rebuker again and be embarrassed.
3. So that the person receiving the rebuke will not bear a grudge against his rebuker.
4. So that they will part in peace.

At first glance, it might seem that the last two reasons contradict each other. Moreover, with regard to the third reason, why does delaying rebuke until shortly before death ensure that the recipient of the rebuke will not hold a grudge? However, it would seem that the experience of receiving rebuke from a person who is soon to depart from this world, especially from one who is deeply beloved to you (as was Moses to the Jewish people and Jacob to his sons), is profoundly different from ordinary rebuke. The knowledge that the rebuker will soon depart from this world creates an openness to rebuke, and a desire to clear the air of all past issues, that enables to the recipient to receive his rebuke without resentment. Thus, not only does the person receiving the rebuke not resent it, but rebuke at this point can actually accomplish a reconciliation that would have been impossible beforehand.

The Ben Ish Chai

The Ben Ish Chai (Rav Yosef Chaim of Baghdad, d.1904), in his Sefer Malach haBris (on Parshas Devarim), raises a far more basic question. The Torah commands us to rebuke our fellow Jews, as it says (Leviticus 19:17), "הוכיח תוכיח את עמיתך" - "You shall rebuke your fellow," and the Sages (Talmud, Bava Metzia 31a) tell us that this obligation applies "even a hundred times"! How then can we say that rebuke should be reserved to a once-in-a-lifetime event, shortly before death?

The Ben Ish Chai answers that there are two forms of rebuke and admonishment. One form is the rebuke given to a specific individual for a specific sin, in which the sinner is directly confronted with his guilt. The other form is a general admonishment on the importance of doing good and avoiding evil, in which the speaker arouses the listener to repentance by discussing the evil of a variety of wicked deeds without specifying any particular culpability on the part of the listener.

The difference between the two approaches is that the latter avoids causing any embarrassment or resentment on the part of the recipient. It is with regard to such rebuke that the Sages say that it should be repeated "even a hundred times." 

In our context here in Devarim, however, we are discussing rebuke of the first category, in which Moses directly confronted the Jewish people with their sins. It is only with regard to such rebuke that the Sages says that one should reserve rebuke until shortly before death.

Of course, it should go without saying that even under these circumstances, rebuke must be given appropriately and correctly, with a deep concern for the dignity of the listeners. Thus, the Ben Ish Chai continues, even here, when Moses directly rebuked the people for their past sins, he only spoke in the presence of "all Israel," even though only a small minority had actually been guilty in any given sin.

---

Balak - The School of Abraham and the School of Balaam

In Parshas Balak we encounter the enigmatic case of the wicked prophet Balaam. The very idea of a wicked prophet raises obvious questions. Perhaps the most basic question is how can a person who speaks to God choose to act wickedly?

The key to this puzzle is found in the mishna in Pirkei Avos (5:19 or nearby) in which the Sages teach us:

כל מי שיש בידו שלשה דברים הללו מתלמידיו של אברהם אבינו, ושלשה דברים אחרים מתלמידיו של בלעם הרשע.

עין טובה ורוח נמוכה ונפש שפלה - מתלמידיו של אברהם אבינו. 

עין רעה ורוח גבוה ונפש רחבה - מתלמידיו של בלעם הרשע.

Whoever has these three things is from the disciples of our father Abraham, and whoever has three other things is from the disciples of the wicked Balaam.

A good eye, a subdued spirit, and a modest personality - [such a person is] from the disciples of our father, Abraham.

A wicked eye, an uplifted spirit, and a greedy personality - [such a person is] from the disciples of the wicked Balaam.

The commentaries discuss the exact nature of each of these traits (and bring Scriptural examples of each in connection to Abraham and Balaam). The basic explanation of these three traits (and its opposite extreme) is as follows:

• עין טובה - A Good Eye: This refers to the trait of הסתפקות - being satisfied with what one has. The opposite is the "wicked eye", which is a jealousy of others and a desire to possess that which belongs to them. The full extent of the "good eye" - as defined by Rabbeinu Yonah - is generosity, i.e. the ability to give to others.
• רוח נמוכה - A Subdued Spirit: This refers to humility. The opposite is the "uplifted spirit", i.e. arrogance and pride.
• נפש שפלה - A Modest Personality: This refers to the trait of self-control with regard to physical desires. The opposite is the "greedy personality" that constantly seeks to satisfy every desire.

The mishna continues:

מה בין תלמידיו של אברהם אבינו לתלמידיו של בלעם הרשע? תלמידיו של אברהם אבינו אוכלין בעולם הזה ונוחלין בעולם הבא, שנאמר, "להנחיל אוהבי יש ואוצרותיהם אמלא." אבל תלמידיו של בלעם הרשע יורשין גיהנם ויורדין לבאר שחת, שנאמר, "ואתה אלהים תורידם לבאר שחת אנשי דמים ומרמה לא יחצו ימיהם ואני אבטח בך."

What is the [ultimate] difference between the disciples of our father Abraham and the disciples of the wicked Balaam? The disciples of our father Abraham eat in this world and inherit the world to come, as it says (Proverbs 8:21), "To cause those that love Me to inherit substance [in the world to come], and I shall fill their storehouses [in this world]." But the disciples of the wicked Balaam inherit Gehinom and descend into the pit of destruction, as it says (Psalms 55:24), "But you, God, shall bring them down into the pit of destruction, men of blood and deceit shall not live out half their days, and I shall trust in You."

There is a great deal to discuss in this mishna, but we will focus on a very basic issue. Although the mishna is contrasting two groups of "disciples", the disciples of Abraham and the disciples of Balaam, it is not speaking of literal students of these men. Rather, a disciple is one who follows in the path of another. Thus, Abraham and Balaam represent two opposing schools of thought, each of which has followers.

Now, whenever we speak of opposing schools of thought, we are always speaking of two different approaches to the same subject matter. (Thus, we never speak of a debate between a school of thought in art and a school of thought in chemistry.) If there is a conflict between the school of Abraham and the school of Balaam, then both schools must be dealing with the same basic issues.

The Tiferes Yisrael (commentary on the Mishna by R' Yisroel Lipschutz, d.1860) explains the nature of the two schools of thought:

[מתלמידיו של אברהם אבינו] אפילו הוא עכו"ם, עכ"פ הוא מתלמידי אאע"ה שלימד לכל בני עולם דעת אלהים ומדות ישרות. ומה"ט לא נקט תנא תלמידי משרע"ה, דתלמידי משרע"ה צריכים לקיים כל התורה.

[One who possesses these three traits,] even if he is a gentile, is still from the disciples of our father, Abraham, for he taught all mankind the knowledge of God and upright character. It is for this reason that the mishna did not say, "the disciples of Moses, our teacher", for the disciples of Moses must uphold the entire Torah.

Thus, the school of Abraham is one that is far broader than the conventional limits of "Judaism," and applies to all mankind. It is the school that follows the basic teachings of Abraham, i.e. the knowledge of God (דעת אלהים) and upright character (מדות ישרות).

As is clear from Scripture, Balaam also fully recognized God as the Creator and All-Powerful Lord of the universe. Balaam also had דעת אלהים - the knowledge of God. However, while Balaam's intellectual recognition of God was of an extraordinarily high level, he did not recognize the importance of מדות ישרות - upright character. To Balaam, and those who follow in his path, the knowledge of God is all that matters. Yet, not only is this insufficient, but, as the mishna states, the knowledge of God without upright character is literally the path to damnation.

R' Samson Raphael Hirsch

This idea is expressed by R' Samson Raphael Hirsch in his commentary on the Torah in this parsha (Numbers 22:8) (emphasis added):

We saw in Abraham's time that, in the midst of a polytheistic world, there was still a Malchi Zedek, the priest of the highest god, who was the One and only God of the Abrahamites, how Job and his friends appeared as pure honourers of this One, so we see Balaam also considering himself and calling himself solely in service of this One.

Altogether, the monotheistic truth as opposed to the polytheistic error is not the special, and certainly not the whole, characteristic of Judaism. That is rather the monotheistic truth with the full realization of what it entails for human living, the identifying One God with one mode of life, by His revealed Law.

But Balaam's monotheistic spiritual height appears morally muddled, far off from even that of Malchi Zedek, far from a Job and his friends. His high spiritual gifts bringing him near to God were subordinated to his egoism and placed themselves at the service of earthly potentates and mighty ones and their lowest desires.

This is a profoundly important lesson. A Jew can only function as a Jew, a disciple of Moses, if he is already functioning on the more basic level of a proper human being, a disciple of Abraham. While a proper human being must have knowledge of God, that is only the beginning. To be a true disciple of Abraham one must also have מדות ישרות - proper character traits. Otherwise, regardless of one's apparent spiritual achievements, one is actually on the path to the pit of destruction.

---

Korach - Dealing with Machlokes

The Chofetz Chaim

The Chofetz Chaim (R' Yisrael Meir Kagan d.1933) used to tell a story (recorded in ספר חפץ חיים עה"ת on Parshas Korach) about a machlokes - a dispute - that broke out in a small town between a resident and the head of the community. The machlokes deteriorated to the point that the resident threatened to inform on the head of the community to the government about various illegalities he was involved in. When the resident's wife learned of this, she tried to convince him not to do so, pointing out that the head of the community had been responsible for freeing their own sons from the draft. (Referring to the infamous Cantonist decrees of 19th century Russia.) "If they investigate him," argued the wife, "they will also arrest our sons!" The husband replied, "It is worth it! It is worth it for all of us to be imprisoned, as long as we can lower him from his position!"

The Chofetz Chaim pointed out that once a person is involved in a machlokes, there is no telling where it may end.

The incident with Korach in this week's parsha is the classic case of machlokes. Although he was one of the greatest men of his generation, Korach's desire for honor and his jealousy of Moses and Aaron led him entirely off the proper path. His name is now used to epitomize the baal machlokes (disputatious person) to the degree that the mitzva to avoid machlokes is "לא יהיה כקרח ועדתו" - "Do not be like Korach and his congregation" (Numbers 17:5 - Talmud, Sanhedrin 110a).

In Pirkei Avos (5:17) we learn:

כל מחלוקת שהיא לשם שמים סופה להתקיים, ושאינה לשם שמים אין סופה להתקיים. איזו היא מחלוקת שהוא לשם שמים - זו מחלוקת הלל ושמאי, ושאינו לשם שמים - זו מחלוקת קרח וכל עדתו

Any machlokes which is for the sake of Heaven, "its end will be upheld," and a machlokes that is not for the sake of heaven, "its end will not be upheld." What is a a machlokes that is for the sake of Heaven? This is the machlokes of Hillel and Shamai. What is a machlokes that is not for the sake of Heaven? This is the machlokes of Korach and all his congregation.

Here we find that the Sages made a critical distinction between two kinds of machlokes, "for the sake of Heaven" and "not for the sake of Heaven." However, there are a number of aspects of this mishna that need to be explained. Most importantly, what exactly is the difference between these two categories?

The commentaries explain that the essence of machlokes for the sake of Heaven is a dispute in which all the disputants are motivated by the commitment to determine the true will of God as expressed in His Torah. While they may disagree about the details, the core motivation of both sides is identical. This is the kind of dispute we find throughout the Talmud and traditional literature, and it is exemplified by the famous disputes between the great Talmudic sages Hillel and Shamai.

The Baal Shem Tov, R' Yisrael Baal Shem (d.1760) (ספר הבעש"ט - ואתחנן מט) made an analogy to a group of architects who were appointed to design a palace for the king. The architects met to begin their plans and they began to disagree. Each one had a different idea as to what would make a more beautiful palace. Even though they are in disagreement about the details of the palace, their basic goals and motivation are identical. Each one seeks to express his love and respect for the king in the best possible way.

Similarly, taught the Baal Shem Tov, when Torah scholars argue for the sake of Heaven, as we find in the Talmud, their disagreement is only on the details of how to serve God properly, but their basic values and motivations are the same.

This idea can help us understand the famous Talmudic passage (Kiddushin 30b):

א"ר חייא בר אבא, אפי' האב ובנו, הרב ותלמידו, שעוסקים בתורה בשער אחד, נעשים אויבים זה את זה ואינם זזים משם עד שנעשים אוהבים זה את זה

R' Chiya bar Abba said, Even a father and son [or] a rebbi and disciple who study Torah at together (literally, "in one gate") become enemies of each other but they do not move from there until they love each other.

Initially, when a dispute in Torah study begins, each one sees the other's approach as improper. However, as the discussion continues and each one comes to understand the other's perspective and reasoning, they recognize that the disagreement is not rooted in a rejection of their most basic values, but only on the details of their application. Thus, their love is rekindled even stronger than before. (See the עץ יוסף there in the עין יעקב who gives a mashal from the עקדה that is very similar to the mashal quoted above from the Baal Shem Tov.)

The Sheivet Mussar (R' Eliyahu of Smyrna, d.1729) (37:48) comments similarly on the famous Talmudic passage (Brachos 64a), תלמידי חכמים מרבים שלום בעולם - "Torah scholars cause peace to increase in the world":

והנה אע"פ שלעיני הרואים נראה כמחזיקים במחלקת בהיותם נלחמים זה עם זה בהלכה... אדרבה מחלקת זה אינו אלא שלום

Behold, even though to the observer it seems as if [the Torah scholars] are engaging in machlokes in their disputes with each other on the law... on the contrary, such machlokes is nothing but peace!

While the Sheivet Mussar explains this idea in rather esoteric kabbalistic terms, the basic idea is clear. Whatever the disagreements may be between Torah scholars, they are rooted in core values that are not in dispute at all. The love of God, the commitment to obey His will as expressed in the Torah, and the commitment to absolute truth in the pursuit of those goals - these are held to by both sides and, when all is said and done, it is these values that really matter. The machlokes of the Sages is only on the surface, but with regard to the most basic and central issues they are entirely בשלום - at peace. Indeed, the very passion with which each side argues for its position and attacks the others testifies to their commitment to these shared values.

This principle, that machlokes for the sake of Heaven refers to machlokes where both sides are seeking the same goal of truth, helps us understand the odd language used by the mishna, "כל מחלוקת שהיא לשם שמים סופה להתקיים" - "Any machlokes which is for the sake of Heaven, 'its end will be upheld.'" What does the mishna mean by "סופה להתקיים" - "its end will be upheld"? Many commentaries explain this to mean that the true goal - the "end" for which both sides are striving - will be upheld. Thus the Bartenura (commentary on the mishna written by R' Ovadia m'Bartenura, d.1515) writes:

ואני שמעתי פירוש 'סופה' - תכליתה המבוקש מענינה. והמחלוקת שהיא לשם שמים, התכלית והסוף המבוקש מאותה מחלוקת להשיג האמת, וזה מתקיים, כמו שאמרו, "מתוך הויכוח יתברר האמת," וכמו שנתבאר במחלוקת הלל ושמאי, שהלכה כבית הלל. ומחלוקת שאינה לשם שמים, תכלית הנרצה בה היא בקשת השררה ואהבת הניצוח, וזה הסוף אינו מתקיים, כמו שמצינו במחלוקת קורח ועדתו שתכלית וסוף כוונתם היתה בקשת הכבוד והשררה והיה להיפך

I have heard explained that "its end" refers to the purpose that was sought from [the machlokes]. In a machlokes for the sake of Heaven, the purpose and the end that is sought in the machlokes is to know the truth, and this purpose will be upheld, as is said, "Out of debate the truth is made clear." As it is was clarified by the the machlokes of Hillel and Shamai that the law is like the academy of Hillel.

But by a machlokes that is not for the sake of Heaven, the desired purpose is the pursuit of power and the love of victory. This purpose will not be upheld, as we find by the machlokes of Korach and his congregation. Their goal was the pursuit of honor and power and in the end they found the opposite.

The Talmud (Eiruvin 14b) discusses why the law followed the opinion of the academy of Hillel:

מפני מה זכו בית הלל לקבוע הלכה כדבריהם? מפני שהיו שונים דבריהם ודברי בית שמאי, ולא עוד אלא שהיו מקדימין דברי בית שמאי לדבריהם

Why did the academy of Hillel merit that the law should be according to their words? Because they would study their own words as well as the words of the academy of Shamai. Moreover, they would study the words of the academy of Shamai before they studied their own!

R' Chaim Shmulevitz

R' Chaim Shmulevitz (d.1979) points out (שיחות מוסר תשל"ב - מאמר ל"ג) that this demonstrated that the academy of Hillel was devoted purely to knowing the truth to an even greater degree than the academy of Shamai. Because of their complete devotion to knowing the truth, they merited to be the dominant opinion.

The great sages Hillel and Shamai epitomize machlokes for the sake of Heaven, where the goal of both sides is purely to determine the truth. Korach and his congregation epitomize the opposite, a machlokes not for the sake of Heaven, but for selfish purposes, motivated by jealousy, pride, and the desire for honor. Such machlokes, asides from being a sin in its own right, also paves the path towards many more sins, ranging from lashon hara (gossip and tale-bearing) and leitzanus (mockery) to the extremes of physical strife and even murder. The spiritual harm caused by machlokes is immense for it causes the Shechina (Divine Presence) to depart from our midst. R' Chaim Shmulevitz says:

כמה קשה המחלוקת, שראינו כמה ישיבות קדושות שהחזיקו מעמד במצבים קשים ביותר ולא נחרבו אלא על ידי מחלוקת. ואף על פי שבית המדרש הריהו מקדש מעט שהשכינה שורה שם... אבל על ידי המחלוקת השכינה מסתלקת ונעשה ח"ו "ביתו" של השטן

How harsh is machlokes! For we have seen many holy yeshivos that continued to function even in the most difficult of circumstances, and they were destroyed in the end only by machlokes. Even though the beis medrash (Torah study hall) is a miniature Mikdash (Holy Temple) in which the Shechina rests... but machlokes causes the Shechina to depart and it becomes, God forbid, a "house" of the soton.

Knowing all this, we must still bear in mind that Korach and his congregation were men of great stature. While it is very easy for us to talk about the evils of machlokes in theory, in practice it tends not to be so simple. Whenever there is a machlokes, the instigators always claim to be acting for the sake of Heaven. This was certainly true of Korach. So how is the ordinary person to distinguish between a true machlokes for the sake of Heaven and one that is not actually for the sake of Heaven?

Indeed, one of the more disconcerting aspects that arises from the story of the dispute is that Korach apparently believed that he was in the right and that, when they all came before God with their burning incense, God Himself would chose him as the high priest. This tells us that not only can it be difficult for an outside observer to know if a machlokes is truly for the sake of Heaven, but it can even be difficult for the leader of the machlokes to recognize this! These signs are therefore vitally important not for judging others, but for assessing ourselves.

One method is alluded to in the mishna. When the mishna gives an example of a machlokes for the sake of Heaven, it refers to Hillel and Shamai, the two opposing sides in the machlokes. When the mishna gives an example of a machlokes that is not for the sake of Heaven, however, it identifies "Korach and his congregation," which was only one side in the dispute. On the simplest level, this is because, while Korach and his congregation instigated the machlokes against Moses and Aaron for their own selfish purposes, Moses and Aaron acted purely for the sake of Heaven. 

However, a number of commentators (עץ יוסף, עקבי  הצאן, מלבי"ם) see in this an additional lesson. When Korach and his congregation began their machlokes, each one of them was motivated by his own selfish purposes. Their alliance with the others was purely one of convenience, to enable each of them to achieve his own goals. Ultimately, each of them really wanted to gain power exclusively for himself. Thus, when Moses told them that each claimant to the high priesthood would burn incense and God would choose the one who was worthy, Korach correctly understood this to mean that only one of them would survive (רש"י טז:ז). Yet, this did not bother Korach, because Korach did not care a whit about "his congregation". They were nothing more than a tool for Korach to use. Thus, not only was there discord between the two ostensible sides of the machlokes, but there was also discord within the camp of Korach and his congregation. They too were not truly at peace with each other. This is a sign that the machlokes is not truly for the sake of Heaven.

Another way to assess if a machlokes is truly for the sake of Heaven is discussed by R' Yonason Eibschutz (d.1764) in his Yaaros Devash (vol. 2, p.135b). R' Yonason  Eibschutz says that the Sages referred to Hillel and Shamai together to give us a sign by which to distinguish between a true machlokes for the sake of Heaven and a machlokes that is not for the sake of Heaven:

אי המחולקים ובעלי ריבוח הם זולת הדבר שחלקו בו ומנגדים זה לזה הם אוהבים גמורים בלב ונפש זהו אות שמחלוקחם לש״ש אבל אם אויבים ונוטרים שנאה זה לזה על ידי מחלוקת זהו שלא לש״ש ויתיצב השטן בתוכם

If the disputants, asides from the specific issue in which they disagree, love each other completely, heart and soul, this is a sign that their machlokes is for the sake of Heaven. However, if they are enemies and hold hatred towards each other, then this is not a machlokes for the sake of Heaven and the soton stands among them.

The disagreements of Hillel and Shamai never impacted upon their love and respect for each other. This is a sign that their disputes were motivated purely for the sake of Heaven. If however, the machlokes leads the disputants to express hatred towards their opponents, as we find by Korach and his congregation, then this is a sign that the machlokes is not for the sake of Heaven.

In general, one of the most reliable ways to know if a machlokes is truly for the sake of Heaven is to look at the methods used by the disputants. By Korach we find that he made use of a wide range of "dirty tricks" to achieve his goals. He engaged in the worst forms of lashon hara and motzi shem ra (libelous gossip and tale-bearing), accusing Moses of being a power-hungry egomaniac and even of immoral behavior (Talmud Sanhedrin 110a - חשדוהו באשת איש). We also find that he made use of leitzanus (mockery) in his attacks on the Torah (such as his mockery of the laws of tzitzis and mezuzah) and of chanufa (flattery) and other forms of bribery in his appeals to the people.

However, in the end, the best advice when faced with a machlokes is, if at all possible, to simply not get involved. As the Talmud states (Chullin 89a):

א"ר אילעא, אין העולם מתקיים אלא בשביל מי שבולם את עצמו בשעת מריבה...

R' Ilaah said, The world survives only for the sake of those who silence themselves at a time of strife...

R' Samson Raphael Hirsch

In Proverbs we read (26:17), מחזיק באזני כלב עבר מתעבר על ריב לא לו - "Like one who grasps the ears of a dog, is one who gets angry over a quarrel that is not his." R' Samson Raphael Hirsch explains (From the Wisdom of Mishlé, ch.11):

Disputes are compared to biting animals. Do not meddle if a quarrel does not concern you. If you mix in, you are (as it were) grasping the ear of a biting animal: it will let go of its previous adversary and direct its attacks at you. (וכן פירש רש"י והגר"א)

This, in essence, was the advice that On ben Peles received from his wife that saved him from being destroyed along with Korach and his congregation. Even though On was initially one of Korach's supporters, as we see in the opening verse of the parsha (16:1), we find that he is not mentioned again. The Talmud  (Sanhedrin 109b) explains:

אמר רב, און בן פלת אשתו הצילתו. אמרה ליה, מאי נפקא לך מינה? אי מר רבה אנת תלמידא, ואי מר רבה אנת תלמידא!

Rav said, On ben Peles was saved by his wife. She said to him, "What are you going to get out of this? If he is the master you will be the disciple, and if he is the master you will be the disciple!"

The Sages praise the advice of On's wife very highly, applying to her the verse from Proverbs (14:1), חכמות נשים בנתה ביתה - "The wisest of women builds her house." Sometimes the greatest wisdom is also the simplest. While On almost certainly believed, at least initially, that he was supporting the right side in the fight, his wife was wiser than he. "This is not your fight! Stay out of it!" With this advice On's wife saved her husband and her family from the fate of Korach and his congregation.

---

Who Achieves Divine Inspiration?

What does a person need to do in order to achieve the highest levels of spirituality? What are the steps one must follow to achieve a genuine connection with God? What were the minimum requirements that had to be achieved by any prophet?

The Gemara (Avodah Zara 20b) tells us a famous beraisa (teaching of the Tannaim) that gives us the basic information:

אמר רבי פינחס בן יאיר: תורה מביאה לידי זהירות, זהירות מביאה לידי זריזות, זריזות מביאה לידי נקיות, נקיות מביאה לידי פרישות, פרישות מביאה לידי טהרה, טהרה מביאה לידי חסידות, חסידות מביאה לידי ענוה, ענוה מביאה לידי יראת חטא, יראת חטא מביאה לידי קדושה, קדושה מביאה לידי רוח הקדש, רוח הקדש מביאה לידי תחית המתים.

Rabbi Pinchas ben Yair said, “Torah leads to Carefulness, Carefulness leads to Diligence, Diligence leads to Cleanliness, Cleanliness leads to Abstinence, Abstinence leads to Purity, Purity leads to Piety, Piety leads to Humility, Humility leads to Fear of Sin, Fear of Sin leads to Holiness, Holiness leads to Ruach HaKodesh (Divine Inspiration), and Ruach HaKodesh leads to the Resurrection of the Dead.”

One of the most popular and influential works of mussar (character development) of all time is the classic Mesillas Yesharim, by Rabbi Moshe Chaim Luzzatto (d.1747). The Messilas Yesharim is based on the beraisa of R’ Pinchas ben Yair. He discusses each of the steps, from זהירות - Carefulness to קדושה - Holiness, in detail.

The following is a description of the essence of each of these traits as explained in Messilas Yesharim. As we study it, it will quickly become clear that very few people achieve more than a few of these steps. Even that is a great accomplishment! This should bring us to appreciate the incredible heights of self-perfection that were achieved by every holy Jew who ever achieved Ruach HaKodesh.

• תורה – Torah: The first step for any achievement of spirituality must be the study of the Torah and the commitment to follow its commandments.
• זהירות – Carefulness:  A person must carefully consider all his actions and habitual behavior to determine if they are proper and conducive to his spiritual growth.
• זריזות – Diligence: Just as זהירות trains us to avoid the negative, זריזות trains us to actively pursue the positive. This trait requires us to overcome our laziness and to strengthen ourselves to serve God.
• נקיות – Cleanliness: A person must work to cleanse his mind and soul of any inclination or desire towards sins and bad middos (character traits). He will then have a perfectly clear mind, capable of pure clarity of thought.

The traits detailed above describe the level of a tzadik, the following traits are towards the higher level of the chassid:

• פרישות – Abstinence: This is the level where one trains oneself to stay away from anything that might lead to spiritual harm, even if the thing itself is permitted. (The Messilas Yesharim emphasizes that this principle can be misused to cause a person to abstain from proper and necessary behavior.)
• טהרה – Purity: This is the perfection of one’s thoughts so that even when one does take pleasure from this world, it is not done for the sake of enjoyment but only for the sake of the good that will result. Similarly, when one does a mitzvah, it should be done purely for the sake of God.
• חסידות – Piety: This is when a person serves God out of love, doing more than is strictly required by law. A person with the trait of חסידות looks at every mitzvah to find its underlying message and works to fulfill God’s desire, not just His command. (The Messilas Yesharim emphasizes here too that this principle requires great care to avoid improper behavior. He devotes an entire chapter to the methods used for determining what is true חסידות and what is not.)
• ענוה – Humility: This is when a person does not attach any importance to himself and does not consider himself deserving of praise or honor.
• יראת חטא - Fear of Sin: This is the trait of one who is constantly concerned that some element of sin may have entered into his actions, thus detracting from the glory of God. Fear of Sin is not fear of punishment, which is a very basic level, which even the simplest Jew must achieve. Fear of Sin derives from a consciousness of the awesome greatness of God, and a constant fear of doing anything in opposition to His greatness.
• קדושה – Holiness: This trait is similar to טהרה, mentioned earlier, but much stronger. In קדושה, a person engages in physical acts, not simply with pure intention, but in a state of complete attachment to God, lifting the physical items he uses to a higher spiritual level. The Messilas Yesharim emphasizes that this trait is one that a person must strive for, but it can only be fully achieved as a gift from God.
• רוח הקדש - Ruach HaKodesh: This is when the Shechina (Divine Presence) rests upon a person and his understanding transcends his human nature.
• תחית המתים - Resurrection of the Dead: It is possible for a person to reach such a high level that, through his perfect union with God, he is granted the power to revive the dead, as did Elijah the Prophet and his student, Elisha.

We must always bear this in mind when we learn about the great holy people of Tanach (the Jewish Scriptures). The first ten traits, enumerated above, are the minimum requirements for achieving Ruach Hakodesh. Every holy prophet in Tanach reached these high levels. As we see, this means that they reached a level of self-control that is almost impossible for us to truly understand. Such a person never just did something by habit, or gave into temptation. On the contrary, every action was carefully measured and used to achieve higher levels of spirituality.

---