Extinguishing the Flames of Strife

“Four people are called evil…including he who involves himself in Machloket.”
- Midrash Bamidbar Rabbah (18:12)

A World of Dispute

In his preeminent commentary to Pirkei Avot, Derech HaChaim, Rabbi Yehudah Loew Zt”l, the famed Maharal of Prague makes a most fascinating observation:

“More than anything else, this world is suited for machloket (eng. dispute), for machloket is the discipline of this world, a place of natural disunion and argument.[1] We may come to understand this notion by pointing out that from the very first day that the world was created, machloket entered it via the argument between Kayin (Cain) and Hevel (Able).”[2]

At first blush, there appears to be a glaring difficulty with the Maharal’s position. If, as the Maharal posits, machloket is built into the very nature and fabric of this world, why did it start only with Kayin and Hevel? Indeed, how did Adam and Chavah, manage to circumvent the inherent spirit of machloket which is bound so tightly to this world? This question is significantly amplified when we recall that Adam felt that “The woman whom You (Hashem) gave to be with me- she gave me of the tree and I ate.”[3] It would seem that Adam, and perhaps rightfully so,[4] felt that Chavah was largely responsible for introducing pain, fear, devastation and suffering into an otherwise perfect world. Can we imagine a more likely platform on which to promote dispute and argument? How, in fact, did Adam and Chavah manage to escape the clutches of this powerful force?

A deeper understanding of the Maharal’s words, however, will yield a powerful strategy which can aid us in extinguishing the destructive flames of machloket that have wreaked havoc on our saintly nation since the beginning of time. Not surprisingly, the answer to this question —like all questions— is found in our holy Torah.

Thus, the Torah records Adam’s poetic reaction to his realizing that Chavah was actually fashioned from one of his sides[5]:

“And Adam said ‘This time it is bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh. This shall be called Woman, because from Man she was taken.”[6]

And what’s more, they were both quite aware of this fact. It was specifically because Adam and Chavah appreciated that they were essentially one entity, and only superficially encased in two physical vessels,[7] that they were able to inhibit what we might correctly assume to be a most natural impetus for machloket in this case.[8]

A Unified Nation

In a similar vain, the Yerushalmi in Mesechet Nedarim[9] records an amusing drasha on the pasuk, “You shall not take revenge and you shall not bear a grudge against the members of your nation; you shall love your fellow as you love yourself.”[10] The Talmud comments:

“’You shall not take revenge and you shall not bear a grudge against the members of your nation.’ To what may this be compared? To a person who is cutting a piece of meat and cuts his hand with the knife; will he then exact revenge by cutting his other hand [the hand that was responsible for the initial blow]? ‘And you shall love your neighbor as you love yourself.’ Rebbe Akiva said, ‘This is the great rule of the Torah.’”

Consider here, that Chazal are teaching us a most valuable principle; albeit manifest in disunified bodies, Bnei Yisrael, at its core, is a single unified entity. It therefore follows that to engage in machloket with another member or segment of Klall Yisrael is to engage in machloket with oneself. [11]

A Machloket Not For the Sake of Heaven

While on the surface, it is obvious how machloket contributes to dismembering the grand body that is Klall Yisrael, there are deeper levels of understanding as well. To enrich our tapestry s bit more let’s examine a celebrated mishna in Mesechet Avot. The Mishna relates:

“Any Dispute which is for the sake of Heaven will be upheld; but one which is not for the sake of Heaven will not be upheld. What is an example of a dispute for the sake of Heaven?—This is the disputes between Hillel and Shamai. And what is a dispute not for the sake of Heaven?—This is the dispute of Korach and his entire company.” [12]

Rav Meir Leibush Malbim Zt”l, the world-renowned author of the Peirush Malbim al HaTorah, makes a keen observation on the precision of the mishna’s wording:

“Seemingly, it would have been more fitting for the mishna to say, ‘This is the Machloket between Korach and Moshe! [For indeed, it was Moshe that Korach had been arguing with and not his own company of men?!] In reality, however, it would seem that Chazal here are teaching us an inevitable truth. When a dispute is initiated for the sake of Heaven, each party from the two opposing sides remain one, in that they share a common goal—to increase the glory of their Father in Heaven. On the other hand, when a dispute is not driven by a thirst for Truth and Kavod Shamayim, and is rather caused by a desire for honor and a bloated sense of self worth, this breeds an air of disunion even amongst the men who gather to stand on one side. Each of them argues on his own behalf and is opposed to his friends reason, for he fights for his own honor and his own glory.[13] This is in fact what we find by Korach and his company. Each man had a different motive to fight against Moshe and Aharon.”[14]

Here in lies a deeper understanding of the selfish evil that is machloket. The Malbim exposes the baseness of this trait, illustrating how it can cause the chains that serve to unite a community to dissolve,[15] leaving the greater community as vulnerable individuals left to fend for themselves.[16], [17]

Korach’s Sons Did Not Die

It is truly unfortunate that, as a nation, we have not yet learnt from the story of Korach and his followers that the fate of those who busy themselves in the machloket is one of failure and destruction. [18] In his Imrei Shefer, Rabbi Shemual Pinchasi, quotes the Ben Ish Chai, Rav Yosef Chaim of Baghdad:

“The Torah says, ‘The sons of Korach did not die.’ What the Torah means by this is that even though Korach himself died, to our great misfortune he left to the world many heirs who, from generation to generation, perpetuate his ways. They are considered his offspring as they are his disciples who follow in his footsteps. Although they all claim to argue for the sake of Heaven, many fall into the pit that Korach dug.” [19]

Rabbah and the Arab: Machloket as a Burning Oven

The gemara (Mesechet Bava Basra 74a) relates that the great sage Rabbah Bar-Chanah was once traveling in the desert when he met an Arab who offered to show him the hole into which Korach had been swallowed. Rabbah agreed and was brought to a secluded area in the desert, where the Arab showed him two large cracks in the ground, smoke billowing from them both. The Arab proceeded to take a clump of wool, dipped it in water, and fastened it to the end of a spear (heb. Romach). He lowered the spear into one of the large cracks in the ground. When he removed it, Rabbah saw that the fire below had scorched the wool. Finally, the Arab asked Rabbah to lower his ear to the ground and relate what he heard. Rabbah answered, “I heard voices crying out ‘Moshe is true, his Torah his true, and they are liars!’”

R’ Yitzchak Shmelkes Zt”l, the revered Av Beis Din of Premishlah and later of Lavov, explains this enigmatic Midrash Aggadah. In his, Beit Yitzchak al HaTorah He writes:

“Rabbah wanted to indicate just how serious the evil of machloet is, for it is like a burning oven. The Arab took wool, which represents Tzitzit (a mitzvah which is itself symbolic of all the mitzvoth in the Torah [20]), and soaked it in water, which is symbolic of Torah[21]. He then stuck the drenched wool on the end of a spear (heb. Romach) alluding to the 248 limbs in the human body, (The numerical value of the word “romach” is 248). This is to say that even when all 248 limbs of a person’s body are steeped in Torah and Mitzvot, this is of no value if he will still engage in machloket. Thus, when the spear was lowered into Korach’s hole it was singed by the fire, demonstrating that even if a person is entirely devoted to Torah and Mitzvot, once he involves himself in the evil discipline of machloket, he will not emerge unscathed.” [22]

Peace Can Save us from Harsh Judgment

But let us not forget that just as machloket has the power to destroy the small amassment of Torah and Mitzvos that we have achieved in our short carriers as servants to Hakadosh Baruch Hu on this earth, abstaining from it has the power to protect us from harsh judgment as well. The Midrash Rabbah[23] quotes Rebbi Yehudah HaNassi Zt”l:

“How great is peace for even if Israel practice idolatry but manage to maintain peace amongst themselves, the Holy One, blessed be He, says, so to speak, ‘I have no dominion over them,’ for it is said, ‘Ephraim is united in idol-worship, leave him alone.’ But when their hearts are divided, what is written? ‘Their heart is divided, now shall they bear their guilt.” From here we learn the greatness of peace and the aversion to discord.” [24]

The power of peace amongst brothers is so effective that even when Klall Yisrael is guilty of committing even the gravest of sins, Hashem, in his infinite mercy overlooks there misdeeds because he is pleased to see his children getting along with one another.[25] As our sages so aptly put it, peace really does “outweigh everything.”[26]

Bitter Feud and the Sweetness of Compromise

In many cases, the best way to douse the flames of dispute is to affect a compromise. Indeed, a story is told about Rabbi Avraham Yitzchak HaKohen Kook’s father, Rabbi Shlomo Zalman Kook Zt”l, who once, while traveling to raise money for the settlement of Eretz Yisrael, arrived in a town were a tremendous dispute had ensued between the gabba’im of a certain Beis HaKnesset and those who davened there. As a noted Torah scholar, Rabbi Kook was asked to make an attempt at reconciling the two sides:

“He agreed immediately, and arose to speak to the congregation. In his address, he mentioned the dispute between Korah and his followers and asked: ‘Why did Aharon’s rod yield almonds and not another type of fruit?[27] The reason is that this hints to the fact that there are two possible conclusions to a machloket. We are told in Mesechet Maaserot that there are two types of almonds[28]—sweet and bitter. The first type starts sweet but turns bitter, while the second type starts bitter but turns sweet. The same is true of arguments and peace. Machloket, like the first almond, is sweet at the beginning, with each person trying to prove his argument, but will soon turn very bitter. Peace, on the other hand, is the exact opposite. At first peace is bitter, because it is so difficult to give in to the other person. In the end, though, after each person does give in and is willing to compromise somewhat for the sake of peace, how good and sweet it is for both sides. His words had the desired effect, and the two sides reached a compromise.

It is clear then, why Hashem specifically chose almonds as the fruit that would blossom on Aharon’s staff; to teach us this surefire way to eliminate the bitter effects of machloket.

How the Shagas Aryeh Died

In his halachic work, HaSefer B’Halacha, a collection of essays regarding the proper treatment of Seforim in normative Jewish law, Rabbi Eliyahu Yochanan Gurari Shlit”a records a most unusual story about the passing of Rav Areyeh Leib Ginsburg Zt”l, the Av Beis Din of Mitz and the author of the Sefer Shagas Aryeh:

One day, in his old age, the Shagas Aryeh needed to look into one of the Sifrei Rishonim to clarify a thought that he had had. He got up from his seat and approached his bookshelf in order to remove the desired sefer. Suddenly, the bookshelf toppled over and all the books, as well as the bookcase itself fell crashing down on top of the elderly Shagas Aryeh. When his students and family heard the crash, they ran into the study only to find the Shagas Aryeh in a doubtful state of life. Buried underneath the seforim, his family could barely hear him sobbing that all of the seforim that he had argued on in his life had fallen upon him in an attempt avenge their names.[29] While underneath the pile, he asked forgiveness from the authors of each the seforim. They were all mochel him, with the exception of Rav Mordechai Yaffi, the author of the Sefer HaLevush. It was thought that as a result of the Levush’s refusal to forgive him, the Shagas Aryeh passed from this world.[30]

The Pnei Yehoshua’s Grandfather

In contradistinction to the tragic story of the passing of the Shagas Aryeh, is the story told of the passing of the Pnei Yehoshua’s grandfather. I once merited to obtain a copy of the out of print biography of the Pnei Yehoshua, Rabbi Yaakov Yehoshua Faulk Zt”l. The small book includes a story about his grandfather, the author of the Sefer Magaeinei Shlomo, who bore the same name as his grandson. (His commentary “Defence of Shlomo” is an attempt to resolve some of the questions asked by the Ba’alei HaTosafot on Rashi’s commentary to the Talmud Bavli.) It is said that on his deathbed in 1648, the Magaeinei Shlomo told everyone surrounding his bed to move out of the way and make room for Rashi, who had come to escort him into Gan Eiden as an honor for defending him against the questions of the Ba’alei HaTosafot on his commentary.[31]

The Unifying Power of Torah

It is well known that Hashem infused His Torah with various deep secrets and energies, many of which we cannot even begin to fathom; however, there are several of the Torah’s forces that we have come to appreciate. Foremost among these powers is the Torah’s capacity to unite the Jewish people as a single nation.[32] The gemara in Mesechet Zevachim relates:

When Hashem gave the Torah to Bnei Yisrael His voice went out from one end of the world to the other. The non-Jewish kings were seized with trembling in their palaces…They all gathered before Bilham HaRasha and asked him ‘What is this great noise, perhaps another flood is coming to the world?’[33] ‘No,’ Bilham answered them. ‘Hashem already promised that a flood would never again be brought to the world…rather it is the precious treasure that Hashem keeps in his storehouse [the Torah which he has revealed to Bnei Yisrael].’”[34]

Rav Meir Shapro of Lublin Zt”l, the world renowned Rosh HaYeshiva of Yeshivat Chachmei Lublin elucidated:

Why did the non-Jewish kings who ran to Bilham immediately suspect that this loud noise was a flood? Why not an earthquake, a stampede, or a tornado? Indeed, what is the significance of their having thought that it was specifically a flood that was immanent?

Rabbi Shapiro goes on to suggest that the nations of the world knew of only one other time in history that people had gathered together in a manner which had mimicked the gathering of the Jews under Har Sinai. In fact, such an expression of unity was seen only one time before this in the history of the world—during the Mabul! Noach and his family—the only people in existence at the time—were huddled together inside Noach’s ark. As we know all too well, it is easy to come together in times of fear and tragedy, and to cling to each other when the world around us is being turned upside down. Thus, the first thought that came to the minds of the non-Jewish kings when they saw the Jewish people united under Har Sinai was, “Perhaps we are again experiencing the type of unity that is coupled with tragedy—like the Mabul?” Bilham, however, who understood the unifying power of Torah assured them that they were mistaken. When the people of Israel study the Torah, it brings peace and unity to the world, and creates an unbreakable bond of brotherhood between them.[35]

A Unity of Brothers

To understand this phenomenon, we must turn to the beautiful words of Rashi found in his peirush al HaTorah. With incredible sweetness Rashi comments on the pasuk “And you should teach it [the Torah] to your sons,”[36] that we are called the children of Hashem because He taught all of us His Torah.[37]

Rabbi Meir Bergman Shlit”a, the son in law of Rav Elazar Menacham Mann Shach Zt”l, and a tremendous Talmid Chacham to boot expands upon Rashi. In his Sefer Sha’arei Orah, Rav Bergman notes:

If it is true that learning Torah is the means through which we can express ourselves as children of the Rabbono Shel Olam, it necessarily follows that this same learning serves to enhance our sense of brotherhood, (for we are all children of the same “Father” who teaches us His Torah). [38], [39]

Being Different Together

Judaism espouses that while we all gravitate toward a common goal—obtaining closeness to the Master of the Universe—there are certainly a host of different roads, routes, paths, avenues and highways, which can facilitate our getting there. Just recognizing this fact can save us from much internal strife.[40] Indeed, Chazal in Mesechet Brachot (58a) teach us, “Just as every person has been endowed with a different face, so has every person been endowed with a different thought process.” Similarly, the gemara in Mesechet Sanhedrin (38a) recounts the greatness of Hashem, in that he is able to make every person different. The gemara tells us, “People are distinguished by three things: Their voice, their face, and their thought process.” It is known that the great tzaddik and holy man, Rabbi Menachem Mendel of Kotzk was wont to say, “Just as the first two are of no bother to you [that people have different faces and different voices], so should the last one be of no bother to you [that people think differently]!”[41]

The closing lines of Mesechet Ta’anis significantly amplify the poignancy of this message. Chazal tell us:

“Rebbe Eliezer said: ‘In the future, Hashem will make a circle for the righteous in Gan Eiden and He will sit in the middle of them. And all of the righteous will point with their fingeres and say, “And they will say on that day, ‘Behold, this is our G-d; we hoped in Him that He would save us. This is Hashem in Whom we have hoped, let us exalt and be glad in His salvation.’”’” [42]

The Maharal in his Be’er HaGolah, expounds upon this gemara in a most incredible way. A circle is defined as a round place whose boundaries consist of points equidistant from the center. Using any spot around the perimeter of the circle as your point of departure, it is always the same distance to the middle of the circle. And so it is with the service of Hashem; although many of us start from different points along the circle’s perimeter, if we have pure intentions, we will merit to point with our finger to the center of the circle and cry out, “This is our G-d…let us exalt and be glad in his salvation.”[43]

Hate the Resha (Evil) Not the Rashah (Evil Person)

Unfortunately, in our times more than ever, there is terrible strife which exists between religious Jews and those who have either not yet found or have been led away from the path to the middle of the circle, a path which is sweeter than even the most pure honey. Rav Yechezkel Levenstein Zt”l, in his ethical work, Or Yechezkel advises:

“A foundation of the service of Hashem is that one should hate the actions of those who do evil, and not G-d forbid, the ‘evil’ people themselves. Every man is so beloved to his Creator[44] that he was created in the image of G-d and it is therefore impossible to hate any person, G-d forbid.” [45]

The gemara in Mesechet Brachos (10a) bears similar sentiments:

“There were these troublemakers in Rebbi Meir’s neighborhood and they caused him considerable distress. Once, Rebbi Meir was praying for mercy regarding them, so that they would die. His wife Beruriah said to him, ‘Why do you pray for their deaths?’ He answered her, ‘The pasuk says “Let the sinners cease from the earth.’” She retorted, ‘But does the pasuk say, “Let Chotim [implying the sinner himself] cease from the earth”? Does it not say, “Let Chota’im [implying the one who causes these people to sin—namely, the Yetzer Harah] cease from the earth”? Therefore you should rather pray for mercy regarding these troublemakers that they should repent.’ Rebbi Meir heeded her advice and prayed for mercy regarding these men, and they in fact repented.”[46], [47]

How crucial is it, in our times more than ever, to draw our brothers in from the cold winter of exile, and share with them the warmth and sweetness of Hashem’s eternal gift— the Holy Torah.[48]

It is Worth the Wait

Rav Mordechai Gifter Zt”l, the late Rosh HaYeshiva of Telshe, has a beautiful explaination of the pasuk, “[Moshe] spoke to Korah and his entire assembly saying, ‘In the morning G-d will make known the one who is His own and the holy among us.’” In his Pirkei Torah, Rav Gifter asks, why did Moshe want to wait until the following morning to settle the issue? What was wrong with settling the argument right away? Chazal tell us, (Bamidbar Rabbah 18:7), that “Moshe thought that Korach and his Eidah were under the influence of food and drink!”[49] Rav Gifter concludes from here that once the ill effects of the food and drink wore off, Korach and his company would drop the argument.[50]

We would do well to contemplate this insight and glean direction from Rav Gifter’s words. Before engaging in machloket, a person might try pausing for a while so that he might hope to arrive at an unbiased, uninfluenced decision about whether or not it is worth arguing in the first place.[51] Sleep on it!

Divrei Bracha

The very last mishna in all of Shas Mishnayot discusses the blessing that Hashem wishes to bestow upon the world. The mishna concludes:

“Rebbe Shimon ben Chalafta said, ‘Hashem found no better vessel for holding blessing that the vessel of peace,’ as the pasuk says, ‘Hashem gives strength to His people, Hashem blesses His people with peace.’”[52]

May we merit to increase the outpouring of blessing in this world by strengthening our resolve to love and pursue peace, so that we may usher in the day when we can finally sing, “This is our G-d; we hoped in Him that He would save us. This is Hashem in Whom we have hoped, let us exalt and be glad in His salvation.”

****************************************

[1] Perhaps the Maharal here refers to the fierce battle which rages between the soul and the body of man. This model is discussed at length in the works of R’ Moshe Chaim Luzzato, Mesillat Yesharim (The Path of the Just) and Derech Hashem (The Way of G-d). See specifically: Mesillat Yesharim (1); Derech Hashem (3:2). Additionally, see Chagiga (16a), where man is compared in three ways to an angel (soul) and in three ways to an animal (body). I once heard from R’ Nathan Lopez Cordozo Shlit”a, that it is for this very reason that the Torah begins with the letter “ב”. Only after the Torah acquaints us with the idea that there are “ב” (two) dichotomous forces that fiercely battle each other in this world can it instruct us how follow the correct of these two paths. See as well, R’ Nachman of Breslav Zt”l’s Lekutei Maharan (Mehadura Kama, [Simin 64:1:4]): “Machlokes is the likeness of the creation of the Universe…”

[2] Derech HaChaim al Pirkei Avot (1:12), D”H (Hillel and Shamai…)

[3] Bereishit (3:12)

[4] See the Yerushalmi Shabbat (2:6), Bereishit Rabbah (17), Zohar (1:263b), Tikunei Zohar (31), amongst other Midrashim, as well as the Hakdama to Maharal’s Netivot Olam which serve to corroborate Adam’s contention that Chavah was responsible for bringing death into the world: “Because Chavah brought death into the world…” It is interesting to note the observation of R’ Chaim Yosef David Azulai (Chidah), in his Moreh Atzavah (Os 140) that Erev Shabbos (the very juncture during which Adam and Chavah ate from the Tree of Knowledge) is a time when machloket is extremely prevalent between husband and wife. [This same phenomenon is also recorded in R’ Chaim Pilagi’s Kaf HaChaim (Simin 27, Os 35)].

[5] See Mesechet Brachot (61a), Eiruvin (18a), and Bereishit Rabbah (8:1) regarding the machloket between Rav and Shmuel about how Chavah was created. Rav posits that Adam originally had two Partzufot (faces) on one body and that Chavah was formed from one of these sides.

[6] Bereishit (2:23)

[7] This idea is captured most beautifully in Gutman Lock’s enigmatic book, There is One, (See specifically, pgs. 15-21) To quote one excerpt, “One life fills all. The one life fills ten fingers equally. The one life enlivens the entire body. The fingers appear to themselves to be separate beings, but this is not true. Separate fingers, yes; separate beings, no.” The Maharal Zt”l (Nesiv HaTzedaka, Chapter 6) asserts that the whole world is one synidated chain: “Now that the creatures are linked with one another because one receives from the other…the world is one.”

[8] We would do well to recount a story (perhaps the most beautiful one I have ever heard) told about the great Tzaddik R’ Aryeh Levine Zt”l, who served for many years as the Rav of the Shaarie Tzedek Medical Center in Jerusalem. Once, when Rabbi Levine’s wife was suffering from severe foot pain, he took her to the doctor to have her foot checked. When the doctor enquired as to the reason for their visit to the hospital Rav Aryeh answered, “Our foot hurts.” The doctor was stunned by Rabbi Levine’s sensitivity toward his wife’s discomfort. Her pain was literally his pain.

[9] Yerushalmi Mesechet Nedarim (9:4)

[10] Vayikra (19:18)

[11] Bearing similar sentiments, the gemara in Yevamot (13b) expounds the pasuk Devarim (14:1), “Lo Titgodidu,” (You shall not cut yourself) as, “Lo Tasu Agudot Agudot,” (Do not create multiple groups!) Again Chazal here make the striking point that when Klall Yisrael do not stick together, they are nothing short of “cutting themselves!” Likewise, the Maharal Zt”l writes that “all of Israel should be like a single person.” (Netivot Olam: Netiv Ahavat Rei’a [Chapter 1], in Derech Chayim, to Mesechet Avot [1:12] ).

[12] Pirkei Avot (5:17)

[13] See R’ Shlomo Wolbe Zt”l’s Alei Shor II (pg. 545) as well as R’ Yaakov Emden Zt”l in his Ya’avros Dvash (Vol 2: D’rush 8), and R’ Yom Tov Lipmin Heller Zt”l’s Tosafot Yom Tov to Avot (5:20), that the litmus test to expose whether a machloket is “for the sake of Heaven,” is to see if any personal gain is involved. For a similar theme, see R’ Herschel Shachter’ Shlit”a’s Nefesh HaRav (pg. 121) D”H Takanas Birkat HaMinim, based on R’ A.Y. Kook Zt”l’s, Olas Reiyah (Chelek #1, p.278). Note Shu”t Nodeh B’Yehudah (Mahadurat Kamma) (Y.D. Sof Simin 1), Chasam Sofer to Parshat Korach, and the Ba’al HaTanya in his Igrot HaKodesh (Letter 32) who all concede that in our times, there is no such thing as a Machloket L’sheim Shamayim.

[14] Peirush Malbim al HaTorah, Bamidbar (16:1). Similarly, see R’ Shmuel Uzidah’Zt”l’s Midrash Shmuel and R’ Chonoch Zundel Zt”l’s Etz Yosef to Avot (5:17).

[15] We might suggest, that to counteract Korach’s act of disunity, Moshe chose to battle Korach and his company specifically by using Ketoret (eng. incense)—see Bamibar (17:1-13). R’ Avraham Yiztchak HaKohen Kook Zt”l, in his Ein Ayah, Chelek 4, (Pg. 213), explains that etymologically, the Hebrew word ‘Ketoret’ is related to the word ‘Kesher,’ which means a ‘bind’ or a ‘knot.’ The power of the incense is to unite the essence of all forces according to the unique recipe that Hashem has prescribed in His Torah.

[16] An elaboration of this idea can be found in the Netziv’s Shu”t Meishiv Davar (Simin 41), where he writes that in Galut, Bnei Yisrael are compared to the dust of the earth, as Hashem says to Yaakov Avinu, “And your children shall be like the dust of the earth,” and the nations of the world are compared to gushing waters, as the pasuk in Yeshayahu says, “The great multitude of nations are like gushing waters.” It is only when the dust of the earth is drawn tightly together, forming a rocklike solid that it can stand steadfast against the tumultuous waters. And so it is with us: when Klall Yisrael unites, we can withstand even the most powerful struggles against the nations of the world. See R’ Ovadiah Seforno Zt”l’s peirush to Bereishit (13:7) regarding the machloket between Avraham and Lot, as well as Malbim’s comments to Shmuel I (11:7), in his Davar Shmuel. Additionally, see R’ Yitzchok ben Moshe of Vienna’s Sefer Or Zarua (I:115), “Peace is great, for it is the vessel that holds all blessing. Dispute is disgraceful, for it destroys people and drives away the Shechinah, without which Klall Yisrael has no protection.”

[17] Similarly, the Midrash Shochar Tov (93a), records the origin of the creation of the seashore. The waters sought to cover the entire world and would have been successful, except that the grains of sand came together to form a barrier against the water. At that moment the angels rejoiced, “Just look at the might of the little things. When they unite, they become a mighty power.”

[18] See the Shelah HaKadosh’s brilliant incite regarding the fact that the letters of word machloket themselves attest to this reality in his Sha’ar HaOseos: Beis/Brei’ot (Simin 12), quoted in R’ Yechiel Mich’el Stern Shlit”a’s Otzer HaYediot, Chelek 2, Perek 35. My father, my teacher, Reb Chaim Yonah ben Reb Ya’akov Weinberg Shlit”a pointed out to me that the word machloket (מחלקת) is actually composed of the letters “חלק” and “מת,” which translates as “He apportions death [to himself],” a clear allusion to the destructive power of machloket.

[19] Sefer Imrei Shefer al Pirkei Avot (5:17), pg. 74.

[20] In fact, the Sifrei to Bamidbar (15:39) states, “‘And you will see it and remember all of the mitzvot of Hashem.’ From here we see that one who fulfills the mitzvah of tzitzit, is considered as if he had fulfilled all the mitzvot of the Torah.”

[21] See Yeshaya (55:1), Taanis (7a), Bava Kamma (17a, & 82a), Avodah Zara (5b), Rambam Talmud Torah (3:9), Devarim (32:2), Amos (8:11), where Torah is compared to water.

[22] Beit Yitzchak al HaTorah: Parshat Korach (Ma’amer 154).

[23] Bereishit Rabbah (38:6). See, Yerushalmi Pe’ah (1:1), Vayikra Rabbah (26:2), Bamidbar Rabbah (19:2), Devarim Rabbah (5:10), Tanchuma Chukas (4), Midrash Tehillim [Shochar Tov] (7), (12) and Yalkut Melachim (remez 213) regarding the generation of Achav. Similarly, see Yerushalmi Chagiga (1:7) regarding the generations of Enosh, Dor HaMidbar, and Micha.

[24] R’ Shlomo Ephraim, in his Peirush Kli Yakar al Hatorah (Bereishit 1:11, D”H Eitz Pri Oseh Pri L’mino) makes a fascinating observation that may help to elucidate this Midrash. He writes: “Rashi on this pasuk tells us that when Hashem commanded the ground to produce fruit trees (trees whose bark would taste like the edible fruit), the ground disobeyed and brought up fruit bearing trees instead. As a punishment for defying Hashem’s command, when Adam HaRishon was punished for eating from the Eitz HaDaas, the ground was cursed along with him; instead of growing only fruits and vegetables, it would now bring up thorns and thistles as well.” The Kli Yakar points out that it is certainly strange that Hashem waited until Adam sinned to exact punishment on the ground. He suggests that Hashem, in a display of magnificent justice, would not allow the punishment of ground to cause pain to Adam HaRishon until he (Adam) himself deserved this pain. Therefore, until Adam ate from the Eitz HaDa’as, the ground was spared from punishment on Adam’s behalf. Perhaps now we can better understand the Midrash above. By connecting ourselves to community, even if we ourselves are less than perfect, Hashem will refrain from punishing us as individuals, so as not to cause pain to those members of Klall Yisrael that are not deserving of punishment. For several possible parallels, see Rashi to Bamidbar (14:9) D”H Sar Tzilum, the Seforno al HaTorah to Bereishit (6:13) D”H Ki [Unlike Rav Cooperman’s reading of Seforno (ibid.)], and Targum Yonatan to Bereishit (19:29). Additionally, see R’ Alexander Zusia Friedman Zt”l’s Ma’ayana Shel Torah to Bamidbar (20:23-24). Lastly, if one were to count all of the words of Tochacha in Sefer Devarim, he would arrive at the number 676. Perhaps, we can suggest, that it is not arbitrary that the number 676 is, in fact, the numerical equivalent to the word “רעות,” which means “friendship.” This speaks to the notion that there are times when one’s friendships are effective in driving away these 676 curses.

[25] A striking Midrash in the Tana D’Bei Eliyahu (Perek 28) relates that Hashem calls to us, “I have an infinite storehouse of bracha that I wish to pour down on you. All I ask is that you love, and respect one another.” Apparently, included in this bracha is Hashem’s willingness to forgive us for any actions that might be—shall be say—less than perfect. See the sefer Minhag Yisrael Torah (Simin 149:5) on page 264, for an amazing teaching from R’ Shalom of Belz Zt”l about the tefillah, “Acheinu Kol Beis Yisrael.”

[26] Sifra, (Parshat Bechukotai, #1). See as well, Rashi’s commentary to Vayikra (26:6).

[27] Bamidbar (17:6-26) describes how Bnei Yisrael complained against Moshe and Aharon for having killed Korach and his company. To prove Aharon’s righteousness, Hashem instructed that the princes of each tribe write there name on a wooden staff, (Aharon would represent the tribe of Levi). Hashem told Moshe to tell the people that ‘the one whose staff buds tomorrow is the chosen of G-d.” The next morning. Aharon’s staff was the only one to bud.

[28] See Mesechet Ma’aserot (1:4) and Chullin (25b) where Chazal talk about the status of the obligation or exemption of these nuts depending on whether or not they are in their natural state, (e.g. when bitter almonds are sweet, they are exempt from ma’aserot)

[29] We note that the Shagas Aryeh was a tremendous Gadol B’Torah and certainly was engaged in machloket only for the sake of Heaven. Nonetheless, this story should arouse us to realize the extreme potency of machloket. Nonetheless, see R’ Eliyahu Ragoler’s Shu”t Yad Eliyahu (2:25) regarding the danger inherent in disputes even “for the sake of Heaven.” See, for example, R’ Baruch HaLevi Epstein’s Mekor Baruch (Vol. 4, Perek 37 [Bein Kodesh L’Kodesh] Pgs. 1693-1699) regarding the machloket which erupted in Volozhin because of the unique learning styles of the Netziv and Rav Yosef Dov Ber Soloveitchik. Likewise, see R’ Herschel Shachter Shlit”a’s M’Pninei HaRav, (pg. 65), D”H Machloket.

[30] HaSefer B’Halacha (pg. 120) quoting from the book, The Shagas Aryeh: His Life and his Torah (Chelek 1, pg. 12).

[31] For a fascinating insight into Chazal’s attitude regarding proper etiquette when presenting a dissenting opinion, see Mesechet Horayot (2a) with Tosafot (ibid.) D”H Amar Abayei.

[32] See R’ Sadia Gaon Zt”l’s, Emunos V’daos, (Perek 6) and the insight of the sefer Panim Yafos on the pasuk: “Torah tzivah lanu Moshe, morasha ke’hilat Ya’akov” (Devarim, 33:4). For an interesting spin off of this idea, see R’ Mordechai Rogov Zt”l’s Ateres Mordechai to Shemos (19:2), that Har Sinai actually created the need for national unity.

[33] This is a reference to the flood that wiped away all but a handful of people during the time of the righteous Noach.

[34] Mesechet Zevachim (116a)

[35] See, however, R’ Yizchak of Karlin Zt”l’s explaination of this gemara in his Sefer Keren Orah al HaShas (ibid).

[36] Devarim (6:7)

[37] The comparison of a Rebbe/Teacher to a parent has its sources in the Mishna in Bava Metziah 2:11 (33a), and is recorded by Rambam: Hilchot Talmud Torah (5:1). See also Sanhedrin (19b) quoted in Rashi Bamidbar (3:1) regarding the pasuk ‘These are the descendants of Aharon and Moshe...’.

[38] Sha’arei Orah: Chelek 1, Parshat Vayishlach- “All of Bnei Yisrael are Brothers,” pg. 46. See also, the Maharal’s Netzach Yisrael, Perek (38) and Rabbenu Bachya’s Kad HaKemach: Sinat Chinam.

[39] Note Chazal’s comments in Pirkei D’Rebbe Eliezer (Chapter 41) and Yalkut Shimoni (Parshat Yisro: Remez 273) that until Matan Torah, Bnei Yisrael traveled with machloket, but after they received the Torah they became a unified nation. Similarly, see the end of Rambam to Hilchot Chanuka that “Torah was given to make peace in the world.” Additionally, see Maharal Zt”l’s Derech Chaim (1:6, and 1:12), R’ Yisrael of Koznitz Zt”l’s Avodat Yisrael, Parshat Noach (D”H Eilah Toldot Noach), R’ Yehudah Leib Alter Zt”l’s Sefat Emet al HaTorah, Parshat Korach (5656) as well as R’ Meir Simcha HaKohen of D’vinsk Zt”l’s Meshech Chochoma, Devarim (4:29), regarding the notion that the unity of Klal Yisrael is a natural outgrowth of our service of Hashem. Perhaps it is for this reason that Chazal tell us that “The Torah was only created for peace.” [See Mesechet Gitten (59b), based on Mishlei (3:17), as well as the Midrah Tanchuma, (Tzav #3), and in Rambam’s Mishna Torah, Hilchot Megillah U’Chanuka, (4:14).]

[40] In fact, R’ Naftali Tzvi Yehudah Berlin Zt”l, in the Hakdama of his HaEmek Davar on Sefer Bereishit writes that the sinat chinam that eventually led to the destruction of the second beis hamikdash began with otherwise righteous individuals who suspected each other to be of being Tzedukim and Kofrim, simply because their personal path toward Yirat Shamayim was different than one another. See also, Dr. Carl Gustav Jung’s essay entitled Psychological Types (1921), which discusses the importance of understanding different peoples thought processes. Incidentally, Dr. Jung, nearing his death, admitted that nearly all of his advances in psychology were preempted by Rabbi Dov Ber, the Maggid of Mezritch Zt”l (1704-1772) [See C.G. Jung Speaking, pgs. 271-272].

[41] See the Midrash Tanchuma, Pinchas (10), and Sefer Chafetz Chaim al HaTorah: Parshat Re’eh (pg.256) that someone once came to the Chafetz Chaim, R’ Yisrael Meir Kagen Zt”l, and asked him, “Why did Hashem create so many different types of Jews? Would it not have been more beneficial to create Jews all the same?” The Chafetz Chaim kindly replied to the man that he should rather ask of the king why his army consists of foot soldiers, cavalry, navy, etc. Precisely, just as the army of a flesh and blood king consists of many types of soldiers, and would be very unsuccessful were it not so, so it is with Hashem’s army; were there not a number of types of Jews, each who focus on a different area of Avodat Hashem, we couldn’t possible get around to fixing the multitude of broken vessels in this world. Similarly, see R’ Shimshon Raphael Hirsch Zt”l’s peirush to Bereishit (33:11), as well as the Maharal in his Chidushei Aggadot to Kiddushin (70b), and R’ Yaakov Meir Shechter Shlit”a’s Leket Amarim Vol. 1 (pg. 144), D”H Ikvita D’Meshicha. Likewise see the brilliant essay by R’ Menachem Mendel of Lubavitch Zt”l printed in Likkutei Sichot Vol. 8, (Pgs. 114-119) and in the adapted work Torah Studies by R’ Jonathon Sacks Shlit”a, Parshat Korach (Pgs. 246-251).

[42] Ta’anis (31a), Yishayah (25:9).

[43] Maharal, (Be’er HaGolah: Be’er #4) as explained by R’ Eliyahu Dessler Zt”l in his Michtav M’Eliyahu, Volume 4 (pgs. 149-150). Likewise, see the Rebbe, R’ Tzvi Elimelech of Diniv Zt”l’s Bnei Yissaschar: Maamarei Chodesh Tamuz and Av Maamar #4.

[44] As the great Ba’al Shem HaKadosh Zt”l said, “Would that I could have as great a love for the most righteous person as G-d has for the biggest sinner.” Likewise, see the sefer Tomer Devorah by R’ Moshe Kordavero Zt”l (Beiur middat “Asher Nishbata L’Avoteinu”): “There are certain people who act with complete impropriety, and yet Hashem has mercy on them…”

[45] Or Yechezkel (Sefer Middot, pg. 12). We should however note that there are extreme circumstances in which dispute becomes praiseworthy. The R’ Yisrael Meir Kagen Zt”l in his Bieur Halacha (O. Ch. 1) rules, “If a person finds himself in a place of heretics who act in a hostile manner toward the Torah and wish to enact laws to turn people away from the will of Hashem, and his attempts to make peace with them were rebuffed, it is a mitzvah to hate them and quarrel with them. This is as Dovid HaMelech wrote, ‘With those [and only those] who rise against you I will quarrel (Tehillim 139:22).’”

[46] Interestingly, R’ Shmuel Eliezer HaLevi Eidels Zt”l, the Maharsha (ibid.), explains that the only reason that Rebbe Meir’s request that these troublemakers do teshuvah was answered, is that he included himself in the prayer- he asked that he himself do teshuvah for his original request. We see from here that even the great R’ Meir had to do teshuvah for not appreciating that even these troublemakers were the beloved creations Hashem.

[47] See Mesechet Ta’anis (23b) for a similar episode.

[48] See the comments of the Shelah HaKadosh to Mishlei (9:8), “Do not rebuke the foolish man lest he come to hate you; rebuke the wise man so that he may come to love you,” where he explains the pasuk as an instruction to refrain from rebuking someone as if he were a fool and rather to rebuke him as though he were a wise man. In other words, instead of saying, “You simpleton, why do you insist on sinning?” one should rather say, “My wise friend, you are too good for this type of behavior; you are too holy to involve yourself in these actions.” In this way, he will draw his friend after his Creator. In fact, in Sefer Koheles (9:17), Shlomo HaMelech himself says, “The words of the wise, spoken gently, are heard.” See as well, Hoshe’a (2:1), and Seferno’s comments to Bereishit (5:22) with footnote #15 by R’ Yehudah Cooperman Shlit”a. Likewise, see R’ Nachman of Breslav Zt”l’s Likutey Moharan I:34 and I:282, as well as R’ Avraham Yitzchak HaKohen Kook Z”tl’s Igrot HaRayah, Volume I: Letter 138.

[49] R’ Gifter Zt”l tackles this issue at length: How can food and drink, which are physical entities, affect a desire for honor, which is purely intellectual? He writes that if man doesn’t control his desires, he becomes a slave to them, in all matters both physical and intellectual alike! A lengthy discussion of this topic is beyond the scope of this article.

[50] We find a similar incident recorded in the Midrash Ha’Morah to Parshat Bereishit: “A certain Apikores (non-believer) once asked Rebbe Akiva, ‘Who created the world?’ ‘Hashem,’ replied Rebbe Akiva. ‘Prove it,’ demanded the Apikores. ‘Rebbe Akiva’s only answer was, ‘Come back tomorrow and I will tell you.’ Only when the man returned the next day did Rebbe explain to him, ‘Just as a house was obviously built by a builder, and a garment sewn by a tailor, so was the world (which follows a natural order) obviously created by a Creator!’” The question remains, why didn’t Rebbe Akiva answer the Apikores right away? Did he not have the answer handy, chas v’shalom? Rather, Rebbe Akiva understood that it was futile to answer the man until he was certain that the man was actually looking for an answer, and not merely trying to start trouble.

[51] See as well the Mishna in the very beginning of Mesechet Ketubot (2a) w/ Rashi (ibid.), D”H B’Sheini U’Vachamishi.

[52] See the holy R’ Pinchas Koritzer Zt”l’s explanation of this mishna Imrei Pinchas: Sha’ar Te’haros HaMiddos (#36), pg. 411: “For a vessel to hold something, all the walls of the vessel need to be equal…”

Teshuva: Perspectives on the Art of Return

“אם אתה מאמין שיכולים לקלקל תאמין שיכולים לתקן”
“If you believe that you can break; believe that you can fix”
- Rebbe Nachman of Breslav

Introductory Remarks

This composition was written Liluy Nishmas little Noach Yitzchak ben Moshe Berel whose mere smile could melt 1000 hearts of stone. May his soul be elevated to the highest heights.

Few people, if any, have been able to recreate the semblance of poetic grandeur expressed by Rav Avraham Yitzchak HaKohen Kook Zt”l, when he penned his thoughts on the topic of Teshuva, repentance. In the forward to what many would consider his magnum opus, Orot HaTeshuva, HaRav Kook speaks breathtakingly about the cosmic passions and fears that literally seized him as he prepared to speak about this most exalted topic. It is with great humility that I profess, on my own small level, to share these sentiments:

“For sometime now, I have been fighting an inner battle. A powerful force is compelling me to speak on the subject of teshuva. My attention is concentrated on only this…And while my inner essence compels me to speak about teshuva, I am yet taken aback by my own thoughts. Am I worthy enough to speak about teshuva? The loftiest souls of the past wrote about teshuva; the prophets, the holy Sages, and the greatest masters of piety. How can I venture to join their ranks? However, no shortcoming in the world can discourage me from fulfilling my inner demand.”[1]

Teshuva: the Foundation of the World

Even before Hashem created light or darkness, heaven or earth, water, dry land, fruits, vegetables, birds, fish, animals or even Man himself, He created the potential for teshuva. The gemara in Mesechet Pesachim relates:

“Seven things were created before the conception of the world. They are: Torah, Teshuva, Gan Eden, Gehenim, the Kissei HaKavod, the Beit Hamikdash, and the name of Moshiach”[2]

A perfunctory understanding and thus blind acceptance of this enigmatic gemara simply will not suffice; fortunately, the key understanding this complex ma’amar chazal was long ago fashioned by the great 13th century sage Rabbenu Bachya ben Asher Zt”l. In his philosophical work, Kad HaKemach, Rav Bachya writes:

“One of the great kindnesses that Hashem has bestowed upon us is that He created the concept of teshuva. Even before He created the world, it was revealed and known before Him that man would eventually sin, and He therefore placed the cure (teshuva) before the disease(creation).”[3], [4]

In fact, the Torah testifies that “There is no righteous person on earth who does not sin.”[5], [6] After considering the fact that (at one time or another) everybody falls short of spiritual excellence, we must neither under employ nor under appreciate the gift that Hashem has bestowed upon us by creating a means for us to return to Him. That said, it is essential that we articulate our ambitions not in terms of attaining perfection—which would be unfeasible in this world[7]—but rather in terms of striving toward that objective.[8] Indeed, as Shlomo HaMelech teaches in Sefer Mishle, “Seven times does a righteous man fall, yet he rises again, but the wicked stumble in evil”[9]; falling down, shaking off the dust, and returning to your feet are integral steps in the road to becoming a tzaddik. All the while, it is our Father in Heaven, fully cognizant of our limitations, Who waits for our return with open arms.

Ostensibly, it is this markedly significant point that the Rambam appears to have buried beneath the myriads of Halachot that scatter the pages of his Hilchot Beit HaBechira. In a somewhat uncharacteristic historical interlude, the Rambam writes:

“It is an accepted tradition that the place where Dovid and Shlomo built the altar [on the threshing floor of Aravna Ha’Yevuti] is the same place where Avraham built an altar and bound Yitzchak to it. It is also the place where Noach built [an altar] when he left the ark, and it is the location of the altar upon which Kayin and Hevel sacrificed [korbanot].[10] On it Adam offered a sacrifice when he was created, and from there he was created, as our Sages said, "Adam was created from the place of his atonement.”[11]

Consider well, that the Rambam here is making a most keen point; namely, that the reality offset by the fact that Hashem created Adam as a human being and not as an angel, is one where sin would be conceivably extant. Anticipating that Man might be incited to sin, Hakadosh Baruch Hu deliberately fashioned and animated Adam out of earth collected from the site of the holy alter, the very location where Adam could return to his former state of excellence, and experience rebirth.[12]

Armed with this understanding, we may perhaps begin to elucidate a cryptic comment made by the Maharsha, Rav Shmuel Eliezer HaLevi Eidels Zt”l, in his running commentary to Mesechet Rosh Hashana (17b). The gemara submits:

“Hashem passed over [Moshe’s] face and He called out.” Rav Yochanan said, if the pasuk didn’t say so itself, it would be impossible to say; but from here we learn that Hashem wrapped himself like a Shliach Tzibur and showed Moshe the order of the prayer [known as the 13 attributes of mercy]. He said to him, any time that Bnei Yisrael sin, recite this prayer in front of me and I will pardon them.”

The Maharsha comments:

“And in an old book of wisdom from the mystics I found, ‘Hashem garbed himself in the very same white Tallis that he wrapped himself in at the creation of the world.’”

What might otherwise ring esoteric now smacks of conventionality; it would appear most conceivable that if Hashem wanted to present the formula for teshuva to the world, he would do so wearing, k’viyachol, the same cloths that he wore while He was creating that same world. This merely serves to bolster everything we have said until now; it was the act of creation itself that served as the impetus for teshuva.

Teshuva: the Great Constant

The art of return is a funny thing; it takes only a moment to begin, but a lifetime to perfect.[13] Indeed, it is quite likely that this exact point served as the inspiration for Rav Yisrael Lipkin of Salant Zt”l when he coined the following witticism:

“Most people begin to do teshuva during the week of selichot preceding Rosh HaShanah; the more righteous begin at the beginning of the month of Elul preceding Rosh HaShanah; but I say that one should begin to do teshuva immediately after Yom Kippur has ended.” [14]

Indeed, Teshuva is a constant endeavor, which must be practicedמראשית השנה ועד אחרית שנה—from the commencement of the year until its end. [15]

A fascinating appeal included in the Tzavah (Last Will and Testament) of the great, Rebbe Yehudah HaChassid Zt”l may help us to add a bit more nuance to this slightly inaccessible abstraction:

“Item #39: It is essential that a man not shine his shoes on the day that he sets out on a journey.”

To expand our understanding of this strange request, let us turn to the commentary of R’ Avraham Yaakov Finkle Shlit”a, which he appended to his translation of the Tzavah. Rav Finkle expounds:

“Perhaps he [Rebbe Yehudah HaChassid] intended to alert each and every person to prepare himself and repent [exemplified by the cleaning of one’s shoes] well before he sets out on his ultimate ‘journey,’ and not wait for the last moment. [This follows what] the Mishna says: ‘Rebbe Eliezer said, “Repent one day before your death.”[16] His disciples asked, “Does a person know on what day he will die?” Rebbe Eliezer said to them, “All the more so should he repent today, lest he die tomorrow. All of one's days should be spent in Teshuvah.”’”[17]

Perhaps our classification of teshuva as an omnipresent obligation can inspire a more profound understanding of a most perplexing gemara in Mesechet Berachot regarding the status of Ba’alei Teshuva. The gemara insists:

“Rebbe Avahu said, ‘[In the World to Come], even the completely righteous cannot stand where the Ba’alei Teshuva stand,’ as the pasuk says, ‘Peace, peace, unto the far and the near.’ First the pasuk says to the far (those who were spiritually far) and only then does the pasuk include the near (the righteous).”[18]

Indeed, how are we to understand this gemara? Is it really feasible that a person who has reached many exalted levels of righteousness should be surpassed by a meager Ba’al Teshuva? We may suggest, however, that since teshuva at its very core is a constant attempt at improving ones relationship with the Master of the Universe, the spiritual composition of its adherents is even more refined than that of a person who has not experienced this devoted striving. [19], [20]

The Will to Believe

I do confess, however, that while it is one thing to philosophize about what precisely constitutes teshuva, or how exactly one achieves this exalted state—we’ll leave that to the professionals—it is an entirely different matter to believe in its efficacy. Indeed, even the now dissipated generations of our nation’s past, found it justifiably[21] challenging to harness their faith in the potency of teshuva. For instance, near the end of Sefer Yechezkel, Hakadosh Baruch Hu relates the following catechetical message to his beloved prophet:

“Tell Bnei Yisrael that ‘Although you [Bnei Yisrael] have said: “Our rebellious acts and our sins have caught up with us, and we are wasting away because of them. How can we live?”’ Say to them, ‘Hashem declares, “As surely as I live, I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but prefer that the wicked change their behavior and live. Turn back, turn back from your evil deeds!”’” [22]

In his peirush to Sefer Yechezkel, Rashi acts as if a pair of reading spectacles aiding our presbyopic mind’s eye to glean the proper intention of these truly illuminating pesukim. Rashi comments:

Hashem instructed Yechezkel, “Tell them that I know that they do not want to return because they think that Teshuva will not help them; [but, they are wrong.]”[23]

Unfortunately, this type of expressed hopelessness is not unique to the times of the nevi’im. During the days of our sages as well, there were those who despaired of the potential to do teshuva. One such example of this despondency was displayed by the foremost masmid turned maskil, Rabbi Elisha Ben Avuya, (later to be dubbed “Acher” which means “the other one”) who left the fold around the 2nd century. The gemara (Chagigah 15a) credits Acher's persistence in maintaining his new found, yet self destructive modus vivendi to his misgivings about the כח of teshuva. The gemara records the following heartrending account:

“Acher rhetorically asked [his student] Rebbe Meir, ‘What is the meaning of the
pasuk (Iyov 28:17), “Neither gold nor crystal can be compared with it, nor can a vessel of pure gold match its worth”?’ He explained, ‘This pasuk refers to words of Torah which are as difficult to acquire as gold, and as easy to lose as glass.’ Rebbe Meir responded, ‘Our teacher Rebbe Akiva did not interpret this pasuk like that; rather, “just as broken vessels of gold and broken glass may be mended, likewise a talmid chacham who has sinned may be mended.”’ [24] Rebbe Meir concluded, ‘Please, mend yourself as well.’ Acher answered him, but I have already heard them call out from behind the Heavenly partition, “Return, O wayward children…except for Acher.”’”

In his seminal work, Agra D’pirka, Reb Tzvi Elimelech Shapira of Dinov Zt”l, more commonly known as the Bnei Yisaschar, notes that Acher did in fact hear a Heavenly voice seemingly barring him from doing teshuva. Nonetheless, however, he was expected to rise above doubt, ignore this “divine decree,” and execute an unabridged, full on return to Hashem.[25]

While this answer does evoke some degree of appreciation for those who have risen to the occasion in realizing the strength of teshuva, it does little to pacify the strange, yet incessant feelings of sympathy that one cannot help but feel for the rebellious Acher. After all, how could he possibly have known to ignore this divine calling? A curious gemara in Mesechet Pesachim affords an exceptional answer to this question and a complementary lesson in etiquette to boot:

“Rav Huna the son of Rav Nasan said, ’Everything your host [בעל הבית] tells you to do, you must do, except leave [חוץ מצא].’” [26]

A humorous gemara no doubt; but what does this have to do with Acher and his divine decree? Rav Meir Simcha of Dvinsk Zt”l, the author of the sefer Meshech Chochma, had this to say:

The gemara means to instruct us to listen to everything that Hashem [the בעל הבית] tells us to do. There is only one exception to this rule: if we feel like we are being pushed away from doing teshuva [צא], as did Acher, we must not listen; rather, we must learn to defy this inner voice, and return to Hashem nonetheless.[27]

The Talmud Yerushalmi (Ma’akot 2:6) offers this unique perspective as well:

“[Chazal] asked Wisdom [i.e. one of the books of כתובים], ‘What is the punishment for one who sinned?’ Wisdom answered, ‘Let evil trample the sinner’ (Mishlei 13:21). They asked Prophecy [i.e. one of the books of נביאים], ‘What is the punishment for one who sinned?’ Prophecy answered, ‘The soul that sins shall perish’ (Yechezkel 18:4)…They asked Hashem, Blessed be He, ‘What is the punishment for one who sinned?’ He said, ‘Let him do teshuva and he will be forgiven.’” [28]

Consider well this most exalted lesson; even though the highest forms of human understanding (Prophecy and Wisdom) whisper in our impressionable ears, “Teshuva cannot help you”, we must have faith in Hashem’s word.

Those who are little of Faith

And now, to help us expand our tapestry a bit further, let’s examine an intriguing gemara in the seventh perek of Mesechet Sotah. The gemara relates:

Rav Yochanan said in the name of Rebbe Shimon Bar Yochai: To what end did the Anshei Kneset HaGedolah [Men of the Great Assembly] establish silent prayer? So that those who have sinned may admit their transgressions without being ashamed[29] [in front of others].[30]

Rav Yissachar Ber Elenberg, the author of the sefer Be’er Sheva (and a possible relative of mine) was troubled by the following question:

“It is very difficult for me to understand…how the gemara can attribute the establishment of silent prayer to chazal’s sensitivity toward the shame of those who have sinned, when the gemara in Brachot (24b) details: ‘Anyone who raises his voice in prayer is considered little of faith,’ implying that, irrespective of our sensitivity towards sinners, there is some prohibition to raise one’s voice in prayer…V’tzaruch Iyun (And this needs further consideration)?[31]

I would like to suggest a possible reconciliation for the Be’er Sheva’s question; however, this will need a word or two of introduction.

As it turns out, there are several other places in ש"ס where the term “מקטני אמונה” is used to describe those who are, so to speak, “little of faith.” One classic example of this formulation is found in the last perek of Mesechet Pesachim (118b):

“Rav Huna said, ‘The generation of Jews who left Egypt were מקטני אמונה.’ This is in accordance with Rabbah bar Mari’s explanation of the pasuk [Tehillim 106:7], ‘“And they rebelled on the banks of the Red Sea;” This teaches us that they rebelled and said, “Just as we entered the sea and came out, so shall the Egyptians enter the sea and come out.”’”

But something remains aloof here; after all, does this gemara not speak of the דור דעה– the generation that was redeemed from Mitzrayim and went on to receive the Torah at Har Sinai–about whom the midrash declares, “Even the most simple maidservant was able to see that which the prophets did not see”?[32] Indeed, does the gemara really mean to suggest that the members of such a distinguished generation, who witnessed the revealed hand of Hakadosh Baruch Hu through ten mystifying plagues, doubted the existence of their Creator, chas v’shalom?

And so, it is this very question that R’ Yitzchak Blazer, the renowned disciple of R’ Yisrael Lipkin of Salant, addresses in his preeminent work, Koch’vei Ohr:

“It is clear that R’ Huna, in the above cited midrash, did not come to speak disparagingly about this exalted generation; rather, מקטני אמונה here means, that they were complete in their אמונה, lacking only one minor detail. [In other words, if the word אמונה implies one-hundred percent participation, מקטני אמונה implies a slightly imperfect level of faith].”

HaRav Blazer goes on to explain that the אמונה which Bnei Yisrael lacked was true faith in the efficacy of teshuva, a force which is beyond the realm of our human comprehension. “How could it be,” they wondered, “that just days ago we were worshiping idols, and now we are a separate and holy people?”[33]

Using this new definition from the term “מקטני אמונה,” we are now prepared to answer the Be’er Sheva’s question, and to resolve the seemingly contradictory opinions recorded in Mesechtot Brachot and Sotah, regarding the impetus for the establishment of silent prayer. Essentially, we would like to suggest that the true reason for the establishment of silent prayer is one recorded in Mesechet Sotah: “So that those who have sinned may admit their transgressions without being ashamed [in front of others],” and that the gemara’s assertion in Mesechet Brachot that one who prays out loud is deemed “מקטני אמונה,” is merely a consequence of rationale given in Mesechet Sotah.

In other words, since silent prayer was established so that those who have sinned may admit their transgressions without being ashamed, it follows that one who does not take advantage of this opportunity must be “little of faith,” in that he does not believe that teshuva is effective. For if he truly believed in the strength of teshuva, he would surely be davening silently, admitting his transgressions before his merciful Father.

To be continued………………

*************************************

[1] Rav Kook’s words here are reminiscent of an anecdote recounted by R’ Teitelbaum to R’ Shalom Schwadron, who in turn related it to R’ Shlomo Price, who taught it to this author. One year at the Great Assembly of the Agudat Yisroel, the Chafetz Chaim spoke at length about the importance of spreading the light of Torah to the far reaches of the earth. After completing his speech, the Chafetz Chaim noticed the reluctance of his esteemed audience, who, in their great humility, had disqualified themselves from this most vital undertaking on account of the Rabbinic dictum (Bava Batra 60b) “First adorn (perfect) yourself, then adorn others.” “Who are we,” they said with complete sincerity, “to carry the message of the pure and holy Torah?” Realizing the problem, the Chafetz Chaim quickly returned to the podium to address the disheartened audience. “A nobleman once came to visit his manor,” he began again by way of a parable. “His subjects prepared an impressive reception for him at which they served some of finest tea in all of the land. However, because the water supply in the manor was not clean, the tea was quite muddy. After just one sip of the brew, the nobleman spit out the tea and promptly proclaimed that ‘No water from the manor is to be used without first sterilizing it through boiling!’ A short while later the nobleman heard that his manor had burnt to the ground. When he inquired as to why the subjects had been negligent in putting out the fire, they told him that although they had tried, the new law required that they cook the water before using it. ‘By the time we finally prepared the water,’ said the subjects, ‘the fire had already consumed the entire manor.’ The furious nobleman screamed at his subjects, ‘You fools! When you want to serve tea, then you need to sterilize the water first, but when there is a fire burning, you must not be particular as to what kind of water to use; you must use any kind of water you can find!’” So too, explained the Chafetz Chaim, when a fire is burning in the world, we cannot afford to be picky about who takes on the responsibility to spreads the light of Torah, no matter how unfit he may be for the task. It is with this in mind that we humbly present this essay.

[2] Mesechet Pesachim (54a); Similarly, see Bereishit Rabbah (1:4), Midrash Tehillim [Shochar Tov] (90:12), and the Zohar (I:134b): “Great is teshuva for it preceded the creation of the world…”, as well as Rabbi Avraham Yitzchak HaKohen Kook Zt”l in Orot HaTeshuva (5:6): “Teshuva preceded the world and is therefore the foundation of the world. The fulfillment of life occurs specifically through the unfolding revelation of its essential nature.” Additionally, see R’ Meir Ben Yitzchak Zt”l’s liturgical poem, Selichah #61, recited on day 3rd day of the Aseret Y’mei Teshuva. The Zohar Chadash (65a) goes so far as to say that the world itself was metaphysically formed out of teshuva. Lastly, see R’ Shalom Rokeach, the Sar Shalom of Belz Zt”l’s Torah U’Moadim (Parshat Bereishit D”H Od #1) [collected by R’ Yisroel Yaakov Klapholtz], for a fascinating observation about the connection between the beginning of the Torah and its end.

[3] Kad HaKemach, Os Tuf/Teshuva. Similarly, see R’ Yaakov Moelin (Maharil) Zt”l’s Sefer Minhagim: Hilchot Aseret Y’mei Teshuva (9), and the Shelah HaKadosh Mesechet Shevuaot: Perek Torah Ohr (21). Perhaps Rabbenu Bachya here is basing his comments on the Zohar (I: 22a-23b) as paraphrased by Rav Yaakov Culi Zt”l, in his Me’am Loez: Parshat Netzavim: “When Hashem desired to create the world, He asked the Torah for counsel. The Torah replied: ‘Master of the world, if You create man there are times when he will sin...thus, neither the world nor man will be able to endure.’ Therefore, before Hashem created the world, He created teshuva.” Baring similar sentiments, see Mesechet Avodah Zarah (3b), Pirkei D’Rebbe Eliezer (Chapter 11), and Rashi to Bereishit (1:1) D”H Barah Elokim

[4] See Mesechet Megillah (13b) for a discussion of this notion: “Reish Lakish said, ‘Hashem does not strike Bnei Yisrael unless He creates the cure first…’” Additionally, see Yalkut Shemoni, Esther (Remez 1053), and the R’ Shlomo ben Shmuel Zt”l’s Selichah (#66), recited on the 4th day of the Aseret Y’mei Teshuva. It is fascinating to note the gemara’s archetype for הקדים רפואה למכה, supplying the cure before the disease: “Hashem knew that Haman would expend 10,000 kikar [a unit of weight] in silver shekel in exchange for permission to destroy B’nei Yisrael; therefore, Hashem made sure that our shekel [those donated to aid the construction of the mishkan] preceded Haman's shekels, so that they might serve as a protection for us. “Interestingly, the gemara’s example of הקדים רפואה למכה lends further credence to the already well supported association between Purim and Yom HaKippurim, [seeTikkunei Zohar (86)]. What becomes readily apparent is that both Purim and Yom HaKippurim are celebrations of the fact that Hashem always establishes a רפואה before He strikes us—on Purim, we revel in the fact that Hashem prevented our physical destruction by preemptively soliciting our shekalim before Haman attempted to carry out his evil plan against us; on Yom Kippur we celebrate that Hashem created teshuva, as a means to draw ourselves closer to Hashem even before He created the means for us to distance ourselves from Him. Additionally, see the Midrash Pli’ah (Astonishing Midrash) cited in Yalkut Reuveni (Shemot, Ki-Tisa #10) that in the merit of donating Shekalim to the Mishkan, the Jewish People were given the a day of forgiveness, Yom Kippur, as well as the Maharal in his Tiferet Yisroel, (Chapter 53) regarding the midrash that Purim and Yom Kippur will be the only festivals that we continue to celebrate even L’atid La’vo.

[5] Kohelet (7:20); Additionally, see Hakadosh Baruch Hu’s magnificent work, Sefer Vayikra, where He repeatedly uses the phrase, “When (and not “If”) a person from among the nation sins…”, and R’ Yitzchak Abarbanel Zt”l’s comments to Devarim (30:1), as well as Rav Kalonymus Kalman Epstein Zt”l’s Me’or V’shemesh: Parshat Bereishit D”H V’yivra (#1) where he quotes from R’ Yaakov Yitzvak Ish Horowitz Zt”l, the Chozeh of Lublin that “in our times there is not a single person who is not considered a Ba’al Teshuva.” Likewise, see R’ Yaakov Emden’s Siddur Ya'avetz (Beit Yaakov [Lomberg Addition] pg. 68b) that the reason chazal established the bracha Ha’shiveinu directly after Chonen HaDa’at is to remind us that since Hashem gave us Da’at—free will—it is certain that we will need the gift of teshuva.
Lastly, there is a saying which has been passed down from R’ Nachaman of Breslav: “Der velt hot a taos. Az a tzaddik mact a taos—oder iz er nisht kein tzaddik, oder iz es nisht kein taos. Nisht azoy! Tzaddik bleibt tzaddik, un taos bleibt taos. [The world is subject to a common misconception. If a Tzaddik makes a mistake—either he is not a Tzaddik, or it is not a mistake. It is not so! The Tzaddik remains a Tzaddik, and the mistake, a mistake.]

[6] However, Shabbat 55b: Binyamin, Amram, Yishai, Kalev ben David, see Tanya about tzaddikim never sinned have no yetzer hara- even a beinoni never sinned

[7] See the Sefer Megalei Amukot, by R’ Nosson Neta Shapira of Krakow Zt”l to Devarim 34, regarding Moshe Rabbenu’s death on the mountain “Navo” (Heb. בו). Rav Shapira explains"נ"-בו , he reached the שער "נ", the 50th level of purity, and in his newfound state of perfection, he was no longer fit for this world; for perfection, by its basic definition, has no place in this world. Likewise, see the Maharal’s comments in his Chidushei Aggadot to Sandhedrin (106a), “Sitting, is always synonymous with pain…” and Mesechet Brachot (17a), “In Olam Haba…the Tzaddikim sit with their crowns on their heads.” For further reading on this subject, see R’ Yehuda Leib Alter Zt”l’s Sefat Emet: Lech Lecha (5634); R’ Meshulam Gross Zt”l’s Nachalas Tzvi: Vayeira, D”H Vayeira #2; R’ Moshe Feinstein Zt”l’s Drash Moshe: Shoftim (16:22) D”H V’lo Takim Lecha Matzeiva #2; R’ Yaakov Katina Zt”l’s Korban Ha’ani: Netzavim, D”H Atem #2; Ma’aseh Ish, a digest of minhagim and stories about the Chazon Ish, (Vol. 5, pg. 119), and Lamed vav: a collection of the favorite stories of Rabbi Shlomo Carlebach Zt”l (pg. 23-24): The holy Rebbe of Sochachov (the son-in law of the Kotzker) became very sick soon after he got married at the young age of 13. His father came to the Kotzker to ask him to pray on behalf of the still young child. “Rebbe,” he said, “pray for my son. He is only 13 years old and yet he knows the entire Torah!” The Kotzker laughed, “You call that learning? He has done nothing.” Soon after, the Sochachover recovered, but his father was still disturbed by his visit to the Kotzker. The Sochachover, who immediately understood his father-in-law’s depth, said, “By intimating that I have not even begun to learn yet, he was appealing to Heaven as if to say, ‘He has not completed his role in the world; do not take him away yet!’” See the Yerushalmi Kiddushin (1:7 [20a]) for a similar story about a sick R’ Tarfon’s (non)perfection of the mitzvah Kibbud Av V’eim. Interestingly, it was R’ Tarfon himself who taught: “You are never free to desist from working [to perfect the world]” (Pirkei Avot 2:16).
[8] See Orot HaTeshuva 5:6, “If a person is constantly given to stumbling…this is not a defect in his perfection, for the principal of perfection is realized only in the struggle to attain it.”

[9] Mishle (24:16). See R’ Yitzchok Hutner’s understanding of this pasuk in his Pachad Yitzchak (Igros U’kesuvim #128). For a similar theme, see the Rebbe Nachman of Breslav in Likutey Moharan (I:25).

[10] For a discussion of the apparent discrepancy between Noach and Avraham, who “built alters” and Adam Kayain, and Hevel who are merely described as “sacrificing” on those alters, see R’ Yehoshua Olbaum Shlit”a’s Divrei Yehoshua: Parshat Noach (pg. 25).

[11] Bereishit Rabbah (14:8). See as well, Midrash Tanchuma: Tzav (14), that the Mizbe’ach was composed of dirt in order that it be fit to atone for man who is made from dirt, and Kli Yakar to Bereishit (3:23) that after Adam sinned he was sent from the garden to work the ground of Har HaMoriah so that he might build a Mizbei’ach from there; thus, facilitating teshuva through the same dirt that caused the chet, [i.e. his body].

[12] Regarding the notion of Teshuva as a rebirth, the Tikunei Zohar (Tikun 1) writes that the word "בראשית" is actually a conjunction of the letter "ב" and the word "ראשית", meaning “two beginnings.” In his Imrei Baruch: Bereishit (Maamar 2), R’ Baruch Simon Shlit”a elucidates that every man’s life consists of two beginnings. The first beginning is the point of his birth, when he enters the world. The second beginning occurs as a rebirth; after having sinned, he may do teshuva and begin again. Hashem provides with this all important message in the first word of the Torah to ensure that we do not despair of spiritual redemption. [Perhaps this is similar to the Midrash Shmuel’s insight regarding the Hakdama to Pirkei Avot, “Kol Yisrael Yesh LaHem Chelek L’Olam Haba…” Ayain Sham.] Indeed, the well known relationship between mikva’ot and teshuva stems from this quality of rebirth. See the Sheim Mi’Shmuel: Shabbat Teshuva (5672) and R’ Aryeh Kaplan’s Waters of Eden (Pgs. 13-14) who both write that mans inability to live underwater serves as a symbolic act of death; it follows, therefore, that his accent from the water serves as a form of rebirth. It is therefore interesting to note that the word “ך-ש-פ- נ” using ש” ב ת”א transforms into the word “ל-ב-ו-ט.” See as well, Sefer HaChinuch (Mitzvah 173) and R’ Nosson Sternhertz of Nemirov’s Likutei Halachot:Yoreh De’ah, Hechsher Keilim (1:2 and 4:20).

[13] Perhaps this is what R’ Kook meant when he wrote in the Hakdama to Orot HaTeshuva, “It [teshuva] is the commandment which on one hand, is most simple to perform—for a mere thought of teshuva is already considered teshuva; but on the other hand, is the most difficult to perform—for its essence is not fully revealed in the world.”

[14] Quoted in Torat Rebbe Yisrael M’Salant (Chapter #4: HaYomim HaNora’im, pg. 101), written by Rav Yisrael’s grandson R’ Chaim Yitzchak Lipkin Zt”l.

[15] In his Sefer Ta’amei HaMinhagim, Likutim Inyanim Shonim (Simin 151 [pg. 543]) R’ Avraham Yitzchak Sperling Zt”l quotes from the Great Tzaddik of Rahatin that the bracha “Sh’hechiyanu,” which is customarily recited in conjunction with the performance of any mitzvah which is connected to a specific time of year, is not said on the mitzvah of teshuva precisely because it is a constant process that remains active throughout the year. We might suggest this as a possible reason for the absence of any bracha over the mitzvah of teshuva whatsoever. Indeed, see the ruling of the Or Zaruah (Vienna) Hilchot Birkat HaMotzei (Simin 140) that “all constant mitzvot (e.g. believing in Hashem, fearing Him, loving Him, etc…) do not receive brachot.” Teshuva, which fits into the category of “constant mitzvot” as well, should not—and indeed does not—receive a birkat mitzvah. For a similar theme, see the last comment of the Maharsha to Mesechet Megillah (32a) D”H V’yidaber Moshe as to why there is no specific injunction to learn the halachot of teshuva thirty days before Rosh HaShana and Yom Kippur as there is to learn the laws of Sukkot, Pesach, and Shevu’ot before each of these other holidays respectively.

[16] Mesechet Pirkei Avot (2:15)

[17] Mesechet Shabbos (153a). This notion adds an extra dimension of depth to the story which is told about R’ Yisrael Salanter: Late one night, while taking a walk, he passed by a shoe store and was perplexed to see an old shoemaker still up mending shoes. After expressing his surprise, the shoemaker pointed at his half burnt out candle and replied, “As long as the candle still burns, it is still possible to fix what is broken.” Rav Yisrael took this powerful mussar with him until the day he passed on from this world. [Although this story is told about quite a few gedolim, including: the Chafetz Chaim, the Besh”t, and R’ Zushia of Anapoli, to date, I have never seen it printed in any primary source.]

[18] Mesechet Brachot (34b) and Sanhedrin (99a).

[19] Perhaps this is an extension of the concept from Pirkei Avot (5:26), “According to the pain is the reward.” It is the painful struggle that a Ba’al Teshuva constantly undergoes, which pushes him to higher levels than the tzaddik. Indeed, the Rambam rules, [Hilchot Teshuvah (2:8), based on Meschet Yoma (86a)] that even after one repents for having commited an aveirah, he must continue to do Teshuva every Yom Kippur.

[20] For several alternate explanations try: Ba’al HaTanya Zt”l’s Iggeret HaKodesh (Letter 10), R’ Yehudah Leib Alter Zt”l’s Sefas Emes: Acharei Mos (5664), R’ Chaim Halberstam of Tzanz Zt”l’s Chidushei Divrei Chaim on Shas (Chelek 3, pg. 389), R’ Yosef Dov Soloveitchik Zt”l’s Al HaTeshuva: (Chapter 7, see specifically pgs. 169-183), and the Maharal, Tiferet Ysirael (Chapter 57). Additionally, see R’ Yonatan Eibshitz Zt”l’s Yaaros Dvash (Drasha 1:1) where the author explains that since the spot where the ba’al teshuva stands used to be occupied by sin, it is dangerous for a tzaddik to stand there.

[21] See R’ Moshe Chaim Luzzato Zt”l’s Mesillat Yesharim (Chapter 4): “According to strict justice, there should be no correction at all for a sin, for in truth, how can a man straighten that which he has made crooked?” Likewise, see R’ Shemuel Yehudah Katsenelenbogen Zt”l’s Drashot Mahr”i Mintz: HaDrash HaRishon (pgs. 9-10), and Mesechet Avodah Zarah (4b) w/ Rashi (ibid.) regarding the fact that Dovid Hamelech only sinned because Hashem wanted to show people that, despite the fact that logic seems to dictate otherwise, teshuva truly is effective. We can readily understand that common sense would seem to reject the notion of teshuva. See the Maharal in his Netivot Olam: Netiv HaTeshuva (Chapter 2) who writes that just as it is unnatural to expect an earthly court to accept the apology of a criminal; it is likewise unnatural to expect the Heavenly court to forgive us for our sins.

[22] Yechezkel (33:10-11). See Mesechet Ta’anit (16a) with Maharsha (ibid. D”H HaZaken Shebahem) and Sefer Ba’al Shem Tov al torah: Parshat Breishit #169 that the fasting and afflictions which are often associated with teshuva are to be viewed merely as a catalyst toward fixing ones character rather than a punishment for the wicked actions of the past. Thus, the gemara in Ta’anis (16a) relates “It is not fasting, nor sackcloth which helps; rather, teshuva and good deeds that are effective.” Fasting and sackcloth are merely a means to improve ourselves. Indeed, the idea of “punishment”—divine or otherwise—as a means to teshuvah is a major reoccurring theme in R’ Ovadiah Seforno’s commentary on the Torah. See for example, his comments to Shemot (3:7) regarding the imagery of the burning bush as a symbol for the ma’akot in general, as well as Shemot (4:23) regarding ma’akot bechorot and (7:3) regarding pharaoh’s obstinance specifically. It is only when there is no hope for teshuva [see comments to Bereishit (18:17)] that Hashem is forced to punish us for our own good. For a similar theme, see R’ Shlomo Ben Aderet Zt”l’s Shu”t Rashba (Simin #18) for the reason that we do not make a bracha on the mitzvah to carry out capital punishment. Additionally, see R' Moshe Yehudah Leib Zilberberg M'Ketina Zt”l’s Shu"t Zayit Raanan (Vol. 2, Likutei Chidushei Torah: Bereishit #1) for a beautiful explanation of the midrash [Bereishit Rabbah (2:5)], “‘And Hashem saw that the light was good,’ this shows that Hashem desires the actions of the righteous more than the actions of the wicked.”

[23] As we will see, with G-d’s help, Bnei Yisrael had a similar issue during the Exodus from Egypt, which Hakadosh Baruch Hu helped them to surmount.

[24] Rebbe Meir is certainly referring to Acher here. Interestingly, Rebbe Akiva, the author of this interpretation, was himself the son of a convert who, until the age of 40, was little more than a common shepherd. Lacking even a rudimentary understanding of the Aleph-Beis, he transformed himself, with remarkable perseverance, into one of the greatest torah luminaries of all time. He serves as the embodiment of this teaching. For his life story, see Mesechet Pesachim (49b), Mesechet Ketuvot: (62b-63a), and Avot D’rebbe Nosson (Chapter 4, Mishna 2).

[25] Sefer Agra D’pirka (Os #1). We should note, however, that the Dinover Rebbe was a 5th generation disciple of R’ Yisrael Ba’al Shem Tov, the founder of the Chassidic movement, who preceded him in this understanding of the gemara; see Shivchei Ha’Besht, (pg. 50). See as well, Yerushalmi Peah (1:1), Yerushalmi Sanhedrin (10:1), Rambam to Hilchot Teshuva (3:14), Tosefot to Bava Metzia (58b), and R’ Yechezkel Landau Zt”l’s Drashei HaTzlach (Drash #4): “Nothing can stand in the way of Teshuva…” For an interesting elaboration, see R’ Dr. Moshe Burak’s The Hatam Sofer (pg. 294-296).

[26] Pesachim (86b); the Beit Yosef also quotes this from Derech Eretz Zuta (Perek 4) and Derech Eretz Rabbah (Perek 6). Granted, R’ Menachem ben Solomon of Provonce Zt”l, the illustrious Meiri (ibid) believed that “some jokesters add this line to the gemara and it should be removed.” However, for a few possible explanations of this gemara see, R’ Shmuel Eliezer Eidels Zt”l’s Maharsha (Pesachim 86b.), R’ Yehudah Leib Alter Zt”l’s Sefes Emes (Pesachim 86b.), R’ Yoel Circus Zt”l’s commentary to the Arbah Turim, Ba’it Chadash (Orech Chaim 170:6). For a literal reading of the gemara, see the commentary of the Drisha (ibid. 170:3)

[27] Meshech Chochma, Devarim (9:23). Likewise, see the Shelah HaKadosh in his Shaar HaOsios, Kuf/Kidushat Zivugim (Simin 21) D”H V’yesh Lomar and Eliyahu De’Vidas Zt”l’s Reishit Chochma Sha’ar HaKedusha (#17), as well as the Chid”a Zt”l, in his Nachal Kedumim (Parshat Bo) quoting from R’ Ya’akov Toledano Zt”l, the Maharit. The Agra D’Pirka (ibid.) goes on to explain that this divine decree was nothing more than a test of sincerity which Acher, and many like him failed to surmount.

[28] See as well, Yalkut Shemoni Tehillim (25), Piskta D’rav Kahana (24:7); and Yerushalmi, Sanhedrin (10:2) regarding Hashem’s acceptance of the evil King Menashe’s teshuva. Likewise, see the brilliant insight of R’ Nosson Neta Shapira of Krakow Zt”l in his Sefer Megalei Amukot: Rosh Hashana, D”H Ofen HaSheni regarding the pasuk “קחו עמכם דברים ושובו אל ה'” (Hoshe’a 14:3). Based on the gemara cited above, Rav Shapira explains that a person must ignore the words of “Wisdom” and “Prophecy” [i.e. קחו עמכם דברים] and return to Hashem nonetheless [i.e. ושובו אל ה'].

[29] See the comments of R’ Yechiel ben Yekutiel Anav Zt”l in his Ma’alot Ha’middot (Chapter 17: Repentence) and of R' Yochanan Luria Zt”l in his Mashivat Nefesh to Parshat Netzavim, who write that Hashem does everything he can to try to make Teshuva less embarrassing for us: “Indeed, Hashem returns to us first, like a doctor who takes some medicine to show the patient that it is not dangerous.” Ayein Sham! Likewise, see Bava Metzia (mishna 4:10) and the gemara (ibid. 59a) as well as Rambam [Hilchot Teshuvah (7:8)], regarding the punishment for embarrassing a Ba’al teshuva..

[30] Mesechet Sotah (32b). We would do well to mention that this gemara appears to be inconsistent with the gemara in Mesechet Brachot (12b): “One who is embarrassed as a result of a transgression is forgiven for all of his sins.” [See the Maharal in his, Netivot Olam: Netiva HaTeshuva (Chapter 5), who explains that his feelings of embarrassment are indicative of the fact that he feels disconnected from his sin; for one who is attached to his sins would surely think them natural. Indeed, it is these feelings of detachment that warrant his being forgiven.] Perhaps the gemara in Mesechet Chagiga (16a) can serve to reconcile the two statements: “Who is a person who has no respect for his creator? One who sins in private [i.e. he looks around to make sure no one is looking, thus implying that Hashem cannot see him.] Since the root of his first transgression stemmed from his failure to feel embarrassed in front of Hashem, Chazal established silent prayer to serve as a forum to feel embarrassment in front of Hashem alone. [As the gemara says, “without being ashamed in front of other people,” (i.e. without being ashamed only in front of other people, to the exclusion of Hashem).] The gemara in Brachot, therefore, teaches that a person who feels embarrassed, even under the rubric of silent prayer, deserves to have all of his sins forgiven. Perhaps this can also account for the strange language of the Mishna in Avot (5:20): “Boshet Panim L’gan Eden, (eng. the shame faced go to Gan Eden).” Why does the mishna add the seemingly superfluous word “Panim (eng. face)” to the mishna? Would it not suffice to say, “Those who possess [the trait of] shame go to Gan Eden”? Perhaps we can suggest that the word “פנים” here should be pronounced “P’nim (eng. internal),” instead of “Panim (eng. face);” thus rendering the mishna, “Anyone whose embarrassment is internal goes to Gan Eden.” [Rebbe Mori R’ Elie Marcus Shlit”a pointed out to me that this approach adds new meaning to both the gemara in Berachot (7a): “Rav Yochanan said in the name of Rav Yossi, ‘One strike to the heart (internally) is better that 100 lashes to the body (externally),” and the gemara in Brachot (34b): “Rav Kahana said, ‘A person who openly admits his sins (i.e. only openly to the public, but not to Hashem) is called brazen, as the pasuk says, “Happy is the man whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is hidden (from the public).”’” Additionally, see Rashi and Radak to Tehillim (130:4).

[31] Sefer Be’er Sheva: Mesechet Sotah (32b), D”H “Mipnei Mah”. See the Maharsha (ibid.) who asks the same question and gives a technical answer that he himself is not satisfied with: “Perhaps we can suggest that if everyone was accustomed to raise his voice during tefillah, we wouldn’t think of this as a show of little faith; however, once chazal established that tefillah be said quietly, one who raises his voice is called little of faith. V’dachok Ketzat (And this is slightly forced).”

[32] See Mechilta (15:2) and Shir HaShirim Rabbah (3:9) cited by Rashi to Shemot (15:2). [The midrash, however, name the prophet Yechezkel in particular.] The Maharal, in his Gur Aryeh (15:2) insists that the midrash learns this from the use of the singular form in the pasuk, which implies that each and every member of Klall Yisrael was afforded this sublime level of prophesy.

[33] Regarding the idol worship of Bnei Yisrael in Mitzrayim, see the opening words of the Haggadah shel Pesach based on the mishna, Pesachim (10:4): “In the beginning our fathers worshiped idols in mitzrayim.” Likewise, see Mechilta, (Parsha 5); Midrash Shachar Tov (Chapter 15); Yalkut Shimoni (1:234).