Many, many, meforshim emphasize that we do mitzvos sichliyos not because of our seichel. We do them because the RBSO commanded us to do them.
Examples, and I'm going to add more as time goes on:
The Netziv asks why it says על האדמה by Kibbud Av in the Aseres Hadibros. He answers that we all know that the ikker of mitzvos is in Eretz Yisrael. But we might think that this only applies to mitzvos that we only do because of Hashem's tzivui. But sichliyos would apply no less in chutz la'aretz. So Hashem says that this is not correct. Even Kibbud Av, the paradigm of sichliyos, is done because of Hashem's tzivui, because it is commanded among the Taryag. As such, it is more meaningful in Eretz Yisrael than it is in chutz la'aretz. You do it because of Hashem's tzivuy.
Reb Micha Berger mentioned a very clear example of this shittah, as follows:
See Arukh haShulchan OC 1:14:
On the other hand, Reb Moshe, for example, says, why does it say אם כסף תלוה את עמי העני והגר..... it's not an "if," it's a chiyuv. He explains that Hashem wants us to be rachamanim, to the point that even if there was no tzvuy we would do it on our own initiative. This seems to be farkehrt from the others.
Darash Moshe, Yisro.
Even the Netziv seems to say farkert in his hakdama to Breishis about Sefer Yesharim.
I've been wondering about this for decades. I've been arguing about this with Rav Dovid Zucker for at least thirty years. The idea that we should supress our human kindness and focus exclusively on the fact that it's a mitzva in the Torah makes it cold and bloodless. Imagine doing Kibbud Av, and saying to yourself, "I really don't care if he's hungry. But vibalt the RBSO was metzaveh on Kibbud, I'll get him something to eat." Pretty horrible, I think.
Even the Netziv seems to say farkert in his hakdama to Breishis about Sefer Yesharim.
Last Friday, erev Chukas, my son Rav Mordechai said an excellent answer. It is one of those that, like the Gaon, is impossible to think of, and once told, everyone says "Well, that's obvious." It's not obvious at all. The problem is that people think they understand the answer when they do not.
To understand the answer, we need to begin with what will appear to be an impossible yesod:
- If a person does chesed only because he has a soft heart, he is a loving altruist, then he is not doing the mitzva properly.
- If a person does chesed only because the RBSO commanded it, he is not doing the mitzva properly.
- If a person does chesed for both reasons, because he is a loving humanist and because the RBSO commanded it, he is not doing the mitzva properly.
That seems to leave us thinking that no possiblities are left, and nobody can do the mitzva properly. But that is not the case.
We do chesed because the RBSO told us not only to do chesed, but that we should develop our souls to be baalei chesed. We do Chesed because the RBSO told us that the middah of chesed is a wonderful thing, and that He wants us to be BAALEI chesed, and for that we need to be baalei chesed in our hearts.
Hashem told us to kill all that live in an ir hanidachas, but that does not mean that we should be people that enjoy killing children. Hashem told us to do chesed, but that does mean that we should be people that enjoy doing chesed.
Not only should we enjoy doing chesed, but we should do it so many times, and work on ourselves so much, that we would do it even if Hashem would not command us to do it.
This is really an application of והלכת בדרכיו. Hashem does chesed not because it is imposed upon Him externally. Hashem does chesed because that is what Hashem does inherently. If you want to be מה הוא רחום, then you have to be an inherent Rachum, not a Rachum because someone is making do rachamim.
Reb Mordechai added that this is why the Gemara in Kiddushin relates the Parah by Dama with his Kibbud Av. For him, Kibbud was a sichlis. For us, they're both chukim. But Kibbud is a chok that is supposed to change us so that it becomes so natural that not doing it would be unthinkable. This is not the case with Parah, or kashrus, or korbanos. It's only by mitzvos of Chesed.
Rav Dr NJ Stone responded to the above sentence "so that it becomes so natural that not doing it would be unthinkable. This is not the case with Parah, or kashrus, or korbanos. It's only by mitzvos of Chesed." with an email titled "Why? Says Who?", and he continued and said
"why not the others ? maybe tahara should become second nature? kodshim ?"
All I can say is, I have no idea. Maybe he's right. Maybe the dinim of kedusha and kashrus are meant to teach us to develop spiritual sensitivity to whatever enhances or contradicts them. But I know that in the mah hu/af atta list of "vehalachta bidrachav" it doesn't say anything about kashrus.
Examples, and I'm going to add more as time goes on:
The Netziv asks why it says על האדמה by Kibbud Av in the Aseres Hadibros. He answers that we all know that the ikker of mitzvos is in Eretz Yisrael. But we might think that this only applies to mitzvos that we only do because of Hashem's tzivui. But sichliyos would apply no less in chutz la'aretz. So Hashem says that this is not correct. Even Kibbud Av, the paradigm of sichliyos, is done because of Hashem's tzivui, because it is commanded among the Taryag. As such, it is more meaningful in Eretz Yisrael than it is in chutz la'aretz. You do it because of Hashem's tzivuy.
Reb Micha Berger mentioned a very clear example of this shittah, as follows:
See Arukh haShulchan OC 1:14:
... וכן מיסודי הדת לעשות כל המצות לא מפני שהשכל מחייב כן, כגון במצות שבין אדם לחברו, אלא מפני שהקדוש ברוך הוא צוה אותנו לעשות כן. ולכן נאמר בדברות האחרונות בשבת ובכיבוד אב: כאשר צוך ה' אלהיך". משום דזה מוסכם בכל אום ולשון שהאדם צריך לנוח יום אחד בשבוע כדי לחזק כחותיו, וכן ההסכמה בכל אום ולשון לכבד הוריו. ולזה אמרה תורה: "שמור את יום השבת לקדשו כאשר צוך ה' אלהיך", "כבד את אביך ואת אמך כאשר צוך ה' אלהיך". כלומר: ולא מפני שהשכל מחייב כן. ובדברות הראשונות קודם חטא העגל לא הוצרכו לאזהרה זו, לפי שהיו כולם במדרגת מלאכים, כדכתיב: "אני אמרתי אלהים אתם, ובני עליון כולכם"....
Darash Moshe, Yisro.
ואם מזבח אבנים (כ כב)
שם בג' מקומות נאמר אם והוא חובה, אם מזבח אבנים, והוא חובה, אם כסף תלוה [להלן כב כד], והוא חובה, ואם תקריב מנחת בכורים [ויקרא ב יד], והוא חובה. עיין ברש"י. וצריך להבין הטעם. ונראה שאף שאמרו [תו"כ קדושים] אל יאמר א"א בבשר חזיר אלא אפשי ומה אעשה ואבי שבשמים גזר עלי כך, מ"מ יש דברים שהתורה מקפדת שגם ירצה זה ברצון נפש ממש, והוא שיכין עצמו וטבעו לרצות לעשות דברים טובים. שמה שנדמה לבני אדם שהוא קרבן יהיה אצלו דבר קביעות, וכחלק מטבעו. וזה הוא כוונת מזבח אבנים, שהוא דבר קבוע ולא נפסד לעולם. וכשיעשה רק מחמת שהוא כפוי מהקב"ה ליחן צדקה ולשמור שבת וכדומה, עלול שלא יהיה זה דבר קבוע. וגם הקביעות שייך שיהיה רק ע"י אמונה גדולה ובטחון בהשי"ת עם הידיעה שרק מידו הכל, שאז לא יהיה שום נסיון. ולכן נאמר אם, שאף שהוא חובה, רוצה השי"ת שיהיה זה בדרך רצון שהוא בלשון אם. וכן מצות הלואה וצדקה רצון התורה שירצה בלב שלם לא רק מצד כפיה ממצות התורה אלא שישנה טבעו שירצה בעצם לעשות טובות שרק בזה יהיה קיום העולם. וכן מנחת ביכורים ליתן הראשית להשי"ת ישנה טבעו שירצה ברצון גמור ולכן נכתב בהו אם שהוא לשון רצון
Even the Netziv seems to say farkert in his hakdama to Breishis about Sefer Yesharim.
I've been wondering about this for decades. I've been arguing about this with Rav Dovid Zucker for at least thirty years. The idea that we should supress our human kindness and focus exclusively on the fact that it's a mitzva in the Torah makes it cold and bloodless. Imagine doing Kibbud Av, and saying to yourself, "I really don't care if he's hungry. But vibalt the RBSO was metzaveh on Kibbud, I'll get him something to eat." Pretty horrible, I think.
Even the Netziv seems to say farkert in his hakdama to Breishis about Sefer Yesharim.
Last Friday, erev Chukas, my son Rav Mordechai said an excellent answer. It is one of those that, like the Gaon, is impossible to think of, and once told, everyone says "Well, that's obvious." It's not obvious at all. The problem is that people think they understand the answer when they do not.
To understand the answer, we need to begin with what will appear to be an impossible yesod:
- If a person does chesed only because he has a soft heart, he is a loving altruist, then he is not doing the mitzva properly.
- If a person does chesed only because the RBSO commanded it, he is not doing the mitzva properly.
- If a person does chesed for both reasons, because he is a loving humanist and because the RBSO commanded it, he is not doing the mitzva properly.
That seems to leave us thinking that no possiblities are left, and nobody can do the mitzva properly. But that is not the case.
We do chesed because the RBSO told us not only to do chesed, but that we should develop our souls to be baalei chesed. We do Chesed because the RBSO told us that the middah of chesed is a wonderful thing, and that He wants us to be BAALEI chesed, and for that we need to be baalei chesed in our hearts.
Hashem told us to kill all that live in an ir hanidachas, but that does not mean that we should be people that enjoy killing children. Hashem told us to do chesed, but that does mean that we should be people that enjoy doing chesed.
Not only should we enjoy doing chesed, but we should do it so many times, and work on ourselves so much, that we would do it even if Hashem would not command us to do it.
This is really an application of והלכת בדרכיו. Hashem does chesed not because it is imposed upon Him externally. Hashem does chesed because that is what Hashem does inherently. If you want to be מה הוא רחום, then you have to be an inherent Rachum, not a Rachum because someone is making do rachamim.
Reb Mordechai added that this is why the Gemara in Kiddushin relates the Parah by Dama with his Kibbud Av. For him, Kibbud was a sichlis. For us, they're both chukim. But Kibbud is a chok that is supposed to change us so that it becomes so natural that not doing it would be unthinkable. This is not the case with Parah, or kashrus, or korbanos. It's only by mitzvos of Chesed.
Rav Dr NJ Stone responded to the above sentence "so that it becomes so natural that not doing it would be unthinkable. This is not the case with Parah, or kashrus, or korbanos. It's only by mitzvos of Chesed." with an email titled "Why? Says Who?", and he continued and said
"why not the others ? maybe tahara should become second nature? kodshim ?"
All I can say is, I have no idea. Maybe he's right. Maybe the dinim of kedusha and kashrus are meant to teach us to develop spiritual sensitivity to whatever enhances or contradicts them. But I know that in the mah hu/af atta list of "vehalachta bidrachav" it doesn't say anything about kashrus.
No comments:
Post a Comment