Parshath Rë’é (Deuteronomy XI,26-XVI,17) 8/6/10

A.



ראה אנכי נתן לפניכם היום ברכה וקללה (“See, I am placing before you today a bëracha and a curse (qëlala). So begins our parasha.

The Sforno explains the very stark choice which this verse represents as follows: הביטה וראה שלא יהי' ענינך על אופן בינוני כי אמנם אנכי נותן לפניכם היום ברכה וקללה שהם שני הקצוות כי הברכה היא הצלחה יותר מן המספיק ע"צ היותר טוב והקללה היא מארה מחסרת שלא יושג המספיק. שניהם לפניכם להשיג כפי מה שתבחרו (“Look and see that your affairs will not be in any mediocre fashion, for I am really placing before you today a bëracha and a qëlala which are two extremes, for the bëracha is success beyond what is sufficient on the better side, and the qëlala is a depriving execration, such that what suffices will not be obtained. Both of them are before you to be achieved, as you choose”).

After all, as our parasha also informs us later on, בנים אתם לד' אלקיכם כו' כי עם קדוש אתה לד' אלקיך בך בחר ד' להיות לו לעם סגלה מכל העמים אשר על פני האדמה (“You are sons to Ha-Shem your G-d.... For you are a people holy to Ha-Shem your G-d; He has chosen you to become His treasure-nation [‘am sëgulla] from all the nations which are on the face of the earth”; XVI, 1-2).

Having accepted the bargain at Sinai, Israel has evermore been subject to the obligation to live up to the mandates of the Torah. The Talmud points out that: בין כך ובין כך אתם קרוים בנים (“one way or the other, you are called sons”, i.e., whether we are observant or not, citing in support, amongst other verses, בנים לא אמון בם (“sons with no trust in them [bam]”; Deuteronomy XXXII, 20; קידושין ל"ו.).

In his comments on this verse, Rashi observes אין גדולי נכרים בהם כי הוריתים דרך טובה וסרו ממנה (“My great ones are not recognizable amongst them, for I taught them a good way and they departed from it”), going on to note that the unusual word émun, translated here “faith,” is related to omén in Esther II, 7, where it connotes training or raising a child, as well as לשון אמונה כו' אמרו בסיני נעשה ונשמע ולשעה קלה בטלו הבטחתם (“an expression of faithfulness... they said at Sinai ‘We shall do and we shall hear,’ and in a short while broke their promise....”).

The first paragraph of the Shëma‘ teaches us ושננתם לבניך ודברת בם (“And you will teach [words of Torah] to your children and speak about them”; Deuteronomy VI, 7), and the sëfarim ha-qëdoshim have long noted the odd word bam where we expect bahem, seeing in it an allusion to both the Written Torah, which begins with béyth, bë-réshith, “In the beginning” (Genesis I, 1), and the Oral Torah, which begins with mem, mé-eimathai, “From when” (ברכות פ"א מ"א). It seems to me likely that its recurrence in our verse is again an allusion to the “good path” to which Rashi refers.

So we see that, whilst G-d will not abandon us, and will continue to treat us as His children, neither will He coddle us, should we choose not to strive to live up to His expectations. Whether we are blessed or cursed depends upon us.

So what does it mean to be a holy nation?

B.

It is told of Rabbi David Leibovitz זצ"ל, founding rosh yëshiva of Yëshivath Hafétz Hayyim, that he was conversing with a lady who remarked, "Men darf zain frum un gut (One must be pious and good)." "Neyn," he gently corrected her, "Men darf zain gut un frum (No, one must be good and pious)." Some of the ramifications of Rabbi Leibovitz’s emphasis for a holy people are evident in our parasha.

Somewhat later, we read: כי יהי' בך אביון מאחד אחיך וכו' פתח תפתח את ידך לו ותתן לו די מחסרו אשר יחבר לו: השמר לך פן יהי' דבר עם לבבך בליעל לאמר קרבה שנת השבע שנת השמטה ורעה עינך באחיך האביון ולא תתן לו וגו' (“For there will be amongst you a poor man [evyon] of one of your brothers...Opening shall you open your hand to him and granting shall you grant him enough for his need which is lacking him. Guard yourself lest an unworthy thing be with your heart, to say, the seventh year has drawn near, the shëmitta year, and you look malevolently at your impoverished brother and do not give to him....”; XV, 7-9).

The Talmud (גיטין ל"ו.) records: רבי אומר "וזה דבר השמטה שמוט" בשתי שמטות הכתוב מדבר אחת שמטת קרקע ואחת שמטת כספים בזמן שאתה משמט קרקע אתה משמט כספים וגו' (“Rabbi [Yëhuda ha-Nasi’] says, ‘And this is the matter of the shëmitta, shamot [release]’ [ibid., v. 2]; Scripture speaks of two shëmittoth, one is shëmittath qarqa‘ [under which cropland must lie fallow every seventh year] and one is shëmittath kësafim [under which debts are nullified]; at a time when you are releasing land, you are releasing funds....”). Plainly, the context of our parasha’s passage is the reluctance to lend to the poor in the shadow of the approaching shëmitta year, when the debt would be cancelled.

Rambam uses the passage to apply to lending to the poor in general (which, as he also notes, is actually derived from Exodus XXII, 24), concluding והתורה הקפידה על מי שימנע מלהלוות לעני שנאמר "ורעה עינך על אחיך האביון" (“And the Torah is stringent with one who refuses to lend to the poor, for it is said, ‘and you look malevolently on your poor brother’”; הל' לוה ומלוה פ"א ה"א).

The Lehem Mishne explains Rambam’s logic: וי"ל דמ"מ מיית ראי' דהוי איסור למנוע להלוות משמטה דכתיב בי' "ורעה עינך באחיך האביון" משמע דקפיד על מה שעינו רעה שאינו רוצה להלוות (“And one may say that he brings evidence that there is a prohibition of refusing to lend from shëmitta, concerning which it is written, ‘and you look malevolently at your poor brother’, indicating that [G-d] is concerned with the malevolent look, for he does not want to lend”). In other words, the impending shëmitta is only being used as an excuse for the miser’s stinginess. The stinginess is the issue, and needs the work.

C.

With this in mind, consider the encounter between Rabbi ‘Aqiva and the evil Roman military governor of Judaea, Turnus Rufus, recorded in the Talmud. Turnus Rufus asked: אם אלקיכם אוהב עניים הוא מפני מה אינו מפרנסן? (“If your G-d is such a lover of the poor, why does He not support them?”), Rabbi ‘Aqiva answered: כדי שניצול אנו בהם מדינה של גיהנם (“In order that we might be rescued through them from the judgment of Geihinnom”; בבא בתרא י.).

It is brought down in a multitude of sources that the Alter of Kelm questioned Rabbi ‘Aqiva’s explanation: What is it about the mitzva of tzëdaqa, of charitable giving or lending, which is more protective from punishment than any of the other mitzvoth?

He answered that the secret lies not in performing the mitzva simply because G-d wills it, and we wish to perform His will (important as that is); it lies in feeling the poor man’s pain and plight as though it were one’s own. Observed in this way, the merit of the mitzva of tzëdaqa is uniquely able to protect us from punishment for other transgressions.

An illustration of this quality may be found in a story I have heard concerning Rabbi Eliyahu Hayyim Meisels of Łódź, Poland, who was known for his empathy. One particularly brutal winter day, he set out to collect from a wealthy man who had the reputation of being a miser. When the householder saw the rabbi at his door, he bade him quickly come in, but the rabbi insisted on remaining outside to make his appeal. When the rich man protested that he could not stand the cold, the rabbi told him that he was there to collect for people so destitute that they could not afford a fire even on such a day. The putative miser saw the point, and gave generously.

D.

This, it seems to me, is the point of what Rabbi Leibowitz was quoted as saying above: That in order to fulfill the purpose for which Israel came into existence, an ‘am qadosh la-Shem (nation holy to Ha-Shem”) which is perceived as fit to bear the standard of Torah in the world, it is necessary to observe especially the mitzvoth she-béyn adam la-havéro (“between man and his fellow”) in a fashion which is li-fnim mi-shurath ha-din, more than a formal observance of the Torah’s requirements.

To paraphrase, it is necessary to make the conscious effort to be good, in order to be truly frum.

No comments: