Tuesday, September 13, 2011
Welcome Rabbi Denbo!
We are honored to welcome our newest contributor, Rabbi Shalom Denbo. A talmid of Rabbi Noah Weinberg, a respected Mohel and an inspiring educator, Rabbi Denbo has been teaching Mesilas Yesharim for years. We look forward to reading his posts.
Monday, September 12, 2011
On the Relevance of Nekius
Chapter eleven makes us feel bankrupt. While it seems reasonable to strive for zehirus and zerizus, no matter how you spin it, nekius just does not seem humanly possible. Complete and total eradication of the Yetzer HaRa?! Even our indefatigable author grants that it is "difficult" (See, however, the final paragraph of the chapter). One can't help but wonder how many years (centuries?) it has been since a naki has walked this earth.
But yet, the Mesilas Yesharim remains relevant, for why should we assume it is all or nothing? People are multidimensional. A person can certainly be less than zahir in one area and naki in another.
We should not make the mistake of working only on the areas where we are weak and abandon our qualities to habit. Where we are strong and have already reached zerizus, we should be striving for greatness, for nekius. (Yes, Virginia, everyone is a zariz for at least some Mitzvos.) The Ramchal tells us how to carry our strengths to new heights and we can use his advice. Nekius is relevant for us all.
This explains chapter eleven. Inordinately long relative to the other chapters of the book, in chapter eleven the author stops speaking in generalities and enters into the details of specific character traits and Mitzvos. He sounds almost apologetic when he explains why he isn't writing about every Mitzvah. "Even though the Yetzer HaRa tries to get people to violate every law, there are those that human nature finds more desirous... requiring greater strength to defeat his Yetzer and become clean (naki) of the sin." And later, "I am only going to discuss the [Mitzvos] where most people typically fail."
Why does the Ramchal need to discuss the details of every Torah challenge? He could drastically shorten this chapter by simply stating that the Yetzer HaRa must be defeated on all fronts. But life is not all or nothing. This is the Ramchal's message: Every single Mitzvah and every single Middah present a stand-alone nekius opportunity.
The Ramchal says as much quite explicitly in chapter eleven. "Many have achieved chassidus (yischasidu) in many aspects of chassidus, but have not been able to reach perfection when it comes to disdaining [illegal] financial gain." There it is: Perfection in one area; imperfection in another. It's not hypocrisy; it's just being human.
But yet, the Mesilas Yesharim remains relevant, for why should we assume it is all or nothing? People are multidimensional. A person can certainly be less than zahir in one area and naki in another.
We should not make the mistake of working only on the areas where we are weak and abandon our qualities to habit. Where we are strong and have already reached zerizus, we should be striving for greatness, for nekius. (Yes, Virginia, everyone is a zariz for at least some Mitzvos.) The Ramchal tells us how to carry our strengths to new heights and we can use his advice. Nekius is relevant for us all.
This explains chapter eleven. Inordinately long relative to the other chapters of the book, in chapter eleven the author stops speaking in generalities and enters into the details of specific character traits and Mitzvos. He sounds almost apologetic when he explains why he isn't writing about every Mitzvah. "Even though the Yetzer HaRa tries to get people to violate every law, there are those that human nature finds more desirous... requiring greater strength to defeat his Yetzer and become clean (naki) of the sin." And later, "I am only going to discuss the [Mitzvos] where most people typically fail."
Why does the Ramchal need to discuss the details of every Torah challenge? He could drastically shorten this chapter by simply stating that the Yetzer HaRa must be defeated on all fronts. But life is not all or nothing. This is the Ramchal's message: Every single Mitzvah and every single Middah present a stand-alone nekius opportunity.
The Ramchal says as much quite explicitly in chapter eleven. "Many have achieved chassidus (yischasidu) in many aspects of chassidus, but have not been able to reach perfection when it comes to disdaining [illegal] financial gain." There it is: Perfection in one area; imperfection in another. It's not hypocrisy; it's just being human.
The Changing Face of Inspiration
Chapter eight is deceptive. It first appears simple, almost obvious, but a careful reading quickly reveals the author's precision and insight.
He tells us that zhirus and zerizus are actually two sides of the same coin - zehirus is avoiding sin and zerizus is doing Mitzvos - and therefore there is no real difference in method when it comes to acquiring these two traits. Torah leads to zerizus just as it leads to zehirus, with the same three types of inspiration for the three different types of people, as described back in chapter four.
On the face of it, that is all the author seems to say and it makes perfect sense. However, this is problematic. R. Pinchas ben Yair did not say that Torah leads to both zehirus and zerizus; he said Torah leads to zehirus and zehirus leads to zerizus. Is the Ramchal accusing R. Pinchas ben Yair of inexactitude?
The simple answer to this question is found in the final paragraph of chapter nine. There the Ramchal says that zerizus belongs after zehirus for as long as people pay no attention to their behavior, excitement for Mitzvos is highly unlikely. It is only after zehirus is achieved that zerizus becomes a possibility. This is of course true, but in chapter eight the Ramchal provides, in his subtle choice of words, a deeper appreciation of the process in which zehirus brings a person to zerizus.
At the end of chapter eight, the author sums up the chapter, claiming that he has described how the same three kinds of inspiring contemplations that worked for zehirus also work for zerizus. But a careful reading shows that the Ramchal has written things differently here. First of all, before the final paragraph, no mention is made of the three different kinds of people. The Ramchal just describes three ways of thinking that lead to zerizus as if they work equally well on all people. More significantly, none of the three "contemplations" found in chapter eight match the "contemplations" found in chapter four! In chapter four we find the fear of flaws for the "shleimei hada'as," the shame of dishonor in the next world for those "inferior to them," and the fear of punishment for "the masses." Compare that to the three "contemplations" of chapter eight: First there is awareness of the value of Mitzvos and the magnitude of our obligation to perform them, then there is thinking about the constant flow of wonderful things that God does for people, and finally, man's dependence on God and the awareness that a failure in divine service could lead to deprivation. The two sets of three just don't match.
It seems that our three friends have evolved since chapter four. While before zehirus contemplations have to be custom-tailored for different kinds of people, after zehirus is achieved and people have grown in their spiritual sensitivity, they can be motivated by an increasing variety of contemplations. And although they still have different "personalities" and the Torah impacts and inspires them in different ways, we can readily see how they have matured and are now not just inspired by the Torah to avoid sin, but each in his own way is motivated to do Mitzvos as well.
Indeed, it is as R. Pinchas ben Yair said. Zehirus leads to zerizus.
He tells us that zhirus and zerizus are actually two sides of the same coin - zehirus is avoiding sin and zerizus is doing Mitzvos - and therefore there is no real difference in method when it comes to acquiring these two traits. Torah leads to zerizus just as it leads to zehirus, with the same three types of inspiration for the three different types of people, as described back in chapter four.
On the face of it, that is all the author seems to say and it makes perfect sense. However, this is problematic. R. Pinchas ben Yair did not say that Torah leads to both zehirus and zerizus; he said Torah leads to zehirus and zehirus leads to zerizus. Is the Ramchal accusing R. Pinchas ben Yair of inexactitude?
The simple answer to this question is found in the final paragraph of chapter nine. There the Ramchal says that zerizus belongs after zehirus for as long as people pay no attention to their behavior, excitement for Mitzvos is highly unlikely. It is only after zehirus is achieved that zerizus becomes a possibility. This is of course true, but in chapter eight the Ramchal provides, in his subtle choice of words, a deeper appreciation of the process in which zehirus brings a person to zerizus.
At the end of chapter eight, the author sums up the chapter, claiming that he has described how the same three kinds of inspiring contemplations that worked for zehirus also work for zerizus. But a careful reading shows that the Ramchal has written things differently here. First of all, before the final paragraph, no mention is made of the three different kinds of people. The Ramchal just describes three ways of thinking that lead to zerizus as if they work equally well on all people. More significantly, none of the three "contemplations" found in chapter eight match the "contemplations" found in chapter four! In chapter four we find the fear of flaws for the "shleimei hada'as," the shame of dishonor in the next world for those "inferior to them," and the fear of punishment for "the masses." Compare that to the three "contemplations" of chapter eight: First there is awareness of the value of Mitzvos and the magnitude of our obligation to perform them, then there is thinking about the constant flow of wonderful things that God does for people, and finally, man's dependence on God and the awareness that a failure in divine service could lead to deprivation. The two sets of three just don't match.
It seems that our three friends have evolved since chapter four. While before zehirus contemplations have to be custom-tailored for different kinds of people, after zehirus is achieved and people have grown in their spiritual sensitivity, they can be motivated by an increasing variety of contemplations. And although they still have different "personalities" and the Torah impacts and inspires them in different ways, we can readily see how they have matured and are now not just inspired by the Torah to avoid sin, but each in his own way is motivated to do Mitzvos as well.
Indeed, it is as R. Pinchas ben Yair said. Zehirus leads to zerizus.
Friday, September 9, 2011
And Zerizus Leads To...
Chapter seven is entitled, "Describing the Components of Zerizus." The author tells us that zerizus consists of two parts: 1) taking advantage of Mitzvah opportunities as soon as they arise, and 2) completing Mitzvos with alacrity, not because you want to get it over with but because you are afraid the Mitzvah might slip away before you are finished doing it.
Luzzatto then goes on to tell us something extraordinary about zerizus. Whereas a person is by nature lazy, acting with zeal and alacrity will create a fundamental change. Acting externally with zerizus transforms you internally into a person who is in love with Hashem and is driven to do Mitzvos.
It is nice to know about the transformative power of zerizus, but why is Luzzatto writing about it here? This chapter is dedicated to describing the components of zerizus; side effects, however positive, are irrelevant. While it is possible that Luzzatto is just trying to encourage us, telling us that zerizus won't be as hard as we think for we will grow into it and eventually enjoy it, I believe our Kabbalist author has something far more fundamental in mind.
The next level after zerizus is nekius. Nekius is the state of being entirely clean of sin - both in deed and in mind. A naki has eradicated his evil inclination and his negative drives, and no longer has any desire to sin. This is an extraordinary spiritual level, one which seems light years ahead of zerizus. Nonetheless, it is the very next level. How does a person get from zerizus to nekius?
Luzzatto deals with this problem in chapter ten and his answer is amazing: Once a person achieves zehirus and zerizus they will automatically transform into a naki! (The only thing lacking is a comprehensive knowledge of Torah. See chapter twelve.) For, as he wrote here, zerizus changes the person internally, developing a growing love for Hashem and Mitzvos. Eventually, the fire of his Yetzer HaRa will be extinguished.
But our question still remains unanswered. So what if zerizus develops into nekius? That is relevant for nekius, not zerizus. Why speak of it here in chapter seven?
The answer can be found in the original words of R. Pinchas ben Yair. "Zerizus leads to Nekius." This is the very definition of zerizus: it is a thing that leads to nekius. And if it doesn't, then it just isn't zerizus. For example, if one were to act with zeal and alacrity because they just wanted to get the Mitzvah over with, such behavior will not create any inner transformation, nor will it lead to nekius. Ergo, such behavior is not zerizus at all. The transformation of the person is thus a defining component of zerizus and that is why it belongs in chapter seven.
It turns out that the ladder of spiritual growth is actually more of an escalator than a ladder. A person is lifted automatically from level one to level two, from level two to level three, and so on. The task is thus far less daunting than one would suppose. One needs only to perform well on their current level - and one day they will discover themselves elevated to the next level.
Luzzatto then goes on to tell us something extraordinary about zerizus. Whereas a person is by nature lazy, acting with zeal and alacrity will create a fundamental change. Acting externally with zerizus transforms you internally into a person who is in love with Hashem and is driven to do Mitzvos.
It is nice to know about the transformative power of zerizus, but why is Luzzatto writing about it here? This chapter is dedicated to describing the components of zerizus; side effects, however positive, are irrelevant. While it is possible that Luzzatto is just trying to encourage us, telling us that zerizus won't be as hard as we think for we will grow into it and eventually enjoy it, I believe our Kabbalist author has something far more fundamental in mind.
The next level after zerizus is nekius. Nekius is the state of being entirely clean of sin - both in deed and in mind. A naki has eradicated his evil inclination and his negative drives, and no longer has any desire to sin. This is an extraordinary spiritual level, one which seems light years ahead of zerizus. Nonetheless, it is the very next level. How does a person get from zerizus to nekius?
Luzzatto deals with this problem in chapter ten and his answer is amazing: Once a person achieves zehirus and zerizus they will automatically transform into a naki! (The only thing lacking is a comprehensive knowledge of Torah. See chapter twelve.) For, as he wrote here, zerizus changes the person internally, developing a growing love for Hashem and Mitzvos. Eventually, the fire of his Yetzer HaRa will be extinguished.
But our question still remains unanswered. So what if zerizus develops into nekius? That is relevant for nekius, not zerizus. Why speak of it here in chapter seven?
The answer can be found in the original words of R. Pinchas ben Yair. "Zerizus leads to Nekius." This is the very definition of zerizus: it is a thing that leads to nekius. And if it doesn't, then it just isn't zerizus. For example, if one were to act with zeal and alacrity because they just wanted to get the Mitzvah over with, such behavior will not create any inner transformation, nor will it lead to nekius. Ergo, such behavior is not zerizus at all. The transformation of the person is thus a defining component of zerizus and that is why it belongs in chapter seven.
It turns out that the ladder of spiritual growth is actually more of an escalator than a ladder. A person is lifted automatically from level one to level two, from level two to level three, and so on. The task is thus far less daunting than one would suppose. One needs only to perform well on their current level - and one day they will discover themselves elevated to the next level.
Thursday, September 8, 2011
The Hidden Cost of Laziness
Chapter six introduces and defines the second level, zerizus.
Zerizus can be translated as "zeal" or "alacrity" (Ofek, Feldheim). However, see "Lights Along the Way" (Artscroll) where R. Twersky refuses to translate the word, claiming there is no fair English equivalent. Regardless of how you translate zerizus, chapter six is basically a manifesto against its antithesis: i.e., laziness.
Man is naturally lazy, Luzzatto tells us, and one who wishes to achieve zerizus must strive to overcome their very nature. Otherwise, man is guaranteed to end up bereft of mitzvos.
Simple enough. But Luzzatto is not satisfied. He quotes Mishlei (24:30-34) in which Shlomo HaMelech contemplates an overgrown vineyard with a broken fence and learns this lesson: "A little sleep, a little slumber, a little folding of the arms to lie down, then your poverty shall come as a runner..." Ramchal then quotes a Midrash which interprets these verses as an analogy. Someone who fails to invest sufficient time and energy into learning will, as a result, fail to understand Torah and then misinterpret it, ultimately leading to violations of the law.
Question: Why is Ramchal talking about learning? His topic here is how laziness works against zerizus. Learning will obviously be damaged by laziness, just like every other mitzvah - why is it singled out?
I think it is clear that Luzzatto is not just giving us learning as an example, but is rather making an additional, important point about zerizus. Laziness has a negative impact on Mitzvah performance in two very different ways.
1) Because of laziness, a person will fail to fulfill his obligations.
2) Because of laziness, a person will not learn enough, and then, due to their lack of training, they will misinterpret Torah - and do Mitzvos wrong!
Although well-intentioned and, if they ever realize their error, these people will assume it was "just a mistake," they are not as innocent as they think. It all comes back to a failure in zerizus.
Zerizus can be translated as "zeal" or "alacrity" (Ofek, Feldheim). However, see "Lights Along the Way" (Artscroll) where R. Twersky refuses to translate the word, claiming there is no fair English equivalent. Regardless of how you translate zerizus, chapter six is basically a manifesto against its antithesis: i.e., laziness.
Man is naturally lazy, Luzzatto tells us, and one who wishes to achieve zerizus must strive to overcome their very nature. Otherwise, man is guaranteed to end up bereft of mitzvos.
Simple enough. But Luzzatto is not satisfied. He quotes Mishlei (24:30-34) in which Shlomo HaMelech contemplates an overgrown vineyard with a broken fence and learns this lesson: "A little sleep, a little slumber, a little folding of the arms to lie down, then your poverty shall come as a runner..." Ramchal then quotes a Midrash which interprets these verses as an analogy. Someone who fails to invest sufficient time and energy into learning will, as a result, fail to understand Torah and then misinterpret it, ultimately leading to violations of the law.
Question: Why is Ramchal talking about learning? His topic here is how laziness works against zerizus. Learning will obviously be damaged by laziness, just like every other mitzvah - why is it singled out?
I think it is clear that Luzzatto is not just giving us learning as an example, but is rather making an additional, important point about zerizus. Laziness has a negative impact on Mitzvah performance in two very different ways.
1) Because of laziness, a person will fail to fulfill his obligations.
2) Because of laziness, a person will not learn enough, and then, due to their lack of training, they will misinterpret Torah - and do Mitzvos wrong!
Although well-intentioned and, if they ever realize their error, these people will assume it was "just a mistake," they are not as innocent as they think. It all comes back to a failure in zerizus.
Peer Pressure
When describing the things that get in the way of proper Zehirut, Ramchal names 3 reasons: Being too busy, not taking life seriously, and having bad friends. Ramchal previously talked about being too busy as being the big challenge to Zehirut, and being overly jovial and not taking things seriously seems to be the direct opposite of Zehirut, so it makes sense why Ramchal mentions these two here.
Having bad friends is interesting, however, as its opposite - having good friends - is not mentioned as one of the positive ways of acquiring Zehirut. This is strange because in Pirkei Avot (Chapter 2) it says "איזוהי דרך ישרה שידבק בה האדם" - "What is the straight path that a person should stick to?" - and one of the answers given there is "חבר טוב" - "a good friend." In the mishna this is contrasted with the question "What is the bad path that a person should distance himself from?" with one of the answers being "bad friends."
Why did Ramchal leave out positive peer pressure?
Having bad friends is interesting, however, as its opposite - having good friends - is not mentioned as one of the positive ways of acquiring Zehirut. This is strange because in Pirkei Avot (Chapter 2) it says "איזוהי דרך ישרה שידבק בה האדם" - "What is the straight path that a person should stick to?" - and one of the answers given there is "חבר טוב" - "a good friend." In the mishna this is contrasted with the question "What is the bad path that a person should distance himself from?" with one of the answers being "bad friends."
Why did Ramchal leave out positive peer pressure?
Tuesday, September 6, 2011
It's All Torah
In chapter five the treatment of level one is completed with a list of three things that ruin it. This will be Luzzatto's modus operandi throughout the book; he will define each level, describe how to get there and then end with a list of things which make it difficult to attain and/or retain that level.
The first item on his list, and the one he spends the most time writing about, is insufficient Torah learning. For after all, R. Pinchas ben Yair was clear that it is Torah that leads to zehirus. The Ramchal describes the attempt to achieve zehirus without Torah as pure foolishness, comparing it to ignoring a doctor's prescription.
Why didn't the Ramchal mention this before? When the Ramchal taught us how to acquire this trait in the previous chapter, he spent little time talking about Torah learning. Granted, he did begin with the quote from R. Pinchas ben Yair, but then he quickly segued to the three methods of acquiring zehirus for the three different kinds of people. Why now, when it comes to listing things that are detrimental to zehirus, does he suddenly put so much emphasis on Torah?
The answer can be found in the opening lines of the previous chapter. There Luzzatto quotes Rabbi Pinchas ben Yoir's teaching that Torah leads to zehirus. However, Luzzatto qualifies it. He writes that Torah leads to Zehirus בדרך כלל, "generally." But בפרט, "specifically," it is Mussar that does it. Is Luzzatto arguing with Rabbi Pinchas ben Yoir? Certainly not! The Ramchal is making a profound statement that is getting lost in translation. To understand it, we should remember that a פרט is, by definition, a part of a כלל. Now reread his words at the beginning of chapter four:
Specifically, [על דרך פרט] what brings to [Zehirus] is contemplating seriousness of the service that man is obligated [to perform] and the depth of judgement for it, and he can extract these [lessons] from the study of biblical narratives and from learning the relevant teachings of the sages.
Luzzatto reiterates the idea in chapter five:
... But, if he studies Torah, when he sees its ways, its Mitzvos and its warnings, a new awakening will eventually develop on its own within him and it will lead him to the good path... As I wrote before, this also includes [בכלל זה ג"כ] the setting of times for analyzing and correcting one's deeds.In short, when Rabbi Pinchas ben Yoir said that Torah leads to Zehirus he was making a very broad and general statement, a כלל. While it is true that any and every Torah teaching leads to Zehirus, there is a specific area of Torah, a פרט of the כלל, that is a more targeted and more effective way to achieve the desired results. These are the "contemplations" described by the Ramchal. And when the Ramchal writes that these lessons can be learned from the biblical narratives and the teachings of the sages, he is not merely referring us to textual sources for inspiration. He is proving his point. If these Mussar lessons are derived from Torah that can only mean one thing: Mussar is Torah!
In chapter four, Luzzatto describes different contemplations for different types of people. Some are motivated by the human perfection offered by Torah, some by its honor and others by the fear of consequences - and Luzzatto shows us that every one of these ideas has its source in Torah. Whichever motivation moves you, it's all Torah. (For a further expansion of this idea, see this post.)
II
Luzzatto tells us that the non-idealistic masses can be motivated by the fear of strict divine justice. He spends a lot of ink bringing example after example of great biblical figures who were punished for their errors and, uncharacteristically, he allows himself to be lead off-topic into the thorny theological problem of reconciling divine justice with divine compassion. But why is all this necessary? Do the masses really need to grapple with these issues? Would it not suffice to simply state that God punishes sin? He could illustrated this fact with the well-known flood of Noah, the burning of Sodom or the ten plagues in Egypt. Surprisingly, Luzzatto fails to cite the explicit biblical Mitzvah to fear Hashem! (cf. Devarim 6:13). Wouldn't these sources be a much more succinct and straightforward way of making his point?
The answer is that when Rabbi Pinchas ben Yoir said that Torah leads to Zehirus, he was not referring to Torah truths, nor was he referring to Mitzvos. As Luzzatto himself writes (in chapters four and five), Rabbi Pinchas ben Yoir was referring specifically to Torah study. Luzzatto's thesis in chapter four is that the fear of God is a subject; a deep and central subject of Torah study. (In fact, this is the central message of the entire book, see the author's introduction.) But how do we know this to be true? Where in Torah does the fear of God appear not as law but as a subject? As we pointed out before, Luzzatto provided the answer in the opening lines of chapter four: "... [He] can extract these [lessons] from the study of biblical narratives and from learning the relevant teachings of the sages." If it comes from Torah, it is Torah.
Fear itself does not develop Zehirus; Torah study does. Specifically, studying the definition of divine justice and its theological implications. In other words, the Sugya of מדת הדין. This is the Torah that leads to Zehirus.
Fear itself does not develop Zehirus; Torah study does. Specifically, studying the definition of divine justice and its theological implications. In other words, the Sugya of מדת הדין. This is the Torah that leads to Zehirus.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)