avakesh

Who shall live and who shall die

Produced by Rabbi N. Daniel Korobkin of Los Angeles, CA. Thanks to R. Michael Green www.RabbiMichaelGreen.com www.RabbiMichaelGreen.com/Blog

The Sefer that found me: Q&A with Avakesh

A Simple Jew asks:

There is a well-known saying that we do not choose the books we read, rather the books choose us. This seems to be somewhat connected to Likutey Moharan #11, in which Rebbe Nachman of Breslov taught that when we enunciate words from the sefer before us, they reveal to us the the areas where we need to do teshuva.

Have you ever felt that you did not choose a sefer, but rather the sefer chose you specifically for the purpose of illuminating your path back to Hashem?

 

I was fourteen when the Mesilas Yeshorim found me.

 

A polite, diffident, overly brainy, and intense teenager, awakening to the vastness and meaningfulness of the world that the Master of the World has set before me, I was not prepared. Under the surface, mostly hidden from my as of yet immature mind, a spiritual awakening was gathering strength and when Messilas Yeshorim came to me, it struck with the force of a gale and an impact of a hurricane. I put the book inside of my Gemorra and toiled at it for three days, all day long, over and over. Fortunately, my rebbi was wise and did not intervene. The book changed me, radically, decisively and forever. I now know that this reaction is not unique among yeshiva bochurim and I met other sensitive souls who had undergone similar experiences.

 

What Rabbi Moshe Chaim Luzzatto offered was an orderly20plan to spiritual perfection, presented with wisdom and authority. I was sure that if I only followed the plan exactly as written, it would take no more than two weeks to achieve its final stages (it did not occur to me to ask why others have not done it as well because at that point it was just me and the book).

 

It did not take long for me to learn that it might take longer, a few months perhaps. Gradually, I understood that bringing Mesilas Yeshorim to life might require a lifetime. Mussar became my pathway into spirituality. I became friends with and proficient in Shaarei Teshuva, Orhos Tsaddikim, Sefer Hayashar, Chovos Halevovos and the whole breadth and length of mussar literature. I wrote a book about the Mussar movement and still teach and lecture about it. I never did go very high on the ladder of Mesilas Yeshorim, but I learned humility and submission. The most valuable lesson that Mesilas Yeshorim taught me was the one grows more from failure than from success.

 

I still believe that Mussar is crucial, especially in the early stages of spiritual growth. Rav Elya Ka plan wrote an insightful essay that compared the approach of Mussar and Chassidus. He analyzed several reports of the meetings between R. Yisroel Salanter and the Rebbe Maharash, bringing out and contrasting the differences in approach between them (http://www.aishdas.org/raek/2derachim.pdf). Chassidus aims to lift a person above the field of the struggle with the evil inclination, through joy, fellowship and striving for spirituality. Mussar wants to reconstruct man’s character. The former is at the danger of self-delusion, thinking that external characteristics of the spiritual lifestyle equate with its accomplishments; the latter risks sinking into exaggerated self-analysis, despondency and fear.

 

I am much older now. I know now that detours bring one closer to the destination than highways, that failure is a better teacher than success, and the God is often found in all the hidden places. The mystical and the complicated mirror the inner man better than simple schematics, and ladders often lead nowhere. Teshuvah is not merely a means to set right what one has spoilt but the very basis for moving forward in the vast, complicated and wonderful worlds of spirituality. Spiritual advancement comes in spurts and unexpectedly, not always when we want it, but always when Hashem desires it. Our job is to be aware and take advantage of the opportunities that he sends us; it demands deep introspection and cannot be forced. Upon this path, Mussar can only take one so far, even though without mussar the path does not even exist.

 

I do not know why Ramchal presented spiritual growth as a linear and directed phenomenon. I now know deeply inside that it is not like that. Nevertheless, Mesilas Yeshorim awakened and launched me, and it will always hold a special place in my heart.

 

 

Saying Torah

 

Copyright Alex Levin 

Khazar capital found!

From Haaretz:

Russian archaeologists said Wednesday they had found the long-lost capital of the Khazar kingdom in southern Russia, a breakthrough for research on the ancient Jewish state.

"This is a hugely important discovery," expedition organiser Dmitry Vasilyev told AFP by telephone from Astrakhan State University after returning from excavations near the village of Samosdelka, just north of the Caspian Sea.

"We can now shed light on one of the most intriguing mysteries of that period -- how the Khazars actually lived. We know very little about the Khazars -- about their traditions, their funerary rites, their culture," he said.

The city was the capital of the Khazars, a semi-nomadic Turkic peoples who adopted Judaism as a state religion, from between the 8th and the 10th centuries, when it was captured and sacked by the rulers of ancient Russia.

At its height, the Khazar state and its tributaries controlled much of what is now southern Russia, western Kazakhstan, eastern Ukraine, Azerbaijan and large parts of Russia's North Caucasus region.

 

Comment: What important manuscripts or inscriptions might we now find?

Hashem is King

You stand this day before Hashem your G-d (Devarim 29,9).

The Zohar says that 'this day' refers to Rosh Hashana.[1] With this in mind, let us discuss how one stands in prayer before Hashem on this Day of Judgment.

Say before Me the verses of kingship in order to make me King over you (Rosh Hashana 16)

The liturgy of Rosha Hashana is unique in that it centers around the verses of Malchiyous (Kingships), Zikhronos (rememberances) and Shofaros (shofar blowing). Rosh Hashana 32a requires the Musaf prayer to be arranged around 10 verses that contain these concepts. Does it mean ten in total, divided in groups of three Mlachiyos, three Zikhronos, three Shafaros (and presumably a closing verse as well to complete the set of ten) or does it mean ten of each? Tannaim disagree about this.  R. Yehuda says three of each and R. Yosi requires that for each of the categories we must start with 3 verses from the Chumash, follow with three verses from Prophets and three from the Kesuvim and close with one again from the Torah. There is no great difficulty in finding appropriate verses for Zikhronos and Shofaros but there are only three such verses in the Chumash for Malchiyous. We have no verse left from Chumash to close the set of the ten of Malchiyos.

R. Yosi in Rosh Hashana 32b solves this difficulty by proposing that the Shema is also a verse of Malchiyous and that we close with it; R. Yehuda objects that Shema is not a verse of Malchiyos at all (as it does not contain within it an idea of Kingship).

R. Yehuda's opinion appears most reasonable; after all there is no explicit mention of Kingship in the Shema? What is the warrant for R. Yosi's opinion?

An explanation may arise from another disagreement of R. Yosi and R. Yeshuda on the same page. They argue about how many Malchiyos are contained in Tehilim 24:7-9 and 47:7-8. Both agree that "G-d is King over nations; G-d sat on his Holy throne" is considered one (not two) expression of Kingship.

Consideration of the parallel passage in the Yersushalmi suggests that what is in question is how clear and unambiguous must the expression of kingship be in order to be used as such in prayer. R. Yehuda is content with a general reference to G-d as ruler[2] while R. Yehuda insists on a more precise definition - one that explicitly expresses reign over the affairs of the world. For example, in the Yerushalmi they disagree whether verses that use the name E'lokim rather than an appellation King can be used for kingships.

Underlying the disagreement is the fact that the Shema contains within it the idea of G-d as sovereign over our world for He is Hashem Elokeinu. At the same time, the idea is not well developed; in fact, the Rabbis placed an explanation immediately after the first verse of the Shema that makes this idea explicit - Blessed Be the Glory of the Name of His Kingdom?. While Name, Glory and Kingdom have specific meanings in this context[3], the Kingdom is over the world in which we live and function.

R. Yosi and R. Yehuda followed their pre-existent views in determining whether the Shema can be used for Malchiyos. R. Yosi requires clarity and rejects the first verse of the Shema as not specific enough; R.Yehuda, in accordance with his view in the Yerushalmi  that does not strive for absolutely explicit definition of kingship, does accept it as adequate.[4]

The methodology that explains a disagreement between two Sages based on their views elsewhere, is called in the language of Talmudic learning - leshitoso, or, 'according to his own opinion'. Emblematic of such an approach is a recently published work that connects and explains every position of R. Shimon Ben Yochai in the Talmudin accordance to his previously cited view. This style of learning has lost ground in the 'Lithuanian' yeshiva world over the past century but can still be seen and heard in the Chassidic communities of Hungarian origin. At its worst it can be forced and inauthentic; at its best, little can compare to it for grandeur and beauty of expression.

May Hashem bless all for you with goodness, health and sweetness in the coming year and may we merit to see Him assert his Kingship in the year to come.

---

1 See Likutei Torah for an elaboration of a deeper connection between this verse and Rosh Hashana liturgy.

2 One might see this disagreement as one about Deism, a system of thought that believes in G-d as benevolent Creator but does not accept Him as actively involved in the affairs of the world. R. Yehuda does not find it necessary to be concerned about a possible Deisitic misinterpretation of Rosh Hashana prayer but R. Yosi does.

3 See the next footnote.

4 This approach is explained and referenced at greater length in M. Levin, With all your heart: The Shema in Jewish worship, practice and life, Tagum/ Feldheim, 1996. A different explanation of the disagreement is found in Pachad Yitshak, Rosh Hashana 22. Another explanation of the disagreement may be based on Vilna Gaon's comments to Sifra D'Tsniusa. He explains that there are two kinds of Kingship. The first one is expression of G-d's authority through miracles and signs and the other - man's acceptance of Him as Ruler and King. The Rabbis disagree whether the Shema which is only an expression of the latter, can serve as the verse of Kingship for purposes of prayer.

Ours and theirs

When the Baal Shem Tov made the first chassidim, the Yetzer Hara was in great straights, for as he said to his followers, "Now the Chassidim of the Besht will set the world ablaze with their holiness". But he then thought of a way out. He disguised himself as someone else and went to two chassidim who lived together in a certain town. "Your avodah is praiseworthy", he said to them, " but you there should be at eelast ten of you, so you can daven in your own minyan".  He fetched ten of his own people and joined them to these two chassidim. And since they had no money to buy a Torah scroll and other things, he brought them a rich man - also one of his devotees and he provided them with all that they needed. He did the same everywhere. When he had finished, he said to his followers: "Now we no longer need to be afraid, for we have the majority, and that is what counts".

(R. Simcah Bunim of Pschysha, Siach Sarfei Kodesh, 1:44, 34

Kapporos Guidelines

Download KICKaporosSuggestions.pdf

Judge your neighbor ...

I saw this story in R. Lazer Brody's "The Trail to Tranquility", with Kaye, a high powered executive in an airport. Now comes a video version.

A man with an attitude

The three ways of Psak

Ishim V'Shitot has an interesting post on trends in psak. 

Here is my comment:

Halachah k'basroi (the law is according to the latter authority) is very relevant here. In fact, it is pivotal. As Prof. Ta Shma (whom you referenced in your article and who goes through the sources; my application of his points is my own) points out, the Sephardic and Ashkenazic understanding of this principle differ greatly.

Among Ashkenazim there are two views.

1. The latest PUBLISHED posek is the basroi and we follow him (the currently accepted approach). The basis for this understanding is that although we are dwarfs, we stand on the shoulders of giants and see farther than they. A vriant of this is the idea of "Posek Acharon", which is quite recent and novel and is applied mostly to R. Elyashiv. 

2. The posek who is NOW considering the question is the basroi and has the right to follow his own judgment even against previous poskim.R. Moshe Feinstein was such a posek. He often posed a question and gave a novel answer and then based a leniency on his own answer. This truly took courage but was not an unncommon approach among Litvishe poskim in the past. Not having many seforim and little access to acharonim except the commentareis to Shulchan Aruch due to poverty has, I think, a lot to do with it. Aruch Hashulchan is a mild proponent of this view as well, having no compunctions about relying on his own judgment, a very Litvish approach.

3.Among Sephardim, all authorities are important, because halacha k'basroi is a principle that applied to Amoraim and not in contemporary psak.  So one collects all of them and follows the majority, which is the approach of R. Ovadiah.This is, of course, beyond the capacity of mere mortals, especially in these days of many new published manuscripts, but the Mishna Berura in Biur Halacha sometimes attempts to use this approach as well. In his hands, it tends toward ruling strictly, so as to take into account substantial minority opinions.