The Re-Invention of Yissachar-Zevulun: a “Push Button Judaism” Distortion

The Re-Invention of Yissachar-Zevulun:

a “Push Button Judaism” Distortion

By Eliakim Willner

It’s New! It’s Different! And It’s Wrong!

A recent article spoke glowingly about a “modern day version of the Torah’s Yissachar-Zevulun partnership”; an arrangement wherein members of a Kollel would daven for the success of a local businessman’s venture and would share in the profits if the venture succeeded.

Innovations in avodas Hashem always have to be very carefully scrutinized, especially when, as is the case with the aforementioned “partnership arrangement”, there were no hurdles precluding such “partnerships” a hundred or even a thousand years ago. Yet we have no prior record of such practices. Mosdos in earlier generations would presumably have latched on to such a potentially lucrative fund-raising tactic if it were legitimate.

In fact, this arrangement does not stand up to scrutiny. It exemplifies several hashkafic weaknesses that are symptomatic of the general 21^st century mindset and which have begun to affect the thinking of our own community as well.

Yissachar and Zevulun Would Not Approve

We’ll begin with the 21^st century tendency to gloss over accuracy for the sake of journalistic effect. Whatever the legitimacy of the “partnership arrangement” described in the article it is most assuredly not a Yissachar-Zevulun partnership, “modern day” or otherwise. The halachos of Yissachar-Zevulun relationships are complex but the fundamental structure is not: Zevulun provides sustenance to Yissachar, who spends his time learning Torah. Part of the reward for the Torah learning accrues to Zevulun in exchange for his material support of Yissachar.

The only reward Zevulun can count on from a bona fide Yissachar-Zevulun relationship is spiritual. In no way is he “buying” a guarantee of success in his business enterprises nor does he have grounds for complaint if he does not achieve success.  An arrangement whereby a businessman provides support for Torah study in expectation of material and not spiritual reward is emphatically not Yissachar-Zevulun. An arrangement whereby the support provided Yissachar is conditional on Zevulun’s material success or anything else is emphatically not Yissachar-Zevulun. Such arrangements are the antithesis of Yissachar-Zevulun. To use that term to describe them is a serious distortion that turns a venerable arrangement for support of Torah study on its head!

Yissachar-Zevulun Re-Invented: A Symptom of “Push-Button” Ruchnius

In fact it is questionable whether such an arrangement is legitimate or effective at all, whether it benefits the businessman providing the funds, whether it benefits the Kollel receiving them, and whether it benefits klal Yisroel.

It is a true that, as we learn in the haftorah of Shabbos HaGadol, one may, as it were, “test” Hashem by attaching conditions to tzdakah donations. However there are no guarantees regarding how the condition will be fulfilled, when it will be fulfilled and even, if it will be fulfilled.

We live in a push-button society. When we flick a switch we expect the light to go on – it almost always does and we are thus frustrated when it does not. When we press on the accelerator we expect the car to pick up speed and we are frustrated when it does not. We are, in general, a society that has become conditioned to expect instant gratification. “Click on the ‘Buy Now’ button to add the item to your shopping cart and it will be delivered tomorrow”.

However, cause and effect in ruchnius isn’t nearly so simple, immediate or obvious.  We understand the operation of a light switch and car; they are completely deterministic. But we understand very little about the ruchniusdike factors that underlie the hashgacha pratis that determines what happens to us. We do know that giving tzdakah conditionally, mitigates in favor of our condition being met. But we don’t know all the other factors at play and thus predictability in any sense is impossible. And immediate gratification is usually not forthcoming.

Bitachon: Yes. Instant Gratification: No

Bitachon is a cornerstone of yahadus – the proper attitude of a baal bitachon is to trust that Hashem is controlling events down to the last detail, that He “hears” our requests (and tzdakah conditions), that He wants to benefit us – and that He knows better than we do what is to our ultimate good. We may not get what we want when we want it, no matter how fervently we ask for it and no matter how much tzdakah we give. We are permitted, even required, to make our requests of Hashem. Having done so, we are required to assume an attitude of kol man d’avid Rachmana l’tav avid.

Being matzdik es haDin is a fundamental Jewish trait. We say, “Posaiach es yodecha u’masbiah l’chol chai ratzon”, G-d satisfies the desire of every living thing, and we follow it immediately with, “Tzadik Hashem b’chol drochov v’chasid b’chol maasav”, a declaration that all the ways of Hashem are righteous – even if an immediate desire is unfulfilled. When the Bais HaMikdosh was completed Shlomo Ha Melech asked Hashem to respond favorably to the requests of the non-Jews who came to pray there – knowing that, while non-Jews would lose faith if their prayers weren’t answered in an obvious way, Jews would not.

Faith, patience, acceptance, are characteristic of Jews. They are uncharacteristic of the general 21^st century population. Thus we have to hold fast to our values or we risk being sucked into the vortex of the prevailing and antithetical 21^st century value system.

Building Walls Against False Values

Indeed, these false values have already begun to leech into our thought processes, and the “partnership arrangement” described in the article is symptomatic of a creeping trend toward facile religious devices that are expected to yield instant and foolproof gratification. It is akin to other contemporary manifestations of the same disease: seeking “segulos” as a “push-button” means to achieve desires, consulting “mekubalim” in the expectation of immediate results, responding favorably to flyers from tzdakah organizations filled with “case studies” of people who, with disaster staring them in the face, make desperate pledges and are miraculously and instantly saved.

Like those other quick-fix religious tricks, the “partnership arrangement” sets false expectations. A businessman with an imminent deal is expecting a concrete positive outcome when he enters into this partnership – whatever the “fine print” of the “contract” may say. That expectation is reinforced when he is assured by Rabbis, whom he presumably respects, that this arrangement “works”.

What will his reaction be if and when the deal falls through – as it very well might, since, as noted earlier, Heaven cannot be manipulated by flicking a switch? A yeridah in bitachon is likely. A diminuition of respect for talmidei chachomim is inevitable.  And the more common such “partnerships” become, the more pervasive the yeridah in bitachon and diminuition of respect will become in our general society.

Moreover, conditioned now to view donations to mosdos as business deals more than as mitzvos, the businessman will be much less likely to make a donation in the future – after all, he’s seen that it’s a “bad deal”; why enter into it again?

Our Kollelim are supposed to be bastions of Torahs emes, beacons of light to their respective communities. It is saddening to see some of them inadvertently peddling spiritual snake oil instead.

A proponent of the “partnership arrangement” enthuses in the article, “The concept is to make Hashem your business partner. When you’re negotiating a deal you feel that Hakadosh Baruch Hu is with you. The extra confidence it brings is a wonderful feeling”.

May we all realize that Hashem is “with us” all the time, not just when we’ve pushed the right button, that davening earnestly to Hashem on our own behalf is far more effective than outsourcing the job to others, that proper hashkafos and bitachon provide all the “extra confidence” one could ever need – and may we be zoche to u’malah haaretz daiah es Hashem and to a complete geulah b’korov!

The Power of Thought and Ayin HoRah

The Power of Thought and Ayin HoRah

By Eliakim Willner

Eliakim Willner is author of “Nesivos Olam – Nesiv HaTorah: An Appreciation of Torah Study”, a translation with commentary of a work by the Maharal of Prague, published by Artscroll Mesorah. This article is adapted from his forthcoming sequel, “Nesivos Olam – Nesiv HaAvodah: The Philosophy and Practice of Prayer”.

Introduction

The secular world views thought as an intangible brain activity with no implication beyond micro-current flowing through neurons. It is actions that count, they say, and thoughts that do not lead to actions have no import and are therefore meaningless.

This, however, is not the Jewish perspective on thought. The subject is wide-ranging and is worthy of a book in its own right. In this article we will summarize the Jewish perspective on thought with a focus on ayin hora, or evil eye – one of the better known areas where the reality of thought plays a significant role.

The Reality and Potency of Thought

The 10^th of the Rambam’s 13 principles of faith is that Hashem, “…knows all the deeds of human beings and their thoughts…”. This is evident in that there are commandments that are purely thought-based, such as belief in Hashem. There are also prohibitions that are triggered by motivation such as, “Do not… place a stumbling block before the blind” (Vayikra 19:14) which encompasses intentionally giving bad advice in order to achieve personal gain. The verse continues, “and you shall fear your G-d”. Rashi explains that the verse adds this phrase as a wake-up call to the advice-giver. He might want to claim that his advice was well-meant and not intended for his own benefit, so the verse exhorts him to remember that Hashem knows his motivations and thoughts and if they are in fact selfish he will have to face the consequences. It is clear that our thoughts are not ours alone. They are known outside of ourselves.

Beyond that, thoughts have an effect on the physical world. See Nefesh HaChaim, Shaar Aleph, and in particular chapters 4 and 14, where Rav Chaim Volozhiner explains that our actions, words and thoughts have the power to affect the celestial worlds, and that since the celestial worlds control the flow of Hashem’s beneficence to our own world, improper thoughts and motivations can negatively affect events in our physical world, and proper thoughts and motivations can positively affect events in our physical world. He cites the verse, “He forms their hearts together, He understands all their deeds” (Tehillim 33:15) – the same verse cited by the Rambam in support of his 10^th principle.

Thoughts, then, have both a reality and a potency outside our minds. Not only do they accrue merit or demerit to their “owners” but they also affect the world-at-large as well.

The Power of an Individual’s Thoughts and the Evil Eye

It is also possible for an individual’s thoughts to have a positive or negative effect even on specific people. In Michtav MiEliyahu v.3 pages 96-97 Rav Eliyahu Dessler explains that Hashem created man, as the Torah teaches, “in the image of G-d” (Beraishis 9:6) and that means that Hashem gave man capabilities “resembling” His own, as it were. Now, Hashem created the world by willing it into existence (in ten “steps”, as discussed by our Sages). We were granted a similar power to affect reality by willing things to happen. Our thoughts actually create an “energy” that triggers events.

From a practical standpoint these events often do not come to fruition because the object of our wish may himself have wishes that run counter to our own and the energy created by his wishes may overpower and negate the energy of our own wishes. Possibly he has merits that shield him from the negative effects of our wishes.

Nonetheless, even if the energy does not come to fruition on its intended object, it remains in existence and must find an “outlet”. The Maharal in Chapter 2 of Beer Hagolah compares this pent-up energy to throwing a rock with force. If it hits its target the force is expended but if it is blocked it bounces back and rebounds on the person who did the throwing.

The Maharal explains how this works in the context of the aidim zomimim (false witness) laws. The Torah specifies that false witnesses suffer the sentence that would have been imposed on their scapegoat had their testimony not been disproven. However this applies only if the sentence on the intended scapegoat had not already been carried out. For example, if the false witnesses testified that their scapegoat killed someone – a capital offense – and their testimony was discredited, the false witnesses would themselves be subject to capital punishment, but only if their scapegoat had not yet been executed. If he had been executed the false witnesses would not be executed.

This provision seems counter-intuitive. It would seem that the harsher punishment should apply if the scapegoat had been executed rather than only when he was still alive! The Maharal explains that the will of the false witnesses to harm the scapegoat generates a fatal negative energy that must find release. If the scapegoat is in fact killed that negative energy was expended. If their intent to harm the scapegoat was not actualized, however, the negative energy is active and it bounces back on the false witnesses themselves, causing them to suffer the fate they intended for their scapegoat – like the analogy of a rock thrown with force hitting a wall and ricocheting back on the thrower.

Rav Dessler writes that if all humankind joined in willing a common goal it would be in its power to bring it about since there would be no counter for all the common thought-energy created thereby. Because that common goal might not be a good one, Hashem blocked such events from taking place by making it impossible for mankind to unite for an evil common goal – this is the underlying explanation of the events of the tower of Bavel (see Beraishis 11). Humankind will only be able to join in a common goal at the end of days when all will join in service to Hashem and there will no longer be a motivation toward evil.

Rav Chaim Friedlander, citing Rav Dessler and the Chazon Ish, whom we will quote shortly, discusses this as well in Sifsei Chaim, Pirkei Emunah V’Hashgacha, page 393 and explains that this concept is the basis behind ayin horah, or “evil eye”. A very common impetus for willing something negative to happen to another person is jealousy or simply an inability to begrudge someone else their good fortune. The negative energy released is real and dangerous and thus our Sages urge us to be circumspect about our possessions and good fortune and avoid ostentation and braggadocio. (It is called “evil eye” and not “evil thought” because the process of casting ill-will on a person begins with seeing him or his possessions, as we will explain).

What are the mechanics behind this negative thought energy and its ability to have a harmful effect on others? Rav Dessler, in Michtav MiEliyahu 4, p. 6, explains that no man is a spiritual island; we are all interconnected at our spiritual roots and are therefore interdependent. We all derive some degree of spiritual energy from every other being. People who do not begrudge others their good fortune, whose very existence bothers them, blot these others out from any of their emanations of positive spiritual energy. Therefore, to the extent that the web of interdependencies that sustains the evil eye victim relies on the evil eye perpetrator, the victim is cut off from a vital life source. He is weakened, vulnerable and susceptible to harm.

In this light we understand that ayin horah is very real and not at all a “superstition”. It is discussed in Gemara and cited as a factor affecting Jewish law – halacha. For example, one may not display a lost object, even for its own benefit (air it out, etc.) if visitors are present because it may be damaged, as Rashi explains, by ayin horah of the visitors (Baba Metziah 30a). One may not stand in the field of his fellow when the crop is ripe because, as Rashi explains, he may damage it through his ayin horah (Baba Basra 2b). Two brothers, or a father and son, may not be called consecutively to the Torah because of ayin horah (Shulchan Aruch Orach Chaim 141:6). And, soberingly, the Gemara in Baba Metziah 107b says that Rav went to a cemetery, recited incantations over the individual graves to ascertain the cause of death and reported that ninety-nine percent died through ayin horah, and only one percent through natural causes.

The Chazon Ish discusses the power of thought to affect events in Likutim, Baba Basra 14, #21. He writes, citing several sources in the Gemara, that a person’s thoughts can imperceptibly trigger real-world events and that this is one of the enigmatic aspects of creation. A fleeting thought, he says, can wreak serious destruction on substantial physical structures. Therefore when people gossip about a successful venture, they jeopardize it since that can cause jealousy and result in the evil eye.

Evil Eye in the Context of Divine Justice

One must keep in mind, the Chazon Ish, cautions, that Hashem’s will is behind all events and that if it were not the will of Hashem for damage to occur no evil eye could instigate it. The evil eye in this respect is one of the tools in Hashem’s arsenal, so to speak, that He uses to carry out His will. [It is no different from a gun wielded by a criminal – which also appears to cause harm even though it is also only an agent of Hashem in carrying out His will.]

In this light it is clear that one can only suffer from an evil eye as a result of a divine decree. Negative divine decrees are typically the outcome of improper actions. One way a person can bring evil eye vulnerability on himself is by ostentatiously flaunting possessions or attributes in a manner that evokes jealousy in others. While jealousy is improper, a jealous person nonetheless suffers and a person who causes others to be jealous is responsible for their suffering. This can activate the divine attribute of justice and cause a revaluation of his entitlement to the things he was flaunting, in light of the pain he caused to others by making them jealous of him – and to possibly lose those things (from Michtav MiEliyahu 3, p. 313).

(It is also plausible, the Chazon Ish says, that the greater the person, the greater the potency of his “eye” in both positive and negative senses. There are also factors that affect susceptibility to the evil eye – for example there are times when Hashem’s attribute of strict justice is dominant and people are judged more harshly than they would be otherwise. At such times the evil eye is more likely to have its negative effect.)

Evil Eye as a “Klippo”

Rav Shlomo Alkabetz, in his Kabbalah-based work Shoresh Yishai on Rus, associates the evil eye with a klippah, a spiritual entity rooted in impurity. Klippos, like all spiritual entities, are agents of Hashem, but these particular agents are enforcers when punishment is called for. The klippah associated with the evil eye is named Ra’ah, which means “evil”. It attaches itself to that which a miserly eye is cast upon, infecting it and using it as a “base” from which to emanate harm.

Why, asks Rav Alkabetz (on Rus 2:2), did Boaz warn Rus not to collect harvest leavings from fields other than his own? The answer is that some field owners resented the stricture to permit the poor to collect the leavings. They possessed an ayin ra’ah, or evil eye, and thereby invoked the klippah named Ra’ah, which attached itself to the leavings in their fields. Gathering and using those leavings would thus bring misfortune to the hapless poor person who collected them. Boaz was warning Rus to avoid those harmful leavings and to stick with those in his own field since, unlike some of the other field owners, Boaz had an ayin tova, a benevolent eye, and his leavings would thus not be harmful to the leaving-collectors.

The Maharal on Evil Eye

The Maharal devotes Nesiv Ayin Tov (“a good eye”) of Nesivos Olam to discussing this subject. Similar to Rav Alkabetz, but without referencing Klippos, he notes, based on a Gemara in Sotah 38b, that the evil eye has contaminating properties and substances infected with it are outside the pale. Attempting to benefit from these substances is equivalent to attempting to benefit from substances that are tameh, spiritually befouled, and is actually (per the Gemara) prohibited. Rav Dessler explains this to mean that since benevolence is one of the world’s foundations, a person who lacks it – such as a person who possesses an evil eye – shakes the world’s very foundations and weakens his own attachment to existence as well as the attachment of those who associate with him, by causing them to benefit from his evil-eye-infected possessions. The prohibition against benefiting from these substances is to safeguard people from this danger.

The Maharal also writes that the negative energy emanated by a person with an ayin horah is so palpable that birds can actually sense it and most of them will therefore avoid traps set for them because they can detect the negative energy of the bird-trappers. In discussing the relationship between ayin horah and the egla arufa ritual he states that ayin horah can kill – as borne out by the Gemara in Baba Metziah cited above – and he labels the person casting the ayin horah a murderer.

The Maharal concludes the Nesiv with, “A person should take extreme care to protect his possessions from ayin horah, as our Sages taught, ‘blessing devolves only on items that are hidden from the eye’ (Taanis 8b) as the verse indicates, ‘Hashem will order the blessing to be with you in your granaries’ (Devarim 28:8). [The blessing takes effect when the produce is hidden in the granaries and not when it is exposed.]

Antidotes for Evil Eye

The first line of defense against the evil eye is circumspection. As noted above, flying below the radar with respect to one’s possessions and attributes inoculates them against the evil eye. However we are not hermits and it is not always possible to avoid exposing one’s assets to others.

The Gemara in Brachos 55a prescribes advice for those who wish to protect themselves from the evil eye. It suggests that one should grasp his right thumb in [the palm of] his left hand, and his left thumb in [the palm of] his right hand and say, “anah ploni bar plonis mi’zarah d’Yosef k’asina, d’loh shalta bay aina bisha”. “I, Ploni [his name] son of Plonis [his mother’s name] am a descendant of Yosef, who was immune to the evil eye”. The Gemara goes on to explain why Yosef was immune to the evil eye, as we will discuss shortly. The origin of this advice is a Gemara in Brachos 20a which states that Rabbi Yochanan did, for good reason, something that could cause the evil eye but claimed immunity from it as a descendant of Yosef. The commentators cite verses to explain that all Jews are considered the spiritual descendants of Yosef even if they are not his physical descendants, so we may all use this formula.

Rav Chaim Kanievsky shlita, as cited in Sefer Doleh U’Mashkeh p. 370 and in Sefer Segulas Rabboseinu p. 138 recommends this practice to those who fear the evil eye. He also specified that the mother’s name, rather than the father’s name (as some versions of the Gemara have it) be used in the formula.

The Ben Ish Chai in Sefer Ben Yehoyada on the Gemara in Brachos provides a Kabbalah-based reason for the grasping of the thumbs. He explains that the thumbs, which are separate from the other fingers, represent Yisroel, who are separate from the other nations. The other four fingers with the palm, in which the opposing thumb is grasped, contain thirteen joints (three on each finger plus the wrist) which is the Gematria numeric value of echod, one, and of ahava, love. Grasping the thumbs in the manner described creates a unity with a value of twenty-six (thirteen doubled) which is the Gematria value of Hashem’s ineffable name (yud followed by hai following by vov followed by hai). Presumably he means that this action envelopes Yisroel (thumbs) in our love of Hashem (who is One) and places us under the protection of Hashem via invocation of his ineffable name. More information on this intriguing shield against the evil eye can be found in Sefer Segulas Rabboseinu by Yishai Mazalmian (5763).

Finally, if we are claiming protection from the evil eye as descendants of Yosef it behooves us to understand why Yosef was immune to the evil eye and attempt to emulate him as best we can. The Gemaros in Brachos gives two  reasons. The first is based on the blessings Yaakov gave the sons of Yosef (Beraishis 48:16). In those blessings he compared the descendants of Yosef to fish, who are immune to the evil eye because they are concealed by the water. As explained above, concealment of one’s assets is the first line of defense against the evil eye.  The second reason is that Yosef steadfastly resisted the blandishments of the wife of Potiphar (Beraishis 39) and refused to sin with her – as the Gemara puts it, “the eye that refused to sate itself on that which did not belong to him is shielded from the evil eye”.

Rav Dessler (Michtav MiEliyahu 4 p. 6) explains that both properties derive from fish. Since they live under water, not only are they shielded from the gaze of others, but they live in their own world, isolated from the goings-on in the dry-land world around them. They are not seen by the “outside” and they do not see, and therefore cannot covet, what others have on the outside.

If we inculcate both these properties of Yosef into our own lives – that is, we are circumspect with our possessions and we build walls around ourselves to avoid the temptations of the outside world, and thus do not cast our eye on the possession of others – we will be secure, like Yosef, against ayin hora. In that event we can legitimately call ourselves Yosef’s descendants and utilize the Gemara’s segulah with a clean conscience.

May Hashem protect us from the ayin horah of others and bless us to project only ayin tov onto others.

The Maharal on Milah and Redemption

The Maharal on Milah and Redemption

By Eliakim Willner

Eliakim Willner is author of “Nesivos Olam – Nesiv HaTorah: An Appreciation of Torah Study”, a translation with commentary of a work by the Maharal of Prague, published by Artscroll/Mesorah. This article is adapted from his forthcoming continuation of the Nesivos Olam series, “Nesivos Olam – Nesiv HaAvodah: The Philosophy and Practice of Prayer”.

Prior to our redemption from Egypt as discussed in this week’s parsha, we were commanded to perform two commandments that were blood-related – Milah, or circumcision, and Korban Pesach, the Pesach lamb sacrifice. What is the relationship of these two mitzvos to redemption from Egypt? In this article we will answer that question with a focus on the inner meaning of the mitzvah of Milah as explained by the Maharal in his various seforim.

Milah and the Land of Israel

We begin with a passage from the Maharal’s Nesiv HaAvodah, chapter 18:

“From chapter Shlosha SheAcholu (Brachos 48b): “We learned in a Braiso: … Nachum the Elder said, one must mention Bris [in the land blessing].”

“What is the relationship between Bris… to the land [of Israel], such that it is vital to the second blessing,? The answer centers around the fact that the land is sanctified, and apart from other lands. For this reason the nation that possesses the land similarly has to be apart from other nations. This is why Hashem commanded us to be circumcised. The land demands that its inhabitants be apart from other nations just as it is apart from other lands, and Milah, and the sanctity that it brings, are the only characteristics that definitively set Yisroel apart from the other nations. Milah is the excision of the foreskin, which represents lowliness, degradation, corporeality, physicality.  Its removal thus brings sanctity.  This is why we say [in the Milah blessing] asher kidash yedid mibeten, “…Who sanctified the beloved one from the womb”. (Rashi on the Gemara in Shabbos 137b that provides the text of this blessing explains these words to mean that from the time Avrohom was originally commanded to perform Milah all Jewish males are sanctified in potential form even while still in the womb, in anticipation of their forthcoming Milah.)

What does the Maharal mean? Although our entire bodies are physical the foreskin represents the depths of physicality, to the extent that it prevents our having a close relationship to Hashem. In Tiferes Yisroel chapter 19 the Maharal writes that the difference between our physical nature and Hashem’s purely spiritual nature made a relationship between man and Hashem impossible until the advent of Avrohom, who “discovered” Hashem and made a degree of closeness with Him possible. The totally physical nature of the foreskin precluded implementing that closeness so Hashem commanded Avrohom to remove his foreskin, thus doing away with the final impediment to achieving closeness with Hashem. Avrohom’s progeny, Yisroel, were commanded to maintain this practice so that they, too, could achieve closeness with Hashem. As the Zohar says (3:14a, 93b and 73b), “In what way does Yisroel form a bond with Hashem? Through the holy seal that is impressed on their flesh - their Bris Milah”. (As with many concepts in the Maharal, there are several “layers” of explanation that build one on another. We will add an additional dimension to the Bris of Avrohom later.)

Milah, which enables a closeness with Hashem, thus became the Bris, the covenant, that formalizes and finalizes our close relationship with Hashem. The Maharal elaborates on this concept further in Chidushei Aggados on Nedarim 31b, where he writes that Milah represents man’s “finishing touch”; an act by man, on his person, that completes Hashem’s creation of him. This “partnership” relationship, implemented in man’s person is the basis for the covenant “partnership”.

Now, the source for the Maharal’s statement that the land mandates Milah is a Medrash in Beraishis Rabbah 46:9 which says, “If Avrohom’s children uphold Bris Milah, they will enter the land and if not they will not enter the land”. Israel is the land where the Shechina resides, the land that is under Hashem’s direct supervision, as it were, as the Maharal explains in Gur Aryeh on Beraishis 17:8. Since Hashem “lives” in Israel and since He cannot interact with people who retain their foreskins, it follows that the nation that is destined to inherit the land and “coexist” there with Hashem must practice Milah.

Milah – Enabler of Existence

In addition to removing the barrier to a relationship between Hashem and Yisroel, Milah, on a general level, enables a relationship between Hashem and mankind. The Gemara in Nedarim 31b states that, “Milah is significant because if not for Milah Hashem would not have created His world”. The Maharal in Chidushei Aggados on that Gemara writes that the world would have no basis for existence without Milah because Milah is the covenant between Hashem and mankind and without it there would be no relationship between Hashem and mankind. Since the world was created for the sake of that relationship there would be no point in the world persisting otherwise. (As we discussed earlier, Yisroel is mankind’s “representative” in mankind’s relationship with Hashem which is why Milah is specifically mandated for Jews. See Rambam, Mishna Torah, Melachim 10:7.)

Targum Onkelos translates “Bris” as kayama, a force that maintains. Bris Milah is the “maintainer” of the relationship between Hashem and mankind.

Milah Prevents Destruction

The Maharal in Gur Aryeh on Beraishis 41:55 discusses why Yosef demanded that the Egyptians circumcise themselves prior to his selling them food during the years of famine. The intent was not conversion – we do not encourage non-Jews to convert – but rather, Yosef, with his divine vision, realized that the reason the produce that the Egyptians themselves hoarded for the famine rotted was because the Egyptians were uncircumcised. Milah is a “maintainer”; it promotes persistence. Lack of Milah – the presence of the foreskin – leads to the opposite: rotting and disintegration. That is why the private produce of the Egyptians rotted and that is why Yosef commanded them to circumcise themselves.

Milah – Our Connection with the Metaphysical

Although Milah is a physical act on a physical person it is essentially metaphysical in nature in that it elevates man to a state where he can have a connection with Hashem. In Chidushei Aggados on Nedarim 31a the Maharal writes that Milah is on the eighth day because eight is step beyond the physical world. The physical world is represented by seven – a central point (1) with arcs extending towards each of the four points of the compass (4), and up and down (2). The world, which was created in seven days, is bound by time and space. Eight projects us into a metaphysical world that is not limited by those boundaries.

The Maharal often distinguishes between matter and form. Matter is physical. Form is not. Eight-day Milah is in the category of metaphysical form.

The Gemara in Nedarim 31a declares, “Great is Milah in that it did not let pass a delay of even one hour on the part of the righteous Moshe”. The reference is to the incident described in Shmos 4:25-26 (see the commentary of Rashi) where, despite Moshe’s greatness, his life was at risk because he briefly tarried before performing Milah on his son. Why is this indicative of the greatness of Milah? The reason Milah is unforgiving of delay is because its origins are in a world that is beyond time – and this is its greatness.

Milah – Our Mark of Servitude to Hashem

As noted, Milah enables and establishes a covenantal relationship between Hashem and Yisroel. What is the nature of this relationship? Simply put, it is one of servant to Master. We, Yisroel, are the servants and Hashem is our Master. In his Drush L’Shabbos Shuva the Maharal writes that Milah “brands” us as servants of Hashem in the same manner that ordinary servants are customarily branded with the insignia of their human masters. Indeed, the Maharal writes in Tiferes Yisroel chapter 9 that Avrohom was the first to be commanded to perform Milah not simply because he was the first to establish the possibility of a relationship with Hashem, as mentioned earlier, but because he defined that relationship by referring to Hashem as adon, Master. We  recognize this aspect of Milah in one of the accompanying blessings: v’tzeetzaav chasam b’os bris kodeh, “… [Hashem] branded his [Yitzchok’s] offspring with the sign of the holy covenant”.

The Maharal in Gur Aryeh on Shmos 12:6 writes that in preparation for our exodus from Egypt Yisroel was commanded to perform Milah and the Pesach sacrifice. Since we were exiting servitude to Pharaoh and entering into servitude to Hashem we  were required to “rebrand” ourselves accordingly. That Milah constituted our formal entry into the service of Hashem. (The purpose of the Pesach sacrifice at that juncture was to initiate us into servitude with our first commanded act of service. This is why a non-circumcised person is forbidden to partake of the Pesach sacrifice – he has not entered himself into formal service to Hashem.)

Milah – Arouser of Divine Mercy

In Gevuros Hashem chapter 35 the Maharal presents another reason Milah was required before the redemption from Egypt and that is that the blood of Milah evokes divine mercy. Tehillim 44:23 says, “For it is for Your sake that we are killed all the time, [that] we are considered as sheep for the slaughter”. The Gemara in Gittin 57b applies this verse to Milah – throughout history Jews sacrificed to the point of death, ignoring the decrees of oppressors, in order to perform Milah. Milah “reminds” Hashem of our willingness to sacrifice for His sake and causes Hashem to be merciful to us and free us of oppression. It was thus an appropriate precursor to our exodus from Egypt.

May our continued perseverance against today’s Milah antagonists similarly evoke divine mercy and may we thereby merit a speedy redemption from our current exile!

The Maharal on Wine

The Maharal on Wine

By Eliakim Willner

Eliakim Willner is author of “Nesivos Olam – Nesiv HaTorah: An Appreciation of Torah Study”, a translation with commentary of a work by the Maharal of Prague, published by Artscroll/Mesorah. This article is adapted from his forthcoming continuation of the Nesivos Olam series, “Nesivos Olam – Nesiv HaAvodah: The Philosophy and Practice of Prayer”.

Wine – A Ubiquitous Beverage

Wine makes an appearance in many different contexts in Judaism. Aside from the ad’lo yada role in plays on Purim it figures prominently in Kiddush, Havdalah and Birchas HaMazon and is even used in situations that have nothing directly to do with eating, such as Siddur Kiddushin. For many of these applications wine is either the required or the preferred beverage. Clearly, for us Jews, wine is not just another drink.

What is special about wine? Why is it singled out in Jewish tradition? We will examine this question from the perspective of the Maharal and thereby gain an appreciation of the ruchnius’dike, spiritual aspect of wine and the underlying reason it is so important in so many aspects of our avodas Hashem.

Wine – the Bright Side

The Maharal in Chidushei Aggados on Sanhedrin 70a explains the significance of wine in detail. Wine is a powerful potion, the Maharal writes, because it has strong spiritual as well as physical characteristics. It “gladdens both Hashem and men”. This is evident in the process by which wine is derived. It originates from the hidden interior of the grape and is thus more associated with the hidden (spiritual) world than with the open and exposed physical world. In fact, as the Maharal points out in Drush al HaMitzvos, the Gematria value of wine in Hebrew, yayin, is 70, the same value as the word for “secret”, sod. Indeed the reward reserved for the righteous in the world-to-come is metaphorically compared to “wine secreted in grapes” to highlight its hidden nature.

Because of its spiritual properties wine should by rights be reserved for spiritual things – the Gemara gives as an example, comforting mourners. It is also utilized as an instrument by which to reward the wicked while they are yet in this world for their paltry good deeds, so as to avoid the need for rewarding them in the world-to-come. The reward for good deeds is spiritual, so wine, with its spiritual properties, is ideal for this purpose.

Wine – the Power of Blessing

The Gemara (Brachos 51a, b) enumerates ten requirements for the kos shel bracha, the wine-filled “blessing cup” that is used when reciting birchas HaMazon with a mezuman quorum. (The Shulchan Aruch in Orach Chaim 271:10 and 296:1 states that these same requirements apply to the cup used for Kiddush and Havdalah .)

The Maharal, in Nesivos Olam, Nesiv HaAvodah Chapter 18 says that, since the Gemara takes pains to point out that there are exactly ten things, and does simply enumerate them and leave it to us to count them, there is no doubt that the number ten is not just incidental; it carries significance. In fact, the Maharal says, these ten items correspond to the ten v’yiten l’cha blessings that Yitzchok bestowed on Yaakov (see Beraishis 27:28).

The Maharal is saying that we observe these ten practices in order to invoke the ten blessings of Yitzchok, for prosperity and ascendancy over our enemies, onto ourselves and by extension, onto all of Yisroel. His source is likely a Gemara which appears in Horios 12a and Krisos 5b: “Our Rabbis taught that kings may only be anointed next to a well-spring so that their rulership should endure. [Just as the well-spring flows continually, so should the new king’s rule endure continually.]… Abaye said, now that it has been said that symbolism is significant [and can affect actual events], people should make a regular habit of eating pumpkin, fenugreek, leek, beet and dates [because the Aramaic names of these foods are evocative of various different blessings].” It is indeed common custom to eat these foods on Rosh Hashanah to invoke the power of their blessing.

It is apparent from these Gemaros that evocative actions can and do invoke blessing. The Maharal is saying that the ten blessing cup practices are evocative of the blessings of Yitzchok and therefore they have the power to bring those blessings to those who observe the practices and by extension, onto all of Yisroel.

Wine – the Deleterious Side

But there is a dark side to wine as well. Because wine is spiritual in nature but resides in a physical context it is susceptible to misuse, with generally catastrophic results, up to and including death. This is why the Gemara in Sanhedrin 70b says that wine brings lamentation to the world and the Medrash in Vayikra Rabbah 10:4, teaches that, “Wine leads both men and women to adultery”. Wine has a beneficial effect on people who are generally spiritual – it attenuates wisdom in those who are wise – but it has a negative effect on people who tend toward the physical, as can be seen in the typical effects of drunkenness on such people.

What is the origin of this negative effect? In Drush al HaMitzvos, the Maharal explains that wine is by nature associated with hiddenness but when it is extracted from its hidden state in the grape, bottled and imbibed, it is no longer covert, it is exposed, and in the process it become a powerful “exposure agent” that acts upon those who drink it. That is why the Gemara in Eiruvin 65a says, “When wine enters, secrets emerge”. The Torah (Beraishis 9, beginning at verse 20) relates the unfortunate consequences suffered by Noach when he planted a vineyard after exiting the ark, over-imbibed and allowed his nakedness to be exposed. This too is an instance of the “exposure agent” at work, to disastrous effect.

The Gemara says that the Torah portion relating the effects of Noach’s encounter with wine has thirteen instances of the letter vov (vowelized with the patach sound, the Maharal explains) which in combination sounds like a cry of dismay: vay! The course of human history was changed detrimentally as a result of those events, justifying cries of dismay. The significance of the number thirteen is that complete good is described by the thirteen attributes of Hashem’s mercy listed in Shmos 34:6-7. The thirteen instances of the letter vov show that the effects of the misuse of wine are completely bad – diametrically opposite the complete good described by Hashem’s thirteen attributes.

(Parenthetically, the expression, gam zu l’tova, “this too shall be for the good”, which is commonly said when hearing apparently bad news as a statement of faith in Hashem’s ability to turn what appears at first glance to be bad into a blessing, uses the word zu, instead of the more common zeh, because the numeric value of zu, spelled zayin-vov, is thirteen. This signifies that even something that appears totally bad, with no redeeming value, can be, and with faith, will be, transformed by Hashem into good. See Nesiv HaBitachon Chapter 1 for more on this topic.)

Wine – the Somber Side

In Gevuros Hashem Chapter 60 the Maharal explains that wine symbolizes a heavenly decree. As an example (from Chapter 10 of Gevuros Hashem), when Yosef revealed himself to his brothers and urged them to go to Israel and  return to Egypt with his father Yaakov, Yaakov’s extended family and all their possessions (Beraishis 45), Yosef sent back with them several items for his father that carried a hidden significance. One of them, says Rashi on verse 23 (based on a Gemara in Megillah 16b), was yayin yoshon, aged wine, since “the minds of old people takes delight in aged wine”.

The Maharal explains that this wine was an allusion to the heavenly decree communicated to Avrohom at the bris bain ha’besarim: that his descendants would find refuge in Egypt but would be enslaved there shortly thereafter. In sending the aged wine to his father Yaakov, Yosef was hinting to Yaakov that he should not fear descending to Egypt, because doing so would be a fulfillment of that decree, and, as difficult as it would turn out to be, it was part of the divine plan that would ultimately lead to Yisroel’s redemption. The Gematria value of yayin yoshon is 430, the precise number of years that were decreed for the Egyptian exile, signaling that the exile has a defined end and would be followed by the positive aspects of the communication to Avrohom at the bris bain ha’besarim. Yosef intended that Yaakov, once assured of this, would “take delight” through the message of the “aged wine”.

Wine – the Harbinger of Exile

Wine has a particular affinity to a heavenly decree of exile. In Gur Aryeh, Beraishis 9:21 the Maharal explains the statement of our Sages (Beraishis Rabbah 36:4) that the ten tribes of Yisroel were exiled because of wine. The Maharal writes that wine weaken the intellect, and since it is the intellect that attaches us to the G-dly, weakening the intellect weakens that attachment. Our attachment to Hashem is key to remaining implanted in Israel, where we belong; it is key to warding off exile. When that attachment is weakened, exile is the result. As we noted earlier, when the juice of the grape, which is hidden, becomes exposed in the form of wine, it tends to have an exposing effect.

Noach’s unfortunate episode with the vineyard and with wine resulted in his becoming exposed – ויתגל, vayisgal.  That word shares the same root as גלות, galus, exile. When we are in our native environment we are protected. Outside of it, we are exposed and vulnerable. Wine leaves us exposed to the dangers of exile, just as it left Noach exposed.

It is no wonder that the Maharal (Gur Aryeh, Shmos 45:23) refers to the process of becoming exiled as, “drinking from the wine-cup of exile”; indeed the verse (Yeshayahu 51:17) declares, “Awaken, awaken, arise, Yerushalayim, for you have drunk from the hand of Hashem the cup of His wrath…” – and the Radak on that verse explains that “cup” refers to the wine-cup of exile.

Conclusion

Wine is thus a primarily spiritual substance but it must be handled with care because it can be a two-edged sword, beneficial to some, in the right contexts, but extremely harmful to others, who misuse it.

Rav Boruch Sorotzkin z”tl points out a critical difference between the feast that our forefather Yaakov prepared for his father Yitzchok prior to obtaining the blessings (Beraishis 27) and the feast that his earthly brother Esav prepared. In verse 25 the Torah reports that Yaakov brought wine to accompany the feast and Yitzchok partook of it. But there is no indication that Esav did the same. The reason is simple. To Yaakov, wine is a spiritual “elevator” and enhances the power of blessing, as explained earlier. It was only natural to bring wine to a feast that was a precursor to blessing. But Esav’s wine experience was completely different. To him wine was an exposer of his base and corrupt inner self. It was the last beverage he would think to bring to a feast that would end, he hoped, in his receiving blessing.

As Purim nears, it behooves us to remember that as Jews we are primarily spiritual beings but in our weakened galus state – especially in the context of the decadent world we live in – it is easy to succumb to physicality. We need to be realistically self-aware and not delude ourselves into imagining that, with our wine-drinking, we are climbing the heights of ruchnius while in reality we are over-indulging ourselves into the depths of an animalistic, Esav-like gashmiusdike state.

Da’as Torah on Da’as Torah

Da’as Torah on Da’as Torah

A Shmues by HaRav Yitzchok Hutner, Z’tl

Transcribed and adapted for publication by Eli Willner

Introduction

In the year prior to Rav Hutner’s departure to Eretz Yisroel he said a chaburah on topics of interest and concern to the bnei ha’chaburah. After delivering this particular shmues Rav Hutner called me over and requested that I adapt it into an English article for publication. I did so, and submitted the article below to him for review. The Rosh Yeshiva suggested changes, which were incorporated into the article, and approved it for publication, but for various reasons it was not published at the time.

The title and section headings are supplied by me.

Eli Willner

Why Not More Proactive Guidance?

Many are the issues that confront the Torah-observant Jew today. Which candidate merits his support in a national or local election? What position should he assume vis-à-vis the occupied territories? These questions and numerous others like them are issues of current concern in committed Orthodox circles. They are the daily grist for the mills of the Jewish media and are for that reason the constant preoccupation of the conscientious Jew, eager to adopt a stand in accordance with the view of the Torah. The burden of these questions therefore often engenders still another question — a question considered by many to be more potent than the others, and that is, why do our Gedolim not, in each problematic situation, establish for us the proper position from the Torah perspective? Or, as many public commentators on the Jewish scene cry, why do our Gedolim leave us on the dark on vital questions that beg for answers? In the process of answering this last question we will be looking in two directions, examining the nature and defining the limits of Da'as Torah.

Da’as Torah in Divrei Reshus

The usual connotation of the Da'as Torah concept as it is used in Torah circles includes the idea that the views and opinions of our Gedolim, our Torah sages, are ipso facto equivalent in any situation to the view of the Torah. Every opinion uttered by a Gadol is spoken with the voice of Torah and stamped with the authority of Torah. It is doubtful that any thinking person would question the propriety of a Gadol addressing himself to a question that falls within the purview of the four sections of the Shulchan Aruch. That is his field of expertise, the area in which he has received his training and over which he has proven his mastery. The most hidebound secularist would admit that the Gadol is the ultimate authority in the field of halacha, just as the doctor is the authority in the field of medicine or the lawyer the authority in the field of jurisprudence.

The authority of a Gadol to decide issues outside the sphere of halacha is often challenged, however. When we arrive at the area of divrei reshus, dilemmas left unresolved by halacha, the gray area that is commonly referred to as the "fifth Shulchan Aruch", many well-intentioned but ignorant individuals dispute the Gadol's preeminence with the argument that the Gadol, with his lofty focus of vision, is unqualified to deal with such mundane matters as a current worldly issue, for example. Problems of this sort, these individuals would maintain, are best left to men of the world, who are experienced in such matters.

It must be understood that this misapprehension of the Gadol's role with its accompanying rationale date back no further than two hundred years, to the birth of the various reform movements in Germany and later, to the birth of the Zionist movement in Russia. This denial of a basic principle of Yiddishkeit (later in this article it will be seen that the supremacy of the Gadol's authority in every facet of life is a basic principle of Yiddishkeit) can be traced directly back to when, for the first time in the history of our people an organized movement in opposition to the authority of Torah took root. True, throughout our history there have been individuals who threw off the yoke of mitzvos, but until two hundred years ago there were no formal institutions in our midst that ran counter to the Torah rule. What had until then been scattered instances of disobedience thereafter became organized rebellion, an evil that formerly claimed an insignificant few in each generation grew to encompass an entire state, a medina that marches under the banner of anti-Torah. This tragic situation, grown to such unfortunate proportions today, began, as we have said, no more than two hundred years ago and two hundred years ago the foundation was laid for the repudiation of Da'as Torah that is exemplified by the type of argument mentioned in the previous paragraph.

Of course, those who were "enlightened" themselves had and have no need for a rationale. Having totally rejected the authority of Torah; they are not troubled when they go against the rulings of the Torah authorities. People who basically wish to remain observant Jews but find it more convenient for whatever reason to take a position antagonistic to Da'as Torah — a position legitimized by the anti-Torah organizations — cannot so easily brush off the guidance of the Gedolim, however. These are the people who, swayed by the public opinion generated by the Torah-free establishment and yet uncomfortable in their new-found rebellious role, rationalize their disobedience in the manner described. Unfortunately, with public opinion as strong a force as it is today, far too many people fall into this latter category. We will have more to say on the subject of public opinion later in this article.

The extended authority of the Gadol to areas ungoverned by halacha is called Keser Torah, the crown of Torah. The precise nature of Keser Torah, the means of acquiring it[i] and of judging who possesses it and who does not are beyond the scope of the present discussion. These subjects are treated extensively in Sefer Pachad Yitzchok, Shevuos Ma'amor thirty-six, by HaGaon HaRav Yitzchok Hutner, shlita. The following few paragraphs are in the nature of a synopsis of sections from that ma'amor.

The field of a Jew's activities can be divided into two domains: mitzvah-regulated activities and unregulated activities. The rule is however, that hakol boroh lichvodo — the purpose of all creation is the glory of G-d — and therefore the privilege to perform unregulated activities is to be regarded as an opportunity, for those Jews willing to take it, for the consecration of the entire sphere of their activities to Hashem. This division of activities into two domains applies not only to the Jew as an individual but also to the Jewish nation as a whole. In the latter case, however, the two domains

of activity generate two domains of authority. As the Ran explains in his Droshos,[ii] Sanhedrin is the authority in the area of mitzvah-regulated activities. It's power extends to the determination of Torah law — questions of permitted or prohibited, guilty or not guilty, clean or unclean, sacred or profane. Questions of this sort are decided by Sanhedrin, whose view in these matters is the Torah view — Da'as Torah. Their rulings are arrived at solely within the context of the body of Torah law. The leadership of the nation in the area of its unlegislated (by mitzvahh) activities — that is to say, the determination of which course of action will lead to the greater glory of HKBH — is in the hands of the king of Yisroel, however. His primary jurisdiction lies in the area of situational decisions, because to assess which course of action out of many will bring about the greatest glory of Hashem must of necessity involve the consideration of circumstances and conditions specific' to a particular situation. In contrast, the primary jurisdiction of Sanhedrin is in the area of decisions for posterity exclusively, for judgments in the area of mitzvahh-fulfillment are handed down for all generations to come.

Although it would appear from the foregoing that there are two independent categories of intelligence, with one to manage that which is holy and another to manage the sanctification of the not-yet-holy, this in fact is not the case. That this is true is evident in the halacha that establishes that a king may be installed only by virtue of the power of Sanhedrin. In effect this halacha teaches us that, with respect to the Jewish nation as a whole, the intelligence that decides questions pertaining to non-mitzvah regulated activities is a child of the intelligence that is empowered to decide questions pertaining to sacred, mitzvah-regulated activities. The former intelligence has its own modus operandi but the source whence it derives its power is the intelligence that rules over the realm of sanctity itself, enacting from the eternal body of Torah law rulings to endure forever.

Contrary to the usual order of things we exemplify a condition that holds true in the case of each individual by showing how it holds true in the case of the nation as a whole. For the fact of the matter is that the two types of intelligence mentioned above in connection with Am Yisroel function in the individual as well as in the nation, each in its own particular way. In the individual as well as in the nation, the intelligence that decides questions that arise in the area of mitzvah-fulfillment has established halachos upon which to base its judgment while the intelligence that decides between alternative courses of conduct in the area of non-mitzvah regulated activities has no set rules upon which to rely. For sometimes greater kovod shomayim results from active striving for a particular goal, sometimes from a more passive placing of faith in HKBH; sometimes from adopting a submissive posture, and sometimes from acting more assertively. In all such cases the decision depends on a sensitive appraisal of the situation as it stands at the time of decision.

Each and every Jew must realize that, with respect to the individual too, "A king may only be installed by virtue of the power of Sanhedrin". The intelligence that decides questions in the area of non-mitzvah regulated activities is not self-sustaining; rather, the efficacy of that intelligence as it functions to sanctify actions in the non-regulated realm is dependent totally for its existence on the intelligence that functions in the body of sanctity itself, determining law in the area of mitzvah fulfillment that will endure for generations, along with all the rest of the Torah. The intelligence for situational decisions rests completely on the intelligence for eternal decisions.

We must realize that we are not dealing here with a natural property belonging to the faculty of reason. We are saying that the one whose merit enabled him to reach that level in Torah that is asukei shmaitso aliba d’hilchisa, "concluding a decision according to law", is the one and only one whose powers of resolution are sufficiently sure for him to be trusted with decisions that depend on a dynamic situation with constantly changing conditions, decisions that relate not to the established laws of mitzvah-fulfillment, but to the manner of bringing that which is non-regulated into the realm of the sanctified.

The link between the ability of the intelligence to decide questions in an area that has set rules and its ability to resolve issues in an area which permits nothing more than estimation and the considered weighing of whichever alternatives are presented by the circumstances — this link between the two categories of intelligence does not operate under natural law. It is an extra-ordinary link; appearing as a wonder, and similar to the other wondrous capabilities that are in attendance with Torah.

It is the crown of Torah — kisra shel Torah. Someone who, through his mastery of the ability to "conclude a decision according to law" in the area of mitzvos, has gained the ability to determine the proper mode of service to HKBH in the area of divrei r’shus may be said to have earned the crown of Torah. He may apply to himself the posuk —   bi melachim yimlochu,[iii] “by my power shall kings reign”. He is the one who, in a manner of speaking, "installs a king with the authority of Sanhedrin".

His ability really is, as we have said, a supernatural one, properly termed "wonder" for in truth the sort of perception that is needed for successfully confronting worldly dilemmas is totally incongruent with that needed for setting down law for eternity. Anyone understanding of human nature will realize that a person who distinguishes himself in one of those areas is not likely to distinguish himself in the other. And it is correct to generalize from the commentary of the Ramah[iv] on the brocho that concludes with umafli la'asos,"and performing wonders" (the Ramah explains that those very words refer to HKBH's conjunction of the spiritual and the material) and state that any tying together of two incompatible items falls under the heading of "wonder". The wonder that is the combination in one individual of the two types of perception required for issuing rulings for eternity and for issuing rulings local to a point in time is one of the remarkable attainments that are the reward of Torah.

To summarize the words of Rav Hutner shlita, the authority to decide questions of halacha and the king-like authority to decide day-to-day questions outside the scope of halacha — questions pertaining to how Jews must react as individuals or as a nation in situations they may be confronted with at given times — are not, as one might suppose, two separate and independent domains of authority. Rather, the authority — we may even say the capability — to decide questions of the second sort follows as a result of the achievement on the part of the Posek of a level high enough to allow him to answer questions of the first sort. Torah knowledge is a prerequisite for Keser Torah then, but it is itself not a sufficient condition for Keser Torah, which is a G-d -given segulah that comes only to one who is amel BaTorah, one who diligently labors at the task of acquiring Torah. Someone who meets both conditions, knowledge and ameilus has earned the Keser Torah. Of such a person does the posuk declare "by my power shall kings reign".

Parenthetically, let us add that not everyone who possesses the Keser Torah has it to the same degree. The relative "size" of a person's Keser is a function of the strength of that persons claim to both the abovementioned factors. Also we must point out that a person is often faced with contradictory opinions from different (equally recognized) Gedolim. In that event he must Lahalacha follow his personal sense of trust. His decision will then be intuitive rather than rational, but if he acts in good faith; if he is motivated purely by the desire to do what is right, he will not be lead astray. Consider, as an illustration, that as long as a person is healthy he may not be able to say which of two doctors with similar credentials he would select to treat him, should the need for a doctor arise. But if he were to fall ill and receive mutually exclusive advice from the two doctors he would at that time recognize his latent instinctive preference for one doctor or the other. The pressure of the decision determines where his loyalties lie and he follows that doctor's prescription. There is surely no need to elaborate on this parallel. The same process is involved when one must act according to the opinion of either one Gadol or another.

Da’as Torah – Limitations

Peripheral issues aside, it should be clear to the reader that when a Gadol does speak out on any subject his word is authoritative, and that challenges to his competency based on a putative lack of expertise in a specialized area bespeak a faulty understanding of the nature of Da'as Torah, reveal the influence of the anti-Torah establishment and are, in fact, totally baseless.

It must be understood withal, however, that there are in a sense restrictions on the questions to which a Gadol may address himself in that no Gadol regardless of stature can rule on any problem, regardless of the area in which it falls simply by referencing the appropriate weighty tomes in his library. siyato dishmayo is the sine qua non for every one of his decisions. Even the Gadol engaged in pilpul, rhetorical discourse, requires a certain degree of siyato dishmayo. The Gadol attempting to decide a question in halacha requires still more siyato dishmayo, but the Gadol who must respond to a difficulty in an area unregulated by halacha requires a far far greater degree of siyato dishmayo. And — this is crucial — siyato dishmayo is forthcoming only when the response to a question has an immediate, practical application. On a hypothetical question, on a question conjured up "for the sake of discussion", there is no siyato dishmayo and thus the Gadol's hands are tied; his lips sealed. This is true because every Gadol is a "fragment" of Moshe Rabbeinu so to speak, and the authority of every Gadol to decide questions for Yisroel is an outgrowth of Moshe Rabbeinu's authority. HKBH told Moshe after the transgression of the Eigel, lech raid ki shichais amcha,[v] which the Gemorah  explains to mean, lech raid migadlusecha – klum nosati l’cho gedulah elah bishvil Yisroel,[vi] "step down from your exalted position — have I given you eminence for any reason other than to serve Yisroel?". Whenever any sort of barrier interposes between the Gadlus of Moshe — or by extension any Gadol — and his ability to concretely serve Yisroel, the Gadol is cut off from siyato dishmayo; stripped of his Gadlus, as it were. Every Gadol hears lech raid echoing as a caution in his ear whenever his powers are called upon. Therefore a Gadol will speak only when his advice will directly serve Yisroel.

It follows that whether or not a Gadol can respond to a particular question depends more on the enquirer than on the respondent. If the question is a real one, if the person asking it is willing in all humility to submit to the ruling of the Gadol and if the person will have a voice in the implementation of the ruling, then and only then can the Gadol consider the question and rely on divine assistance as he formulates his response. But if the question is speculative, if the enquirer is, let us say, a journalist looking for copy, and if the sole effect of the Gadol's response is an article that will appear in the in the next day's newspaper, no divine assistance will be forthcoming and no reputable Gadol will consent to reply. Indeed, while it is difficult to ascertain authentic Gadlus, there is one sure test to detect the charlatan. Anyone posturing before television cameras, ready to spout "Da'as Torah” on any and every vacuous question belongs in that category. The true Gadol in contrast, knows that his role is not that of a puppet of the press, his function not that of an oracle spewing forth empty pronouncements on sundry subjects for the benefit of an appreciative audience.

The legitimate Gadol responds only to real questions. Thus, when he is approached by a person in authority regarding the question of which territories to surrender in return for which concessions, for example, he responds. Under these circumstances his response is solidly grounded in siyato dishmayo. In a land whose bureaucracy operates under civil law, however (a la Ben Gurion's declaration that "This country is one of civil law, not one of halacha") scenarios like the hypothetical one described are not likely to take place.

It is curious that people who, lehavdil, accept that a secular court such as the United States Supreme Court will rule only on matters of fact (such as a test case) and not on unsubstantial issues will not accept the same principle when applied to a non-secular situation such as the one under discussion. Nevertheless, it is so much more so true when the authority is Da'as Torah that the case must be real and relevant before there can be a response, as has been explained.

Public Opinion Versus Da’as Torah

We alluded earlier to several evils which we traced back to the negative influence of public opinion.[vii] Public opinion as a mover of individuals is certainly not a modern innovation, but it has taken on a new character in present times, with respect to both the extent of its influence and the nature of its genesis. It is certainly a far more pervasive force today than it has been in the past. It is also true, however, that while in the past public opinion was no more than the sum of the views commonly held and spontaneously generated by the bulk of the populace, it is today a synthetic product manufactured at the behest of a few individuals of means in positions of power. Wishing to foster points of view beneficial to themselves, they bring in public relations experts, hire press and advertising agents, and foist their interests on the masses through the various media. Public opinion is a purchased commodity; people are regularly misled by it and made to dance to its. tune.

It is customary to eat chalah in Eretz Yisroel on Yom HaAtzmaut. A "minhag" of sorts. The casual observer might be deceived into believing that that day is some kind of Tom Tov. How ludicrous! When the Gedolim of a certain era watched klal Yisroel carry their knives to the Bais HaMikdosh on an Erev Pesach that fell on Shabbos they were the observers of a bona-fide minhag, part of the nation's heritage and an indication of how things should be. It was the unprogrammed reaction of the community to a given situation. But the origin of the "minhag" to eat chalah on Yom HaAtzmaut is completely artificial, purely the result of state indoctrination.

So distended has the influence of public opinion become that it may even be said that a basic principle of halacha, minhag Yisroel Torah hee, Jewish customs have the force of law, is inapplicable in the United States today. This means that any minhag hamakom peculiar to the United States or any locality thereof is suspect, and is to be disregarded if it cannot be traced back definitely to a genuine Halachic source. In all probability its origin is of dubious legitimacy. It is almost certainly not grounded in halacha.

It was at one time customary in New York City for the rabbis present at a wedding to precede the choson and kallah to the chupa. The caterers at these affairs always caused difficulties when a dignitary refused to follow this "local custom". Once, Rav Reuven Grodzovsky Z”tl was present at a wedding and was asked to proceed to the chupa to await the choson and kallah. He declined, explaining afterwards that any American minhag of unknown origin should be assumed to have derived from some church custom. At a church wedding the priest formally weds the pair; he awaits them at the altar and they must approach him. The custom was evidently adopted at one time by the Jews (or the caterers) of New York City.

The pressures of public opinion cause people to turn away from Torah and from the guidance of their Gedolim. It causes them to follow the whims of a self-serving, powerful few. It is a strong enough force to have persuaded millions to believe in so patent a falsehood as the blood libel, as one prominent Hebrew writer of the last century pointed out. It is obligatory for those involved in the education of our children to use all means at their disposal to train them not to be influenced by what they see and hear and read in the alien society that surrounds them.

---

[i] Described in Rambam, Hilchos Talmud Torah, Perek 3, Halachoh 13

[ii] See Drush 11

[iii] Mishlei 8,15

[iv] Orach Chaim 7, 1

[v] Shmos 32, 7

[vi] Brochos 32(a)

[vii] This subject is discussed in detail by Rav Hutner Shlita in an article in JO March, 1970