The Misoninim Mysteries: An Understanding Based on the Torah of the Maharal and the Ketzos HaChoshen

The Misoninim Mysteries: An Understanding Based on the Torah of the Maharal and the Ketzos HaChoshen

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”.

Part I – The Misoninim

The Mysteries

The parsha of the Misoninim (Bamidbar 11) may superficially seem straightforward but on reflection, there are a number of puzzling aspects that beg for explanation. First of all, what was their primary complaint? Did they want meat? If so, what was the point of mentioning the vegetables that they ate in Egypt? Were they tired of the mon? Then why mention meat, any “real” food should have served their purpose? And why (posuk 7) did they seemingly speak in complimentary terms about the mon?

Why does the Torah tell us (posuk 4) that they “had a lust”; what does that add to the stated complaint of “we want meat!”? Why (posuk 10) do they add their resentment of the newly forbidden marital relationships to their litany of complaints; what does that have to do with either a hankering for meat or the “monotony” of the mon? One might say that they were complaining for complaining’s own sake, so there is no relationship between the complaints, but that seems superficial.

Finally, the quail that they were provided was immediately fatal; the moment they sunk their teeth into it, they died. How, then, did so many people die from eating it? Didn’t people watching the first quail-eaters die realize that they might be better off avoiding it?

Surely there is depth to be mined beneath the surface here.

The Benefits of a Coercive Matan Torah

To solve these mysteries – and to understand this parsha – we turn to the introduction to Sefer Shev Shmaitso, by the Ketzos, who has a unique and unifying understanding of the parsha of the Misoninim based on the Torah of the Maharal.

It all begins at Sinai. Recall that, per the Medrash (Tanchuma, Noach 3) before the Torah was given to Yisroel, Hashem lifted the mountain over their heads like a barrel, har k’gigis, and told them that if they did not accept the Torah, “this will be your burial place”. Of course the question is, since the nation had already willingly accepted the Torah (naaseh v’nishma; we will observe and we will understand) why was this coercive measure necessary?

The Maharal in Tiferes Yisroel 32 answers by pointing out that things that are imperative are permanent. This is why, for example, a me’anes is bound to his victim, the anusa, for life; he forced himself upon her (imperative) and therefore the relationship becomes permanent. The Maharal cites a Medrash that explains that the coercion at Sinai metaphorically creates an unbreakable me’anes-anusa-type relationship between Hashem and Yisroel; the Sinai covenant is permanent and, come what may, neither party can back out of it. Naaseh v’nishma was a discretionary acceptance of the Torah and therefore, despite its merits, it would not have been permanently binding.

The Ketzos notes that this bond extends to the relationship between Yisroel and the Torah as well. We must study Torah; it is imperative and not optional; permanent and not transitory. He cites Yalkut Re’uveini (Vayishlach) that the Sar of the Torah, the angel in charge of the Torah, was tasked with mon production. What does the mon have to do with the Torah? The Sefer HaMagid of the Bais Yosef states that the mon had the effect of nullifying free choice and making it impossible for those eating it to occupy themselves with anything other than the Torah. Their physical appetites disappeared; their only passion was for Torah study.

Appetites for Appetites

This, then, was behind the primary complaint of the Misoninim. They wanted their physical appetites back; they “had a lust’ for their dormant physical lusts! This business of mandatory Torah-study-only wasn’t for them. They yearned for the ability to enjoy a steak again; they remembered that in Egypt they were even able to enjoy vegetables!

In short, they wanted the discretionary Torah of naaseh v’nishma only, the imperative nature of the har k’gigis coercion wasn’t letting them enjoy the physical pleasures of life. However, they sugar-coated their complaints by arguing that it was more meritorious to operate on a free choice basis than to be boxed in to Torah. We would eat the mon without being forced to, they argued; after all, it’s appealing and tasty. We would study Torah too – when we wanted to. But we want our physical appetites back!

They were way out of line. The role of that generation was to immerse themselves totally in Torah study. Har k’gigis was supposed to have a dramatic effect on their way of life during their desert sojourn and the mon was an integral part of creating that way of life.

Their punishment, writes the Ketzos, was that they got their physical cravings back with a vengeance. They knew, after the first few moments, that eating the quail was a death sentence. Yet their appetites were so strong that they were compelled to gorge themselves nonetheless!

Forbidden Marital Relationships and Har K’Gigis

This approach solves most of the Misoninim mysteries we mentioned. How, though, does their resentment of the newly forbidden marital relationships fit into this picture? The Ketzos answers this by referencing a question of the Maharal in Gur Aryeh (Vayigash). The Maharal notes that when the Torah was given, the entire nation had the status of converts to Judaism. If so, the Maharal asks, why is it that the forbidden marital relationships affected this generation? We know that a convert has the status of a newborn and his previous familial relationships are cancelled. A convert may even marry his birth-sister since the conversion nullifies the brother-sister relationship. So why were the Misoninim complaining about these forbidden relationships in the first place?

The answer, says the Maharal, is that a convert only has the status of a newborn when the conversion was done willingly. However, the conversion of the nation at Sinai was transformed into a coerced conversion when the mountain was held over their heads. Therefore their previous familial relationships were not nullified and the prohibitions applied.

If the Torah had been given on the basis of naaseh v’nishma only there would have been no practical application of the Torah laws prohibiting certain marital relationships for that generation. The “culprit” preventing that from happening was the coercive nature of their conversion brought about by the threat of har k’gigis. We now understand how this particular complaint fits into the Misoninim’s broader picture. They were bothered by all the ramifications of har k’gigis versus naaseh v’nishma, and this was one of them.

The Implications for Us, Today

Our generation does not have mon and our therefore our physical appetites are restored. We can choose to favor them, but the mon remains in our genes forever and we retain the ability to attenuate our physical desires and to choose to single-mindedly devote ourselves to the pursuit of Torah and mitzvos, just as our ancestors did in the desert.

The Ketzos adds a sobering thought. Our physical and spiritual components were implanted in us as separate entities and were “designed” to stay that way. When we leave this world our soul should be heading upwards, unimpeded and unsullied by the body, while the body reposes in the earth, disconnected from the soul.

To the extent that we humor our physical component by indulging ourselves in physical pleasures, we pollute our spiritual component by intermingling it with our bodies. The separation at death is more difficult and more painful and our souls actually retain the pollution of the physical desires we indulged in during our lives.

The Torah tells us (verse 34) “He named that place Kivros Hata'avah (Graves of Craving), for there they buried the people who crave.” Note the present tense: “who crave”. They were dead and buried, surely it would have been more accurate to say, in the past tense, “the people who craved”? But the Ketzos quotes the Akeida who writes that even after their death, their souls continue to crave since they were polluted by the body’s craving when they were connected. Sobering indeed!

May we all merit to take full advantage of the permanence Hashem blessed us with when he imposed har k’gigis, by focusing our lives around Torah and by minimizing physical world indulgences.

Part II – The Meraglim

What Didn’t They Like?

Rashi at the beginning of Parshas Shlach explains that the Meraglim “had it in” for the land of Israel before they even saw it, and their plan from the beginning was to come back with a report that would scare the nation away from wanting to go there. The obvious question is “why?” They left Egypt fully understanding that that was where they were headed. They knew that Hashem promised the land to Avrohom, for his descendants. What happened to change their thinking?

The Maharal, in Chidushei Aggados, Sotah 34b, explains that they knew that Hashem had two sets of rules with which He interacted with Yisroel. First, was natural law; if you want to eat, you have to plow, sow, plant, tend to, harvest, etc. Second, was “miracle law”; the way that Hashem interacted with Yisroel in the dessert, as they traveled to Israel. It included the mon, the ananim and the other phenomena that were discussed in Part I. That set of rules was designed so that Yisroel could focus exclusively on the Torah and spirituality – their role while in the dessert.

The Maharal explains that the Meraglim realized that once they reached Israel, the first set of rules would come back into play. The thought horrified them – think of all the time that would be wasted on the mundanities of earning a living, when they could have been learning Torah! They devised a ploy that, they hoped, would extend the “miracle law” mode as long as possible. For that reason, they came back with a report that, they knew, would frighten many members away from wanting to continue on to Israel.

Part III – The Conundrum

But Was That Bad?

This raises a serious question. True, the Meraglim were wrong to frighten the nation in this way, and to attempt to thwart Hashem’s plan to bring the nation into Israel, but weren’t their hearts in the right place? What was wrong with their desire to remain in an elevated spiritual state for as long as possible?

Moreover, the events of the Meraglim came on the heels of the events of the Misoninim and the two sets of events appear to show the nation acting in two contradictory ways. As we explained in Part I, the Misoninim were bothered by too much spirituality – they wanted their physical appetites back, as we explained. But shortly thereafter, the nation seemed to be pining for more spirituality; they wanted to continue on the high spiritual level of the dessert and defer the workaday life that they knew awaited them in Israel.

Apparently the nation took the lessons of the Misoninim to heart and learned to cherish a purely spiritual life. But then, why did they suffer such serious consequences after the Meraglim events?

Part IV – The Lesson

There is a Time for Everything

The answer is that Hashem presents us with a variety of challenges in life, and our job is to serve Him to the best of our ability within the constraints of the circumstances He has placed us in. When in the dessert, the nation’s job was to devote themselves exclusively to spiritual pursuits. That was the form of service Hashem demanded of them. But in Israel, the demands were different. The challenges were different. The nation’s job was to serve Hashem to the utmost, within the constraints of natural law. It is very wrong to rail against, or try to flout, Hashem’s plan, and that was the sin of the Meraglim.

All of use have similar challenges in our own lives. When we are in Yeshiva or Bais Yaakov our service to Hashem must include intensive study and we are charged to avoid anything that distracts us from that. When we enter the world of commerce our service must include integrity, kiddush Hashem, and of course, to maintain as rigorous a Torah study schedule as possible, albeit it will not be as intensive as it was during our Yeshiva days.

Not to distinguish between one set of life challenges and another partakes of the sin of the Meraglim. That must be our big takeaway from the juxtaposition of these two Torah portions.

Part V – Korach

Consequences

Perhaps a failure to appreciate this lesson was a factor in the rebellion of Korach, which appears in the next Torah portion. Korach and his cronies were frustrated: “What does Moshe want from us? First, we get into trouble for not being frum enough! So we “reboot” and become super-frum and we get into trouble for that! Moshe is just looking to get us into trouble!”

What they failed to appreciate is that there is a time and place for a variety of different modes of service to Hashem, and the consequences for Korach for that failure and his subsequent rebellion were to be permanently removed from the service-to-Hashem “playing field” entirely.

There are many lessons in these three parshios; may we take them all to heart!

This article is dedicated in honor of the upcoming wedding of our dear son Dovid to Perry Jerusalem, on the first day of Rosh Chodesh Tamuz. May they be zoche to build a bayis ne’eman b’Yisroel together, l’shaim, u’l’tiferes, and to be a source of nachas to myself, my wife, to our future mechutanim, Rabbi and Mrs. Akiva Jerusalem, and to all of klal Yisroel!

The Rebbi, the Talmid – and Your Personal Ruchnius

The Rebbi, the Talmid – and Your Personal Ruchnius

How the Rebbi-Talmid Relationship Affects Every Jew’s Dveikus and Ahavas Hashem, as Explained by Rav Yitzchok Hutner – An Adaptation of Pachad Yitzchok, Shavuous Maamar 18.2.

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”.

Introduction

Our institutions of chinuch, and therefore our mesorah itself, are under unprecedented attack. It is obvious that outside interference in what our Yeshivos teach and how they teach it will affect our ability to transmit our values to our children.

Less obvious, but just as important, is the fact that tampering with our mesorah has the potential to negatively impact every individual’s personal avodas Hashem, dampening our dveikus and attenuating our love for Hashem. It is important that we understand these dangers as well. In the following excerpt, Rav Yitzchok Hutner zt’l explains the relationship between the Rebbi-Talmid bond, and these mitzvos temidios.

1 – The Chain Effect, As a Means of Cleaving to the Shechina

“‘…And to cleave to Him’ (Devarim 11:22). But is it possible to cleave to the Shechina, the Divine Presence? Does not the verse say of Him that He is ‘a consuming fire’? (Devarim 4:24) Rather, cleave to Torah Sages and their students.” (Yalkut, Eikev 873)

The fact that this Medrash provides an alternative mode of fulfilling the command to cleave to the Shechina  – teaching us that besides cleaving to Sages themselves, one may also achieve closeness with the Shechina by cleaving to their students – reveals an novel aspect of this mitzva: even though the student is not directly connected to the Shechina, still, cleaving to him is considered cleaving to the Shechina, by virtue of the student’s association with the Sage, his teacher.

This is a powerful statement about the closeness of the Rebbi-talmid relationship. Not only is cleaving to the student the equivalent of cleaving to the teacher, but it even extends to transitively creating a connection to the Shechina, with whom the teacher is connected.

2 – Another Interpretation of the Advice to Cleave to the Shechina

But there is another way to understand the “cleave to Torah Sages and their students” advice, and that is to view it not as two separate approaches to cleaving to the Shechina – either via the Sages or their students – but rather as an instruction to cleave to Torah Sages and their students together, as a single unit. What is the benefit of understanding the Yalkut’s method of cleaving to the Shechina in this way?

3 – Loving Hashem Through Teaching Torah

“…And you should love Hashem, your G-d…” (Devarim 6:5). The Sifri (Devarim 6:7) comments on this verse, “But this verse does not specify how one goes about loving Hashem. The “how” answer, however, is supplied in the next verse, ‘And these words (a reference to words of Torah)… shall be upon your heart’.”

This Sifri is the source for the well-known view that the path to achieving love of Hashem is through study of Torah, and, more forcefully, that without Torah study it is impossible to achieve love of Hashem. This is very clear from the wording of the Sifri, which states that without the answer to the “how” question in the next verse, we would be at a loss to know how to go about loving Hashem.

So, the well-known view that the path to achieving love of Hashem is through Torah study originates in the Sifri, but the point we wish to make is that the lesson of the Sifri cuts deeper than that well-known view.

Consider that when the Torah-study mitzva is specified in the next verse in the “And you should love Hashem” chapter, it is not the general mitzva to study Torah that is mentioned but rather the specific mitzva to teach Torah. The verse we are referring to is, “And you shall teach them to your sons” (Devarim 6:7), which is understood as referring to the mitzva, incumbent on every Torah Sage, to transmit their Torah knowledge to students. (“Sons” is a reference to students, not to biological offspring, as will be discussed shortly.)

It follows, then, that if we interpret the Sifri as saying merely that the path to loving Hashem is through Torah study, we are missing a major point. In fact, the Sifri is teaching us that the power of Torah study to create love of Hashem is centered around the pinnacle level of Torah study, which is disseminating Torah to students.

Obviously, we are not claiming that personal Torah study alone does not lead to love of Hashem; the fact is that Torah is Torah and love of Hashem will follow from any avenue of Torah study. Our point, however, is that the power of Torah to bring about love of Hashem comes into full bloom only through the vehicle of teaching Torah.

The Sifri makes it very clear, then, that that the purpose of the “And you should love Hashem” chapter is to set forth the mitzva to love Hashem and explain how to do it, and the flow of the verses plainly indicates that the optimum method is through teaching Torah. Why is this so?

4 – Teaching Torah Should Create Sons

The mitzva to disseminate Torah is couched in terms of “And you shall teach them to your sons”. If we reflect carefully on this verse we will see that what it is actually teaching us about what it means to teach Torah, is much deeper than would appear on the surface. The common understanding is that there are two independent elements in the act of teaching Torah. The first is the act of teaching itself. The second is that students are referred to as “sons”. Thus, when one teaches Torah he is teaching “sons”, and the verse refers to Torah teaching using the “And you shall teach them to your sons” terminology for this reason.

This is the common understanding. But upon reflection, it seems to us that there is more to the use of “sons” in this verse than a poetic reference to students as “sons”. Rather, the verse is teaching us that teaching Torah and labeling students as “sons” are two sides of the same coin. The point of Torah dissemination is not to teach Torah to students who happened to be called “sons”. Rather, it is to enlist the power of Torah teaching to create sons.

We illustrate with an example. A person can acquire any possession, purchase any object his heart desires, from anyone he pleases. There is just one thing a person cannot acquire in the open market, and that is life itself. Life is acquired from a father and only from a father. The sole way to impart existence to another being is through fatherhood.

This is exactly how the Rebbi-talmid relationship is supposed to work. Students are only truly called “sons” when they value the Torah that has been imparted to them as they value life itself – not as a non-essential possession that they can either live with or do without, but as something crucial to their existence.

What the Torah wants us to understand, with the verse “And you shall teach them to your sons”, is that Torah dissemination can only have a lasting effect if it is done with an eye to creating “sons”; that is, if the Torah is valued as one would value life itself, when it is transmitted; when it is passed on as a father passes on life to the next biological generation.

This is what we mean when we say that that teaching Torah and labeling students as “sons” are two sides of the same coin. One side is the Torah transmission itself. The other side – the resultant side – is the creation of sons. There is much more to the verse, “And you shall teach them to your sons” than an enumeration of two independent elements in the act of teaching Torah.

5 – Love Creates Sons; Creating Sons Engenders Love of Hashem

We return to the idea we developed in section 3, that the power of Torah to bring about love of Hashem comes into full bloom only through the vehicle of teaching Torah; through fulfillment of the mitzva, “And you shall teach them to your sons”, which refers to transmitting Torah knowledge to students.

There are numerous sources (see the end of the second chapter of Nedarim) that detail the many hardships and travails that are the unfortunate lot of the child of “the hated wife”, and from the terrible consequences of hatred one can infer the extraordinary consequences of love. To get the full measure of a thing, look at its opposite; doing so in this case tells us that when love, not hate, is injected into the process of producing life, it has an incredible power.

The Sifri we discussed in section 3 made us aware that the reason for the juxtaposition between Torah study and the mitzva to love Hashem was to teach us that Torah study is the one and only path to achieving love of Hashem, and that ideally, the form that Torah study should take is the teaching of Torah, or, in the terminology of the previous section, the spiritual birthing of “sons” via the transmission of Torah.

We now know that for the spiritual birthing of sons to be worthy of the name it must be suffused with love. And that is the basis for the linkage between “And you shall teach them to your sons” and “You should love Hashem, your G-d”.

For the Rebbi-talmid relationship to be most effective – to the point where the analogy to giving life to a son is more than just a flight of fancy – the Torah transmission must be delivered on wings of love. If it is, then passing on Torah to the next generation is passing on life to the next generation and the students appreciate the Torah they learn as vital, just as their teachers do. The ideal described in section 4 is achieved.

Can there be a better way to both achieve and pass on love of Hashem than for a teacher of Torah to accomplish this level of Torah transmission with his students? This is what we mean when we say that the Sifri is teaching us that the power of Torah to bring about love of Hashem comes into full bloom only through the vehicle of teaching Torah; through fulfillment of the mitzva, “And you shall teach them to your sons”.
 

6 – Using the Rebbi-Talmid Nexus to Become Close to the Shechina

We are now ready to delve deeper into the second way of understanding the meaning of cleaving to Torah Sages and to their students, as mentioned in section 2. In the first way of understanding this directive, two alternatives to cleaving to the Shechina are being presented – cleave either to Torah Sages or to their students. It is hard, however, as we pointed out, to understand the justification for equating an attachment to a student with an attachment to the Shechina; the student may not have any personal merit that connects him directly with the Shechina.

In the second way of understanding this directive, however, the desired result of cleaving to Hashem is accomplished by cleaving not to either Sages or students, but rather, to a single aggregate consisting of both Sages and their students. The benefit of associating with this aggregate, in contrast to associating with one or the other of its components, is that only when Sages and their students are together is the birthing power of the Torah that emerges from, “‘And you shall teach them to your sons’ – this refers to students”, evident.

As we discussed earlier, this power to create “sons” is effective only when the Rebbi-talmid relationship glows with the light of love; when the Torah is valued as one would value life itself. This is when the teachers themselves are most connected with the Torah, and it is only on the strength of the teachers’ connection with Torah that one can connect to the Shechina via a connection to a Torah teacher.

The most effective setting, then, for achieving a connection with the Shechina by connecting to a Torah Sage who is connected to the Shechina is when the Sage’s connection is at its peak, when his connection to his Torah is in full force, and that only happens when the Torah Sages are mingled with their students – with their “sons”.

And that is why the Yalkut advises us, as we learned in section 1, that if we wish to become close to the Shechina we should “cleave to Torah Sages and their students”. The wording is precise. To get as close as possible to the Shechina, latch onto the teachers when they are with their students.

The Neglected Dangers of the Internet

The Neglected Dangers of the Internet

By Eliakim Willner

Eliakim Willner is a computer professional with deep experience in issues relating to the benefits and dangers of the Internet. He is also 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.

“Hidden” in Plain Sight

The Internet and its dangers are getting renewed attention from the Chareidi world, as we try to grapple with ways of protecting our children – and adults – from the corrosive effects of the worst of the Internet while not impeding legitimate and often necessary usage of benign Internet sites.

I think therefore that the time is ripe for us to focus on what I will call the “hidden” dangers of the Internet. Truthfully, these websites are far from “hidden” – most frum Jews who use the Internet are aware of them and probably patronize them to some extent. Yet they are “hidden” in the sense that most people unthinkingly put them in the benign category, while, they are perhaps more dangerous to anshei shlomeinu than sites purveying shmutz, which most of us would never dream of visiting anyway.

I am referring to the Jewish “blogs” – websites with frum-sounding names (containing Yeshivishe or Yiddish words), run by supposedly frum people that supposedly report news of interest to the frum community. Most people naively feel right at home patronizing a site like that. After all, it is run by people “like us”! What could possibly go wrong? I will tell you what could and does go wrong.

For the uninitiated, here is how these sites work: the site management collects news stories from other websites, or in some cases from amateur “reporters”, and publishes them as “articles”. Anyone can access and read those articles – and moreover, anyone can post a “comment” on an article, and that comment is then, at the discretion of the site’s managers, made available to everyone reading the article. Others can then respond to already-posted comments and a dialogue ensues.

In theory such websites can be useful, and indeed to some extent these websites do serve a productive function; they are supreme when it comes to getting the word out quickly about a kashrus problem, a risk to the community, a levaya, r’l, and so on. But let me be blunt: the way these websites are currently run, they are hotbeds of every kind of shmiras haloshon problem described in sefer Chofetz Chaim, they are rampant with apikorsus, with denigration of gedolei yisroel and with laitzonus. They provide a platform that gives the lowest elements of our community equal-footing access to the hearts and minds of every member of our community.

Because these blogs operate under the guise of frumkeit people mistakenly believe that they are safe not only for themselves but also for their impressionable children. But do we really want our children reading remarks that ridicule gedolim for bringing to light a heretofore unknown halachic problem, or that poke fun at a legitimate chumra, or that publicize crimes supposedly committed by members of the frum community – with or without naming names?

Do we have any idea how much permanent damage this causes to the hashkofos of ourselves and our family members, especially when the exposure is prolonged? What was formerly unthinkable is now thinkable; what was formerly unspeakable is now speakable, what was sacrosanct is now open season for laitzonus, and doubts and temptations that might have rested dormant beneath the level of consciousness, especially in weaker individuals, will have come alive and raised their ugly faces to torment them and possibly cause them to go astray, chas vesholom.

I do not have statistics but I believe that it quite plausible that while we are busy locking the door to a set of shmutz-related Internet dangers that primarily affect the weak and the vulnerable – yes, that precaution is indeed necessary and praiseworthy – we are ignoring the elephant in the room; these blogs that insidiously affect almost everyone.

Now, you may ask, “I have a highly recommended filter on my computer, that is supposed to block everything that is ‘bad’. Surely if these sites were as dangerous as you say, my filter would block them, right?”

Wrong! In fact, not only do most of the filters fail to block most of those sites, some of the filters actually advertise on those sites! Some of those sites piously publish articles extolling the virtues of the filters! The fox is guarding the henhouse!

How did this sorry state of affairs come to pass?

Money!

Money is the root of all evil, at least when it comes to the Jewish blogs. The blogs exist to make money, and they do that by selling advertising on their sites, and by publishing “feature” articles that are really ads in disguise – for a fee. As with newspapers, ad fees are a function of readership – the more people that visit a site, the more it can charge for ads. This measure is called “eyeballs” in the trade. To keep a for-profit blog in the black (and the Jewish blogs we are talking about are all for-profit) it is crucial to get and keep the “eyeballs” number as high as possible.

Now, it is an unfortunate fact of life that many people, even, unfortunately, in our community, are drawn to “juicy” stories, to sensationalism and to controversy. It is therefore hard for a blog owner, in a quest for more eyeballs, to resist the temptation to pander to those tastes, even if, in doing so, various serious halachos are violated. Perhaps some of the blog owners soothe their consciences by telling themselves that they have “standards” – red lines that they will not cross. Perhaps that is even the case. But that is small comfort if the red lines are drawn so far off-field that much of what does pass muster is unacceptable by halachic standards – as is in fact the case.

For a variety of reasons I am not naming any of these sites, nor am I going to quote from them verbatim. But here are a couple of typical examples of their “all-for-the-eyeballs” tactics.

A tiny group of frum Jews makes it a practice to demonstrate against the Jewish state and to align itself with various unsavory sonei Yisroel. Is this objectively newsworthy? Considering that the impact of their actions is zero, and that they have been doing the exact same thing for years, the answer is “no”. Yet this kind of article is a staple on the blogs. Why? Because many readers who like to comment on the articles invariably are incensed, and say so, others disagree and say so, and arguments, many of them quite hostile, develop, and that draws a crowd of readers. And it is obvious that the article was couched in such a way as to maximize the negative reaction, draw out the commenters, and foment the controversy.

It does not require a halachic expert to determine that these discussions contain numerous shmiras haloshon violations – which apply to those reading the discussions as well as to those posting in them –  yet they make for titillating reading and people are drawn in. To the blog owner, the ensuing eyeballs help him keep the prices of his ads up and thus he is motivated to post articles like these and to rationalize the michshol, and his own halachic violations, away.

Another example: A group of Jews who consider shaitlach to be prohibited sponsors a shaitel burning event to encourage their followers to get rid of them. Is this an inherently “bad” thing? No, it is not, because there is a sound basis in halacha for not wearing shaitlach and if that is their shittah, such an event is a legitimate means of making their point.

Is this newsworthy? Perhaps a case can be made for a “yes” answer, but the blogs glory in events like this, and write about them not as dispassionate news, but as if they were the height of primitive fanaticism – again to bring the negative commenters out of the woodwork, encourage remarks decrying chumros in general and again, to foment controversy. And again the motive is “eyeballs” – i.e. making more money.

An alleged “cult” takes refuge in a foreign country and its leaders are accused of terrible things. A person once regarded as a charismatic religious leader is charged with committing unspeakable acts. Whether or not these charges are true, should stories like this be publicly disseminated, let alone become fodder for public comment?

What’s In a Name?

Just who are the people commenting on articles like this, anyway? Unfortunately, we do not know who they are because most of the blogs allow people to make up pseudonyms for themselves and most of the comments are published anonymously – and even when real-sounding names are used, there is no way to tell if the name is genuine, or if someone is using another person’s name, or a fictional name.

And herein lies one of the biggest problems of the blogs, because many readers naively believe that since the blog is intended for frum people, the commenters are fellow-frum people like themselves. This gives credence to what they write – after all, if I am reading a comment by a person I suppose is frum on a blog I suppose is frum, then it must be ok for a frum person to think this, or even to say this.

Unfortunately this is often not the case. It is an unfortunate fact that many of the people commenting anonymously are the dregs of Jewish society – drawn from the small but vocal community of embittered formerly-frum, who delight in casting everything frum in a negative light, as a means of self-justifying their abandonment of Torah and mitzvos. Others are misfits who evoke nothing but pity in real life, but who find a voice and garner attention for themselves by saying outrageous things anonymously on a blog. Or they may be closet apikorsim who wouldn’t dare to express their heresies under their own name for fear of being ostracized, but who do so with impunity under a pseudonym.

Yet we, our spouses, our children, are lulled into thinking that the views expressed by these people are acceptable because, after all, they appear on a “frum” blog. And it is easy to believe that someone who goes by the name “Bubby” is a heimishe Yiddishe bubbe, or that someone who calls himself “Gadol BaTorah” must at least be able to learn a bit, but actually Bubby is more likely to be a cynical 19 year old boy on the fringe, and Gadol is more likely to be someone who has issues with ikrei emunah.

It gets worse. Some of the less scrupulous blog owners not only post provocative articles, they actually hire people to post provocative comments, under the guise of regular users, in order to further stoke the fires of controversy and, of course, to further their eyeballs-quest. Since anonymity is permitted, no one is the wiser.

The Decline of Decency

There is another problem with anonymous discussion that is endemic to all blogs, not just Jewish ones, and that is that civility tends to go out the window when a “discussion” about a controversial topic is in writing, not face-to-face, and especially when the correspondents are hiding behind pseudonyms. Sarcasm, derision, ad hominem attacks and downright insults are tossed about with abandon by people who wouldn’t dream of engaging in these tactics in real-life. In theory, blog owners “moderate” the discussions and can control the viciousness, but they often do not – again, because they believe that “street-fighting” attracts a larger audience, and their revenue is a function of audience size.

Do we really want to inure ourselves and our children to that kind of gutter behavior? Shouldn’t our standards be higher than those of the non-Jewish electronic “street”?

Power Corrupts

Unfortunately, the people who run the blogs are accountable to no one but themselves and can do what they want with impunity. This leads to abuses that go beyond the ones described above.

For example, some of the blogs favor certain frum politicians and disfavor others, to the ludicrous point of never reporting anything that might be construed as negative about the ones they favor, and finding every excuse to say something negative about the ones they don’t. Aside from the shmiras haloshon aspect of beating up on a yid in public,  what motivates this blatant favoritism – which does a disservice to the blog’s readers, who may actually believe that they are getting objective news? Is money changing hands? It’s a reasonable question but unfortunately, because of the lack of accountability, no one knows.

Some blog owners abuse their power by engaging in public shaming. They have been known to take a dislike to some commenters and to publicly “out” them by publishing their identifies for all to see. Now, I am a strong opponent of anonymity in the first place but if a reader is given to expect that he has it, there is absolutely no justification for publishing his identity.

If the blog owner happens not to like someone’s comments, he can and often does, arbitrarily delete them without posting them publicly, giving the lie to the implied claim of an “open” forum. Halevai that this would be the worst sin of these blogs, but I mention it as yet another illustration of the basic underlying problem: An unvetted and unregulated group of people who are strongly profit-motivated and oblivious to the negative halachic implications of what they are doing.

What Can Be Done?

Clearly, we have a serious set of problems here, and now, when the tzibur is redoubling its efforts to protect itself from the dangers of the Internet, is the time to deal with it. And we CAN deal with it. Here are some suggestions to help bring the blogs around to cleaning up their act.

1)      Insist that until these blogs shape up (more on that soon) they are blacklisted by ALL the filter programs, and that filter programs that do not comply will not be on the “approved” list.

2)      Ban the practice of the filter programs advertising on these blogs under pain of being removed from the “approved” list. It is a blatant conflict of interest.

3)      Approach the advertisers who place ads on these blogs and insist that they cease and desist until the blogs shape up. Names of advertisers who do not comply will be publicized.

4)      I am astounded that there are respected Rabbonim who write articles for these blogs, seemingly oblivious to their dangers. Approach them and educate them and insist that they cease and desist until the blogs shape up.

5)      There are numerous frum mosdos, including many Yeshivos, who shill their events on these blogs, both before the events, and with “photo essays” after the fact. Some of these mosdos are doubtless participating in the current Internet protection efforts! Approach them and educate them and insist that they also cease and desist until the blogs shape up.

Here are some of the things we ought to insist that the blogs do in order to restore the tzibur’s trust in them and to enable them to function without the restrictions above.

1)      Establish a tzibur-run regulatory authority to monitor and supervise the blogs to assure no violations of halacha, either in the articles or in the comments. Give them the “teeth” to impose meaningful penalties, drawn from the list above, for “recidivist” blogs.

2)      Create a detailed, written set up guidelines that blogs will have to abide by in order to be approved.

3)      Create a mechanism for members of the tzibur to easily report infractions to the regulatory authority.

4)      Allow only blog “members” to comment, require all members to be adults, and to be identified with full first and last name and city of residence, and verify all information provided by would-be members before authorizing them to comment.

5)      Insist on financial transparency so that the regulatory authority knows who is paying the blog, and for what, to avoid the genaivas daas inherent in taking money under the table, for any reason.

6)      Let it be known that if the current blogs don’t shape up, the tzibur will organize the formation of new blogs that will provide the same benefits as the current ones, but which will scrupulously follow the rules, so they and only they won’t be blacklisted.

I defer to the manhigei hatzibur who are organizing the current Internet initiative, and to the gedolim they rely on for advice; this article is intended to draw attention to what I believe to be a serious problem and to suggest a path toward a solution. I leave the ultimate solution in their hands but I volunteer to serve on the tzibur-run regulatory authority to keep the blogs in check, and to assist in  whatever other way I can.

Comments and further suggestions are welcome and can be sent to me at eli@eliwillner.com.

Postscript

Until the authorized filters get around to blocking these sites, it is relatively easy to block them yourself, by programming your router accordingly. It is not as hard as it sounds. If you want guidance, please email the make and model of your router, and the sites you wish to block, to my email address above.

B’ezras Hashem, through our efforts l’shaim shomayim, we will be zoche to useful blogs without their current unsavory side, and to ways of using the productive and necessary parts of the Internet without risking its pitfalls, and in that zechus may we be zoche to Eliyahu HaNavi’s announcement of the arrival of Moshiach (guaranteed that Eliyahu HaNavi will not need a blog to spread that wonderful news!)

Reality, Alternate Realities, Miracles and Moshiach

Reality, Alternate Realities, Miracles and Moshiach

An Examination of Axiomatic Truths, Perception and the Nature of Reality from the Torah Perspective, as Explained by the Maharal, Ramchal, Rav Hutner and Rav Dessler

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”.

1 – An Uncomfortable Comfort Zone

Most people assume that questions like “What is reality?”, or “Is truth absolute or relative?” are the province of philosophers and are not relevant to the daily lives of believing Jews. But consider this statement by Rav Yitzchok Hutner in Pachad Yitzchok, Kuntrus HaRishimos 5, Pesach: 

“In our current world, it is axiomatic to a normal person that 2 x 2 = 4. Now, we may believe that this is indisputable fact, and that a properly functioning intellect can come to no other conclusion. But, to put it baldly, this is a deficiency in faith. Just as it is possible for the sea to turn to dry land,  and for the sun at Givon to stop moving,  and just as it is possible for the same vessel to contain water for a Jew and blood for an Egyptian,  so also is it possible for our mind’s eye to see as incontrovertible fact that 2 x 2 =3.”

We will return to the words of Rav Hutner shortly. But this statement alone should give us pause. We all strive mightily to avoid “deficiencies of faith”. Yet, ask a typical observant Jew if it can ever be possible that 2 x 2 =3 and his answer will probably be a resounding “No!”, perhaps accompanied by expressions of concern for our mental health. So perhaps it is time for us to leave our “take it for granted” comfort zones and take a closer look at the questions like the ones in our opening paragraph, and discover the Torah perspective on them.

Hashem’s Capabilities Are Without Limit

We begin with the words of the Ramchal in Klach Pischei Chochma, Pesach 30:

“It is wrong to say that, since the Ain Sof [a reference to Hashem], may He be blessed, created the universe with the axioms under which it operates, that these axioms are immutable and it would have been impossible to create the universe with a different set of axioms… or to similarly say that things had to be a certain way because it is logically impossible for them to be otherwise. We may not say, Heaven forfend, that Hashem was bound to act in this or that particular way, because we must understand that Hashem is completely unrestricted in what He can do; He can do anything we can imagine and anything even if we cannot imagine it. The bottom line is that there are no boundaries or other limits to Hashem’s capabilities.

“The natural order that we perceive; every tangible aspect of it, is the way it is because Hashem made it that way, but He is not bound by that or any other natural order, in any way, shape, manner or form”.

It is difficult to perceive of realities other than our own, with different laws of nature – and even different rules of logic – than our own. But that is because our imaginations are limited by our experience. Hashem, however, is omnipotent in every respect and if it is His will to create a reality where 2 x 2 = 3, He can do so.

We will see that achris hayomim, the end-of-days epoch, is a time when an alternate reality will apply. But rules of nature can change even in our current reality – that is the essence of a miracle; as Rav Hutner points out, “it is possible for the same vessel to contain water for a Jew and blood for an Egyptian”. Clearly the laws of nature do not allow for such a phenomenon, yet when Hashem wills it, it happens.

The Maharal on Miracles

The Maharal discusses the nature of miracles at length in his second introduction to Gevuros Hashem. With respect to “self-contradictory” miracles, such as the same vessel containing blood for an Egyptian and water for a Jew, the Maharal explains that reality has two “tracks”, the physical world track, and the miracle track. These two alternate versions of reality exist in parallel and they intersect only insofar as those experiencing their version of reality may be aware that others are experiencing an alternate version of reality. Such was the case with respect to the plague of blood, dam.

This was also the case with respect to the plague of darkness, choshech. Whereas, for Jews, light functioned as normal, for the Egyptians, there was only darkness. Their eyesight was perfectly sound but there was no light to enable them to see. Thus, at the very same physical spot, the Jew was surrounded by light, the Egyptian, by darkness.  Those two forces are contradictory; they cannot coexist. Yet they did, on different reality tracks – the natural law track for the Jew, the miracle track, for the Egyptian.

A more dramatic example is that of Yehoshua stopping the sun. For him, his army and the enemy they were fighting, the sun indeed remained in place; time advanced but the sun did not. Yet the rest of the world did not experience this phenomenon. From the perspective of our reality this is impossible. An object cannot be in motion and motionless at the same time. Yet, miracles operate on their own reality track that replaces the natural law reality track for those for whom the miracle was intended, so indeed, the sun was in motion and motionless at the same time.

Rav Moshe Kasher, in an article titled “Introduction to the Torah of the Maharal” (Noam 25, pp. 261-263, quoted by Rav Yehoshua Hartman in his notes on Gevuros Hashem) writes, in explaining this Maharal, that the appearance of contradiction in these miracles is only from our natural law-based perspective. The human mind cannot fathom two opposites coexisting at the same time and in the same place. If one is there, the other is not; reality is one or the other, but never both. Otherwise the power of reason fails. However, the Maharal’s introduction of two tracks, natural and miraculous, solves this paradox. In effect, we have split time (in the case of Yehoshua’s miracle) into natural law time and miracle law time. They are now two separate entities, and there is no contradiction if each operates independently of the other.

Building on the Maharal

Rav Kasher cites Shailos U’Teshuvos Eretz Tzvi (1:105, p.241), who makes the same point, and extends the concept of alternate realities to the realm of the non-miraculous as well by distinguishing between physical reality and spiritual reality. He uses this concept to explain a Gemara in Pesachim 94b, which states, “The Sages of Israel maintain that the sun travels beneath the sky by day and above the sky at night; while the Sages of the nations of the world maintain that it travels beneath the sky by day and below the earth at night. Said Rebbi: And their view appears more plausible than ours…”. 

If their view appears more plausible than ours, why do our Sages maintain a different view? The answer, says the Eretz Tzvi, is that our Chachomim are speaking of how the sun behaves from a spiritual standpoint – an alternate reality from that of astronomers, who are limited to seeing the sun from the physical standpoint. To an ordinary person observing the sky, their view appears more plausible. But that is only because an ordinary person’s vision is also limited to the physical, like that of the astronomers.

Perception is Reality

Rav Eliyahu Dessler, in Michtav MiEliyahu 1, pp. 308-312, takes these concepts still further. He writes that reality is nothing more than perception and every person has his own version of reality; that which he perceives based on his individual level. This concept seems strange and even frightening, but that is only because we are comfortable with our reality; it is the only one we know, so we convince ourselves that it is absolute and shared by everyone. It is disorienting to contemplate that others may be experiencing a different reality than ourselves.

Yet, this explains how the Egyptian found himself drinking blood while the Jew drinking from the same vessel found himself drinking water. There is no contradiction because each was experiencing his own reality. Similarly, the Medrash Tanchuma relates that Avrohom identified the place where the Akeida was supposed to take place because he saw a cloud hovering over the mountain. Yet his gentile servants saw no such thing. Again, each was experiencing his own reality.

Yehoshua saw the sun’s motion cease, those for whom this miracle was relevant saw the same thing. Those for whom the miracle was irrelevant saw no deviation from the sun’s usual motion. Separate realities for different individuals because they had different situational needs.

But as we said, we are not speaking only of miracles. We all prepare a chair for the prophet Eliyahu at a bris, and set aside a cup of wine for him at the Pesach seder. Most people see nothing happening at either venue. But people on a sufficiently high level actually see, and possibly can even touch, Eliyahu.

Our forefather Yaakov was embalmed and buried, the Torah tells us. Yet, the Gemara tells us that Yaakov never died. How can those two facts co-exists, asks the Gemara. The answer, the Gemara says, is that we have verses to support Yaakov’s survival. But, we ask, how does that answer the question? How can a person be dead and alive at the same time – it seems the ultimate contradiction! But the Gemara’s answer is valid because once there are verses to support both versions of reality, they are both correct. Context – the individual, his spiritual level, the surrounding circumstances – will determine the perception that governs at any given moment of time.

The Alternate Reality of the Days of Moshiach

As we mentioned at the outset, Rav Hutner explains that a belief in the possibility of a shift in our mental operations that enables a belief that 2 x 2 =3 is a matter of bitachon, of faith in Hashem. He uses this principle to explain a fundamental fact about the times of Moshiach. Following is another excerpt from that Maamar: Rav Hutner begins by referencing a prophecy in Yeshayahu 65:17 regarding the end of days: “For behold, I create new heavens and a new earth, and the first ones shall not be remembered, neither shall they come into mind”.

Rav Hutner writes,

“We are all aware of the “new heavens” and the “new earth” that will make their appearance at the end of days and it is easy to fall into the trap of believing, wrongly, that the primary change will be in the world itself, while our intellects will of necessity function in the same manner as they do now. However, this is a foolish mistake. The intellect is a creation of Hashem like any other. How it works, and the manner in which is comprehends things today, are functions of the will of Hashem, who, “said and it came about” (Tehillim 33:9), and “if He wills, He shapes it, if He wills, He dissolves it” (from the Piyut, ki hinei ka’chomer from the Yom Kippur service.

“The new reality of the end of days is primarily a difference in the rules governing how our intellects work. In our current world, it is axiomatic to a normal person that 2 x 2 = 4. Now, we may believe that this is indisputable fact, and that a properly functioning intellect can come to no other

conclusion. But, to put it baldly, this is a deficiency in faith. Just as it is possible for the sea to turn to dry land (as it did at the splitting of the Red Sea; see Shmos 14:21), and for the sun at Givon to stop moving (as it did when Yehoshua conquered Givon; see Yehoshua 10:12.), and just as it is possible for the same vessel to contain water for a Jew and blood for an Egyptian (per Shmos Rabbah 9:9), so also is it possible for our mind’s eye to see as incontrovertible fact that 2 x 2 =3. This rewiring of our intellects is what our Sages refer to as “the Torah of Moshiach”.

“I believe with complete faith that this Torah will not be exchanged for another…” (This is the 9^th of the Rambam’s 13 Principles of Faith). If so, what will Moshiach make of the portions of the Torah dealing with death-based ritual impurity, or those dealing with the red heifer, after the dead are revived? We must conclude that the “Torah of Moshiach” will provide a different understanding of ritual impurity and the means of rectifying it, such that these Torah portions will make perfect sense in a post revival-of-the-dead context.

“Given our current understanding of those Torah portions, we might characterize the “Torah of Moshiach” understanding, whatever it may be, as the equivalent of 2 x 2 = 3. But that is only because we believe that the way our minds work now is how they have to work, and no alternatives are possible. That belief is a mistake.”

In other words, Rav Hutner is saying, rules of logic are not absolute; they are only valid relative to the context of how our minds currently work. But Hashem can “reprogram” our minds to work differently, such that what is self-evident as true now becomes axiomatically false, and what is self-evident as false now becomes axiomatically true. Doubting that such “reprograming” is possible, Rav Hutner says, is equivalent to doubting other miracles that violate laws of nature – it is a failure to properly appreciate Hashem’s omnipotence.

Thus, the “Torah of Moshiach” is identical to the Torah we have now – “this Torah will not be exchanged for another” – but our minds will be reprogrammed to understand those same letters, words and chapters differently, in a manner that befits the Moshiach epoch. The ashes of the red heifer were used to remove death-based ritual impurity. But death as we know it will no longer exist after the dead are revived so our current understanding of those Torah chapters will be obsolete and will have to be replaced by a new understanding, that suits the new context.

A Lesson About Hashgacha Pratis

There is a further lesson to be learned from the miracle of the Egyptian drinking blood while the Jew drank water from the same vessel, as Rav Hutner points out in Pesach, Maamar 48, and that is that every person is a world unto himself, and every person enjoys Hashem’s hashgacha not as part of a collective, but as a unique individual.

We can appreciate this idea more fully by imagining that we are sitting outdoors and enjoying the sun. Now, why is the sun shining on us and providing this enjoyment? The facile answer is that the sun is shining for the world as a whole and you and I are incidental beneficiaries of the sun’s rays. But this is false. Actually, the sun that is shining on me is a specific blessing intended for me, and the sun that is shining on you is a specific blessing intended for you. But, you might ask, if the sun is shining for me and you are next to me, you have to be exposed to the sun also, regardless of your personal worthiness for that blessing.

The proof that this is not the case is the miracle of the Egyptian drinking blood while the Jew drinks water from the same vessel! The Egyptian saw the Jew drinking water and thought that he was in the right place at the right time – water is water! – and took a few gulps. Of blood!

Thus, the sun shining on me is specifically intended for me, and if the sun is shining on you, too, it is because you, too, merit that blessing – not that you are piggybacking on my blessing of sunlight or the world’s general blessing of sunlight.

Conclusion

We do not advocate obsessing over what is real and what is not. Here and now it is the will of Hashem that we be grounded in the reality of this world and conduct our lives, interact with others, and perform our service to Hashem, accordingly. However, the concepts we have introduced in this article have several practical applications in the here and now; they add an important dimension to our understanding of Hashem’s infinite capabilities and that thereby enhances our faith in Him.

We hope and pray that by strengthening our bitachon we will hasten the arrival of Moshiach, and the Torah of the end-of-days.

May we speedily merit experiencing first-hand the alternate reality of the days of Moshiach!