Shomer Negiah and the problem of evil

Good morning. We'll speak about those topics. We'll begin first with the issue again of Shomer Negiah, of avoiding physical contact between unmarried men, women, unmarried, not husband and wife. And then a very different topic, more of a philosophical topic, we'll discuss בעזרת השם בלי נדר the question of evil in the world. In the beginning of Parshas Kedoshim in Sefer Vayikra, so the Torah tells us דבר אל כל עדת בני ישראל, speak to the entire congregation, ואמרת אליהם קדשים תהיו and tell them that you should be holy כי קדוש אני השם אלקיכם because I Hashem your God, I am holy. And according to the Rambam explains, Maimonides explains, that he doesn't list this mitzvah, this commandment of Kedoshim Tihyu being holy as one of the 613 mitzvos because one of the rules the Rambam gives us for enumerating mitzvos is if you have something which is an overarching goal of all of Torah, so then you don't list it as an individual mitzvah because all the mitzvos are geared and primed towards kedusha. So the goal of one of the goals of Torah life is to attain kedusha, to attain holiness, to attain sanctity. Now sanctity means many things and has many manifestations but it also has one very specific and especially pronounced expression. And that can be gleaned from the following. I don't know if you've had occasion to the probably the greatest work of Rabbinic literature, post-Talmudic times, is the Rambam's Mishneh Torah, right, is Maimonides' code of law. So the Rambam subdivided his code of law into 14 books. The first one is Sefer Hamada, the book of knowledge, the second is Sefer Ahava, book of love, the third is Sefer Zmanim, the book of seasons, of festivals, the fourth is Sefer Nashim, the halakhos, laws dealing with marriage, with divorce etc. And the fifth of the 14 books of the Rambam's code of law is Sefer Kedusha, the book of holiness. So what does one find in Sefer Kedusha? So again on the one hand kedusha is a goal according to Maimonides himself of the entire Torah and yet what is it that the Rambam includes in the book of kedusha? So Rav Soloveitchik used to highlight this fact that what you find in Sefer Kedusha are A, the halakhos of which relationships are forbidden, whom a person can marry, whom a person cannot marry, again what the boundaries are between unmarried people and what's appropriate conduct, what's inappropriate conduct, that's part of what you find in Sefer Kedusha and the other part that you find in Sefer Kedusha are the halakhos relating to the dietary code, what a person is allowed to eat, what a person is not allowed to eat. So it's especially in the area of curbing physical desire that that's where kedusha, that's where holiness and sanctity is especially to be realized and that's why the Rambam includes these halakhos in Sefer Kedusha. So in our quest for holiness and our quest for sanctity there's no area which is more important or more significant again than knowing what the boundaries are between men and women, knowing how to curb and channel of intimacy. That's introduction number one. Introduction number two is that the hallmark of the Torah's approach in general and specifically in these areas of Kedusha is that the Torah is very realistic. The Torah doesn't imagine that we have our heads in the clouds. The Torah is very realistic about who we are, what people are and the drives and the instincts and the urges that people have. The Torah doesn't pretend they don't exist. That's why celibacy is not an advocated way of life in the Torah system. It's not a realistic way of life. That's not the way we were created. We weren't designed that way. So the Torah is very realistic. Now part of that realism, one way that realism expresses itself, אבות דרבי נתן. אבות דרבי נתן is again from Chazal, rabbinic literature, is sort of a, I don't know, call it an elaborated version of Pirkei Avot, Ethics of the Fathers. So in אבות דרבי נתן we find the following: איזהו סייג שעשתה התורה לדבריה? Where do you find generally we associate the making of safeguards with that that was delegated to the rabbis? And generally that is the case, that the Torah delegated the making of a siyag, of a safeguard to avoid violating a prohibition. The Torah delegated that to the rabbis. But the Torah itself modeled how to make a siyag. The Torah itself modeled again what type of safeguards are we to enact in order to help facilitate compliance. So the אבות דרבי נתן says where do you find it? So the אבות דרבי נתן says because the Torah says at the beginning of the Parsha of Arayot, at the beginning of the parsha again which lists all those forbidden marriages, men and women who are not allowed to be intimate. The Torah says לא תקרבו לגלות ערווה. The Torah says that not only again is what would actually consummating the relationship be forbidden, but even any type of expression of any physical contact expressing affection, even without the physical contact, any kind of, any kind of, what's the word, expression, expression of love, yeah, what's the word, desire, expression of love, oh I'm blanking on the erotic expression, thank you, yes, some type of expression of love. Fine, anyway, even on the level of talk, any type of, sorry I'm blanking on the word, that even that because it's conducive to leading to something else, to leading to more, that the Torah forbids that. איזהו סייג שעשתה התורה לדבריה. Now again why is this an expression of realism? For a very simple, very simple reason. Let's say if a young man and a young woman are dating. So on a scale of one to ten let's say we have to rank the impulse, the urge to hold hands, or that he wants to give her a kiss on the cheek. Let's say we have to rank again on a scale of one to ten that the strength of that urge. Let's say we'll give it a, I don't know, a three. You can give it a, you can make it a two, you can make it a four, but let's say for purposes of illustration we'll give it a three. Okay fine, let's say that they're holding hands. So they do that. So let's say now you have to rank on that same scale of one to ten, again the strength of the urge of the desire not only to hold hands but to escalate in terms of the physical contact. So at this point passions having been aroused a little bit and having the flames having been fanned a little bit so to go to the next level so now already it's going to be a five or a six. And if they will go to that level so then how are you going to rank the strength of the urge of the desire right so you see it's going to keep getting stronger and stronger. To ask someone to comply with what the Torah says again when on a scale of one to ten the strength of the urge of the desire that a person is experiencing is an eight or is a nine is going to be an incredibly difficult challenge and it's going to be one that some people almost inevitably are going to fail. To tell people when the challenge is a much more realistic one to tell people don't hold hands. So that's a much easier challenge for a person to deal with to contend with. That's what we meant before when we were talking about how the Torah is very realistic in its approach. It's a very strong strong urge and drive within the human personality. It's one again that if controlled before it's inflamed can be controlled and if it's controlled it can be sanctified in the context of marriage but if it's one which isn't curbed and controlled but is inflamed so then it becomes very very difficult increasingly difficult in order to control. One more perspective on again the fact that the Torah and Chazal explicating their words again tell us that any type of any type of physical contact which expresses any type of affection is assur. So the truth is it's that siyag is meaningful in two ways. And maybe I'll just try to give you a mashal to explain both both levels of meaning. Let's say imagine you have a son he's very very devoted to his father. Very devoted to his father. So not only will he go bring the father a cup of tea when the father asks him but he's so devoted to the father that he checks in with him regularly every few minutes every 15 minutes every half hour he checks in with his father and says are you comfortable is there anything I can get you can I be of service in any way. And he does this every 15 20 minutes so takke after doing this for two three hours at one point the father says you know what if it's not too much of an imposition could you bring me a cup of tea. So what did the son accomplish how would we explain the meaningfulness the significance of the attention that he paid to his father how would we explain it on how many levels rabosai. Is it only because three hours into the attention he's paying his father so takke it happened that the father wanted a cup of tea and he was there to provide the cup of tea or is there more to it than that. Are you with me do you hear the question. I don't understand. Yeah sure. So imagine the father let's say you have a father he's laid up in bed. He's laid up in bed so because of that he can't really fend for himself. So the son is working in an adjoining room he's working from home online but every 15 minutes the son comes into the father's room and says to him abba is there anything I can get you are you comfortable would you like a drink do you want me to open the shades do you want me to close the shades. Finally at twelve o'clock, the father says, you know what, if it's not a problem, I'd like a cup of tea. So what the question we're asking is how would we explain to someone else the meaningfulness of what the son was doing? Is it meaningful only because well at twelve o'clock finally it all paid off because his father wanted a tea a cup of tea and he brings him the cup of tea or is it was the meaningfulness go beyond that? Okay so is the Kibud Av V'eim is that is that the respect that he's showing his father? Again is it only that it pays off because at twelve o'clock the father wants a cup of tea? It's supposed to look like all the time, not only at the time his father needed it. Correct but let's say at ten o'clock and eleven o'clock when he came in so the father said no thank you I have everything I need. So did did he accomplish anything? Is there any significance to what he was doing? Even though he didn't accomplish anything there's something that was done and there's definitely value for him that came out of it because it's saying that okay even though you don't need anything it really matters to me to give you respect and give you... 100 percent or in other words what the son does is meaningful for two reasons: A. Because of the system he put in place he was there when the father wanted the cup of tea. If he hadn't had this system in place he may not have been there when the father wanted the cup of tea. But it goes way beyond that. The fact that he's always mindful the fact that there's this devotion being shown and this effort being expended so that is tremendously meaningful in its own right. Does everyone sort of intuit that? That the going in the the fact that this is on his mind the fact that he's devoted to this even when the father says no thank you that's still meaningful. So that's the that's the mashal. That's the that's the analogy. What what's the analogue of us saying? The analogue is when we talk about a syag. When we talk about a safeguard whether it's a safeguard that the Torah itself institutes or whether it's a safeguard that the Torah left for the Rabbis to institute so the syag is also the safeguard is also meaningful on two levels. A. It's meaningful it's like the cup of tea that because the syag is in place because the safeguard is in place the father gets the cup of tea when he wants it. Because we abide by the safeguards so thank God we don't get to the point where we succumb and do what the Torah said that we shouldn't do. So it's meaningful on that level. But it's meaningful beyond that level. It's not only because of the cup of tea it's meaningful. It's also meaningful because now instead of again just having one minute when I'm thinking about Kibud Av at twelve o'clock when I'm drinking the tea so it's something I'm involved in all the time. So too the the attention that we pay and the effort that we expend and the devotion that we demonstrate towards kedusha towards sanctity by observing the safeguards that itself sanctifies a person. It's not only that it sanctifies the person by ensuring compliance that he doesn't end up doing again the ultimate transgression which the Torah prohibits but again the involvement the concern the effort the devotion to keep away from that itself sanctifies a person and creates a tremendously again holy lifestyle a very sanctified lifestyle. So that's the the perspective. But doesn't sometimes it can be too much? Like for example in your example with the father if you go really every fifteen minutes it can bother him. Right so the same in the this like you're supposed to like maybe at some level it's already beginning to be too much like the rules of all the... How do you feel really where is the right level with it you know? The break-even. Yeah. Right. So the question is not really a question, it's a point. The point is an excellent point. There certainly is, and that's why, so for instance, the Rambam, Maimonides, talks at great length how the Torah is very, again, let's maybe shift to the other part of the book of Kedushah, the Book of Holiness, for now, in terms of curbing one's physical appetite and in terms of eating and drinking. So the Rambam writes there exactly your point. He says a person can overdo it. If a person is going to become such an ascetic that he is not going to eat enough to be healthy and to feel good, so that takeh is overdoing it. And it's exactly right. The Torah is, according to the Rambam, when Dovid Hamelech, when King David, says in Sefer Tehillim, in the Book of Psalms, Toras Hashem temimah, so to be when you say that Hashem's Torah is perfect, is complete, it means that it's balanced in the sense that again, it doesn't overdo it. And therefore the Torah, when it was delegated to the Rabbanim to institute the syagim, they are doing this with that in mind. And you're right, in my mashal, in the analogy, I probably overstated it in the sense of to go in every fifteen minutes, you don't let him nap, you don't let him, but the point is very well taken. Okay, I think we're really out of time, but I'm not sure if I said bli neder when I said that we were going to talk about a little bit the question of evil. So let's solve the question of evil in two minutes and then you can move on to other areas of life. The Mishna tells us in the end of Masechet Brachos that just as we make a bracha on good tidings, we make a bracha, Hatov Vehameitiv, that God is good and benevolent and bestows benevolence, so too we make a bracha, we make a blessing, Rachmana litzlan, on bad tidings, that God's judgments are always true. Which means that basically, from our vantage point, so we experience good and we experience evil, and people who live on our level are doing good and doing evil. From God's vantage point, the fact that he allows the evil to happen means that even though on our level it may be unintelligible, maybe incomprehensible, and we experience it as evil, on some level, on some vantage point from which Hashem is able and views the world, so then there is nothing from his vantage point which is evil, but from his vantage point what happens has to happen and is supposed to happen. From our vantage point, if one person is violent to another person, so he wasn't given a prophecy, so that's something which is evil and that's something the person is accountable for, and if a person hasn't been given a prophecy, it's absolutely horrible and horrific to do it. From Hashem's vantage point, the reason he's not interfering is because for some reason, again, which we can't expect to understand because we don't share that vantage point, it's something which is supposed to happen. So joking aside, obviously this is something that needs to be talked about at greater length, but that's the basic kivun, that's the basic direction and approach, and maybe with your rabbeim, it's something that if you're interested, that can be fleshed out. Excuse me, someone's supposed to be harmed in some type of way, was kind of in from this person or whatever the case? That's what many, that's the theory of divine providence that many, not all, have. There are different opinions and that's the the great Torah thinkers throughout the ages, but that is one major school of thought, yes, Simon. And that's the one which which I was presenting. Not everyone agrees with that but that's the one that many systems have. Okay, thanks. I was just reminded on the recent atrocities that have happened like the bombing in Jerusalem and what happened to Bobov, those would be occasions to say the bracha Baruch Dayan Ha'emes? So, generally we only say it with Hashem's name, we only say ברוך אתה ה' אלקינו מלך העולם if it's one of the seven immediate relatives who passed away. If we hear that someone who wasn't one of the immediate relatives, so then our custom is that we say it without the Shem u-Malchus, without saying ה' אלקינו מלך העולם, we would say just Baruch Dayan Ha'emes. Oh, is that the I believe that is the most known on hearing unfortunate news, but there's something like that you say on an unfortunate event, I thought? Right, I mean, that's the bracha that we're talking about. Oh, okay, that's what I assumed because I we've I did this when I heard I said that bracha when I remember hearing about Rabbi Noah Weinberg, zecher tzaddik livracha, passed away. Thank you very much, everyone.