Hil.Deos Perek 5

Perek Hei.

כשם שהחכם ניכר בחכמתו ובדעותיו והוא מובדל בהן משאר העם כך צריך שיהיה ניכר במעשיו ובמאכלו ובמשקהו ובבעילתו ובעשיית צרכיו ובדיבורו ובהילוכו ובמלבושו ובכלכול דבריו ובמשאו ובמתנו ויהיו כל המעשים האלו נאים ומתוקנים ביותר.

Keitzad? Talmid chachamim

לא יהא גרגרן אלא אוכל מאכל הראוי להברות גופו ולא יאכל ממנו אכילה גסה ולא יהיה רודף למלאות בטנו כאלו שמתמלאין ממאכל ומשקה עד שתפח כרסן. ועליהם מפורש בקבלה וזריתי פרש על פניכם פרש חגיכם.

Amru chachamim

אלו בני אדם שאוכלים ושותים ועושים כל ימיהם כחגים והם האומרים אכול ושתה כי מחר נמות וזהו מאכל הרשעים. ושולחנות אלו הם שגינה הכתוב ואמר כי כל שלחנות מלאו קיא צואה בלי מקום. אבל החכם אינו אוכל אלא תבשיל אחד או שנים ואוכל ממנו כדי חייו ודיו הוא שאמר שלמה צדיק אוכל לשובע נפשו.

It's a pelledike halacha here in the Rambam. I think we had commented earlier in פרק א הלכה ד, we just had read together that when the Rambam is describing the mida habeinonit, so the Rambam says in Alef Dalet,

וכן לא יתאוה אלא לדברים שהגוף צריך להם ואי אפשר לחיות בזולתם כענין שנאמר צדיק אוכל לשובע נפשו.

So we saw there that the Rambam says that the pasuk of צדיק אוכל לשובע נפשו is expressing a standard that's incumbent upon everyone. And we explained the lashon tzadik, so we saw in Ramchal that tzadik means someone who doesn't do aveiros, which means that we're all supposed to be tzadikim, there's nothing lifnim mishuras hadin about a tzadik in that sense of the Torah. And here the Rambam turns around and says,

החכם אינו אוכל אלא תבשיל אחד או שנים ואוכל ממנו כדי חייו ודיו הוא שאמר שלמה צדיק אוכל לשובע נפשו.

And even if the Rambam sort of had dramatized it by reusing the same pasuk, just earlier in the halacha, keitzad, when the Rambam begins illustrating how the talmid chacham has to be nikar b'maasav, b'machalo, b'mashkehu etc., he says he should eat l'havros gufo ולא יאכל ממנו אכילה גסה. So no one's allowed to eat achila gassa. That's not, there's nothing limited to a talmid chacham about that hanhaga. And here too the very same way he uses the very pasuk, the lashon that one should eat l'havros gufo, I don't remember if we read this line together or not. So the Rambam in Gimmel Beis when he was presenting וכל מעשיך יהיו לשם שמים, he said,

וכן כשיאכל וישתה ויבעול לא ישים על לבו לעשות דברים הללו כדי להנות בלבד עד שנמצא שאינו אוכל ושותה אלא המתוק לחיך ויבעול כדי להנות אלא ישים על לבו שיאכל וישתה כדי להברות גופו ואיבריו בלבד.

Essentially the same lashon l'havros gufo. And again as we discussed then, in Gimmel Beis, the Rambam never said anything about וכל מעשיך יהיו לשם שמים being reserved for talmidei chachamim. The emes is that later in Halacha Dalet, the Lechem Mishneh already is mis... In halacha daled, so the Rambam writes אף על פי שאשתו של אדם מותרת לו תמיד whenever she's tehora,

ראוי לו לתלמיד חכם שינהג עצמו בקדושה ולא יהיה מצוי אצל אשתו כתרנגול אלא מלילי שבת ללילי שבת אם יש בו כוח.

So says the Lechem Mishneh, ולאו דווקא תלמיד חכם. ובפרק כ"א מהלכות איסורי ביאה when the Rambam is not addressing only talmidei chachamim, he says the same thing:

כתב רבינו אין דעת חכמים נוחה ממי שמרבה בתשמיש. ולכך יש לתמוה קצת על רבינו בדין זה וקצת דינים אחרים אשר בפרק זה הם נוהגים בכל, כגון אם לא יהיו שניהם שיכורים ולא עצלנים,

etc. So says the Lechem Mishneh,

אולי יש לומר דאפילו הדברים הנוהגים בכל שאר העם הנזכרים כאן כתבם גבי תלמיד חכם מפני שהוא צריך להיזהר בהם ביותר.

So maybe a talmid chacham has to have a zehiras yeseira. So itachen follows. Whether this is pshat in the Lechem Mishneh or whether this is adding something, saying something different than the Lechem Mishneh, ayen sham, but itachen follows. Let's take takeh the example of lehavros gufo, right? The same lashon which the Rambam used earlier in Gimmel Beis by kol adam, that he uses here specifically with regard to the talmid chacham. So itachen follows. That takeh is such an inyan for every one of us based on בכל מעשיך יהיו לשם שמים. By the talmid chacham, there's an additional chiyuv. In nami, the hanhaga is the same. The hanhaga is the same. There's an additional mechayev by the talmid chacham of kesheim shehachochom nikar. That's an additional mechayev. Kesheim shehachochom nikar again bechochmaso uvideyosav. So כך צריך שיהיה ניכר במעשיו. In some cases, I'm not sure if in every case of overlap that we can find in perek hey, there's necessarily a nafka mina ledina between whether or not the mechayev is only the same mechayev that you have by shear ha'am or whether you have the additional mechayev of betoras chacham, betoras talmid chacham, but in some cases lichora there will be a nafka mina. And again, let's take that example of lehavros gufo. What happens if a person doesn't eat achila gassa? A person eats very moderately, he eats what he needs to eat. He eats what he needs to eat לא פחות ולא יותר. He has a calorie counter. Exactly how many calories the doctor tells him he needs to learn three strong sedarim a day. But he prepares the foods which are the nutrition vechulu vechulu that the whole pyramid, whatever the latest version of the pyramid is. But he prepares the food in such a way that it should be as tasty as possible. As tasty as possible. Is he doing anything wrong? Absolutely not. Absolutely not. He's certainly being mkayem the vehalachta bidrachav. the amounts that he's eating are again reflect the mimmutza, the derech habeinonit. The fact that he sort of goes out of his way to make it as tasty as possible, is that the highest madrega possible in וכל מעשיך יהיו לשם שמים? Mistama not. Mistama Baba Sali didn't prepare his meals that way, but he's certainly not guilty of being mevatel anything. I think what we discussed already the Sefer HaChinuch says a person is mevatel the mitzvah of ahavas Hashem. Again, we mentioned I think last time that really וכל מעשיך יהיו לשם שמים belongs under the mitzvah of ahavas Hashem, and the Rambam advanced in Hilchos Deos for other reasons. But a person is mevatel that mitzvah when he's not working towards it. The fact that a person hasn't reached a madrega where everything he's doing is on that level, that doesn't mean a person is guilty of any bitul, of any bitul. So at the end of the day, when we eat and v'dekhay you add salt, you add spices, which is not there lehavros gufo, we're not doing anything wrong. Is it the highest madrega in the world? Avada not. But certainly the Rambam would not tell us that we're doing anything wrong. Itakhen that in this type of situation the chacham's additional mechayev, itakhen that the chacham's additional mechayev means that in addition to again just not being the highest ideal and fullest kiyum of וכל מעשיך יהיו לשם שמים, but he's also falling short of כך צריך שיהא ניכר במאכלו ובמשקהו. And that here itakhen ika nafka mina, and that maybe for the chacham it's takeh more of a shailah me'ikar hadin than for the rest of the population. Agam that the Rambam in both contexts uses the word tzarich, right? He introduces our perek with tzarich, which is the same lashon that he has in the beginning of וכל מעשיך יהיו לשם שמים. But lichora that's the pshat that the Rambam is saying that the hanhagos here which the Lechem Mishneh tells us that we can find elsewhere, so the point the Rambam is saying is that there's an additional mechayev by the chacham, which again may not necessarily ika nafka mina, it may be lav alav as it were bishnei lavin in some context, but in some context lichora it will ika nafka mina. Now this idea that in some contexts it will ika nafka mina then basically means that the chacham has to answer to a higher standard. He has to answer to a higher standard and that is clearly the Rambam lishitoso. The Rambam at the end of perek hey of yesodei hatorah, there's a machlokes with Rashi. When the Gemara in Yoma pey vav says היכי דמי חילול ה'? So

אמר רב כגון אנא דשקילנא בישרא מטבחא ולא יהיבנא דמי לאלתר.

If I buy on credit, I buy from the butcher and I don't pay immediately, why is that a chillul Hashem? Says Rashi

וכשאני מאחר לפרוע הוא אומר שאני גזלן ולומד ממני להיות מזלזל בגזל.

When I'm late in paying, so he thinks that I'm a gazlan and he figures, oh, if Rav can be a gazlan, then I can be a gazlan also. Rav gives another example that Rabbi Yochanan amar כגון אנא דמסגינא ארבע אמות בלא תורה ותפילין. Says Rashi ואין הכל יודעין שנחלשתי בגרסתי. So according to Rashi all of these examples are basically examples of maris ayin on things which are me'ikar hadin. And by the and by Chachamim when you have a maris ayin so it's not just an issue of a maris ayin but it's also an issue that people are going to emulate them so mimeila that translates into a chillul Hashem. But all these are things again which are at least a maris ayin on something which is me'ikar hadin. That's the way Rashi teitsches it. The Rambam in Hey Yud Aleph

ויש דברים אחרים שהן בכלל חילול השם והוא שיעשה אדם גדול בתורה ומפורסם בחסידות דברים שהבריות מרננות אחריו בשבילם ואף על פי שאינם עבירות הרי זה חילול השם.

And the Rambam doesn't talk about any maris ayin shebo. הכל לפי גודלו של חכם צריך שידקדק על עצמו, skips a few lines, ויעשה לפנים משורת הדין. So that lichora is again what the Rambam is sort of reiterating here in the beginning of Perek Hey and adding to that that sometimes again this mechayiv of the chacham answering to a higher standard sometimes is just an additional mechayiv for the same dinim and sometimes will takeh a nafka mina in terms of making things which for other people are not problems are not me'ikar hadin for him it will be me'ikar hadin. In the English sefer with the transcriptions of some of the Rav's comments during kinos so he suggests very interestingly pshat in the following Mechilta right on the pesukim of כל אלמנה ויתום לא תענון. אם ענה תענה אותו. So the Mechilta has the following: אחד עינוי מרובה אחד עינוי מועט. Davar acher. Rebbe omer.

כבר היה רבי ישמעאל ורבי שמעון יוצאין ליהרג. רבי ישמעאל ורבי שמעון

right of the Asara Harugei Malchus. So they were taking out they were being taken out to be executed. אמר לו רבי שמעון לרבי ישמעאל Rebbe רבי לבי יוצא שאיני יודע על מה אני נהרג. What did I do wrong that the Ribbono Shel Olam is punishing me this way?

אמר לו רבי ישמעאל לרבי שמעון מימיך בא אדם אצלך לדין או לשאלה ועכבתו עד שתהא שותה כוסך ונוטל סנדלך או עוטף טליתך?

So Rebbe Yishmael says to Rebbe Shimon says did it ever happen that someone came to ask you a shaila? So the Rav here paints a picture. So Rebbe Shimon has had a long exhausting enervating day maybe didn't even have pas shacharis he was so busy. He's finally coming home he's gonna he's having a cup of tea. And someone comes he has a shaila. And so Rebbe Shimon has one of his bnei bayis asks the person to wait. He should wait thirty seconds while he finishes his cup of tea. Or maybe he's sitting ich veis he's sitting in short sleeves or something when someone comes so before going out he wants to put on his jacket that he should bekavodik.

בא אדם אצלך לדין או לשאלה ועכבתו עד שתהא שותה כוסך ונוטל סנדלך או עוטף טליתך? אמרה תורה אם ענה תענה אחד עינוי מרובה אחד עינוי מועט. אמר לו ניחמתני רבי.

So what was the shakla vetarya? So I guess without the Rav's comment we would have said that Rebbe Shimon did. didn't know this drasha אחד מינו מרובה אחד מינו מועט. So the Rav says differently. No, itachen, I mean implicitly, and this isn't spelled out, but apparently itachen that Rabbi Shimon knows this drasha. Knows the drasha ma'aneh sa'aneh of אחד אינו מרובה אחד אינו מועט. It never occurred to Rabbi Shimon that that's considered being ma'aneh to have a person wait while he finishes his cup of tea when he's chaleshing. And Rabbi Yishmael tells him, yeah, for most people it takeh isn't. For most people this wouldn't be relevant. You couldn't call this an inuy muat. But for you, for Nasi Yisrael, so you're on such a high level and you're held to such a high standard that for you, that's an inuy muat. You kept him waiting 30 seconds while you finished your cup of tea. For you, that's an inuy muat. Then the Rav has here, I think Rav Shechter quotes this in I forget in which of the sefarim he quotes this also, the Gemara in Shabbos of כל האומר דוד חטא אינו אלא טועה. So what do you mean כל האומר דוד חטא אינו אלא טועה? The psukim say that David was choteh. Okay, so again mistama we would have learned pshat otherwise. כל האומר דוד חטא in the way that it would appear from the mashma'os, from the literal meaning. No, it was choteh in a different way. So the Rav says no, כל האומר דוד חטא אינו אלא טועה. If you would look at David as David, not as David Hamelech, not as David Hamelech the na'im zmiros Yisrael. You look at David Hamelech as a כמה דוד איכא בשוקא as a stama David and you would think that chata, so he'd be eino ela to'eh. Ein hachi nami, the psukim say he was choteh because the psukim are describing David Hamelech. David Melech Yisrael on that madreiga, so then he was choteh. But on a madreiga of David? So then it's eino ela to'eh. It's the same yesod. Okay, maybe just one more he'ara here. In halacha vav, the Rambam quotes a Gemara in Berachos that כדרך שנוהג צניעות בבית הכיסא ביום כך נוהג בלילה. That a talmid chacham acts with the same degree of tzniyus at night in the beis hakiseh as he does bayom. Gemara in Berachos, it's a strange Gemara seemingly. Gemara in Berachos, I think who is it, Rav Nachman? I forget who it is, I think maybe Rav Nachman accosts hahu safdana, someone who was maspid, and he said about the niftar that he was a tremendous tzanua. So Rav Nachman says to him, how do you know whether he was tzanua? Did you ever observe how he conducted himself in the beis hakiseh? And that ein korin tzanua ela to someone who's tzanua in the beis hakiseh as well. And in that context, the Rav says that a person should have the same degree of tzniyus balaila in the beis hakiseh as he does bayom. So what's all that about? We generally translate a person who's tzanua, a person as being modest. Lichora that definition is a little too narrow because you have in a few places in the Mishnayos where the Mishnayos speak of צנועי בית הלל המחמירין כבית שמאי in this, so you have such a Mishnah in Demai, you have... The mishna that the the Gemara in Meruba quotes about how the tznuim would be manichin maos to be podeh the the maaser sheni if people would in Shvias would would inadvertently take maaser sheni, they wanted to be podeh it for them, tznuin in a context that has nothing to do with modesty. And you have that lashon of of tznuim a few times in the mishnayos. So l'chora what what you see is, and in each of those contexts, the Rambam actually comments on it in Peirush Mishnayos. So tznuim are people who have tremendous yiras shamayim and they're medakdek bemitzvos, being medakdek bemitzvos. So apparently the definition of tzniyus, modesty, is sort of the the manifestation, is a corollary. But the definition of tzniyus is that a person has a sense of being lifnei Hashem, a yiras shamayim, a sense of being in Hakadosh Baruch Hu's presence. Oh, if that's the case, then he's going to be נוהג צניעות בעצמו בבית הכסא בלילה כדרך שנוהג ביום because if tzniyus means modesty, okay, so you have to be modest when people are around. No one's around, so there's nothing to be modest of. So if no one else is home, so what difference does it make how the person parades around, whether he parades around in a tzniyusdikke fashion or an untzniyusdikke fashion? No one sees. So how can you say that that's a lack of tzniyus? But if the the root of tzniyus is not really supposed to be klapei other people, the root of tzniyus is supposed to be כלפי הקדוש ברוך הוא, so then that's what the Gemara says: you want to know whether a person's a tzanua, so you have to know what the person does when he thinks no one else is around. Because then you know if he's an emesdikke tzanua because tzniyus is supposed to flow from a sense of being lifnei Hashem, from from an awareness and a sensitivity to being in Hakadosh Baruch Hu's presence. Then mimaila that again it does express itself in what we describe as modesty, that that is a correct manifestation, but the source of it is not that a I'm being that a person is supposed to be modest vis-à-vis other people, but he's supposed to be modest because he's he's in the presence of Hakadosh Baruch Hu. And mimaila that's why the Gemara says this is the test, this is the test of of tzniyus when a person is in a situation where he correctly is is assuming that no one, no person sees him. So if that person maintains his tzniyus, then he's an emesdikke even in that situation then he's an emesdikke tzanua.