Perek 1, part 2

Let’s come back for a minute, I think we left off talking a little bit about the Malbim on the last phrase here of pasuk bais ובתורתו יהגה יומם ולילה. So we saw that the Malbim explains, again this is not his chiddush, that you find the lashon higayon referring to sometimes to machshava, sometimes to dibbur. So in Yehoshua in perek alef

לא ימוש ספר התורה הזה מפיך והגית בו יומם ולילה.

So the Metzudos here already comments that v'hagisa pa'am teshamesh l'dibbur k'mo u'leshono tehege from later in Tehillim. U'pa'am teshamesh l'machshava k'mo v'hegeus libi, also from Tehillim. So you find that the lashon higayon again sometimes is dibbur, and in Chazal you find that also. Let’s say the Mishna in Sanhedrin ההוגה את השם באותיות. It refers to some, not quite exactly what the p'shat is, but somehow some kind of pronunciation of the shem yud-keh-vav-keh. Ha-hoge, to make sounds, to articulate, ההוגה את השם באותיות. So the lashon higayon, it’s interesting that pa'am it indicates and connotes dibbur and sometimes it connotes machshava. So the Malbim, here comes the Malbim's chiddush, that what sort of bridges these two meanings of higayon is that higayon always, in both instances, in both manifestations, higayon includes being motzi, bringing forth. Sometimes bringing forth means in thought analytically when a person is מבין דבר מתוך דבר, by deducing, he’s מבין דבר מתוך דבר, that’s hotza'ah. But bringing forth also can mean that when the person articulates the thought that he has, a person articulates a thought, he’s also being motzi. Now based on that, so that then leads the Malbim to his understanding that when the pasuk says ובתורתו יהגה יומם ולילה, it means ללמוד על מנת לעשות. It means a machshava which is being motzi, a machshava which is deriving conclusions, which is generating applications, a machshava which is being motzi because that’s the connotation of higayon. And hence ללמוד על מנת לעשות. The Malbim already says the same here on this pasuk in Yehoshua and I don’t know, everything the Malbim says is so incredibly meduyak. So the lashon hapasuk is

לא ימוש ספר התורה הזה מפיך והגית בו יומם ולילה.

The Rebbe used to tell a story that once the Malbim was passing through wherever the Beis HaLevi, I don’t remember if he said, I don’t remember at that point where the Beis HaLevi was, where the Beis HaLevi was a rov then, and the Malbim was passing through. So the Beis HaLevi at that time had a little, a young daughter. So he told her to put on bigdei Shabbos. It wasn’t Shabbos. Told her to put on bigdei Shabbos and to take candles because they were going out to be mekabel panim of the Malbim.

לא ימוש ספר התורה הזה מפיך והגית בו יומם ולילה למען תשמר לעשות ככל הכתוב בו.

So says the Malbim

והגית בו שיחשוב ויעיין תמיד בחלק העיוני שבתורה ותכלית העיון והעסק יהיה בעבור המעשה

which is the next phrase of l'ma'an tishmor la'asos. So here the Malbim sees confirmation for his havanah in higayon that the higayon results in l'ma'an tishmor la'asos, which is exactly what our Malbim here is saying that ללמוד על מנת לעשות. Yitachen meod that albeit here in the context of parshanus... The way the Malbim understands these psukim, again albeit in the context of parshanus, it positions him on a major question in halacha, very very major question. The question is for someone who's rawuy l'kach, very few people, so we're discussing it but it's not halacha l'ma'aseh for us. But for someone who's rawuy say to learn chochmas hanistar, so how does the person allocate his time in terms of talmud torah? How much of talmud torah is nigleh, is Shas v'Poskim, and how much of it is other chelkei torah? So the Rama in, again this is the Rama, רמ"ו ד' in Yoreh De'ah, the Rama writes as follows:

ואין לו אדם ללמוד כי אם מקרא משנה וגמרא והפוסקים הנמשכים אחריהם ובזה יקנה העולם הזה והעולם הבא אבל לא בלמוד שאר חכמות. ומכל מקום מותר ללמוד באקראי בשאר חכמות ובלבד שלא יהיו ספרי מינים וזהו הנקרא בין החכמים טיול בפרדס. ואין לו אדם לטייל בפרדס רק אחר שמילא כריסו בשר ויין והוא לדעת איסור והיתר ודיני המצוות.

The lashon HaRama is the etzem shitah is clear, the lashon HaRama as the Shach and the Gr"a point out is very very difficult. But let's first step by step here. אבל לא בלמוד שאר חכמות, so the Shach says what does the Rama have in mind? כגון ספרי פילוסופים ותכונה וחכמת הקבלה וכיוצא בהן. Included within sh'ar chochmos the Shach says the Rama means kabbalah as well. So it's clear that the Rama is saying even for a person who's rawuy for that chochma, his ikar limud is still supposed to be in nigleh, in Shas v'Poskim. Not just that for us שאין אנו ראויים לכך that that's what we should be focused on, no, but even for someone who's rawuy l'kach. That's what, now what in the words of the Shach is אין לשון הרמ"א מסוקן is the fact that when the Rama says וזהו הנקרא בין החכמים טיול בפרדס, Pardes doesn't include all sh'ar chochmos. So that's what's a little confusing here in the Rama and the Gaon has the same question on the Rama. But that difficulty notwithstanding, the Shach says it's clear that al kol panim the Rama's opinion is that the ikar limud even for someone who's rawuy for chochmas hanistar is מקרא משנה גמרא והפוסקים הנמשכים אחריהם. The Gaon is massig and says that he doesn't think that, he says mah nafshach, if the sh'ar chochmos that the Rama is talking about includes kabbalah then how can he say that it should only be b'akrai b'alma? Because

אין לך קבל שכר יותר מזה כמו שאמרו דבר קטן הויות דאביי ורבא

davar gadol. So ma nafshach if he's not talking about kabbalah, then he shouldn't be identifying it with pardes, the gaon says. If he is talking about kabbalah, so then how can he be saying that it should only be ba'akra'i. So what emerges is that the rema according to the shach's havana is saying that the ikar hisaskus even for someone who is ra'uy lechachmas hanistar is supposed to be in nigla, whereas the gaon is saying if a person is ra'uy lekach and and ra'uy lekach is is measured both in yiras shamayim and in terms of מלי כרסו בשר ויין in in terms of being a big big talmid chacham in in nigla and and there's the the shach famously quotes that maybe there was also a gezeira that that it's measured chronologically in terms of age, not before age 40. So the gaon clearly says that mi she'rauy lekach—no, he's not עוסק בחכמת הנסתר בעקראי בעלמא because it's the for mi she'rauy lekach it's the highest level of talmud torah. Now so what if anything are the implications of our own malbim for this question? So based on there's a difference in in between the way the malbim in the peirush on the tehillos david and the way the malbim in biur hamilos sets it up. But the way he says it here in tehillos david, so let's let's just re-read it again.

על כן התנה כי בתורת השם חפצו. והנה שלמות הזה מתחלק לשניים שלמות העניין ושלמות המעשה שלמות העיוני נקרא תורת השם,

toras hashem in the sense of what the focus of the torah is, right? As as we saw yesterday.

כי היא תורהו דעת השם ודרכיו ואמיתתו. אבל חלק זה

remains begeder cheftzo, אבל חלק זה לא ישיגהו האדם עד תכליתו because yidias hashem is כי לא יראני האדם. panoi lo yeiru, אבל חלק זה לא ישיגהו האדם עד תכליתו. It always remains a desire, it always remains an aspiration.

ודי אם בתורת השם חפצו ומאויו ומשתדל להשיגו בדרוש אחריו הגם שלא ישיגהו

ufonav lo yeiru. So the malbim doesn't say anything here in the in the ikar biur, he doesn't say anything about that we're talking about someone who's not ra'uy to be venturing into the area of torah of toras hashem. No, he's saying that by it's part of the part of toras hashem is the sha'ar hachamishim, what the ramban in the hakdama to the peirush al hatorah calls the sha'ar hachamishim which is to to understand hakadosh baruch hu. So so no one can. It's always going to be bechinas cheftzo. So if we're talking even about a person who's ra'uy lekach and then the torah says ובתורתו יהגה יומם ולילה, so then that's mamash what the rema says because if yomam valayla clearly means that that's going to be the primary focus of of his time. If you look in the biur hamilos, I don't know, it's it's a funny thing, but that in the biur hamilos, it's it's a different malbim sets it up differently.

וכפי דברי במה שאמר בתורתו מדבר מתורה המעשית המיוחדת לאדם להגות בה ולדעת המעשה ודרכי האמונה.

vesoras hashem—I'm I'm reading from the biur hamilos around three lines under toras hashem and ubesoraso. ותורת השם היא התורה הצפונה בסודותיה ותעלומותיה, the hidden parts of torah, the secrets of torah.

שלא כל אדם יהגה בהם שאין מוסרים הסודות רק לראויים לזה ורק חפצו ותשוקתו אליהם.

So in the biur hamilos there's a crucial difference there, rabbosai. In the biur hamilos, the way the malbim says it is that the the reason Toras Hashem remains bechinas chefetz, something which is a desire, something which is an aspiration as opposed to something which would ever be in hand, something which would ever be attained, is because very few people are re'uyim lekach. And and and even the ashrei ho'ish that Dovid Hamelech is depicting is not a person who's who's entirely ra'uy lekach. But the way he says in the Be'urei Hamilos, so then there is no implication that the ובתורתו יהגה יומם ולילה that the primary his'askus of someone who be'vadai ra'osa chochmah would be in the cheilek hanigleh. You you with me, rabbosai? Unfortunately today the the sensitivity to what the Ramachal writes about Pardes, whatever whatever one thinks Pardes is, that that a person has to be meilei basar v'yayin, unfortunately that that sensitivity is is not always present. And v'zeh klal, rabbosai, when when we don't follow the guidelines, the progression that chachmei Yisrael provide us, it's not only, only in quotation marks, it's not only that it's wrong that we're going against them, it's that it doesn't work. It doesn't work. It's sort of משל למה הדבר דומה if if you're doing a home construction project. So you you consult an expert in construction and and he tells you what kind of foundation, you're adding a room to your house. You're adding a room onto your house. He tells you what what kind of foundation you need to to put down and then how you can build up on the foundation. And and and you have a shortcut. You say no that's too time consuming, a little too expensive, especially time consuming, the work is too hard to lay the kind of foundation that he wants. I'll do it my way. So it's not the result is not only that it's a chutzpah or impolite that one is, you know, disregarding what a mumcheh says, no, the room's going to collapse. The project is not going to work. The project is not going to work. The project can't work on on many levels. It can't work on the level of all of Torah requires tremendous siyata d'shmaya but nistar even more than nigleh. גל עיני ואביטה נפלאות מתורתך. Dovid Hamelech felt the need for a special siyata d'shmaya, Dovid Hamelech knew how to learn very well, Dovid Hamelech felt special and a special need, a need for special siyata d'shmaya. I don't know we we can't expect siyata d'shmaya in doing things that we're not supposed to be doing. On another level it can't succeed and it doesn't succeed. It's it's true conceptually, it's also true empirically. It can't succeed and it doesn't succeed also another reason is because knowing nigleh won't ensure that a person can understand what the nistar means, but it will prevent his erroneously, erroneously interpreting. Anchored in, immersed in nigla. To illustrate, if a person learns, the Rambam says if we learn the hakdama l'perek chelek and the yud gimmel ikkarim once and we think we understood it, he said we're deluding ourselves. A person learns it many, many times, so then when he'll come across sources in nistar, will he know what they mean? I don't know. But he'll know what they don't mean and he won't, rachmana litzlan, make very, very, very serious errors in interpretation. Whatever it means that the neshama is a chelek eloka mima'al, whatever it means מאן דנפח מדיליה נפח, it's clear what it doesn't mean. It's not a piece of Hashem. Hashem doesn't have pieces and there's no piece of Hashem in us. What does it mean? I don't know. But nigla doesn't necessarily tell you what it means, but it prevents a terrible misunderstanding and distortion and at least it tells us we know what it doesn't mean because there are no contradictions between the nigla and nistar. They're layers. There's no contradiction. Your suit size reflects your dimensions. There's no contradiction between the two. They're layers. And it's remarkable that according to the Malbim here in the Biur HaMilos that this ashrei ha'ish, even he is not necessarily one of those who's ra'uy lekach and that's why it remains בבינת תורת השם חפצו. Okay, just to begin the next pasuk, b'ezrat Hashem, I think the way we'll go about it is we're not going to read every line of the Malbim because it'll just, we won't, every line is important to read and it goes without saying immeasurably worthwhile. So I hope whatever we don't read together inside, I hope you'll be mashlim, but just in terms of, in the little bit of time that we have, we'll excerpt some of the lines from the Malbim's peirush.

והיה כעץ שתול על פלגי מים אשר פריו יתן בעתו ועלהו לא יבול וכל אשר יעשה יצליח.

So the metaphor for the ashrei ha'ish, for the individual who cultivates shleimus hanefesh, is the comparison is to a tree. The Malbim explains very beautifully, what's the difference let's say between a tree and a leaf? So a leaf sort of has its life cycle and then it withers and it dries. It has no as it were individual staying power. It's part of a broader system. There are always leaves, but each individual leaf sort of has its run and nothing left to it. Ma she'ein kein the tree, it's the same apple tree year after year. Even in halacha, right? That's relevant to where we draw the line between what's a borei pri ha'eitz and a borei pri ha'adama. Borei pri ha'eitz is when the, it's a machloket whether it has to be... There's completely above ground, there's nothing that remains from year to year. So that's what the metaphor of the etz is, meaning that the ashrei ha'ish is someone whose life results in hisharas hanefesh, in his personal immortality, not just that he's part of humanity and דור הולך ודור בא. No, that would be the metaphor of a leaf. But he's compared to the etz,

לא כעשב לא כציץ אשר רק מינו ישמר והוא תכליתו האחרון וכן המון בני אדם,

masses of people לא יעשו מעולם לקיום אישם. The way they live their lives does nothing to preserve or perpetuate their own existence, rak l'kiyom minam. Okay, if they get married and have children so then they sort of participate in humanity continuing, ולהניח יתרם על הארץ and they leave yerusha, כאילו אין להם תכלית רק קיום המין. Aval hu, this ish that Dovid HaMelech is depicting, דומה לעץ אשר מלבד קיום מינו, besides contributing to that, אשר עוד ינוב בשיבה גם אישו יתקיים. He as an individual endures, ויתן פרי קודש הלולים, torah u'ma'asim tovim l'hisharas nafsho. So the אשר פריו יתן בעתו, what's the fruit that he produces? The fruit again reflective of the fact that he's an etz, something that endures. So what the nimshal is, torah u'ma'asim tovim, which provide a person with hisharas hanefesh, with immortality, with mitzius. So here you have reflected again in the Malbim's torah u'ma'asim tovim, so for instance if you take a look, Rambam has this in a few places, if you take a look at one place in perek tes of hilchos teshuvah, so the Rambam writes that a person's chelek b'olam habah is לפי גודל חכמתו וגודל מעשהו. There are two variables in a person's chelek b'olam habah, in a person's zechiyah b'olam habah is לפי גודל חכמתו ולפי גודל מעשהו. That's what is reflected here in the Malbim as well, that ויתן פרי קודש הלולים. What's the pri? Torah u'ma'asim tovim l'hisharas nafsho. Okay, so we'll stop for today.