Consolidating Spiritual Gains

In last week's Parashat Beshalach,

ויאמר משה אל העם אל תיראו התייצבו וראו את ישועת השם אשר יעשה לכם היום כי אשר ראיתם את מצרים היום לא תוסיפו לראותם עוד עד עולם.

The Ramban quotes from the Mechilta here on this pasuk that the

אשר ראיתם את מצרים היום לא תוסיפו לראותם עוד עד עולם

is not only a havtacha, but is also a mitzvah. It's a mitzvah, a mitzvat lo ta'aseh not to go back to Mitzrayim. And the Mechilta goes on to say this is one of three places in which the Torah communicates this lav that we're not allowed to regress to go back to Mitzrayim. So le-fi pshuto al pi halacha, again, it's an issur to the way the Rambam formulates it to go to Mitzrayim to live there, which generates the famous discussion of how the Rambam ended up, ended up living there. And there are different diyukim in terms of the precise delineation of this mitzvat lo ta'aseh. Let's just spend a few minutes perhaps understanding what on derech aggadah what this mitzvat lo ta'aseh represents. The mitzvat lo ta'aseh not to return to Mitzrayim. The Mishna in Arvei Pesachim that we quote at the Seder,

בכל דור ודור חייב אדם לראות את עצמו כאילו הוא יצא ממצרים.

It's a funny lashon, bekhol dor vador. A place we don't find bekhol dor vador חייב אדם להניח תפילין, likro k'riat shema, lehitpalel bekhol yom. A mitzvah is bekhol dor vador. A mitzvah's ledorot. That's the very semantics of a mitzvah. Hakadosh Barukh Hu gives a mitzvah, a mitzvah it's assumed is ledorot unless we're given some contrary indication. Here the Tanna emphasizes that bekhol dor vador. So likhora the pshat is as follows: חייב אדם לראות את עצמו כאילו יצא ממצרים. So what does that mean? That a person should see himself that he left Mitzrayim meaning and he should imagine himself living thousands of years ago? Or

בכל דור ודור חייב אדם לראות את עצמו כאילו יצא ממצרים,

no, he sees himself as he is now, but he should feel that where he is now in Washington Heights or wherever, it's as if he just came here from Mitzrayim. So the pshite is that it means the latter. That

בכל דור ודור חייב אדם לראות את עצמו כאילו הוא יצא ממצרים

means that a person ba'asher hu sham in whatever time and place, in whatever set of circumstances he finds himself, should see himself כאילו הוא יצא ממצרים. Oh now if that's the pshat, so then that generates a question. So mela when at those times, those periods in Jewish history when things are good, so we understand that

בכל דור ודור חייב אדם לראות את עצמו כאילו הוא יצא ממצרים, ולפיכך אנחנו חייבים להודות ולהלל ולשבח ולפאר.

But what about in those times when things were very very dark and difficult? What was the basis for saying Hallel

בכל דור ודור חייב אדם לראות את עצמו ולפיכך אנחנו חייבים להודות?

So what was the basis for, for the Jews who were pre- who were having a Seder in a concentration camp r'achmana litzlan or in Siberia? So what's the בכל דור ודור חייב אדם? So apparently that's the hava amina that maybe this mitzvah shouldn't apply in every generation. You find yourself living in in the United States in comfort, okay, so then there's a basis for Hallel vehodaya that כאילו הוא יצא עתה משעבוד מצרים. But if one finds himself in what presumably were even worse circumstances than than in Mitzrayim, so why how is the כאילו הוא יצא ממצרים a basis for the hiyuv Hallel? So that's the hava amina which the Tanna is, is coming to to counter, right? That's the hava amina, that's why we need the emphasis of bekhol dor vador. But what's tka the pshat? So the pshat likhora is that you see from here again what is otherwise indicated and mukhach that the ikkar... of yetziat mitzrayim is not the political, but the pedut nafshenu. That there was a spiritual transformation when Klal Yisrael left Mitzrayim. And that pedut nafshenu is something that again, at least the capacity, therefore, is something that remains and resides within the neshama of every Jew ba'asher hu sham, even Rachmana litzlan in the worst of times. So even in the worst of times, that's the ka mashma lan, that bechol dor vador, even in the worst of times, Rachmana litzlan, a person still has a basis for lehodot ulehalel because even though politically things may be even worse, but in terms of the spiritual resilience and the spiritual independence and the spiritual capacity that a Jew has, so that remains with them regardless of what the external circumstances are. And that's the pshat in the bechol dor vador. So hashta de'asinu lehachi that yetziat mitzrayim, again, Mitzrayim is a physical geographical place with a precise location, and al pi halacha, lefi peshuto, the lav of לא תוסיפו לראותם עוד עד עולם relates to Mitzrayim again as a geographical place, but al pi aggada, the lav of לא תוסיפו לראותם עוד עד עולם represents that change, we can't regress. We can't... the same way al pi halacha we can't return to Mitzrayim physically, geographically, so too and on the level of ruchniyut we can't return to Mitzrayim there either. Let's maybe pursue this a little further. The tendency, the weakness, at times desire to revert back can be very dramatic and easily recognizable. It can also be much more subtle. Let's first maybe mention one or two illustrations of the more dramatic and then talk about what probably is most relevant to us, the more subtle. Tosafot in Shabbat kayadu'a on the pasuk in this week's keriat HaTorah ויתייצבו בתחתית ההר מלמד שכפה עליהם הר כגיגית. So Tosafot asks, right, all the sefarim quote, the kasha that goes back to the Midrash Tanchuma. So why was it necessary to have kfia if they had already voluntarily said na'aseh v'nishma? So Tosafot says שמא יחזרו בהם כשיראו האש הגדולה. Again, this weakness that maybe they would have regressed, so that's what Hakadosh Baruch Hu was looking to preempt. And taka subsequently Rashi in Parshat Bamidbar, in Sefer Bamidbar, excuse me, in Parshat Beha'alotcha quotes the Sifrei: זכרנו את הדגה אשר נאכל במצרים חינם, chinam min hamitzvot. Again, there was this desire to revert back. What's that based on? That again, that weakness, that desire to revert back, where does it come from within the human personality? Effecting change in oneself is difficult and specifically is frightening because a person is comfortable with his habits. A person is comfortable with that to which he has become accustomed and the need to adjust. Need to assume certain responsibilities which until this point he hadn't accepted, maybe he hadn't even been aware of, maybe he hadn't had the inspiration to shoulder, requires sacrifice and it can be very daunting. It can be a scary prospect. When you try to literally run back to Mitzrayim or literally run away from Ma'amad Har Sinai, it's hard not to recognize what the dynamic is. It's hard not to recognize, again, that a person is afraid of the transition that he needs to make, that he is afraid of the change which he needs to affect in his life. But lema'aseh, we do it all the time in much more subtle ways. And when it happens in more subtle ways, it's easier for it to go undiagnosed, to not be recognized for what it is. Sometimes you can have an experience where a person will go and maybe spend Shabbos in a certain setting, in a certain environment where he's never spent Shabbos before. Maybe it's not a Shabbos, maybe it's visiting a certain Beis Medrash, a certain neighborhood, a certain family. It can be any one of these types of exposures and experiences, or countless others that you can think of. And a person tastes, ta'amu u'reu, a person tastes something that he's never really experienced before. There's a certain kedusha in the lifestyle, there's a certain romemus hanefesh that he had from spending Shabbos. But he understands on one level or another that in order for him to introduce that into his life, in order for that not to be a short-lived visit to that madreiga, he's going to have to make changes. Whether he enjoys the schmoozing and ich veiss and devarim beteilim with his social circle on Shabbos presently, or whether it's the again, a certain restlessness that needs to be tamed, to learn with greater hasmada, in the short term it's difficult, it can be very difficult, and it requires a mesirus nefesh. And often, beyoda'in or belo yoda'in, that's a scary prospect. It's a scary prospect if a person is used to a certain level of gashmius, a certain level of physical comfort, and he understands, he understands, he doesn't on some level he doesn't delude himself, he understands that this, again, this higher level of ruchnius to which he's been exposed isn't compatible with that level of gashmius that he currently enjoys. Rabbeinu Bachaye writes in Chovos HaLevavos, he says that love of Olam Hazeh, again Olam Hazeh not in the Vilna Gaon's Olam Hazeh of that you can be mekayeim a mitzvah lulav and, not the Vilna Gaon's Olam Hazeh, the Olam Hazeh that's out on the street, not in the Gaon's kloiz, that love of Olam Hazeh. The love of olam hazeh and love of olam haba can no more coexist than water and fire. So when a person is but hahergel na'aseh teva and we're accustomed to certain comforts and we realize that that to which we were exposed, that higher level of ruchanius, of kedusha to which we were exposed, is going to require a sacrifice which in the short term, again, while a person is transitioning, is going to be difficult. And it's very common, again, so we don't tell ourselves we're afraid. We don't tell ourselves we're afraid. We tell it's not for me. Person has to be realistic. And the person has to know what he's capable of, what he's not capable of, and lo l'kach notzarti. Now obviously in the correct context, so that can be a correct statement and a correct sentiment, but it can also be used as a cover-up and as a kind of a masveh when basically we're just afraid of making the necessary sacrifice in order to transition. That's where the Torah comes and tells us that אשר ראיתם את מצרים היום it's going to be difficult. It's going to be difficult adjusting from being avdei Paroh to being avdei Hashem. As as horrible as it was to be avdei Paroh, it doesn't mean that you're not going to have the difficulties and the challenges and the fears associated with something new that you're not used to, but לא תוסיפו לראותם עוד עד עולם. Instead of bypassing moments of and squandering moments, experiences of inspiration which can potentially be mechazek a person, which can potentially be transforming, aderaba, we have a chiyuv to take advantage of it and to move forward. To move forward again by capitalizing on every opportunity. Moving forward with a consistency. So how do we do that? So I just mention two ma'amarei Chazal from the end of Masechet Brachos. Rebbi omer:

למה נסמכה פרשת נזיר לפרשת סוטה למה לך שכל הרואה סוטה בקלקולה יזיר עצמו מן היין.

Shem mi'Shmuel comments on this gemara and says lich'ora the person who needs the neder nezirus is someone who's never seen a sotah b'kilkula. Someone who's never seen a sotah b'kilkula hasn't witnessed what the catastrophic fallout from becoming intoxicated with wine. So he needs to keep him on the straight and narrow, he needs a neder nezirus. A person who has this memory of the horrible plight of the sotah, he doesn't need a neder nezirus. It's

כל מי שלא ראה סוטה בקלקולה יזיר עצמו מן היין.

The one person who doesn't need it is ro'eh sotah b'kilkula. So he says a tremendous, tremendous yesod. He says ירדה תורה לסוף דעתו של אדם. No matter how powerful an experience one has, no matter how gripping and overwhelming it is bishas ma'aseh. Ultimately, everything gradually, gradually weakens. And what initially is an overwhelming experience, it wanes and it recedes. If a person doesn't act while again fully feeling the effect of that inspiration, if he doesn't consolidate it, so then inevitably it's going to wear off. And inevitably this person who was ראתה שפחה על הים, he himself will be vulnerable to succumbing to the dangers of drink. However, if again, or in the categories what we're talking about tonight, he's prone to be over on the לא תוסיפו ולא תגרע עד עולם. So what does he have to do? So says the Shem MiShmuel, to perpetuate, to consolidate, a person has to make a kabbalah. If a person sees what a proper Shabbos is, so a person has to make a concrete kabbalah, bli neder, he doesn't want to be nichshal in avon neder, but a person has to make again concrete kabbalahs how that's going to be integrated and how he's going to act on that in his life. A person sees the sotah b'kilkulah, so while he has that experience, he has to act on it, he has to consolidate it, there has to be some kabbalah whereby he ensures that that's going to remain forever, that that aliyah which he had from the experience is going to remain with him. That's one way that we head in the opposite direction from Mitzrayim, by capitalizing on every experience, every moment of hissorarus. Another one is provided by a very startling, sobering ma'amar here on amud beis here in Shabbos.

עוד פתח רבי יהודה בכבוד תורה ודרש הסכת ושמע ישראל היום הזה נהיית לעם וכי אותו היום ניתנה תורה לישראל והלא אותו יום סוף ארבעים שנה היה אלא ללמדך שחביבה תורה על לומדיה בכל יום ויום כיום שניתנה מהר סיני אמר רבי תנחום בריה דרבי חייא איש כפר עכו תדע שהרי אדם קורא קריאת שמע שחרית וערבית וערב אחד אינו קורא דומה כמי שלא קרא קריאת שמע מעולם.

Amazing ma'amar Chazal. Scary ma'amar Chazal. A person reads, a person leins Krias Shema morning and night the way he's supposed to. One night, one night he's very tired and he's very hungry, ochal kima, eshte kima, ishan kima, דומה כמי שלא קרא קריאת שמע מעולם. How is that possible? How can it even be domeh to that? How can it even be domeh to that? So I think, I think it was Reb Aaron Kotler who said that the pshat is as follows. I just, to give a mashal to introduce his pshat. Let's say you have someone rachmana litzlan who's diabetic. He has to take regular shots of insulin, otherwise rachmana litzlan he can lapse into diabetic shock and it won't be good. It won't be good. What's the likelihood that he's ever going to forget to give himself a shot? What's the likelihood that he's going to be too tired and he's going to say ochal kima, eshte kima, ishan kima, and then I'll administer the shot? Not too good. Why? Because he understands the critical, pivotal importance of administering the shot. And he realizes that this isn't something that one can take the slightest chance with because it's just so important. It's just so pivotal that he does it. So says... So says Rav Aharon Kotler, if a person once doesn't say Krias Shema, it says something about all the Krias Shemas that he did say. That he only missed it once, but if he missed it once, so what does that say about the chashivos that he attaches to Krias Shema? It says something not only about tonight, but it says something about all the previous Krias Shemas also because if it were, if it were the anchor of his life, if קבלת עול מלכות שמים were the anchor of his life, so he wouldn't have missed it tonight either. If he missed it tonight, so you know he takeh said it and it's not that לא קרי קריאת שמע, it's not mafkiya the mitzvos, but it's domeh because it does cast a certain negative light on all the previous Krias Shemas. So what does that mean? It means that to be consistent, which is a tremendous challenge for us, a tremendous challenge in our avodah, in our kiyum hamitzvos, we have to take time out to reflect on the chashivos of mitzvos. Just to be committed to doing mitzvos, but without a sense of the chashivos, without the sense of Lekach notzarnu, without the sense of כי הם חיינו ואורך ימינו, so then a person is prone, rachmana litzlan, to taking periodically a few steps back in the direction of Mitzrayim. We need to, in addition to doing, we need to take a few minutes to think, to reflect, to remind ourselves of what's ultimately, everlastingly important in life and what isn't, and sort of let it sink in, the chashivos which those endeavors have. And if we'll again, constantly remind ourselves on a regular basis, be misbonen in the chashivos, so then that's what the Gemara says, it's inconceivable that we'll miss even a single night of Krias Shema. If a person doesn't miss even a single night of Krias Shema, so it means that be’ezras Hashem, it means that there isn't even one step taken backwards in the direction of Mitzrayim, but it's constantly in a forward direction.