Yiras HaOnesh, Yiras HaRomemus

The opening posuk in this week's Parsha את האלהים התהלך נח, Onkelos translates בדחלתא דה' הליך נח. That Noach lived his life with yiras Hashem. As Onkelos is wont to do, for instance just to mention one other example at the end of Parshas Eikev u-ledovko bo, so there too Onkelos speaks of u-l'eskarava l'dachaltei. To come close to His capital H fear. The Rambam would certainly tell us that that's part of Onkelos's sensitivity to make sure that we don't misunderstand anthropomorphisms and don't rachmana l'tzlan attribute any kind of gashmiyus to Hakadosh Baruch Hu. Al kol panim according to Onkelos, את האלהים התהלך נח means בדחלתא דה' הליך נח. So perhaps apropos of that we'll just spend a few minutes talking about the mitzvah of yiras Hashem. The Rambam writes in Sefer HaMitzvos היא שצונו להאמין יראתו יתעלה ולהיפחד ממנו. L'ha-amin yiraso presumably means to maintain an awareness of His yira. L'ha-amin yiraso to maintain an awareness of His yira

ולא נהיה ככופרים ההולכים בשרירות לבם בקרי אבל נירא ביאת ענשו בכל עת וזהו אמרו את ה' אלקיך תירא.

So when the Rambam writes that the mitzvah is nira, that we should fear ביאת ענשו בכל עת. So what does the b'chol eis modify? It certainly modifies the yira as per the Sefer HaChinuch that it's a mitzvah temidah that a person should have yiras Hashem, should have yiras Shamayim. But does the Rambam possibly intend also that the b'chol eis should also modify the biyas onsho? Is it possible that the b'chol eis is modifying both? And that part of the yiras ha-onesh similar to

בכל עת יהיו בגדיך לבנים, שוב יום אחד לפני מיתתך

is that a person should have an awareness that not only is there din v'cheshbon, but it could be at any moment. So is the b'chol eis modifying the yira? It certainly means that the yira should be b'chol eis. But is it possible that it's also also modifying the biyas onsho? Were that true, were that the avodah, that that yiras Shamayim, yiras ha-onesh is not only to maintain an awareness of an ultimate din v'cheshbon, but of the possible immediacy, it would have an even greater effect on us. Clearly one of the challenges in maintaining a sense of yiras ha-onesh is the remoteness of it. משל למה הדבר דומה. Just about everyone will refrain from sticking their hand in the fire. Many people, I don't know, maybe most people, I don't know, I have to do a study, will engage maybe in... can have long-term adverse consequences. Whether it's the type of diet they eat, or in whatever whatever respect. So what's the difference? They're both both of them were told according to natural physical law will have adverse consequences. So the answer is that one's immediate, and because of that, it's much easier for us to relate to. A person sticks his hand in fire, he feels it. And the other one is more remote. And more remote something is, so even when there's an awareness of it, but somehow or other, the feeling that it's remote, psychologically sometimes, it doesn't have to, but sometimes it does dull the awareness. Were it true that that the bishleimusa, the mitzvah of yiras ha-onesh is not only liyra be-chol eis, but לירא ביאת עונשו בכל עת, it it would mean that that the Rambam is telling us that the Torah is looking to counteract and to remove that sense of of remoteness. But what does it mean? Lema'aseh in the Sefer HaChinuch, so there's no ambiguity. Where the Sefer HaChinuch writes:

להיות יראת השם על פנינו תמיד לבלתי נחטא כלומר שנירא ביאת עונשו ולא יהיה לבבנו בלי מורא אליו כל היום ועל זה נאמר את השם אלוקיך תירא.

Once more.

להיות יראת השם על פנינו תמיד לבלתי נחטא כלומר שנירא ביאת עונשו ולא יהיה לבבנו בלי מורא אליו כל היום.

So the Chinuch is mefurash that the temidiyus, that the kol hayom is only modifying the sense of of yiras Hashem, of yiras ha-onesh. It's not modifying the bi'as onsho. There's no safek in the Chinuch's formulation. So at least in terms of the Chinuch's position, that much is clear. But but what about in the Rambam? So itachen, let's ask a different a pose a different question. The pasuk says את השם אלוקיך תירא. How do we bikhlal know that that means yiras ha-onesh? There are different aspects of fear, and and the question that we're putting forward is not the not the not the very important time-honored question that in Sefer HaMitzvos the Rambam talks about yiras ha-onesh and then in the Yad in perek beis of Yesodei HaTorah he talks about yiras haromemus. No, but let's isolate the Rambam in in Sefer HaMitzvos. Leave aside the fact that in in Yesodei HaTorah he speaks of of yiras haromemus, that that a person has a feeling of being a בריה שפלה ואפלה עומדת בדעת קלה לפני תמים דעות. Let's leave that aside, just minei u-vei within Sefer HaMitzvos. How do we know the pasuk says את השם אלוקיך תירא. Maybe maybe it means yiras haromemus? How do you know it means means yiras ha-onesh? It's certainly not what mora always connotes. I mean, clearly when we talk about איש אמו ואביו תיראו, lichora it doesn't mean, agam that Chazal say that it's more natural for mora av than mora em, but nevertheless, it doesn't mean that that a person is supposed to be afraid that his parents are going to beat him up. I mean, maybe that works till age three, four, five, or six, I'm not sure exactly at at what age that that stops working. And yet the mitzvah is certainly certainly remains. So the pashtus is that that when we talk about mora av va-em, we're not talking about anything which is the analogue of of yiras ha-onesh. So how do we know just minei uvei in Sefer HaMitzvos that את השם אלוקיך תירא should translate into yiras ha'onesh? So perhaps as follows. Maybe let's take a couple of meshalim from a more mundane context. Remember a long, long time ago when I took driver's ed? So we had to watch, I assume that's still the case, but so we had as part of the driver's education course, so you had to watch a film. And the film showed footage, probably a little bit sanitized, but certainly not completely sanitized, of people who drove recklessly, whether it's because they had been drinking alcohol, or whether just because they allowed themselves to be distracted. And it showed the wreckage of cars after horrible crashes. It gave, it provided very sobering statistics. And clearly the message was that, not that, the message was to be aware of the power, of the force of an automobile which is traveling 70, 50, even 30 miles an hour. That a person should be aware and react accordingly. I would imagine that when a soldier or a police recruit first receive their weapons, that a similar impression is made upon them, to be aware of the force of that with which they've been entrusted and to know to react accordingly. What does it mean to react accordingly? So in the case of driving, it means to pay attention, not allow oneself to be distracted. In the case of the weapon, it means to keep it locked when not in use, never to leave it lying around that it can fall into someone else's hands. So let's try to abstract a rule. So when a person is dealing with something awesome, something which is nora, so he should react, the yira will reflect the nora'os of the object. The yira that a person, the appropriate yira that a person should have to driving is not necessarily identical with the yira that he should have when entrusted with an Uzi. It should reflect the reality of the nora'os which he's encountering. And maybe the definition then of yira, again, is to react both attitudinally as well as practically to the awesomeness which one confronts, in whose presence one stands. Mora av va'em is to have a sense that these are the people Hakadosh Baruch Hu enlisted as shutfim in giving us life. That's a rather awesome status. They're the Ribono Shel Olam's shutpim in giving us life. And that again, so what's what does yirah mean? So דבר מינה ואוקי באספי. It's determined contextually depending upon what the davor nora is or the person who's nora to whom we're reacting. It means that as close as as one might be, should be, should be with one's parents, but they're not, they're not our colleagues. They're the Ribono Shel Olam's shutpim in giving us life. They're not, they're not our colleagues. The, the, the again, the closeness, the intimacy, the love, everything that should be there, but acharei kichalot hakol, it's not the same as the, there can't be the, what can be appropriate with a friend won't be appropriate with a, with a, with a parent. The answer then perhaps to the question we asked: How does the Rambam know in Sefer Hamitzvos that את ה' אלהיך תירא denotes yiras haonesh? The answer is, it's not, it's not the semantics of yirah. No, when you talk about mora av va'em, yirah doesn't denote that. But what yirah means is to react appropriately, again, both in terms of attitude and practice, attitudinally as well as practically to the facets of noraos which one encounters, in whose presence we stand. One aspect of Hakadosh Baruch Hu's interaction with the world, with the briah, with us, Hakadosh Baruch Hu is דע לפני מי אתה עתיד ליתן דין וחשבון. Hakadosh Baruch Hu is melech meimis umechaieh. That's one aspect of his noraos. So then mimmela, what yirah means is to react in kind, to react appropriately to that facet of noraos which we encounter, in whose presence we stand. Another aspect of the noraos of Hakadosh Baruch Hu is what the Rambam describes in perek bet of Yesodei Hatorah. חכמה שאין לה ערך ואין לה קץ. We stand, we live in the presence of that aspect of noraos as well. So then mimmela in the context of the מצות את ה' אלהיך תירא, so yirah connotes that as well. Perhaps smuchim l'khach to this definition is that itachen, according to this understanding of yiras haonesh, one's yiras haonesh, this was pointed out to me, one's yiras haonesh won't be simply a personal sense of inhibition or intimidation. But again, heyos that the yiras haonesh, yes, of course it does have pragmatic applications. בעבור תהיה יראתו על פניכם לבלתי תחטאו. Of course it does. But one's yiras haonesh again is just a response to being in the presence of Melech Malchei Hamlachim. Rashi quotes, you all know in Parashat Shemini, Rashi quotes from Chazal:

ויאמר משה אל אהרן הוא אשר דבר ה' לאמר בקרובי אקדש ועל פני כל העם אכבד וידם אהרן.

After the death of Nadab and Abihu. ועל פני כל העם אכבד, says Rashi:

כשהקדוש ברוך הוא עושה דין בצדיקים מתיירא מתעלה ומתקלס. אם כן באלו כל שכן ברשעים. וכן הוא אומר נורא אלקים ממקדשיך אל תקרי ממקדשיך אלא ממקודשיך.

So Rashi Chazal Rashi doesn't mean only that a person is misyarei because he's thinking gevalt if Nadav and Avihu are punished, what's going to be with me? No, Rashi means again that sense of it's driven home to us in whose presence we stand, and the yiras haonesh isn't only again a personal yiras haonesh in the sense of my concern for my fate, but it's rather what we're talking about, it's a response, it's a reaction to the presence in which one finds oneself. That can be engendered even when an onesh is forthcoming to someone else, and even if even if the bas kol simultaneously, when Nadav and Avihu are stricken down, the bas kol comes and tells me don't worry, don't worry, I give you a beracha for arichas yamim v'shanim meah v'esrim and longer. The reaction of misyarei misaleh umis-kales is the same. And this is the same is true when the Rambam describes the yiras haromemus.

וכשמחשב בדברים האלו עצמן מיד הוא נרתע לאחוריו ויפחד וידע שהוא בריה קטנה שפלה אפילה עומדת בדעת קלה מעוטה לפני תמים דעות. כמו שאמר דוד כי אראה שמיך מעשה אצבעותיך

when I see and I contemplate the heavens, your handiwork, מה אנוש כי תזכרנו. So the מה אנוש כי תזכרנו, which is again the statement, the expression of yiras haromemus, isn't only what am I? Mah enosh. Who is who is man in general? What is humanity ki tizkerenu? So itchen then that the definition again of yira is to respond appropriately to the noraos. So mimeila how do we know whether it means yiras haonesh, whether it means yiras haromemus? Look at the look at the noraos in front of you. If the noraos in front of you is a noraos of romemus, so then so then it means it means yiras haromemus. If it's a noraos of of a melech who's dan, it's a yiras haonesh. If it's both, so it's taka both. Hashta d'asina l'hacha it could very well mean that when the Rambam says נירא ביעת עונשו בכל עת, it taka could very well be that the b'chol eis doesn't modify both. That the b'chol eis is not only again emphasizing, as as the Chinuch so beautifully underscores, the temidius of the mitzva, but part of the noraos is that a person also doesn't know when Hakadosh Baruch Hu is dan and when Hakadosh Baruch Hu, when when a middas hadin is going to be implemented. And mimeila that's part of the noraos. If that's part of the noraos, then it should taka be part of the yira response that it engenders. Certainly by no means is Yira the only component of authentic religious experience. But on the other hand, it's incontrovertibly true that Yira is an important and indispensable element within Yahdus. In the Toras Hashkafa, contrary to modern sensibilities, Yira, fear, is a healthy and necessary religious emotion. And healthy and necessary on at least two levels. Healthy and necessary as in the mashal we gave with someone who gets behind the wheel of a car, someone who's entrusted with a weapon, it's very healthy and vitally necessary that the person should have the appropriate sense and understanding of the nora'os with which he's dealing. There's nothing negative or unhealthy about Yira being part of a balanced awareness. But beyond that, beyond the balti nechtav, beyond the, again, just the very pragmatic application and implications of the Yira, it's also necessary just in terms of authenticity. Again, going back to the other mashal, the other example of Mora Av Va'em, the mora there is for the relationship to be authentic and accurate, to be an authentic parent-child-parent relationship, again, not necessarily because of any inhibition from cheit, that was the first level in which it's healthy and necessary, but just in terms of authenticity. In terms of authenticity, again, for it to be, to have an authentic child-parent relationship, there has to be, again, an element of nora'os that these are the shutfim who gave me life. It in no way compromises or adulterates all the correct associations and depictions of Hakadosh Baruch Hu as Avinu Av Harachaman. It in no way compromises or adulterates the אהבה רבה אהבתנו אהבת עולם בית ישראל עמך אהבת to recognize that for the relationship with Hakadosh Baruch Hu to be authentic that Yira has to be equally prominent within that relationship. The Minchas Chinuch, if you take a look, he has the same type of comment whether the mitzvah is a mitzvah of Ahavas Hashem, Yiras Hashem. He doesn't say very much about these mitzvos, but he has a tefilla. He writes אשרי כל ירא ה' השם יתברך ישים חלקנו עמהם.