Being Open to Torah

Parshas Va'eira and Bo presenting the makkos are the parshios which which teach us the yesodos ha'emunah. This depiction is is most famously associated with the Ramban at the end of Parshas Bo where he explains how how the yesodos of metzius Hashem, of yediya, of hashgacha, of nevuah were all demonstrated through the course of the makkos. The emes is, I think Rav Moshe Shapiro, zichrono livracha, points out that the Rambam also, also, also presents this fact. If you take a look at the beginning of perek ches of Yesodei HaTorah,

משה רבינו לא האמינו בו ישראל מפני האותות שעשה שהמאמין על פי האותות יש בלבו דופי שאפשר שיעשה או שיעשה האות בלט וכישוף אלא כל האותות שעשה משה במדבר לפי הצורך עשאם לא להביא ראיה על הנבואה היה צריך להשקיע את המצרים קרע את הים והצלילם בתוכו צרכנו למזון הוריד לנו את המן צמאו בקע להן את האבן כפרו בו עדת קרח בלעה אותם הארץ.

But it's meduyak, this is what Rav Moshe Shapiro points out. The Rambam says כל האותות שעשה משה במדבר. That that the miracles were lefi hatzorech, that the miracles were occasioned by need and were in response to need rather than to serve as some sort of demonstration. So the Rambam says that about the osos bamidbar and it's clear the - it's not a diyuk once once he points it out, it's clear, the Rambam's saying. But the osos and the mofsim in Mitzrayim, so they takeh were intended to to demonstrate and and to teach. The reason the Rambam and the Ramban are mechaverim ledavar echad because as the Ramban points out, because it's meforash a pasuk.

למען תדע כי אני השם למען תדע כי אני השם בקרב הארץ למען תדע כי אין כמוני בכל הארץ.

Rashi and the Ramban in in this week's sedra both quote the the ma'amar Chazal, the medrash, that Pharaoh only lost his bechirah for the second - the last five makkos. But for the first five makkos Pharaoh still had his bechirah. דם צפרדע כנים ערוב דבר. So that wasn't overwhelming enough? If a person's being getting beat up it doesn't have to come out of any tzidkus to to give in and to acknowledge, just out of a basic instinct for self-preservation. It doesn't have to be any any any tzidkus here. The question is not where where is Pharaoh's tzidkus. The question is where's his instinct for for self-preservation? How how does one understand it? But what's reflected here is is something which is fundamental to the way Hakadosh Baruch Hu created the world. A person can only and will only recognize truth if there's a willingness on his behalf and a receptivity to truth. Again, that doesn't mean that a person sort of just subjectively believes what he wants to believe. that he wills to believe, that he wishes to believe, it's not a Jewish concept, leap of faith as the basis for emuna ba-Shem, emuna in Torah min ha-shamayim is not a Jewish concept. Our belief is anchored, our belief is grounded. Once a person has belief in the Ribono Shel Olam, in Torah, anchored and grounded, so then yes, so then that issues a mandate for even when a person doesn't understand and even when a person doesn't know, but the basis for emuna is our emuna is anchored in strong compelling reasons. What it means is that despite the fact that there are compelling reasons to believe, a person can't be compelled to believe. Despite the fact that there are compelling reasons to believe, despite the fact that there's absolute truth, a person can't be forced to accept, acknowledge, or recognize that truth. Pharaoh was not ready, he was not willing, he was not receptive to the truth of למען תדע כי אני ה׳ וכולו. To try to just get a little bit more havana into this, there are shnei ketuvim in life. There's a kasuv echad that there's absolute truth. There's a kasuv sheni that a person has absolute and unrestricted bechira. So how does that work? If there's absolute truth, absolute truth which can be presented clearly, lucidly, compellingly, so where's the bechira? And that's what we're talking about, the kasuv shelishi is that in order to maintain, to give us bechira even about truth, we have a capacity to not acknowledge truth. And that's what it means that unless there's a receptivity, unless there's a willingness, it doesn't matter how compelling objectively the case is, a person has a capacity to resort to skepticism, cynicism, all kinds of intellectual contortions or contrivances to avoid acknowledging the truth. And when all that doesn't seem adequate, a person has a capacity for denial. Sometimes people come and they want to be forced to believe. They want to be forced to believe. They want that the answer should override their bechira. There's no such answer. You can be granted an audience with the Rambam, you can be granted an audience with Rabbi Akiva, הכל צפוי והרשות נתונה, there is no such answer that overrides a person's bechira. Because absolute truth notwithstanding, the Ribono Shel Olam created a world in which there's absolute truth but in which there's also absolute bechira. And the kasuv shelishi is that we have to have a willingness, a receptivity to be willing to recognize and accept truth. The same way that that is true, that yesod, that there has to be a receptivity, there has to be a willingness, there has to be an openness, the same way that's true in terms of yesodos ha'emuna, it's true in terms of hashkafos haTorah, it's true in terms of mussar haTorah, it's true in terms of Torah values. There has to be a willingness to recognize what the Torah clearly teaches in terms of hashkafos haTorah, mussar haTorah, and Torah values. And absent that willingness, people will resort, again, to all kinds of intellectual contortions and contrivances and distortions to avoid acknowledging what's true. In the confused and therefore potentially rachmana litzlan confusing world that we live in in ikvesa deMeshicha, one sees this phenomenon of a lack of willingness, a lack of openness to recognize, to acknowledge hashkafos haTorah, mussar haTorah, Torah values for what they are; a lack of willingness to have to recalibrate one's own hashkafos, one's own mussar, one's own values al pi what's unambiguously and unequivocally hashkafos haTorah, mussar haTorah, Torah values. And we're all aware of the two main areas in which one sees this very painful phenomenon: in issues relating to feminism and in issues relating to homosexuality. There's so much which is just so unambiguous and so unequivocal and so clear-cut. There's so much which is just absolutely, absolutely clear what the hashkafos haTorah, what the mussar haTorah, what the Torah values are. And yet there's an unwillingness to accept, there's a lack of receptivity, there's a lack of openness. And we're all aware of the fallout rachmana litzlan from that opaqueness, from that refusal to recognize, from being closed to hashkafos haTorah, mussar haTorah, Torah values. On different levels, not on every level, but on some levels, it's entirely correct to say that the yesod hayesodos is for a person to have accurate self-knowledge, because the absence of accurate self-knowledge. can color and distort every other perception that a person has. If I don't have an accurate read on myself, I can't trust my instincts in terms of interpreting, in terms of reacting. Ribbono Shel Olam gave us plenty of resources and avenues to have accurate self-knowledge, which is why self-delusion and self-deception is not a defense, it doesn't cut it. When a person thinks or knows better than thousands of years of tradition, that's not a self-delusion or self-deception which can really be justified or whitewashed. When a person, never mind leaving aside the vertical perspective, take the horizontal perspective, when a person doesn't accurately gauge his or her level of learning, depth of commitment, knowledge relative to contemporary Gedolim, there also isn't any very good excuse for that self-deception either. There's much more to talk about, but the Yesod is so important that no matter how compelling the truth is, a person will not be compelled to accept the truth, whether it's truths of Yesodos HaEmunah, whether it's truths of Hashkafas HaTorah, whether it's truths of Hilchos HaTorah, unless there's an openness and a receptivity to accept the truth of Torah regardless of what that entails in terms of personal recalibration.