Life’s Balancing Act: Worldly Responsibilities and Spiritual Aspirations

Thank you very much. The need for balance between worldly responsibilities and spiritual aspirations is clearly exemplified by various halachos and ma'amarei chazal well known to all of us.

יפה תלמוד תורה עם דרך ארץ שיגיעת שניהם משכחת עון.

The correct balance between talmud torah and between derech eretz which is understood by most rishonim to refer to the time invested in pursuing parnassah, one's livelihood, that correct balance, that correct combination is becoming שיגיעת שניהם משכחת עון because that combined toiling that a person does in those two areas eliminates sin from his life. המבזבז אל יבזבז יותר מחומש. A person is supposed to spend money on mitzvos, a person is supposed to give, give generously to tzedakah, and nevertheless chazal tell us המבזבז אל יבזבז יותר מחומש. A person who lives on a rather limited budget is not supposed to spend more than twenty percent of his budget on mitzvos, on tzedakah. Another place where this need for balance emerges is if we juxtapose various ma'amarei chazal. For instance, on the one hand there are many ma'amarei chazal which emphasize the need to be mistapek bemiut to be a minimalist and to make do with the basic necessities. On the other hand, chazal themselves tell us in the gemara that דירה נאה כלים נאים מרחיבים דעתו של אדם. If a person lives in a nice house, if a person has nice kelim to use within that house, it affords him a certain measure of harchavas hadaas, a certain expansiveness, a certain openness to be able to live life more fully and more completely. So clearly chazal are aware of this, this need for balance. In fact, there's a very beautiful gemara in Sanhedrin. The gemara says that Antoninus posed a question to Rebbe. Antoninus said to Rebbe that le'asid lavo on yom hadin when we all have to give a din vecheshbon before hakadosh baruch hu, the guf veneshamah, both body and soul, can exonerate themselves ultimately in the yom hadin. The guf, the body, can argue that from the day the neshamah left me, so I've been like an inanimate object, like an even domem, so obviously the responsibility for cheit lies with the neshamah. The neshamah on the other hand can argue, Antoninus says to Rebbe, that from the day I left the guf, from the day the neshamah departed from the body, so I've been as pure as a tzippor, as a bird flying through the air. So how will hakadosh baruch hu be able to fault either guf o neshamah? So Rebbe answers Antoninus with a mashal. He says I'll give you a mashal. A king has this beautiful orchard with many, many choice fruits. And the king appoints two watchmen to guard the orchard. One of them is blind, the other is lame. So the lame one says to the blind one: There's all kinds of beautiful fruits here. Let me piggyback on your shoulders and then I'll be able to reach the fruits and we'll be able to and then we'll be able to enjoy the fruits of this orchard. So they do that. So the blind person takes the lame person on his shoulders and the lame person picks the fruits. The king comes back and sees that the field's been pillaged, and he confronts the two watchmen. So each watchman says, the blind one says I didn't even know what's here, you certainly can't fault me. The lame one says I can't move, I'm not ambulatory. I certainly couldn't have accessed any of this fruit. How can you be faulting me? So the king takes the lame person, puts him on the shoulders of the blind person, and then he makes him stand trial in that position. He puts the lame person on the shoulders of the blind person and makes him stand trial. So too Rebbe says to Antoninus, so le'asid lavo hakadosh baruch hu reunites neshamah vaguf and then he judges us as neshamah veguf together. So what's the point of the gemara? So the Yad Rama in his chiddushim on Sanhedrin discusses this gemara in his polemic with the Rambam. The Rambam is of the opinion that olam haba is only for the neshamah. That olam haba is an incorporeal existence, it's only neshamas. And the Yad Rama says no, the point of this gemara is that we live our life as a cooperative venture between body and soul, guf veneshamah together, neither the guf nor the neshamah can or does function independently. Without the other. And the same way Hakadosh Baruch Hu is going to judge them together according to this Gemara, so too the reward which we earn, which Hakadosh Baruch Hu bestows upon us will be to guf and neshama together. So therefore Yad Rama agrees that it's a spiritual existence, there's no eating, there's no drinking, etcetera. But he says it will be guf and neshama together. But it's interesting and basically the Yad Rama is saying that the Rambam has a somewhat dualistic approach in terms of a certain opposition between body and soul and the Yad Rama says no, it should be more of a monistic approach. But it's very interesting that when the Gemara wants to depict the relationship between body and soul, between guf and neshama, so what's the imagery which the Gemara uses? The imagery which Chazal use is that the lame person takes the blind person on his shoulders. Now to take someone on your shoulders, you need to have to balance them. There's an act of balancing. And that's part of what Chazal are hinting at also that for guf and neshama to work together the way Hakadosh Baruch Hu wanted, so there is a need for balance. And the truth is that this need for balance between the worldly responsibilities, again worldly responsibilities, I guess the most prominent amongst them because it's the most prominent amongst them which comes to mind of course is the need for parnasa, but we're going to use when we talk about parnasa tonight, we're using it more as the prototype for worldly responsibilities. It includes tzorchei haguf, it includes whatever physical needs a person has in terms of attending to health, it includes all the mundane side and dimensions to child rearing and running a household. All that is included in worldly responsibilities. So when we talk about parnasa, we'll do so more as illustrative of all these various responsibilities. So when Chazal talk about combining and again and the relationship between guf and neshama that they intentionally use this imagery of balancing of the blind person balancing the lame person on his shoulders because that's basically the most quintessential human need and trait is this ability to balance guf and neshama appropriately to be able to balance the worldly responsibilities and our spiritual aspirations. All of which just highlights and underscores the question of what exactly is the right balance between the time that we devote to meeting our worldly responsibilities and the time that we have left to pursue our spiritual aspirations. Now the truth is that on one level the answer to that question is exceedingly simple, exceedingly simple, so much so that we could probably adjourn in 30 seconds. The Rambam writes in Hilchos Talmud Torah when the Rambam and again when one will speak of Talmud Torah just as parnasa is sort of illustrative of worldly responsibilities, so too Talmud Torah is intended as again as illustrative of spiritual aspirations. The Rambam writes that how does a person determine how much time he has for Talmud Torah? First the person sees how much time parnasa requires. So the Rambam says keitzad, if he was a ba'al umnus, if a person is an uman, whatever his trade is, whether he's a shoemaker, whether he's a tailor, whatever the umnus is. So the Rambam says if in order to earn his livelihood he has to spend three hours a day working, so the Rambam says well then that will leave him with around nine hours a day for learning, and then the Rambam says how those nine hours should be divided amongst various disciplines in learning. So it's quite remarkable, it's very telling in terms of which dictates here? It's the worldly responsibilities which dictate, right? The Rambam begins by saying well first a person has to calibrate how many hours a day are necessary in order for him to meet his worldly responsibilities and then the remaining time is then available for pursuit of spiritual aspirations, Talmud Torah, mitzvos, ma'asim tovim, vechulu. Again, all of which makes it all the more crucial that we're able to calibrate accurately what exactly are our worldly responsibilities and having done so, and having done so, so then we have again a very simple and direct answer to this question. The Chasam Sofer in a teshuvah in Choshen Mishpat, he was asked about a rav taking a salary for a rabbinical position and he says ba'avonoseinu harabbim, he says אחשד לא עשה דבר, he says you really shouldn't be asking me because מאן דאחשד לא עשה דבר can't really taka talk about it. But then he goes on to say the same formula as the Rambam. That a person works kedei chaya, that a person works enough to earn a livelihood and then the rest of the time he devotes to pursuit of Torah u'mitzvos. Now this formula, if we're able to really pare down our expenses so that it's legitimately and genuinely the case that the worldly responsibilities are those which Hakadosh Baruch Hu is imposing upon us by virtue of our olam hazeh existence as opposed to there being self-imposed, so then whatever if we strike that balance, so then we also gain that we have the potential that our entire lives can be one uninterrupted continuum of avodas Hashem. The Rambam writes in Hilchos Deos, the Rambam elaborates on the mishna in Pirkei Avos of בכל מעשיך יהיו לשם שמים, that everything a person does should be leshem shamayim. And the Rambam says that basically if a person orients genuinely, sincerely, if a person orients everything he does for avodas Hashem, then everything is a fulfillment of avodas Hashem. If a person goes to work because Hakadosh Baruch Hu says we're supposed to earn a parnassa and because he wants to pay his children's tuition bill in yeshiva and a person eats and drinks to maintain his health because without good health a person can't be oved es Hashem and a person sleeps for the same reason, so then the Rambam says everything he does is avodas Hashem. So if we're successful in identifying what our worldly responsibilities are and limiting ourselves to meeting those worldly responsibilities, so then the net gain is that our lives can be one uninterrupted continuum of avodas Hashem. Now here it's crucial and this is already implicit in what we've been talking about, but it's crucial to understand when we talk about balance, what exactly are we balancing? So sometimes we have the mistaken notion that we're seeking to balance sort of our enjoyment of olam hazeh with our preparation for olam haba and that what we're looking to balance is olam hazeh aspirations and olam haba aspirations. We have certain olam hazeh aspirations, the American dream, and there are olam haba aspirations, the Jewish dream. So how does a person balance those two? But that's not at all what we're discussing. According to the Torah's outlook on life, according to the guidance the Torah gives us, all aspirations, all goals are spiritual. The Torah doesn't encourage us to say, well, have your ultimate olam hazeh goals, have your there's the American dream and there's the Jewish dream. No, there's only the Torah dream. And the Torah dream is oriented totally, totally towards spirituality, towards avodas Hashem. Maybe I'll just read you a few statements of this from throughout the generations beginning with the Rambam, not necessarily in chronological order here. So the Rambam writes in Hilchos Deos in perek gimmel that

צריך אדם שיכוין לבו וכל מעשיו כולם לדעת השם ברוך הוא בלבד.

A person has to orient, has to direct his heart in all his actions, bechol ma'asav, all his actions, לדעת השם ברוך הוא בלבד, for the sole and exclusive purpose of knowing Hakadosh Baruch Hu. The Mesillas Yesharim in perek aleph writes

עיקר מציאות האדם בעולם הזה הוא רק כדי לקיים מצוות ולעבוד ולעמוד בניסיון.

The purpose of our existence in olam hazeh הוא רק כדי לקיים מצוות ולעבוד ולעמוד בניסיון. Is to fulfill mitzvos, to be oved es Hashem, and to stand up to meet the challenges of a life of avodas Hashem in olam hazeh. וראוי לו שתהיה כל פנייתו רק לבורא יתברך. And therefore it's fitting that every direction a person turns should always be with the sole intention of coming to Hakadosh Baruch Hu.

ושלא יהיה לו שום תכלית אחר בכל מעשה שיעשה אם קטון ואם גדול אלא להתקרב אליו.

A person should have no other goal. So there's no we're not talking about balancing worldly and spiritual goals, we're talking about what the role of worldly responsibilities is within our pursuit of spiritual goals. The Chasam Sofer in the teshuva we mentioned just a minute ago says

דע כי מי שזכה לעסוק בתורה מחויבים לקיים והגית בו יומם ולילה.

There's a mitzvah to learn Torah constantly as much as one can. ויהיו עוסקים רק כדי חיותם יום יום. People should earn just as much as they need to make a living, to pay the bills.

ומוציאים שארת היום בעבודת השם שכל הזמנים כולם הוא קודש להשם.

And then they should devote the rest of the time ba'avodas Hashem since all of the times are holy to Hashem. Umimmela says the Chasam Sofer since this is again the description of what the right balance is, אין לו לאדם לבקש מותרות. A person should not be looking for luxuries. A person shouldn't be looking literally for the extras. Shouldn't be looking for luxuries. And the Chovos Halevavos has a very sharp and enlightening description and definition. And he says as follows, listen to this rabbosai the Chovos Halevavos. כאשר לא יתחברו בכלי אחד המים והאש. The same way a single receptacle cannot contain fire and water. Fire and water can't coexist.

כן לא יתחברו בלב המאמין אהבת עולם הזה ואהבת עולם הבא.

In the heart of a person who's a ma'amin, love for olam hazeh and again love for olam hazeh doesn't mean like the Vilna Gaon who was crying on his deathbed because he wouldn't be able to be mekayem mitzvos. The Vilna Gaon loved olam hazeh right but that's not what the Chovos Halevavos is talking about. Love of olam hazeh means the physical comforts and pleasures and enjoyments of olam hazeh. It doesn't mean olam hazeh as the opportunity as the olam ha'asiyah as the opportunity to be oved Hashem. So says Rabbeinu Bachya, the Chovos Halevavos, the same way fire and water are antithetical, one vanquishes the other, so too ahavas olam hazeh and ahavas olam haba cannot coexist. Everything we're talking about on the one hand is very simple, very basic, and yet on the other hand sometimes our perception is skewed or clouded because the truth is that because we have the shnei yetzarim, because we have a yetzer hara, again a yetzer hara doesn't mean that it's innately evil but yetzer hara means an inclination towards the physical. And we have a yetzer hatov, an inclination towards the spiritual. So often we try to misplace that and try to rationalize to ourselves that the two are compatible. That a person can have a love for olam hazeh, for all the comforts and indulgences of olam hazeh and simultaneously can cultivate a love for olam haba and for everything that represents. Says the Chovos Halevavos, we're deluding ourselves. There's no such thing. To the degree that a person cultivates a love for olam hazeh, so to that degree he doesn't have a love for olam haba. The two can no more coexist than water and fire can coexist in the same place. So it's very important to understand again that we're not looking to balance worldly goals with spiritual goals but we're looking to balance worldly responsibilities within a life which is totally and exclusively devoted to spiritual goals. All of which brings us back one more time to the question of how much do we truly need. Now the answer is not going to be entirely uniform. Obviously the dollars and cents and the precise details of such an answer are going to vary from individual to individual. So the most we can talk about in a public forum are some general guidelines or at least common denominators in terms of what worldly responsibilities the Torah imposes upon us and what worldly responsibilities we have which are self-imposed. So the Rambam when he tries to... well not he tries, when the Rambam does tell us how to strike the proper balance between again within our worldly responsibilities, so the Rambam says vechen lo yit'ave in discussing how much a person should eat and drink and the Rambam says in Perek Alef of Hilchos Deios

וכן לא יתאוה אלא לדברים שהגוף צריך להן ואי אפשר להיות בזולתן כענין שנאמר וצדיק אוכל לשובע נפשו.

A person should only desire to eat what he needs to maintain himself healthy, strong, vohl basetst, but not more than that. As the pasuk says, now this is fascinating, the pasuk is about a tzadik and the Rambam is quoting this pasuk for all of us. Shene'emar vetzadik ochel, a tzadik eats lishova nafsho to satiate himself. Meaning the tzadik doesn't eat, he's not eating for pleasure and his choice of diet is not dictated by pleasure, it's lishova nafsho. What he needs to strengthen himself. Similarly the Rambam says in terms of how much parnassah a person should make hishtadlus, a person should should make effort to earn. So the Rambam says vechen... וכן לא יהיה עמל בעסקו in discussing how much parnassah a person should make hishtadlus, so the Rambam says

וכן לא יהיה עמל בעסקו אלא להשיג דבר שצריך לו לחיי שעה כענין שנאמר טוב מעט לצדיק.

So too when it comes to calculating how much parnassah we need, so a person should look to to see what he needs to sustain himself. Again that same that same description which which the Chasam Sofer echoed of k'dei chayei, basic necessities. Chodesh Elul is is a time when it's hopefully our hearts are a little bit more open and receptive to cheshbon hanefesh and therefore make a cheshbon hanefesh about our lifestyle and I'm not talking about any particular community, I'm not even talking about any particular particular age or or epoch within within Jewish history. Whenever you know whenever whenever Jews had the means, so the problem that we're discussing tonight is a problem unfortunately with a I guess you could say a long and and rich history. So I'm not referring again to any there's no local dimension in terms of the problem that exists and the applications are local and universal everywhere. So let's maybe explore a few areas in which we've lost the sense of balance, in which we've lost the sense of proportion. We mentioned the Chazal say that a dirah na'ah is one of those things which affords harchavas hadaas. That a dirah na'ah to live in a nice house gives a person harchavas hadaas. Again a certain expansiveness. In certain the same way as a mashal, you know if a person's in a cluttered room so sometimes it clutters your thinking. So a person lives in a dirah na'ah again gives them a certain openness, a certain harchavas hadaas, a certain expansiveness. So that's a ma'amar Chazal, a ma'amar Chazal that that we're not looking to to modify, but looking to place in context. Me'idach gisa, what was Chazal's conception? So in terms of how what does that translate into for us? Okay. So what was Chazal's definition of a house? What was Chazal's definition of a house? So the Gemara in Sukkah tells us that various dinim which depend upon a house. The Torah says

מי האיש אשר בנה בית חדש ולא חנכו ילך וישוב לביתו.

That a person who just built a new house but hasn't made a chanukas habayit, hasn't yet inaugurated the house, so then he's excused from milchama, right? And when the Kohen Mashuach Milchama discusses those who are excused from going out to war, so he's one of those who's excused. There's a chiyuv if you have a house with a flat roof, there's a chiyuv of a ma'akeh, you have to build a fence around the roof. כי תבנה בית חדש, we just read the pasuk, right? כי תבנה בית חדש ועשית מעקה לגגך. So there are many dinim וכתבתם על מזוזות ביתך ובשעריך. The Torah has many dinim which are a function of a bayis. So what's the definition of a bayis? So the Gemara says the definition of a bayis is ד' אמות על ד' אמות. If the house is ד' אמות by ד' אמות, that constitutes a house. How much is ד' אמות על ד' אמות? Let's take large shiurim. Maybe it's 8 feet by 8 feet. Now please don't misunderstand me. I don't live in ד' אמות על ד' אמות, maybe I should, I certainly don't, and as such I'm certainly not insinuating that anyone else should. But in terms of understanding just how spacious and elaborate and extravagant a house has to be and what Chazal had in mind when they said that a dira na'ah gives a person harchavas hadaas, and even factoring in that people are a product of their upbringing, their environment, factoring everything in, but we shouldn't lose sight of what Chazal's definition of a bayis was also. Chazal's definition of a bayis was that it was ד' אמות על ד' אמות. And this represented something so significant that the person was excused. He could go back from milchama because he had invested so much. He had built a house and it was inconceivable that we should put him in a position that he may not be able to make a chanukas habayit, he may not be able to inaugurate the house. What precisely the square footage is in Tashas Samech Ches of a dira na'ah which is מרחיבה דעתו של אדם I don't presume to know and therefore I don't presume to say. I think we probably could if we're honest with ourselves agree that it's a lot less than we like to tell ourselves it is. And therefore the financial burdens that we assume in this area are not financial burdens which the Torah is imposing upon us, but they're financial burdens which are self-imposed. Another associated burden in this realm of housing is that there is a very natural preference, very strong preference which we all have, I think we all have, is that there are certain neighborhoods which are especially attractive. Neighborhoods which are thriving, which are pulsating Jewish communities and often in addition to all the Jewish institutional life, they're very pleasing aesthetically as well and because of that all of us are naturally drawn to such neighborhoods. It's a very natural inclination and it's a very strong preference. The tzarah is, right, as everyone who even those of us who don't know anything about real estate know that prices in real estate are driven by location. And once a neighborhood becomes so desirable, so the inevitable result is that prices spike. So those who come later, so even if the house, let's say, is what qualifies as, you know, a minimal dira na'ah by today's standards which affords harchavas hadaas, but by insisting on certain neighborhoods, so again we impose a very great financial burden upon ourselves. Now neighborhoods are very important, very, very important. But yesh gvul, there are limitations. One of the previous Gerer Rebbes, zecher tzadik livracha, made a takana that he forbade his chassidim when getting married, the young chassidim, he forbade them to buy apartments in Yerushalayim. Because in Yerushalayim, so real estate was, I assume still is, more expensive than elsewhere in Eretz Yisrael because it's the most attractive neighborhood. Who doesn't dream of living in Yerushalayim? So the Gerer Rebbe said that they're not allowed to. to find an apartment in Yerushalayim because even if they're gonna buy a small modest dira na'ah, which maybe isn't, maybe it's not even big enough to be מרחיבה דעתו של אדם, but the financial burden which for which that will place upon them was gonna be too much and the Gerer Rebbe, right, he recognized that that would be a self-imposed worldly responsibility, not one which the Torah, which Hakadosh Baruch Hu is imposing upon us. In this context, it's worth discussing for a moment. You know, there are Mishnah Berurahs and when we have sha'ylos in Hilchos Shabbos and Hilchos Brachos, so we look in the Mishnah Berurah, we live by the Mishnah Berurah. So there are Mishnah Berurahs about our topic tonight also. The Mishnah Berurah in the very beginning of Hilchos Shabbos in סימן רמב quotes where the Shulchan Aruch discusses how much a person spends on Oneg Shabbos, how much expense a person incurs in terms of buying food to have food for Oneg Shabbos. So the Shulchan Aruch, excuse me, the Mishnah Berurah quotes there is a Gemara in the beginning of the second perek in Masechet Beitzah where the Gemara says that

כל מזונותיו של אדם קצובים לו מראש השנה ועד ראש השנה.

A person's income for the coming year is set on Rosh Hashanah. It's decided on Rosh Hashanah, Yom Kippur, that Hakadosh Baruch Hu decides what our income is going to be for the coming year. And Rashi says on this Gemara and the Mishnah Berurah quotes this la'halacha that therefore a person has to be very very careful in spending money because there isn't going to be an extra allocation. And if a person assumes all kinds of financial responsibilities which exceed, which surpass what was allocated to him on Rosh Hashanah, so then he's gonna be of tzaros because he was given a set budget and he has to live within that budget. So the question is, but we're not given this inside information me'achorei hapargod what that budget is. So the answer is that as long as we're dealing with reasonable expenses, so then we have a right to reasonably hope that the Ribbono Shel Olam has decreed that we should have enough to meet reasonable expenses. But the minute we exceed what the Torah considers reasonable, it no longer becomes a reasonable expectation or reasonable assumption that Hakadosh Baruch Hu necessarily allocated that much to us. So kal vachomer that certainly when a person assumes financial responsibilities for years and years, 10, 15, 20 years ahead, that again a person has to be very weary of assuming very heavy financial responsibilities. Who knows what taktiv? Who knows כל מזונותיו של אדם קצובים לו, so who knows exactly how much Hakadosh Baruch Hu is going to plan to allocate? And even if right now indications are that Hakadosh Baruch Hu's allocating a person be'shefa, Hakadosh Baruch Hu's allocating a lot of money, there's no guarantee that that's what the Ratzon Hashem is for coming years as well. And to become to assume a responsibility which is going to be a heavy responsibility again and one which the Torah would consider unnecessary and unreasonable is a very very risky proposition, not one which the Mishnah Berurah endorses. The truth is that there is one mechanism to which the Mishnah Berurah doesn't refer. There is one mechanism where a person can get a supplementary allocation if he exceeds his budget of the כל מזונותיו של אדם קצובים לו. And I'm referring as you all know to the famous Gemara in Ta'anit where Rabbi Chanina ben Dosa's wife says to him, you know, we live a life of such dire poverty. You're such a great such a great man with such a koach hatfillah, isn't there something you can do about it? So Rabbi Chanina ben Dosa davens and this golden leg of a table which is worth who knows what comes down and now they're now they're as rich as they could ever dream to be and they can afford anything they want. Then הרבנית חנינא בן דוסא has a dream and she dreams that Olam Haba all the tzaddikim are sitting at tables, at three-legged tables, and she and her husband are sitting at a two-legged table. And she understands the significance of the dream. She understands that she was borrowing in in In surpassing, in exceeding her budget, in exceeding what was allocated to her in Olam Hazeh, so there is a mechanism to exceed, but that mechanism to exceed is borrowing against what HaKadosh Baruch Hu really wants to give us in Olam Ha-Ba. So she understands the dream and she tells him, "I don't want any part of this." So רבי חנינא בן דוסא davens and the golden leg disappears as miraculously as it appeared. So there is a mechanism for exceeding our allocation, our budget, but the price is very, very steep. Let's mention one or two other areas again in Chodesh Elul, a time of Cheshbon Ha-Nefesh both personal and collective. Let's mention one or two other areas in which again if we're honest with ourselves, not the easiest of tasks, but if we're honest with ourselves, I think we'll recognize that we've lost our sense of proportion and balance. The well, in grammatically correct Hebrew the Semachot or in colloquially incorrect Hebrew the Simchas that we make, be they weddings, be they Bar and Bat Mitzvas, the lavish, extravagant Simchos that we make just indescribably out of proportion. The amount of money which is spent on a single day is mind-boggling, is absolutely mind-boggling. It's a Seudas Mitzva. It's a Seudas Mitzva. Of course a wedding should be celebrated. And to celebrate it of course there's going to be some expense involved. It's a Seudas Mitzva. But the extremes to which we go in our Simchas totally beyond any reasonable sense of proportion. And again, unfortunately this too is a problem with a very rich history. But if you look in terms of the Takanos which have been made by Kehillas throughout the generations, so throughout the generations there have been Takanos as to how many people you can have playing in a band. There have been Takanos as to how much money you can spend on flowers. Exactly how much money do you throw away by having flowers that are there for one day and the next day end up in the garbage? There are Takanos, there have been Takanos as to how many people should be invited to a wedding. Now obviously we can't be very literal and say well because, because in the history of Takanos they once made a Takana in some localities that you can't invite more than 30 couples to a wedding, and they did make such a Takana. So obviously we're not going to literally transpose that. I mean how can you compare when people lived in a village to life nowadays when we live in a global village? So obviously we can't literally transpose any of these Takanos. But the need to curtail the amount of money spent on a Simcha certainly that is a message which should be heard and should be drawn from the history of these Takanos. Gedolim such as the Noda Bi-Yehuda from the Gedolei Ha-Poskim were involved in deciding how many members there should be for a band at a Simcha that there shouldn't be unnecessary expense associated with making a Simcha. Now it's also very important to emphasize that when we talk about limiting and curtailing expenses, so we're not talking only about people who are of limited means for whom this creates a great financial burden. Of course we're talking about these people as well for the reasons that we've been discussing. But the obligation is equally incumbent upon people who are of means for whom it doesn't represent any hardship whatsoever. They're equally, if not more obligated to curtail spending in the areas that we've been talking. And the reasons for that are either two or threefold. First of all, the Gemara in Moed Katan elsewhere as well tells reconstructs a remarkable scene for us. It says that once upon a time when a relative would die, the expenses associated with burying the mais were more traumatic for his family than his death. The expenses associated, the tachrichim which people, the shrouds with which people used to be malbish the maisim, in which the mais was dressed, tended to be so expensive and the aniyim therefore felt an obligation, even those who were not people of means felt an obligation to keep up with what others were doing, so much so that the trauma of bearing these expenses was so great that it was greater than the trauma of losing the family member. And things reached such a stage of crisis that people used to abandon their responsibility, they would abandon the maisim because they felt that they simply didn't have the means to provide for them. Until Rabban Gamliel left a tzava'ah that he should be buried in the simplest of tachrichim and from then on everyone was buried that way and that removed this burden from the aniyim. So one reason that even people of means have the responsibility to curtail their spending is because otherwise if they don't curtail their spending, whether they intend it or not, they set a certain standard which just places too much of a load and too great a demand on people who don't have comparable means. The Gemara has in a few places another reason for why even people of means have to curtail their own spending, שלא לבייש את העניים, not שלא להכביד על העניים, the other consideration, but so as not to embarrass the aniyim. So the Gemara says that on Tu B'Av when the young women would go out and it was a day when many shidduchim were made, so even those who came from homes where they had the means where they had their own nice clothing, so everyone used to borrow clothing שלא לבייש את מי שאין לו, so as not to embarrass those who don't have. And the Gemara has other things where even people of means have to limit what they're doing שלא לבייש את מי שאין לו, so as not to create a disparity between what some people can afford and what others can afford as well. So everything we're talking about is not only because of the again increased load of worldly responsibilities but also even if one has the resources, even if one has the means, one has an achrayus and arvus, a responsibility vis-a-vis society, vis-a-vis everyone else not to create hardship for others or not to embarrass others and to curtail their spending accordingly. Maybe just mention quickly one or two other areas in which also our sense of balance and proportion needs to be restored. There certainly is ample justification and rationale for taking vacations. People certainly need to refresh themselves, people certainly need a break. There's no need to belabor the point. There's certainly ample room for vacations in a Torah lifestyle as well. Yesh v'yesh, but it doesn't mean that the vacation has to necessarily generate the types of expenses which the vacations that we want to take nowadays do. And that's another aspect of another area in which our sense of balance has to be restored. Now often the impulse or impetus which causes us to lose this sense of balance is really the sincerest of motives. As parents, so we all want to give our children the best. We want to give them the best of homes to live in, we want to give them the best of clothing to wear, we want to send them to the best of summer camps. We want to give our children the best. The motive couldn't be more pure, the motive couldn't be more sincere, and yet too often it's misdirected. Misdirected for two reasons. First of all, if we send our children a message that Talmud Torah, that the father having more time to learn Torah in the Beis Medrash with his children is a more important value in life than additional physical comforts and luxuries, so then we're doing the best for our children and that's something, that's truly doing the best for our children. But we can give them the best of houses, we can give them the best of summer camps and and everything else, but ultimately that's not giving them the best. If we teach them yes, we're mistapek bemuat because to be able to afford in quotation marks the best of houses, so then the father would and the parents, the mother as well, would have to undertake to work extra hours and have even more time spent on what's intrinsically mundane, so we're not giving our children the best. But even more than that, there's another reason why again the best of houses, the best of clothing, the best of camps isn't necessarily the best for our children and that is that ultimately, ultimately we want to our children, we want to imbue our children, we want to set them on a path of Avodas Hashem. To set them on a path of Avodas Hashem means to help them develop a spiritual personality, to help them develop a personality which is devoted, which is devoted to Avodas Hashem, not to, not to implant within them again what the Chovos HaLevavos talks about the love for Olam Hazeh, but the love for Olam Habah. And again, Rabbeinu Bachya tells us the two can't exist, coexist. The love for Olam Hazeh, the love for Olam Habah cannot more coexist than water and fire can coexist. So giving our children the best of houses, the best of clothing, the best of camps with the most fun and games, we're giving them a love of Olam Hazeh. We give them less, we're giving them more. We give them less, we're giving them more. Now one area in which we don't compromise, in which we can't compromise, in which we don't look to to trim expenses is when it comes to chinuch and this is for two reasons. First of all, as as the Gemara so beautifully depicts, children are a pikadon. Hakadosh Baruch Hu entrusts us with a pikadon. He makes us guardians over his children when he blesses us with children. And Hakadosh Baruch Hu entrusts us with pure neshamos and it's our job, it's our obligation as parents to do everything possible to see to it that those neshamos remain as pure as they are what Hakadosh Baruch Hu entrusts them to our care. Hakadosh Baruch Hu also entrusts us with money, that's another pikadon. לי הכסף ולי הזהב. The hakesef and zahav, the gold and silver belong to Hakadosh Baruch Hu. We're supposed to use one pikadon to care for the other pikadon. So one area in which we don't look to to limit expenses is when it comes to chinuch. There's another reason for this as well, because the Gemara says that the truth is that chinuch doesn't cost us anything.

כל מזונותיו של אדם קצובים לו מראש השנה ועד ראש השנה,

when the budget is is made up and we're allocated money, so the Gemara says but there are certain exceptions and one of those exceptions is חוץ מהוצאת בניו לתלמוד תורה, that the money that we spend on chinuch, so Hakadosh Baruch Hu says that for that you have an expense account. That whatever money we spend on chinuch, so then if we add, so then Hakadosh Baruch Hu adds to our allocation and if we and if we hold back and if we subtract, so then Hakadosh Baruch Hu subtracts from our allocation as well. Now is not really the time, time is is short and it really requires a separate iyun, but all this notwithstanding, certainly communally everything possible should be done to try to hold down tuition expenses and to try to make tuition as affordable as possible to all parents. The Gemara in Bava Basra said that Yehoshua ben Gamla made a takkana that every city with with Jewish community has an obligation to be me- mosheiv melamdei tinokos, which in our terms means to have a Yeshiva to educate the children. And in Shulchan Aruch in Yoreh De'ah and Choshen Mishpat, it's discussed again, so that obligation is not only on the parents. That obligation is on everyone who lives in the city; everyone has an obligation to see to it that the city provides the chinuch for the children of the city. So it certainly should be a priority of philanthropy to try to limit as much as possible the tuition and tuition-related expenses. And that's something which needs to be elaborated upon. I'd like to just in conclusion: if we make a cheshbon hanefesh and through that cheshbon hanefesh are really able to strike the right balance and we really succeed in identifying those worldly responsibilities which are necessary, which the Torah imposes upon us, there's another crucial, crucial positive fallout to that and that is the Vilna Gaon writes that bitachon and histapkus are כללים לכל המידות טובות. That bitachon, a sense of trust in Hakadosh Baruch Hu and histapkus, of being content, of making do with what's necessary, that these encapsulate all midos tovos. Now bitachon and histapkus also go hand in hand. How so? As long as a person genuinely only seeks from Hakadosh Baruch Hu that which he truly needs, so then a person can turn to Hakadosh Baruch Hu and say Ribbono Shel Olam, help me that I shouldn't have to work till 10:00 every night in order to pay my bills. But as long as we don't have the midah of histapkus, so then the midah of bitachon is misplaced. There's no midah of bitachon Ribbono Shel Olam help me support a lavish lifestyle. That's misplaced bitachon. The bitachon and the histapkus go together. If we're mistapek, if we have the sense of contentment with what we genuinely need, with what the Torah, with what Ribbono Shel Olam genuinely wants us to have, so then we can turn around and say Ribbono Shel Olam so please help us. Then if we can turn in Tefilla Zaka towards the end of Tefilla Zaka, so we beseech Hakadosh Baruch Hu

וחתמנו בספר חיים טובים, חיים של פרנסה בנחת ובכבוד ובהיתר,

parnassa which will come easily in a dignified manner without Rachmana litzlan being over any issurim, ולא יטרידנו הפרנסה בטרדת הזמן, parnassa behashket uveshalva, a parnassa which will come our way amidst serenity and tranquility. But the bitachon which asking Hakadosh Baruch Hu for that reflects, that bitachon is only possible if a person is not looking for excessive parnassa. If a person is assuming and incurring the excessive expenses and the worldly responsibilities which the Torah wants, which the Torah imposes, so then we can have the bitachon that when we're mispalel in Tefilla Zaka, that Hakadosh Baruch Hu will answer our tfillos. But that bitachon is misplaced if we're looking for more than the Torah thinks that we should be having. And finally, I'll just conclude with one Mishnah Berurah. The Mishnah Berurah in the Biur Halacha in Klal Alef quotes as you're all familiar from the Sefer HaChinuch the Sheish Mitzvos Temidiyos, that there are six mitzvos which are always operative. The sixth of these is the mitzvah of לא תסורו אחרי לבבכם ואחרי עיניכם from the last parsha in Kerias Shema. So the Gemara darshens that אחרי לבבכם זו אפיקורסות and I think and אחרי עיניכם זו זנות, zenus. So zenus generally so we would translate as promiscuity. There's a remarkable The Mishnah Berurah, take a look, the Chayei Adam also quotes it in klal aleph of Chayei Adam, the Mishnah Berurah in siman aleph of Mishnah Berurah quotes the Sefer HaChinuch says uvichlal znus, included under the category of znus מי שהוא רודף אחר תאוות העולם a person who pursues the pleasures of this world מבלי שיכוון בהם כלל לכוונה טובה without any positive or redeeming reason or goal

בלי שיעשה אותם כדי שיעמוד בריא ויוכל להשתדל בעבודת בוראו.

It's not because he needs it to maintain his health, but no, he's looking for the pleasure, to indulge the pleasure. The Sefer HaChinuch says the Mishnah Berurah quotes it lehalacha. It's bichlal znus, it's bichlal what the Torah says לא תתורו אחרי לבבכם. Ribono Shel Olam should help that in Chodesh Elul we should make a cheshbon hanefesh individually, collectively, that we're able to say bileiv shaleim in Tefillah Zakka that the Ribono Shel Olam should be חתמנו בספר חיים טובים, chayim shel parnassa, that we should be able to have this well-founded and well-placed bitachon that the Ribono Shel Olam will answer our tefillos.