Part of the series: Divrei Hashkafa by Rav Mayer Twersky
Transcript
AI-generated transcript. May contain errors.
Hi good morning Gut Voch rabosai hope you are well. We were in the middle of of Michtav Mem Gimmel last time. So the footnote had sketched the the background to the passage in Chazon Ish that his correspondent had written hassagos on. Shulchan Aruch says that the way to deal with the tza'ar ba'alei chayim of not being able to leave an animal 24 hours without milking is to do it על ידי אמירה לנכרי. That amirah leakum is muttar במקום צער בעלי חיים. So in fact in Eretz Yisrael that's what they were doing and they were employing Arab labor again I think this question the Chazon Ish was writing on in the 30s because he corresponded with the Rav Chaim Ozer back in Vilna about this question. So it was in the 30s and again in terms of that issue of of Arab labor and the the safety or dangers thereof obviously it has to be nidon lefi hazman. But they were they were and Chazon Ish and others had paskened that that's what they should continue to do in Eretz Yisrael as it says in Shulchan Aruch על ידי אמירה לעכו"ם. There were those who very very strongly objected to employing Arabs referring it to it with a melitzah of avodah zarah. So Rav Hutner explained that's why when the Chazon Ish gives his psak he begins talking about about doing chesed with the umos ha'olam and and not seeking to take revenge. Okay so we're in the letter what up to os aleph here where Rav Hutner's now responding to the specific hassagos that the that the shoel had raised.
אף שלאחר הרקע המעשי של הפיסקה הנעלה בחזון איש נבוא על סדר דבריו של כבוד תורתו. מה שתמה כבוד תורתו כי עם כל העונשים אינם אלא כדי שלא יהיה העולם טרף לשיני בריאי הגוף חלושי השכל.
So the Chazon Ish writes in that passage and in the bottom they give the specific mareh makom to the Chazon Ish in Orach Chayim that onshim are intended as a deterrent that the world shouldn't just be what's the the teref is is what the behemah malls when a behemah malls another behemah so the world shouldn't be mauled by the teeth of those who are very very megushamdig of of healthy body but of of weak intellect. If that's the entire pshat in the whole ma'arachah of onshim in the Torah the shoel asked אם כן כיצד נבאר כל הדקדוקים במשניות ובסוגיות דסנהדרין. Obviously this general consideration of deterrent doesn't explain all the dikdukim in ארבע מיתות בית דין and and how the misos beis din is given and what the specifics of the misos beis din are. Rav Hutner answers him.
הנה ברור הוא שמרן זצ"ל לא כתב מה שכתב אלא בנוגע לעונשים שהם בגדר הוראת שעה למגדר מלתא.
He wasn't talking about the onshim kevu'im. He was talking about the din that beis din as a hora'as sha'ah כדרך שמכין ועונשין שלא מן הדין. Right? The Gemara in Sanhedrin has a din that that Sanhedrin מכין ועונשין שלא מן הדין לקיים את התורה. That the beis din has certain discretionary powers. It's a major major machlokes rishonim whether this refers to davka a beis din of smuchim or even bazman hazeh to a beis din hedyotos. But beis din have discretionary powers to punish even when there isn't a din kavua to punish or to punish to this degree in such a case. So for instance the braisa in Sanhedrin illustrates that in the times of the But when we were under the influence of the Greek empire there was a tremendous hisrashlus in Shmiras Shabbos and at that point they once gave skila to someone who violated the isur derabanan of riding of horseback riding on Shabbos. So they gave him skila. So obviously that's not a din kavua in that sense of Shalom min HaDin, but it's rather authorized the Beis Din have that discretionary power. It's that discretionary power that the Chazon Ish was was explaining with this sentence that it's intended as a deterrent
ובודאי דאין לזה שום שייכות עם דיני מיתות ומלקות הקבועים בתורה בתור הלכות מאוששות
solid well-established halachos which are l'doros שאין לנו בזה שום מבוא של ta'ama u'nimuka. A person doesn't we don't assign ta'ama d'kra. Why the why did the Torah come up with these ארבע מיתות בית דין? סקילה שריפה הרג וחנק. Why didn't the Torah come up with other ארבע מיתות בית דין, with different misos beis din? No, that's not something that we speculate on. There's no inyan giving ta'ama d'kra. That's not what the Chazon Ish was talking about.
ועיין עוד ברמב"ם הלכות מלכים שכשהמלך הורג בתור הוראת שעה אינו הורג אלא בסייף ולהורג.
Right, so clearly what what Rav Hutner means with that last he'ara is and then halo davar hu that when the Melech who also has discretionary powers just like the Beis Din has discretionary powers, the Melech also להעמיד הדת על תלה also has these discretionary powers. So you takeh don't find arba misos with chilukei dinim because all of those arba misos with chilukei dinim, again, those are the the dinim kevuim. But in terms of when it's intended as a deterrent l'migdar milsa, so ein hachi nami there's just one din misa because there's just one overarching goal and and rationale to to the onshin. Beis. The Chazon Ish also says
בדברי מרן החזון איש נאמר כי אין בין בליעל ומשוגע ולא כלום.
That there's no difference between a wicked person and a meshugene. The context again, if you look up there in siman nun vav in the Chazon Ish, the context of that statement is in the same way a person is not motivated to take revenge against a m'turaf because a person understands he's not of sound mind, so what am I, I'm not offended, I'm not looking to avenge myself against a m'turaf. So the Chazon Ish is saying there's no difference between a person who's a rasha he's also a m'turaf.
אין אדם חוטא אלא אם כן נכנס בו רוח שטות.
It's the ultimate tiruf hadaas that that a person's a rasha and that a person violates ratzon Hashem. That's the ultimate tiruf hadaas. So the same way instinctively a person doesn't look to avenge himself from or against a m'turaf, so so too the Chazon Ish is again telling them you shouldn't be looking to avenge yourself against a a rasha and that shouldn't be an issue in terms of whether of how you accomplish the chaliva bishabbos.
ועל זה כותב פה בתורתו כי הדגשת השנאה של היחס הזה לעובר החוק גרמה לביטול מורא של מלכות.
So the Shoel writes to Rav Hutner, so that basically relieves people of moral responsibility. So then there's going to be no mora shel malchus. If I do something wrong, so then I'll just turn around and defend myself by saying that אין בין בליעל ומשוגע ולא כלום. If I were a m'turaf, if a psychiatrist would give an expert opinion that I'm a m'turaf, so then I'd be innocent by virtue of that fact. So if the Chazon Ish says that אין בין בליעל ומשוגע ולא כלום, so then he just undermined all moral responsibility. Says Rav Hutner a very important yesod. הנה כל משכיל בעבודת השם יודע נאמנה. Any any discerning person in avodas Hashem understands and this is so basic and so fundamental, כי עולם עבודת השם עשוי הוא רשויות רשויות. There are different domains, different... And each domain, each area is governed by its own set of rules, by its own set of concepts.
וממילא אין שום סתירה סותרת את חילופי ההנהגות בין רשות אחת לחברתה.
And therefore you can't ask a kasha from one domain, from one area to a different domain, to a different area and through that juxtaposition claim that you have a stira.
והלא בשעה שקילל שמעי בן גרא את דוד לא הניח דוד לעשות שום מחאה כנגדו.
Dovid Hamelech besha'ato didn't allow even any protest against Shimi's curse and he said כי השם אמר לו קלל. Bechol zos, the same Dovid Hamelech who besha'ato attributed Shimi's klala to כי השם אמר לו קלל, bechol zos we see כי המילה האחרונה של דוד בעולמו, when Dovid Hamelech is giving his tzava'a, his final words to Shlomo Hamelech, so what were his final words? His final words to Shlomo Hamelech contained the following: היה הציווי להוריד את שיבתו של שמעי בדם שאול. He told Shlomo, don't let Shimi die a natural death. Don't allow him to live to a ripe old age and die a natural death. You know what he did when I was running away. You know that that klala nimretzes that he imposed upon me. ולחכם שכמותך בוודאי שאין צורך להאריך ביסוד זה. This is a very point yesod, let's give a different example of it. In Parshas Vayigash you have the following: Within the final encounter between Yosef and the Shivtei Koh, when Yosef reveals himself to the Shivtei Koh, so initially according to Chazal in the Gemara in Chagigah, so Yosef rebukes them very, very sharply. ולא יכלו אחיו לענות אותו כי נבהלו מפניו. So Chazal say that I forget which of the Amora'im, כי מטי להאי קרא הוה בכי, when Chazal learned with a sensitivity there was no sense of detachment rachmana litzlan in their learning. When he would come to this posuk he would cry. It says that mah, if the Shivtei Koh couldn't answer the tochacha of basar vadam, so אוי לנו מיום הדין אוי לנו מיום התוכחה, how are we going to be able to answer when we stand before the Ribbono Shel Olam in din, when we hear the Ribbono Shel Olam's tochacha? So clearly according to Chazal, Ha'od avi chai wasn't an innocent inquiry but rather as the Beis Halevi explains, Yosef had inquired from them last time they were there as to Yaakov's welfare. In the interim they had no update because he had orchestrated again with the gavia in Binyamin's pack. So he had orchestrated their arrest. So they never got back home. So they have no update as to Yaakov Avinu's welfare. So when he's asking them Ha'od avi chai, it's not an innocent inquiry as וואס מאכט דער טאטע. No, it was Ha'od avi chai, is it conceivable that after all the agmas nefesh, the incredible, the greatest tza'ar that a person can have in life is to lose a child rachmana litzlan, is it possible that after having to endure that tza'ar, is it possible that he's still alive? And that's why ולא יכלו אחיו לענות אותו כי נבהלו מפניו. So you see here that Yosef Hatzaddik is holding them accountable and is rebuking them very, very sharply. Then Yosef says to them thirty seconds later, Yosef says to them, he says
ועתה אל תעצבו כי לא אתם מכרתם אותי הנה כי אלוהים.
Don't worry about anything. Don't worry about anything. Don't feel bad. You didn't send me here. words of tochecha. Sfas Emes explains very, very beautifully. What one of the extraordinary miraculous facets of hashgacha is the way Hakadosh Baruch Hu only allows one person's bechira to impact another when that corresponds to what Hakadosh Baruch Hu decrees should happen anyway. So Yosef HaTzadik says there's really two levels on which what happened needs to be viewed and processed. You, the brothers, the Shivtei Kah, you acted mirtzonchem. You acted voluntarily. You acted willingly. You didn't know that you were carrying out some divine plan, some divine scheme. You acted misinah and mikinah and sold me into slavery and went back and insinuated to Yaakov Avinu that I'd been killed. You did all that from bechira chofshis and you have responsibility for that. You have a moral responsibility for what you did because you did it mitoch bechirasecha. Now, next stage of the conversation. Lest you think that I'm going to look to take revenge, lest you feel vulnerable that I'm going to try to take revenge from you, so you should know that on a different level, not on the level of, not from the vantage point of you, the subjects who perpetrated the action, but from the vantage point of my vantage point, the object to whom the action happened. The one who was impacted by the action. From that vantage point, everything that happened was min hashamayim. And if it hadn't happened as a result of your nefarious scheme, it would have happened through some other means. So I have no reason to have any grievance against you because from my vantage point, what happened would have happened regardless. From your vantage point, you did, you're guilty of an incredible aveira and you have to own up to that and you have to do teshuva for that. But from my vantage point, my Yosef HaTzadik's vantage point, so that I'm not, I have no reason and no inclination for revenge because what happened would have happened regardless. That's an example again of rishuyos rishuyos. So from, in the rishus, in the domain, in the area, from the vantage point of Yosef, what happened was gezeira min hashamayim. From the vantage point of the brothers, what happened was their bechira chofshis and therefore they have a responsibility. From Yosef HaTzadik's vantage point, they're not the cause of what happened. So rishuyos rishuyos and there's no stira between the two and that's exactly what Rav Hutner is illustrating the same thing with the klalah of Shimi ben Gera. At the time Dovid HaMelech at the time when Shimi curses, so Dovid HaMelech says at this point the focus has to be on my being mekabel what is nigzar min hashamayim. If Shimi in his bechira is able to curse me, it's because Hakadosh Baruch Hu wants me to be subjected to that and that's right now what I have to be mekabel. I have to be מצדיק עלי את הדין and not react. At a different point in time Dovid HaMelech says now when I'm no longer going to be around and it's not a question of my being מצדיק עלי את הדין, now the time has come to view this in a different rishus. From a different vantage point and now the time has come to hold Shimi accountable for that terrible terrible aveira that he did. Uma'ata continues Rav Hutner בדברי מרן באמרו שאין בין בליעה למתורה ולא כלום when the Chazon Ish. says that there's no difference between a rasha and a meshugana what he means is מעסקו להדיא בחשבון החכם עם נפשו ולהימנע מרגשי הנקמה. Chazon Ish says from the vantage point of the person whom is affected. The one who's affected by the actions of the beliyal, the one who's victimized by the beliyal, the one who's hurt by the beliyal, so from his vantage point the way he accurately is supposed to see things is there's no difference between what a meshugana does and what this rasha does. And that's why the same way instinct- intuitively we understand that there's no reason and there's no urge or inclination for nekama against the meshugana, there's no- should be no urge or inclination for nekama against the beliyal. U'v'reshus zo and in this domain בוודאי שאמנם נכון הוא הדבר, it's true, it's a hundred percent true. והחשבון הוא חשבון צדק and and the calculation is is a correct calculation, כי ברשות זו אנו כופים בבחירה, ein hachi nami. The way a person experiences something as an object. So from that vantage point, yeah, we do deny the bechira. וכשם שהמטורף עושה מעשה בגזירה של חוקי הטבע, the same way a meturaf has some kind of chemical imbalance in him and because of that he acts out of the the decree of of of that chemical imbalance. כמו כן הבליעל נענס הוא בגזירת הטבע של יצר. So so too this wicked person is acting under the coercion of his yetzer hara.
וכמו שאמר דוד על שמעי שהשם אמר לו לקלל. אבל כשאנו עומדים ברשות המשפט,
but when the vant- but when the perspective, when the medubar is not how the victim should should act or respond or feel, but the medubar is the achrayus, the responsibility of the victimizer,
אז בוודאי שאנו עומדים על הבסיס המוכרח של כח הבחירה.
Of course, of course, we talk about absolute free will. עשה הצדיק שנגנב ממנו כל רכושו. Think of the following example. You have a tzadik. Someone comes in and and steals everything, wipes him out entirely. ובשעה שנודע לו על זה, when the tzadik is informed that that he has that he has nothing left,
הרגיש בכל מעמקי נפשו שכל דעביד רחמנא לטב עביד. מצדיק עליו את הדין,
he says whatever the Ribbono shel Olam does is for the best.
והיה ברור אצלו שכל דעביד רחמנא לטב עביד, והיה ברור אצלו שההפסד שלו הוא לטובתו. ומכל מקום בוודאי שלא היה הצדיק הזה פוטר את הגנב מתשלומי כפל על פי הסברא הנ"ל.
If they'll catch the ganav, it doesn't mean that because the tzadik b'shaito responded that tzadik as an object as the one affected, the one impacted, the fact that in that context he reacted with כל דעביד רחמנא לטב עביד doesn't mean that when the focus shifts to the ganav, if they catch the ganav, it doesn't mean that he has to be mochel the kefel to the ganav. כל מה שנתבטל מרושא של מלכות בתקופתנו, Me-rosha shel malchus is only undermined in our day, היינו משום שהכניסו את הכפירה בכח הבחירה ברשות המשפט. Because they denied bechira when when viewing the oseh, the subject, the one who did things. When you deny bechira from in that reshus, in that domain, then ein hachi nami, if a person has the reassurance and the comfort of knowing, wow, whatever I do, ex post facto, can just be attributed to to an uncontrollable yetzer and and there's not going to be any moral responsibility, then I might as well indulge every every whim that I have. Ein hachi nami,
בטלה מרושא של מלכות, וכפי אמרו צדיקי הדורות. שאף על פי שבבנייני צורכי עצמו יש לאדם למעט בהשתדלות,
tzaddikim of the other generations have said that for himself a person should be memate hishtadlus. He should do the amount of hishtadlus necessary but not more than that and then rely in bitachon. ולסמוך על הנהגת ההשגחה מכל מקום בנוגע לטובת חברו, when it comes to doing yenama tova, צריך אדם להאמין אך ורק בכח ההשתדלות. Here a person has to have the sense, no, that it's up to me to provide for him, it's up to me to bring about this result for him. Is that a stira? Of course not, says Rav Hutner, it's the same yesod.
וכל צד בנוי הוא על היסוד הנ"ל כעבודת השם עשויה רשויות.
There are different domains, different areas, different vantage points. ומה שנקרא ברשות אחת הסתכלות קדושה, and what from one perspective, in what in what domain it's a histaklus kedusha, it's a sacred viewpoint, such as again, when a person is victimized to see it as gezeira min hashamayim, קרויה היא ברשות השנייה, but if you're looking at the victimizer and you look at it that way, it's a histaklus asura. V'mimaila there's no kasha on the Chazon Ish. ודברי מרן עוסקים הם ברשות שבין אדם לעצמו. He's addressing the acheinu bnei yisrael who are the victims and telling them that they shouldn't have this desire for nekama. בשעה שהוא רוצה להתרומם, he's trying to teach them how to rise above מעל רגשי נקמה ושנאה, feelings of vengeance and hatred.
אז בוודאי שכן הוא האמת כי יצא על רשע הרי זה אונס ככל האונס ואין בין בליעל למודר ולא כלום. אבל אם באנו להשתמש בסברא זו בבית המשפט,
but if you'll bring the ose avla to a beis din, אז הרי זה שקר מוחלט, of course it's sheker muchlat. He did it out of his bechira,
כי אם לפי גדרי הדין הוא מזיד. הרי אנו מסתכלים על מעשיו כעל מעשי הזדון ואנו מענישים אותו ובהיתר לזה וכל חומר מהדר.
Okay, so we'll stop here. Okay bli neder im yirtze hashem we'll resume tomorrow. Have a good productive day rabosai, be well, be safe.