Avos 1:7 – Ahava & Yirah. Careful Speech.

Mishna Zayin. Nitai Ha'Arbeli Omer:

הרחק משכן רע ואל תתחבר לרשע ואל תתיאש מן הפורענות.

The Rambam comments on the last phrase in the Mishna and he says

ואמר כשתחטא ותראה חוטא לא תבטח ותאמר שהשם יתברך לא יענישהו אלא בעולם הבא ולא תתיאש מלהינקם ממנו מהרה על חטאו.

Because we usually encounter the word ye'ush in the context of aveida or gezeila ugneiva so we think of it more in the sense of despair, right? That a person gives up hope of recovering the lost or the stolen object. But it at its root, so l'hityayesh means to discount a possibility. So one contextual form of that is a person discounts the possibility that he's ever going to retrieve the aveida, but at its root what it means is again to sort of discount or dismiss the possibility of something. So אל תתיאש מן הפורענות the Rambam says means that a person should never discount or dismiss the possibility of an onesh. Keshetachta otireh chotei, don't complacently think שהשם יתברך לא יענישהו אלא בעולם הבא. That there's time to... there's no imminent possibility of onesh of pur'anut. Lo tityayesh in that sense, right? Don't dismiss, don't discount the possibility מלהינקם ממנו מהרה על חטאו. So the Rambam here clarifies what is ambiguous at least in the translation, I don't know how it is in the original, but what's ambiguous in Sefer Hamitzvos. You think of it in Sefer Hamitzvos v'hamitzva harvi'is, so the Rambam writes

והמצוה הרביעית היא שצונו להאמין יראתו יתעלה ולהפחד ממנו ולא נהיה ככופרים ההולכים בקרי אבל נירא ביאת עונשו בכל עת. והוא אמר יתעלה את ה' אלהיך תירא.

So when the Rambam says in defining yiras Hashem for purposes of its inclusion in minyan hamitzvos that it refers to yiras ha'onesh, so the phrase here is nira, right? We should fear, ביאת עונשו בכל עת. So the b'chol eis is modifying the nira that b'chol eis there should be an awareness of accountability and liability that at some point there's biy'as onsho. Or no, maybe the b'chol eis is a double modifier, b'chol eis is modifying both the nira as well as the biy'as onsho, at every moment we should have a nira that at any moment there can be biy'as onsho. So you can't really again I don't know whether whether in the original whether it is discernable but in the translation it's ambiguous, but you see from our Rambam here in Perush Hamishnayos that it's clearly intended as that double modifier. It's not only modifying the nira that the yiras ha'onesh should be tmidis that at some point there's biy'as onsho if a person does aveiros and doesn't do teshuva but rather no, the b'chol eis is modifying both that the person should have a nira that at any moment, אל תתיאש מן הפורענות, that at any moment there could be an onesh rachmana litzlan. Just a little bit more to try to understand the chiddush of Netaneh Tokef, what he's underscoring. So the Rambam writes in Perek Vav of Hilchos Teshuva Halacha Aleph, beginning third line:

בזמן שאדם אחד או אנשי מדינה חוטאים ועשה החוטא חטא שעשו מדעתו וברצונו כמו שבידאנו ראוי להיפרע ממנו והקדוש ברוך הוא יודע איך יפרע. יש חטא שהדין נותן שנפרעין ממנו על חטאו בעולם הזה.

Skipping a couple lines:

ויש חטא שהדין נותן שנפרעין ממנו לעולם הבא ויש חטא שנפרעין ממנו עליו בעולם הזה ובעולם הבא.

So the Rambam says in terms of the s'char ve'onesh, so Hakadosh Baruch Hu knows when it's appropriate that the onesh be meted out in olam hazeh, when it's appropriate that it be meted out in olam haba or both. And the chiddushe bo lichora is the Gemara Kiddushin here in לט עמוד ב quotes that Rabbi Yaakov הוא דאמר שכר מצוה בהאי עלמא ליכא. That מתן שכרן של מצות is le'asid lavo. So what the Rambam is telling us here, which is why this Rambam that we just read is one-sided, right? The Rambam that we just read, even though he's talking about the yesod of s'char ve'onesh, he's only talking about onesh. So when it comes to s'char, so like Rabbi Yaakov says, that leaving aside the eleh devarim, like Rabbi Yaakov says, that שכר בהאי עלמא ליכא. But that's not the other side, that's not equally, that's not intended and it's not equally true of onesh. Even according to Rabbi Yaakov that שכר בהאי עלמא ליכא, but onshim there is. And that's what Netaneh Tokef is saying, right? Al te'ashmen hapur'anus, hagam hagam that you hold like Rabbi Yaakov that שכר בהאי עלמא ליכא, so don't think that that implies that that's equally true of onesh. No, that's not the way Hakadosh Baruch Hu's system operates. Now, it's true, it's a pasuk in Chumash that meshaleim... So for someone who's a ben olam haba, so then שכר בהאי עלמא ליכא. Rachmana litzlan, a shoneh Hashem who's going to be nichras from chayei olam haba, so whatever schar he's entitled to, Hakadosh Baruch Hu certainly does give in this world. But Rav Yaakov says for a person who is on track, who is a ben olam haba, so the שכר בהאי עלמא ליכא. And that's what Nittai HaArbeli is saying that אף על פי כן ואל תתיאש מן הפורענות. Don't think that that onesh operates the same way. So this sort of the ואל תתיאש מן הפורענות brings us back to what we discussed earlier in the mishna of Antignus Ish Socho. ויהי מורא שמים עליכם. So we saw the diyuk in the lashon of Rambam that whereas the Rambam initially critiques both הריני עושה מצות התורה כדי שאקבל שכר as well as אפרוש מן העבירות כדי שאנצל מן הקללות, when he then tells us what the right thing to do is, he only revises how a person should be עוסק במצות התורה, he doesn't revise how a person should be nimna min ha'aveiros. That that yiras ha'onesh is supposed to be a staple in a person's life, in a person's religious experience. So maybe to try to understand that a little bit, at the time we just pointed it out, let's try to understand that a little bit. If you come back to the Rambam earlier in the mishna, what is it, mishna gimmel? ואמר אם היותכם עובדים מאהבה לא תניחו היראה. You see that for a second?

ואמר אם היותכם עובדים מאהבה לא תניחו היראה. ואמר אם היותכם עובדים מאהבה לא תניחו היראה לגמרי ויהי מורא שמים עליכם כי כבר בא בתורה המצוה ביראה והוא אומרו את ה' אלקיך תירא.

Which is exactly the point that we discussed then. It can't be that this is just a stage, that it's something a person is supposed to outgrow, mamash. It's a mitzvas asei. It's a mitzvas asei.

ואמרו חכמים עבוד מאהבה עבוד מיראה. ואמרו האוהב לא ישכח דבר ממה שצוה לעשותו והירא לא יעשה דבר ממה שהוזהר מעשותו כי ליראה מבוא גדול במצות לא תעשה וכל שכן במצות השמעיות.

So the Rambam says that ahavah leads to and therefore correlates primarily with mitzvas asei and yirah leads to and correlates with zehirus from cheit. So yitachen that on one level that the need for constant yiras ha'onesh is just very practical, very pragmatic. I think that's the shoresh hamitzvah the Sefer Hachinuch gives for, I think, for yiras Hashem. Just as an impediment, as a safety measure against cheit. That even someone who's a big bal madrega needs it. But itochen there's another dimension here as well. If you go to, if you open in Yesodei Hatorah, perek beis, halacha beis. Let's see. Beis beis in Yesodei Hatorah.

והיאך היא הדרך לאהבתו ויראתו? בשעה שיתבונן האדם במעשיו וברואיו הנפלאים הגדולים ויראה מהם חכמתו שאין לה ערך ולא קץ, מיד הוא אוהב ומשבח ומפאר ומתאוה תאוה גדולה לידע השם הגדול, כמו שאמר דוד צמאה נפשי לאלהים לאל חי. וכשמחשב בדברים האלו עצמן, מיד הוא נרתע לאחוריו ויירא ויפחד וידע שהוא בריה קטנה שפלה אפלה עומדת בדעת קלה מעוטה לפני תמים דעות, כמו שאמר דוד כי אראה שמיך וגו' מה אנוש כי תזכרנו וגו'.

So there's a fundamental difference between ahava and yira in the following sense. Ahava is not relational. Right? When the Rambam depicts the ahava, so it's got nothing to do with one's own self-perception, nothing to do with one's own relationship with Hakadosh Baruch Hu.

ויראה מהם חכמתו שאין לה ערך ולא קץ מיד הוא אוהב ומשבח ומפאר ומתאוה תאוה גדולה לידע השם הגדול.

Doesn't say a word about, again, one's self-perception, one's self-image. So contrast that to how he depicts the sense of yira that the person has, that

מיד הוא נרתע לאחוריו ויירא ויפחד וידע שהוא בריה קטנה שפלה אפלה עומדת בדעת קלה מעוטה לפני תמים דעות.

So yira is relational, ahava is not relational. And when you think about it, even, you know, if you think of, you know, as a mashal on the most, I don't know, elementary level, that on the most elementary human level, it's like that also. You're afraid of someone who's, if you're walking down the street at night and you see this big guy, you know, looks like he spends most of his day in the gym, and you're afraid. You see this, I don't know, this little thin guy and he's not carrying any weapons, and then you're not afraid. Yira is relational, right? But ahava, ahava isn't relational, right? Ahava is inspired by an appreciation of the ahuv. It's not relational in the sense that it's inspired by what I am vis-a-vis the other. But yira is, right? Yira is a function of what I am vis-a-vis the other. And that's what's reflected here in the Rambam's description and definition. And when the Rambam's presenting yiras haromemus, so it's impossible, yiras haromemus entails that the person recognize that infinite gap between himself and Hakadosh Baruch Hu. It entails that the person is

וידע שהוא בריה קטנה שפלה אפלה עומדת בדעת קלה מעוטה לפני תמים דעות.

Now, the pashtus is that yiras haonesh is the same. And yiras haonesh isn't, only in quotation marks, isn't only something practical, something pragmatic in the sense of, you know, if I do this, you know. Now there's a there's a din v'cheshbon I'm gonna be accountable for it. It's not only, again, only in quotation marks, not to in any way diminish the significance or importance of that. It's not only, again, yiras ha-onesh as something practical, but it's also yiras ha-onesh in also that it means that the person understands who he is, what he is in relationship to Hakadosh Baruch Hu. And whereas yiras ha-romemus depicts, expresses that relationship on on the level of of our being a בריה קטנה שפלה אפלה in terms of understanding in the presence of Hakadosh Baruch Hu who's temim deios. So yiras ha-onesh, the the sense that a person's life is, right, hangs by a thread that that you know if you know that if Hakadosh Baruch Hu decides, snaps, chas v'shalom, let's not. So it's again only in quotation marks. It's not only there for the practical import, but it's also there for the that the person should understand what he is in relationship to Hakadosh Baruch Hu. The the tenuousness, the contingency of a person's existence is all part of of an awareness of of yiras ha-onesh. That's also the the the point of the Midrash that Rabbeinu Yona quotes at the beginning of Sha'arei Teshuva when when he quotes, where's it from Koheles Rabbah that he's quoting, about a mashal, a person who doesn't do teshuva? So he quotes משל לכת של לסטים who were imprisoned and then they they tunnel out and they have they have a breakout from from jail. And one of them doesn't go. He stays behind. And when the the Melech comes and discovers them, so then he his, you know, he he vents his his wrath, his fury on on this one as to why he didn't join the the breakout. So again lu yehei, you know that obviously the Midrash needs to be understood. The Midrash is not saying that he stays there out of, you know, contrition and, you know, chatasi avisi pashati and I don't want to break the law anymore by breaking out of jail. That's not why he stays. He stays there out of a sense of of contemptuousness that he's not afraid of, you know, being vulnerable to to what the Melech can can do to him. So it's true not only on a practical level, it's again only in quotation marks, it's not only on a practical level that that a person is supposed to have that that awareness. Not not just that you know I shouldn't do this aveira as a as a safeguard to the aveira, but it's it's part of the mitzvas yira which is relational and the same way it's to experience that one is a birya shefela v'afela, it's also to experience that that one's, you know, one's life is also also in the balance. That's part of the yiras ha-onesh. Or are you saying, meaning it's not true in ahva that an ohev should not consider the self at all? It isn't there. It isn't there. Is ahvas Hashem a paradigm for what ahva in the beginnings is also? Oh, for sure. It's interesting when we have Ahava spoken about in context bein adam l'chavero then many of the Maamarim refer to the self, meaning ahavta l'rei'acha kamocha. Talking about the wife, when Rambam says k'gufo. It's not- not hard, it wouldn't be any different- and hence Tosafos concludes. The pshat is that- I think the Rambam would probably answer your question. So Ramchal says in the Mesillas Yesharim when he's defining chasidus, he says that chasidus is- the mashal is that just as a son who loves his father doesn't wait for his father to make demands, or if his father does ask for something, he doesn't look for just what he has to do, but he wants to be oseh nachas ruach. And that's an expression of the- of the filial loving devotion. So that's what it means, that's what a chosid has an ahavas Hashem. So Ramchal does, I think, understand that Ahava in context of ahavas Hashem is intended in the same term, in the same sense as Ahava amongst people, again, when it's a noble Ahava. But the pshat is that the Rambam doesn't agree with that- with that definition of ahavas Hashem. The Rambam we just read here in mishna gimmel where the Rambam says

אמרו חכמים עבוד מאהבה עבוד מיראה ואמרו האוהב לא ישכח דבר ממה שציווה לעשותו והירא לא יעשה דבר ממה שהוזהר מעשותו.

Again the Rambam coordinates Ahava with mitzvos asei and yirah with mitzvos lo sa'asei. I don't understand, if you really love your father and, I don't know, Shabbos afternoon he's taking a nap, then you're not going to make noise, no? It's not only that earlier at the table you were mizdareiz to serve him, but you'll be equally zahir not to disturb him then. So why does Ahava only translate in terms of mitzvos asei and you need the yirah to be the driving force in terms of mitzvos lo sa'asei? So the pshat is that the Rambam doesn't define- I don't think the Rambam would translate ahavas Hashem, again, as love of Hashem in the- least not in the sense that that expression means to us. If you take a look in the famous halacha in perek yud of Hilchos Teshuva, halacha gimmel, yud-gimmel. Take a look if you have a mishna.

וכיצד היא האהבה הראויה הוא שיאהב את השם אהבה גדולה יתירה רבה עזה עד מאוד עד שתהא נפשו קשורה באהבת השם ונמצא שוגה בה תמיד כאלו חולי האהבה שאין דעתם פנויה מאהבת אותו אשה שהוא שוגה בה תמיד בין בשבתו בין בקומו בין בשעה שהוא אוכל ושותה. יתירה מזו תהיה אהבת השם בלב אוהביו שוגים בה תמיד כמו שציוונו בכל לבבך ובכל נפשך ובכל מאודך והוא ששלמה אומר דרך משל כי חולת אהבה אני וכל שיר השירים משל הוא לעניין זה.

So the Rambam gives a mashal

כאלו חולי אהבה שאין דעתם פנויה מאהבת אותו אשה שהוא שוגה בה תמיד.

So we would describe that- I don't think we would describe the mashal as love, I think we'd describe the mashal as being obsessive. It's not- it's not love. I mean, two people can be very much in love and each one goes about his or her routine during the course of the day and they're not- it's not that they can't focus on any- anything else. anything else. That's again the moshal doesn't depict love. The moshal depicts depicts an obsession, obsessiveness, it doesn't depict love. So what is it intended to suggest in the nimshal? The other place where ahava is also used that way clearly in the Rambam, I pointed that out in Nach already, that's where the Rambam got it from. If you take a look in פרק ב' הלכה א' in Hilchos Teshuva, Beis Alef:

איזהו תשובה גמורה זה שבא לידו דבר שעבר בו ואפשר בידו לעשותו ופירש ולא עשה מפני התשובה לא מיראה ולא מכישלון כוח כיצד הרי שבא על אישה בעבירה ולאחר זמן נתייחד עמה והוא עומד באהבתו בה ובכוח גופו ובמדינה שעבר בה ופירש ולא עבר זו היא תשובה גמורה.

So והוא עומד באהבתו בה I don't know if we translate that as you know he still loves her, he still has the same lust. That's what's being depicted here, it's also not love. So ahava at times obviously at times it does mean love but again at its root ahava means and and what it means in in terms of ahavas Hashem is that a person is so mesmerized by Hakadosh Baruch Hu, so enthralled by Hakadosh Baruch Hu, so captivated by Hakadosh Baruch Hu that that his attention is not diverted for for even any waking moment from Hakadosh Baruch Hu. Again this totally being mesmerized, enthralled, captivated. And that's how again that's the nimshal to someone who's obsessed with again obviously in the nimshal it's it's a negative portrayal in the moshal excuse me in the moshal it's it's a negative portrayal and the nimshal it's you know it's the highest madreiga. And that's why the Rambam translates it as shoge b'ahava tamid again this total totally enthralled, mesmerized, captivated. That's what he was describing the Rambam we just read in פרק ב' של יסודי התורה as well. So if that's the definition so then you understand that a mitzvas asei which the person senses maybe understands, intuits, you know oh that's going to bring me closer to Hakadosh Baruch Hu so ahava will naturally express itself ahava as understood by the Rambam naturally expresses mitzvas asei but what's that going to do with checking my shaatnez? How does that come to the picture here? You know what what the Rambam's describing. So obviously it does in avodas Hashem and that's why it's there but that's also why the mitzvah of v'eimah shamayim aleichem is is there for that. So for that sense in the Rambam again I don't think ahava is I don't think it translates as love in the way that we we understand the word. And that's why the Rambam says when the mitzvah lo sa'asei is כי ליראה מובא גדול מצוות לא תעשה and then he he emphasizes וכל שכן במצוות שמעיות because mitzvos shimiyos means chukim. Because on mitzvos shimiyos again there's no the the impulse, the the focus, the desire doesn't seem the chok seems to be irrelevant to that so what am I you know I'm not going to pay attention to that just mitzad ahava. Okay we're we're here again we came back to Mishna Gimmel, it's also relevant to the next mishna we're going to look at. Rambam continues and he tells us about how Tzadokim and Baitusim those two movements began here in. And then Rambam describes how they thought that it wouldn't be socially acceptable to reject everything, so they postured that they accepted Torah she-bi-khtav and rejected Torah she-be-al Peh because Rambam says once you reject Torah she-be-al Peh, so then you can shape and twist Torah she-bi-khtav into anything you want anyway. So it really wasn't going to clip their wings in all. So it was an innocent mistake? Tzadok and Baitos?

וכאשר שמעו שאמר זה המאמר יצאו מלפניו ואמר אחד לחברו הנה הרב אמר בפירוש שאין לאדם לא גמול ולא עונש ואין תקוה כלל.

No, there's לית דין ולית דיין and then there's no Olam Ha-Ba, there's no nothing. So the whole thing was a tragic misunderstanding. So take a look here in Mishna Yud-Alef. Avtalyon says:

חכמים הזהרו בדבריכם שמא תחובו חובת גלות ותגלו למקום מים הרעים וישתו התלמידים הבאים אחריכם וימותו ונמצא שם שמים מתחלל.

So Chachamim hizaheru be-divreichem. You have to measure every word. Why? שמא תחובו חובת גלות. Maybe you'll be uprooted from your hometown, city, ve-tiglu and you'll be exiled le-makom mayim ha-ra'im. Rambam: מים הרעים כינוי לאפיקורסות. Ve-amar: השמרו בדבריכם בתוך ההמון when you're speaking in public. ולא יהיה בדבריכם מקום שיסבול פירוש אחר. You can't leave any ambiguity in what you say. You can't allow what you say to be misconstrued. מפני שאם יהיו שם אנשים כופרים because again, once you're in a different environment, not in the beit midrash where you think you know everyone. Yefarshu osam people will interpret what you say kefi emunasam either according to what they already believe or according to their tendencies. והתלמידים כבר שמעו אותם מהם and then others will hear it from them in your name ve-yechzeru le-apikorsus and rachmana litzlan they will then be nimshach to the heresy ויחשבו שזאת היתה אמונתכם and they'll think that that was your teaching, that was your credo.

ויהיה בזה חילול השם כאשר אירע לאנטיגנוס עם צדוק ובייתוס.

So again, just to back up a couple of lines here, the danger of being misunderstood if there's the slightest bit of ambiguity is primarily, not exclusively, but primarily אם יהיו שם אנשים כופרים יפרשו אותם כפי אמונתם. So it's clear that that's how the Rambam explains that Tzadok and Baitos were two holy talmidim who va-yehi ha-yom and they misunderstood a shiur. When you look at the Rambam's description in Mishna Gimmel, I mean it seems worth asking the Rebbe what he meant. Rebbe is that really what you meant? So instead they go out, kofer ba-ikar, they establish heretical sects. Ask him, no? Ask Antignos yourself, you know, we don't understand what the Rebbe is saying. So that's what the Rambam says. saying that if a person leaves and something slightly ambiguous, if he leaves מקום שיסבול פירוש אחר, so then people will interpret it tendentiously. Now lema'aseh, you can't prevent people from distorting if they're determined to distort. The Rambam writes in his Igeres Techiyas Hameisim, which he wrote in response to the slander that he didn't believe in physical resurrection. So the Rambam says like what am I supposed to say, look in Hilchos Teshuva where I list amongst those שאין להם חלק לעולם הבא הכופר בתחיית המתים and then he says you can't prevent distortion. He says the Christians took the pasuk of שמע ישראל ה' אלקינו ה' אחד and they used it for their belief in the trinity. He says so Ribono Shel Olam wasn't immune to having what he writes in the Torah distorted. So the Rambam here isn't saying that a person can prevent. A person can't prevent if someone wants to distort they'll distort. But what a person can and is obligated to do is he's not supposed to leave any kind of ambiguity that invites that kind of tendentious misunderstanding and misrepresentation. Nowadays when if a person says something that's going to be posted online, so Avtalyon's concern is not just if שמא תחובו חובת גלות ותגלו and you'll end up in such and such a place. No, a person can be without galus, his words can end up in such and such a place even though he's yoshev bimkomo. A person has to always try to, it's not pashut. Not pashut. But a person has to try to anticipate not just what his words mean given his mindset, but what his words mean to people who hear them with a different mindset. Which is basically what this Rambam in Perush Hamishnayos is saying, right? Don't assume that everyone is listening with the same assumptions that you're operating with. Don't assume that everyone is processing within the same mindset that you have. No, they're going to be mefaresh kefi emunasam. And a person has to try to anticipate again what the range of attitudes and factors is that will affect how his words are understood or misunderstood. It's an avoda gedola.