Avos 4:4: Being Extremely Careful Regarding Ga’ava and Ka’as

I think we were up to Mishna Daled, here in Perek Daled, Rabosai.

רבי לויטס איש יבנה אומר מאוד מאוד הוי שפל רוח שתקות אנוש רמה.

What does the idiom Ish Yavneh mean? So Rashi in Masechet Shabbat is commenting on the in the Baraita where we find the lashon Shavna ish Yerushalayim. So he's identified as Ish Yerushalayim. So what does Ish Yerushalayim mean? So Rashi says אדם גדול היה בירושלים ושמו שבנא. So Ish similar to what Rashi quotes in Parshas Shlach כולם אנשים ראשי בני ישראל הם. What does it mean Kulam Anashim? So it means Kulam Anashim meaning Gedolim VeChashuvim. So too רבי לויטס איש יבנה means from the Gedolei VeChashuvei Yavneh. מאוד מאוד הוי שפל רוח שתקות אנוש רמה. Meod means extremely, extreme or extremely. And thus מאוד מאוד הוי שפל רוח, meaning that a person should be Shfal Ruach to the nth degree. One Meod would communicate extremely. Two Meods means to the ultimate extreme. That's the sense of the double Meod. To the ultimate extreme, to the ultimate. A person should be a Shfal Ruach to the ultimate. Let's see the Rambam here. כבר ביארנו בפרקים הקודמים שהענווה היא מן המידות המעולות. Anavah is one of those desirable noble traits because היא ממוצעת בין הגאווה ושפלות הרוח. And in general what's Memutza, what's balanced is what's Meula, is what's desirable, is what's noble. VeShem, then the Rambam gives an Arabic word, BeLashon HaIvis, the way that Arabic word translates into Hebrew, Anavah. והגאווה יש לה שמות רבים. There are many synonymous expressions or words which connote Gaiva

גובה לב ועיניים רמות וגאה ורם. ומן השמות שכינו חכמים רוח גבוהה וגסות הרוח ומתגאה.

The Rambam gives us another Arabic word, Hi Shiflus HaRuach.

וכבר ביארנו בפרק הרביעי כי האדם ראוי לו לנטות לאחד משני הקצוות עד שיקבע בהנהגה ממוצעת על דרך הסייג.

In general, the only context in which a person should be intentionally going towards an extreme is as a Syag, as a temporary measure to. to compensate for the opposite flaw. If a person is too stingy, so he needs to temporarily give more tzedakah than he really should be giving. If a person is too generous, he needs to temporarily give less tzedakah than he should be giving until the temporary extreme will help uproot and help correct and help rectify the chesron within him. So going to the extreme is a temporary measure. It's warranted at times, but as a temporary measure. זולתי במידה זאת הזאת לבדה מכל המידות כלומר הגאוה. There is an exception to that rule. Gaivah.

כי לגודל חסרון המידה הזאת אצל אנשי המעלה ובהכירם את נזקה הרחיקו ממנו עד הקצה האחרון והטו אל שפלות הרוח לגמרי כדי שלא ישאירו בנפש רושם לגאוה כלל בשום פנים.

Could be that we have here the key to understand a very long-standing and very very perplexing apparent stirah in the Rambam. If you have the Rambam Hilchos Deios for a moment rabosai. Take a look

פרק ב' הלכה ג'. ויש דעות שאסור לו לאדם לנהוג בהן בבינונית אלא יתרחק עד הקצה האחר והוא גובה הלב שאין דרך הטובה שיהא אדם עניו בלבד אלא שיהיה שפל רוח ותהיה רוחו נמוכה למאוד ולפיכך נאמר במשה רבנו עניו מאוד ולא נאמר עניו בלבד ולפיכך צוו חכמים מאוד מאוד הוי שפל רוח ועוד אמרו שכל המגביה לבו כפר בעיקר שנאמר ורם לבבך ושכחת את ה' אלהיך ועוד אמרו בשמתא דאית ביה גסות הרוח ואפילו מקצתה.

Okay, so the vort is very much along the lines of what the Rambam is commenting on our mishnah and he takeh cites our mishnah here in פרק ב' הלכה ג', clearly clearly distinguishing the spectrum of gaivah and shiflus ha'ruach from the other spectrums of midos telling us that here the person's not supposed to look for the middle position, a person is supposed to go to the extreme of shiflus ha'ruach. But if you go back to perek aleph, so just from the beginning of the perek.

דעות הרבה יש לכל אחד ואחד מבני אדם וזו משונה מזו ורחוקה ממנה ביותר יש אדם שהוא בעל חמה כועס תמיד ויש אדם שדעתו מיושבת עליו ואינו כועס כלל ואם כועס יכעס כעס מעט בכמה שנים ויש אדם שהוא גבה לב ביותר ויש שהוא שפל רוח עד מאוד ויש שהוא בעל תאוה לא תשבע נפשו מהלוך בתאוותו ויש שהוא טהור גוף ביותר לא יתאוה אפילו. ויש בעל נפש רחבה מאוד שלא תשבע נפשו מכל ממון העולם כעניין שנאמר אוהב כסף לא ישבע כסף. ויש ממעט שדי אפילו דבר מועט שלא יספיק לו ולא ירדוף להשיג כל צורכו. ויש מסגף עצמו ברעב וכובץ על ידו ואינו אוכל פרוטה משלו אלא בצער גדול. ויש מאבד כל ממונו בידו לדעתו. ועל דרכים אלו שאר כל הדעות כגון מהולל ואונן וכילי ושוע ואכזרי ורחמן וחלב לב ואמיץ לב וכל כיוצא בהן.

Let's skip Halacha Bais. Halacha Gimel.

שתי הקצוות הרחוקות זו מזו שבכל דעה ודעה אינן דרך טובה ואין ראוי לו לאדם ללכת בהן ולא ללמדם לעצמו.

Person shouldn't train himself in that.

ואם מצא טבעו נוטה לאחת מהן או מוכן לאחת מהן או שכבר למד אחת מהן ונוהג בה יחזיר עצמו למוטב וילך בדרך הטובים והיא הדרך הישרה.

Haderech hayesharah. So a person should go the derech tovah which is the derech hayesharah. What is that? Halacha Dalet.

הדרך הישרה היא מידה בינונית שבכל דעה ודעה מכל הדעות שיש לאדם והיא הדעה שהיא רחוקה משתי הקצוות ריחוק שווה ואינה קרובה לא לזו ולא לזו. ולפיכך ציוו חכמים שיהיה אדם שם דעותיו תמיד.

Person should always be assess, appraising, right? Shuma is is an appraisal.

ולפיכך ציוו חכמים הראשונים שיהיה אדם שם דעותיו תמיד ומשער אותם ומכוון אותם בדרך האמצעית כדי שיהיה שלם.

So in Halacha Dalet the Rambam is clearly... right? he's not clearly, he's explicitly telling us what a person is supposed to do, right? אין ראוי לו לאדם ללכת בהן in Halacha Gimel, it's not ra'uy lalechet in the ketzavos but rather בדרך הטובים והיא הדרך הישרה and now he tells us what the derech hayesharah is. So he's telling us what a person is supposed to do. Keitzad?

לא יהיה בעל חמה נוח לכעוס ולא כמת שאינו מרגיש אלא בינוני. לא יכעס אלא על דבר גדול שראוי לכעוס עליו כדי שלא ייעשה כיוצא בו פעם אחרת.

So the Rambam illustrates the derech hayesharah that a person is supposed to follow with midas hacaas. He continues:

וכן לא יתאווה אלא לדברים שהגוף צריך להם ואי אפשר לחיות בזולתם כעניין שנאמר צדיק אוכל לשובע נפשו. וכן לא יהיה עמל בעסקו אלא להשיג דבר שצריך לו לחיי שעה כעניין שנאמר טוב מעט לצדיק. ולא יקבוץ ידו ביותר ולא יפזר כל ממונו אלא נותן צדקה כפי מיסת ידו ומלווה כראוי למי שצריך. ולא יהיה מהולל ושוחק ולא עצב ואונן אלא שמח כל ימיו בנחת בסבר פנים יפות. וכן שאר דעותיו ודרך זו היא דרך החכמים. כל אדם שדעותיו כולן דעות בינוניות ממוצעות נקרא חכם. ומי שהוא מדקדק על עצמו ביותר ויתרחק מדעה בינונית מעט לצד זה או לצד זה נקרא חסיד. כיצד? מי שיתרחק מגובה הלב עד הקצה האחרון ויהיה שפל רוח ביותר נקרא חסיד וזו היא מידת חסידות. ואם נתרחק עד האמצע בלבד ויהיה עניו נקרא חכם וזו היא מידת החכמים.

So here too by using, by, by invoking the spectrum of ga'avah, anavah, and shiflus haruach to illustrate the midas hachochmah versus the midas hachasidus, so the Rambam is l'chora treating this midah as typical and similar to all other midos, right? The Rambam says there's a midas chasidus which is to slightly incline away from whichever of the two extremes is the greater threat. So for most people, the, the... extreme of taiva represents a greater threat than the extreme of asceticism. So mimaila what the chossid will do is the chossid because of that, because that represents the greater threat, so the chossid will slightly compensate for that fact and instead of being in the middle, he'll be slightly inclined towards the more towards the extreme of total prishus. But the Rambam illustrates that with anava and shiflus haruach. So it seems quite clear that to be a shfal ruach is not something that's required, but is a midas chassidus. So how does that, how do you reconcile that with פרק ב הלכה ג? The emes is the stira is with regard to kaas also, because if we would have read the second half of beis gimmel, the Rambam says kaas is the other exception, and yet in perek aleph, the Rambam also used kaas as a typical mida, as a typical spectrum in terms of that the person should be in the middle. So I think what we're going to suggest is part of the answer. There're going to be some loose ends which clearly means that there's at the very least something missing. Maybe it also means that we should be writing this in pencil, not in indelible ink in terms of maybe even some of what we're saying needs to be adjusted. You know the emes is there's another really very, very enigmatic part of פרק א הלכות דעות. Midas chassidus always means when a person goes lifnim mishuras hadin. What does lifnim mishuras hadin mean generally? So for instance, let's say mei'ikar hadin the circumstances are such that I'm patur from hashavas aveida, but אף על פי כן I say, no, I want to do it, not a case of kohen b'veisa hakvaros. I mean there the kohen can't, so that's not a midas chassidus for the kohen to say I'll go into the beisa hakvaros and be metamei l'meis in order to meishiv aveida. But what if he's, I think the Rambam has it, let's say the value of the aveida and the tircha in getting the aveida will cost more than his bitul melacha. So kehai gavna k'muduah the person's patur from hashavas aveida. So let's say אף על פי כן, no, I'm willing to, I know how much it will mean for this person to have this aveida returned, I'm going to do it. Okay, so ein hachi nami I'm going to miss the business meeting and okay. So that's a midas chassidus. So we understand what does a midas chassidus mean? The Torah only requires so much and the person goes further. The Torah says you only have to do so much and the person says, no, I'll do more. So we understand what it is and we understand why it's a midas chassidus. We understand why it's harei zeh meshubach. But over here, this seems to be very different than all other instances of midas chassidus in that here the midas chassidus seems to contradict and conflict with the mitzvah. It's not sort of just going beyond. It's not a mitzvah only requires so much, but I'm willing to do more, tavo alecha bracha. But over here the mitzvah says not to do more and I say I want to do more. How is that a midas chassidus? The derech hatova, the derech hayeshara, which is the mitzvah of vehalachta bidrachav, says that a person should be in the middle. That a person should be in the middle. So what does it mean that it's a midas chassidus to say no, but I'm going to slightly abstain even a little bit extra? More than the middle. I'm going to have a little bit more prishus than the middle represents. I'll give a little bit of extra tzedaka, I'll be a little bit... extra generous. How can you have a Midat Chasidus which seems to not go beyond the letter of the law but contradict the law? And that that's the pela here. Let's read inside the second half of Beis Gimmel, Rabbosai. Come back to the second half of Beis Gimmel, v'chein hakaas.

וכן הכעס דעה רעה היא עד מאד. וראוי לאדם שיתרחק ממנה עד הקצה האחר. וילמד עצמו שלא יכעס. ואפילו על דבר שראוי לכעוס עליו. ואם רצה להטיל אימה על בניו ובני ביתו או על הציבור אם היה פרנס ורצה לכעוס עליהן כדי שיחזרו למוטב יראה עצמו בפניהם שהוא כועס כדי לייסרם.

However,

ותהיה דעתו מיושבת בינו לבין עצמו. כאדם שהוא מדמה איש בשעת כעס והוא אינו כועס.

So the Rambam says the other exception is kaas. There is a strange formulation here in the Rambam. So l'maiseh, kaas is the other exception, and it's ra'ui la-adam that he should go to the extreme and that he should never get angry. Okay. Now if if what's ra'ui is never to get angry, so that means that there's nothing to get angry about, right? If you're never supposed to get angry, there's nothing to get angry about. And yet the Rambam says it in a very curious way, in a very provocative way. Rambam says no, don't get angry even about something that's ra'ui to get angry about. ראוי לאדם שלא יכעס. I skipped words in between. ואפילו על דבר שראוי לכעוס עליו. So what's what's what's p'shat? Rashi tells us, right? By even by Moshe Rabbeinu, the bechira me-ha'enosh, the greatest human being, that whenever Moshe Rabbeinu came le-khlal kaas, he came le-khlal ta'us. Moshe Rabbeinu gets angry at Aharon and Elazar and Isamar, and he makes a mistake in Parshas Shmini about which chatas should be eaten, which chatas should not be eaten when they were onenim on Rosh Chodesh Nisan. Moshe Rabbeinu gets angry in Parshas Matos with the pkudei he-chayil, and he's not able to remember the halachos of Yoreh Deah. He forgets the simanim in Yoreh Deah of hachshar keilim. So Elazar Ha-kohen has to has to give halacha shiur. What does that mean? It means that anger, more so than almost any other mida, is a volatile mida. Other midos are not necessarily volatile. They're strong, they're weak, they're stronger, they're weaker, but you wouldn't necessarily describe them as in terms of volatility, in terms of being volatile, in terms of being something that b'tivo can't be controlled. What does volatile mean? Something that that can't be controlled, can't be harnessed. Sort of if it ever happened to you, you know when you open a faucet, so there's a little ich veis spring or something inside the handle that lets you control how much you open the faucet. When that piece wears up and then you open the faucet, so it begins gushing torrentially, and you either need several kapitlach Tehillim or a plumber to get it closed again. It's not so poshut to turn the turn the faucet off. So anger is something which is very volatile. The reason we're supposed to go to an extreme by anger, in theory there are things in the world which warrant a response, a targeted measured response of anger. There are things in the world that are morally outrageous. It's plenty examples. Plenty examples. In the news, plenty examples of things that are morally outrageous. דברים שראויים לכעוס עליהם. The inyan that you're not supposed to get angry, be’emes, anger in that sense is really like every other middah. A person needs to eat to maintain his health, to feel good and strong and be able to function at maximum capacity. And because of that, so a person should have a healthy appetite. So we coordinate the middah, the Rambam calls it de’ah, we call it middah. We coordinate the middah with what's with what should happen on the active level. A person needs to pay his bills. He needs to support himself. He needs to have a roof over his head. He needs to buy groceries. He needs to support his family. He doesn't need to be rich. He certainly doesn't need to be fabulously wealthy. So a person should takeh want to have a certain amount of money. So we correlate the middah with the appropriate expression, the need. By those by that standard, a person should on occasion get angry. Nowadays, be’emes I think daily when you read the news by that standard, you should get angry. Be that as it may. Kemochazal amru, but the problem is that anger is too volatile. It's realistic to tell a person to want to have money, but don't want to have too much money. That's realistic. It's realistic to tell a person have a healthy appetite, but don't overeat. That that's it's realistic. It's not simple. Tikkun hamiddos is not simple. Tikkun hamiddos is a tremendous avodah. Which middos are most challenging varies from individual to individual, but it's realistic. Again, realistic and easy are not necessarily synonymous in this context or any other context, but it's realistic. It's not realistic to tell a person get angry, but maintain control. Get angry, but not too angry. Because by definition, anger means that there's a certain loss of control. Because anger is so volatile. And that's what the Rambam means that that's why the Rambam says דברים שראויים לכעוס עליהם. But when the pikudei hachayil come back and they didn't kill the nekeivos, so that was outrageous. It was rauy lichos alav. But even Moshe Rabbeinu, the bechirah min ha'enoshi, couldn't avoid the volatility of middas hakas. That's why lich'ora, the hemshech hahalachah when the Rambam says, let's say a parent has to discipline a child. Child really did something that requires the child ran out into the street. A little child, rachmana litzlan, runs out into the street after the ball. So chasdei Hashem nothing happened, but obviously, obviously, the parent has to impress upon the child never ever to do that again. So if he says to him, tzaddikel, that wasn't such a good idea. and I want you to promise me you're never going to do it again, I don't know how much of an impression that's necessarily going to make on the on the tzaddikel. So he's got to he's got to make an impression on the child, the child should never ever do that again. So the Rambam tells us what to do. The Rambam says that a person has to be an actor. Everyone has to have the capacity, everyone has to have the capacity to be an actor and to know how to feign anger, to posture as though one is angry, because a display of anger makes an impression that that other other approaches don't, but inwardly the person should not be angry. Well, what is this? Stam an etza tova? The Rambam's giving us, he's giving us an etza tova on chinuch. Stam we would welcome any etza tova the Rambam has to give us about any any topic, certainly certainly chinuch, but but how is this part of the halacha? Because the teretz is this is part of the halacha because you can't just tell me that a person should never get angry. No, you have to be able to do that without neglecting your chiyuv to get angry.

דברים שראויים לכעוס עליהם. דברים שראויים לכעוס עליהם. משל למה הדבר דומה.

If a doctor has to tell a patient your cholesterol is too high, you shouldn't eat any meat, he has to tell him what to eat that has iron that he shouldn't become anemic. It's not stam an etza tova. If you're telling a person to avoid something which he's doing to to be mikayem what what what is incumbent upon him, then you have to tell him what the substitute is, what the alternative is. This isn't stam an etza tova of how a parnas can can exercise his leadership for the tzibbur, or how the parent can can can be mechanech his children. No, it's a din, it's a chiyuv licho'os. There are devarim which are rouyim licho'os aleihem. There are a lot of morally outrageous things that happen. Once upon a time the Rambam says there were very few, it was every now and then, I don't know, the world has changed. דברים שראויים לכעוס עליהם. So when when you tell me that because anger is too volatile we should go to the extreme, you have to tell me how to do that without neglecting the chiyuv. Pashtus is that the Rambam means, let's say by kaas, that we're doing this al derech siyag. Meaning me'ikar hadin, as the Rambam tells us in perek aleph, kaas is taka like all other middos. A person should have appetite, he shouldn't have zero appetite, he shouldn't have an appetite for gluttony, he should have a healthy appetite. A person should want money, he shouldn't be totally disinterested, totally apathetic about money, he shouldn't be dream of being listed in the Forbes 500, I think it's 500 right? The Forbes 500, the Forbes 500, but he should want to have enough money to to live in a way that is not mitztarech labriyos, in a way that that he's not, right, the paradox of if a person is mezalzel in having enough money, he ends up as an ani who has to spend all his time worrying about money. That's the the paradox. It's part of the not being smarter than than Chazal and and the Torah in terms of a person says no, I don't want to think at all about money, so he doesn't do anything about money, because of that he's short of money and he ends up spending all his time worrying about worrying about money. When it comes to kaas, so perek aleph the emes is kaas is really like all other middos. As a siyag because of its volatility, so we go ad haktzei ha'acharon, but in going ad haktzei ha'acharon we need to also find a way lema'aseh not to neglect the chiyuv of being ko'es. So what's the kotzva shelishi? The kotzva shelishi the Rambam tells us is yedameh atzmo ko'es, is that a person has to be an actor, he he has to know how to feign. Yitachen that that's the pshat by the chasid also. We asked how can you have a midos chasidus that contradicts the ikar hadin? No, a midos chasidus means to do extra. The din of being pattur from hashavas aveida in most cases only means that it's not required. Okay, it's not required, but אף על פי כן I'm gonna do it. But how can you have a midos chasidus which contradicts an ikar hadin? So maybe the answer is as follows. Let's say the chasid. So the chasid is aware that most people are more prone to to to the extreme of taiva than they are to the extreme of total chesron hataiva. Most people. So he says, I'm gonna compensate a little bit and I'm gonna I'm gonna train myself to be a little bit off-center. So what does that mean? Does that mean let's say the doctor looks at his build and his height and the doctor tells him you should have X calories a day. That's what you need to be in the best of health. Again, stam he gives him a certain range. What no let's say or or maybe with precision I don't know how it's done. Doctor tells him this is what you need. So the chasid is what? The chasid is gonna he's not gonna meet that that goal? If whatever the value of X the X calories, whatever the value of X is, so he's gonna do X minus 300 because because he's a chasid? Or no, maybe the pshat in the midos chasidus is no, he'll do X. To do less than X is not a midos chasidus, it's contradicting the din. But whereas the din doesn't require that he bend over backwards to do X, avoiding any enjoyment from the food, he's bedavka gonna he's gonna find a way to decrease the enjoyment associated with the X calories. Maybe even though it's within the the dietary recommendations and he likes salt, so he's gonna bedavka cook without salt. So it's gonna be very very bland. Or whatever whatever whatever the strategy will be. So yitachen that what the what the chasid does again, what is the person by kaas, so we're all required, maybe it's maybe it's a din derabbanan, that's what the Avodas Hamelech suggests, but either way so when you look in Perek Beis, again we often make the mistake of that we parachute into a Rambam, right? We find the Rambam from the Ein Mishpat and then we parachute into the Rambam. The Rambam intended the Yad Hachazaka to be learned consecutively. So the Rambam had this funny notion that we'd be learning Halacha Gimmel after having learned Halachos Aleph u'Beis. Funny notion. But that was the that was the notion the Rambam had. So when you look at Halachos Aleph u'Beis, what's the context here of this famous Halacha Gimmel? The context is that the Rambam was the Rambam says that just as a person can be physically ill, he can also be spiritually ill. The same way there's such a thing as choli haguf, there's such a thing as choli hanefesh. And the Rambam says just as a choli haguf has to consult a doctor, so too a choli hanefesh has to consult a doctor lenefashos. A doctor lenefashos is a chacham, and the chacham will will write a prescription. The chacham will give the the directive. What's the what's the directive going to be? Take a look in Beis Beis, rabbosai.

כיצד היא רפואתם מי שהוא בעל חמה אומרים לו להנהיג עצמו שאם הוכה וקולל לא ירגיש כלל ואם היה גבה לב ינהיג עצמו בבזיון הרבה ועל קו זה יעשה בשאר כל הדעות אם היה רחוק לקצה אחד ירחיק עצמו לקצה השני.

So going to an extreme is a seyag. So the pshat is that what the Rambam in Beis Gimmel is telling us is. That hagam that me'ikar hadin say m'deoraisa middas haka'as is no different than other middos. The same way by other middos, since I need to eat, the correct midda is to have a healthy appetite. So since there are things in the world which are ra'uy lich'os aleihem, so I should have a, a measure of ka'as within me, but the siyag, because of the volatility of ka'as, is that I shouldn't have any ka'as. Now, that's what the pshat is. But, and that's what what the chasidim do for all middos. They do it on their own. Here chazal taught us to do it. But the chasidim do this on their own for all middos, not to the same degree that we do it by middas haka'as, but, but to a lesser degree, they do it by, by all middos. But lich'ora זיל הכא זיל התם, whether it's the case of ka'as, or whether it's the case of what chasidim do by all middos, it means to do it in a way that doesn't, doesn't clash with what the ikar hadin is. So what's the kosuv hashlishi? The ikar hadin is, is the tov ve'yoshor, the middle. The midda, the siyag is the extreme. So if it's gonna be, if a person's gonna do this perpetually, if it's gonna be a perpetual siyag, which it is for chasidim, which it is for all of us by middas haka'as, so how do you reconcile them? So it must mean that on the active level, I don't neglect the chiyuv ka'as. No, if, if the child, rachemana litzlan, runs out into the street, I put on a display of anger. However, the siyag is that whereas me'ikar hadin, without the siyag, I would actually allow myself to be angry, the siyag is, no, I should be feigning the anger. But inwardly the composure should be, should be complete, should be intact. And the answer to the stira then lagabei ka'as is that me'ikar hadin perek aleph presents the ikar hadin. There's room to add to this, but for now let's just say it that way. And perek beis represents what the siyag requires. But even the siyag is on the level of the midda, it's not on the active level. Come back to our perek mishnayos. Let's just reread a few words, a few words that we read here.

במדה הזאת לבדה מכל המדות כל הגאוה כי לגודל חסרון המדה הזאת אצל אנשי המעלה,

and now this next phrase is, is crucial lich'ora, uv'hakiram es nizko. Right, chazal recognized the danger of ga'iva, right, similar to what we saw by middas haka'as, right? Similar to middas haka'as, so you'll ask how can we say similar to middas haka'as when the Rambam says זולתו במדה הזאת לבדה. That's a good kasha, that's one of the loose ends here. But similar to middas haka'as, similar to middas haka'as, the emes is that me'ikar hadin, shelo betoras siyag, a person doesn't have to be מאד מאד שפל רוח. Shelo betoras siyag, that's how is a person supposed to dress? Is a person supposed to walk around in rags? No, a person's supposed to dress in a dignified manner. A person should be dressed nicely, neatly, and in a dignified manner. That's the way we're supposed to dress. If we were to, if we were to treat this midda as all other middos, so then the underlying inner feeling would match this. So the same way when I eat a healthy breakfast, I have inwardly the midda of a healthy appetite. And the same way when I collect my paycheck, I have inwardly the midda of wanting a certain amount of money. So there would be, there would be, again, ga'iva's sort of misleading because it has the wrong connotation for us, but there would be something internally that matches and that generates the fact that a person dresses nicely, dignified. But ga'iva again, similar, but maybe the dynamic is the way it affects the person is different, but gaiva also is something which chazal also felt that even though the ikar hadin is it's the same as other midos, the syag is that even though the practical level should be maintained, we do dress nicely, we're supposed to dress nicely in a dignified fashion, but the underlying mindset and feeling should be מאוד מאוד הוי שפל רוח. And that's why the Rambam is saying, the Rambam is basically saying that he recognized the godel. Meaning, why is he emphasizing that? Because the Rambam is saying it's being done betoras syag, but it's a perpetual syag, and it's a perpetual syag which tells us to go all the way to the extreme. And that's why the pasuk in the Torah that teaches us this isn't beloshon tzivui, it's a description of what Moshe Rabbeinu does on his own: והאיש משה ענו מאד. Meaning that it's something that a person does betoras syag. But on the level of the ikar hadin, shelo betoras syag, so then a person would, it would be like all of the midos, which is what's reflected in perek aleph. Okay, so maybe we'll stop here, but bli neder we'll probably go on a little bit in this mishnah next week, next Thursday as well bli neder im yirtzeh Hashem. Okay, rabosai, everyone should have a good productive day, a gutten shabbos, be well, be safe rabosai, be'ezras Hashem.