Kiddush Hashem 2

הלכה ב'. במה דברים אמורים? בשאר מצות חוץ מעבודה זרה וגילוי עריות ושפיכות דמים. אבל שלש עבירות אלו אם יאמר לו עבור על אחת מהן או תהרג, יהרג ואל יעבור. במה דברים אמורים? בזמן שהגוי נתכוין להנאת עצמו, כגון שאנסו לבנות לו ביתו בשבת או לבשל לו תבשילו, אנס אשה לבעול אותה וכיוצא בזה. אבל אם נתכוין להעבירו על המצות בלבד, אם היה בינו לבין עצמו ואין שם עשרה מישראל, יעבור ואל יהרג. ואם אנסו להעבירו בעשרה מישראל, יהרג ואל יעבור. ואפילו לא נתכוין להעבירו אלא על מצוה משאר מצות בלבד.

So the context in which the Rambam mentions that the chiyuv of yehareg ve'al ya'avor by the gimel aveiros is the context of Kiddush Hashem and Chilul Hashem, right? That's what this perek is dealing with and it's in that context that the Rambam introduces the chiyuv yehareg ve'al ya'avor by the gimel aveiros. That's why the Rambam repeats again on Halacha Dalet that

וכל מי שנאמר בו יהרג ואל יעבור ונהרג ולא עבר הרי זה קידש את השם.

If on the other hand Rachmana litzlan

וכל מי שנאמר בו יהרג ואל יעבור ועבר ולא נהרג הרי זה מחלל את השם.

And that's referring back to everything discussed in Halacha Beis so it's quite unequivocal that for the Rambam the yehareg ve'al ya'avor of the gimel aveiros is a din within Kiddush Hashem and Chilul Hashem. Okay, no two ways about that. The Sha'agas Aryeh asks like this, I mean we'll ask the shaila from within the Rambam but be'etzem the question is from the Gemara itself. But if you go ahead to Halacha Zayin for a minute rabbosai

ומנין שאפילו במקום סכנת נפשות אין עוברים על אחת משלש עבירות אלו? שנאמר ואהבת את ה' אלהיך בכל לבבך ובכל נפשך ובכל מאדך, אפילו הוא נוטל את נפשך.

Okay, the Rambam doesn't explicitly tell us how you know that that's referring to avodah zarah. Maybe it's not referring to, maybe it's referring to something else, okay, whatever. Again it's not a kasha in the Rambam, it's the question this is just the Gemara in Sanhedrin. Everything the Rambam is quoting this halacha is just straight from the Gemara.

והריגת נפש מישראל לרפאות נפש אחרת או להציל אדם מיד אנס, דבר שהדעת נוטה לו הוא שאין מאבדים נפש מפני נפש.

Right, that's the Gemara's sevara of mai chazis.

ועריות הוקשו לנפשות שנאמר כי כאשר יקום איש על רעהו ורצחו נפש כן הדבר הזה.

So the shaila is the makor for retzichah which is a sevara of mai chazis and the makor for giluy arayos which is a hekkesh to retzichah don't seem to have anything to do with Kiddush Hashem and Chilul Hashem. There's nothing mai chazis has got nothing to do with Kiddush Hashem and Chilul Hashem. What is the sevara of mai chazis? So when we finally get tomorrow bli neder, im yirtzeh Hashem to the machlokes the Rambam and Tosafos and we learn the Reb Chaim, so we'll see there are different mahalachim. So for now let's say Rashi's mahalach in mai chazis, that Rashi says that the whole din of pikuach nefesh is that the Torah says you can be over an issur to save a life, but if the issur you're going to be over is retzichah, you're not going to be saving a life, you're just swapping one life for another. So whoever said this heter of pikuach nefesh is not for me to save my life, it's to save a life. Okay, so my life is no gare'a from someone else's life, but I can't save my life at the expense of your life because then we're not, there's no net gain of a life. It's got nothing to do with Kiddush Hashem and Chilul Hashem. Nothing, nothing whatsoever to do with Kiddush Hashem and Chilul Hashem and the whole din of giluy arayos is

כי כאשר יקום איש על רעהו ורצחו נפש כן הדבר הזה.

Again the kasha is not minay u-vey the Rambam, it's from the Gemara itself. This is the Rambam in Halacha Zayin is just quoting the Gemara. So the emmas is you have the same question in the Baal HaMaor. Right, this question that what we’re talking about in terms of the Gimel Aveiros, so the Baal HaMaor says and an amazing chiddush. Baal HaMaor says that the distinction that the Gemara has in Sanhedrin ayin daled between hana’as atzmo as opposed to le’havir al hadas, so the Gemara introduces that distinction in the context of parhesia. Right again, in terms of Yehareg Ve’al Ya’avor, so there’s the Gimel Aveiros, which is the way we pasken is even be’tzina. And then there’s she’ar aveiros, which is davka be’parhesia, which means asara mi’yisrael and davka if it’s le’havir al hadas. And then there's a third about she'as shemad, let's leave that aside for now. So the Gemara mentions the distinction of le’havir al hadas versus hana’as atzmo in the context of she’ar aveiros be’parhesia. Comes the Baal HaMaor and says no, that distinction is also relevant to Avoda Zara and Giluy Arayos. It’s also relevant to Avoda Zara and Giluy Arayos. If the Giluy Arayos is hana’as atzmo, it’s not Yehareg Ve’al Ya’avor. If the Avoda Zara, if the ones to be for Avoda Zara is hana’as atzmo, it’s not Yehareg Ve’al Ya’avor. It just so happens Baal HaMaor says I can’t think of a case where Avoda Zara proper is hana’as atzmo. I can only think of sort of the secondary cases. Says let’s say in the Avoda Zara service, this is the Gemara's case, the Avoda Zara service they need a frying pan. So they go to the Yisrael and they demand under the threat of death that he give them the frying pan. So they’re not doing it because they want the Yisrael to be complicit in Avoda Zara, they’re doing it because they’re followers of the Avoda Zara and they need a frying pan. So the Baal HaMaor says so that's muttar. That’s muttar. He says Avoda Zara gufa, the actual act of worship, he says I can’t understand how that would ever be hana’as atzmo. That's a shayla why you can't construct such a case but al kol panim the Baal HaMaor says that the din of hana’as atzmo muttar applies not only to she’ar aveiros be’parhesia, but applies even to Giluy Arayos and Shfichas Damim. The Ramban says that’s absolutely wrong because by the Gimel Aveiros the mechayev is not Kiddush Hashem and Chilul Hashem. By the Gimel Aveiros, it’s the chomer ha’aveira that this aveira is not

נדחה במקום פיקוח נפש. כל המצוות התורה הנדחים מפני פיקוח נפש.

The Gimel Aveiros chamuros are not. Clearly the distinction between hana’as atzmo and le’havir al hadas is only relevant when the mechayev is Kiddush and Chilul Hashem. So the emmas is the question that we’re asking on the Rambam, you have the same question on the Baal HaMaor as well. Is it clear, Rabbosai? You with me? Also, so it’s like this. So the Ramban doesn’t mention Kiddush Hashem or Chilul Hashem at all in conjunction with the Gimel Aveiros Chamuros. He says there the pshat is that the din of ve'chai bahem does not apply. It’s what every mitzvah would have been without ve'chai bahem. The din of ve'chai bahem doesn't apply. How do you know the din of ve'chai bahem doesn't apply? By retzicha it’s a svara, מי יימר דדמא דידך סומק טפי. By arayos it’s a hekesh of

כי כאשר יקום איש על רעהו ורצחו נפש כן הדבר הזה.

And by Avoda Zara it’s a בכל נפשך אפילו הוא נוטל את נפשך. Just pashut the din of pikuach of ve'chai bahem doesn’t apply, the chomer ha’aveira, nothing to do with Kiddush Hashem and Chilul Hashem. We’ll see, we may... that’s what the Ramban says. We’ll see it could be that’s... fine. The Baal HaMaor, eich shehu, and this is what we don’t... the Baal HaMaor, eich shehu, clearly thinks that by Avoda Zara and Giluy Arayos it is Kiddush Hashem and Chilul Hashem because the pashas is, as the Ramban says, you can only distinguish between hana’as atzmo and le’havir al hadas if the mechayev, if the gorem, if the mechayev of the Yehareg Ve’al Ya’avor is Kiddush Hashem and Chilul Hashem. You understand that if it’s le’havir al hadas, so this is a situation of Kiddush Hashem and Chilul Hashem. If it’s hana’as atzmo, it’s not. But if it’s the ma’aseh aveira, what difference does it make? What difference does it make? And in the Rambam, so the Rambam does... doesn't have the Ba'al HaMa'or's halacha l'maise distinction between hana'as atzman and l'havir al daas by giluy arayos and shfichus damim. He meforesh rejects it in halacha beis. On the other hand, the Rambam clearly says that it does fall under the rubric, under the heading of Kiddush v'Chilul Hashem. So the questions we have, lechora, the questions are both in the Ba'al HaMa'or and the Rambam. The teretz we're going to say is only בעזרת השם בלי נדר, only fits in the Rambam. It's not going to help us with the Ba'al HaMa'or. The questions we have is as follows: lechora, the mokor for the din clearly by shfichus damim and clearly by giluy arayos has nothing to do with Kiddush Hashem and Chilul Hashem. So meheicha taysay that it pertains to Kiddush Hashem and Chilul Hashem? That's our whole question. Okay. So it yitachen as follows. It yitachen as follows. When you read through perek hey of Yesodei HaTorah and basically you have the same thing, the Rambam already wrote the same thing in Sefer HaMitzvos in the mitzvah of Chilul Hashem, which is לא תעשה סג. So the Rambam basically says that there are three types of Kiddush or Chilul Hashem. One is where the Kiddush Hashem is in the form of yehareig v'al ya'avor. And that's what he spends the bulk of the perek discussing. Then the Rambam has, you take a look in halacha yud, the Rambam has his second type of Kiddush Hashem and Chilul Hashem:

כל העובר מדעתו בלא אונס על אחת מכל מצות האמורות בתורה בשאט בנפש להכעיס הרי זה מחלל השם ולפיכך נאמר בשבועת שקר וחיללת את שם אלהיך אני ה' ואם עבר בעשרה מישראל הרי זה חילול השם ברבים וכן כל הפורש מעבירה או עשה מצוה לא מפני דבר בעולם לא פחד ולא יראה ולא לבקש כבוד אלא מפני הבורא ברוך הוא כמניעת יוסף הצדיק עצמו מאשת רבו הרי זה מקדש את השם.

So that's a nosay kaylim quote to the Gemara in Sotah that the Rambam's quoting with Yosef HaTzadik. So that's also here. Here Kiddush Hashem and Chilul Hashem is the Kiddush Hashem is that the person is poresh me'aveira solely מפני הבורא ברוך הוא. And the Chilul Hashem is that he does the aveira without, and that's the Kiddush Hashem is that he suppresses the taiva for no reason other than מפני הבורא ברוך הוא, and the Chilul Hashem is that when he does an aveira even without a taiva, right? That's the two sides of the coin in halacha yud. And then you have halacha yud-aleph:

ויש דברים אחרים שהן בכלל חילול השם והוא שיעשה אדם גדול בתורה ומפורסם בחסידות דברים שהבריות מרננות אחריו בשבילם ואף על פי שאינן עבירות הרי זה מחלל השם כגון שלוקח ואינו נותן דמי המקח לאלתר והוא שיש לו ונמצאו המוכרים תובעין והוא מקיפן או שיעבור בשחוק או באכילה ושתייה אצל עמי הארץ וביניהם או שאין דיבורו בנחת עם הבריות ואינו מקבילן בסבר פנים יפות אלא בעל קטטה וכעס וכיוצא בדברים האלו הכל לפי גודלו של חכם צריך שידקדק על עצמו ויעשה לפנים משורת הדין וכן אם דקדק החכם על עצמו והיה דיבורו בנחת עם הבריות ודעתו מעורבת עמהם ומקבילן בסבר פנים יפות ונעלב מהם ואינו עולב מכבד להן ואפילו למקילין לו ונושא ונותן באמונה ולא ירבה באריכות עמי הארץ וישיבתן ולא יראה תמיד אלא עוסק בתורה עטוף בציצית מוכתר בתפילין ועושה בכל מעשיו לפנים משורת הדין והוא שלא יתרחק הרבה ולא ישתומם עד שימצאו הכל מקלסין אותו ואוהבים אותו ומתאוים למעשיו הרי זה קידש את השם.

So these are the three types of Kiddush Chilul Hashem. There's yehareig v'al ya'avor, there's menias Yosef, what's represented by menias Yosef HaTzadik. So if you sort of want to give is there one definition then for Kiddush or Chillul Hashem? What's the definition then? There's these sort of three expressions, right? Three manifestations. But what's pashtus is, right? There's one underlying definition. So what does it mean to be mekadesh Hashem? Yes, what's a... is there a common denominator? Itachen that the pshat is as follows. I'm not... look. Itachen that the pshat is as follows. That the Kiddush Hashem means when a person is totally, totally mevatel himself to HaKadosh Baruch Hu. That's what Kiddush Hashem means. A person is totally... so obviously, a person who's neherag,

אין לך התבטלות גדולה מזו. אין לך התבטלות גדולה מזו.

But that's also what's happening in Halacha Yud, right? In Halacha Yud, so the person... a person has taivos, a person has... when he's moneia atzmo from that taiva purely מפני הבורא ברוך הוא. So that's... that was a moment he was mevatel himself entirely to HaKadosh Baruch Hu. How does that fit with Halacha Yud Aleph? That doesn't seem to fit Halacha Yud Aleph. Now Halacha Yud Aleph seems to be more that it's reflecting glory, right? That doesn't seem... that definition doesn't seem to fit Halacha Yud Aleph so well. The emes is, when you look at it... So I'm not sure if I... I hope the next point comes across clearly. When the Rambam says, re-reading the last two and a half lines or so:

ועושה בכל מעשיו לפנים משורת הדין והוא שלא יתחזק הרבה ולא ישתומם עד שימצאו הכל מקלסין אותו ואוהבים אותו ומתאווים למעשיו הרי זה קידש את השם ועליו נאמר ועליו הכתוב אומר ויאמר לי עבדי אתה ישראל אשר בך אתפאר.

So what's the Kiddush Hashem in this Halacha? So usually we look at it and we say the hakol mekalasin oso, right? The fact that, oh, he's a representative of Torah and hakol mekalasin oso, that's the Kiddush Hashem. But is that really what it says here? הרי זה קידש את השם comes afterwards, right? So itachen that the pshat over here is that a person who be-chol ma'asav... עושה בכל מעשיו לפנים משורת הדין. And he's tamid oseh. עוסק בתורה וציצית ומוכתר בתפילין. So much so that in every interaction he has with people, he Hakol mekalasin oso. It means such a person has been totally mevatel himself that in his whole life, that the fact that he represents Torah. He's gadol betorah mefursam bechasidus. He represents Toras Hashem in that sense. And additionally, he represents Toras Hashem in the sense that דרכיה דרכי נועם וכל נתיבותיה שלום, that the reaction people have to him is that ahaveihu al habriyos. So that's the Kiddush Hashem is that such a person has been totally mevatel himself to Hashem. Now the praise, that's not the Kiddush Hashem. That's sort of the measurement of to what degree, the shiur. And how do you know that this person has really been totally mevatel himself to Hakadosh Baruch Hu? Because if he has, the result should be that הכל מקלסין אותו ואוהבין אותו ומשמחין במעשיו. So yitachen that that's the definition. Definition of Kiddush and Chillul Hashem is that the Kiddush Hashem is the total bitul. And the Chillul Hashem is the rebellion. And halacha yud, the fact that, the fact that without a taivah a person's oveir aveirah, so that's the antithesis of the Kiddush Hashem. So now yitachen the pshat in Rambam is like this, rabbosai. Ein hachi nami. The din of yeihareig ve'al ya'avor by the gimmel aveiros is not from Kiddush Hashem and Chillul Hashem. By shefichas damim, by shefichas damim, why is it yeihareig ve'al ya'avor? So why is it yeihareig ve'al ya'avor? It's yeihareig ve'al ya'avor because of mi chazi. It's nothing to do with Kiddush Hashem and Chillul Hashem. By gillui arayos, why is it yeihareig ve'al ya'avor? Hekkesh to shefichas damim. Nothing to do with yeihareig ve'al ya'avor. Ella mai, once there is a din of yeihareig ve'al ya'avor, by definition that becomes an issue of Kiddush Hashem and Chillul Hashem. It isn't, it's not the, it's not the. Do you hear the pshat, rabbosai? By Kiddush Hashem, the pasuk ונקדשתי בתוך בני ישראל means that I, Hakadosh Baruch Hu, should be sanctified, should be elevated through your total bitul to me. And that I, my, your, you shouldn't desecrate my name by doing the antithesis of that. That's what Kiddush and Chillul Hashem is. Now from that pasuk, that doesn't tell you that gillui arayos is yeihareig ve'al ya'avor. It doesn't tell you that shefichas damim is yeihareig ve'al ya'avor. How do you know that gillui arayos or shefichas damim is yeihareig ve'al ya'avor? First the svara, then a hekkesh. Hashta de'asina lehachi, based on the svara, based on the hekkesh that it's yeihareig ve'al ya'avor, so now אין לך קידוש השם גדול מזה. Now it also becomes a question of Kiddush and Chillul Hashem. I'm not getting it across. Let's try again. Maybe to sort of illustrate, maybe this will help clarify. You can't say this teretz for the Ba'al Hama'or, right? Because for the Ba'al Hama'or, clearly, since the Ba'al Hama'or halacha lema'aseh has the distinction between hana'as atzman and le'ha'avir al das, so clearly the initial mechayev in the yeihareig ve'al ya'avor is Kiddush and Chillul Hashem. And what we're suggesting is, even though the Rambam in halacha beis, halacha daled throughout the whole perek keeps telling us that yeihareig ve'al ya'avor falls under the heading of Kiddush and Chillul Hashem, but it's not that the Kiddush Hashem and Chillul Hashem is the mechayev. The mechayev of the yeihareig ve'al ya'avor is mi chazi because there's no din of pikuach nefesh. The mechayev of the yeihareig ve'al ya'avor is כאשר יקום איש על רעהו. Ella mai, now you have a din that the din says yeihareig ve'al ya'avor, now when you have a din that you have to eat matzah, Pesach night, that doesn't now make this also Kiddush Hashem and Chillul Hashem. It's mitzvas matzah, it's not more than that. When you have a din of ולקחתם לכם ביום הראשון, it's mitzvas lulav, it's not more than that. And if because I'm lazy I don't buy a lulav, because of that I don't. I don't shake the lulav, it wasn't the chilul Hashem. It wasn't the chilul Hashem. But when the din is yehareg ve'al ya'avor, it now also becomes kiddush and chilul Hashem. And that's the pshat in the Rambam. We asked, how can the Rambam tell us that it's kiddush and chilul Hashem, yet the yehareg ve'al ya'avor of the gimmel aveiros, the makor by the gimmel aveiros has got nothing to do with

קידוש השם חילול השם? מאי חזית כשיקום איש על רעהו

or קידוש השם מאן דכר שמיה? So the answer is, you're right. Ein hachi nami. The din of the mechayev yehareg ve'al ya'avor, the Rambam agrees 100% with the Ramban. The mechayev of yehareg ve'al ya'avor is not kiddush Hashem and chilul Hashem. Nor vos, the Rambam says, if you understand what kiddush Hashem means, you'll realize that anytime you have a din of yehareg ve'al ya'avor, by definition this now also becomes a matter of kiddush Hashem and chilul Hashem. And that's what we were alluding to before, that yitachen when all's said and done, I don't know, there's nothing in the Ramban that's against the Rambam because all the Ramban to disagree with the Ba'al HaMa'or, what's crucial is what's the mechayev of the yehareg ve'al ya'avor. But once you have that mechayev, that by definition once there's a chiyuv of yehareg ve'al ya'avor, that that now becomes an issue of kiddush Hashem and chilul Hashem, yitachen that the Ramban would agree. So there's nothing in—but the point is, in order to say what the Ba'al HaMa'or said, you have to say the mechayev is kiddush Hashem and chilul Hashem. And the Rambam says that's not true. So hashta d'asina lehachi, the way we understood the Rambam, yitachen the Ramban would also agree. Yevada, yevada if a person is over velo neherag, it's a chilul Hashem and if he's mekayem the din of yehareg ve'al ya'avor, it's a kiddush Hashem. But that wasn't the original mechayev, and since that wasn't the original mechayev, you can't have the Ba'al HaMa'or's the Ba'al HaMa'or's chilluk. Is the pshat clear? Is it clear what we said? Yeah? Yes? No? Yeah. What do you say, David? Clear? Not clear? See, you have to rethink, you have to rethink what Rav Yaakov's Torah that we were talking about on Thursday in light of this. Because if you say that let's say by gilluy arayos, if you say by gilluy arayos for instance, the mechayev yehareg ve'al ya'avor nothing to do with קידוש השם חילול השם, no hekkesh, nothing to do with. It's a din. There's no like the Ramban says, it's the chomer ha'aveirah, the din of vachai bahem doesn't apply. So clearly, clearly, I don't know to whom is that addressed. So clearly that's addressed to someone who is a bar mitzvah, right, a bar or bas mitzvah. Then the only reason it becomes kiddush or chilul Hashem... is because since the definition of Kiddush Chilul Hashem is bitul atzmo, is to be mevatel atzmo entirely, entirely, entirely to Hakadosh Baruch Hu. So if it's not Kiddush or Chilul Hashem be'ikaro, it it becomes Kiddush Hashem or Chilul Hashem. So then lichora it should it won't have its own standard. And Icha Nami you can imagine that maybe that maybe there's going to be a distinction between avodah zarah and the other two. But in terms of saying pshat in the lashon of kol Beis Yisrael, given the fact that the Rambam will sort of evenhandedly talk about all the gimmel aveiros and the yehareg ve'al ya'avor in all three cases as being an expression of this. So I'm not sure, the pshat as this is the mahalach we're saying today, it doesn't doesn't go with what Rav Yaakov says. Again, you can you can still say that avodah zarah should be different, and obviously ta'am venimuk with such a mahalach. But in terms of what the lashon Beis Yisrael means in the Rambam, I'm not sure whether if if what we're saying today is correct, I'm not sure that you can say that pshat in kol Beis Yisrael anymore. I think think we mentioned this kasha earlier in the year, no? What why the Rambam only tells you the three in Sefer Hamitzvos, again, he has the same three types of Chilul Hashem which parallel again the first part of the perek then Halachos Yud and Yud Aleph here, but he didn't mention it under the mitzvah of Kiddush Hashem. We mentioned this kasha, I think. He didn't mention it under the mitzvah of Kiddush Hashem, mitzvas asei tes, he only mentions it under the מצוות לא תעשה סג of Chilul Hashem. Question is why he does that. And it's not only that, it's not only that he didn't say it in mitzvas asei tes, it's that the way he defines the mitzvas asei of Kiddush Hashem doesn't really leave room for what he's going to say later.

המצוה התשיעית היא שצונו לקדש השם ולהאמר בתוך בני ישראל וענין זאת המצוה שאנחנו מצוים לפרסם האמונה הזאת האמתית בעולם ושלא נפחד בהזק שמזיק ואף על פי שבא עלינו מכריח גוי ויבקש ממנו לכפור בו יתעלה לא נשמע ממנו אבל נמסור עצמנו למיתה ולא נטעהו לחשוב שכפרנו אף על פי שלבנו מאמין בו יתעלה.

So it all seems to be about yehareg ve'al ya'avor for emuna. It doesn't, the way he gives the definition, it doesn't, it's not just that he doesn't say it, it's that he doesn't even leave room for it. Yeah I don't know Ayin lo I'm not sure what to do with that. Okay. Well what is the phrase על קידוש השם הגדול הזה back in halacha aleph of perek bet? And specifically so first of all hazeh right hazeh has to mean one of two things. Right? When you say zeh so lechora you use zeh in one of two contexts. Either there's something in front of you right this apple. Right? If there's an apple in front of me I can say this apple is delicious. Or if I mentioned an apple earlier so then the this refers back to what I mentioned earlier. Then it doesn't have to be in front of me so the this means that it's referring back. So presumably okay so first of all we need to track down the antecedent here. The other thing is let's say in perek bet halacha aleph when the rambam talks about upon whom the mitzvah of ahava and yirah focus he doesn't say he says hashem right? He doesn't say shem hashem he says hashem. As do the pesukim right? האל הנכבד והנורא הזה מצוה לאהבו. So the mitzvah is le'ehov et hakeil. Le'ehov et hashem. You don't you don't have to talk about ahavat shem hashem you can talk about ahavat hashem. And you don't have to talk about yirat shem hashem you talk about yirat hashem. By kiddush and chillul so we talk about kiddush and chillul shem hashem.

כל בית ישראל מצווים על קידוש השם הגדול הזה ומוזהרים שלא לחללו.

And then in halacha daled again הרי זה קידש את השם קידש את השם ברבים mechalel et hashem. So the mitzvot of kiddush and chillul relate to shem hashem. The mitzvot of ahava and yirah again we'll have to modify this in a second or seemingly relate to hashem not not to shem hashem. So lechora the simple pshat is as follows. Let's say if you take a look at bet bet in yesodei hatorah so the rambam writes that

היאך 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.

So now again here we're talking about not leyada et hashem but leyada hashem. Now the rambam switched it to shem hashem. כמו שאמר דוד צמאה נפשי לאלהים לאל חי. And again and again at the end of this halacha

ולפי הדברים האלו אני מבאר כללים גדולים ממעשה רבון העולמים כדי שיהיו פתח למבין לאהוב את השם.

So first of all this is lechora what the rambam's referring back to right? When he says hashem hagadol hazeh implying that he's already discussed that he's already identified he's already referred to shem hashem so lechora he's referring back to this halacha. But let's say within this halacha minei ubei why did the rambam switch from talking about hakeil talking about hashem to shem hashem? So the pshat is as follows. The pshat is like this that when the Rambam says le'da Hashem hagadol we don't ever really know Hashem. A person has a ta'ava gedolah but a person never really knows Hashem. So what does the Rambam mean that there's a ta'ava gedolah le'da? le'da what? Hashem is unknowable, incomprehensible. So it means to know him the way he's known to us but not to know him himself, right? To know him the way he's known to us. So Shem in this halacha right doesn't denote right Hashem be'atzmuso but it denotes השם כפי שנודע ומתגלה לנו. And that's why the Rambam switched it. The truth is again at the end of the halacha why did he say le'ahavas Hashem? I'm not sure if it had to be es Hashem there. Maybe it could have been either. I'm not sure about that. But it's le'da Hashem means le'da not Hashem be'atzmuso but le'da Hashem k'fi or במידה שנודע ומתגלה לנו. The yediyah isn't atzmus Hashem. Ilu yedativ heyisiv. It's yediyah of השם כפי שנודע ומתגלה לנו. And that's what's part of what's represented by Shem Hashem. Part of what's represented by Shem Hashem an element of meaning that Shem Hashem has that if you were just say Hashem, Yud-Kay-Vov-Kay or Hakel, it wouldn't have is that Yud-Kay-Vov-Kay refers to Hakadosh Baruch Hu. So the yira is takeh from Hakadosh Baruch Hu and the ahava is takeh towards Hakadosh Baruch Hu. But the yediyah is not of Hakadosh Baruch Hu. It's הקדוש ברוך הוא כפי שנודע ומתגלה לנו. The same way a person's name is not him, right? A person is the person is himself and his name is the way he's known, right? The pshat is what the Rambam is telling us that the kiddush and chillul refer to. Yeah. Meaning hagam again that the way the Kiddush Hashem is accomplished is by being mevatel oneself and hagam that the way the Chillul Hashem is accomplished rachmana litzlan is by the opposite of that but the depiction of as it were Hashem being miskadesh or mischallel so Shem Hashem can be miskadesh or mischallel. Shem Hashem meaning the way Hashem is known to the world that can become sanctified that can become elevated or rachmana litzlan it can be tarnished, it can be debased. Not Hashem himself. Yira is towards Hashem himself. Ahava is towards Hashem himself. The elevation kavyachol, the sanctification kavyachol, which results from our totally being mivatel ourselves to Hakadosh Baruch Hu, doesn't relate to Hashem. Hashem is not elevated. Hashem is not, he's not elevated nor is he rachmana litzlan debased. Hashem is Hashem, but in terms of how he's known in the world, in terms of his reputation kavyachol as it were in the world, so that lends itself, that טאקע אינו הכי נמי. Hakadosh Baruch Hu's reputation in the world can be tarnished. Hakadosh Baruch Hu's reputation in the world can be elevated, can be sanctified. L'chora, that's the pshat here. Okay, so I think tomorrow bli neder we'll try to go through the Nefesh HaChaim, maybe bli neder im yirtzeh Hashem we'll actually bring the Nefesh HaChaim im yirtzeh Hashem.