Momentum in Avodas Hashem

Yeah, you are familiar with the explanation of the Ibn Ezra and Rabbi Yehuda Halevi for the ma'aseh ha'eigel that the kavanos of Bnei Yisrael were letova. What prompts them to this explanation among other things? The Ibn Ezra says, how can it be that Aaron HaKohen was complicit in avodah zarah? Yeihareg ve'al ya'avor. It can't be. The Ibn Ezra says throughout our history, so Jews have always risen to the challenge, that Aaron HaKohen was unable to meet the challenge is inconceivable. So clearly it wasn't the simple, crass avodah zarah which it appears to be. Rather the Ibn Ezra says,

אל תאכל לפרש דרך קצרה קצת הסוד חלילה חלילה שעשה אהרן עבודה זרה גם ישראל לא ביקשו עבודה זרה.

The Jews were not asking for avodah zarah. רק חשבו שמת משה שהסיה מים סוף כאשר פירשתי. They thought that Moshe Rabbeinu had died on Har Sinai. כי ראו שהמן אינו יורד בהר סיני. They saw that there was no man. ומשה התעכב שם ארבעים יום. And Moshe Rabbeinu stayed there for forty days. אין כח באדם לחיות זה הזמן בלא מאכל. And Moshe Rabbeinu, no one can survive for forty days without food or drink. וככה אמרו אשר ילכו לפנינו. So they were looking not chas veshalom to be oveid avodah zarah, but to find a replacement who in their estimation would take Moshe Rabbeinu's place as an intermediate between them and Hakadosh Baruch Hu. And then he says, והנה לכבוד השם נעשה, that really their kavanos were proper. And that's why Aaron went along with it. And Rabbi Yehuda Halevi in the Kuzari says something similar, and as does the Beis Halevi kayaduah.

ענין זה הוא דביקשו ישראל אז אחרי שראו דמשה שהיה עומד בין השם ובינם לא בא.

When they saw that Moshe Rabbeinu didn't return,

רצו לעשות מקום מיוחד שיהיה מסוגל אשר בו יהיה השראת שכינתו וכמו דבאמת היה אחרי כן במשכן.

Lacking Moshe Rabbeinu, the nevi Hashem par excellence, so they were looking for a place which would be especially mesugal for hashras hashchina, and that's what they were trying to accomplish through the ma'aseh ha'eigel. So if that's the case, why was it such a terrible cheit? So the Beis Halevi goes on to explain:

אומנם כל זה תוכל להיות משכן או מקדש רק אם עושה המעשה ציווה עליו התורה לעשותה. וכן במעשה המשכן רק אז אשר ציווה השם לעשותו.

Only if there's a tzivui Hashem, only if we're taking our cue from the Torah, from a ma'amar Chazal, from something, so then a person can derive what's appropriate in avodas Hashem. But to innovate, to do it on our own, a person can't do. And that's why the Beis Halevi again, as you all know, explains that's why in Parshas Pekudei we have the refrain of כאשר ציווה השם את משה, because be'emes the Beis Halevi says what distinguished the eigel from the mishkan, the kavana was the same, but the mishkan was כאשר ציווה השם את משה, the eigel was not. Okay, so the centrality, the importance of the Beis Halevi, of the Ibn Ezra and Rabbi Yehuda Halevi in terms of innovation in avodas Hashem, in terms of guarding that our avoda shouldn't be a self-worship, it shouldn't be something which caters to or reflects our own instincts, our own predilections, but rather should be from the Torah is clear and is something which certainly needs reinforcement in the contemporary scene. is well. But there is a question lechora on this whole approach of Rabbi Yehuda HaLevi, the Ibn Ezra, again elaborated by the Beis HaLevi, and that is the Torah tells us, right, as we learn through the pesukim here that Vayashkimu mimachoras, the day after the the eigel was made as Aharon had said chag laHashem machar,

ויעלו עולות ויגשו שלמים וישב העם לאכול וישתו ויקומו לצחק.

Vayakumu letzachek, so Rashi says that tzchok means shfichas damim, it means gilluy arayos. That's what Vayakumu letzachek means. So the question is if their kavana was letova, right, that they were really doing this for the right reasons, right, as the Ibn Ezra says, right, והנה לכבוד השם נעשה. Nimtza the Beis HaLevi says מחשבתם שישראל היה בזה לטובה. So how did it deteriorate into into gilluy arayos and shfichas damim? Meila that it was avoda zara, okay, so that was the that was the fatal mistake which the Beis HaLevi explains that to innovate, not to be taking one's cue from the Torah, from what Hakadosh Baruch Hu says, so that in and of itself can constitute avoda zara. So that's no kasha, that we understand. But how did something which was machshavtam letova, which was lichvod Hashem na'asa, how did that deteriorate so quickly into avoda into gilluy arayos and shfichas damim vayakumu letzachek? So one answer possibly would be the following. There are a few places in Chazal, in the Rishonim, where the following principle of human behavior is reflected. And that is that whatever a person does leaves an imprint upon, has an impact upon his neshama, הן לטוב הן רחמנא לצלן למוטב. A person does a mitzvah, so it's not only okay, so I spent those five minutes learning, I used those five minutes of my life well, I used them to the fullest. No, but those five minutes also will have a lingering effect on me in the future. When when I have to decide whether to the next day whether I should spend time learning or whether I should squander my time on other things, so the hashpa'a of yesterday's learning will help me, will make it easier for me to continue learning today and conversely. So whatever a person does again, it has it has an imprint upon his neshama. It has an impact upon his neshama. Where do you see this? You see it in a few places. Rashi in in Parshas Eikev, in the second of the parshiyos of Krias Shema quotes from Chazal on השמרו לכם פן יפתה לבבכם וסרתם ועבדתם אלהים אחרים. So Rashi quotes from Chazal that כיון שפורש אדם מן התורה is סופו עובד עבודה זרה. So Rashi says something staggering. Rashi says a person withdraws from Torah the end will be that he'll be oved avoda zara. Now clearly Rashi quoting Chazal is fast forwarding here, right? Rashi is not saying that it happens that it happens under ordinary circumstances the same day. It's not necessarily as dramatic a case as we're discussing here in Parshas Ki Sisa. But even with the fast forwarding, how are we to understand it? So the answer is because again, what a person does is not only self-contained. It's not only that what I do now determines how I've spent this percentage of my life, but what I do now also influences me in terms of the future. If it's something good, it creates a positive momentum because I've purified myself, I've refined myself. And if Rachmana Litzlan I do something, something bad, something which shouldn't be done, so then that has a negative effect. That's metamei and that too has an effect in the future, not one which is insurmountable, not one which deprives us of our Bechira Chofshis, but certainly one which makes the Bechira Chofshis much more difficult to exercise, certainly one which then means that we're going to have to struggle much more in the future. And that's what Rashi, that's what the Maamar Chazal which Rashi is quoting says that keivan sheparash you should realize that whatever a person does has repercussions, it reverberates and it continues, it continues to reverberate. Rabbeinu Yonah writes in Pirkei Avos, in the Mishna of al hadin, על האמת ועל השלום he says the same thing. He says if a person is not medakdek bidiburo, is not careful to speak as accurately as possible, as truthfully as possible, even about unimportant matters, דברים של מה בכך. That a person, even again in דברים של מה בכך, that a person is not, not truthful, not truthful. He says ultimately what that will lead to is sheker in, in other contexts as well, to the point also of kefira. Again same thing. Why? Because very often, right, very often, someone wants you to come, someone wants you to do something, right? Parents are always in this kind of situation. So they say: I'll be there in two minutes. I'll be there in two minutes. They have no intention of being there in two minutes. They have no intention of being there in 20 minutes, they're maybe toying with a hava amina of showing up in 40 minutes, but you say: I'll be there in two minutes and you docheh bekash. So what happens, Rabbeinu Yonah says? What happens is, so then again this has an impact, this has an impact on one's neshama, the mida of emes is compromised. Okay, maybe, maybe the context wasn't so important there, maybe, maybe it wasn't such a big deal in that context, but it, it has this effect upon a person. It has this impact, it, it leaves its imprint. The Rambam similarly describes at the end of Hilchos Tumas Tzara'as: זה דרך ישיבת הליצים הרשעים. The path of, of scornful, wicked people. בתחילה מרבים בדברי הבאי ke'inyan shene'emar וקול כסיל ברוב דברים. At first, they just talk about idle things, all their talk is, is idle chatter, hollow, nothing to it, nothing of mamashus, there's no, no substance to it. וקול כסיל ברוב דברים. Umitoch kach, what does this lead to? And again the Rambam's also fast-forwarding, not necessarily that it happens within one conversation. Umitoch kach, what this leads to is שבאין לספר בגנות הצדיקים. Is that their conversation deteriorates, it's not, it goes from idle chatter to speaking pejoratively about tzadikim. תאלמנה שפתי שקר הדוברות על צדיק עתק. It escalates further, יהיה להם הרגל לדבר מהנביאים ולעשות דופי בדבריהם. Then they'll come to speak against nevi'im. באין לדבר באלוקים וכופר בעיקר. Unbelievable. A person, a person falls into the habit of, of just chattering away, idle chatter, divrei havai, no, no substance to it. So the Rambam says, you know what's at the end of the road? Unbelievable, that's what. But if a person talks all just all the time about again things which have no no tachlis, no substance, so either it already shows a certain cynicism or it will beget a certain cynicism. How can you be how can you be serious about life if if all you're preoccupied with in life is divrei havai? If there's no substance, if there's nothing of meaning, if there's nothing of value, if if everything a person talks about is is empty and meaningless, so eventually even if if originally it it didn't emanate from this, eventually a person becomes cynical. If a person becomes cynical, so then he becomes very critical of people. Whenever there's the slightest doubt, whenever something is is beyond his comprehension, so if a person is cynical, so then he always is gonna he's always going to draw the worst possible conclusion. So mimela this cynicism again, which how did this cynicism come about? Just because he was marbeh b'divrei havai. What happens as a result of this cynicism? He's he speaks against tzaddikim. But then the cynicism is is has become even greater, right, becomes even stronger. Once you speak against tzaddikim, so even these people who are supposed to be holy. So then then it escalates against neviim and ultimately a person becomes cynical enough, so cynicism again when it becomes strong enough, when it becomes poisonous enough, is the antithesis of emuna. A person has to have trust in the Ribbono Shel Olam. A person becomes cynical enough, he there's no room in him, he doesn't have the capacity for emuna in the Ribbono Shel Olam. It's the same thing, right? A person sits and just talks again hours on end, day after day divrei havai, says the Rambam don't think that the only price one is paying is that these hours were wasted, that these hours were squandered. No, there's a bigger price to be paid, I mean that's a big enough price, but there's an even bigger price to be paid in that it has an impact on him. It's making you cynical, it's making him cynical. If it makes him cynical again that's going to reverberate and one thing leads to another. Mitzvah goreret mitzvah, aveira goreret aveira also it it means in the sense that aveira goreret aveira because of the negative hashpah which the first aveira has on me, so I'm now more prone and more susceptible to the next aveira. Conversely, the hashpah which the mitzvah has on me, so now I'm more prone and more likely to undertake to undertake another mitzvah. In the case of the egel, so perhaps what happened is exactly this. What happened was exactly this. How could it be if kavanatam l'tovah yeah it was takeh kavanatam l'tovah. But l'maaseh as the Beis Halevi explains, the kavanatam l'tovah notwithstanding, so they were involved with avodah zarah. The effect which that had on them was so great, again aveira goreret aveira in terms of the impact, in terms of the imprint of how a person spends his time, what he does with his time, the effect that his own actions have on him in this case was so great that one of the gimmel aveiros led to the two other remaining of the gimmel aveiros of of gilluy arayos and shfichas damim. Because what a person does again it reverberates, it has an impact long beyond how I spent these five minutes because it impacts how I'll spend all my future days as well.