Must Do What’s Emmes, Not What’s “Frum”

Hi good morning Rabosai, hope you well.

מכתבך היקר הגיעני לנכון. המכתב הזה מעיד כמאה עדים על אמתיות מאמר החכם כי הסגנון הוא האדם.

And sometimes again literally the style is the person, which means that that sometimes the the person is is reflected accurately in in in his style of writing.

כי אמנם נשקפות הן במכתב זה התכונות הנעלות של נפש הכותב.

In in your letter, the the those very special character traits are are clearly reflected.

וחובת המענה שבמכתב כזה מטיל על מקבלו נכבדה היא בעיני מאוד.

And the the obligation to respond to such a letter is is one that that is is very weighty. ולזאת השתדלתי מאוד להתפנות בכדי למצוא זמן למענה. I I exerted myself to find time to be able to write an answer.

קודם כל ראוי לתאר בפניך את הרקע המעשי אשר על גביו נולדו דבריו של מרן החזון איש זצ"ל.

The the kosef had had written with questions on on a passage in in the Chazon Ish. The Chazon Ish wrote about the the question of of what to do. The the metzius is the Torah already discussed in Shulchan Aruch that it's tzar ba'alei chayim to leave an animal to leave the cow twenty-four hours without milking it. The the pressure that would build up inside the animal would be very great and and it's tzar ba'alei chayim. So already in Shulchan Aruch it says that the eitza is that amira l'akum is mutar in order to to alleviate the tzar ba'alei chayim. So the question was what was the Chazon Ish after he in I think it was around 1933 or something when he went on aliya. So the Chazon Ish dealt with the question of what they should do on in the religious farm settlements, how to deal with this question, and he wrote that the preferred method was as it says in Shulchan Aruch as as has always been dealt with dahinu to do it על ידי אמירה לעכו"ם. The Chazon Ish was mechadesh that if for some reason there is no akum available, so Chazon Ish said that he thinks that you could rely on the following heter. If you would milk let's say into a pail that had ink in it so that as soon as the milk would be expressed from the from the animal the milk would be spoiled so then according to some rishonim it wouldn't have a shem mashka. The whole melacha involved in being cholef is is that cholef is משום מפרק משום דש. The same way when you do deisha so you you breaking out the the kernel of wheat from its from its shell, so anytime you have a food or or mashka which is encased and you remove it you extract it from its encasement so that's a toldah of mefarek of dash. So that's that's the melacha that's what we assume is the melacha associated with cholef. But if what you are extracting is neither ochel nor mashka so then that's not a melacha. The melacha again the melacha mefarek mishum dash is to extract from its encasement ochel or mashka. So the Chazon Ish says there are some rishonim who hold that the chalav which is being again extracted from the from the animal if immediately it's holech le'ibud it wouldn't have a shem mashka and he said that בדיעבד במקום שאין עכו"ם you could rely on it. He actually corresponded on this point with Rav Chaim Ozer. Rav Chaim Ozer obviously was still back in in Vilna and and he described the problem to him and Rav Chaim Ozer was maskim to to add his name to this sha'as hadchak heter as well. But the Chazon Ish said that's only besha'as hadchak if you can't have an akum but the preferred method is. what it says in Shulchan Aruch. The preferred method is to do the חליבה על ידי עכום. Now, the Rav Hutner is describing some of the I guess what at the time was the social context to when the Chazon Ish was dealing with the shaila.

קודם כל ובוא לתאר בקצת את הרקע המעשי אשר גביו נולדו דבריו של מרן החזון איש זצוקל. בימים ההם הייתה נטושה מלחמה עזה.

There was a fierce war being waged נגד הבעלי בתים המעסיקים פועלים ערביים. Again one cannot extrapolate in such matters from one historical context to another historical context. I mean here clearly Rav Hutner is going to be as was the Chazon Ish very critical of this campaign against people who had Arab workers. Right clearly Rav Hutner when he's writing this letter as as did the Chazon Ish years earlier thought that that campaign was misdirected zeal. Again it doesn't mean that one can extrapolate from here that either Rav Hutner or the Chazon Ish would think that one should have in any other tkufa one can't infer what they would say about employing Arab labor and the safety and security issues involved in that. בימים ההם הייתה נטושה מלחמה עזה. There was a fierce war being waged נגד הבעלי בתים המעסיקים פועלים ערביים who employed Arab workers. המלחמה לא הייתה מוגבלת לפולמוס של ויכוח and this war that was being waged wasn't limited to just debate אלא שהתפשטה אל התחום של מעשי אלימות. There were acts of violence being perpetrated against these people who employed Arabs. Va'afilu mikreh okay here they censored exactly how violent the opposition was here. בראש המלחמה עמדו הידועים. The well-known whatever he obviously means troublemakers were the ones who stood at the head of this campaign וכדרכם תמיד השתמשו לצורך מחשבתם במונחים לקוחים מתחום הקדושה. They again clearly wrongly the way Rav Hutner is presenting it so they cloaked their opposition in religious terms and religious categories. If we have the next page here so we're now going to be continuing on page Ayin Beis if that's available. Thank you. והיו קוראים למשק המעביד פועלים ערביים and again in this distorted borrowing and usage of religious terms so those who opposed employing Arab workers referred to those who were ma'avid poalim arviyim as avoda zara. Right as in I guess translating avoda zara as a double entendre as alien alien labor. Uchemo tamid and as always happens says Rav Hutner נגררו אחרי דעתם כמה רבנים ממנהיגי היהדות מחוג ידוע. From known circles of yahadus so certain leaders were also attracted and also drawn after these others in their again in this fierce violent opposition to Arab workers. נגד טענה זו של עבודה זרה responding to this I guess charge of employing foreign labor נשמעת טענה מצד הבעלי בתים. The balebatim owners who had the farms who had the milk farms said כי שמירת שבת מחייבת להחזיק נכרים במשק. In order to keep Shabbos you have to have non-Jews on the farm. Shekein yeshnam kama. animals ומוכרחים להיעשות על ידי נוכרי. And and the way the Shulchan Aruch says to do this is al yedei nochri. אבל דעת הקהל הסתמית, popular opinion at that point, again I think this is describing I think this happened pretty soon after the Chazon Ish came to Eretz Yisroel. So so this is a description of what was happening in the 30s. אבל דעת הקהל הסתמית הייתה אז בתוקף, the popular opinion was very strongly against these balabatim כנגד טענה זו של שומר שבת. Why?

כי הלא אין חכמה ואין עצה ואין תבונה לנגד עבודה זרה,

because again there was this popular emotional opposition.

גדולי הדור ברובם התנגדו אז להחלת האיסור של עבודה זרה משיקולים כלליים.

What the the position that the Chazon Ish took was that of most gedolei hador, that this grievance, this charge of avodah zarah was totally misplaced zeal. Totally totally misplaced zeal. It's quite clear that what Rav Hutner is somewhat euphemistically describing is this non-halachic sort of I don't know whether it's emotionally driven or or what the what the driving force is, but to to insist on on sort of what looks frum, what seems frum, what feels frum as opposed to what's emes. So you know maybe sometimes things can look look frum and and feel frum and if one doesn't know better they can they can seem frum but they're not emes. They're the exact opposite, the exact opposite and and that's what he's somewhat euphemistically describing here in terms of this misplaced and therefore totally inappropriate zealous opposition to those who were employing the the nochrim. It was in that context the right thing to do. It obviously didn't pose any danger to them. Again, which is why the question would have to be reassessed and reevaluated in every historical context. So it didn't represent a a security risk at that point. It was just a question of again of employing those who were not your friends and there was this emotional opposition to it. And that's what the Chazon Ish and other gedolim said, never mind the emotions. Al pi din, what they're doing is right. That's the way a person is supposed to solve the problems and that's what it says in Shulchan Aruch.

ועל כן כשפסק מרן בעל החזון איש בספרו שבעניין החליבה בשבת העצה הכי נכונה היא לחלוב על ידי נוכרי,

the best the best solution to the problem of again what do you do in a when when a Jew has has a farm, has a milk farm, the best thing that you do is is the eitza that's given Shulchan Aruch, amira l'nochri. You have the nochri do do the milking on Shabbos. But given this social context of that psak, that's why the Chazon Ish wrote the lines that Rav Hutner's correspondent had had questioned.

מצא לנכון להוסיף פסקה זו שהעתיק כל תורתו במכתבו. ועל זה הביא דברי הרמב"ם מלכים,

I guess maybe it's maybe the thought the word hilchos?

ועל זה הביא דברי הרמב"ם הלכות מלכים, שאמנם נכון הוא להתנהג בדרכי החסד גם עם האומות.

So why's the Chazon Ish you know if he's dealing with a question of chaliva b'Shabbos so what's he talking about what our attitude is supposed to be to the umos ha'olam and how a person's supposed to do chesed with the umos ha'olam also? מה עניין שמיטה אצל הר סיני? Rav Hutner says no, when you realize what the social historical context was in which the Chazon Ish was giving this psak, you understand why he was addressing this, telling them a, they're right to use to use the nochrim. to use them, to use nochrim to solve this problem. And B, in terms of the other issue that you're inappropriately and incorrectly throwing into the mix, so then you need to have perspective on that also.

ונכון הוא לעשות להם עבודה למחייתם. ובהיות שאז היתה רווחת הטענה,

ki hakavod hale'umi, national pride, doresh demands le'hinnakem me'ha'aravim to take revenge from the Arabs על הפוליטיקה של שנאה she'hem misnahagim bah. ולא עוד אלא שנתרבו אז מעשי אלימות להנקם במסתרים. And what's more, there were, I think he means that there were acts of violence, taking revenge, meaning Jews against Arabs. I think that's what this line means.

לכן הוסיף מרן ז"ל בכאן הדברים הנ"ל כנגד הקנאה והנקמה.

That's why also in that paragraph on the bottom of the page that they give the exact reference for the Chazon Ish in Orach Chayim, maybe next time or something, maybe we'll read through these lines that Rav Hutner's referencing bli neder.

לכן הוסיף מרן ז"ל בכאן הדברים הנ"ל כנגד הקנאה והנקמה,

explaining you know that's why the Chazon Ish is also speaking out against jealousy and against revenge.

וכך נתגלגל העניין שדבריו הללו בעד החזקת נכרים במשק וכנגד רגשי הקנאה והנקמה באו בתוך פסקיו של מרן החזון איש באורח חיים.

That's how again otherwise if you don't know the historical the social context it's a mudneh thing. The psak is a mudneh thing. We're in the middle of Hilchos Shabbos, so all of a sudden the Chazon Ish's you know he's discoursing about how it's a chessed to employ non-Jews also and now a person's not supposed to take revenge vechulu. What's that got to do with Hilchos Shabbos? So Rav Hutner is explaining the background. You know the yesod that a person has to always be guided what's emes, not what looks good, not what looks frum, is obviously it's just about impossible to exaggerate the importance of that. I think Rav Moshe in Igros Moshe has a tshuvah like that also where he writes he had certain piskei halacha that the kannoim didn't like, certain kullos he had. Especially they didn't like his shiur mechitzah. Rav Moshe said, the Rav said the same, that al pi din, again not that this is lechatchilah, not that this is optimal, but lema'aseh bedieved it's enough if the mechitzah is shoulder height for on on the women. Shoulder height. Again Rav Moshe wasn't saying that's optimal, he wasn't saying that's lechatchilah, he wasn't saying that's how I do it in MTJ, but he was saying if you want to know what the ikkar din is and if you want to know if there is a shul with such a mechitzah, is that a kosher mechitzah? The answer is yes, it just has to be shoulder height. And the Rav used to say the same thing. So there were kannoim who didn't like that. Again it didn't the fact that Rav Moshe had rayos to it that apparently wasn't factored into the mix in terms of their reaction. No, it didn't feel frum, didn't look frum, didn't seem frum. I again whether it was emes or not was apparently not the focus. And they were very very they were violently upset with that psak. There's at least one other example, maybe more, I don't know. So Rav Moshe writes I don't know whether he was referencing this particular occasion or but he was certainly addressing this issue. He said you know my whole life he said he said I never did anything, I never said anything other than Torah he said. Never said anything other than Torah he says. And because of that when I say something he says I'm not I'm not nimshach. Again the same way, I forget I forget exactly how he phrased it. He says the same way I'm not nimshach. In the direction of kula based on outside influences, he says, "I'm not nimshach in the direction of chumra based on outside influences also." And a person should realize, a person, sometimes people think, "No, a netiya to a kula, no, that can be due to outside influence. That can be because of the effect that that outside influence has on a person. But a netiya to chumra, no, a netiya to chumra shows how frum a person is, what a big tzaddik he is." And Rav Moshe says it's not true. A person can distort Torah in either of those two directions, and either of those two directions can represent outside influence. And he says, "Agree or disagree with what I say," he says, "but I'm not mushpa from outside influences. My whole life, all I did is learn Torah." It's a very, very big yesod. It's not what looks frum, it's not what seems frum, it's not what sounds frum, it's not what impresses people, it's what's emes. That's the only thing, the only thing in life that counts. Okay, Rabbosai, have a good morning, b'ezras Hashem, we'll resume around twelve o'clock.