PIRKEI AVOT CAPITULO 4 - MISHNA 3
He used to say: Do not be scornful of any person, and do not speak disdainfully of anything, for there is no one who does not have his hour, and there is nothing that does not have its place.
The mishnah says that one should not “scorn any man.”
What does this mean?
According to Rambam, in his commentary to this mishnah, it means that there is no such thing as someone who cannot, at one point or another, cause you some sort of anguish or provide some sort of assistance, should he be so motivated. Should you ridicule him [thinking that he can do you no harm], know that the will cause you anguish [in return], at least to a minor degree.
Rabbi Obadiah m’Bartenura says, similarly, that one should not think regarding someone else, “What harm could he do me?”
Although their comments don’t indicate this explicitly, I believe that both Rambam and Rabbi Obadiah are saying here that it is forbidden to disparage anyone, no matter whom. If my reading is correct, then we see from here as well how wrong it would be to falsely condemn or accuse the people of Israel. For, we learned in the mishnah, that one should not “scorn any man.” My understanding is that this refers to attitude, even to the way one feels in his heart, unrelated to to what one actually does. One should not trivialize another individual, even to oneself, thinking disdainfully: “Him? What could he possibly do to me?” How much more so, then, that one should not say “How awful this person is!” “He’s worthless! A nothing!” “All his good deeds? They’re inconsequential, meaningless. They don’t amount to a thing!”
An illustration of these ideas could be found in the story of Eliyahu Hanavi. Before I explain how it relates to the lesson at hand, I will recount the entire incident, which may be found in Melachim I chapter 19. The story is a bit complex, so please bear with me as I relate the details.
Eliyahu had just slaughtered the false prophets of Baal. Achav told Izabel, his wife, of what had occurred. She, in response, sent a message to Eliyahu, vowing that she would slay him as well.
Upon hearing the news, Eliyahu fled the city, to hide in the wilderness. He walked into the desert for a full day. He came upon a solitary tree, under which he sat and then lay down to sleep.
An angel came to awaken him, bringing food and drink. “Get up and eat!” said the angel. And Eliyahu saw near his head a coal-baked cake and cruse of water. He ate, drank, and went to sleep.
The angel then came to him a second time, to urge him to eat some more. That meal sustained him for the forty days it took to then travel to the mountain of Hashem, Horeb. There, he spent the night in a cave. And then Hashem appeared to him, asking “Why are you here, Eliyahu?”
Eliyahu then recounted to Hashem what had occurred, saying not only that he, Eliyahu, had acted with great zeal in honor of Hashem’s name, but that “the B’nei Yisrael have forsaken Your covenant.; they have razed your altars and killed your prophets by the sword.” B’nai Yisrael had killed Hashem’s prophets by the sword, said Eliyahu, and now he, Eliyahu is the only that remains. “And they now seek to take my life.”
The story continues, with Hashem returning to speak to Eliyahu a second time, asking him the exact same question, namely why Eliyahu had come.
Eliyahu’s response was the same, reiterating the sins of Bnei Yisrael, namely that they had forsaken His covenant. Eliyahu said that he was fleeing for his life, he said once again, after having acted for the sake of Hashem’s honor.
Hashem’s reaction was not to honor Eliyahu, but to let him know that he
should now go anoint Elisha as prophet in his stead.
What had occurred here? Why was Eliyahu, the prophet would had acted so zealously for the sake of Hashem’s honor, now being told that Elisha was to take his place?
The question becaomes even more puzzling when we consider the miraculous nature of the story. It is well-established that Hashem prefers to act through nature, rather than through circumvention of nature. This means that even where He does intervene miraculously, He generally does so in a manner that makes it seem to the onlooker that no miracle had occurred. It is my understanding that He also limits their number.
Yet, in our story, it seems to me that two miracles occurred where, at least
superficially, the same “result” could have been attained through a single miracle.
A single meal sustained him for forty days. That was miracle number one. The second was that Eliyahu’s path to Horeb, in the Sinai desert, was most likely “straightened” for him. I understand why Eliyahu’s meal had to last forty days, for that was the length of the journey. However, as long as the Kaddosh Baruch Hu was going to “straighten” his path to Sinai, meaning intervening so that he would not get lost, He could just as well have “shortened” the journey so that it would not have required anything more than a single day. That way, both miracles would be “rolled up into one.”
Another question I have is why the food miracle was done with the second meal, rather than the first. A third question is why the Kaddosh Baruch Hu had Eliyahu go to Horeb, which is Har Sinai.
My answer here has two components. The first is that the Kaddosh Baruch Hu did all this in order to limit him from being an accuser of the Jewish people. The second part of the answer is that He wanted to teach Eliyahu a lesson in bitachon, in trust.
What I mean by the second answer is that there was no reason for Eliyahu to flee Izabel’s threats. Rather, in my opinion, he should have trusted that Hashem would protect him. I do not believe that Hashem would not have allowed Eliyahu to fall into her hands.
A look at the symbolism behind the food turns out to be quite revealing. What food was it? It was a coal-baked cake, brought to him by a malach. And what significance did that food, in particular, carry? Midrash Shir Hashirim 1:6 explains it:
And he looked, and there beside his head were cakes that were
“ritzafim.” Why are they called “ritzafim?”
(In other words, we know that it refers to coal-baked cake. However, why was “ritzafim” used rather than “gechalim,” which is the most common way of saying “coals?” “Ritzafim” appears only one other place in Tanach.)
Rabbi Shmuel bar Nachman says “rotz - peh” (smash - mouth). That is, smash the mouths of whoever speaks accusingly against my sons.
The midrash is saying that the angel served him precisely this item, specifically named “ritzafim” here, in order to warn Eliyahu to not speak against Bnei Yisrael, lest his mouth be “smashed” by the Kaddosh Baruch Hu for committing this sin.
One could also say that the idea of a cake that is coal-baked is to allude to
that his mouth would be “singed,” as if a coal had been placed against it.
I would add yet another idea here, of my own: This incident demonstrates to Eliyahu a lesson in hashgacha, namely that Hashem is with him everywhere. Just as He could direct that food be brought before Eliyahu, no matter where Eliyahu happened to be, even in a distant wilderness, so could He protect Eliyahu from his enemies wherever they happened to be.
When the Kaddosh Baruch Hu saw that Eliyahu was not returning to Yehuda, that his harsh feelings against Israel remained, and that he simply went back to sleep without having “taken the hint,” the next step was for Hashem to send the angel a second time with food and drink.
With this food, a miracle was done. It remained with Eliyahu for the next forty days, long enough to allow him to reach Har Sinai without his neeeding to eat again.
Earlier, we asked why, rather than make the food last for forty days, the Kaddosh Baruch Hu hadn’t shortened the journey. He performed a miracle to make the food last so long, but could have instead “shortened” the trip by having Eliyahu arrive at Har Sinai in a moment’s time. Why didn’t He?
Of course, the reason why He did not do it that way was because He chose not to.
And why not?
I would say that it was in order to give Eliyahu as much time as possible to think. In other words, “shortening” the journey would have been counter productive.
The Kaddosh Baruch Hu wanted that Eliyahu return to his people and convince them to do teshuva. He therefore wanted to grant Eliayahu as long as possible to consider doing so.
I do think, however, that He did “straighten” the path for Eliyahu, in the sense of making it free of the wild animals and highwaymen whose presence would distract Eliyahu from pondering his own actions and, hopefully, drawing the conclusion that the best thing for him to do would be to return to his people and cause them to do teshuvah.
That did not happen, though.
When Eliyahu arrived at Har Sinai, he entered an adjoining cave. “What are you doing here, Eliyahu?” asked the Kaddosh Baruch Hu.
Eliyahu responded by telling Hashem of how His people had transgressed.
“But what are you doing here?” asked the Kaddosh Baruch Hu.
“One needs to have permission in order to leave Eretz Yisrael. You did not have it. Furthermore, your people have been left without a prophet in their midst.True, they have sinned. And true, they have strayed to idolatry. In the end, however, they will return to Me in teshuvah.”
The Kaddosh Baruch Hu continued, “Hadn’t all of Yisrael hearkened to your words earlier, when you said (I Melachim 18:39) hp g ph g f th :ht t h ht t h th, And the all the nation saw (were awed), fell to their faces, and said ‘Hashem is the Elokim! Hashem is the Elokim!’? You could once again be successful with them and inspire their teshuvah! Why, then, did you flee?”
Despite the Kaddosh Baruch Hu’s hints, Eliyahu was still not judging His nation with favor. Rather, he just continued with his accusations (I Melachim 19:14) : th hc lhc czg hf, “Bnei Yisrael have abandoned your covenant” he said, for the second time.
One could say that what happened next was that the Kaddosh Baruch Hu saw that Eliyahu would not be dissuaded by mere words, so He then invited Eliyahu to go onto Har Sinai itself. Surely, the symbolism and the memories would be quite powerful here. For, it was in this place that the B’nei Yisrael sinned with the golden calf -- after having heard the voice of Hashem from amidst the fire and receiving the Torah.
And how did Moshe Rabbeinu, their leader react? Run to the Kaddosh Baruch Hu to tell him in detail of B’nei Yisrael’s sins? No. What he said was (Shemot 32:32) :cf t lp t h ht t t t t g - And now if You would but forgive their sins! But if not, then erase me from the book that You have written.
Surely, Eliyahu would now realize what it was that he was supposed to do as regards to his people. Surely, he would realize that the appropriate thing was to follow Moshe Rabbeinu’s lead: He must dedicate himself to leading them towards the path of teshuvah -- or, at the very least, immediately cease his words of accusation!
Even this, however, did not work.
The way that I understand the story is that the Kaddosh Baruch Hu now saw that even this last chance at inspiring Eliyahu would be to no avail. He therefore decreed upon Eliyahu that he die. Eliyahu was deprived of his rank and his role as prophet was transferred to Elisha, his disciple.
This was because it is forbidden to be melamed chovah, that is, to interpret actions in a negative light, when speaking of the Jewish People. Rather, one must focus instead on how they may be brought back in teshuvah. Even Achav, the evil one, ultimately returned in teshuvah. So, too, does that potential exist for every Jew, no matter how far he appears to have strayed.
The prophet tells us (II Shmuel 14:14) of an incident where Yoav “put words into the mouth” of a woman from Tekoa for her to say to David Hamelech, so as to make a certain point to him via a parable: Hashem spares no one. [Let the king therefore] ponder thoughts so that no one be banished from him. The plain meaning here is that the king in question is David Hamelech and not the King of kings (Hashem). When it says that Hashem spares no one, the simple meaning is that everyone must die and that no one is spared from that fate. However, there are those who interpret this homiletically. To them, the “king” here is Hashem, not David Hamelech. And, rather than saying that everyone must die, barring no one, they interpret this phrase as saying that Kaddosh Baruch Hu considers and reconsiders, so that not even a single soul of Israel be lost. This corresponds to the way I understand our mishnah.
We know as well that our Rabbis tell us that nothing “stands before” teshuva. In other words, when it comes to teshuvah, there are no insurmountable impediments.
The gemara tells us (Kiddushin 40b) that even if one had been absolutely evil all his days, if, in the end, he did teshuvah, he is not to be reminded again of those sins. Although this could be understood to mean that it would a sin to remind him of his evil past, one could understand it as well as meaning that those evil deeds are now “gone.” This concept is found in Rambam’s Laws of Teshuvah 2:1, partially based on this gemara.
No hay comentarios.:
Publicar un comentario