Kedoshim
Rabbi Bernie Fox
Every person should fear his mother and father and
keep my Shabbat. I am Hashem your
G-d.
(VaYikra 19:3)
The Torah commands us to treat our parents with
respect and awe. Parents especially
appreciate these commandments. They
create a family structure and foster a social order. Our Sages observed that these mitzvot also promote other less
obvious values. One of these values is
appreciation of Hashem. We honor and
fear our parents because we appreciate the benefits that they bestow upon
us. Our very life is made possible
through our parents. However, we owe an
even greater debt of appreciation to Hashem.
Through our behaviors and attitudes towards our parents, we train
ourselves to appreciate others and not take their benevolence for granted. Hopefully, this attitude will be applied to
our relationship with Hashem.[1]
Gershonides notes another important outcome of these
commandments. In order to understand
his observation, an introduction is required.
In Perkei Avot, our Sages exhort us to “make” for
ourselves a rav or teacher.[2] On the simplest level, the Sages are
cautioning the student against attempting to master the Torah without the
assistance of a teacher. The teacher
provides the student with essential guidance.[3] Why is the teacher’s guidance so
important? The answer requires an
understanding of the basic nature of Torah scholarship. Our Sages explain that Torah scholarship is
not achieved through merely memorizing facts and developing fluency with and
mastery of these facts. Instead, the
Torah scholar must understand the underlying principles and concepts that are
the basis of halachah and the Torah’s outlook.[4] Such an understanding cannot be acquired
through reading a list of texts. Even
if a person commits the entire Talmud to memory, this person cannot be regarded
as a scholar. Torah scholarship
requires understanding, synthesis, and insight – not merely memorization.
Understanding is difficult to achieve. It must be developed slowly and
sequentially. A student builds new
concepts upon prior conclusions. As the
student’s understanding develops and expands, additional areas of the Torah become
comprehensible. Furthermore, through
intense study the student's mind and modes of thinking expand and are
refined. The student slowly develops
into a novice scholar. Eventually, the
patient novice can achieve erudition.
However, this development requires guidance. Without the invaluable guidance of the teacher, the student does
not know where to begin. The student
may settle for superficiality. Even
worse, the student may delve into issues beyond his grasp. The result is that a faulty foundation is
created. Every structure is limited by
the strength of its foundation. If the
student lacks a sound foundation, all further attempts to understand the Torah
will be undermined.
The guidance of the rav allows the student to
develop systematically. The teacher
understands the Torah. The rav guides
the student through a systematic program and progression. The teacher tells the student where to begin
one’s studies. The rav evaluates the
progress of the student and determines when the student is ready to progress to
the next stage. With this guidance, the
student can become a true scholar.
However, there is another message in this lesson
from Perkei Avot. The commentaries note
that the Sages did not say that the student should acquire or secure the
assistance of a rav. They said that a
person should “make” for oneself a rav.
This is an odd expression. What
is meant by the phrase “make a rav”?
Maimonides and others comment that the Sages are
alluding to an important issue. It is
not always possible to find an appropriate rav. The inexperienced student, and even the novice scholar, can
expect to find a more advanced scholar to serve as a guide. However, what recourse is available to the
more advanced student? This more
advanced student may not find a teacher with adequate erudition to provide
guidance and direction. What course
should this person choose?
Maimonides explains that the phrase “make a rav”
refers to this situation. Sometimes a
more advanced student may not be able to secure a guide. No available rav is suitable to serve as
this student’s mentor. This student
must “make a rav”. The rav will not be
the ideal guide. Nonetheless, this
novice scholar must appoint someone as his rav. Why is this necessary?
Maimonides explains that knowledge and understanding
are developed through the exchange of ideas.
The student must expose his or her conclusions to critical analysis and
review. This free exchange of ideas is
crucial to achieving an objective and refined understanding of the Torah.[5] Working with a rav – even if he is not ideal
– is essential to the student’s development.
This rav may not be the best guide but he will challenge and stimulate
his student.
Gershonides extends the insight of Perkei Avot to
the commandments regarding our parents.
Gershonides explains that just as the Torah scholar requires a guide, so
does the child. Every young person
faces innumerable challenges and obstacles in the process of personal
development. The parent shields the
child from the challenges that are beyond the capacity of the youngster. The parent exposes the child to appropriate
challenges and responsibilities. The
parent provides guidance and counsel.
At the very least, the parent provides an invaluable review of the
child’s conclusions and decisions. The
parent, in the personal development of the child, performs all of the tasks
that the rav performs in facilitating the intellectual development of the
scholar.
These commandments are designed to foster and
encourage this mentor relationship. A
child who respects his or her parents and holds them in awe is more likely to
accept these parents as guides.
Some children will challenge Gershonides’
analysis. Children sometimes question
the qualifications of their parents to provide guidance. After all, the student chooses a mentor
based on the teacher’s qualifications.
We do not choose our parents. It
is easy to become a parent; it is far more difficult to provide effective
guidance.
Gershonides acknowledges this issue. However, he points out that parents
generally have a unique and important qualification to serve as mentors for
their children. Parents are
instinctively bound to their children.
They feel a selfless love for their offspring. A parent will often even place the welfare of the child before
his or her own interests. The child
cannot find any other mentor who has as deep a commitment to the child’s
welfare. So, although parents – like
everyone – make mistakes, they tend to be very dedicated and selfless
guides. This is a qualification that
certainly recommends the parent for the position of mentor.
It should also be noted that there is a benefit in
“making a teacher" even if the teacher is not the ideal mentor. The same principle applies to one’s
parents. Every person gains from
exposing conclusions and perceptions to a second opinion. This is true even when it is one’s equal who
provides the second opinion. Some
children surpass the accomplishments of their parents. They achieve greater wealth and
success. They are more educated than
their parents and may even be worldlier.
However, their parents remain an invaluable asset. They can provide honest feedback and review.[6]
You must not eat on blood. You must not act on the basis of omens. And you must not act on the basis of auspicious times. (VaYikra 19:26)
Parshat Kedoshim includes many prohibitions
regarding occult practices and superstitions.
We are not permitted to base decisions upon omens or adopt behaviors
associated with the occult. Maimonides
includes all of these prohibitions in the section of his code devoted to
idolatry. He explains that
superstitions and occult practices were used by the idolaters to deceive their
followers. He further explains that it
is incorrect to maintain that there is any value or wisdom to these practices. Superstition and occult ritual are foolish
and of no benefit.[7]
It is readily understandable that belief in the
occult is associated with idolatry.
However, we need to understand the relationship between superstition and
idolatry.
Superstition is based upon human imagination and
fantasy. It attempts to create order
and security in an ever-changing world.
For example, journalists have noted that many professional athletes
develop involved rituals or adopt specific practices which they believe will bring
them good fortune. In general, all
omens and superstitions are designed to provide either insight into the future
or protection from mishap. In short, superstition involves a flight from
reality. Truth is too harsh. The fantasy of superstition provides solace.
The Torah requires that we approach life and the
universe intelligently. The Torah
implores us to understand reality and find truth. This search, honestly conducted, inevitably results in an
appreciation of the Creator and His Torah.
The perspective and attitude underlying superstition is antithetical to
the Torah perspective. Escape from
reality results in an outlook that has no basis in truth. A superstitious perspective can only produce
a fanciful and implausible theology.
This theology is a projection of the individual’s imagination upon
reality.
Idolatry and superstition have identical roots. The idolater does not base religious beliefs
upon wisdom and truth. Inspection and
investigation are replaced by projection.
The theology of the idolater is an expression of the imagination not
tempered by serious thought. The
connection is now clear. A person
guided by superstition has succumbed to the very attitude that underlies
idolatry.
Before the elderly you should rise. And you should give respect to the
wise. And you shall fear your G-d. I am Hashem. (VaYikra 19:32)
We are required to respect the wise. This requirement dictates that we stand in
the presence of a scholar. This law applies
even to a scholar that is not one's teacher.
Maimonides explains in his Mishne Torah that this obligation is derived
from the above passage.[8]
There is an additional obligation that applies to
one’s teacher or rav. Maimonides also
discusses this requirement in his Mishne Torah. He explains that one is obligated to respect and fear one’s
parents. Similarly, one is required to
fear and honor one’s teacher.[9]
These are two obligations – to respect scholars and
one’s rav – are separate requirements.
The obligation to respect scholars differs from the obligation to
respect and fear one’s teacher. For
example, we only rise for a wise person or scholar when this individual enters
into our immediate vicinity. Once the
scholar passes beyond our four cubits (1 cubit is approximately 18 inches) we
may sit.[10]
This is not the case when dealing with one’s teacher. We must rise as soon as the teacher enters into our vision. We remain standing until the rav passes out
of our field of vision. [11] In addition, there are various other
expressions of respect required in dealing with one’s teacher. We are not required to express these forms
of respect towards other scholars.
It is clear that the level of respect and awe a
person is required to show towards one’s rav is greater than the respect due a
scholar. This is reasonable. One has personally benefited from the
knowledge of one’s teacher. It is
appropriate that a higher form of respect is required.
Maimonides makes an astonishing statement that seems
to contradict this reasoning. He
explains that the teacher can excuse the student from the obligations of
respect and awe. Nonetheless, the
student remains obligated in the forms of respect due to his rav as a scholar.[12] Under no circumstances can the honor due a
scholar be dismissed. It is odd that
the more elaborate obligation due one's teacher can be ignored. But the lesser forms of respect due a
scholar can never be dismissed!
Maimonides provides an important insight into his
reasoning. In beginning his discussion
of the obligation to fear and respect one's teacher, Maimonides explains the
reason for this requirement. He
explains that the obligation to honor and fear one's teacher surpasses the
requirement to respect and fear one's parents.
Parents bring us into this world.
However, the teacher provides us with the opportunity to achieve
everlasting life in Olam HaBah – the afterlife.
These comments suggest a basic difference between
the obligation to honor the scholar and the requirement towards one's
teacher. The obligation to honor the
scholar is an expression of our appreciation of wisdom. Because we value wisdom and thought, we
honor those who possess these invaluable assets. It follows that these individuals cannot forgo this honor. We are not honoring the scholar as an
individual; we are showing our respect for the wisdom represented by the
scholar.
In contrast, Maimonides compares our obligation to
our rav with the requirement to respect and fear our parents. This obligation is an expression of
appreciation to the individual for the gift we have received; we are required
to show a deep and pronounced appreciation.
This consideration dictates the respect and awe due our teacher be
emphatically expressed in many forms.
However, the obligation is fundamentally an obligation towards the
individual who has provided us with wisdom.
This means the rav can forgo this honor.[13]
You shall not take revenge and not bear a grudge
against the members of your people; you shall love your neighbor as yourself. I
am Hashem. (VaYikra 19:18)
These passages instruct us that we may not take
revenge or bear a grudge against another and that we are required to love one
another. The pasuk delineates two
prohibited forms of behavior: taking revenge and bearing a grudge. What is the difference between these two
forms of behavior? Our Sages explain
that taking revenge is more direct. It
involves acting towards a person in the same hurtful manner that one has been
treated by this person. For
example: I ask to borrow from a friend
his pen and he refuses. The next day
this friend needs to borrow a pen from me.
I remind the friend of his response to my request the previous day and
refuse the pen. This is taking
revenge. Bearing a grudge is more
passive. In the above example, if I
lend the pen but point out to the friend that I am not behaving as he behaved
to me, this is bearing a grudge.[14] Bearing a grudge is prohibited because it
too is a form of hatred. As the second portion of the passage teaches, we are
to love one another.
The pasuk’s directive to love one another is
remarkable in two respects. First, the passage instructs us to love our
neighbor as we love ourselves. This is wonderful goal. However, our Sages noted that it does not
seem to be a very realistic objective.
Certainly, we should try to overcome the pettiness and self-centeredness
that often interfere with our empathy, compassion, and love for others. But a
directive to love another person to the degree one loves oneself seems to
require the impossible.
Second, our Sages did not regard this directive as a
mere ethical exhortation – an appeal to act with love towards others. The Sages regarded this directive as an
absolute commandment. It is included in
the Torah’s 613 mitzvot. This compounds
the first difficulty. Torah is not only
establishing an impossible standard of behavior, it is commanding us to achieve
the impossible!
Various commentaries suggest different answers to
these problems. Rabbaynu Avraham ibn
Ezra explains that the meaning of the instruction is that we should love those
things that benefit our friends as we love those things the benefit
ourselves. In other words, the Torah is
not suggesting that we actually feel for our friends the same love we feel for
ourselves. This would not be
realistic. The Torah is establishing a
standard of behavior. We must be as
scrupulous in caring for the needs of our neighbor as we are in caring for our
own needs.[15] This remains a high standard, but it does
not contradict human nature.
Although Ibn Ezra’s interpretation of the passage is
somewhat helpful, it is also somewhat vague.
What exactly does the passage require?
Does it mean that if I need a new home for myself, I must also provide
housing for all homeless individuals?
There is a well-known teaching of Hillel that may
explain Ibn Ezra’s position. Hillel
explained that a person should not do to another person that which he would not
want done to himself. Hillel went on to
explain that the remainder of the Torah is merely an elaboration of this
principle.[16]
Hillel’s lesson is empirically compelling. Many of society’s problems could be solved
if this principle were universally adopted.
But Hillel’s contention that this is the essence of the Torah and the
rest is merely an elaboration seems to be an overstatement. Perhaps Hillel did not intend for this last
part of his teaching to be taken literally; he was not suggesting that it is
okay to deny Hashem’s existence as long as you are nice to people. But if Hillel did not intend for his
statement to be understood literally, what was the message he was attempting to
communicate?
Sefer HaChinuch suggests that Hillel noted that so
many of the mitzvot of the Torah are designed to regulate relations among
people. We are not permitted to
steal. We cannot overcharge. We are prohibited from engaging in various
deceptive business practices. We must
return lost objects. All of the
commandments are designed to foster and encourage harmony among the individual
members of society. Hillel recognized
that all of these laws are amplifications of a single theme. They attempt to create a society in which
all members have equal rights to fair and compassionate treatment by one
another. All of these laws are designed
to prevent one member of the group from taking advantage of another. Hillel explained that were we each to treat
our friends as we wish to be treated, all of these laws would be superfluous.[17]
Sefer HaChinuch’s comments provide an explanation of
Ibn Ezra’s position. We are not
expected to be as solicitous of the needs of others as we are of our own
needs. However, we are expected to
regard his needs as being as serious and real as our own. Therefore, we need not provide shelter for
the homeless before building a home for ourselves. We have every right to care for our own needs first. But we cannot dismiss other’s needs as
insignificant. When the poor require
our assistance, we cannot be dismissive.
Certainly, I cannot place my rights before those of another person. I must respect those rights as I would
expect my own to be respected.
We can only recognize the full implication of this
commandment if we acknowledge that this is not our usual attitude. If we are honest, we will admit that although
we do not dismiss our friend’s needs, we tend to see them as somewhat less
compelling than our own. If we honestly
review our interactions with others, we will be able to identify behaviors that
place our needs above others. The Torah
is commanding us to identify these behaviors and correct them.
In short, according to Sefer HaChinuch, we are
required to respect other’s rights and needs as we do our own. This attitude fosters harmony within a group
or society. In a society in which the
attitude is not present, there will be friction and discord.
Rav Naftali Tzvi Berlin Zt”l – Netziv – offers an
alternative understanding of the objective of this commandment. He begins by quoting a teaching from the
Jerusalem Talmud. The Talmud observes
that we are forbidden from taking vengeance.
The Talmud explains that vengeance is absurd. This is illustrated with
an analogy. A person is cutting meat;
his hand holding the knife slips and he cuts his other hand. Would the person then take punish the hand
that slipped by cutting it as well? The
Talmud concludes by explaining that this is the message of our passage. We may not take vengeance because we must
love one another. We are all similar to
the fingers of a single hand, or limbs of a single body. If we take vengeance upon another person –
even to redress a wrong – we are cutting one of our own limbs. [18],
[19]
It seems that Netziv is explaining that the mitzvah
to love one another is not merely designed to serve a practical purpose. It is not designed to assure order and
harmony in society. It has a higher
purpose. It is designed to reorient our
perspective upon ourselves. We are
commanded to refrain from vengeance and to love one another in order to foster
within ourselves a healthy and truthful perspective. We must recognize that we are members of a group and nation. This does not mean the individual is not
important, or that a person’s sense of individual significance is improper. But our sense of our own individual
importance cannot overwhelm our realization and acknowledgement that we are
also part of Bnai Yisrael.
In summary:
According to Sefer HaChinuch, the mitzvah to love one another is
essentially a social contract. It is
designed to foster harmony. According
to Netziv, the commandment is designed to nurture within each person a healthy
and truthful perspective on himself.
Each of us must be able to see ourselves as a member of a group and
nation.
[1] Rav Ahron HaLeyve, Sefer HaChinuch, Mitzvah 33.
[2] Mesechet Avot 1:6.
[3] Rabbaynu Menachem Me’eri, Bait HaBechirah, Mesechet Avot 1:6.
[4] Rabbaynu Shlomo ben Yitzchak (Rashi), Commentary on Sefer Shemot 21:1.
[5] Rabbaynu Moshe ben Maimon (Rambam / Maimonides) Commentary on the Mishne, Mesechet Avot 1:6.
[6] Rabbaynu Levi ben Gershon (Ralbag / Gershonides), Commentary on Sefer VaYikra, (Mosad HaRav Kook, 1997) p. 292.
[7] Rabbaynu Moshe ben Maimon (Rambam / Maimonides) Mishne Torah, Hilchot Avodat Kochavim 11:16.
[8] Rabbaynu Moshe ben Maimon (Rambam / Maimonides) Mishne Torah, Hilchot Talmud Torah 6:1.
[9] Rabbaynu Moshe ben Maimon (Rambam / Maimonides) Mishne Torah, Hilchot Talmud Torah 5:1.
[10] Rabbaynu Moshe ben Maimon (Rambam / Maimonides) Mishne Torah, Hilchot Talmud Torah 6:1.
[11] Rabbaynu Moshe ben Maimon (Rambam / Maimonides) Mishne Torah, Hilchot Talmud Torah 5:7.
[12] Rabbaynu Moshe ben Maimon (Rambam / Maimonides) Mishne Torah, Hilchot Talmud Torah 5:11.
[13] See Rav Yizchak Zev Soloveitchik, Chiddushim on Mishne Torah, Hilchot Talmud Torah.
[14] Rabbaynu Shlomo ben Yitzchak (Rashi), Commentary on Sefer VaYikra 19:18.
[15] Rabbaynu Avraham ibn Ezra, Commentary on Sefer VaYikra 19:18.
[16] Mesechet Shabbat 31a.
[17] Rav Aharon HaLeyve, Sefer HaChinuch, Mitzvah 243.
[18] Talmud Yerushalmi, Mesechet Nedarim 9:4.
[19] Rav Naftali Tzvi Yehuda Berlin (Netziv), Commentary Hamek Davar on Sefer VaYikra 19:18.