For my Friend and my Rebbi,in thanks.

I am reminded of a famous expression which is found throughout the world. In fact I can hear it ringing through my ears in the soft German of my family. I wont mention it explicitly because it is often formulated in a heretical manner. The gist of the expression is that Man plans his life and then circumstances intervene and in the end the man has ended up in a place and state that he had not planned nor had he desired at the beginning. Often times the man experiences great grief at the loss of his "plan" and the experience of his new reality.When the man is thrust into a new reality he is often so fixated on his "plan" , his conception of "happiness" and "good" that he cannot escape his own delusions. He continues to dwell as if he was in the same state as the ante-circumstance man was. In short he had become so infatuated with his prior life, so comfortable, so enamored with the object of his desires and the subject of his thoughts that he can not redeem himself. When he reaches this point, bobbing up and down in the tide he does not even know to tread water. The fortunate ones are those who have that cliched life vest tossed to them.

It is in this light , with this image in my mind that I am writing.

Recently, I experienced first hand the emotional glass breaking that comes with a destruction , an annihilation of "the plan". I would not be eating, I would not be functioning were it not for a salvation that was done for me . They spent their time and their energies , emotionally and otherwise when they were not at a loss for important things to do seperate from me.They demonstrated that my "plan" and my Life were not equivalent. They pointed me on the way to the "Happy Life", they saved me and I love them .



I owe them more than I can repay, and as such my only tribute - some thoughts on the nature of happiness which I have collected from my friends, my Rebbi and Seneca, which are in agreement with one another .



"To live happily, my brother Gallio,is the desire of all men, but their minds are blinded to a clear vision of just what it is that makes life happy; and so far from its being easy to attain the happy life, the more eagerly a man strives to reach it, the farther he recedes from it if he has made a mistake in the road for when it leads in the opposite direction, his very speed will increase the distance that separates him"

When man is in the midst of his "plan", his desires, his lusts, he cannot conceive of the possibility that what he imagines to be his life, what he wants , what he strives for, is not what is good, is not what will make him Happy.Even as the plan crumbles around him, he deludes himself to think that the plan is sound. He is so steeped in the fantasy that he drives himself ever further down the opposite path.The faculty of mind is left at the dock, and he refuses to see that the plan has failed.


"Let us, therefore, decide both upon the goal and upon the way, and not fail to find some experienced guide who has explored the region towards which we are advancing; for the conditions of this journey are different from those of most travel"

This is the solution to the man slipping beneath the waves of his own self denial and fantasy. The Rabbis have said it thus, " Yelech etzel Chacham" , "Go to a sage and he will instruct you".Most people under normal circumstances are untrained and unable to sort through their own turmoil and end in Happiness. The chacham is the therapist, the role model and the guide. Seneca endorses " Aseh Lecha Rav". He cautions , as does the Mesorah, not to blindly follow anyone. The mind is the crucible.Sometimes however, the mind is absent.


"You understand, even if I do not say more, that, when once we have driven away all that excites or affrights us, there ensues unbroken tranquillity and enduring freedom; for when pleasures and fears have been banished, then, in place of all that is trivial and fragile and harmful just because of the evil it works, there comes upon us first a boundless joy that is firm and unalterable, then peace and harmony of the soul and true greatness coupled with kindliness; for all ferocity is born from weakness"
This paragraph resonates with me. I can recall time after time after time being instructed in the truth of this statement. At a certain point man holds tight to his pain , his fragility because that very thing is a remnant of the lost desires, the lost "life" that you had planned.
" But no man can be happy unless he is sane, and no man can be sane who searches for what will injure him in place of what is best."
This is the sickness of the man who cannot allow himself happiness. He thinks bitter is sweet and sweet is bitter. He attempts to eat things which are not food. He seeks out and cleaves to the things that are his undoing.
"the happy man is he who allows reason to fix the value of every condition of existence"
This is the definition. This points to what the mesorah has declared regarding Man and his happiness. Happiness , Good for man, demands his mind. "And therefore the ancients have enjoined us to follow, not the most pleasant, but the best life, in order that pleasure should be, not the, leader, but the companion of a right and proper desire. For we must use Nature as our guide; she it is that Reason heeds, it is of her that it takes counsel. Therefore to live happily is the same thing as to liveaccording to Nature." To live happily, is to live the life of mind, for the nature of man is a rational animal.

"On the Happy Life"

Here Again is a selection from Seneca. I have not posted the entire piece as of yet. You can read the entire treatise as well as many others of Seneca at,http://www.stoics.com/seneca_essays_book_2.html, this site is a good resource for Stoic philosophy. The owners of the site have also added hyperlinks in the text to the works of other philosophers who deal with similar concepts.The bolding and Italics are mine, with something like this the entire piece deserves to be bolded, I have attempted to be conservative in my bolding. I will , with the help of my maker formulate some thoughts on the Happy life after posting this.

DE VITA BEATA
TO GALLIO ON THE HAPPY LIFE
"To live happily, my brother Gallio,is the desire of all men, but their minds are blinded to a clear vision of just what it is that makes life happy; and so far from its being easy to attain the happy life, the more eagerly a man strives to reach it, the farther he recedes from it if he has made a mistake in the road; for when it leads in the opposite direction, his very speed will increase the distance that separates him. First, therefore, we must seek what it is that we are aiming at; then we must look about for the road by which we can reach it most quickly, and on the journey itself, if only we are on the right path, we shall discover how much of the distance we overcome each day, and how much nearer we are to the goal toward which we are urged by a natural desire. But so long as we wander aimlessly, having no guide, and following only the noise and discordant cries of those who call us in different directions, life will be consumed in making mistakes - life that is brief even if we should strive day and night for sound wisdom. Let us, therefore, decide both upon the goal and upon the way, and not fail to find some experienced guide who has explored the region towards which we are advancing; for the conditions of this journey are different from those of most travel. On most journeys some well-recognized road and inquiries made of the inhabitants of the region prevent you from going astray; but on this one all the best beaten and the most frequented paths are the most deceptive. Nothing, therefore, needs to be more emphasized than the warning that we should not, like sheep, follow the lead of the throng in front of us, travelling, thus, the way that all go and not the way that we ought to go. Yet nothing involves us in greater trouble than the fact that we adapt ourselves to common report in the belief that the best things are those that have met with great approval, - the fact that, having so many to follow, we live after the rule, not of reason, but of imitation. The result of this is that people are piled high, one above another, as they rush to destruction. And just as it happens that in a great crush of humanity, when the people push against each other, no one can fall down without drawing along another, and those that are in front cause destruction to those behind - this same thing, You may see happening everywhere in life. No man can go wrong to his own hurt only, but he will be both the cause and the sponsor of another's wrongdoing. For it is dangerous to attach one's self to the crowd in front, and so long as each one of us is more willing to trust another than to judge for himself, we never show any judgement in the matter of living, but always a blind trust, and a mistake that has been passed on from hand to hand finally involves us and works our destruction. It is the example of other people that is our undoing; let us merely separate ourselves from the crowd, and we shall be made whole. But as it is, the populace,, defending its own iniquity, pits itself against reason. And so we see the same thing happening that happens at the elections, where, when the fickle breeze of popular favour has shifted, the very same persons who chose the praetors wonder that those praetors were chosen. The same thing has one moment our favour, the next our disfavour; this is the outcome of every decision that follows the choice of the majority. When the happy life is under debate, there will be no use for you to reply to me, as if it were a matter of votes: "This side seems to be in a majority." For that is just the reason it is the worse side. Human affairs are not so happily ordered that the majority prefer the better things; a proof of the worst choice is the crowd. Therefore let us find out what is best to do, not what is most commonly done what will establish our claim to lasting happiness, not what finds favour with the rabble, who are the worst possible exponents of the truth. But by the rabble I mean no less the servants of the court than the servants of the kitchen; for I do not regard the colour of the garments that clothe the body. In rating a man I do not rely upon eyesight: I have a better and surer light, by which I may distinguish the false from the true. Let the soul discover the good of the soul. If the soul ever has leisure to draw breath and to retire within itself - ah! to what self- torture will it come, and how, if it confesses the truth to itself, it will say: "All that I have done hitherto,
I would were undone; when I think of all that I have said, I envy the dumb; of all that I have prayed for, I rate my prayers as the curses of my enemies; of all that I have feared - ye gods! how much lighter it would have been than the load of what I have coveted! With many I have been at enmity, and, laying aside hatred, have been restored to friendship with them - if only there can be any friendship between the wicked; with myself I have not yet entered into friendship. I have made every effort to remove myself from the multitude and to make myself noteworthy by reason of some endowment. What have I accomplished save to expose myself to the darts of malice and show it where it can sting me? See you those who praise your eloquence, who trail upon your wealth, who court your favour, who exalt your power? All these are either now your enemies, or - it amounts to the same thing - can become such. To know how many are jealous of you, count your admirers. Why do I not rather seek some real good - one which I could feel, not one which I could display? These things that draw the eyes of men, before which they halt, which they show to one another in wonder, outwardly glitter, but are worthless within." Let us seek something that is a good in more than appearance - something that is solid, constant, and more beautiful in its more hidden part; for this let us delve. And it is placed not far off; you will find it - you need only to know where to stretch out your hand. As it is, just as if we groped in darkness, we pass by things near at hand, stumbling over the very objects we desire. Not to bore you, however, with tortuous details, I shall pass over in silence the opinions of other philosophers, for it would be tedious to enumerate and refute them all. Do you listen to ours. But when I say ours, "I do not bind myself to some particular one of the Stoic masters; I, too, have the right to form an opinion. Accordingly, I shall follow so- and-so, I shall request so-and-so to divide the question; perhaps, too, when called upon after all the rest, I shall impugn none of my predecessors' opinions, and shall say: "I simply have this much to add." Meantime, I follow the guidance of Nature - a doctrine upon which all Stoics are agreed. Not to stray from Nature and to mould ourselves according to her law and pattern - this is true wisdom. The happy life, therefore, is a life that is in harmony with its own nature, and it can be attained in only one way. First of all, we must have a sound mind and one that is in constant possession of its sanity; second, it must be courageous and energetic, and, too, capable of the noblest fortitude, ready for every emergency, careful of the body and of all that concerns it, but without anxiety; lastly, it must be attentive to all the advantages that adorn life, but with over-much love for none the user, but not the slave, of the gifts of Fortune. You understand, even if I do not say more, that, when once we have driven away all that excites or affrights us, there ensues unbroken tranquillity and enduring freedom; for when pleasures and fears have been banished, then, in place of all that is trivial and fragile and harmful just because of the evil it works, there comes upon us first a boundless joy that is firm and unalterable, then peace and harmony of the soul and true greatness coupled with kindliness; for all ferocity is born from weakness. It is possible also to define this good of ours in other terms - that is, the same idea may be expressed in different language. Just as an army remains the same, though at one time it deploys with a longer line, now is massed into a narrow space and either stands with hollowed centre and wings curved forward, or extends a straightened front, and, no matter what its formation may be, will keep the selfsame spirit and the same resolve to stand in defence of the selfsame cause, - so the definition of the highest good may at one time be given in prolix and lengthy form, and at another be restrained and concise. So it will come to the same thing if I say: "The highest good is a mind that scorns the happenings of chance, and rejoices only in virtue," or say: "It is the power of the mind to be unconquerable, wise from experience, calm in action, showing the while much courtesy and consideration in intercourse with others," It may also be defined in the statement that the happy man is he who recognizes no good and evil other than a good and an evil mind one who cherishes honour, is content with virtue, who is neither puffed up, nor crushed, by the happenings of chance, who knows of no greater good than that which he alone is able to bestow upon himself, for whom true pleasure will be the scorn of pleasures. It is possible, too, if one chooses to be discursive, to transfer the same idea to various other forms of expression without injuring or weakening its meaning. For what prevents us from saying that the happy life is to have a mind that is free, lofty, fearless and steadfast - a mind that is placed beyond the reach of fear, beyond the reach of desire, that counts virtue the only good, baseness the only evil, and all else but a worthless mass of things, which come and go without increasing or diminishing the highest good, and neither subtract any part from the happy life nor add any part to it? A man thus grounded must, whether he wills or not, necessarily be attended by constant cheerfulness and a joy that is deep and issues from deep within, since he finds delight in his own resources, and desires no joys greater than his inner joys. Should not such joys as these be rightly matched against the paltry and trivial and fleeting sensations of the wretched body? The day a man becomes superior to pleasure, he will also be superior to pain; but you see in what wretched and baneful bondage he must linger whom pleasures and pains, those most capricious and tyrannical of masters, shall in turn enslave.Therefore we must make our escape to . But the only means of procuring this is through indifference to Fortune. Then will be born the one inestimable blessing, the peace and exaltation of a mind now safely anchored, and, when all error is banished, the great and stable joy that comes from the discovery of truth, along with kindliness and cheerfulness of mind; and the source of a man's pleasure in all of these will not be that they are good, but that they spring from a good that is his own. Seeing that I am employing some freedom in treating my subject, I may say that the happy man is one who is freed from both fear and desire because of the gift of reason; since even rocks are free from fear and sorrow, and no less are the beasts of the field, yet for all that no one could say that these things are "blissful," when they have no comprehension of bliss. Put in the same class those people whose dullness of nature and ignorance of themselves have reduced them to the level of beasts of the field and of inanimate things. There is no difference between the one and the other, since in one case they are things without reason, and in the other their reason is warped, and works their own hurt, being active in the wrong direction; for no man can be said to be happy if he has been thrust outside the pale of truth. Therefore the life that is happy has been founded on correct and trustworthy judgement, and is unalterable. Then, truly, is the mind unclouded and freed from every ill, since it knows how to escape not only deep wounds, but even scratches, and, resolved to hold to the end whatever stand it has taken, it will defend its position even against the assaults of an angry Fortune. For so far as sensual pleasure is concerned, though it flows about us on every side, steals in through every opening, softens the mind with its blandishments, and employs one resource after another in order to seduce us in whole or in part, yet who of mortals, if he has left in him one trace of a human being, would choose to have his senses tickled night and day, and, forsaking the mind, devote his attention wholly to the body? "But the mind also," it will be said, "has its own pleasures." Let it have them, in sooth, and let it pose as a judge of luxury and pleasures; let it gorge itself with the things that are wont to delight the senses, then let it look back upon the past, and, recalling faded pleasures, let it intoxicate itself with former experiences and be eager now for those to come, and let it lay its plans, and, while the body lies helpless from present cramming, let it direct its thoughts to that to come - yet from all this, it seems to me, the mind will be more wretched than ever, since it is madness to choose evils instead of goods. But no man can be happy unless he is sane, and no man can be sane who searches for what will injure him in place of what is best. The happy man, therefore, is one who has right judgement; the happy man is content with his present lot, no matter what it is, and is reconciled to his circumstances; the happy man is he who allows reason to fix the value of every condition of existence. Even those who declare that the highest good is in the belly see in what a dishonourable position they have placed it. And so they say that it is not possible to separate pleasure from virtue, and they aver that no one can live virtuously without also living pleasantly, nor pleasantly without also living virtuously. But I do not see how things so different can be cast in the same mould. What reason is there, I beg of you, why pleasure cannot be separated from virtue? Do you mean, since all goods have their origin in virtue, even the things that you love and desire must spring from its roots? But if the two were inseparable, we should not see certain things pleasant, but not honourable, and certain things truly most honourable, but painful and capable of being accomplished only through suffering. Then, too, we see that pleasure enters into even the basest life, but, on the other hand, virtue does not permit life to be evil, and there are people who are unhappy not without pleasure - nay, are so on account of pleasure itself - and this could not happen if pleasure were indisolubly joined to virtue; virtue often lacks pleasure, and never needs it. Why do you couple things that are unlike, nay, even opposites? Virtue is something lofty, exalted and regal, unconquerable, and unwearied; pleasure is something lowly, servile, weak, and perishable, whose haunt and abode are the brothel and the tavern. Virtue you will find in the temple, in the forum, in the senate-house - you will find her standing in front of the city walls, dusty and stained, and with calloused hands; pleasure you will more often find lurking out of sight, and in search of darkness, around the public baths and the sweating-rooms and the places that fear the police - soft, enervated, reeking with wine and perfume, and pallid, or else painted and made up with cosmetics like a corpse. The highest good is immortal, it knows no ending, it permits neither surfeit nor regret; for the right-thinking mind never alters, it neither is filled with self-loathing nor suffers any change in its life, that is ever the best. But pleasure is extinguished just when it is most enjoyed; it has but small space, and thus quickly fills it - it grows weary and is soon spent after its first assault. Nor is anything certain whose nature consists in movement. So it is not even possible that there should be any substance in that which comes and goes most swiftly and will perish in the very exercise of its power; for it struggles to reach a point at which it may cease, and it looks to the end while it is beginning. What, further, is to be said of the fact that pleasure belongs alike to the good and the evil, and that the base delight no less in their disgrace than do the honourable in fair repute? And therefore the ancients have enjoined us to follow, not the most pleasant, but the best life, in order that pleasure should be, not the, leader, but the companion of a right and proper desire. For we must use Nature as our guide; she it is that Reason heeds, it is of her that it takes counsel. Therefore to live happily is the same thing as to live
according to Nature."

Bechiraville U.S.A.

Last night as I drove home from work, tired from a long day, happy for a long weekend, I started to reflect on this land that has given me sojourn. America, is a wonderful land. I do not think that anyone would argue that the founding fathers, framers or whatever you would prefer to call them, were some of the greatest minds the secular world has produced in the last 1000 years. (It is interesting to note, that many of the chachmei harevolution expressed views on religion and the Creator which are at the very least thoughtful) The writings of the revolutionaries are soaked through with the chachmah of political theory and natural philosophy.The founders believed as they so often stated that Man derives his freedom from the creator.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness"( Unanimous declaration of the thirteen United States of America). The founders stated their purpose in the preamble to the constitution,
"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America"
Read these words and absorb the chachma that pours off the pages. These few lines give testimony to the good of America. As the Rambam famously said,"Just as plants bear testimony to the existence of real roots, and waters are evidence for the excellence of springs, so has a firm shoot developed from the roots of truth and righteousness, and a huge river has gushed forth from the spring of mercy( letter to Rav Ya'akob Al Fayumi, the Epistle to Yemen). These words are but a part of the great springs from which this nation flows.The words, justice, tranquility, and blessings reflect the mindset of the founders. They recognized that the world is governed by laws, laws established by the Creator and that Man must attempt to live within these laws. They understood that Man is imperfect and his rule is as a result corrupted. Their system was,( is), designed to minimize that corruption. I would not pretend that this system is better than that of Torah, but we must remember that the Malchus of the Torah and the Philosopher King of Plato ( not to say they are far off), are lichatchila situations. It would have been counterproductive for the founders to try and establish a Philosophical Monarchy and impossible for them to replacate the Malchus of Torah. As such, their system is, the best system that could be achieved.It spreads the power and authority amongst many, while maintaining the position of a national leader. ( This reminds me of the advise of Chazal to not walk alone at night because of the 'mazikin' , the spreading of power to many allows for mutual support and avoidance of mazikin.)There are those who criticize the system for this reason, and to them I repeat my statement. If we had a navi , or a real sanhedrin then I would agree, but that is a stupid mans way of thinking.

Another point that I was reflecting on as I drove was the nature of the Torah world in America. There are those who decry America as evil and elevate Poland, or Yemen, or the Maghreb or wherever their zaydees and papous came from as so much better for yehadus. In America we have seen a total abandonment of yehadus from thousands of Jews. We have also seen the Torah world re-establish itself after the second World War in America and become a center for chachma rivaling any of recent memory.So, in light of both of these facts, I wonder what is the proper view of this country and its society in regards to a Halachic person.
There is no doubt that there are destructive elements in society. We are overly consumed by frivolity, sex and a myriad other pursuits. It is true again, that thousands have left the Bris , tempted by these pursuits. This is a tragedy. However, if we consider the nature of man and his bechirah the greatness of America on a whole and specifically in terms of Torah comes to the fore. Man was created with free will. It is his responsibility to choose "THE GOOD" and "THE LIFE" and avoid and deny "THE DEATH AND THE BAD".No nation on earth allows for this quite as America does. The very idea of personal responsibility and liberty presuppose bechira chofshith. When we decry the loss of some to Torah, it is not Americas fault , it is our fault. If we do not want our people destroying themselves than we better make sure they understand the bechirah. This is the beauty of America. We have been given a foothold in a land that will allow us to quite literally make that free will decision. American liberty IS bechirah.

Some thoughts on Seneca

I have to thank my friend Matt for introducing me to the works of Lucius Annaeus Seneca. ( As you will hopefully see, Matt fits the true model of friend). Seneca was born in Cordoba Spain and educated in Rome. He was tutor, and eventually advisor to the emperor Nero. His biggest legacy to wisdom comes from his work as one of the "stoics"among these the Letters to his student Lucilius and his "Dialogues and Essays" , stand out. Seneca is a master of the one liner and his writings are fertile ground from which sprout many large and beautiful ideas. I do not have a major piece written up, however, he has had such an impact that at the very least I thought it necessary to share some thoughts. It must be noted before reading any of my "thoughts" that you should read Seneca for himself http://www.stoics.com/seneca_epistles_book_1.html, as well as some thoughts that Matt has posted already on his blog, http://www.kankanchadash.blogspot.com/
I apologize in advance if any of the ideas are redundant to something Matt has said, or even if they are pashtus of the letters themselves.

As you know, the chachmei hamesorah have equated anger with idolatry. Maimonides states in Deoth , that the "baalei Qa'as ain chayehem chayim"," the angry person's life is not LIFE".

Seneca on Anger:

Seneca wrote an entire work on the subject of anger. I have not reproduced it in entirety, nor have I even come close to producing a large swath of it, I have selected some simple points from book 3 of "On Anger".

" I shall now try to do what you have particularly desired, Navatus, to expel anger from the mind, or at least to rein it in and check its violence. This should be done sometimes openly and plainly,when a less serious attack of the evil permits,sometimes secretly, when it burns too fiercely and every obstacle intensifies and increases it;it depends on how much strenght and energy it has,whether we should beat it back and force its withdrawal, or should give way to it until the initial storm has spent its fury,in case it carries off with it the very means of effecting a cure"

Seneca, abhors anger.Yet he is realistic about it. He does not pretend, that anger does not occur in even the best amongst us.He recognizes from the outset that the expulsion of anger from the soul is perhaps impossible,that the goal of man in this area must be to rein it in and distance its destructive power from your life as much as possible. I think this is a very powerful, if not subtle position. There is no superhuman amongst us that does not suffer the ill effects of emotion. The goal according to Seneca would be to contain this "violence" such that it does not harm anyone or thing. This is remeniscent to me of the Rambam in deoth chapter 2 halacha 7 " ואמרו שכל הכועס--אם חכם הוא, חכמתו מסתלקת ממנו, ואם נביא הוא, נבואתו מסתלקת ממנו
"... they stated, that anyone who is angry, if he is a Chacham, ( wise) , his wisdom escapes him, if he is a prophet, his prophesy escapes him". Clearly even the most perfected humans , prophets, fall prey to this emotion. This very well might be a bigger lesson about people and levels of perfection than it is about anger itself. We do not believe in supermen. Every single human is succeptible to the destructive forces of emotions.
Further in Seneca:
"... For though the rest of the passions may be amenable to such postponement and may be cured at a slower pace,this one,with its rapid and self propelled violence,does not proceed gradually,but reaches the full scope the moment it begins; unlike other vices it does not tempt the mind but carries it off by force,and drives on those who lacking self control, desire the destruction,it may be, of everyone,spending its rage not only on the targets of its aim but on whatever happens to cross its path. The other vices drive the mind on , anger hurls it headlong."
Again, an interesting point which reminds me of the same Rambam.As Seneca notes, anger comes on as a freight train and carries the mind and self control away with it. This emotion as he notes, does not eat away at the psyche, it does not tempt the heart . Rather, like a tinderbox, there is a spark and then combustion.This could explain the old question of the comparison to idolatry.Anger is the ultimate fantasy. Anger arrives when one's conception of the good comes in conflict with reality. In other words, when what we want, think is right, or think must be, does not occur our conception of the good, our view of reality is upturned and this cataclysmic upheaval explodes in fits of rage. This is the idolatry, the Qo'es, is entirely consumed with the reality of his desire. HE controls what must be and as such when he percieves that he is NOT in control of reality he himself loses control of his mind and flies off into an emotional shooting spree.
more to follow....

Behold I have set before you the Life and the good the Death and the bad - part two.

This is not really a part two so much as another observation that I would like to make about the mikrah in devarim . I think it is interesting to note the lashon of the verse, the pasuk does not say " behold I have set before you life and good death and bad" but rather it says " Behold I have set before you the life and the good , the death and the bad". Did you catch the difference? The verse describes these two choices as either THE life and THE good, or conversely THE death and The bad. The use of 'the' instead of just saying life and good, death and bad, seems to be a further pointer to the meaning of the verse. Rationality and intellectual living is THE Life that man was created for, it is THE GOOD. On the other hand the life of an animal is in reality THE Death of man and THE BAD, the worst possible engagement available to him.

I guess that was a simple point but perhaps it needed to be said again...

Behold I have set before you Life and the good and the Death and the bad and you shall choose life

"ראה נתתי לפניך היום, את החיים ואת הטוב, ואת המוות, ואת הרע" (דברים ל,טו
This mikrah often bothers me and this week it popped into my head again, what kind of a choice is that? . I have set before you life and good, death and bad, choose life?I have given you poison and I have given you sustenance pick whichever you prefer? It seems almost absurd that this mikrah is couched as a choice. What type of choice is it?
Bob, I have two things in my hand , one is a baseball bat with which I will beat you, the other is a pillow for you to rest on, now Bobbo, which one do you want? Curious, no?

Also this week I had an interesting conversation with a friend of mine , ( you know who you are),the friend was lamenting her recent removal from an environment of Torah where she was surrounded by chachmah and Tov.She was literally pained by the sudden uprooting from her cozy chachma nest and the dumping into the world outside the Beit Midrash.Indeed I had recently experienced a similar pain, ( in my case it was pre-emptive), at my impending limit of Beit Midrash time. I think however, that these two feelings , the pain at removal from being one of the permanent "Yoshevei beisecha", to a mere student or a worker, can be assuaged with a proper understanding of the pasuk of Chayim and Maveth, tov and rah.

I think that we can find an answer to my uneasiness with the "choice" in the mikrah if we recall the words of a certain chacham, who has often been quoted by other chachamim anonymously , but I will reference him by saying " hear the truth from whoever speaks it". The quote is as follows ,"EVERY art and every inquiry, and similarly every action and pursuit, is thought to aim at some good; and for this reason the good has rightly been declared to be that at which all things aim." To my mind this quote provides a very good solution, every action of man points to what that man holds to be good, clearly that is why man would do anything. If you did not perceive some good in what you were doing then you would not do it. Now if we keep this in mind then the verse could be saying, " behold I have set before you real Life and objective good and certain death and objective bad which you view as good because you have a false concept of the good, re-evaluate your idea of the good and choose the objective good". In other words this verse is a command to use your mind to decipher what is and is not good .

Now, how does this apply to the situation of my friend?

We are given minds to percieve the wisdom of the creator. This is the ultimate goal of Man. In the words of the pasuk we are given minds to " choose the good", the good is yediath Hashem.When we are in an environment of a beit midrash, when we are literally those who the psalmist speaks of in Psalm 145 as being praiseworthy, we feel a sense of security. It is almost as if we are in an intellectual summer camp, we are engaged in ideas, activities ,on our own, but we are also closed off and sheltered within the stacks of books. Our outside experiences, as in summer camp, are controlled, highly limited.Our learning is regulated, there are shiurim that we have given to us, our schedules revolve around certain fixed points of involvement in chachamah .As such when we are in the Beit Midrash what cares do we have? What is tosafot talking about? How can the Rambam say one thing here and seemingly contradict himself two paragraphs later, ( Lo aleinu!), or even the concern of one who is uncomfortable with the harsh criticism of the Ra'avad. But we do not have open exposure to influences and attractions that openly challenge us on the very deoth that we spend our time with.So the pain comes when we are ripped from this security and thrown into this brave new world of work and battalah and bills to pay and kids to feed and responsibility. No one is there to tell us to learn, no one is standing over our shoulder if we are mevattel our time, no rebbi next to you in shiur to guide you everyday, no chavrutha at work to help you be perfected.
This pain is however, great. Think about it, the pain is the confrontation between the world of bechirah and your mind. It is the point at which you must decide, " Jake, are you gonna go off and lose your mind , or are you going to grab tight and be an Adam".( You dont have to decide using the name Jake, but I do...).This is the first real exposure to the world of maveth and rah and the potential for chayim and tov. In this world of malacha , or better yet just the world outside, we are immediately confronted with taavoth and other distractions that challenge our conception of tov. The pain is beneficial at this point because it is the screaming of the soul, the mind or whatever you want to call it, the yelping of a mind that was spoiled by all day involvement in chachamah and is now conflicted over the removal or limitation of it.It is the recognition of what you have up until now held to be the good. This pain is what will in the beginning stages push you to the bechirah of tov and of chayim and will steer you from the pitfalls of rah and maveth.





א רשות כל אדם נתונה לו: אם רצה להטות עצמו לדרך טובה ולהיות צדיק, הרשות בידו; ואם רצה להטות עצמו לדרך רעה
ולהיות רשע, הרשות בידו. הוא שכתוב בתורה "הן האדם היה כאחד ממנו, לדעת, טוב ורע" (בראשית ג,כב)--כלומר הן מין זה של אדם היה אחד בעולם, ואין לו מין שני דומה לו בזה העניין, שיהא הוא מעצמו בדעתו ובמחשבתו יודע הטוב והרע ועושה כל מה שהוא חפץ, ואין לו מי שיעכב על ידו מלעשות הטוב או הרע. וכיון שכן הוא, "פן ישלח ידו" (שם

ה [ג] ועיקר זה עיקר גדול הוא, והוא עמוד התורה והמצוה--שנאמר "ראה נתתי לפניך היום, את החיים ואת הטוב, ואת המוות, ואת הרע" (דברים ל,טו), וכתוב "ראה, אנוכי נותן לפניכם--היום: ברכה, וקללה" (דברים יא,כו): כלומר שהרשות בידכם; וכל שיחפוץ האדם לעשות ממעשה בני האדם--עושה, בין טובים בין רעים. ומפני זה העניין נאמר "מי ייתן והיה לבבם זה להם" (דברים ה,כה)--כלומר שאין הבורא כופה בני האדם ולא גוזר עליהן לעשות טובה או רעה, אלא ליבם מסור להם

Ra'avad on teshuva 3:15 continued

As I stated in the previous post, it is more than clear that the Ra'avad held from a rational mesora . However, there is still the main question that I had raised which has yet to be answered. The question, in summation is, why would the Ra'avad use the phrase Gedolim vtuvim memenu to refer to those who believed in a physical G, if in fact he rejects that notion.


In the kesef mishna, Rav Yosef Karo takes up our question:
כתב הראב"ד "ולמה קרה לזה מין וכו' .המשבשות את הדעות עכ"ל.
ויש לתמוה על פה קדוש איך יקרא לאומרים שהוא בעל גוף ובעל תמונה גדולים וטובים ממנו . ואפשר שעיקר הנוסחא כמו שכתוב בספר העיקרים פ"ב ממ"א וז"ל. א"א אע"פ שעיקר האמונה כן הוא המאמין היותו גוף מצד תפיסתו לשונות הפסוקים והמדרשות כפשטן אין ראוי לקרותו מין .


"There is astonishment at the holy mouth [ the Ra'avad] how can he call those who say that G' ahs a body or image " greater and better than he"? It is possible that the essential textual version is the same as is written in the sefer haikkarim : "Abraham states, even though the essential conviction is thus ( that G' is non physical) , one who believes that G' has a body because of the language of the verses and the literal interpretation of the midrashim , it is not appropriate to call him a min."

I was recently made aware of a shiur given by my Rosh Yeshiva, Rav Y. Chait regarding contradictory beliefs in which he mentions this Ra'avad. The shiur can be accessed at http://www.ybt.org/Sunday03092003.ram.

The main point that I have gathered from the shiur regarding our Ra'avad is one which deserves a post in its own right.

The real question here is when we are confronted with language from chazal or other chachamim that semingly contradicts our Yisodos, what should our response be? Our Ra'avad is a prime example of this. Are we to view the problem language as a claim against our already established principles , or is there another reaction.According to Rabbi Chait the appropriate reaction to seemingly contradictory language in the corpus of Torah sheba'al peh is the reaction of the kesef mishna to the Ra'avad. The Kesef Mishna did not read the Ra'avad and question his yisodos. The reaction of Rav Yosef Karo was to utterly reject the problem language as invalid and suggest an appropriate replacement. The response to problem chazals is not to run away screaming that the Yisodos are uprooted because of whatever problem language appears. Rather, the response to a problem language is to clamly return to your knowledge of the foundational principles of yehaduth and to accept that the way in which you are understanding that language is impossible within the mesora and to simply reject the problem statement.This is not to say that you cannot try to resolve the problem, if there is a sevara that can preserve the language and is within the framework of Torah then congratulations you have fought a war in which the truth has prevailed. However, if you cannot salvage that particular language then be satisfied that you were able to determine a conflict between what you were reading and the Yisodos and know that the Yisodos are true and there is no statement that will shake you of that notion.

In conclusion, whenever we are faced with a seemingly problematic statement within the mesora there can be but one reaction. To retreat back to the sound foundations of yehaduth that have been rationally proven , and not put stock in languages that conflict with what we already know is true.