What is the cure for diseases of the soul?- ומה היא תקנת חולי נפשות

An anonymous comment on the last post asked what the proper method for perfecting one's self in the area of shtika would be. The comment caused me to focus back on the method of perfecting Deos. I realize that I dont normally like to post out of order in a perek, but alas, it demands its own post .

משוך חסדך, ליודעיך; וצדקתך, לישרי לב תהילים לו,יא
O continue Thy lovingkindness unto them that know Thee; and Thy righteousness to the upright in heart.

א חולי הגוף, טועמים המר מתוק והמתוק מר. ויש מן החולים מי שמתאווה ותאב למאכלות שאינן ראויין לאכילה, כגון העפר והפחם, ושונא המאכלות הטובים, כגון הפת והבשר--הכול לפי רוב החולי. כך בני אדם שנפשותיהם חולות, מתאווים ואוהבים הדעות הרעות; ושונאים הדרך הטובה, ומתעצלים ללכת בה, והיא כבדה עליהן למאוד, לפי חוליים. וכן ישעיהו אומר באנשים הללו, "הוי האומרים לרע טוב, ולטוב רע: שמים חושך לאור ואור לחושך, שמים מר למתוק ומתוק למר" (ישעיהו ה,כ). ועליהם נאמר "העוזבים, אורחות יושר--ללכת, בדרכי חושך" (משלי ב,יג).
ב ומה היא תקנת חולי נפשות--ילכו אצל החכמים, שהם רופאי הנפשות, וירפאו חוליים בדעות, שמלמדין אותם עד שיחזירום לדרך הטובה. והמכירים בדעות הרעות שלהם, ואינם הולכים אצל החכמים לרפא אותם--עליהם אמר שלמה, "ומוסר, אווילים בזו" (משלי א,ז).
ג [ב] וכיצד היא רפואתם: מי שהוא בעל חמה--אומרים לו להנהיג עצמו שאם הוכה וקולל, לא ירגיש כלל, וילך בדרך זו זמן מרובה, עד שתיעקר החמה מליבו. ואם היה גבה לב--ינהיג עצמו בביזיון הרבה, ויישב למטה מן הכול, וילבוש בלויי סחבות המבזין את לובשיהן, וכיוצא בדברים אלו: עד שייעקר גובה הלב ממנו, ויחזור לדרך האמצעית, שהיא דרך הטובה; ולכשיחזור לדרך האמצעית, ילך בה כל ימיו.

The sick of the body taste bitter things as sweet and sweet things as bitter. There are some sicknesses which cause a desire to eat things which are not suitable for eating, such as dust and coal, and also cause a dislike of normal foods, such as bread and meat - it all depends upon the seriousness of the sickness in question. So too man who's soul is sick, desire and love the bad temperaments, and hate the good ways and try to avoid going in those ways, for the sickness makes it difficult. About such people Isaiah said, "Woe to those people who call bad good and good bad, put dark for light and light for dark and put the sweet for bitter and the bitter for sweet", and about them it is written, "...who leave the paths of uprightness to walk in the ways of darkness".
So what is a remedy for sicknesses of the soul? Go next to wise people, for they are healers of the soul, healing it by means of temperaments which they teach until they have returned the soul to the good ways. Concerning those who recognise in themselves bad temperaments but do not go amongst wise people Solomon said, "Fools despise wisdom and instruction".

How do they cure? They tell someone who is of an angry disposition to establish himself, and that if he is hit or cursed he should not react, and he should follow this way until his angry disposition has left him. If he was haughty, he should subject himself to a lot of disgrace and sit low down, and should dress in torn rags which are a discredit to normal clothes, and do similar things until his haughtiness has left him and he returns to the middle way, which is the good way. Once he has returned to the middle way he should follow it for the rest of his life. Other temperaments should be treated in this manner - if one was far over to one extreme, one should move oneself to the other extreme and accustom oneself to it for a long time, until one has returned to the good way, which is the intermediate characteristic that each and every temperament has.

I wanted to clarify something that I know personally I often overlook. Most people are aware that the Rambam advises that one must go to the opposite extreme in order to address a character defect and then moderate himself. What is sad is that this halacha is often learned while ignoring the prior law. The essential cure for deos diseases is consulting a Chacham. ומה היא תקנת חולי נפשות--ילכו אצל החכמים and not rashly changing one's deos on their own.

The derech chachma of adjusting deos is to go to a chacham and speak with him. This is Not a rash self diagnosis but rather a careful consultation with an expert. The Rambam does not advocate hasty pendulum swings in deos. Halacha 2 ( 3) must be viewed in the context of the prior statement, that the cholei hanefesh must go to a Rofeh Nefashos to heal them, and the method that the Doctor will proscribe will involve a careful adjustment of the character through the method described.

לעולם ירבה אדם בשתיקה Man should always maximize silence

משוך חסדך, ליודעיך; וצדקתך, לישרי לב תהילים לו,יא
O continue Thy lovingkindness unto them that know Thee; and Thy righteousness to the upright in heart.
ח [ד] לעולם ירבה אדם בשתיקה, ולא ידבר אלא בדבר חכמה או בדברים שהוא צריך להן לחיי גופו. אמרו על רב תלמיד רבנו
הקדוש, שלא שח שיחה בטילה כל ימיו--וזו היא שיחת רוב כל אדם. ואפילו בצורכי הגוף, לא ירבה אדם דברים. ועל זה ציוו חכמים ואמרו, כל המרבה דברים, מביא חטא; ואמרו לא מצאתי לגוף טוב, אלא שתיקה.
ט וכן בדברי תורה ובדברי חכמה--יהיו דברי החכם מועטים, וענייניהם מרובים. והוא שציוו חכמים ואמרו, לעולם ישנה אדם לתלמידו דרך קצרה. אבל אם היו הדברים מרובים והעניין מועט, הרי זו סכלות; ועל זה נאמר "כי בא החלום, ברוב עניין; וקול כסיל, ברוב דברים" (קוהלת ה,ב).
י [ה] סייג לחכמה, שתיקה. לפיכך לא ימהר להשיב, ולא ירבה לדבר; וילמד לתלמידים בשובה ונחת, בלא צעקה, בלא אריכות לשון. הוא ששלמה אומר, "דברי חכמים, בנחת נשמעים" (קוהלת ט,יז).

" Man should always maximize silence, he should only speak words of chachama or things which are necessary for the life of his body. It is said about Rav the talmid of Rabbeinu Hakadosh ( Rabbi Judah the Prince), that he did not converse in meaningless conversation his entire life, this is the conversation of the majority of Mankind. Even with regards to physical needs, Man should not maximize his words. On this commandment the Sages said " All who increase their words bring sin. They said, there is nothing found that is better for the body than silence.

This applies also to words of Torah and words of wisdom. The words of a chacham should be minimal and the concepts widespread.This is what the sages commanded and said 'Man should always teach his students in a concise manner'. However, if the words are many and the concept small,this is foolishness. Regardung this it says : "For a dream cometh through a multitude of business; and a fool's voice through a multitude of words."( Ecclesiastes 5:2)

Silence is a protection to chachma, therefore one should not rush to answer, nor increase his words, and one should teach his students quietly,without shouting, without lengthy words, this is as Solomon said "The words of the wise spoken in quiet are more acceptable than the cry of a ruler among fools."( Ecclesiastes 9:17)

Questions:

A) What is the Rambam's concept of " Shtika"( silence)
B) What is the perfection of Shtika?
C) Why should man limit even the words of chachama that he speaks?

Perhaps the best way to define Silence and answer our questions is to define the opposite, namely speech. I believe that speech is a declarative action about reality. The speaker conveys his or her vision for reality, or of reality to the world. I know this sounds a bit far fetched, why dont we try it out. " I am tired", the person who makes this statement usually wishes that he was not tired, that he had an alternative reality. " I have work Tomorrow", again , the person is bearing testimony to a reality. ( I can keep going on with these examples , but in the interest of brevity, and not going on anymore, I will stop). Every phrase that the speaker utters is a reflection of the speakers view of reality. This is so because the fact that the person speaks about something means that his view of anything is important in and of itself.
The speaking itself, let alone what is being spoken reflects the worldview of the speaker, one who occupies himself with discussing chachma makes a different statement than one who talks about that beautiful loaf that he found at the market, or the latest gossip. Again, the subject that we choose to speak about reflects our notion of the good on one level, ( the person who only speaks about food clearly values food above all else, he declares that the reality of the universe exists for his tase experience). The fact that we choose to speak is itself also our very own declaration of what reality is. Speaking acts as a stamp on reality, a declaration that something IS or Should be.
If this is the case what is the problem with speaking words of chachma ( or speaking too much)? Surely, words of chachma ARE reality, what harm can be done with lengthy discourse in matters of reality? The problem with over speaking with chachma is the same as it is with anything else, speaking is a declaration or commentary on reality by the speaker. When one is engaged in chachma it has to be clear that the davar is not "his" reality but Realities Reality. The speaker who goes overboard even speaking chachma makes the statement that reality is as he perceives it and is no other way, ( definitively, in explaining an idea you are declaring that the idea IS as YOU see it) this is itself a distortion of reality. We know that no man can perceive reality as it really is and as such lengthening words is muddying the waters.

Therefore, shtika, allows for the removal of man from his desire and practice of making declarations about reality. Shtika allows the person to appreciate reality without imprinting himself on reality or confirming or denying reality. Silence is a defense to wisdom because it helps to slow or prevent the distortions created when we speak.

I found an interesting halacha in the first chapter of the Yisodei HaTorah:
יד ואין לו לא מוות ולא חיים כחיי הגוף החי, ולא סכלות ולא חכמה כחכמת האיש החכם, לא שינה ולא הקיצה, ולא כעס ולא שחוק, ולא שמחה ולא עצבות, ולא שתיקה ולא דיבור כדיבור האדם. כך אמרו חכמים, אין למעלה לא ישיבה ולא עמידה, לא עורף ולא עיפוי

"He does not have death, nor life like that of a body that is living, nor foolishness nor wisdom like the wisdom of a Man who is a sage, neither sleep nor waking, neither anger nor levity, and not happiness or sadness, Not silence and not speech like the speech of a man. Thus said the sages, there is no sitting nor standing no back and no fatigue"

This halacha is of course from the very first chapter of the laws of the foundations of the Torah. I found it interesting that the Rambam uses the anthropomorphisms that he does. Particularly " no shtika and no Speech like that of a Man". The " attributes" are phrases that we use to attempt to understand G' by comparing him to our experiential data. It is interesting that we do not have an idea of " Shtika" in terms of G' but we do have an idea of "Dibur". I think, that this could be pointing to the potential idea of shtika from hilchos deos. Dibur of G' is the manifestation of chachma. Chachmas Hashem is manifest in the creation, Neviim experience chachma manifested even further because they are at highly perfected levels of thought and deed, " and G' spoke to Moses saying". " Dibur" in terms of G' is reality.Shtika could not be appropriated to G' because there is no alternative to Reality being manifest.

שאין העולם מתקיים, אלא בהבל פיהם של תינוקות של בית רבן. The world is only sustained because of the breath of children in the house of study

משוך חסדך, ליודעיך; וצדקתך, לישרי לב

In Matt's comment on the last post he quoted the following Midrash from Kallah Rabbasi :

Every day a malach goes out before the Kadosh Baruch Hu to destroy the world, but once the Kadosh Baruch Hu gazes upon the tinokos shel beis rabban and the talmidei chachamim, immediately His anger turns to mercy.



Matt also pointed to the gemara in Shabbos 119b which says: "The world is only sustained by the breath of the tinokos shel beis rabban."

What does these two Midrashim mean? What is the benefit of the Tinokos shel Beis Rabban that we can say that the world is saved because of them?

This idea is brought down by the Rambam in the second chapter of the laws of Talmud Torah ( first halacha):

א מושיבין מלמדי תינוקות בכל מדינה ומדינה, ובכל פלך ופלך. וכל עיר שאין בה תינוקות של בית רבן--מחרימין את אנשי העיר, עד שמושיבין מלמד תינוקות; ואם לא הושיבו, מחריבין את העיר: שאין העולם מתקיים, אלא בהבל פיהם של תינוקות של בית רבן.
" You establish childhood educators in each and every province and each and every town. Any city that does not have an educator for its children- the men of the city are placed in excommunication until they sit an educator for the children. If they do not seat an educator, you destroy the city, because the world is only sustained through the breath of the mouths of the children in the study house"

Again, we see that the " world is only sustained through the breath of the children in the house of study". The Rambam is quite clear that every city must have an educator for its children or risk excommunication or loss of the city. What is the importance of this?

I find it interesting that the midrash states that the Kadosh Baruch Hu gazes at the children and the Talmidei Chachamim and his " anger" is assuaged. In the other two formulations I have presented only the children are emphasized. I think this is a hint.

The world is only sustained through the breath of the children in the study house. I believe that this is refering to the Mesorah of yedias Hashem. In other words the world is only sustained if there is a system of training humanity to be knowers of G'. Humanity as a species has a goal of recognizing and " knowing" G' , Am Israel is tasked with being humanities teachers. If Am Israel does not create and maintain a system of education in this concept then Humanity will not live in line with its purpose. As such the world will not be sustainable since it's purpose is no longer fulfilled ( that is, it will fall within another realm of law since it has failed to foster Yedia { " Hashem's Anger"}). This is why the Rambam includes the law that a city that does not seat an educator is excommunicated and then risks destruction. It has failed to perform its most important goal as a city which is to be a tool of perpetuating Yedias Hashem and when it has relinquished this priority it has relinquished its hold on existance.

Why then is there a slight difference between the aggadita in Shabbos ( as quoted also by the Rambam) which states that only the breath of the children sustains the world, and the midrash in Kallah Rabasi which mentions the image of Tinnokos and Talmidei Chachamim "assuaging" the Kadosh Baruch Hu? These two phrases are in reality two expressions of one idea. Talmidei Chachamim are the active and current teachers of humanity, they are the ones with the greatest understanding and those who are most capable of spreading Yedia. Children in the house of study are not yet active tools of yedia, rather they are the material from which Yodei Hashem are formed. In other words the "sight" of Talmidei chachamim and Tinokos is really the expression that Humanity as a SPECIES is engaged in the recognition of G' and not merely as a generational occupation. The inclusion of both Talmidei Chachamim and Tinokos, demonstrates that humanity is engaged perpetually in the process of Yediah. Both generations point to our essential purpose. The world is only sustained through the Human species' recognition of Yedias Hashem, and this can only be accomplished through being maishiv melamdei Tinokos and fostering the " Hevel Pihem shel Tinokos shel Beis Rabban"

I wanted to take this opportunity with this idea on my lips, to be personally Meshabeach the Kadosh Baruch Hu for a great blessing he has bestowed on me,the birth of my niece,Meora Lila, the first of her generation. May it be his will that she grow into a woman of valor , one with yedias Hashem, a true expression of the verse in Micah 6
"ח הִגִּיד לְךָ אָדָם, מַה-טּוֹב; וּמָה-יְהוָה דּוֹרֵשׁ מִמְּךָ, כִּי אִם-עֲשׂוֹת מִשְׁפָּט וְאַהֲבַת חֶסֶד, וְהַצְנֵעַ לֶכֶת, עִם-אֱלֹ-ֶךָ.
It hath been told thee, O man, what is good, and what the LORD doth require of thee: only to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk modestly with thy G.

Dialogues with a Modern Stoic

Recently I came across a website run by a " modern stoic". Amazed that there were individuals out there who considered themselves stoics, I sought to contact him and start a dialogue. I mentioned that I was a student in a yeshiva and thought that the stoic philosophy was very similar to the words of chazal in many cases.
In his reply email the gentleman asked me the following question.
" Do you believe that your god really cares about the extraordinary detail that goes into daily practice, especially on the Sabbath, of course. And if so, why?

I guess what I'm really asking is how much is divine expectation versus Rabbinical invention?"

The following is my letter in response to his question. Keep in mind that I was trying to avoid extreme detail and felt it was necessary for the sake of him understanding my basic point, to sacrifice some detail and clarity.In addition there are certain lines which seem redundant, again, my concern was to make sure that I communicated my point and as such there are certain repetitions.


First off, I just wanted to say again how thankful I am that we can engage in an honest and open investigation. It is yet another gift that I have been granted in this life. Please forgive me for lack of style, and if it seems that I am quoting from your question or from a source I apologize, it is merely for my organization.

You ask, “. Do you believe that your god really cares about the extraordinary detail that goes into daily practice, especially on the Sabbath, of course. And if so, why?” You go on further and ask, “I guess what I'm really asking is how much is divine expectation versus Rabbinical invention? I probably shouldn't compare your situation with the Catholic faith, but it's the first to come to mind: only fish on Fridays, celibate priests, infallible popes, birth control prohibition, et cetera. Is there a substantive difference between Catholic prohibitions and those of the Orthodox Jewish faith?

I think you are asking two separate questions. As I understand it, your first question pertains to the Jewish view of G-d, the proper service of him and the reasons for said service. The second question seems to seek a clarification of the system of Jewish law how it is derived, instituted and practiced. I will attempt to answer the questions in order.

Do I believe that my God really cares about the extraordinary detail that goes into my daily practice? No. Unequivocally God does not care. God does not need my service to him. God does not need anyone’s service nor does he need any of his creations for anything. To attribute a need to God would be to attribute a lack to him, he needs neither me nor my service .God is independent of his creations. The question then is, “if it is so that God does not want my service, then what is the purpose of my observance?” I believe that the answer to this question will come from an understanding of what Torah is and what its relationship to man is.
Man
As you know the essence of Man is his faculty of reason. The verse in Genesis 1 “27 And God created man in His own image, in the image of God created He him; male and female created He them”, is interpreted by the Talmudic scholars to be referring to the human intellect. Our purpose in life is to use our intellect to perceive reality and to live in accordance with it. This is I believe the same as the stoic adjuration to live in line with nature. What then is this system of Torah that has occupied the minds and governed the lives of Jews for the last 5 thousand years, and how does it relate to mans nature?

Torah
Torah is an intellectual system of life given to Man through the nation of Israel. The Torah exists in two media, written and oral. Neither is complete without the other and both were given to a mass of people at Sinai. Encompassed in the Torah are the commandments ( Mitzvos). The commandments (all six hundred and thirteen) are tools that God has given us to perfect our minds. Each individual commandment is aimed at removing a false notion of the universe and instilling the correct idea.
It is now possible to answer the question that we had asked earlier on, namely if God does not want my service what is the point of my service? The Torah is an intellectual system that was given to man to perfect himself. Each law in the Torah is designed with human nature in mind to guide Man to his ultimate potential. When we engage in the law we are not serving God for hopes of appeasing him or satisfying a desire . Rather what we aim at with our dedication to the law is a fulfillment of Man’s mission to live in line with his intellectual nature, and perceive the reality of the Universe as it really is and not as my psyche wishes it to be.

As per the second part of your question, I would point you to three verses in Deuteronomy ( Chapter 30:12-14). 12 It is not in heaven, that thou shouldest say: 'Who shall go up for us to heaven, and bring it unto us, and make us to hear it, that we may do it?' 13 Neither is it beyond the sea, that thou shouldest say: 'Who shall go over the sea for us, and bring it unto us, and make us to hear it, that we may do it?' 14 But the word is very nigh unto thee, in thy mouth, and in thy heart, that thou mayest do it. In terms of Rabbinic “invention” or the relationship between what was given and what we do , these verses stand out as the rubric. The words of God himself are quite clear. “It is not in the heavens”, the system of Torah was given over as an intellectual system for man and it is he who must master the law and interpret it. The rules and guidelines were given over to man and it is Man’s job to make sure it is kept. This is where the perception of “Rabbinic invention” comes in. It is true that there are rules or extensions of rules that were not given to Moses at Sinai. However, “ it is very nigh unto you” ,one must note that the very system of interpretation was within the system given to Moses at Sinai .
As I stated previously the Torah is an intellectual system which serves to perfect our lives. Again God does not need me or my service. The system of Torah was given to humanity as the tool for engaging the mind and accepting the reality of the laws of creation. It is up to the experts in the legal system to apply and extrapolate its principles. In that way there is no such thing as “Rabbinic invention” because the Torah given by God demands that there is a constant engagement of legal experts to properly understand it.

To recap, Man was given the Torah, a system of intellectual and moral perfection, not for Gods satisfaction ( which is impossible), but only so that Man can reach his potential and recognize the reality of the Universe. Man can only achieve true happiness, true success if he recognizes and lives in line with his nature, as Aurelius states in Book two of the Meditations. “This thou must always bear in mind, what is the nature of the whole, and what is my nature, and how this is related to that, and what kind of a part it is of what kind of a whole; and that there is no one who hinders thee from always doing and saying the things which are according to the nature of which thou art a part”. This is the goal of Torah and this is the philosophy of the Stoic masters as I see it.

Man- Intellect, Instinct, Imagination

I have the tremendous bracha to have just started a new chavrusah with my friend Jonny. The topic of our study is Mitzvos and the Mishneh Torah. Our first hour of study brought out some amazing ideas and I thought it would be appropriate to share them , perhaps as the first in a series of posts resulting from this new endeavor.


Since our chavrusah is to focus on the area of Mitzvos as a system, we thought it would be beneficial to start out by defining some basic ideas that are relevant to mitzvos. Today we took on the concept of " Man".


What is Man?


This is a question that is all to hastily answered by most people. The immediate answer could be, "man is an animal". This is flawed because it fails to capture man's essence. Another answer could be " Man is intellect", this is flawed because man is not purely intellect. A more subtle approach would be the synthesis of these two catchphrases into " Man is a rational animal".This answer is also flawed but for a different reason than the two previous. This answer is flawed because the term " rational animal" is so in need of definition as to be practically meaningless.


In order to properly formulate the definition we first examined "Animal".


When an animal, say a cougar wakes up in the morning, it has immediate instinctual drives.The cougar is hungry so it goes out to the field and spots antelope.The cougars instinct tells him that this antelope is a food source. The cougar pounces on its prey , kills it, eats it and satisfies its instinctual need for food. When the cougar needs to mate, it again goes to the field spots a female cougar utilizes it to his procreative need and satisfies his instinct. When the cougar needs shade it finds a tree and rests beneath it allowing the boughs to keep the sun's rays from causing harm.The animal is capable of seeing good for himself. The cougar can see a shady spot and instinct will guide it to rest, a plump antelope to eat, and a young female to sport with.


How does the instinctual gratification of the Cougar compare to that of Man?


When Man wakes up in the morning he is also hungry. He can gather food, he understands what is and is not food. Similarly he needs to procreate so he looks for and finds a mate. He relates to the instinctual needs similarly to the cougar. He needs to eat, he needs to procreate, he needs shelter. Man also has another element though. When he gazes on an apple tree, he does not just see food, he does not just see shade. There is something beyond the immediate instinct that Man has the ability to comprehend. Man can see the apple tree recognizes it as a source of physical good and then can make a breakthrough. All of a sudden he can see the tree and place it into a general category of "Plant" and can fit that into part of the overall ecosystem. He can perceive the tree as both food and as part of a universal category.



This ability to see the world both in terms of immediate instinct and universal categories is our working definition for " intellect". When the cougar wakes up he immediately starts collecting data and uses it to satisfy his instinctual needs. When Man wakes up he collects data for his instinctual needs and also uses that data and fits it into universal categories. He sees the world as both individual circumstances for fulfilling his instinct and a unified order of nature.



We now have a clear distinction between Man and Animal.The question now is how does the Man take the data that he has collected and use said data?

As the sensory data is collected it is acted on by the " imagination". The Imagination is the part of man that collects the sensory data and orders it into essences and accidents based on the frameworks of either the Instinct or the Intellect.For instance the Man can see a bone lying on the ground. His imagination will then categorize this bone as " essentially a weapon with which I can fend off predators"( an example of the Imagination viewing instinctual essences and accidents), or he can see this bone and view it as " essentially a part of the skeleton of an antelope" and intellectually fit it into the universal system of nature.

To recap we have three aspects, Instinct- the part of man that tells him he is hungry,he needs shade, he needs reproduction.Intellect- the part that puts the data that his senses collect into categorical terms, views everything he comes in contact with as part of a universal. Imagination- the part that takes the data and views it in terms of essences and accidents of both the Instinctual and Intellectual.

To be continued....