I referenced the constant commandment “Do not have any other gods”, and then remembered there is an excellent write up by Rav Noah Weinberg zt"l on this mitzvah: Don't Believe In Any Other Power. This goes into the danger of taking credit in detail. Highly recommended.
The articles on the 6 constant mitzvot which can be found in the Aish foundations page are excellent and introduce an additional practical level to the basic commandment.
Tuesday, April 12, 2011
admitting our greatest debts
The Gemara, ג, discusses the famous case of מודה במקצת, the law that someone making a partial admission must take an oath on the remainder. The example given is Reuven taken Shimon to court, claiming Shimon owes him $100. Shimon replies that owes only $50. The Torah requires Shimon to make an oath to Reuven regarding the other half.
The Amora Rabah explains why the Torah requires this oath. A person has a sense of gratitude (hacarat hatov) to someone who lent him money, and therefore would not have the gall (hutzpa) to deny the entire loan to his face. However, Shimon could rationalize that he doesn't have all the money now, and think it prudent to admit only part, and pay the rest back later when he gets the chance. The oath is intended to prevent this rationalization, and get the truth out. The court can help Shimon arrange a payment plan.
We should be aware that the logic Rabah describes applies to each. We are all rationalizing to avoid admitting what we owe to others. So many people have helped us, and it seldom comes naturally to thank them and admit that so much of our success is due to others.
The Amora Rabah explains why the Torah requires this oath. A person has a sense of gratitude (hacarat hatov) to someone who lent him money, and therefore would not have the gall (hutzpa) to deny the entire loan to his face. However, Shimon could rationalize that he doesn't have all the money now, and think it prudent to admit only part, and pay the rest back later when he gets the chance. The oath is intended to prevent this rationalization, and get the truth out. The court can help Shimon arrange a payment plan.
We should be aware that the logic Rabah describes applies to each. We are all rationalizing to avoid admitting what we owe to others. So many people have helped us, and it seldom comes naturally to thank them and admit that so much of our success is due to others.
One of the most difficult things is to admit that really, every pleasure and accomplishment we have enjoyed is direct from G-d. We would much rather credit our hard work or cunning. Or we want to think 'G-d gave me brains but I used them to get where I am'. We are rationalizing to avoid giving G-d all the credit.
In fact, this is a constant test, as there is a mitzvah tmidi (constant commandment) on us “Do not have any other gods”, which means don't believe there is any power except for our Creator. When we, or our ego really, tries to take the credit, we are pretending that we are the power that made it happen. (This is the first step to ignoring G-d, see Devarim/Deuteronomy 8:12-17).
We (our egos) are hooked on rationalization, it fuels our sense of self satisfaction but destroys our hacarat hatov. What to do?
We can apply Rabah's logic. If we can start admitting that G-d has provided us with small things, we are at least being מודה במקצת. This will make it easier to admit that the bigger things, all of 'our' accomplishments, even life itself - everything is a gift.
To make a practical start, we can try to have a real sense of gratitude when we wake up alive in the morning. Jewish law provides a number of blessings we say every day – we thank our creator for eyes, our brain, our ability to walk, our clothing. We are thanking G-d, but since we say these every day, they become ritualized. Really the morning blessings are a way to start integrating gratitude a little at a time. This gradual approach can avoid some of the pitfalls of the ego as we work our way up to thanking our Creator wholeheartedly for everything.
Wednesday, April 6, 2011
:ג coming clean up front
When we make a mistake, we know the right thing to do is admit the problem and correct it as soon reasonably possible. This is not always simple, and often what could have been a quick apology gets dragged out.
On daf ג: Tosafot brings a dispute between Rabbi Meir and his peers regarding the admission of a person who is accused by witnesses of eating חלב, a prohibited fat. If the accused ate the fat unintentionally, he must bring an offering, a חטאת, to atone for this mistake. If he ate on purpose he does not bring an offering, but his punishment is כרת "excision" (which is more serious, but lighter on the pocketbook).
The assumption is the accused did not eat the fat on purpose (we give our fellows the benefit of the doubt). But if he says I ate on purpose, the Rabbis believe him and he is not liable to bring an offering, even if he only makes this admission after denying that he ate at all. However, Rabbi Meir only believes such a confession if the accused offers it immediately. If the accused first contradicts the witnesses, by saying "I did not eat", and only later admits "I did not eat as you thought - unintentionally, rather I ate intentionally" Rabbi Meir does not believe him.
It seems to me that Rabbi Meir is concerned that the accused is confessing to save some money, as if he was sincere about eating on purpose he would have admitted that right away instead of contradicting the witnesses. The lesson for us is that when we make a mistake, if we delay coming to terms with it, the people we need to apologize to may be less willing to accept our admission as genuine. (However, this is not true when we apologize to our Creator, who is infinitely patient and always accepts תשובה).
This opinion is sensible. So why are Rabbi Meir's peers willing to accept his admission even after the accused contradicting the witnesses? One factor is the accused is not totally contradicting the witnesses, but rather explaining that when he said "I did not eat" he really meant "I did not eat unintentionally as you assumed, but on purpose". Another factor is that the accused may realize that if he allows the testimony of the witnesses to stand, he will have to bring an offering that in reality is not needed (as an offering is not the proper atonement for eating חלב on purpose). Once he realizes this, the accused has that additional pressure to help him overcome the shame of admitting he ate on purpose. If this pressure is not enough, then he has committed the additional transgression of bringing an inappropriate offering (עבירה גוררת עבירה).
From here we can learn that even if we have delayed admitting our wrong doing, and seemingly could avoid ever admitting, continuing to hide is not the right thing to do.
Additional problems are likely to come up that will eventually drive us to confess. The bottom line is that being willing to admit our wrongdoing right away is very difficult, but will enhance our credibility and help us avoid more complications.
On daf ג: Tosafot brings a dispute between Rabbi Meir and his peers regarding the admission of a person who is accused by witnesses of eating חלב, a prohibited fat. If the accused ate the fat unintentionally, he must bring an offering, a חטאת, to atone for this mistake. If he ate on purpose he does not bring an offering, but his punishment is כרת "excision" (which is more serious, but lighter on the pocketbook).
The assumption is the accused did not eat the fat on purpose (we give our fellows the benefit of the doubt). But if he says I ate on purpose, the Rabbis believe him and he is not liable to bring an offering, even if he only makes this admission after denying that he ate at all. However, Rabbi Meir only believes such a confession if the accused offers it immediately. If the accused first contradicts the witnesses, by saying "I did not eat", and only later admits "I did not eat as you thought - unintentionally, rather I ate intentionally" Rabbi Meir does not believe him.
It seems to me that Rabbi Meir is concerned that the accused is confessing to save some money, as if he was sincere about eating on purpose he would have admitted that right away instead of contradicting the witnesses. The lesson for us is that when we make a mistake, if we delay coming to terms with it, the people we need to apologize to may be less willing to accept our admission as genuine. (However, this is not true when we apologize to our Creator, who is infinitely patient and always accepts תשובה).
This opinion is sensible. So why are Rabbi Meir's peers willing to accept his admission even after the accused contradicting the witnesses? One factor is the accused is not totally contradicting the witnesses, but rather explaining that when he said "I did not eat" he really meant "I did not eat unintentionally as you assumed, but on purpose". Another factor is that the accused may realize that if he allows the testimony of the witnesses to stand, he will have to bring an offering that in reality is not needed (as an offering is not the proper atonement for eating חלב on purpose). Once he realizes this, the accused has that additional pressure to help him overcome the shame of admitting he ate on purpose. If this pressure is not enough, then he has committed the additional transgression of bringing an inappropriate offering (עבירה גוררת עבירה).
From here we can learn that even if we have delayed admitting our wrong doing, and seemingly could avoid ever admitting, continuing to hide is not the right thing to do.
Additional problems are likely to come up that will eventually drive us to confess. The bottom line is that being willing to admit our wrongdoing right away is very difficult, but will enhance our credibility and help us avoid more complications.
what is "the middle gate" ?
bs''d
"The middle gate" is the English translation of “Bava Metzia”, which is the title of the thirteenth volume of the Babylonian Talmud (Gemara). The Talmud is a primary source for Jewish law, ethics, and traditions, as it explains the specifics of what the Torah (the Hebrew Bible) requires of us.
The Gemara records conversations, debates, and stories that explain the rulings of the Mishnah, the oral partner to the written Torah. The Talmud was written down about 1600 years ago, but existed in oral form for over a thousand years. There are some Mishnaot (the plural of "Mishnah") that are unchanged from the time of Moses, who lived 3200 years ago.
Bava Metzia is called the middle gate since it comes after Bava Kama "the first gate" and Bava Batra "the final gate". Bava Kama mainly discusses damages and restitution (torts in modern legal parlance) while Bava Batra contains property law and inheritance. These three volumes together are referred to as the Order of Nezikin (damages).
Bava Metzia generally is about laws that apply between people in the context of doing business. For example, Bava Metzia describes laws related to returning lost objects, hiring and paying workers, making acquisitions and using credit, contracts, futures, and interest payments, and the responsibilities of a person guarding the property of another.
As with any volume of the Talmud, Bava Metzia is much more than a law tome. The legal rulings and traditions contain many profound concepts that guide interpersonal interactions every day. Some of these are give explicit guidance or examples, while other concepts are hidden within complex legal standards. Bava Metzia also contains some crucial passages which reveal the nature of the relationship our Creator has with us.
Our Torah is called “Torat Haim” literally “instructions for living”. Many elements which may seem simple have a deeper content or theme which we can apply to our life to enhance the way we live every day. I have chosen, with the help of our Creator, to study Bava Metzia with the goal of bringing some of these concepts to a wider audience.
"The middle gate" is the English translation of “Bava Metzia”, which is the title of the thirteenth volume of the Babylonian Talmud (Gemara). The Talmud is a primary source for Jewish law, ethics, and traditions, as it explains the specifics of what the Torah (the Hebrew Bible) requires of us.
The Gemara records conversations, debates, and stories that explain the rulings of the Mishnah, the oral partner to the written Torah. The Talmud was written down about 1600 years ago, but existed in oral form for over a thousand years. There are some Mishnaot (the plural of "Mishnah") that are unchanged from the time of Moses, who lived 3200 years ago.
Bava Metzia is called the middle gate since it comes after Bava Kama "the first gate" and Bava Batra "the final gate". Bava Kama mainly discusses damages and restitution (torts in modern legal parlance) while Bava Batra contains property law and inheritance. These three volumes together are referred to as the Order of Nezikin (damages).
Bava Metzia generally is about laws that apply between people in the context of doing business. For example, Bava Metzia describes laws related to returning lost objects, hiring and paying workers, making acquisitions and using credit, contracts, futures, and interest payments, and the responsibilities of a person guarding the property of another.
As with any volume of the Talmud, Bava Metzia is much more than a law tome. The legal rulings and traditions contain many profound concepts that guide interpersonal interactions every day. Some of these are give explicit guidance or examples, while other concepts are hidden within complex legal standards. Bava Metzia also contains some crucial passages which reveal the nature of the relationship our Creator has with us.
Our Torah is called “Torat Haim” literally “instructions for living”. Many elements which may seem simple have a deeper content or theme which we can apply to our life to enhance the way we live every day. I have chosen, with the help of our Creator, to study Bava Metzia with the goal of bringing some of these concepts to a wider audience.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)