Predestination And You
The Torah mandates to fence our roofs saying “do not place blood in your home, when ‘the faller’ falls from [your roof]”. Why is the victim called ‘the faller’?
Rashi explains that he is named ‘the faller’, because he was predestined to fall. He would have died anyhow. Take care, however, teaches this mitzvah, that you are not involved in his death…
This implies that when one causes another’s death, the victim would have died anyhow. So what do we fault the killer for? It it for merely trying to kill the other, or perhaps for taking liberties in caring for him, but not the actual death?
Kayin was accused: ‘the blood of your brother and his future generations cry out to Me from the earth’, implying that Hevel’s eventual generations were destroyed by Kayin. Had he merely chosen to kill Hevel, but Hevel would anyhow not lived, then what generations are there to talk of? Why saddle Kayin with the onus of their lost lives?
In fact, the argument seems circular; if I know that I can only kill someone predetermined to die, then how can I guilty of attempting to kill – I do know I cannot do anything undestined??
There are two tracks, neither connecting to the other; Foreknowledge and Free Choice means that Hashem knows what I am going to choose, yet that does not affect my ability to choose freely. Precisely as our knowing someone’s choice after the fact does not affect his choosing, so does Hashem knowing our future choice not affect our power to choose.
Hashem may know that A will choose to kill B. In His book the victim is already as good as dead, but only because the murderer chose to do so. So he is hardly absolved because of predestination – on the contrary, – he caused that predestination!
(I am still not too clear, about this. The simple reading of the sources is that the fellow would have died without the killer, yet the killer is held responsible for it.)
***
Health Vs Morals
Rashi comments that the Torah permitted marrying gentile women in war because had it been forbidden, they would be taken in sin. Better permit it, and no one sins. This sounds like the Torah is at odds with human nature, permitting a wrong marriage because there is no other choice. Is this a G-d given Torah?
A normal person functions in a certain way. Not always does being emotionally healthy and doing right dovetail. For example, the Rambam says that it is proper for a person to get angry over very important matters. Being too cool means you are emotionally dead, not human. Yet anger is evil, even then.
What if someone considers it important (nebach!) that his kids keep off the couch – is he to become angry about that? From the viewpoint of emotional health, Yes, he ought to get angry. And at the same time, something is also very confused about the priorities in his life. Perhaps we would say: theoretically, it is wrong to be angry about this, but practically one ought to be.
The duality exists, and is real.
The warrior who has taken a liking to a gentile woman is being healthy emotionally. Situationally, it is normal behavior. Here emotional good contradicts moral good. And the Torah condones the marriage. The Torah is not raising a white flag – rather it chooses (in this case) that we go with our emotional good.
Often there is a flip side to our instincts. Those instincts are important, but we need to know that health can have side effects. Sometimes we see our fellow doing something and scratch our heads ‘Why is he doing that!?’ Then we realize: its the flip side of his generous nature, or some other fine point of his. The good trait is causing a bit of mess here.
Realize this well, and take more kindly to our friend’s faults!
***
Too Complicated…
The Torah forbids taking back a wife if she married again after her divorce. If she wasn’t married, only betrothed, then its fine. From the context, the Torah makes it clear that there was no plan of a temporary marriage, of exchanging mates. Rather the second husband hated and divorced her, or died. So what’s the problem?
Perhaps there are too many issues involved in the marriage; 1. the first sour marriage 2. the relationship with another fellow 3. the breakup of that relationship and 4. coming back to the first husband. This marriage is too complicated. The two are ruined (- ‘hutam’a’ah’ -) for each other because there are issues within issues.
The lesson? A. We need to resolve issues before they become too many and big to resolve. B. Not everything is resolvable – sometimes you simply need to walk away from it. We can – and sometimes do – royally screw up.
***
Publicity and Crime
A sinner is executed and hung. We do not leave him there even overnight, for ‘kililas Elokim taluy’. The Targum explains that we take him down because he was killed for sinning to Hashem. The Mishna explains “…that people will say ‘Why was this fellow hung? Because he cursed Hashem!’ This disgraces Hashem’s name!”
What’s the disgrace? A king who’s subjects are unruly and rebellious is a poor leader. People say “What kind of kingdom is it when the subjects don’t listen to their king? What an impotent king!” So discussing sinners is a chillul Hashem, – even just talking about them!!
Another reason we don’t publicize criminals is because these people stand for crime. They are a pro-crime statement. We don’t want to hear that statement, and so we pretend they don’t exist!
How does this fit in with the Torah concept of ‘so that people hear, and take warning’, i.e. discouraging crime by publicizing its consequences?
Perhaps sudden news of a criminal being punished has a shock effect on the hearers. It deters them from evil. But chronic hearing of evil has the opposite effect. People get used to it; it becomes familiar, and hence legitimate. So we hang him up, all right, to scare everyone; but quickly take him down before we grow familiar with what he represents.
Newspapers, news channels and so on – by definition, titillate our senses. They are not out to educate nor to promote wholesomeness. This parsha serves warning: watch out! – you are being ruined!
***
In His Image…
A person hung after execution is not to be left overnight – “the disgrace of Hashem hangs”. How so? Rashi explains that Man is formed in the image of Hashem, and we are also called Children of Hashem. Its like two brothers, one who was crowned king while the the other became a thief; when the thief is caught and hung, passerby think that the king is hanging. So too, a man –
looking like Hashem – hanging disgraces Hashem.
A cardinal tenet of Judaism is that Hashem has no limits, and therefore no shape or likeness. So how can Man bear the likeness of Hashem?
Perhaps although Hashem has no innate likeness, He can take form if He so chooses (sod hatzimtzum). And when he has done so, it has invariably been to appear in human form. He has never appeared as a dragon or monster. When the Jews saw Him at the Yam Suf, it was in the form of a warrior. A human warrior. And so with His every appearance to us. This is significant. Hashem chooses to appear Human form because Humans are important. Our likeness is that of Hashem.
Your fellowman is human. Please respect him!
***
Doing Hashem A Favor
The Torah tells us not to take the garment of a widow as collateral, and remember that we were slaves in Egypt, and Hashem redeemed us from there, therefore He commands us to do so.
We are to leave a bundle forgotten in the field to the poor, as well as the odds and ends left on the vines when harvesting the grapes. And remember you were slaves in Egypt, therefore Hashem commands you to this.
What is the connection between being slaves and these specific Mitzvos?
Certain Mitzvos are morally imperative; they are the right thing to do. Other Mitzvos, however, are not actual justice. In fact, we are being taken advantage of! The only reason Hashem asks us to do the extra kindness is because we owe Him one. We were slaves and He took us out. He is asking for a Personal favor; He asks us to help His personal charges and friends – the poor.
The Pasuk says ‘He who helps the poor lends Hashem’. He considers this a personal debt; we are taking care of His personal charges. Let us change our perception of poor people, they who walk with Hashem at their arm!
***
Thanks A Lot!
We are to be thankful to the Egyptians, for they afforded us refuge in time of famine. Ok. But afterwards they kinda acted ugly to us, very ugly, in fact. Why are we still so thankful?
The good they did us is not erased by the hurt they did us later. We are angry at them and thankful at the same time. This is the way we ought to function: the bad does not erase the good.
Often we have a long relationship with someone and there are ups and downs. Sometimes the downs make the entire affair so unprofitable that we need to part company. A couple may divorce, children may leave their parents. Still, we need to remember the good too. There had been good times too, and never forget that. One does not cancel out the other.
***
Wearing Two Prescriptions
The Ramban explains that the Kohen addresses the soldiers before battle ad assures them not only of victory, but that not a single one be harmed. Hashem travels within their camp to succeed their campaign. However, then the police send home anyone who built a new home, married or planted a vineyard, lest he die in war. Well, will people die or not?
The Ramban suggests that the Kohen, the mystic, takes the position that no one will die. The police, the pragmatists, take the position that people will.
I’m not exactly sure how to understand this Ramban, but he does provide a window to dealing with the conflict between issues such as predestination and personal responsibility; it all depends who you ask. Different – valid – viewpoints exist simultaneously, and not only are they accepted, they are even Torah-mandated.
Here where we appoint BOTH the Kohen and the police to address the soldiers. Each one contradicts the other, and that’s the way it needs to be…
***
What Marriage Means
This parshah talks of a man taking a woman. The term it uses is “Ki yikach” – he will take, or buy.
The nature of marriage is that a man takes a woman into his domain. He buys hers, although not monetarily. She is his, but not his property. She is his wife.
(The processes is similar to buying – just as one can buy an object and take it into ones possession, so too does one buy a woman and take her into ones possession. An object belongs to one in a monetary sense, a woman in a matrimonial sense. So they are very different, but follow similar paths. A woman’s part in marriage is that she allows the man to ‘own’ her, not an active role.)
This accounts for some of he inequality of marriage – a man can divorce, a woman cannot. A woman is owned – she is not active in creating the marriage – therefore she cannot dissolve it.
Is marriage necessary and mandated?
The Rambam maintains that a more casual relationship, that of a pilegesh, is not allowed for normal citizens, rather it is reserved for kings. The Ramban and Rashba and other rishonim hold that anyone may take pilegesh. So if that is the case a couple need not marry at all, but may maintain a pilegesh relationship.
The Torah, in laying out how to marry, is discussing how to go about creating marriage, should they opt to marry, not that their relationship needs to be one of marriage.
So why opt to marry? People want/need stability and support and commitment. It just doesn’t work to have a non-committed relationship when a couple wants to raise a family together. Having one partner wander off when the going gets tough is not a good situation…So even if marriage is only optional, human nature is to prefer over non-commitment.
***
Mr. Ben Sorer
Ben Sorer Umoreh is unique in that he needs to be summoned to Beis Din by specific people, – his parents – whereas usually Beis Din will arrest a criminal without regard to anyone summoning them to Beis Din. Why is this?
The kids suggested that this showed how dire his addiction was – his own parents turn him in!
Another suggestion was that the Torah did not want this to ever happen – there is an opinion in the Gemarah to the effect that indeed, there was never such a case. Instead it was written for us to learn values from. So in order that it never happen the Torah mandates that the parents bring the boy in to Beis Din, knowing that this will likely cause it never to be.
A third idea was that for the extreme penalty the Torah mandates, there needs to be someone demanding it. That propels the penalty. And therefore the parents, the injured party, needs to demand that Beis Din address the matter and punish the boy.
One last thought was that so long as the parents can handle the boy, there is still hope, there a be remedy for the situation. When the parents come in to Beis Din and declare that their son is not listening to them, that is a declaration of surrender. Then Beis Dim must take action, because no one else can…
***
Moral Hygiene
The Torah tells us not to leave a person hung overnight, for the curse of Hashem is a hung man, and you should not be ‘metameh’ the Land Hashem has given as your inheritance. The message seems to be that one may not leave a person hung overnight for that will cause the Land impurity, and we are responsible for the Land’s welfare, for it is our trust and inheritance.
What is the impurity here? The Torah tells us in Vayikrah 18:24-27 that incestual relations cause impurity to the Land. So too, in Bamidbar 35:34 the Torah enjoins us not to help a murderer for blood is the corrupter of the Land, and you should not cause impurity to the Land…
We learn here that there is impurity associated with the Land. Its not ritual impurity, which anyhow cannot be transmitted to Land. It is impurity associated with immorality, and blood. And, perhaps, with hanging bodies. The common ground these three have is the grotesque. The abnormal and macabre, the gross. These are things that offend normal sensibilities, and the Torah considers them impurity itself.
The message is that we need to keep away from the groteske, and keep ourselves mentally hygienic.