Volume 67, Issue 3

R. Rosensweig – Speech on September 11, 2002, Lamport Auditorium

“Vateytze esh milifnei hashem vatochal osam vayamusu lifnei hashem” (Vayikra 10:2) The Torah tells us with respect to the calamitous death of the sons of Aharon that esh, that fire, went out from the Ribbono Shel Olam and consumed them, they died in the presence of God. The response of their father, their beloved father: “vayidom aharon” (10:3), and Aharon was silent. And of course, the paradigm for deafening silence. Even a whole year later, the combination of grief and pain, of anger and of horror, at the vicious attack that destroyed thousands of lives, that assaulted the very foundations of civilization, of decency, simply leave us dumbstruck. Given the tragedy and the magnitude of the outrage, an appropriate theological, even an appropriate personal response, appears to be simply elusive. The temptation is to adopt the position, the tziduk hadin posture, of Aharon Hakohen, vayidom aharon. After all, sometimes silence is the most eloquent form of all.

But the fact is, that Aharon Hakohen and his silence was really unique. His position and his responsibilities as a Kohen Gadol was unique, the tragedy that he faced was different, a direct and clear judgment from the Ribbono Shel Olam, resulting from a clear infraction, though one difficult to pin down, ki bikrovay ekadesh. Even then, the Ramban tells us in his perush al HaTorah (10:3), although others disagree, that Aharon initially cried out in great pain – “boche bekol vetzoek bemar rucho.” In any case, certainly klal yisrael’s reaction was not one of silence but of tears. “Veacheychem kol beis yisrael yivku es hasreifah asher saraf hashem”(10:6). And there was a sereifah asher saraf hashem, and nonetheless the reaction was one of bechi and tzeakah, of crying and of tears. The reaction of bechi and misped and tachanunim, of tears and eulogizing, and tefillah, supplication, has always been the halachic approach to personal and to national loss from the very beginning of our history. Avraham, for Sarah; Klal Yisrael for Yaakov/Yisrael; Klal Yisrael for Moshe and for Aharon, each in its own special way. Bechi indeed is the normative response for personal as well as for national crisis and catastrophe. This is reflected in Tanach, in Chazal, in Jewish history. Unfortunately there has not lacked incidents and manifestations of tragedy and suffering inflicted by evil orders and by nations; we are not new to catastrophe. The Rambam in Hilchos Taanis, which I’ll speak of in a couple of minutes, perek aleph, halacha alef through gimmel, documents this normative response in a very unambiguous way.

And yet we must be extremely sensitive and careful in the timing and in the tone of our response. Words and actions that are appropriate and healing in one context can be hurtful and counterproductive in another. We should reject the natural tendency to pursue silver linings or fringe benefits. For example, increased world appreciation for Israel’s plight in its just struggle against an implacable evil and terror of organized enemy, a wakeup call to the American giant, which, according to many understandings, had been until 9/11 slumbering. These may be true, but they rarely provide comfort, certainly when they are only speculation, and even when they are accurate, the exclusive focus, at least initially, should be one of immo anochi betzarah, of mishtatef betzarasan. Simply of empathy, that of course is crucial to the effort to come to grips with the enormity of any loss, personal and especially collective.

Moreover, we must believe that there are always other ways to raise people’s consciousness, and it must be understood unequivocally as well that tragedy and evil are undiluted even by the long-term positive changes that they do engender. Avdus mitzrayim, the experience of slavery in Egypt, was no less evil for the positive impact that it undoubtedly had, according to Chazal, on the formation of Klal Yisrael. The Shoah, the Holocaust, was no less evil and no less horrific, notwithstanding the possible impact that it had at least on speeding the establishment of medinas yisrael, and so on. Certainly, then, one needs to be even more cautious with respect to the attempt to penetrate divine mysteries and advancing specific theological explanations and justifications of tragic and of catastrophic events. In absence of nevuah, of prophecy, or an approximate, unimpeachable spiritual source, like the mesorah of Chazal, or maybe the consensus of authentic gedolei yisrael, such speculation merely inflicts pain, and in addition, is simply spiritually and halachically counterproductive. As ironically, it serves to de-emphasize the sense of real responsibility and serious, authentic teshuvah that is really crucial to the process, as we’ll discuss.

Although shemiras hamitzvos, observance, certainly increases shemirah and hashgacha, divine protection and divine providence, providential intervention even, and may certainly prevent tragedy, and certainly the doctrine of mipnei chataeynu, the link between sin and punishment, rooted firmly in torah shebichtav and torah shebeal peh, unequivocally establishing this link, all this is certainly true, none of these doctrines leads us to the conclusion that every act of evil or tragedy should be specifically correlated with a single infraction or event. In the absence of nevuah, or its equivalent, such speculation then often reduces to spiritual scapegoating, which may trivialize the event by associating it exclusively with one single prohibition or flaw, or, at the very least, often shifts the blame to a particular group or population, absolving the mainstream. And even if one were to conclude that a particular group bears greater responsibility, certainly the notion of arvus dictates that the total of klal yisrael retains collective responsibility for the atmosphere that allows any of its segments or populations to engage in improper behavior, which means that the blame always needs to be spread unto the collective. Ironically, these spiritual rushes to judgment are counterproductive, then, to the more authentic, the more comprehensive introspection, and the very ambitious call for teshuvah, and to responsibility, that is echoed in the powerful words of the Rambam in hilchos taanis, whose goal is the refashioning of the religious persona in the aftermath of catastrophe, for the sake of transforming a calamity into a spiritual catalyst.

What about simple empathetic nechama, consolation? This too is complex and requires caution. The mishna in maseches avos (4:18) tells us, “al teratzeh chavercha beshas ka’aso, ve’al tenachamehu,” and do not console him, “beshaah shemeiso mutal lefanav,” in the presence of his unburied relative. Various explanations are given for this limitation. Rashi explains that at the time of meiso mutal lefanav it’s simply premature for one’s consolation to be effective, and I think that psychologists would agree. However, Rabbeinu Yonah adds a critical point. He argues that it can be unintentionally cruel and counterproductive, lest the victim misconstrue that you underestimate or don’t fully share his pain. Medrash Shmuel takes it even further, suggesting that improper or improperly timed nechama can trigger a theologically rebellious response and constitute a michshol.

The medrash bears this out with respect to the Ribbono Shel Olam Himself. We’re told that “mishegalu yisrael vecharav beis hamikdash,” when the churban took place and the beis hamikdash was destroyed, “hakadosh baruch hu ke’ilu misabel,” the Ribbono Shel Olam Himself was in mourning, “she’neemar vayikra hashem elokim tzevakos levechi ule’misped. Bikshu malachei hashares lenachamo,” the angels tried to comfort Him. “Heshivan Hakadosh Baruch Hu, al taitzu lenachameini, ein eilu nichumin, niutzin hem lifanai.” Sometimes nechama is clearly counterproductive.

It’s a measure of the magnitude of this evil, devastating attack, and the horror and pain that it engendered, that a whole year later it’s still incumbent upon us to ask or at least to examine if the appropriate time for nechama has yet come. For those tragically who have yet to reclaim a body for burial, they are literally, if perhaps not halachically, in the category of mi shemeiso mutal lifanav. And if the entire western civilization, certainly for this country, which continues to reel with anxiety and panic – witness even the last 24 hours – from the security reverberations of the attack, the assault on our most basic way of life that persists, the question is moot. Some measure of nechama is undoubtedly appropriate, and sensitivity certainly is needed. The need for care and sensitivity in response, then, rests from the inadvertently increased pain notwithstanding our good intentions when we trivialize events of great magnitude, as necessary.

However, simple empathy, immo anochi betzarah, can in fact be very powerful and very therapeutic. The value of immo anochi betzarah after all is rooted in imatatio dei, the mitzvah lehidamos, imitating the Ribbono Shel Olam Himself, about whom it is said immo anochi betzarah. The neglect of mishtateif betzarasan, of identifying with other people’s pain, is something that according to the Rambam, based on the gemara, is tantamount to the flaws of a non-believer, of an apikores. Rosh Hashana teaches us that bechi, crying, in the form of tekias shofar, is sometimes more powerful than articulate prayer, as it is more basic and sometimes penetrates the inner recesses of man’s soul and his instinct. As the Rambam notes, there is genuchi ganach and yelulei yalil, not merely two different ways of making the sound, but two different concepts of bechi. The sighing that is the realization of the full implications of one’s situation and crisis, and also yelulei yalil, the uncontrollable sobbing that is a natural reaction to suffering, emotional outlet to pain. This morning the kol shofar that we just heard, in keeping with the Rambam’s hilchos taanis then, is appropriate indeed.

Obviously empathy takes a much more concrete form, in terms of acts of chesed, where one really can impact upon those who have suffered, and I must say that the efforts of our talmidim, both here and in Stern College, in this respect, have been exemplary indeed. Being shomer, for those who need it, other acts of chesed, donation of blood, and so on, and if they are called on to do more, of course we should respond appropriately.

While nechama may yet be premature, and speculation and spiritual scapegoating certainly inappropriate, it’s always appropriate to seek a halachic and hashkafic perspective, and to engage in what the Rav, zecher tzaddik levracha, characterized as the normative response to tragedy, to suffering, and to evil. Not the speculative attempt to penetrate the mystery the question of tzaddik vera lo, the reconstruction of why it happened, but the projection of comprehensive responsibility coupled with a commitment to improve to rededicate to Torah values. In other words, the theme that is particularly appropriate to aseres yemei teshuva as the Rama quotes it, the idea of being mefashfesh bemaaseacha, rigorous introspection.

The components of response to the tragedy that we have undergone also include joining the struggle against this route, achzariyus, viciousness, inhumanity, cruelty, the ideology of the attacks, as well as, of course, what I just noted, personal and collective teshuvah. Chazal tell us that “kol hamerachem al achzar,” misplaced compassion, ultimately leads to viciousness and cruelty itself, “sofo lehiyos achzar bimkom rachmanus.” That is something which we need to be very careful about. The Rambam characterizes the posture of indifference to the underlying cause of catastrophe itself as achzaryius, as viciousness. He argues that one who attributes calamity to the confluence of various factors or simply to coincidence, nikroh nikreiti, it simply happened, thereby psychologically and otherwise removing himself from the tragedy, is himself vicious and cruel, one might add, this is the middah achzariyus, and nikroh nikreisi, asher karcha baderech, of Amalek, the paradigm of viciousness itself.

The proper response to evil that we have experienced is to reject tyranny and terror and the underlying ideology that drives them, of disrespect for others, for the very value of life, and so on, by reaffirming and rededicating to our own opposite and sacred ideals. Kedushas hachayim, the sanctity of life, tzelem elokim, the notion of the image of God focused on each and every one of us, the principle of vechai bahem velo sheyamus bahem, uvacharta bachayim, and so on. We need to accentuate these themes to articulate them educationally and to implement them in practice. Moreover, it’s important that we appreciate and we project the remarkable manifestations of these very same values that we cherish that took place on that infamous day, by rescue workers, police, firemen, simple citizens who reacted with remarkable nobility and bravery. Let us never forget that the day of achzariyus, cowardice and evil, also reflected man’s potential, his soaring nobility, his capacity for spiritual greatness, selflessness, and altruism, all core halachic principles.

In connection with this theme, responding to the actual challenges posed by our enemies, it’s also important that we also be practically engaged. As a community and as individuals, we need resolve to support and to persevere in combating evil here, and of course in eretz yisrael. We need to exercise whatever political and other influence we have, to ensure that the government, and the broader population do not become exhausted or distracted. There are many stories in chazal and Jewish history, I don’t have time to elaborate, of political activism, even of gedolei torah, who we associate with the dalet amos shel halacha, when necessary and appropriate, and of course this is the key issue, to protecting and to promulgating our core values. Last year’s trip to Washington, is a good example. Of course, according to guidelines that are not at the expense of progress in talmud torah and investment in each one of our talmidim, which of course is consistent with the values that we are speaking of.

Moreover, in light of events of the past year, and unfortunately, for many years past with respect to the situation in ere­tz yisrael, we need to have further appreciation for the extent of hashgacha that is visited upon us, and that we are accorded. And the words of avinu malkeinu should resonate with greater strength and intensity with us, hafer atzas oyveinu, and of course, the danger of ignoring even mastineinu umekatregeinu, even the articulation of hate and the ideology of violence. Our awareness needs to translate into greater vigilance.

But, as noted earlier, the critical component in the normative response to all situations of suffering and tragedy, is teshuva. The Rambam’s use of the phrase “midarkhei hateshuvah” in hilchos taanis is particularly significant in this context. I’m just going take one moment to read it. The Rambam says: “mitzvas aseh min hatorah lizok uleharia bachatzosros al kol tzarah shetavo al hatzibbur.” It is incumbent upon us to cry out, to blow the trumpets, when we encounter a tragedy. “Vedavar zeh midarkhei hateshuva hu,” this is the methodology of teshuva, “shebizman shetavo tzarah veyizaku aleha veyariu yed’u hakol shebiglal maaseyhem haraim hura lahem, kakasuv avonoseichem hitu elleh.” This is the methodology of teshuva, to presume and to project that we are responsible, that our flaws contributed, certainly to our lack of protection, if not more, and therefore to pursue the course of teshuva. This phrase “midarkhei hateshuva” reinforces the idea that indeed we are dealing with a normative response that transcends any specific infraction, perhaps even the one that may in fact be specifically linked to the punishment or at least reduction of providential protection. The Rambam’s approach, as noted, calls for maximal personal responsibility and demands the opportunity that is afforded by crisis be used for that purpose - to reexamine, spurred by the crisis, to assess priorities and purpose, to identify flaws that may indeed be responsible for the predicament, or at least reduction of hashgacha, in a word, to reinvent ourselves spiritually. We cannot always control the events around us. But, we certainly always fashion our religious worldview as bnei torah in a way that generates self improvement, that increases hashgacha, that forcefully rejects the values of tyranny evil and terror, and allows to cope further, and for more genuine Torah and halachic perspective. This understanding is reinforced by the Rambam’s very same use of the term “midarkhei hateshuvah” in a famous passage in hilchos teshuvah that formulates the most ambitious and comprehensive concept of teshuvah, literally leading to a religious personality change and clearly transcending the flaws that initially motivated the process. The Rambam in hilchos teshuva tells us, perek beis halacha dalet, “midarchei hateshuvah,” you need to read one in light of the other, “lehiyos hashav tzoek tamid,” the baal teshuvah should constantly be in a state of tear, crying, “tamid lifnei hashem, bebechi uvetachanunim, veoseh tzedakah lefi kocho, umisrachek harbeh min hadavar shechata bo,” he should distance himself from the sins that brought him here, but, more than that, “umeshaneh shemo,” he should change his identity, “kelomar,” in other words, “ani acher,” I am a different person, “eini oso haish sheasa osam hamaasim.” And then the Rambam adds, “umeshane maasav kulam letovah,” we need to change all of our behavior and conduct, not limited to what brought us to this crisis. “Vehaderech hayeshara shehu goleh memikomo, shegalus michaperes avon, shegoremes lehikana, lehiyos anav veshafel ruach.” We have to work on making ourselves anav, humble, and shefal ruach.

This idea, of course, is critical for this period of the year, culminating in Yom Kippur, the time of existential crisis for every Jew, ketz selicha umechila leyisrael. The gemara in rosh hashana (18a) tells us, dirshu hashem behimatzo, kerauhu bihyoso karov, elu asares hayamim shebein rosh hashana leyom hakippurim. And the medrash tells us that these pesukim are particularly addressed to yoshvei beis haknesses and yoshvei beis hamedrash, who have the increased sensitivity to appreciate the crisis of Yom Kippur and to know how to respond halachically to its challenges.

What should be our posture then, as we pursue this agenda? Let me conclude by saying that the response again can be found in the sources of the halacha itself. We should pursue these various challenges the components of our response to the attack, external war against the forces and values of terror, internal challenge of darchei hateshuvah, all of its ambition, self-improvement, etc., with a sense of both yirah and vulnerability, as well as confidence. This dialectic of yirah and confidence generally plays a critical role in yahadus and in halacha, a religious experience as the Rav, zecher tzaddik levracha, has developed it.  But it’s particularly crucial to the response to crisis and to calamity. The Rambam in sefer hamitzvos, mitzvah nun tes, does a remarkable thing. He groups together the mitzvah of tekiah bachatzosros at the time of the korbanos hachag together with tekiah bachatzosros le’eis tzarah. “Hu shetzivanu litkoa bachatzoros bamikdash im hakravas hakorban mikorbanei hamoados. Vehu amaram yisaleh, uveyom simchaschem uvemoadeichem utekatem. Vechen anachnu metzuvim,” in the same mitzvah, “litkoa bachatzosros beitos hatzorech vehatzaros,” in times of crisis and need, “keshenizak lifnei hashem. Vehu amaro, ki savou milchama beartzechem al hatzar hatzorer eschem.” The link is already of course hinted at in the torah shebichsav itself, which puts these two parshiyos together. On the surface, two mitzvos could not be in greater contrast. After all, we’re dealing in one context with simcha, the height of the religious experience, and in the other with a sense of suffering and calamity. And yet both, apparently, are inspired by the unique sense of lifnei Hashem, the presence of the Ribbono Shel Olam, undoubtedly each experience is enriched by the memory of the other. The profound lesson conveyed by the Rambam’s single grouping may precisely be that simcha and yira, that confidence and vulnerability, are not mutually exclusive in halacha’s special worldview. The sense of bitachon, reliance on the Ribbono Shel Olam in times of vulnerability, leads to confidence, even as one must always must feel that sense of vulnerability and shfal ruach, the reliance on the Ribbono Shel Olam, even when engaged in the spiritual heights of hakravas korbanos. This dialectic of course is reflected in the merged halachic source for shofar shel yovel and shofar shel rosh hashana, the idea that both together form the source for the kol teruah of tishrei. The gemara in rosh hashana tells us that themes that look disparate, kol kamah depashat maalei tfei, kol kamah dekayif maalei tfei.

It is precisely with this sense of reliance and confidence that we put our faith in the Ribbono Shel Olam as we encounter the severe challenges ahead. Dirshu Hashem behimatzto, kerauhu bihyoso karov. Through teshuvah, tefillah, and tzedakah, and hishtadlus, perseverance and the proper effort required, may we be zoche individually and collectively in this time of crisis to a gmar chasimah tovah. May we find the wisdom to respond in a halachically proper manner to all of the challenges that face us.

Transcribed by Avi Robinson

What do you think? Click here to send a letter to the editors.
All content is copyright © Yeshiva University Commentator.