Well when we think of mitzvos, so we correctly associate mitzvos with the semantics of the word commandments. And what a command demands is compliance. Something is a mitzva, a commandment that demands compliance. And of course it goes without saying that that certainly should be at the core of our conception of a mitzva. A mitzva is something that demands compliance. But as true and fundamental and absolutely indispensable as that literal definition of the mitzva is, it's also inadequate in terms of one's approach and one's attitude towards mitzvos. We were talking last night a little bit about feeling a sense of confidence in Torah mitzvos. Dovid Hamelech in the kapittel we say as part of the Shabbastike Psukei D'Zimra has many many very very basic very central adjectives which provide perspective on mitzvos. Mitzvos are not just commands from Hakadosh Baruch Hu which demand compliance; they're mishpatei Hashem emes. They're true. They're true. Pikudei Hashem yesharim. It's not just that Pikudei Hashem, He's the boss and we're the poalim, so memaila we have to listen. That is true. But Pikudei Hashem, they're yesharim, they're emes, they're yesharim. Torah as a whole is tmima, is meshivas nafesh. All that in terms of attitude, approach, understanding and appreciation is leagues beyond the inadequate minimalist conception of a mitzva is something with which I have to comply. How much of what we're talking about is midas chasidus and how much me'ikar hadin in terms of is it just something again, the ikar hadin, comply? A commandment is something with which one complies. Or is it me'ikar hadin to appreciate them as emes, as yesharim, as tamim, as meshivai nafesh? So that's the pasuk in the tochacha that we were reading last night from the Rambam Hilchos Lulav of תחת אשר לא עבדת את השם אלקיך בשמחה ובטוב לבב.
The compliance can be there, but if the compliance doesn't reflect, if the compliance doesn't reflect an appreciation that it's emes, that it's yosher... and that therefore it's not only a chiyuv but simultaneously a zechus, so the Torah is unequivocal in saying that that's not acceptable. So we're not talking about midas chasidus, we're talking about me'ikar hadin. Nisbonen na. Every mitzvah has a common denominator. It doesn't matter whether whether it's netilas lulav, whether it's achilas matzah, whether it's hakravas korbanos. Every mitzvah has a common indispensable element, which is that the kiyum hamitzvah, the kiyum hamitzvah has to be an expression of קבלת עול מלכות שמים, kabbalas ol mitzvos. Even if you hold מצוות אינן צריכות כוונה, but a person has to be committed to mitzvas lulav, mitzvas matzah. Okay, does he have to be mindful of it at this particular moment? There's a machlokes, mitzvos tzerichos kavanah, מצוות אינן צריכות כוונה. But a mitzvah, a mitzvah by definition, a kiyum hamitzvah is an expression of קבלת עול מלכות שמים, kabbalas ol mitzvos. Our conception of Hakadosh Baruch Hu is not simply that Hakadosh Baruch Hu is the Borei Olam who's metzaveh. Again, obviously those are critical, central, and indispensable elements of our conception of and relationship with Hakadosh Baruch Hu. He's the Borei Olam, He's metzaveh. But part of our conception of Hakadosh Baruch Hu, Hakadosh Baruch Hu is tov. Hakadosh Baruch Hu is perfect. What kind of קבלת עול מלכות שמים is it? What kind of קבלת עול מלכות שמים does one express if if the whole mitzvah performance is unidimensional in the sense that there's a command which I acknowledge and therefore with which I comply? But that's not קבלת עול מלכות שמים. It's it's a critical integral part of it, but but there are critical integral elements which are missing. קבלת עול מלכות שמים is יעשה האמת מצד שהוא אמת as we read last night from the Maggid Mishneh, and הטוב מצד שהוא טוב. That's part of Hakadosh Baruch Hu's emes. חותמו של הקדוש ברוך הוא אמת. So that means His mitzvos are emes, not just that I comply because He's the Borei and the metzaveh. No, but I also have an attitude. Hakadosh Baruch Hu's emes and because of that His shaliach to give us the Torah, משה אמת ותורתו אמת. As as obvious as as as this hashkafa is, it's important to review, it's important to mechazek ourselves. When you hear about different kuntsen and every I don't know every every year every few years sort of brings its own kunts. But when you hear about kuntsen, you know usually very very learned, erudite, a little bit more imaginative, a little bit less imaginative kuntsen, you know, so ten years ago, whatever it was, so the so it was women's tefillah groups and and it was simulating that that women were were getting aliyos but but they weren't getting aliyos. It was postponing birchas hatorah from the morning vechulu. Or again, whatever whatever whatever the latest kunts is, whether the kunts is to try to figure out how to Bypass Rav Moshe's, Rav Moshe's just clear, clear teaching, no chidushim, of just how antithetical a double ring ceremony is to what the Torah's conception of marriage is. So what's wrong with the kuntres? What's wrong with the kuntres is that ultimately, I mean, often there are many other things wrong with them as well. This is not to imply that this is the only thing wrong. But the tzad hashaveh, which is fundamentally wrong, is that the approach to mitzvos is that mitzvos are only commandments and therefore you just have to figure out how to technically comply and within the system outsmart the system. And as long as a mitzva is a commandment and and what and all and that's all it means to one and therefore all it implies and all it demands is compliance. Okay. Everyone does that when you fill out your taxes. You look for every legitimate loophole there is and if if it's not legitimate, you don't take it. If there's a legitimate, if it's totally, if it's straight, if it's legitimate, if you can outsmart the IRS, more power to you. Okay. It's it's a law. It demands compliance. It absolutely demands compliance. You you can figure out playing by the rules how how to pay less taxes. Gezuntheit. But the the Torah's mitzvos are not simply, again, commandments with which we comply. They're emes, they're yosher. A mitzva is something a person embraces. It's something that that a person looks to get himself in sync with. So the Torah's conception of a marriage ceremony, the Gemara Kiddushin says is אמר הוא ונתן הוא כי יקח איש אשה ולא כי תלקח אשה לאיש.
Okay. That's the Torah's conception. Is that conception at odds with the the temper of the times? Presumably, presumably it is. Okay. So so we can do one of two things. We can try to we can try to come up with kuntres to make the wedding ceremony look as bilateral as as possible and and couch that in terms of sensitivity and inclusiveness, but ultimately, ultimately what it's saying is that the way the Torah portrays it without the without the kuntres, that doesn't really work. So because of that we need to... but we'll be learned and imaginative enough you know not to not to be guilty of any technical violations. But that means it's not mishpatei Hashem emes, it's not pikudei Hashem yesharim. If the Torah's idea, if we have to try to outsmart the system, obviously the outsmart is in quotations each time. If we have to try to outsmart the system, so it means that a mitzva is something with which you comply but it's not something which which you view as emes, which you view as yosher. Because if if we view it as emes and we view it as as yosher and and the and it is an expression of קבלת עול מלכות שמים to comply with mitzvos. If we don't think so, it's not just the Ribbono Shel Olam is the Borei and the Metzaveh. He's that, he's that. הצור תמים פעלו כי כל דרכיו משפט. There's nothing that that needs improvement, there's nothing to see. So avada we should learn as much as possible to try to understand and appreciate. So what's the significance? What's what's what are the implications of the way the Torah structures something? But regardless of of whether or not on a purely technical level the complies. It's something that a person views as emes and as yosher. There isn't anything fundamentally wrong about the Torah's teaching about women. There isn't anything fundamentally wrong or insensitive about what the Torah has to say about homosexuality. There may be something fundamentally wrong and insensitive in our understandings and in our views and in our hashkafos. But there isn't anything fundamentally difficult or problematic. Mishpetei Hashem emes, pikudei Hashem yosher. Rav Dovid Zvi Hoffmann in his teshuvos Melamed Leho'il as did many of the other contemporary Gedolei HaDor. So around the turn of the century from the 19th to 20th century there was a proposal in France to a proposal that every so often someone rediscovers America and tries to resurrect the proposal that all kiddushin should be al tenai in such a way as to obviate the need for a get Rachmana litzlan, for chalitza Rachmana litzlan. So first again, whatever it has its shelf life and then someone comes another generation or two later and is mechadesh the same proposal again. So around the time of Rav Dovid Zvi Hoffmann, so the Gedolim were obviously peh echad explaining why it doesn't work. Rav Dovid Zvi Hoffmann so he talks on the technical level, talks about insurmountable issues on the technical level. But then he says let's leave that aside for a moment. He says what underlies this proposal? What underlies this proposal is that the Torah's system of marriage and divorce doesn't work. It's not fair. It's antiquated. But that's all divrei kefira what I just said. That's all divrei kefira what I just said. But that's what underlies the proposal Rav Dovid Zvi Hoffmann says. He says lu yetzuyer. He had said earlier that lu yetzuyer, לויצויר. It is impossible but lu yetzuyer that it were, he said it would still be assur on the grounds that it's a chilul Hashem. אין לך חילול השם גדול מזה to imply that we need to circumvent the system because the system doesn't work. So as we prepare for Kabbalas HaTorah, so mitzvos, yeah, the commands and we comply, whether it comes easily, whether it's more difficult. But the קבלת עול מלכות שמים, the קבלת עול מצוות שבו is to accept and fulfill mitzvos as emes, as yosher, to embrace mitzvos, not to feel begrudgingly just Rachmana litzlan that it's something we comply with. It's something that we recognize as emes, as yosher and אשרינו מה טוב חלקנו ומה נעים גורלנו and halevai we should put in the effort and Hashem ya'ir eineinu to realize that, to recognize that and to appreciate.