Thank you very much Trump, Shoshanat Shechter, Shoshanat Maor Das. The Torah introduces the Aseres HaDibros, וידבר אלקים את כל הדברים האלה. The Torah employs of the different shemos Hashem, the Torah introduces the Aseres HaDibros with the name Elokim. Rashi quoting from the Mechilta says אין אלקים אלא דיין להיפרע. The sense of Elokim, what Elokim expresses is that Hakadosh Baruch Hu is a judge who holds us accountable. Many mitzvos are introduced וידבר ה' אל משה לאמר, but by the Aseres HaDibros, the Torah makes a point of introducing it as Vayidaber Elokim. So in a shiur on Aseres HaDibros, the Rav zichrono livracha explains what the omkus of this Mechilta is. Throughout Ma’aseh Bereishis, so Hakadosh Baruch Hu is also described as Elokim. Bereishis bara Elokim, Vayomer Elokim, Vayomer Elokim, all the Asara Ma’amaros are Vayomer Elokim. Elokim signifies order, law. Hakadosh Baruch Hu created a world that functions according to natural law, and that's why the briah is attributed to Elokim because Elokim expresses that idea. Hakadosh Baruch Hu as the author and architect of a system of law. So the world isn't random, the world functions according to set natural law, and hence the briah is described as Bereishis bara Elokim. Hakadosh Baruch Hu not only created natural physical law, but Hakadosh Baruch Hu created natural moral law as well. The Gemara in Yoma famously distinguishes, differentiates two types of mitzvos: there are mishpatim and chukim. Mishpatim are those which are intuitive, din hu sheyikasevu, unlike a chok which means something which is engraved, something which needs to be legislated because otherwise on our own we couldn't and wouldn't intuit. But a mishpat is something which is intuitive, it's natural moral law. So some of the Torah's moral law is natural and intuitive, and some of it is not intuitive. Some of it is not something that we would have naturally known, recognized, and discerned. There are many middos that the Gemara says in Eruvin that אלמלא לא נתנה תורה, so we would have derived tznius from looking into the briah and seeing how a cat behaves, etc. There are many, many aspects of moral law which are natural and others are chukim. So the Rav explains that that philosophical distinction between mishpatim and chukim has really very, very far-reaching practical implications and repercussions, and that's as follows. What will be if a person says he's going to defy natural physical law? No, I'm not going to abide by, I'm not going to acknowledge, I'm not going to abide by the law of gravity. So he's going to go out, he has a porch off his 20th floor penthouse apartment, and he's going to step off of that porch because I don't abide, I don't feel bound, no one's going to tell me what to do, I don't feel bound by natural physical law. So it's not only that he's going to have to give a din vecheshbon לאחר מאה ועשרים שנה to the Ribono Shel Olam for his brazenness of defying the Ribono Shel Olam's natural law, but the consequences are going to be immediate. He's going to fall and he's going to die. So natural law, even though the ultimate, the Rambam writes based on Chazal in the 11th of the Yud Gimmel Ikkarim, that the ultimate schar va’onesh is of course in Olam Haba, it's not in Olam Hazeh. But natural physical law has its, if a person defies it, it has consequences in Olam Hazeh as well. So the Rav explains the same is true for natural moral law. Natural moral law also, because it's natural. So HaKadosh Baruch Hu, that means that HaKadosh Baruch Hu wove it into the very fabric of human society. And when natural moral law is rejected, so it's not only that there's going to be a דין וחשבון לאחר מאה ועשרים, there is, but not only is there going to be a דין וחשבון לאחר מאה ועשרים, but there are immediate consequences to defying natural moral law the same way there are immediate consequences to defying natural physical law. You know, in reflecting historically, so there's no obvious point to begin. So somewhat arbitrarily, we'll go back to the 60s. So in the 60s, American society began an assault, not only, excuse me, so just coming back to the Mechilta, so וידבר אלקים את כל הדברים האלה לאמר, so in the Mechilta says the Aseres Hadibros are not chukim. Everything in the Aseres Hadibros, these are natural moral law and vayedaber Elokim, that HaKadosh Baruch Hu in the sense of dayan, meaning not only dayan in Olam HaBa, but dayan in this world as well, that the consequences will also be immediate for defying natural moral law the same way they are immediate for defying natural physical law. So in the 60s, American society began an assault, began defying natural moral law. The so-called—again, it's somewhat arbitrary to start with the 60s. I don't know, maybe if I were even older, so maybe I'd be inclined to start in the 50s. What happened in the 60s had its roots in the 50s as well. But in the 60s, the so-called revolution in the 60s, the rejection of traditional morality, the rejection of authority, the widespread disdain for one's parents, one's elders, who represented that traditional authority, was an assault on moral law, natural moral law. If a person wears shatnez, if he has a linen in the collar of his woolen suit, so there will be a דין וחשבון לאחר מאה ועשרים for going against ratzon Hashem. But it's not going to cause the disintegration of society because people are walking around wearing shatnez. But when there's a—when people defy natural moral law, so the consequences happen in Olam HaZeh as well. They happen in Olam HaZeh as well. It's sort of the flip side of אלו דברים שאדם אוכל פירותיהם בעולם הזה והקרן קיימת לו לעולם הבא,
so this is the flip side of that in terms of aveiros Rachmana litzlan. If one didn't understand the Rav's drasha in the abstract, so all one has to do is look into American society and see what has happened, the implosion of American society. It's just simply disintegrating, and it's disintegrating because of its rejection of natural moral law. The Gemara says that יצרו של אדם מתחדש עליו בכל יום, מתגבר עליו בכל יום, מתחדש עליו בכל יום.
The yetzer hara is never content. The yetzer hara is never satisfied. Once the yetzer hara conquers one position, so then it pushes forward to the next position. And that's also the immorality of the 60s. It began with pre-marital znus, extra-marital znus, and once that became accepted, once the yetzer hara had won... won that battle and American society approved of, approved of that, so then the yetzer hara pushed its, its assault forward to the point where things that, that people in with the most, I don't know, you couldn't have had a sordid enough imagination in the 60s and the 70s to imagine where the world is today. There's a famous drasha what the Rav in the 70s, in the 70s he said this. He said that Western society is neurotic. That's what he saw in the 70s. We, like the posuk in the Tochacha, הבקר תאמר מי יתן ערב והערב תאמר מי יתן בקר.
We, if only we could go back to the 70s, if only we could go back to the, to the 60s. Why? Because yitzro shel adam is מתחדש לו בכל יום. The yetzer hara is not content. Once one, one part of natural moral law has been undermined, has been decimated, so then it presses its attack forward and increasingly more and more of natural moral law is destroyed. And יצרו של אדם מתחדש לו בכל יום, so it, it presses its attack further in another sense as well. Originally the attack was on moral truth. Moral truth can't stand in the way of self-gratification. At a certain point, people figured out, well, if we don't have to let moral truth stand in the way of personal gratification, why should objective truth, factual truth, stand in the way of moral gratification either, of personal, excuse me, of personal gratification either? So today we live in a world where there's no objective reality. There's no objective reality anymore. People use their pronouns. Call, call me them. People use, people... there's no... you fill out a birth certificate, so the child is non-binary, the child's not a boy, the child's not a girl. It's lunacy. And it's beyond irrational, beyond irrational, but it's יצרו של אדם מתחדש לו בכל יום. It goes further and further and further, and it erodes further and further and further. And, and that's what we see. There's no more objective, objective truth. They, they discover that the President of Harvard is guilty of plagiarism. So what does she do? She gives a klop and says, "No, I stand by the integrity of my work." What do you mean you stand by the integrity of your work? They can show word for word, they can show word for word that you plagiarized. No, there's no truth. You don't have to, there's no objective reality that a person is held to anymore. There's no, there's no standard that objective reality is not a standard by which a person is, is measured anymore. The Beis HaLevi has a comment in his sefer on Chumash. I think maybe it's in brackets. I was looking for it last night and I couldn't find it again. I'm sorry, I wanted to read it to you. But the Beis HaLevi says that apikorsim also have emuna. And what, what he means by that in context is that they have an irrational faith in their own apikorsus. So there are many, many, many, many examples of that, that they cling to their non-belief with, with a tenacity and, and reject any kind of objective disproving of that with, with... it's a blind faith. Apikorsim also have faith. L'chora, the p'shat in that is that the Ribbono Shel Olam endowed us with a capacity for belief. Okay, so we're supposed, together with mesorah, together with reason, so we're supposed to channel and, and use that capacity correctly for belief in Hakadosh Baruch Hu, for belief in, in his Torah. But when a person chooses not to recognize Hakadosh Baruch Hu, not to believe in his Torah, he doesn't lose that capacity for belief. He just transfers that, he misdirects that. The belief that people had in communism back in the thirties, there were people who went back to Stalinist Soviet Union only to be then slaughtered by Stalin in some of his purges. They had such emuna. A person, especially a Jew, is a maamin, but people in general have a capacity for emuna. That's what you look in modern society. So modern society isn't content to have the license to engage in their immorality. No, they make an absolute out of the immorality. They impose it upon everyone else. It becomes a new secular religion. That's what the Beis Halevi said, that apikorsim also have emuna. The question is in what a person has emuna. A person has emuna in the truth, a person has emuna in what tradition teaches us, in what reason points to, or a person's emuna is directed elsewhere. The current state of American society where there's no acknowledgment of truth, again just factual truth, not only moral truth, there's not even factual truth anymore. It's nihilism. It's nihilism. There's no other word for it. What are the implications for us? So the implications are at least twofold. These reflections are somewhat just association, stream of consciousness, so they're certainly not comprehensive, hopefully comprehensible, but certainly not comprehensive. Will the current level of antisemitism abate after the milchama comes to a close? So there's a side of us that says yes, that clearly it's a reaction to the milchama, and when with the end of the milchama, so then the antisemitism will abate. So besides the fact that it's always more difficult to when you buy something then you have to return it, it's always more difficult to get it back into its original packing than it was to take it out of the packing. So besides that general truth, the antisemitic impulse was there before October 7th as well. It was there before Shmini Atzeres as well. This explosion of antisemitism didn't happen yesh me'ayin. I mean, if you put a match and there's an explosion, so that means that there was gas there, it means there was fuel there, it means that there was something combustible. Yes, there was a match, there was a spark that lit the fire, but there had to be something combustible to put the match to. If you put a match to nothing, so the match is just going to burn itself out. Nothing's going to happen. So obviously this explosion of antisemitism was not yesh me'ayin. Ella mai, it was inhibited. But the more nihilistic American society becomes, the less inhibition there's going to be. I don't know how realistic it is to think that the antisemitism is going to go back to status quo ante with the conclusion of the milchama. I think that's probably wishful thinking on our part. Will it be the same level? I don't know, maybe not. I don't know. But it doesn't seem realistic that it will abate to what was before because what inhibits those evil impulses which were clearly clearly present is certain moral boundaries within society when the presidents of the most prestigious universities in the country. can equivocate about genocide, so again that's just an indication of how far the moral nihilism has gone. So where's the inhibition going to be to hold to check these evil impulses of antisemitism? I don't know that it's realistic to think that antisemitism is going to revert back to where we were on Hoshana Rabba. That certainly should give us reason to pause in terms of contemplating the future of American Jewry. In addition specifically for Shomer Torah Mitzvos, even leaving aside the factor of antisemitism for a moment, just as America disintegrates and drifts further and further into moral nihilism, might there be a pushback? Maybe, so far it hasn't been too successful, and it's a דבר שלא בא לעולם and I'm not sure it's even what the Gemara classifies as Avidey D'Asu, something which is naturally prone to happening the same way a fruit tree, even if it hasn't grown its fruit yet but the fruit is at least Avidey D'Asu, it's something which is on track that it will be a fruit. Whether or not there's going to be a pushback against this nihilism that will reverse course, I guess it's possible, but it certainly hasn't materialized sufficiently yet and it's not clear at all that one can bank on such a development. Again, welcome as it would be, it's not clear that one can bank on such a development. So even leaving aside the antisemitism, which we're not going to be able to, but even leaving aside the antisemitism, just America's not going to be a congenial place for a frum Jew to live. I don't know, I could be wrong, I don't see my grandchildren, leaving aside all the Ma'alos of Eretz Yisrael and מצוות יישוב ארץ ישראל, leaving aside all the positive factors, just responding to the negative factors, I don't see them living here, I don't see them raising their families here. So that's something which is very hard for us to wrap our minds around that notion. It isn't something that within our individual lifespans most of us have experienced, so it's different and it's foreign in that sense, and b'khlal it's just kind of jarring to imagine that the ground underneath is going to shift and move. But if you look at Jewish history, that's what happens. If you went to a Jew during the Golden Age of Spain and you asked him does it seem realistic to you that Jews are going to be driven out of Spain, so he certainly would have said no. During the Golden Age of Spain, if he just would have reacted based on his own personal experience, no, things are so good and there are so many, the Jews are sought after as advisors to kings, and so we know how the history of Spanish Jewry ended. And if you would have asked a Jew in Germany in the 19th or early 20th century, can he imagine what the end of German Jewry was going to be, or for that matter of all the Torah centers in Eastern Europe, so it was also unimaginable. Because as long as we imagine only based on our personal experience, maybe it is unimaginable, but part of our consciousness is supposed to be our history. It's our consciousness is supposed to be informed not only by our own personal experiences of the past twenty, thirty, forty, fifty, sixty, seventy, eighty years, but it's supposed to be formed by the collective national Jewish experience. And according to that experience, so not only is it imaginable, maybe it's even to be expected. These are the cycles of of of golus. What what does that imply practically? So first, attitudinally, we we need to reinforce, the Meshech Chochma writes וזה ויגר שם מלמד שלא ירד יעקב אבינו להשתקע אלא לגור שם.
Logur is lashon ger, a stranger. So it's especially telling in the context of Yaakov Avinu, because Yaakov Avinu knew על פי רוח הקודש that he was going to die in Mitzrayim. So he knew that that wasn't just a stop in terms of his earthly sojourn. He was moving there. It wasn't, but still, no, it was logur sham because he was going to be a stranger. Peirush, melamed l'doros, מלמד שלא ירד יעקב אבינו להשתקע, again what we quote in the Haggadah. So the Meshech Chochma says melamed, meaning it teaches a lesson l'doros, not just it tells you pshat in the pasuk. Melamed, it tells us מלמד לדורות בכל גלות וגלות שידעון שלא ירדו להשתקע רק לגור.
A person's never supposed to feel settled, rooted, outside of Eretz Yisrael. ויהיו נחשבים בעיני עצמם לא כאזרחים. The nations of the world, we pay taxes, we're citizens, so they're obligated to relate to us as full-fledged citizens with all the with with all the the equal rights to which we're entitled. But in terms of our religious, not political, but our religious, spiritual, metaphysical attitude is ויהיו נחשבים בעיני עצמם לא כאזרחים. So we're religi- metaphysically... politically we're citizens, but metaphysically we're not citizens. מלמד שלא ירד יעקב אבינו להשתקע במצרים אלא לגור שם.
So if if if one will ask, but wasn't this true before Shmini Atzeret also? Of course it was true. But at times of extreme, one is reminded about basic lessons which perhaps need to be reinforced. So the first thing we need to do is we need to do our best as quickly as possible to internalize this: ויהיו נחשבים בעיני עצמם לא כאזרחים. It can't be that that for any of us it should be unimaginable to leave. It can't be that for any of us it should be unimaginable to move. It can't be that for any of us we should feel so rooted that no, this is who I am, this is where where I'm going to be. No, ויהיו נחשבים בעיני עצמם לא כאזרחים. So that's on on the level of attitude. What does it mean practically, beyond attitude? So obviously, you know, that's something where all the variables and exigencies of life come into play. There's no one uniform answer. Obviously a person's age is is relevant. You know, a 20-year-old who's who's planning a 50, 60, im yirtzeh Hashem longer future, which very very likely means that he's thinking about a longer timeframe than it's gonna be congenial, if even viable, to be here. So there's one implication for for the 20-year-old. What does it mean for someone who's at the other end of the spectrum? So obviously age makes a difference, why one is here in the first place in terms of how quickly one one reacts to. to what we've been discussing is also also relevant, but but certainly we all should be mindful of it. We should all be thinking about it and in the context of our individual lives, again weighing all the individual factors as as we need to, we should be making the plans that are appropriate again for each individual ba'asher hu sham. It isn't a one size fits all answer. It's not uniform, but the reality that we're confronting is uniform. The reality that I don't know all indications are that that America America was once a very great country. It was. But but all indications are presently that our days are numbered here in terms of again whether it's even viable in terms of antisemitism and even if it's viable in terms of antisemitism whether it's congenial just in terms of the the atmosphere. You know when Rav Velvel was was running away from Europe, so he he thought this was true already during the Second World War. And so he said he would only go to Eretz Yisrael; he wouldn't come to America. So when he was asked why not, Eretz Yisrael has has its problems also. It's not as if everyone is is unfortunately not everyone is is uniformly religious there either; it also has its problems. So Rav Velvel said really he said what the the situation today is what the Rambam describes in Hilchos De'os that if every society is corrupt, you have to go out into the into the into the desert and live in a cave like a hermit. Says but we don't know how to do that, so we have to live somewhere. He says in Eretz Yisrael he said you can lock yourself in your house and you can close the trisim and and you can try to prevent what's in the the toxicity in the the atmosphere in the environment from from penetrating. Says in America it penetrates into the houses also. So all of us who have lived here since you know in the 80 plus years since Rav Velvel made that determination, so I think we disagreed. We we were following a view that said no, that you know in America you can also close the trisim when necessary. But increasingly increasingly it looks like that's not the reality. That that again the the nihilism and the immorality is becoming so oppressive, everything is being legislated and becoming so so oppressive that it's just its days are numbered barring a a radical correction and change in course that its days are numbered. What does days numbered mean? Does that mean two years, 20 years, 30 years? I don't know. You have to ask someone smarter to figure that out. I don't know. But the days are are are numbered. Two digits, not not three digits. In terms of years, two digits, not three digits. Its days are numbered and it's something in terms of what attitudinally we all have to have the same reaction to that. Practically is something that each of us has to figure out in the in the context of of of his life, his his family, etc. and the Ribbono Shel Olam should give us the wisdom, should give us the Siyata D'shmaya to figure it out and and to make the right decisions in the right time.