Transcript

I'm not sure that, but kemidume that the way to read and understand is vechalkel devarav bemishpat: where devarav doesn't mean words, but it means his affairs. וכלכל סעודתו ומזונות אנשי ביתו כפי ממונו והצלחתו so that he manages his affairs judiciously so that he stays within his budget.

וכלכל סעודתו ומזונות אנשי ביתו כפי ממונו והצלחתו ולא יטריח על עצמו יותר מדאי.

So on the one hand, it is clear from this halacha, and we'll see it reinforced in a few lines within this same halacha, that it's legitimate that there will be a certain difference in lifestyle depending upon a person's income. Right, he's וכלכל סעודתו ומזונות אנשי ביתו כפי ממונו והצלחתו, so clearly that means that there are going to be differences and that a person who's successful doesn't have to conduct himself as though he were poor, Rachmana litzlan, as though he were impoverished. Meidach gisa, clearly this halacha of פרק ה הלכה י needs to be understood and implemented in a way that's entirely consistent with the halacha we learned earlier, פרק א הלכה ד, when the Rambam is illustrating the Mida Beinonis:

וכן לא יתאוה אלא לדברים שהגוף צריך להם ואי אפשר לחיות בזולתם כעניין שנאמר צדיק אוכל לשובע נפשו.

So clearly what our halacha doesn't mean that the fact that a person can afford to support a lavish lifestyle means that the Rambam is giving that his imprimatur. It means within the boundaries, within the confines of צדיק אוכל לשובע נפשו, there still can be and will be differences kefi mamono vehatzlachato. You know, presumably we imbibe this from the society in which we live, although I suppose we shouldn't rule out our own crookedness, but we often sort of operate with a mentality, with a mindset, that if a person, again, is financially very successful, so it's my money and I don't have to answer to anyone as to what I do with it and how I spend it. And that's certainly not the Torah's perspective. Again, financial success which Again the halacha that we just reviewed in Perek Aleph of Hilchos De'os and even beyond that in the two accounts of Bri'as Ha'olam, Bri'as Ha'adam, so in Perek Aleph is Vayivarech Elokim and in Perek Beis it's Vayitzav. And there's no, just like all the other differences between the two accounts, there's obviously no contradiction, but they're two sides of a coin. Bracha and tzivui, two sides of a coin. Bracha comes with responsibility. Whatever the Ribbono Shel Olam bentsches a person with imposes a responsibility. Whether the bracha is material success, whether the bracha are talents that a person has been given, that they've been endowed with. Bracha comes with responsibility. It's not the case that because I can afford it, I have a right to waste conspicuously, by conspicuously waste money as we often see in different venues, dai lachakima beramiza. It's not the case that because I can write a check to cover it, that there's no accountability. Maybe there's no accountability bein adam lachaveiro, but there's certainly accountability for what one does with one's blessings. Again, the blessings can be material blessings, but interesting, Rashi often comments that that's the peshuto shel mikra of bracha. ואעשך לגוי גדול ואברכך ואגדלה שמך, so Rashi says va'avarechecha that the Kadosh Baruch Hu is telling him even though derech is usually mema'etes gimmel devarim, it's mema'etes pirya verivya, it's mema'etes hasheina, it's mema'etes mamon, and that won't happen to you. So va'avarechecha corresponds to mamon. Yevarechecha Hashem veyishmerecha, again Rashi says yevarechecha means mamon. It's a bracha often again, that overflow, that shefa in Olam Hazeh terms means mamon. But obviously that's not the only form of bracha that we receive. Again, every talent that a person has is a bracha from the Ribbono Shel Olam. And we have a responsibility, the second side, the flip side of a coin of vayivarech is vayitzav. That we have a responsibility. So again, it is true, none of that is to contradict what this halacha says, but it's to integrate it into a larger framework. What does the Rambam think the problem with spending irresponsibly is? A lack of hitbonenus? So let's continue and maybe we'll try to formulate it.

צוו חכמים בדרכי ארץ שלא יאכל אדם בשר אלא לתיאבון, שנאמר כי תאוה נפשך לאכל בשר.

Deinu lebari, if a person is not healthy, a person is anemic or something, has low iron, so obviously that's not talking about that person. Talking about bari, a person who's in good shape.

דינו לברי לאכול מערב שבת לערב שבת. ואם היה עשיר כדי לאכול בשר בכל יום אוכל.

By the way, that's why we eat fleishig, most of us eat fleishigs on a daily basis. Most of us are bechinas ashir. So what's this category of derech eretz or darkei eretz? צוו חכמים בדרכי ארץ. There's at least one other place where the Rambam has it, maybe many more, but just one that comes to mind. If you look in Hilchos Brachos... No, Perek Zayin, sorry. Perek Zayin, Halacha Aleph in Hilchos Brachos.

מנהגות רבים נהגו חכמי ישראל בסעודה וכולן דרך ארץ הם.

Not that same lashon. Okay, here it’s singular and in our halacha, darchei, but it’s the same phrase.

מנהגות רבים נהגו חכמי ישראל בסעודה וכולן דרך ארץ הם ואלו הן.

So maybe let’s look at these examples to try to get a feel for what the term, the category means.

כשנכנסים לסעודה גדול שבכולן נוטל ידיו תחילה ואחר כך נכנסים ויושבים מסובים. וגדול מיסב בראש ושני לו למטה הימנו היו שלוש מיטות גדול מיסב בראש ושני לו למעלה הימנו שלישי לו למטה הימנו.

So you let the gadol shebakullan wash his hands first and then in terms of where you, how you position the couches, that’s also a minhag of derech eretz. So here in Hilchos Brachos I think we would say that derech eretz is basic manners, etiquette, civility. In our halacha of tzivvu chachamim בדרכי ארץ שלא יאכל אדם בשר אלא לתיאבון and dai for someone who’s not an osher לאכול מערב שבת לשבת, it means to act appropriately in context, to act responsibly. I think that aspect of it is reinforced if you take a look in halacha yud-aleph which is the Rambam’s follow up here.

דרך בעלי דעה שיקבע לו אדם מלאכה המפרנסת אותו תחילה ואחר כך יקנה בית דירה ואחר כך ישא אשה.

The Kesef Mishneh is metzayen the Gemara in Sotah mem-daled where the Gemara says למדתך תורה דרך ארץ. So again, this type of responsible, contextually appropriate behavior. So when you take this together with Hilchos Brachos, basically derech eretz really does translate quite well as menschlichkeit, menschlichkeit. And it’s interesting that the Rambam wants us to understand that let’s say the chiyuv to put on tefillin every day is at its root, at its core, let’s call it a religious obligation. These chiyuvim, agam that Chazal mandate them, at their root, at their core, they’re inyanei derech eretz. It’s not that intrinsically these are religious obligations. It’s just... basic responsibility, basic etiquette, basic Menschlichkeit. Now, it's true that it's not that they're optional. It's ציווי חכמים בדרכי ארץ. But it's important to understand, yes, it's a religious obligation to be a Mensch, but the Hanhaga itself isn't a Hanhaga of a Mitzvah the way Hanachas Tefillin is. The Hanhaga itself is a Hanhaga of Derech Eretz. What's the need for Derech Eretz? So Yitachen that there would be the following... I'd have to figure out the exact degree, whether a hundred percent or less... maybe the following would be an analogy. Rav Chaim Vital says at the beginning of Sha'arei Kedushah, according to his understanding, that we don't find Middos legislated in any Mitzvos Hatorah. And yet we find that Chazal speak of Middos Ra'os, or conversely of course, Middos Tovos, in the strongest terms. So

כל הכועס כל מיני גיהינום שולטים בו וכאילו עובד עבודה זרה.

And yet you would have expected, so in Minyan Hamitzvos, let's have a Mitzvah not to get angry. But Rav Chaim Vital says it's not there. So basically what he says, again, he says it within the scheme of Kabbalah, but what he says, the way it translates for us, is that they're prerequisites for Torah, that Torah has to be built on a foundation of Middos Tovos. And Yitachen that this is at least somewhat of an analogy in terms of Chiyuvei Derech Eretz for the Hanhaga. A person can't be Oveid Hashem if he's a Wildes person. A person has to be a Mensch and build on that foundation of Menschlichkeit. So that's why on the one hand the Rambam says these are Darkei Eretz, it's not Hanachas Tefillin. I'm not telling you a Din which is comparable to Hanachas Tefillin. But on the other hand, it's Taka Tzivui Chachamim. It is Tzivui Chachamim. Tzivui Chachamim

ואמרו לעולם יאכל אדם פחות מן הראוי לו לפי ממונו וילבש כראוי לו ויכבד אשתו ובניו יתר מן הראוי לו.

V'hale'ah:

דרך בעלי דעה שיקבע לו אדם מלאכה המפרנסת אותו תחילה ואחר כך יקנה בית דירה ואחר כך ישא אשה שנאמר מי האיש אשר נטע כרם ולא חללו אשר בנה בית חדש ולא חנכו אשר ארש אשה ולא לקחה.

So this is a Pele Atzum. As the Kessef Mishnah points out, but the Pli'ah is not in the Rambam, the Pli'ah is already in Chazal. That's not the order of the Psukim. If you open a Chumash, the order of the Psukim is אשר בנה בית חדש, then Asher Nata Kerem, then Asher Aras Isha. But again, as the Kessef Mishnah points out, it's not the Rambam. The Rambam here is just a mirror image of the way we have it in Sotah Mem-Daled. So if the sequence Taka had been as Chazal present it, so then we would have seen that Taka Limmud Derech Eretz, that the Torah in listing those who are Chozer Me'orechei Hamilchama, so the Torah is also teaching us in that context Derech Eretz, that first comes the Nata Kerem, which represents... the melacha and the parnassa, parnassas adam, then the bana bayis chadash, then then the eiras isha. So the Kesef Mishneh says

יש לתמוה על מה שכתב שנאמר מי האיש אשר נטע כרם מי האיש אשר בנה בית דקרא איפכא כתיב מי האיש אשר בנה בית חדש מי האיש אשר נטע כרם.

And ve'efshar says the Kesef Mishneh

דמדנקט מי האיש אשר ארש אשה לבסוף יליף דלא יקח אשה תחילה כדכתיב בקללות, ומנא ילפינן דהוא הדין גם כן במלבוש בבית וכרם היפך מה שכתוב בקללות.

ve'od דכיון דגלי לן לאחר, לאחר excuse me lechichas isha, mimila mashma

דהוא הדין לאחר בניין בית ונטיעת כרם דמילתא דסברא הוא.

But it's a pela. How can Chazal see here that the Torah is intending to teach us derech eretz when we have to rearrange what the Torah says? Doesn't it make more sense to say that no, al korkecha there's some other, obviously the order's not haphazard, but there's some other, something else which underlies it? It's not reflecting derech eretz. It's reflecting something else. What? I don't know, but it doesn't seem to be derech eretz if we have to, it's true that eiras isha, eiras isha is in the right place, but nata kerem and bana bayis chadash are not. So me'heicha teisei that eiras isha? No, from the place from the eiras isha we know from the Torah derech eretz and therefore we should be mehapeich the, we should reverse the sequence of the bana bayis chadash and nata kerem. So I don't know. It remains tzarich iyun. And again, all the questions are on the Gemara. None of the questions are on the Rambam. So ella mai, here is a pshat maybe. Again, as the Kesef Mishneh points out, de'milsa de'svara hu. This sequence of melacha and the parnassa, or in the words of Chazal, yilmad adam umnus followed by yikneh bayis be'dira is a milsa de'svara. So maybe the vort is like this. The Torah's takeh coming to teach derech eretz, but part of the limud in derech eretz is that sometimes, I don't know, people, want to be very, very sincere, well-meaning, wonderful people want to ask on every prat u'prat. And ich veis when they get married so they buy all the books on shalom bayis which I'm sure are all wonderful and all very important. And so you look up: okay, so this is page 22. What's it say on page 22? The food was excellent. Thank you very much. Ein hachi nami, it's takeh a good thing to say, the food was excellent, thank you very much. But one can't operate based on a manual. A person has to have an intuition for what's right. First of all, for two reasons: number one, when one is operating on a manual, it's sort of like walking like this. There's a stiffness and an artificiality to it. As-ge-patsht, right? There's a stiffness and an artificiality to it. And number two, as the Ramban points out in a very different context, the manual can't list every possible situation and circumstance that every possible person is going to find themselves in. It's impossible. So a person has to have, a person has to have an intuition. Okay, so good, we need examples, we need illustrations to teach us klalim to help us develop that intuition. But oh, that's why the Torah bedafka when it's teaching derech eretz, the Torah says: 'No, you have to recognize in sevara that you need to invert.' So the Torah says 'I'll give you an example.' Eiras isha is last, but... I'm not going to spoon-feed everything because part of the לימוד תורה דרך ארץ is to understand that the person has to have a sevara in order to know how to implement and how to practice the minhagei derech eretz. Okay, we'll stop here and im yirtzeh hashem we'll continue later.