Transcript

Let's see again here a little bit in Perek Vav Halacha Bet. מצות עשה להדבק בחכמים kedai lilmod mima'aseihem. Shene'emar uvo tidbak.

וכי אפשר לאדם להדבק בשכינה? אלא כך אמרו חכמים בפירוש מצוה זו

hidavek bachachamim v'talmideihem.

לפיכך צריך אדם להשתדל שישא בת תלמיד חכם וישיא בתו לתלמיד חכם ולאכול ולשתות עם תלמידי חכמים ולעשות פרקמטיא לתלמידי חכמים ולהתחבר להם בכל מיני חיבור

shene'emar uledovka bo. So the Rambam is quoting as the Kesef Mishneh cites from the Gemara in

כתובות קי"א. ואתם הדבקים בה' אלהיכם חיים כלכם היום. וכי אפשר לדבוקי בשכינה? והא כתיב כי ה' אלהיך אש אוכלה אלא כל המשיא בתו לתלמיד חכם וכולו. מעלה עליו הכתוב כאילו מדבק בשכינה.

So the Rambam added the phrase kedai lilmod mima'aseihem. So it's very mistaber that that's a mistaberdigge thing. It's not something strange but אף על פי כן. Again in the Gemara it's just וכי אפשר לדבוקי בשכינה and then the Gemara gives all these applications that the Rambam gives to as much as possible keep company with the chachamim v'talmideihem. And the Rambam adds kedai lilmod mima'aseihem. So the tochen is as follows. The lashon chazal here is וכי אפשר לדבוקי בשכינה and then the siyum is מעלה עליו הכתוב כאילו מדבק בשכינה. So chazal when they pose the question speak of being dovek in the shchina. What does the term shchina mean? We have it so often. What what what does the term shchina mean? So at least for the Rambam the answer is, I think the Noda Biyehudah has a teshuvah where where he quotes that the Rambam says in Moreh Nevuchim that shchina means either of two things. Sometimes it means A, sometimes it means B. Sometimes it refers to an or hanivra, some kind of supernatural light which is which one one can perceive, an or hanivra. And sometimes shchina refers to hashgachas Hashem. So you say that Hakadosh Baruch Hu's shchina is present in a certain place, the Rambam says what that means according to this what when shchina is being used in the second sense of the term it means that there's a special degree of hashgachah which Hakadosh Baruch Hu exercises vis-a-vis this place. So shchina Hakadosh Baruch Hu's presence, again for the Rambam, in in the second meaning of the term and he says you have to figure out contextually which of the two meanings is intended. So shchina in the second sense of the term refers to Hakadosh Baruch Hu's hashgachah. Hakadosh Baruch Hu is present, Hakadosh Baruch Hu's not physical, Hakadosh Baruch Hu you can't associate Hakadosh Baruch Hu with place A more than place B in terms of Hakadosh Baruch Hu b'atzmuso. Hakadosh Baruch Hu's not physical, he's not found in a place. So what does it mean that Hakadosh Baruch Hu's presence is there? What does it mean that Hakadosh Baruch Hu is residing there? Right, that's what what shchina means, to reside. What does that mean? So it means that Hakadosh Baruch Hu's hashgachah there's a special degree of hashgachah vis-a-vis this place. So this definition, this understanding that that shchina means hashgachah the entire... What we know about Hakadosh Baruch Hu, we know, again, we're not able to understand Hakadosh Baruch Hu himself. We're able to understand, to a degree, his actions. So whatever we say about Hakadosh Baruch Hu is really something which is being extrapolated from his actions. So the Rambam says, I think we talked about this a little bit in Perek Aleph, when it says מה הוא נקרא רחום אף אתה תהיה רחום. So when we see Hakadosh Baruch Hu embedding in nature through the act of Brias Haolam, which is also a type of Hashgacha, that's sort of a Hashgacha Kevuah, not a Hashgacha which is circumstantial, but a Hashgacha Kevuah. Or when we see Hakadosh Baruch Hu acting vis-a-vis a yachid in a way that we perceive rachmanus, so we then describe Hakadosh Baruch Hu accordingly as rachum. So Hashgacha then represents the actions of Hakadosh Baruch Hu. And that's what the Rambam says. So Chazal, I'm not being the chadesh of the definition of the mitzvah of kedei lilmod mimaaseihem. When Chazal said וכי אפשר לדבוק בשכינה, so Chazal said, so how is a person dovek to in the דרכי הקדוש ברוך הוא? How is a person dovek, what does it mean to be dovek in the Hashgacha? What does it mean to be דבק בדרכי הקדוש ברוך הוא? So it means to go to people who are exemplars in terms of their behavior of the דרכי הקדוש ברוך הוא. And so mimmela the Rambam's mokor kedei lilmod mimaaseihem is the fact that Chazal framed the mitzvah in terms of being nidbak bishchinah. And that's where the Rambam gets kedei lilmod mimaaseihem. Okay, let's continue with Halacha Gimmel.

מצווה על כל אדם לאהוב את כל אחד ואחד מישראל כגופו שנאמר ואהבת לרעך כמוך לפיכך צריך לספר בשבחו ולחוס על ממונו כמו שהוא חס על ממון עצמו ורוצה בכבוד עצמו המתכבד בקלון חברו אין לו חלק לעולם הבא.

So this I think we spoke about already, right? The Rambam here, the Rambam in Hilchos Aveil? We spoke about it? We didn't speak about it? We spoke about it? Okay, ayen sham. Halacha Daled.

אהבת הגר שבא ונכנס תחת כנפי השכינה שתי מצוות עשה אחת מפני שהוא בכלל רעים ואחת מפני שהוא גר והתורה אמרה ואהבתם את הגר. ציווה על אהבת הגר כמו שציווה על עצמו שנאמר ואהבת את השם אלקיך. הקדוש ברוך הוא עצמו אוהב גרים שנאמר ואוהב גר.

So I think the acharonim point out with an implicit question. So for the mitzvah of ahavas hager, the Rambam quotes the pasuk והתורה אמרה ואהבתם את הגר. So the pasuk veahavtem es hager is in Sefer Devarim. Perek Yud, Pasuk Yud Tes: ואהבתם את הגר כי גרים הייתם בארץ מצרים. That's the pasuk the Rambam quotes. Question is why did the Rambam bypass the earlier pasuk here in Parshas Kedoshim Perek Yud Tes Vayikra Pasuk Lamed Gimmel,

ל"ג ל"ד: וכי יגור אתך גר בארצכם לא תונו אתו כאזרח מכם יהיה לכם הגר הגר אתכם

v'ahavta lo kamocha כי גרים הייתם בארץ מצרים אני ה' אלהיכם. So he should have quoted the first pasuk, the first pasuk that appears in the Chumash. Why did the Rambam bypass the pasuk in Kedoshim and opt for the pasuk in Parshas Eikev? L'chora the simple pshat is as follows: that the Rambam here continues and says

צוה על אהבת הגר כמו שצוה על אהבת שמו שנאמר ואהבת את ה' אלהיך.

So how is that more true of ahavas hageir than it is true of ahavas rei'im of ahavas Yisrael? Just as Hakadosh Baruch Hu commanded for ahavas Hashem, so too He commanded ahavas geir. He also commanded kol echad v'echad miYisrael. L'chora it's clear that what the Rambam has in mind is as follows: that the way the Torah expresses the mitzvah of ahavas Hashem is ואהבת את ה' אלהיך. The way the Torah expresses ahavas Yisrael is v'ahavta l'rei'acha kamocha. So that's not the same. Yes, ahavas is the same, but it's not being equated; we're bedafka differentiating. One's v'ahavta le and one's v'ahavta es. Oh, so that's why the Rambam is quoting. In Kedoshim it's, the pasuk is v'ahavta lo kamocha. It's also lamed. And the Rambam wants bedafka the pasuk in Parshas Eikev V'ahavtem es hageir. That's where you find that צוה על אהבת הגר כמו שצוה על אהבת שמו. But the difference seems to be one of chashivus and chomer hachiyuv rather than practically how the ahavah should express itself. Because the Rambam doesn't tell us here in halacha daled that practically in terms of how the ahavas hageir should translate, he doesn't tell us that it translates differently than ahavas Yisrael. So the distinction again just seems to be in terms of the chomer hachiyuv, the chashivus that the Torah attaches to it and but not in terms of how it expresses itself. Halacha Hei:

כל השונא אחד מישראל בלבו עובר בלא תעשה שנאמר לא תשנא את אחיך בלבבך ואין לוקין עליו זה לפי שאין בו מעשה ולא הזהירה תורה אלא על שנאה שבלב אבל המכה את חברו והמחרף את חברו אף על פי שאינו רשאי אינו עובר משום לא תשנא.

So there's something to be omeid on here. But first let's see halacha vav or at least part of halacha vav as well: כשיחטא איש לאיש לא ישטמנו וישתוק k'mo shenemar b'resha'im

ולא דבר אבשלום עם אמנון למרע ועד טוב כי שנא אבשלום את אמנון אלא מצוה להודיעו ולומר לו למה עשית לי כך וכך ולמה חטאת לי בדבר פלוני שנאמר הוכח תוכיח את עמיתך.

So if someone wrongs, if Reuven wrongs Shimon, so Shimon can't just harbor hatred in response, but he needs to air it. שנאמר הוכח תוכיח את עמיתך. So there's a tzaruch iyun kal here in the following sense. The mashma'us in the Rambam with the shenemar is that this is the pasuk of הוכח תוכיח את עמיתך is the makor for everything he said here in Halacha Vav.

שיחטא איש לאיש לא ישטמנו כמו שנאמר לא ישטמנו וישתוק אלא מצווה עליו להודיע.

Now lechora, the fact that lo yistamenu veyishtok, that's assur mitsad לא תשנא את אחיך בלבבך. Now maybe I see you'll say that he could have sort of you know vented it in a different way than למה עשית לי כך וכך. And and that's what the Rambam is citing hochei'ach tochi'ach for, but that's not so much the mashma'us in the Rambam. You hear the kasha rabosai? You have the Rambam in front of you? The mashma'us in the Rambam is that hochei'ach tochi'ach is the makor for this entire din, that if Reuven wronged Shimon, so Shimon can't just harbor feelings of enmity to Reuven, but he has to go over to him and he has to say למה עשית לי כך וכך. The Rambam is going to say later in Halacha Ches, in Halacha Tes, that if the person can sort of uproot the sinah without speaking to him, so that's also, that's even better.

מי שחטא לו חבירו ולא רצה להוכיחו ולא לדבר לו כלום

Halacha Tes rabosai

מפני שהיה החוטא הדיוט ביותר או שהייתה דעתו משובשת ומחל לו בלבו ולא שטמו ולא הוכיחו הרי זו מידת חסידות לא הקפידה תורה אלא על המשטמה.

So if that's the case, so then the chiyuv to be mochi'ach, what do you need a pasuk of hochei'ach tochi'ach? The chiyuv is just because otherwise it's לא תשנא את אחיך בלבבך. So lechora is as follows. At the end of Hilchos Rotzei'ach, it's a Gemara in Psachim that the Rambam quotes in the end of הלכות רוצח ושמירת נפש when he's dealing with the dinim of prika uteina, talking about the pasuk of כי תראה חמור שונאך רובץ תחת משאו, so the Rambam writes השונא שנאמר בתורה הוא מישראל לא מאומות העולם. ai

והיכי יהיה לישראל שונא מישראל והכתוב אומר לא תשנא את אחיך בלבבך?

What what kind of tziyur is the Torah giving us here of כי תראה חמור שונאך? There shouldn't be such a thing. So so what do you mean?

אמרו חכמים כגון שראהו לבדו שעבר עבירה והתרה בו ולא חזר הרי זה מצווה לשנאו עד שיעשה תשובה ויחזור מרשעו. ואף על פי שעדיין לא עשה תשובה אם מצאו נבהל במשאו מצווה לפרוק ולטעון עמו.

So the Rambam quotes, again, it's a Gemara in Psachim, that the soneh, it's a case where he saw him being over aveira, and even though the ba'al aveira is aware of the fact that it's an aveira, velo chazar bo, so then there's a mitzvah to hate. There's a mitzvah to hate. So lechora the pshat in Halacha Vav is that sheyecheta ish lish, לא תשנא את אחיך בלבבך isn't noheig because it qualifies for this exception, right? The Gemara in Psachim that the Rambam quotes at the end of הלכות רוצח ושמירת נפש says it's an exception to the rule of לא תשנא את אחיך בלבבך. And that's exactly what the medubar is in Halacha Vav. So mimaila Halacha Vav, from, as far as לא תשנא את אחיך בלבבך is concerned, so then he's lo gara from someone who's a spectator who would have witnessed this dvar aveira, the fact that he's the The fact that he's the victim doesn't make him inferior to a spectator, to someone who's just in the position of a spectator who sees him being over an aveira. So the sina there is warranted. Ah, elamai says the Rambam, no, but where the person is the victim, so then the Torah has a din that kehaigavna where the sina is not going to be sort of this impersonal morally driven sina, but it's going to be certainly tinted and tainted by his personal, by being personally offended. So then the Torah has a din of no, of הוכח תוכיח את עמיתך ולא תשא עליו חטא. Lichora that's the pshat. So if that's the case, so it only highlights what anyway is a kasha. Either way it's a kasha. Why did the Rambam mention this din here? The way when you learn halacha hei, so you see the impression you have כל השונא אחד מישראל בלבו עובר בלא תעשה. There's no intimation that there's any exception. And okay, that may, that's a kasha regardless, even if the pshat we're saying in halacha vav wouldn't be correct, that kasha has to be reckoned with. על אחת כמה וכמה when it seems like halacha vav is actually building upon this exception. So elamai, so this lichora is just another example of the yesod we've spoken about, that the Rambam organizes the dinim conceptually even if that means that the same sugya, the same mitzvah is fragmented between two places. Right? So we saw it gabai the dinim of lashon hara that the Rambam doesn't write the issur of shmias lashon hara in perek zayin of Hilchos Deos, but it's only in Hilchos Sanhedrin that the Rambam tells us the issur shmias lashon hara. Again, that's what we just alluded to, what we discussed by ahavas Yisrael. The Rambam has one presentation in Hilchos Deos, one in Hilchos Avel. So lichora it's the same thing here. לא תשנא את אחיך בלבבך, the issur is a Hilchos Deos-dike issur. The exception is not a Hilchos Deos-dike issur. Okay, there is a fair question to be asked, but lichora that's the pshat and why the Rambam doesn't mention the exception. The issur is the Hilchos Deos. The exception is sort of something that overrides the Hilchos Deos. The mitzvah lisno is not mitzad Hilchos Deos. The fact that it's a mitzvah lisno is not mitzad Hilchos Deos. Okay, we'll stop this sub-video, we'll continue at 1:30 with im yirtzeh Hashem the next Gittin.