Transcript

We left off discussing the Yesod HaHamishi

אשר בא להודות שהוא ישתבח הוא אשר ראוי לעבדו ולרוממו ולפרסם גדולתו ומשמעתו ואין עושין כן למה שלמטה ממנו במציאות מן המלאכים והכוכבים והגלגלים והיסודות וכל מה שהורכב מהם לפי שכולם מוטבעים בפעולותיהם אין להם שלטון ולא בחירה אלא רצונו יתעלה ואין עושים אותם אמצעים להגיע בהם אליו אלא כלפיו יתעלה יכוונו המחשבות ויניחו כל מה שזולתו וזה היסוד החמישי הוא האזהרה על עבודה זרה ורוב התורה באה להזהיר על זה.

Now, the question is as follows. Why is it that the Rambam, to explain the Yesod HaHamishi, the Rambam has to tell us that Malachim and all other celestial higher, however we should refer to them, forms of life, that they're not Ba'alei Bechira? The Rambam says they're mutba'im be'fuloseihem, which means they're programmed. That Hakadosh Baruch Hu has them programmed and that they have no Bechira. And what would be if the metzius were that the Malachim were Ba'alei Bechira? Malachim were Ba'alei Bechira. How does that affect this Yesod, right? The Yesod is not per se whether or not Malachim are or are not Ba'alei Bechira. That's not what the Rambam is setting forth as a Yesod. What the Rambam is setting forth as a Yesod is the fact that you're not supposed to worship anything as an intermediary between ourselves and the Ribono Shel Olam. So of what relevance is it whether or not the Malachim are or are not Ba'alei Bechira? If that's for some reason a Yesod, let it be an independent Yesod. But how is it an integral part of this Yesod? Okay. Now. So let's leave that for a minute and let's discuss a different question. What's the difference between now if I'm not mistaken I believe I believe the Rav writes in Nefesh HaChaim I think so that the tradition in Volozhin was not to say מכניסי רחמים הכניסו רחמינו because it goes against this Yesod of the Rambam in the Yud Gimmel Ikkarim, the Yesod HaHamishi. The what you have at the end of Selichos. At the end of Selichos. So the question is how is it that asking a Malach, מכניסי רחמים הכניסו רחמינו לפני בעל הרחמים, how is that different than asking someone to daven for you? How is that different than asking someone to daven for you? Ribono Shel Olam tells Avimelech go ask Avraham Avinu that he should daven for you. Have Avraham Avinu daven on your behalf. Veyitpalel be'adcha vechaye. If Avraham Avinu will daven for you then then you'll live. Okay. Maybe that's not a raya, but we find to רבי חנינא בן דוסא that רבי חנינא בן דוסא should be mispallel for him. So why is that, why is that acceptable? Why is that acceptable? And this is not acceptable? So perhaps that's what the Rambam has in mind here, and that's what the Rambam is telling us. When you daven, when you ask a person, you ask a person, be mispallel for me. So you recognize that that person is a baal bechira. And it's not in asking the person to daven on your behalf, you're not intimating that you can't or that you're not going to daven directly. But what you're saying is in addition to my tefillah, so then I also want to have the zchus of your tefillah. And in general you have more zechuyos than I do, so therefore I'm asking you that you should daven on my behalf as well. There's nothing that doesn't compromise the yesod hachamishi ki hu zeh. But what happens if you make that same request, right, if you address yourself to malachim? And malachim are not baalei bechira. So then you're not asking them, it makes no sense that you're asking the malach to do something. You can't, you can't ask something which is not a baal bechira to respond to you. So objectively what you're doing when you ask a malach to daven is objectively what you're doing regardless of what misdirected but perhaps sincere kavanah maybe underlying it, the Rambam is saying. But when you ask a malach, so in effect what you're doing is saying, well I have no right to address the Ribbono shel Olam directly. I can't address the Ribbono shel Olam directly. So I address myself to the Ribbono shel Olam via the malach, because I can't address him directly, because objectively there's no other way of making sense of the fact that you're addressing the malach. The malach is he's mutba befoolaso. So what are you asking? He can't respond to you anyway. So what's the point of asking him? So obviously your point is not to ask the malach. When you go and you have no direct access, you want something that only the president, only the Secretary of State, only a cabinet member can approve. But you have no direct access, so you go to an undersecretary. So the most you can hope is that via the undersecretary the request makes its way to the secretary. But you know that that's just a way of channeling it. So that's what the Rambam says like this, in light of the fact that they are not baalei bechira, so that's why objectively addressing yourself to the malach, objectively what that states, objectively what that indicates is that the malach has to be an emtzai between us and the Ribbono shel Olam. And that we can't address ourselves and that we don't have access rachmana litzlan to the Ribbono shel Olam directly. So that's why the Rambam is telling us no, the yesod hachamishi is not necessarily to know that malachim are not baalei bechira. That per se is not the yesod hachamishi. The yesod hachamishi is to know that we have direct access to the Ribbono shel Olam. That we have, as we mentioned from רב שמשון רפאל הירש, והוא קלי וחי גואלי. That that's what the yesod hachamishi is, that we have direct access. Now if I ask a malach, if I say, if I ask a malach to daven, so am I compromising that yesod? Says the Rambam yes, you by definition you're compromising that yesod because since they're mutba'im befoolasayam, there's no other way to understand, to interpret this channeling of the request via the malach. Whereas when you speak to a person who's a baal bechira, so then it doesn't necessarily intimate that ein hachami, if you go to the rebbe and you ask the rebbe to daven but you do it with a kavanah that I can't daven to the Ribbono shel Olam, that only the rebbe can daven, so that's the same thing as davenning to a malach, it's no better. If you go to the rebbe because you want because eina domeh תפילת צדיק בן צדיק לתפילת צדיק בן רשע, therefore you want this zechus of his tfillin in addition and therefore and you're asking him in that capacity, so then it doesn't compromise the yesod hachamishi, but ein hachi nami, it could potentially go against the yesod hachamishi as well. What about davening to a tzaddik? Kivrei tzaddikim? So lechora as follows. On one level, it seems to be going to kivrei tzaddikim, again as the maise rav of Kaleiv in Chevron seems to be a way of invoking the zechus of the tzaddikim. That's on one level. It's a way of invoking their zechus. When the Chofetz Chaim, the Isaac Nussow was the Chofetz Chaim when it came to Maror, so the only kabbalah that he had that he would rely on for making a bracha was chrein. He wouldn't make a bracha on lettuce. And Isaac Nussow, he was just physically unable to eat the chrein. And he had tremendous agmas nefesh from this that he wasn't going to be able to be mkayem the mitzvah. So he asked, he sent people they should go be mispallel at the kever of the Gra, that in the zechus that he published the Tohoras Kohanim with the hagoas haGra, that in that zechus he should have a refuah shleimah and should be able to eat the chrein. Beshalosh, the kever of a tzaddik. In addition, the Chasam Sofer, we're going to mention soon anyway. The Chasam Sofer says that there's another inyan in being mispallel on the, there is some, we don't really, אין לנו עסק בענינים אלה. But there is some connection between people who have been niftar and mekom kvurasam. There is a certain connection. And the Chasam Sofer, maybe I'll read you the Chasam Sofer is in Orach Chaim Kuf Samech Vav. No, I'm sorry, it's the Maharal who talks about kivrei tzaddikim in Nesivos Olam, Nesiv HaAvodah Perek Yud Beis.

הדא דאמינא במסכת תענית שכאשר גזרו תענית היו יוצאים לבית הקברות כדי שיתפללו עלינו המתים רחמים, אין זה שאנו מבקשים מן המתים שיתפללו עלינו, רק שאנו הולכים לבית הקברות ומתחברים למתים.

Some kind of chibur. Again, the premise is that there's a connection between the meisim and the mekom kvurasam and that by our going there when the chayim go there it makes possible some kind of chibur.

ומתחברים למתים שגם המתים יתחברו לחיים ויבקשו רחמים על ישראל, כי המתים גם כן ישראל והם אוהבים ישראל ומבקשים רחמים על ישראל.

That's another dimension which the Maharal sees in the practice. So what do we rely on when we say yiku rachamim? So the Maharal here is discussing it as well. So basically there are two two tzadim. So one is he says v'yesh lomar, the Maharal himself doesn't approve of saying it. The Maharal says it one shouldn't say it. The Maharal also thinks one shouldn't say it. But in trying to melamed z'chus he suggests maybe one tzad limud z'chus is that

ויש לומר כי מה שאנו אומרים מכניסי רחמים הכניסו אין זה בקשה כלל רק שהאדם מצוה כך למלאכים שהם מכניסים מצוה כך למלאכים שהם מכניסים התפילה להכניס התפילה לפני השם יתברך ויש כח לאדם לצוות למלאכים שהם ממונים על זה שיביאו תפילתו לפני השם יתברך.

So that's one one possible I mean he doesn't he doesn't think that that's adequate basis for saying it but that's one that it's not being said b'loshon bakasha but rather b'derech tzivuy. That's one possibility. The other possibility is if you take a look at the Netziv talks about this question in Ha'amek Davar at the end of Parshas Yisro. Now the Netziv has a a limud z'chus, the only thing is the Netziv doesn't say how everything he's saying relates to the Rambam. So this is a mahalach, but whether or not the Netziv somehow or other thought that this was consistent with the Rambam I don't know. But the Netziv says in Ha'amek Davar as follows. He says that to davven to a malach he says to davven to a malach such as machnisei rachameinu or machnisei tefilloseinu he says the pshat in that, the reason that's appropriate at times, right? The Netziv is saying that he thinks it is appropriate at times. The reason that's appropriate at times is because he says משל למה הדבר דומה. He says משל למה הדבר דומה, you have a בנו של מלך שסרח. So he knows that that that his father's door is open to him. He knows that that he can walk in and and he always has a always has an audience. He can always walk in. Ella mai, it's an expression of his own contrition, it's an expression of his own awareness of cheit and lack of worthiness that first he asks the ohev shel melech to be mefayes his father a little bit and then only later will he go to the melech himself. And that it's an expression rather of, it's the ultimate expression of humility that Ribbono shel Olam you give me the opportunity, but right now with these begadim tzo'im so I don't feel that אין לבוא בשער המלך בלבוש שק. I don't I don't think that it's appropriate for me to even though you always always open the door to us, but I think it's more appropriate first to try to be mefayes you indirectly and then only later to address you directly. That's what the Netziv basically writes at at Ha'amek Davar the end of Parshas Yisro. Whether whether he's intending this that he thinks that this distinction would be true within the Rambam but as long as a person knows that he can have direct access, I don't know he doesn't mention the Rambam so presumably it's hard to think the Netziv in terms of the Yud Gimmel Ikkarim is you know mistaber d'nafshei is disagreeing. So maybe maybe what it means is that that if a person thinks that fundamentally we have to have an intermediary between ourselves and the Ribbono shel Olam so that that contradicts the Yesod HaChamishi. If at times a person feels like I'm too much of a chotei and therefore it's more appropriate not that I can't not that I can't but that it's more appropriate to first be mefayes the melech indirectly, on the contrary, and that he'll recognize that as a sign of of one's hakaras hacheit and and regret, so I guess the Netziv thinks that that that would be consistent with this Yesod HaChamishi. What about Yaakov's malach goel osi? I don't know if he's requesting or he's metzaveh, I don't know which is that. In the Vayeitzay he's giving the malachim in the... But again, so then the Maharal says, the Maharal says that if it's belashon tzivuy, so then at least it's not a problem. I don't think as the Maharal doesn't like it because he says it's... well you look here, he explains why he doesn't like it, it's too open to misinterpretation that all of a sudden we're being metzaveh, so he doesn't like it. But in theory the Maharal is okay with the idea of being metzaveh the malach to carry out what his mission is. So I guess that's what's happening with Hamalach Hagoel Osi. Then there are different traditions whether or not the Vilna Gaon skipped the stanza of Barchuni Leshalom because of this same consideration. Did the Vilna Gaon say Barchuni Leshalom? So some say he did. So some say the Vilna Gaon skipped because it's exactly this problem that you're davening to the malach. You're davening to the malach. And again for whatever reason davening to the malach or telling the malach to give you a beracha is different than telling a person to give you a beracha. And others say no that Barchuni Leshalom is not a problem because we're not saying it belashon bakasha, we're rather saying it belashon tzivuy, rather saying it belashon tzivuy. So mistama, so most people say Barchuni Leshalom, so when we say Barchuni Leshalom you have to have in mind that it's belashon tzivuy rather than rather than belashon bakasha. But another way to explain Hamalach Hagoel would be to ask the Ribono Shel Olam that the same malach that protected Yaakov should also protect the children. Not belashon tzivuy, just to ask the Ribono Shel Olam. And maybe maybe it is a bakasha, but the bakasha is the Ribono Shel Olam should send the malach to be mevarech. Yeah. Yeah. It's interesting that the Chasam Sofer in that teshuva has another very interesting distinction he draws between when you have someone else, another person davening on your behalf as opposed to davening to the malach, as opposed to davening to the malach. He says what's the pshat another person davening in your behalf? So he says the truth is that you can't daven for someone else. Davening for someone else is the same as being an intermediary malach. Ella mai, he says when you ask when one Jew is mispallel for another Jew it's because since all of Klal Yisrael is k'guf echad, k'neshama achas, so the person is davening for himself. And it's only when you feel the other person's pain that you daven for them. So you're not davening for someone else, you're davening because the empathy, the sense of identification is so great that it's no different than a person davening for his own tzrachim.

אך כל ישראל שותפים וגוף אחד ונפש אחת וכשאחד מצטער גם חברו מרגיש ועמו מצטער ועל דרך זה המתפלל על חברו צריך שיכלה עצמו עליו פירוש שיראה כאילו גם הוא חולה וכיון ששניהם בצער,

so then he could... the other one can daven as well. Okay, let's see Hayesod Hashishi. Hanevuah.

והוא לדעת שזה המין האנושי שיש ימצאו בו אישים בעלי כשרונות מפותחים מאוד ושלמות גדולה ותתכונן נפשם עד שמקבלת צורת השכל ויתחבר אותו השכל האנושי בשכל הפועל ויאצל עליהם ממנו אצילות שפע ואלו הם הנביאים וזו היא הנבואה וזה עניינה וביאור היסוד הזה בשלמות יאורך מאוד ואין מטרתנו להביא ראיה על כל יסוד ופירוט כל יסוד מהם וביאור דרכי ידיעתו לפי שזהו כללות כל המדעים אלא נזכירם בדרך הודעה בלבד ופסוקי התורה מעידים מנבואת נביאים רבים.

So yesod hashishi is to believe in nevuah in general. That there is such a phenomenon as nevuah, right? And the Rambam emphasizes that in the Yad as well. That's why he talks about nevuah in Hilchot Yesodei HaTorah. And the Rambam says that מיסודי הדת לידע שהאל מנבא בני אדם. In perek zayin, מיסודי הדת לידע שהאל מנבא את בני האדם. So why is this, why is this so important? Again, not why is it true, but again all the things here, right, all the Yud Gimmel Ikkarim, it's not only that they're true, but that they're indispensable to emunah. A person doesn't know it, he's not just lacking in yediah, but he's lacking in yedias haTorah, but he's lacking in basic emunah. So why is the yesod hashishi so so basic, so fundamental? So lichora for one, maybe two reasons, maybe others as well. First of all, the Rambam writes here in perek chet of Yesodei HaTorah that

משה רבינו לא האמינו בו ישראל מפני האותות שעשה שהמאמין על פי האותות יש בליבו דופי שאפשר שיעשה האות בלט וכישוף אלא כל האותות שעשה משה במדבר לפי הצורך עשאם לא להביא ראיה על הנבואה.

Bameh eminu vo? Skipping a couple of lines,

במעמד הר סיני שעינינו ראו ולא זר ואזנינו שמעו ולא אחר האש והקולות והלפידים והוא ניגש אל הערפל והקול מדבר אליו ואנו שומעים משה משה לך אמור להם כך וכך וכן הוא אומר פנים בפנים דיבר השם עמכם ונאמר לא את אבותינו כרת השם את הברית הזאת ומנין שמעמד הסיני לבדו היא הראיה לנבואתו שהיא אמת שאין בו דופי שנאמר הנה אנכי בא אליך בעב הענן בעבור ישמע העם בדברי עמך וגם בך יאמינו לעולם מכלל שקודם דבר זה לא האמינו בו נאמנות שהיא עומדת לעולם הנאמנות שיש אחריה הרהור ומחשבה.

So the Rambam says the basis for our believing in the authenticity of Moshe Rabbeinu is Ma'amad Har Sinai, not any of the otos Moshe Rabbeinu did, but rather Ma'amad Har Sinai, Ma'amad Har Sinai. What happened at Ma'amad Har Sinai? That we experienced bederech nevuah that Hakadosh Baruch Hu communicates with us through Moshe Rabbeinu, right? That עינינו ראו ולא זר אזנינו שמעו ולא אחר ש Hakadosh Baruch Hu said to Moshe Rabbeinu לך אמור להם כך וכך, kach vekach. So kach, what emerges according to this Rambam is that without belief in nevuah in general, we don't have the proper foundation for belief in nevuas Moshe Rabbeinu, right? Without the belief that all of us potentially are capable of nevuah, so then we can't believe, we can't have the true foundation and the true basis for belief in nevuas Moshe Rabbeinu. Mimeila says the Rambam, hayesod hashishi, hanevuah, lada'as that there can be nevuah amongst people in general, not just Moshe Rabbeinu. There can be nevuah amongst people in general, and then mimeila this yesod is then the basis for the yesod to follow in the yesod hashvi'i of nevuas Moshe Rabbeinu. I think that's one element of why this is just so fundamental, that there's nevuah. And the other, the other thing is if you take a look in the ברייתא דפנחס בן יאיר, right, the baraisa which the Mesillas Yesharim uses to structure his sefer. so ultimately it's מביא לידי רוח הקודש. So what's the yesod? The yesod is, and again and this the Rambam is telling us is such a tremendous yesod, yesod ha'emunah, that a person is not only created to be oved Hashem, but a person is also created with the capacity to experience Ribbono Shel Olam as directly and as intimately as happens in a nevuah. That and to realize that that capacity exists in a person and to realize that that's obviously and in our generation we're far from it but to realize that that's the ultimate goal so the Rambam says that that's a yesod ha'emunah as well. Hayesod hashvii just one more. Hayesod hashvii nevuas Moshe Rabbeinu.

והוא שנאמין שהוא אביהן של כל הנביאים שקדמו לפניו והבאים אחריו והכל הם למטה ממנו במעלה והוא בחיר השם מכל המין האנושי אשר השיג ממנו יתעלה יותר ממה שהשיג וישיג כל אדם שנמצא ושיימצא ושכלו עליו השלום הגיע לתכלית הרוממות מעל האנושיות עד שהשיג המעלה המלאכית ונעשה במעלת המלאכים. לא נשאר לפניו שום מסך שלא קרע ולא עצר בעדו שום מעצור גופני ולא נשאר בו שום דבר מן החיסרון בין מעט בין הרבה והושבתו בו הכוחות הדמיוניים והחושים בכל השגותיו ונתפעל כוחו המעורר ונשאר שכל בלבד. ועל עניין זה אמרו עליו שהוא מדבר עם השם בלי אמצעות המלאכים.

Now one of the points which the Rambam is emphasizing very much here is that nevuas Moshe Rabbeinu and this is part of why it qualifies as a separate yesod, it's not just that Moshe Rabbeinu was greater, that Moshe Rabbeinu is in the same class as other neviim but he was greater than they were. Maybe because he received nevuah more often or because his nevuah revealed more to him. It was more of the same, right? He was greater because he had more of the same, more nevuah than they did. No. What the Rambam here is emphasizing is that nevuas Moshe Rabbeinu qualitatively was different. It wasn't just Moshe Rabbeinu's nevuah was one of a kind. And in that sense nevuas Moshe Rabbeinu wasn't just greater but nevuas Moshe Rabbeinu was unique, right? And that's what the pesukim of לא כן עבדי משה is that the uniqueness of nevuas Moshe Rabbeinu, not just the greatness, but the uniqueness of nevuas Moshe Rabbeinu. One element of that that the Rambam says is that when Hakadosh Baruch Hu communicates to all of the neviim, so the Rambam says the neviim to receive the nevuah, Hakadosh Baruch Hu employs two of their faculties. He employs not only the koach hasichli but he also employs the koach hadimyon, right? And that's why they see images. And it's a mareh, it's an image. And that's how Hakadosh Baruch Hu communicated to the other neviim, it's employing their koach hadimyon as well. The Rambam says that with Moshe Rabbeinu so the koach hadimyon was not active at all that Moshe Rabbeinu didn't need that koach, that faculty to be activated to be used that part of the directness of the nevuah is that the only faculty which was operative when Moshe Rabbeinu received nevuah was just the koach hasachel and it was again pure, direct, unmediated and it didn't have to be presented bederech mareh employing the koach hadimyon as well. So the point again which the Rambam is emphasizing is that Moshe Rabbeinu is not greater than the other neviim and the reason this is singled out as its own yesod is the uniqueness of nevuas Moshe Rabbeinu. Now obviously it's It's easy enough to understand why that is so fundamental because only Nevuas Moshe Rabbeinu can create Torah. That Torah which is the l'dore doros, which is the netzach netzachim, the Rambam leads into the yesod hashmini of Torah min Hashamayim and the Torah doesn't change, only issues forth from Nevuas Moshe Rabbeinu and again and that that that we understand and the basis for that is not just that Moshe Rabbeinu was greater than other nevi'im, but Moshe Rabbeinu's nevua was was unique. Mistama the Rambam here goes on, we're not going to read through it together. I hope you will read through it though. The Rambam goes on, he has it here, he has it in Yesodei HaTorah as well to list the four differences between nevuas Moshe Rabbeinu and the nevua of the other nevi'im. The pashus is that the Rambam doesn't mean to imply that if a person doesn't know these four differences that he's also lacking in the emuna, but rather the Rambam is just a little bit is elaborating and and developing the idea for us, but lav davka that the four differences that Moshe Rabbeinu was awake and then that they were in a dream v'chulu lav davka that these differences also, knowing them is is indispensable in terms of emuna, not just in terms of yedias haTorah. Then the Rav used to just point point out that the Rambam, the end of Hilchos Tumas Tzara'as, when the Rambam talks about how chamur lashon hara is, so the Rambam says look at Miriam.

הרי הוא אומר התבוננו מה אירע למרים הנביאה שדיברה באחיה שהייתה גדולה ממנו בשנים וגידלתו על ברכיה

right, her kid brother

וסיכנה בעצמה להצילו מן הים והיא לא דיברה בגנותו אלא טעתה שהשוותו לשאר נביאים.

Right, so the mistake of Miriam, right, in not understanding why Moshe Rabbeinu had to be poreish min ha'isha whereas she and Aharon and all other nevi'im didn't have to abandon family life, is that טעתה שהשוותו לשאר הנביאים. That this yesod again that Moshe Rabbeinu wasn't just another navi, but it was absolutely unique, right? The uniqueness of nevuas Moshe Rabbeinu is what the zechira of, the zechira of Miriam is not only a zechira in terms of lashon hara, but also a zechira in terms of the uniqueness of nevuas Moshe Rabbeinu. Bli neder next time we'll try to finish up. I'm not a hundred percent sure if next time will be tomorrow or or Thursday. So I guess if there's shiur tomorrow, there'll be a sign-up.