Transcript

What one finds at least three levels, possibly four, but three that we'll try to look at briefly בעזרת השם בלי נדר levels of simcha in the Rambam. The most basic level Rambam writes at the beginning of Hilchos De'os:

ולא יהיה מהולל ושוחק ולא עצב ואונן אלא שמח כל ימיו בנחת

besever panim yafos. Again in perek beis:

לא יהיה אדם בעל שחוק והתל ולא עצב ואונן אלא שמח.

So that's one one one darga, one din, one darga of simcha. Then of course simchas yom tov:

שבעת ימי הפסח ושמונת ימי החג עם שאר ימים טובים כולן אסורין בהספד ותענית וחייב אדם להיות בהן שמח וטוב לב הוא ובניו ואשתו ובני ביתו וכל הנלוים עליו.

Even though here the Rambam just speaks of חייב אדם להיות בהן שמח, implicitly in Hilchos Chanukah when he explains, quoting paraphrasing interpreting the Gemara in Rosh Hashanah as to why there's no Hallel on Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippurim:

אבל ראש השנה ויום הכפורים אין בהן הלל לפי שהם ימי תשובה ויראה ופחד לא ימי שמחה יתירה.

So implicitly the Rambam is classifying describing simchas yom tov as simcha yeseirah. Possibly the frame of reference is in contradistinction to the first din, the first darga of simcha. And then the third, also simchas yom tov, but the heightened simchas yom tov in Mikdash and chag hasukkos:

אף על פי שכל המועדות מצוה לשמוח בהן בחג הסוכות היתה שם במקדש שמחה יתירה שנאמר ושמחתם לפני ה' אלהיכם שבעת ימים.

So clearly the Rambam uses the term simcha yeseirah in two different ways. In Hilchos Chanukah implicitly he describes all the yamim tovim which have Hallel as yemei simcha yeseirah and here the Rambam says that's what distinguishes simcha of chag hasukkos in Mikdash that it's simcha yeseirah. So it's not not really a stira, but it's it's clear that he's using the term in in two different ways. So maybe we'll try to think about that also beezras Hashem. Simcha always has to have a focus. You know a person can sort of artificially smile as in when the photographer comes to school and tells the kids to smile. So a a person can artificially smile but to sort of naturally smile, a person has to be smiling about something. Simcha always has there has to be a content and context. Simcha is a reaction. So let's begin perhaps with the first din, the first darga of simcha that a person shouldn't be mehollal v’sochaik. Next, Simcha's reaction. So let's begin perhaps with the first din, the first darga of Simcha, that a person shouldn't be

מהולל ושוחק ולא עצב ואונן אלא שמח כל ימיו בנחת.

So what's the content of that Simcha? ולא עצב ואונן אלא שמח כל ימיו בנחת. So what's, what's the context, content of that Simcha? So in פרק ב' הלכה ז', again,

לא יהא אדם בעל שחוק והתל ולא עצב ואונן אלא שמח. כך אמרו חכמים שחוק וקלות ראש מרגילין לערווה. וציוו שלא יהא אדם פרוץ בשחוק ולא עצב ומתאבל אלא מקביל ומקבל את כל האדם בסבר פנים יפות.

So it's, having מקבל את כל האדם בסבר פנים יפות is a Mishna in Avos. A Mishna in Avos. But what omer dorshani here in the Rambam? If a person is atzeiv umitabel, so it will translate ben adam lechaveiro, but it certainly isn't something that we would identify and define as only being a mida which is relevant to one's ben adam lechaveiro. If a person is atzeiv umitabel, it's something that is gonna be reflected in all the time. It's more of a ben adam le'atzmo than it is ben adam lechaveiro. So the Rambam says one extreme is שלא יהא אדם פרוץ בשחוק. The other is lo atzeiv umitabel. Both of which seem to be, again, the ends of a spectrum which isn't limited to ben adam lechaveiro. And then when the Rambam defines what the derech habeinonis is within this spectrum, it seems to be very narrowly focused on ben adam lechaveiro. אלא מקבל את כל האדם בסבר פנים יפות. Now, it could be that partially if we pay attention to a different question that this question is partially answered. There seems to be repetition here. Again, פרק ב' מדעות הלכה ז', if you have it on your phone, so take a look rabbosai.

פרק ב' מדעות הלכה ז'. לא יהא אדם בעל שחוק והתל ולא עצב ואונן אלא שמח. כך אמרו חכמים שחוק וקלות ראש מרגילין לערווה.

Then the Rambam seemingly repeats:

וציוו שלא יהא אדם פרוץ בשחוק ולא עצב ומתאבל אלא מקביל ומקבל את כל האדם בסבר פנים יפות.

So what's the reisha and seifa here? What are the trei bavei in the Rambam? They both seem to say the same thing. לא יהא אדם בעל שחוק. And then he says: וציוו שלא יהא אדם פרוץ בשחוק. Lo atzeiv veonein. And then he repeats again: velo atzeiv. So what are the trei bavei here in the Rambam? It's also difficult to understand. There were two mishnayos in Avos. One is to מקבל את כל האדם בסבר פנים יפות and the other is to מקבל את כל האדם בשמחה. So why didn't the Rambam quote that mishna? Simcha is the what's memutza, what's memutza'as between the two extremes. Not to be ba'al schok vehessel, not atzeiv veonein, but sameach. So he should've quoted the mishna about being מקבל את האדם בשמחה. Why besever panim yafos? So it's clear that the two halachos in the Rambam is, the first bava is talking about the mida in the person. לא יהא אדם בעל שחוק והתל. It's talking about what a person's mida should be. And the second bava is the person's behavior, the person's conduct. And that's, the first one is לא יהא אדם בעל שחוק. The second is וציוו שלא יהא אדם פרוץ בשחוק. Ra'aya ladavar that in the reisha the Rambam says lo atzeiv veonein and in the seifa it's lo atzeiv umitabel. 'Cause the Mishna in Sanhedrin says that אין אנינות אלא בלב. So when the Rambam is talking about what the mida is, he speaks that a person shouldn't be onein. When the Rambam is talking about what a person's behavior should be, how he should manifest. How he should act, so there it's lo yehei mitabel because aveilus denotes nihug, aninus denotes be'lev. So hashta de'asnan lehachi that the second halacha in the Rambam where he says ומקבל כל אדם בסבר פנים יפות, that's why he quotes this Mishnah, not the Mishnah of be'simcha because he's talking about the behavioral aspect of the din, not the internal middah aspect of the din. So he's looking for where the simcha manifests itself. So it manifests itself bein adam le'chavero. But that obviously doesn't fully answer our question because a person's simcha can manifest itself in other ways as well, not only bein adam le'chavero. It will... So that's the question again is why does the Rambam depict the memutza between peretz ve'schok and otzeiv u'misabel as מקבל את כל האדם בסבר פנים יפות when the medubar is that we're talking about a middah which is much bigger and broader than just bein adam le'chavero? So itachen as follows: what's the content of the simcha here in Hilchos De'os? That a person's perennial, the tzurah of a person is that he should be be'simcha. He should be be'simcha. Not maholal ve'sochak, not frivolous, not lightheaded, but on the other hand, not maros, not sad. So the content of that simcha lichora is

וירא אלהים כי טוב. וירא אלהים כי טוב. וירא אלהים את כל אשר עשה והנה טוב מאד.

Hakadosh Baruch Hu attests and affirms that the briyah is tov. That metziyus, existence, is inherently tov. The Rambam says when Hakadosh Baruch Hu says to Moshe Rabbeinu, אני אעביר כל טובי על פניך. What does it mean that I'm going to let you see all my goodness? It means I'm going to let you understand the way I conduct the entire briyah. That kol tuvi means based on וירא אלהים כי טוב. It means the entire briyah. The simcha of Hilchos De'os is a simchas hachayim. Existence is good. It's a simchas hachayim. Ribbono Shel Olam's to be alive, to exist, to be alive is good. To encounter Ribbono Shel Olam's world is to encounter tov and that's what should engender within us a perennial level of simcha. The Rambam says in the hakdama to perush hamishnayos, he was chozer bo later in the Moreh, so I'm not sure where he's holding in Mishneh Torah, but in the hakdama to perush hamishnayos he says like Rav Saadia Gaon and others that the whole briyah at least under the moon, the whole briyah is for adam. Adam is the, is at the pinnacle of the briyah. Everything Hakadosh Baruch Hu created is letzorech adam. Plant life, mineral life, plant life, animal life, everything is letzorech adam. Even if one doesn't say that in a philosophical sense, but it's certainly true for us experientially. When a person encounters another person, the way we react to another person is the way we react to Hakadosh Baruch Hu's briyah. Ein hachi nami the... The midah of otzev and misabel at one end and poretz bis-chok at the other end is takeh much greater than bein adam l'chaveiro, but being מקבל את כל אדם בסבר פנים יפות also bespeaks something much greater than just bein adam l'chaveiro. It's an also an affirmation of וירא אלקים כי טוב. כל אדם בסבר פנים יפות. Kol adam elicits that reaction. It's a way of reacting to Hakadosh Baruch Hu's briah. So that's the first din or darga of simcha that the Rav has and again, it basically translates into a simchas hachayim. Sometimes we're too focused on whatever frustrations we have, whatever unfulfilled hopes that we have, and allow ourselves to be distracted from the inherent just goodness of being, which is what mechayiv and generates this darga of simcha. You know the Gaon says on the two psukim that the Gemara in Brachos juxtaposes. The Gemara says bemarava used to juxtapose the two psukim of מצא אשה מצא טוב and מוצא אני מר ממות את האשה. So the Gemara says it depends upon who the isha is, which pasuk is the relevant pasuk. Whether it's matza or motze, whether it was tov or whether it was mar. But the Gaon says why the difference in tense? Why is it מצא אשה מצא טוב in the past tense and it's מוצא אני מר ממות את האשה in the present tense? So the Gaon says that when we have a bracha, okay, so initially we appreciate it, we're excited, but then it fades into the past. We just take it for granted. It's not an ongoing source of appreciation, of excitement, of contentment. But when there's something which is amiss in our lives, so then okay, it's not well it happened ten years ago and then it you know we sort of just adjust and let it fade into the background. No, it remains in the present. It remains motze. So that susceptibility that we have also is one which if we're not careful can interfere with the reaction of simcha to the וירא אלקים כי טוב. The simchas hachayim. The second level of simcha, or maybe we'll maybe stop for a few minutes. The second and third dinim and dargas of simcha are both associated with simchas yom tov. The simchas yom tov of the yamim tovim in general and then the heightened simcha of Chag HaSuccos in Mikdash. There's a contrast between how the Rambam presents these two types of simcha. When it comes to the heightened simcha in Mikdash on Succos, the Rambam describes the intensity of the nihugei simcha,

רוקדין ומספקין ומטפחין ומפזזין ומכרכרין כל אחד ואחד כמו שיודע.

And then he tells us, again, all from the sugyas in Succos,

ולא היו עושין אותה עמי הארץ וכל מי שירצה אלא גדולי חכמי ישראל וראשי הישיבות והסנהדרין והחסידים והזקנים ואנשי מעשה הם שהיו מרקדין ומספקין ומנגנים ושמחים במקדש בימי חג הסוכות.

Then the way the correct girsa is from the kisvei yad, the Rambam explains why the simcha was restricted to the gedolei chachmei Yisrael,

שהשמחה שישמח אדם בעשיית המצוות ובאהבת האל שציווה בהן עבודה גדולה היא.

To be able to express such intense, unbridled simcha בעשיית המצוות ובאהבת האל is an exalted avoda. It's an exalted avoda so mimaileh it's re'uya for gedolei chachmei Yisrael vechulu. So the Rambam here clearly tells us what the content of the simcha is, what the simcha's reacting to, what the simcha's expressing, עשיית המצוות ובאהבת האל. Very clearly defines. By contrast, in Hilchos Yom Tov the Rambam is pretty reticent.

שבעת ימי הפסח ושמונת ימי החג חייב אדם להיות בהן שמח וטוב לב.

No, he doesn't say בעשיית המצוות ובאהבת האל or anything analogous. There's no analog to it. Not that he should say the same thing, but there's no analog to it. Okay, maybe because it's obvious? Maybe because it's obvious? But it doesn't seem so because later in Halacha Chaf when the Rambam says

כשאדם אוכל ושותה ושמח ברגל לא יימשך ביין ובשחוק ובקלות ראש ויאמר שכל שיוסיף בזה ירבה במצווה שהשכרות והשחוק הרבה וקלות הראש אינה שמחה אלא הוללות וסכלות ולא נצטווינו על ההוללות ועל הסכלות אלא על השמחה שיש בה עבודת יוצר הכל שנאמר תחת אשר לא עבדת את ה' אלוהיך בשמחה ובטוב לבב.

It's a rather low bar. It's simcha she'yeish bah, not a שמחה שהיא עבודת יוצר הכל, but a simcha she'yeish bah, a simcha that contains an element, a core of. Not a Simcha which is inherently and intrinsically and purely an Avoda. It's שמחה שיש בה עבודת יוצר הכל. So the pshat seems to be as follows. The Rambam writes in the Ta'amei Mitzva of the Yomim Tovim. Yomim Tovim (in parentheses in the translation, no'adu) כולם לשמחות ולהתכנסויות מענגות ההכרחיות לאדם לרוב. The Yomim Tovim are designed to provide an occasion for Simcha, for gathering, which is something which is a basic human need. There's a need, part of the human psyche. One of our basic needs is to be sameach. The Torah wants that instead of our manufacturing occasions of reshus or even worse, as the focus and occasion for Simcha, that the Simcha should be elevated to Mitzva and therefore the Torah focuses the Simcha on Yetzias Mitzrayim, on L'maan Yedu Doroseichem, on Mattan Torah. When the Rambam quotes the pasuk of

תחת אשר לא עבדת את ה' אלהיך בשמחה ובטוב לבב,

so here, not everywhere, but here, the Rambam's learning pshat in the pasuk differently than we generally learn pshat. We learn pshat

תחת אשר לא עבדת את ה' אלהיך בשמחה ובטוב לבב

when you oved Hashem, you felt that it was a tremendous burden, and you felt that it was very onerous, and you weren't oved Hashem besimcha. Here the Rambam is learning pshat תחת אשר לא עבדת את ה' אלהיך בשמחה: when you were being mesameach, you didn't infuse that Simcha with Avodas Hashem. When you were being mesameach, you didn't elevate that Simcha. And that's what he says, that נצטווינו על השמחה שיש בה עבודת יוצר הכל. It's a basic human need to have times of Simcha, to have gatherings of Simcha. And the Torah instructs us how to elevate it and how to infuse it with an element of Avodas Hashem. The Rambam has the same pshat in the pasuk תחת אשר לא עבדת earlier in Hilchos Teshuva as well. In Perek Tes of Hilchos Teshuva the Rambam writes,

וכן הודיענו בתורה שאם נעזוב התורה מדעתנו ונעסוק בהבלי הזמן.

If we'll forsake Torah, Rachmana Litzlan, and preoccupy ourselves with narishkeit, with nonsense.

כענין שנאמר וישמן ישרון ויבעט שדיין האמת יסיר מן העוזבים כל טובות העולם הזה שהן חזקו ידיהם לבעוט ומביא עליהן כל הרעות המונעות אותן מלקנות עולם הבא.

So everything that Hakadosh Baruch Hu gave us to function as a support system that we should be able to engage in avodas Hashem, if we're not using it for avodas Hashem, then he takes it away kedei she-yovdu be-risham. And that's what's written in the Torah,

ועבדת את אויביך אשר ישלחנו ה' בך, תחת אשר לא עבדת את ה' אלקיך בשמחה ובטוב לבב מרב כל.

So the context here is not that we were oved es Hashem but begrudgingly, experiencing it as something onerous. No, it's saying that we weren't being oved Hashem. So how is this the proof text? No because that's the same havana in the pasuk that the Rambam has in Hilchos Yom Tov that

תחת אשר לא עבדת את ה' אלקיך בשמחה ובטוב לבב

in your zmanei simcha, in your need to be sameiach, you didn't infuse that with avodas Hashem. And that's lechora why the Rambam is reticent in terms of telling us what the defining the simchas yom tov, again avada of course it's שמחה שיש בה עבודת יוצר הכל. But on its most basic level, the Torah is providing us with an outlet for that basic need that we have, but sanctifying it, elevating it. Sometimes a person will appropriately ask himself, say he goes to, I'll give it as a mashal, the Rambam is talking about dinim d'Oraisa but just as a mashal, a person goes to a Purim chagiga. Okay, so he's dancing, and then at some point before, during, or after, a person asks himself, what were my kavanos, where was I really holding, and does that sort of honesty and self-introspection, does that sort of invalidate? The answer according to the Rambam is a resounding no. The fact that the person chooses Purim which celebrates the nes and the hatzalah as the time to be sameiach, that itself is on the most basic level is what the Torah wanted. And it certainly doesn't on the most basic level invalidate our simcha, our experience of simcha. Halevai that everything we do at every moment should be even higher and higher, l'eila l'eila. But unquestionably on its most basic level, that's gufo what the, again now the nimshal, that's the most basic level of simchas yom tov according to the Rambam. And hence, it's not a simcha which is pure avodas yotzer hakol. It's a שמחה שיש בה עבודת יוצר הכל. But I'm also enjoying, I'm enjoying the meat and I'm enjoying the camaraderie, and ein hachi nami. But that is what the Torah had in mind on its most basic level in terms of simchas yom tov. Which is why simchas yom tov is accessible to everyone.

חייב אדם להיות בהן שמח הוא ובניו ואשתו ובני ביתו.

It's not restricted to an elite group. We're all capable, we all have the capacity for שמחה שיש בה עבודת יוצר הכל. It's not restricted to an elite and elite group. We're all, we're all capable. We all have the capacity for שמחה שיש בו עבודת יוצר הכל. The simcha, again, what we refer to as Simchas Beis Hashoeva, for the Rambam, it's simchas yom tov of Sukkos in Mikdash is entirely different. That's not providing us and sanctifying us, providing us with an outlet and sanctifying it. It's not a שמחה שיש בה עבודת יוצר הכל, no, but it's a simcha where the... it's not being infused with avoda, the entire simcha is generated by asiyas hamitzvos and ahavas hakeil. One wonders whether our minhag to have Simchas Beis Hashoeva gatherings, if the pshat in the minhag is not aspirational. Ein hachi nami, if the Mikdash was standing, so we would I guess be in the back row of the bleachers, but ein hachi nami. But there's something aspirational about participating in a Simchas Beis Hashoeva that maybe it's not yet a reality. But if we don't aspire, it certainly won't become a reality either, that's for sure. And our gathering is hopefully both aspirational as well as inspirational. Okay, maybe we'll maybe continue a little bit more later, but we'll stop there for now. Eizeh... Rambam concludes Hilchos Lulav

וכל המשפיל עצמו ומקל גופו במקומות אלו הוא הגדול המכובד העובד מאהבה.

Person who lowers himself with what maybe in a different context would seem to be an inappropriate disregard for one's dignity,

הוא הגדול המכובד העובד מאהבה. וכן דוד מלך ישראל אומר ונקלותי עוד מזאת והייתי שפל בעיני. ואין הגדולה והכבוד אלא לשמוח לפני ה' שנאמר והמלך דוד מפזז ומכרכר לפני ה'.

What's the proof?

ואין הגדולה והכבוד אלא לשמוח לפני ה' שנאמר והמלך דוד מפזז ומכרכר לפני ה'.

Who says Dovid Hamelech was interested in bizyones? So Dovid Hamelech who was takeh dancing with tremendous hislahabus. Who says he was interested in bizyones? Maybe he wasn't interested. So this isn't the only time that the Rambam cites the paradigm of Dovid Hamelech, for instance in Hilchos Teshuva talking about olam haba. ve-khamma hamma David or ve-khamma qama David והתאוה לחיי העולם הבא. How much did Dovid HaMelech pine? How much did Dovid HaMelech yearn for Olam Ha-Ba? שנאמר לולא האמנתי לראות בטוב ה' בארץ חיים. But here the Rambam just says kama hamma David. Doesn't identify him as Dovid HaMelech. Here the Rambam identifies David as Dovid HaMelech. So lekhora the pshat is very simple: מלך שמחל על כבודו אין כבודו מחול. So avada Dovid HaMelech had to be concerned with kavod. Dovid HaMelech, we're not talking about David in terms of yearning for Olam Ha-Ba. It's not relevant that he was Melech Yisrael. But over here, מלך שמחל על כבודו אין כבודו מחול. So of course Dovid HaMelech, at least in terms of the kavod part, was, had to be concerned with the kavod. If Dovid HaMelech was מפזז ומכרכר לפני ה', he was dancing with such, such frenzy, so it's clear that that constitutes what the genuine kavod, because it was very much in keeping with his position as Dovid Melech Yisrael. The previous line in the Rambam:

וכל המשפיל עצמו ומקל גופו במקומות אלו הוא הגדול המכובד העובד מאהבה. וכן דוד מלך ישראל אומר ונקלותי עוד מזאת והייתי שפל בעיני.

The two leshonos, a person is mashpil atzmo and he's mekeil gufo. So lekhora it follows. Earlier in Hilchos De'os, in talking about Ahavas Yisrael, the Rambam writes

מצווה על כל אדם לאהוב את כל אחד ואחד מישראל כגופו, שנאמר ואהבת לרעך כמוך. לפיכך צריך שיספר בשבחו ולחוס על ממונו כמו שהוא חס על ממון עצמו ורוצה בכבוד עצמו.

So le-pum riyata, the Rambam is disagreeing with a famous Ramban. Ramban says either it's על דרך ההפלגה when the Torah says ואהבת את רעך כמוך or it's meduyak that it's not ואהבת את רעך כמוך but le-rei'akha kamokha. You should love for your friend what you want for yourself, but everyone's self-love exceeds their love for other people. So le-pum riyata, the Rambam disagrees: לאהוב כל אחד ואחד מישראל כגופו. But ella mai it's clear that the Rambam is giving a different answer to the Ramban's question. Ein hachi nami it's kamokha, but kamokha kegufo. Gufo as opposed to ke-atzmo. No ma'amin who believes that we have a neshama defines himself as his guf. It's mamash kamokha, but it's not mamash kamokha in terms of the actual self-love for oneself because גופו לחוד עצמו לחוד. And it's klar that that's the pshat and that's why it's so limited to the two things mentioned in the Mishnayos in Avos: יהי כבוד חברך חביב עליך כשלך and יהי ממון חברך חביב עליך כשלך, both devarim chitzoniyim, externals. That same understanding is reflected here also: וכל המשפיל עצמו ומקל גופו. Person is mashpil himself and additionally he's mekeil gufo. In these occasions, in these situations to be sameach lifnei Hashem atzmo vegufo. Rashi in Sanhedrin has the same thing. Rashi in Sanhedrin when the Gemara says that there were two mekoros from מניין לראות חבירו טובע בנהר. So how do you know that a person is not allowed to stand apathetically by but he's chayav l'hatzilo? So one is לא תעמוד על דם רעך and the other is v'hasheivoso lo. The pasuk of hashavas aveidah. So Rashi says hashavas gufo lo. You have to return the person's body to him. It's hashavas aveidah. You're restoring the person's body to him. That same chillek. Both in terms of both symptomatically and substantively, avodah me'ahavah involves shiflus. So maybe on a very superficial level, very superficial, the understanding is as follows. The Rambam gives us two definitions of avodah me'ahavah. The initial one is

עוסק בתורה ומצות והולך בנתיבות החכמה לא מפני דבר בעולם לא מפני יראת הרעה ולא כדי לירש הטובה אלא עושה אמת מפני שהוא אמת.

That's definition number one of avodah me'ahavah. Definition number two:

וכל העוסק בה לא ליראה ולא לקבל שכר אלא מפני אהבת אדון כל הארץ שצוה בה הרי זה עוסק בה לשמה

which is avodah me'ahavah. The common denominator between the two is that avodah me'ahavah is selfless. There's a selflessness, entirely selfless. Whatever gaiva we have erects a barrier between ourselves and avodah me'ahavah. The degree of the gaiva determines the height and thickness of that barrier. To the degree that a person is successful in ridding himself of that, that he's mashpil atzmo, it helps to facilitate and to make possible the avodah me'ahavah.