והיה כעץ שתול על פלגי מים אשר פריו יתן בעתו ועלהו לא יבול וכל אשר יעשה יצליח.
And m'ushar, the person who attains hisharus hanefesh, is compared to a tree, and the Malbim explains that what a tree represents, unlike say a leaf or unlike grass, is that leaves, grass, the individual leaf, the individual blade of grass, has no kiyum. It grows, it withers, and next year, next season, there are other leaves, there are other blades of grass, ma sheken, it's the same tree year to year. So the eitz represents the hisharus hanefesh. shasul, and the Malbim says again, kedarko, to distinguish what might appear as synonyms, difference between shasul and natua. natua means planted, shasul means something which can be transplanted. Incidentally, that's how it's used in the modern usage is correct, right? A heart transplant is hashtalas lev in modern Hebrew, so it's a correct, correct usage. So what does it mean that the k'eitz shasul, a tree that can be transplanted, is that a person, we're sort of the default when a person is born into this world, so he's in olam hazeh. The transplanting is that the person's focus is not on inyanim gashmiyim, not where he initially finds himself, but in terms of the ruchniyos of olamos elyonim. What does it mean al palgei mayim? So maybe this we'll read a couple of lines inside. על פלגי מים כי העץ הנטוע במקום יבש, if you have a tree which is planted in an arid area, yidag bishnas batzores, if you have a year of drought when not adequate rainfall, ויבוש מעשות פרי או לא יעשה בזמנו, so the tree can be adversely affected; maybe the tree will not be able to produce any fruit, maybe the produce will be delayed in coming. לא כן הנטוע על פלגי מים, but if the tree is planted right in around brooks of water, שמוצא תמיד מזונו ולחותו, so the tree has this built-in water supply. What's the nimshal? כן הישרים בעדת הפילוסופים אשר התנהגו בצדק וחסד על פי נימוסים שכליים,
the difference between a commitment to tov, to yosher, to morality, to ethics, the difference between a philosophical commitment to that as opposed to a religious Torah commitment is that הישרים בעדת הפילוסופים אשר התנהגו בצדק וחסד על פי נימוסים שכליים לא מצאו תמיד די סיפוקם.
Just like the tree which is planted in an arid area may at times be wanting for water, so too those who are guided only by human reason will not be adequate for the task of identifying fully what is tov, what is yosher, כי השכל האנושי ילאה. The sechel ha'enoshi comes up short, מקלוע אל המטרה תמיד, from always hitting the target v'yiteh b'rov mishpatov. And that's a very, very powerful, very powerful phrase: v'yiteh b'rov mishpatov, meaning even in the the realm of mishpato where there is an intuition that we have, says the Malbim if a person is only guided by reason, by intuition, not by the Torah, so he's gonna be, it's gonna be analogous to the העץ הנטוע במקום יבש. He's gonna be wanting. The nimshel is that he's not going to identify correctly what's right, what's wrong. לא כן הנטוע על תורת השם ופקודיו שימצא תמיד חפצו מכלי יחדיו.
This idea is something that the Rav zichrono livracha spoke about I think often. The way he phrased it, I think maybe on one occasion he associated with the pasuk ושמרתם את חוקותי ואת משפטי that a person has to approach mishpatim with the same mindset as chukim. Dehainu that the commitment to even what we generally classify as mishpatim has to be the basis for that has to be the same as chukim. With chukim where we have no intuition, so the basis of our commitment is it's devar Hashem, tzivui Hashem. Doesn't make a difference what we think. When it's clear that this is what the devar Hashem is, this is what the tzivui Hashem is, that's what's mechayev. So that mindset, it's not that that mindset should be present additionally by mishpatim. No, that has to be the foundation. And he used to illustrate it as follows. The ultimate mishpat lichora, the ultimate mishpat is shefichas damim. אין לך משפט גדול מזה in terms of what's intuitive, in terms of natural morality, that one person has no right to take the life of another person. He says when you leave it to sechel enoshi, what the Malbim calls nimusim sichliyim, you have abortion. In the Rav's day that's all we had, but he said chacham adif minavi, he said the next frontier is they'll matir euthanasia, which is now, it is legal in some states, physician-assisted suicide. And obviously once physician-assisted suicide is legal, so who's to say that the choleh really wanted it as opposed to that the choleh's yorshim are more interested in the yerusha than they are with the burden of an old sick parent. So mamash the ultimate mishpat and even here we come up short. Our society, people self-righteously proclaim the right to what al pi Torah is shefichas damim. שופך דם האדם באדם דמו ישפך. Ve'eizehu adam sheba'adam? Zeh ubar. An ubar is a person inside a person. שופך דם האדם באדם. Who's an adam ba'adam? An ubar is an adam ba'adam. So according to Hakadosh Baruch Hu's morality, that's shefichas damim. According to the sechel enoshi, albeit blinded by its negius, but according to the sechel enoshi, no, it's this self-righteous constitutional right. And actually the only ones who have pushed back against it are those who push back against it based on religious beliefs. That the only groups that have pushed back for the past, it's almost 50 years, have been religious groups. There's no other base of opposition. This approach of the Malbim of the Rav, it's interesting to contrast, it's not a comparison, it's more of a contrast. And unfortunately I forgot to bring the first sheet here. If you take a look in Rav Saadia Gaon's Emunot V'Deot in Hamaamar Hashlishi, so Rav Saadia Gaon poses the question after following in the footsteps of Chazal in the Gemara in Yoma that defines Mishpatim, that differentiates Mishpatim from Chukim, in that Mishpatim is אלמלא נכתבו דין הוא שיכתבו, that even if the Torah hadn't legislated it, so we have an intuition, mah she-ein kein Chukim, we don't have, we don't have an intuition. So Rav Saadia Gaon poses the question and says, so then why are Mishpatim written in the Torah? If if din hu she-yikasbevu, right? The assumption, the underlying assumption to Rav Saadia Gaon's kasha is also very important. The underlying assumption is that what sechel tells us is a mechayev. So if these are mitzvot sichliyot and what sechel tells us is a mechayev, so why is it just redundant? If you had a pasuk twice in the Chumash, we'd ask a kasha why you need the second pasuk. So why do why do we have it, why do we have it twice? So the answer that Rav Saadia Gaon gives is Rav Saadia Gaon says, yeah, but so gezel is a mitzvah muschelet. But without the dinim in the Torah, so you wouldn't know how is a person koneh mamon to sort of delineate what's his, what's not his. How am I koneh metzia? That that I've now been koneh that the mitzvah muschelet should the should now apply that you can't take it. It's a mitzvah muschelet that a person has to thank Hakadosh Baruch Hu, a person has to be makir tov l'Hakadosh Baruch Hu. It's a mitzvah muschelet. But when, on what occasions? So the Torah has to tell us v'achalta v'savata u'veirachta. Torah has to tell us when when to daven. It's a mitzvah muschelet Rav Saadia Gaon says, issur zenut, that a person shouldn't be mezaneh is a mitzvah muschelet. That a person should live chayei ishut. But how do you how do you create ishut, how do you generate ishut? So that you need the Torah to tell you bekessef b'shtar v'chulei. So each answer Rav Saadia Gaon gives is it's these details. What what the Malbim and the Rav are saying is it's much more fundamental, is that even in the mitzvah muschelet itself, in the guf hamitzvah, sechel is inadequate. It's it's a very fascinating difference in terms of just how far the sechel ha-enoshi can can be relied upon to to get us. The Malbim has a similar, I mean the pshuto shel mikra really really jumps up and suggests it, but this idea again that the difference between Torah morality and and human morality is is not limited to Chukim, but is even in the guf hamishpatim. So again the pasuk sort of jumps out at us, but but the Malbim does underscore it. If you take a look at the end of Tehillim in the pesukei d'zimra קאפיטל קוף מם זיין, so מגיד דבריו ליעקב חוקיו ומשפטיו לישראל לא עשה כן לכל גוי ומשפטים בל ידעום.
Meaning that not only apparently is it mishpatim bal yedau'm by virtue of the fact that they don't have the Torah. still leaves them in a state of mishpatim bal yedaum. The Malbim here comments לא עשה כן לכל גוי כי גם המשפטים בל ידעום שאף הנימוסים השכליים לא קיבלו מהשם ולכן ילכו במשפטים בל יחיו בהם.
And because of that, since it's mishpatim bal yedaum, that the nimusim sichliyim which they generate are not adequate. And again, puk chazi our society. The pasuk speaks of אשר פריו יתן בעתו. So the Malbim who is just extraordinary how he misyaches to every single detail and every nuance in the pesukim. Lich'ora it would have been enough for the pasuk to say אשר פרי יתן בעתו. Obviously the apple tree gives you its fruit, it gives you apples. You don't need to tell me that the apple tree isn't gonna give you pears and the pear tree isn't gonna give you oranges. So obviously it's אשר פריו יתן בעתו. העץ הזה יתן פריו. Aleph, again reading inside in the Malbim, רצה לומר לא כעשב וירק שלא יתן רק זרעו ואינו קיים באיש רק במין.
First of all, it has pri. But second of all, לא כעץ נטוע בערבה שיפסד עניינו ולא יתן פריו המיוחד לו רק פירות גרועים ונשחתים.
If you have a fruit tree but it produces inferior quality fruit, that's not piryo, it's pri. A peach tree should yield juicy, good fruit. אבל זה פריו המיוחד לו יתן. Vechein hatzaddik, so what's the nimshal? וכן הצדיק אינו כמשכילים בעכו"ם שמוציאים פרי על ידי עיוניהם ומחציהם השכליים אבל אינם פרי הנפש המיוחדת לו.
So, a philosopher can generate peiros but it's not piryo because piryo of a person who has a nefesh Elokis, אבל אינם פרי הנפש המיוחדת לו מצד שהיא בת מלך מאלוקים שפריו מצד זה קודש הילולים ולא יצאו לפועל אך על ידי התורה האלוקית ומצוותיה.
For a person who has a nefesh Elokis to produce piryo and again, the pri is the person's learning, the person's ma'asim tovim, so that requires Torah. I don't know that this is necessarily indicated in the Malbim, but if we, maybe it is, but I'm not at all sure that it is. But if we flesh this idea out based on something that the Rov zichrono livracha would explain, what's needed to yield the piryo, the pri which is becoming, which is worthy of the nefesh Elokis is not only that sechel that seichel doesn't begin from scratch but that seichel is applied to mitzvos haTorah and values of the Torah. It certainly means that but it means more than that. It also means that the logic is Torahdik logic, not necessarily regular human logic. So, the, maybe it's merumaz in, in, what when the, when the Malbim says על ידי התורה האלוקית ומצוותיה. So mitzvosya means that he, he begins with the Torah's values, not, not what we, based on seichel, identify as values, but then moreover it's also through the Torah's way of thinking and analyzing that we, that that the ללמוד על מנת לעשות, the application of these values. The Rav's whole, he has this in different places. He comments for instance famously on, on based on the Rambam in the beginning of Hilchos Krias Shema. So the Mishnah in the beginning of the second perek in Brachos when it's talking about the order of the parshiyos of Krias Shema, which requires an explanation because the parsha of Tzitzis is first in the- in parshas Shlach, and the others are in Sefer Devarim. So it says למה מקדימין פרשת שמע לוהיה אם שמוע כדי שיקבל עליו עול מלכות שמיים תחילה ואחר כך יקבל עליו עול מצוות.
So that's the explanation Chazal give. The Rambam poses the same question at the beginning of Hilchos Krias Shema and says למה מקדימין לקרות שמע שיש בה ייחוד השם ואהבתו ותלמודו.
So the Rav understands that the Rambam isn't giving us an alternate explanation for what Chazal gave, but that he's identifying what's compressed in קבלת עול מלכות שמיים. It means affirmation of yichud Hashem. It means questing, seeking ahavas Hashem and it means talmudo. And he elaborated what it means that talmud Torah is an act of קבלת עול מלכות שמיים and he says explicitly there, it's in the famous drasha that he gave to the rabbinic alumni in the early, in the early 70s. He says that kabolas ol- that talmud Torah is an act of קבלת עול מלכות שמיים because we surrender the human, I think the lashon he uses is the human mercantile logic and we operate with not just mitzvos Elokiyos but higayon Torani. It's not just that we're applying seichel ha'adam to mitzvos haTorah, to values of the Torah as opposed to applying seichel enoshi to human values, it's also that the seichel is a different seichel, the higayon is a different higayon. Human logic sort of begins, is rooted in the here and now, and even in the area of morality is basically driven by practicality and pragmatism. That's what he means by mercantile logic. Social contract theory is that people need to live in groups. and obligations in order to allow them to live in that in that state. It's rooted in even even the morality shebo is rooted in practicality. And mimmela one's logic is a practical logic, is a functional logic, is a pragmatic logic. Torah is not rooted in practicalities. The logic is an abstract logic, it's an ideal logic. Many many things that we think are difficult is because we're thinking on the wrong level. Is that we're thinking על פי נימוסים שכליים, we're thinking with what the Ramchal calls a mercantile logic as opposed to a Torah logic. Vealehu lo yibbol, the leaf of the tree doesn't wither. What's the nimshal? Says the Malbim, hatzlachot hazmaniyyim, the mundane success that the meushar, the ba'al shelemut hanefesh enjoys. What are hatzlachot hazmaniyyot? What are our mundane forms of success? עשרו ונכסיו ובריאות גופו. A person doesn't want for money, a person doesn't want for possessions, he has a car, he has a house to live in, uvriyut gufo, his health. So vealehu lo yibbol means that the meushar, that those too yitkayyemu velo yibbolu. Why is this important? למען יהיו לו עזר על אשרו האחר שהוא פריו. The same way the leaf on the outside when a fruit is budding protects the fruit, so too the way not to be, zeh haklal, it's a very very important klal of life. The way not to be focused on gashmiyyut is to not neglect gashmiyyut and make sure that a person has enough that he doesn't have to focus. The person who spends the most time thinking about gashmiyyut is the person who doesn't have. How am I going to pay this bill? How am I going to pay that bill? How am I going to take care of this expense? How am I going to shoulder that expense? The mindset that no, you shouldn't be meyaches to inyanim gashmiyyim, you should only think about inyanim ruchniyyim, which then results in a person not having adequate means of support. It's as we said yesterday, when a person goes against the guidance of the Torah, the guidance of Chazal, it's not just that it's wrong because a person's going against it, it doesn't work. Whatever the din is in the machloket Abbaye ve-Rava, in this context it's avad lo mahanei. It certainly avad lo mahanei. The way a person, in order for a person to be spiritual, he has to have enough money in the bank. And in order for a person's head to be in learning all day, he can't be worried about how he's going to pay the electric bill, how he's going to pay this bill, how he's going to pay that bill, what's he going to do because he doesn't have the money for necessities. If that's going to be impinging upon him, so of course it's going to preoccupy him, and then he's going to have to run around inefficiently trying to deal with those needs. That's what the Malbim says, so the bracha is that the tzaddik has hatzlachot hazmaniyyot also. He needs a bechinat osher. Here osher doesn't mean wealth, it means enough. עשרו נכסיו ובריאות גופו למען יהיו לו עזר על אשרו האחר שהוא פריו.
So the Ramchal... This world, not that that's the schar, but but the Torah promises us the necessary support system to be able to focus on what's really on what's really important. Rambam writes in Hilchos Deos, if a person doesn't have health, if a person, rachmana litzlan, is sick, person has a pounding headache, you can't sit and learn when you have a pounding headache. You're not going to be able to focus with the same the same degree. וכל אשר יעשה יצליח, what what does that allude to? It means that that his children as well in his zechus will will follow in in his path. Okay, we'll stop there.