The Sochatchover explains (Shem m’Shmuel Sukkos 5573) that the
tochacha comes “tachas asher lo avadta es Hashem Elokecha b’simcha uv’tuv
leivav,” (Devarim 28:47) because of a lack of simcha in avodas Hashem. Sukkos is called “zman simchaseinu,” a time
of joy. It’s the opportunity to become
inspired with a simcha inoculation
against those curses of the tochacha.
But why davka is it the number of lambs that add up to 98 – why not
count the cows or the rams as well? Let
me preface the Shem m’Shmuel’s answer with a vort from R’ Gifter also on our
parsha. In the parsha of bikurim the
Torah commands, “V’smachta b’chol hatov,” (26:11) to rejoice over all the good
that Hashem has given. When the farmer
goes out to field to collect his bikurim, he sees the first fruits (literally)
of months of labor. He can now feel
confident that all the work and energy he put into his crops is going to pay
off. Even if the Torah didn’t say it, the
farmer would be happy. Why does
the Torah need to command him to rejoice?
Is it just so he can get mitzvah reward for what comes naturally?
R’ Gifter answers that there’s more to it than that. Every moment of happiness has the potential
to be tainted by the feeling that “if only there was more.” I see this in my kids all the time. You give a child X as a treat, she will
complain why she didn’t get Y or why X was not better, etc. (A real pleasure to deal with…) There are adults who live their whole lives
this way. Chazal already tell us that if
a person has manah, inevitably he/she wants masayim. This is the meaning of the tochacha coming
because of a lack of “simcha v’tuv leivav” – you can have simcha but at the
same time not have “tuv leivav;” your heart is not filled with joy because deep
down there is that nagging feeling that there is more out there that you still
don’t have.
The Torah therefore gives the farmer a mitzvah of simcha. True, any farmer would be happy given the
situation, but that's 90% happiness, or 95% – there would still be that
nagging, “If only the crops were a little better…” Torah/mitzvah happiness is
100% because it comes from the sense that not only does Hashem give 100% of
what a person needs and deserves, Hashem gives 110%. The mitzvah of simcha is about absorbing that
perspective.
Coming back to the korbanos of Sukkos, the Shem m’Shmuel reminds
us that Avraham had a Yishmael; Yitzchak had an Eisav. Their simcha could never be 100% because there
was an inescapable missing something in their lineage. Only Ya’akov was blessed with having every
descendent for all eternity connected to the family of Klal Yisrael. Only Ya’akov had the 100% wholeness, that allows
for 100% simcha. Therefore, it
is on Sukkos, the chag connected specifically with Ya’akov, through the
korbanos of lambs, offerings specifically connected with Ya’akov, that we can celebrate
with complete 100% simcha divorced from any negative feeling, any lack of “simcha v’tuv
leivav,” that would c”v bring us tochacha.
Tip: Correct the typo in the subject line and delete this comment.
ReplyDeletethanks micha. second time in 2 weeks I've messed up in the title
ReplyDeleteAccording to the theme of the Shem MiShmuel, Avraham and Yitzchak also would/should have had 100% simcha. So in what way is Yaakov different? Unless he is serving not as an archetype of that kind of simcha, but as a symbol of a life that ought to elicit 100% simcha.
ReplyDeleteYou say the mitzvah of simcha is accomplished by recognizing that Hasham gives us everything we need and deserve or more. However, it is human nature to be disappointed at the completion of any enterprise, even if you accomplished/received exactly what you set out to do or more. This is true because when people are dedicated to achieving something, they end-up caring more about successfully maneuvering the means rather than achieving the ends or because the means become a part of you and when they are over a part of you dies too or because it is the nature of a person to run and we are more happy running then finishing the race. The mitzvah of simcha demands that we not fall for any of these traps by recognizing that all worldly accomplishments are part of a much larger grander pursuit we need to constantly be occupied in of coming closer to Hasham.
ReplyDeleteAvraham and Yitzchak had the psoles of Yishmaeil and Eisav so their simcha could not be complete. Ya'akov is mitaso sheleima.
ReplyDeleteDBS - you mean you think barring the mitzvah the farmer would feel sadness when he sees the new crops ripen? I don't think that's true. Isn't there a big ribbon cutting when they launch a ship or open a new building or park -- there is simcha, not sadness there?
I think it can go both ways.
ReplyDeleteAlso, and this is a question on the question, that is wrong with Hasham commanding us to do something that is human nature anway? Doesn't Rashi say that it is human nature to be repelled by blood but Hasham gave us a mitzvah anway to give us more reward?
ReplyDeleteR' Gifter does suggest what you wrote as one of his answers. I liked the psychological insight of the answer I used, but if you think the assumption about human nature is wrong then you probably prefer the other one.
ReplyDeleteI don't understand what you're saying. Your whole point is that even if a person's life is not what he hoped for, he should feel as if it were- he should have Simcha Shleima. If so, Avraham and Yitzchak should have had Simcha Shleima despite their not having mita shleima.
ReplyDeleteA person who has everything should not want more because he is greedy and never satisified. That's the mitzvah of simcha.
ReplyDeleteA person who legitmately is lacking something has a right to feel pain because of that lack of shleimus.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletePlease elaborate on
ReplyDelete"Therefore, it is on Sukkos, the chag connected specifically with Ya’akov (?), through the korbanos of lambs(?), offerings specifically connected with Ya’akov,(????) that we can celebrate with complete 100% simcha divorced from any negative feeling, any lack of “simcha v’tuv leivav"
Still not clear why lambs.