There is a
fundamental difference between Shabbos and Rosh Chodesh. The mitzvah of
Shabbos is preceded by “sheishes yamim ta’avod.” There is a mitzvah of
preparing for Shabbos. Chazal say that only “mi she’tarach b’erev Shabbos
yochal b’Shabbos.” Shabbos is the culmination of the cycle of the week.
Not so Rosh Chodesh. Rosh Chodesh precedes the events that will occur in
the upcoming month. It sets the tone for what is to be, and does not
depend on the energy and preparation of prior events. It is an
inauguration, not a conclusion.
Klal Yisrael
had known of Shabbos even while in Mitzrayim, but until Pesach, they had not
known of the concept of Rosh Chodesh. They understood that for those who
put in spiritual work and effort, G-d delivers rewards. What Rosh Chodesh
taught them is that G-d can deliver the rewards in advance, and the effort can
come later. This is the foundation upon which Pesach rests. Klal
Yisrael had little merit to speak of when they left Egypt; “ta’avdun es
haElokim al ha’har hazeh” was an event that would occur in the future.
Nonetheless, G-d promised them deliverance based on what would be.
That’s why,
explains the Shem m’Shmuel, the haggadah has a hava amina of “yachol mei’Rosh
Chodesh,” that maybe we could do sipur yetzi’as Mitzrayim from Rosh
Chodesh. Rosh Chodesh is the precedent that gives rise to a Chag
haPesach.
The gemara
(Shabbos 147) tells a story about R’ Elazar ben Arach: there was a place that
had great wine and bath houses and the ten tribes that were exiled there were
drawn in by the pleasures and vanished. R’ Elazar ben Arach decided he
was going to go to that place and check it out. After spending some time
there, the gemara says that he got an aliyah (maybe it was parshas hachodesh)
and instead of reading “hachodesh ha’zeh lachem” he read the words as “hacheiresh
haya libam” – their heart was deaf. The Chachamim davened that his learning
should be restored, and learned a lesson that even a talmid chacham should be “goleh
l’makom Torah” and not think he can live removed it.
Taken at face
value, it’s an incredible story. This is
the same R’ Elazar ben Arach about whom R’ Yochanan ben Zakai said that if all
the other Chachamim were placed on one side of a scale and R’ Elazar on the
other, he would outweigh them all. How
can this same R’ Elazar ben Arach go so far astray as to not even be able to
read a pasuk in chumash correctly?! From
a mussar perspective, I guess you would say that that’s exactly the point –
even someone so great can fall to the lowest depths. But maybe there is more to it than that.
If you’ve ever
davened mincha in, for example, a ba’al teshuvah yeshiva, you can find people
focusing on every word of davening like it’s Yom Kippur. Meanwhile, the guy who
has been davening mincha for the past 30 years knocks off his shmoneh esrei in
three minutes flat. The thrill is gone; the newness, the freshness is gone. We don’t remember what it’s like to daven for
the first time. R’ Elazar ben Arach could
have been one of the biggest Roshei Yeshiva and said shiur on the same cycle of
7 masechtos again and again for decades, but he knew that if that’s what he
chose to do, he risked losing that freshness and newness that comes with seeing
things the first time. So he sought out
people who could see things for the first time – he went out to the boondocks
and started a kiruv movement in a place where there was nothing left of Judaism
and where the lure of hedonism drew everyone in. He went out and lived among people who, when
they discovered Judaism, saw it as new and fresh. R’ Elazar knew that in order to experience “hachodesh
hazeh lachem,” hachodesh = chadash, newness, freshness, you need to first have “hacheiresh
haya libam.” Sure, putting himself in
that situation was a challenge and a step down from the amazing shiurim R’
Elazar might have been saying, but it ultimately was a step up, because the
vitality of those around him would rub off and R’ Elazar himself benefit from
that constant rejuvenation.
That’s the
upshot of the gemara, explains the Chernobeler in his Ma’or Eynaim. “Havei goleh l’makom Torah” – you have to
sometimes go out, go into galus, go to the boondocks, and there you will find
Torah as it should be experienced, as new, as fresh, as filled with
vitality. The truth is that you don’t have
to travel too far. There are plenty of souls that are deaf to Torah all around
us because no one has come along to open their ears. The truth is that we each have a little bit
of “hacheiresh haya libam” in us, but if we help each other out we can transform
it into “hachodesh (=hischadshus) hazeh lachem.”
Thanks for sharing this more favorable reading of what became of R. Elazar ben Arach.
ReplyDeleteSo when his contemporaries were mevakesh rachamim olov, it was because....?
ReplyDeleteThe Maor Enayim says R' Eb"A deliberately caused himself to fall to a lower madreiga so he could relate to those whom he wanted to be mekareiv. The Chachamim were mispalel that he should be able to restore himself to his former level.
DeleteThis is what bothers me [and I have spent over twenty years in kiruv of one kind or another]. The action of the Chachamim implies that they thought/paskened that R' Elazar ben Arach should not stay at that lower madreiga, even if it made kiruv more effective or even possible.
DeleteThe only resolution I can think of is that their tefilla was that he should be able to do effective kiruv despite being on the highest madreiga.
Perhaps this is analogous to the Slabodker vort about Hillel. If, when R' Yonasan ben Uziel was learning, birds flying overhead burned up, what happened when Hillel learned? Answer - nothing happened. The concept is worthwhile considering even if it contradicts the Yerushalmi's answer to the same question.
>>>The action of the Chachamim implies that they thought/paskened that R' Elazar ben Arach should not stay at that lower madreiga, even if it made kiruv more effective or even possible.
ReplyDeleteBut if you put all those Chachamim on one side of the scale and R' Eb"A on the other...
I think the word "thought" fits better here than the word "paskened" -- I'm not sure it's something that lends itself to a hachra'ah.
When I said this vort over on Shabbos my son's response was that this reading of the gemata only makes sense if you are wearing a shtreimel and have had a few drinks beforehand. I wrote it over because it is creative, but if you ask me aliba d'emes if that is what the gemara means, I'm less than convinced.
Excellent application of the scale principle. I wonder how much "lev tov" had to do with it [l'fi madraigosom].
DeleteAnd, I suspect Rav Hutner would say that your son's observation proves the deep emes of the vort.