************************************************************
Shiur #14: Perek Two - Reconciling Divine Mandate or
Breaking Human Will
By Rav Moshe Taragin
This shiur is dedicated in memory of Naomi Zeiger, z"l.
The fourth mishna of the second perek records one of
Rabban Gamliel's statements. In an attempt to facilitate retention of this idea,
Rabban Gamliel constructed a phonetically and logically symmetrical phrase. His
statement 'asei ritzono kirtzonekha, kdei sheya'aseh ritzonkha kirtzono;
batel ritzonkha mipnei ritzono, kdei sheyivatel ritzon acheirim mipnei
ritzonkha' speaks to various issues relating to 'synchronizing' human will
with Divine Command. It may be loosely translated as "fulfill His will as your
own so that He implements your will as His; Surrender your will to His so that
He will interrupt the will of others on your behalf." Perhaps the stylistic
'palindrome' structure is more than just a mnemonic; perhaps the symmetry of
language reflects the desired symmetry between the Divine command and human
instinct!!
A. Fulfill His Will as yours….
Most commentators assert that Rabban Gamliel is obliquely
referring to financial expenditure on behalf of religious needs. Since the
promised reward for such behavior is that Hashem will perform His Will as if it
were yours (a seeming reference to abundant material provision), presumably the
first half of this statement encourages generosity in the fulfillment of
mitzvot. As such, the phrase "fulfill His Will as yours" should be taken
as a SIMILE: just as a person would be munificent in spending money on personal
needs, similarly he should be liberal in committing funds toward mitzvot.
The phrase does not convey an existential attitude in which Divine Will
influences personal experience. This popular approach to the mishna seems
implicit in the comment of Avot d'Rebbe Natan to this mishna. It cites a
pasuk from Divrei Ha-yamim I perek 29 in which David Ha-melekh
exclaims "for all emanates from You and from Your hand we receive" – an
acknowledgement which should inspire generous dispersal of personal funds for
religious needs.
To a degree, this popular reading also stems from the adjacency
of this mishna to the previous statement of Rabban Gamliel. In mishna three he
discourages political activism based upon a highly pessimistic view of the true
intentions of politicians. He asserts that politicians - being predominantly
unreliable – should not be pursued or befriended. Dedicating funds for their
needs is unwise because such generosity will be betrayed. By contrast,
committing to the Heavenly Ruler will yield benefit because, unlike human
sovereigns, God will not betray our loyalty. The juxtaposition of these
mishnayot caused many commentators to adopt a practical reading of our
mishna effectively viewing it as an endorsement of financial commitment toward
mitzva performance.
Alternatively, Rashi appears to take a more existential read
when he explains that Rabban Gamliel exhorts us to channel our entire experience
toward religious worship. Even when attending to personal functions or human
endeavors we should perform these tasks for the sake of heaven. Not only does
Rashi cast the advice as an emotional charge (rather than merely a fiscal
responsibility), but he also broadens the demand from financial obligation to a
more extensive lifestyle decision.
Perhaps Rashi adopted this dissenting opinion because of the
'rhythmical' language. The phrase to "fashion your will as His" seems to demand
more than just distributing funds generously. The phrase suggests more than just
a SIMILE!! It seems to demand a CORRESPONDENCE between experiences which are
distinctly religious and those which appear mundane, but which should also be
geared toward religious growth. Perhaps, in addition, Rashi was influenced by
the conclusion of the mishna which also lodges claims which appear to demand
existential or religious conditioning.
B. Break your will on behalf of His….
Whereas the first part of this phrase demanded a
synchronization of the Divine Will and human instinct (whether in a practical
sense of financial commitment or the broader existential sense of Rashi) the
second part of this mishna expects the human will to be defeated on behalf of
the Divine Will. Rashi offers an indirect reference to a different mishna in
Avot (chapter 2 mishna 1) which encourages the evaluation of the rewards of a
mitzva alongside its disadvantages. Every mitzva is accompanied by inconvenience
just as it promises fulfillment and reward. This clash of sorts between the
human need for convenience and the Divine Will should be resolved in favor of
Hashem's Will and enable performance of the mitzva.
In a broader sense, Rabban Gamliel 'tandem statements'
highlight an important aspect of religious experience. Should a person attempt
to reconcile his will to Torah demands by identifying the logic and sensibility
of mitzvot and the harmful and damaging nature of sin? Or should a person avoid
this effort, rather performing halakha solely based on a pious dedication to the
Divine command. The Sifra in parashat Kedoshim instructs us not to revile
prohibited foods but rather to crave for them. (Sifra Kedoshim 10:11) They
should be avoided solely because of halakhic prohibition!! This statement
certainly parallels the second part of Rabban Gamliel's statement to break human
interest on behalf of halakhic guidelines.
By contrast, numerous statements of Chazal do encourage
attempts to appreciate the rectitude and morality of the Divine Will and
harmonize the halakhic system with the human condition – to effectively view our
world and experience through the lenses of halakha. Assuredly, the lofty
standard of ahavat Hashem (love of God) can best be attained
through this synchronization process. We certainly fulfill Hashem's command
because we sense that they are 'right' and not only because He commanded them!!
Ultimately, religion demands both phases of Rabban Gamliel's
advice. Ideally, we struggle to appreciate and assimilate, not just the details
of halakha, but also its internal spirit. We aim to condition ourselves and our
thoughts toward greater understanding, not just greater adherence. However,
despite our concentrated efforts, we often reach particular 'alcoves' of
halakhic mandate or broader religious experience, which remain impenetrable to
the human mind. At those moments we are summoned to suppress human ration, and
break the human experience upon the altar of Divine worship.