More on peace -- in the big world and the little one

The previous blogpost discussed the value of peace and where we learn in Pirkei Avot of its importance. Staying on the topic of peace, the idea that each individual is a world in himself, and that the “world” is actually each one of us, is frequently discussed in the context of Shimon Hatzaddik’s teaching (Avot 1:2) that the world stands on the three pillars of Torah, Temple service and acts of kindness. These, according to the Maharal of Prague (Derech Chaim) correspond to man’s need to sort out his relationship with God, with others and with himself.  

The same approach can also be taken in the Mishnah at Avot 1:18, where Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel teaches that the world is kept going by three things: truth, justice and peace. Within the "little world" which is each of us, we must internalise the values of truth, justice and peace. A person who does not even admit or recognise the truth as to what he is and what he has done is a person who will never be able to address the challenges in his life in an honest manner. He must learn to judge himself fairly, neither being unduly critical of himself nor giving himself the benefit of what is a fictional doubt. Only then will he be able to live at peace with himself, knowing his capabilities and his virtues as well as his faults and his failings – and knowing where and how he can best hope to improve himself in his own eyes and in the eyes of others.

From where do we learn the value of peace?

Writing for the Jewish Press, Rabbi Moshe Meir Weiss refers to Avot in a piece ("Allergic to Fighting") that opens with the following words:

One of the most fundamental missions of a Torah Jew is encapsulated in the Rambam’s statement at the end of the Laws of Chanukah: “The entire Torah was given to promote peace in the world, as Scripture says, ‘Its ways are ways of sweetness and all its paths are paths of peace.’”

 This statement is remarkable coming from the Rambam, who was an expert on all 613 mitzvos. We also know the value of peace from Pirkei Avos, which teaches, “Hashem is pleased with anyone with whom people are pleased.” 

To my mind, and with due respect to the author, it is not easy to see how this mishnah (Avot 3:13) is where we learn the value of peace: this is not what it says; nor is it normally understood by the commentators as referring to peace. However, the rabbi is quite right to say that Avot teaches us how valuable peace is. A more explicit source would be, for example, Avot 1:18 ("The world endures on the basis of three things: truth, justice and peace").

A useful gift?

Passing the Pomeranz bookshop in Jerusalem the other day, I spotted this commentary on Pirkei Avot by Rabbi Adin Steinsaltz, a man whose massive scholarship is happily matched by his prodigious productivity and literary lucidity. Although it comes in at nearly 400 pages, it is not a challenging read: the usual high quality of Koren typography gives the text plenty of space and makes it easy on the eye. The text of all six chapters is accompanied by an accessible commentary plus biographical notes on rabbis whose teachings form the bulk of Avot. 

This book is handsome enough to be given full coffee-table treatment and may make an excellent present for anyone who enjoys engaging with Pirkei Avot without having to digest two millennia of detailed commentary and textual analysis in order to do so.  

Pirkei Avot with Commentary by Rabbi Adin Steinsaltz here

Sample text of chapter 1 for free inspection here

You don't say!

Here's yet another false citation, this time in a reader's letter to the Tryon Daily Bulletin. The author cites a proposition concerning lashon hara (inappropriate speech about another person, whether it be true or false). He writes:

In my faith tradition, we have The Ethics of The Fathers where they wrote,“ Slander kills three people, the one who speaks it, the one who listens to it and the one about whom it is spoken.”

This proposition is indeed part of our Jewish tradition, as Maimonides makes clear in Mishneh Torah, Hilchot De'ot 7:3 -- but it is not to be found anywhere in Pirkei Avot, The Ethics of the Fathers.

How to greet (or not greet) others: a handy guide

I've put together a handy little table from which you can see that Avot provides an extensive framework for the onset of any interpersonal social encounter. The framework looks like this:

Mishnah	Guidance	Significance
1:15	Greet others with a smiling face	External appearance is important since one’s face bestows respect and appreciation to one’s fellow humans
3:16	Greet others with joy/happiness	Internal feeling is important as a recognition of the fact that every person one meets is made in the image of God
4:20	Be first to greet others	Take the initiative in establishing amicable relations with others
4:23	Avoid greeting or even seeing a person who does not wish to be greeted	Give respect for or empathy with another’s need for personal time and space
6:9	Greetings should be given and returned with an expression of peace	Non-threatening opening to encounter between strangers

 From this we can appreciate how important in the eyes of our Sages is the impact of an initial encounter. We should bear this in mind when greeting others, responding to them -- or avoiding a meeting with them entirely.

Are there still any astronomers around?

In Avot 3:23, Rabbi Elazar Chisma says:

“[The laws of] bird sacrifices and the onset of menstrual periods – these are at the heart of the law. Astronomy and mathematics are [just] the appetizers of wisdom”.

The word "mathematics" in this Mishnah is a translation of gematria, a branch of learning in which the numerical value of each letter of the Hebrew alphabet is brought to bear on words by adding them up and drawing comparisons or contrasts with other words that have the same numerical tally.  

This Mishnah praises the study of halachah, even where it may not be of current application, while reminding us that other topics of study such as gematria and astronomy -- however interesting and useful they may be -- remain of only secondary significance.

Gematria has remained a popular pursuit with Torah students since mishnaic times, but I was wondering whether any Torah scholars or institutions today are seriously engaged in the study of astronomy. 

Responding to a friendly greeting

I recently witnessed the following brief dialogue:

Person A to Person B: "Gut Shabbes!" [this being a traditional Sabbath greeting which originated among Yiddish-speaking members of the Eastern European Jewish diaspora and which is still used by many people today, even if they speak little or no other Yiddish].

Person B to Person A: "Can't you rid yourself of your galut attitudes and say 'Shabbat shalom'?" [the Sabbath greeting predominantly used by Hebrew speakers in Israel today].

Pirkei Avot advises us to greet other people with a friendly, smiling face (Avot 1:15) and also to greet them with joy (Avot 3:16).  If someone wishes to challenge another person's use of a friendly and harmless greeting, there is surely a better time to do so than at the moment he is receiving a friendly greeting.

Does popularity with man bring about popularity with God?

There's a Mishnah in the third perek of Avot in which Rabbi Chanina ben Dosa teaches as follows:

כֹּל שֶׁרֽוּחַ הַבְּרִיּוֹת נוֹחָה הֵימֶֽנּוּ, רֽוּחַ הַמָּקוֹם נוֹחָה הֵימֶֽנּוּ. וְכֹל שֶׁאֵין רֽוּחַ הַבְּרִיּוֹת נוֹחָה הֵימֶֽנּוּ, אֵין רֽוּחַ הַמָּקוֹם נוֹחָה הֵימֶֽנּוּ  

This is usually translated non-literally, often along the lines of:

"One who is pleasing to his fellow men, he is pleasing to God. But one who is not pleasing to his fellow men, he is not pleasing to God",

However, in truth, when we stop to reflect for a moment, it is apparent that the notion that one who is popular with his fellows will also be loved by God raises problems.  The first problem is that of establishing and justifying any causal connection between people being popular with their peers and their being popular, as it were, with God.  When we humans like other people, it can be both because of their qualities or despite them – and we might like them for quite the wrong reasons.  This is why we have such a deep and irrational fascination and sometimes affection for rogues and villains. We would expect God, whose knowledge and understanding quite exceeds our own, to make better judgements than we do.  Why should God’s spirit rest more on a charismatic rogue than on someone who is socially awkward but possessed of finer inner qualities?

A second problem is that our own literature does not appear to support this simple view of the Mishnah. A case in point involves two of the most outstanding personalities within Jewish culture, Moses and Aaron.  There is no doubt that these two individuals were loved by God: they possessed remarkable human qualities and dedicated their lives to unselfish service of their Maker.  However, while Aaron was greatly loved and deeply mourned by a fickle and demanding public, Moses was of necessity a remote and distant figure, a stranger to the masses, respected and feared rather than loved. Indeed, he feared that they were ready to kill him.  It is difficult to reconcile a simple understanding of the words of this Mishnah with the notion that God’s warm favour and affection is only directed towards those who are popular with their fellow men. We might also contemplate the cases of Noah (an object of ridicule and derision who finds favour in God’s eyes), Jeremiah (subjected to vilification and physical abuse but gifted with prophecy by God) and Shimon ben Kosevah (‘Bar Kochba’, the charismatic leader of a popular revolt against Roman rule but who did not receive God’s support).

Thoughts, anyone?

Humble: what we want everyone else to be

Yesterday I spotted a comment by Rabbi Baruch Halevi Epstein (author of the Torah Temimah) in his commentary on the siddur, Baruch She'amar. Towards the end of his commentary on the Amidah, he picks up on the words "venafshi ke'afar lekol tihiyeh" ("and let my soul be like dust before everyone"). We say this formula at least three times a day, but what does it mean to us?  Do the good and the great in our communities actually want to be treated like dust? And as for those people who puff themselves up with their own self-importance -- do they even stop for a moment to consider that, with these words, they regularly petition God to burst their bubble and bring them down to earth?  When we think that these are the same people who object if we accidentally sit in their regular seat in shul, and who barge in front of us in queues or when seeking to access the delicacies at a laden kiddush table, we may well wonder what sort of thoughts, if any, they have when reciting this time-honoured formula.

From Avot we can see that humility is both recognised and strongly advocated as an essential element of human behaviour.  Shiflut ru'ach -- the opposite of self-importance -- is urged for example by Rabbi Levitas (Avot 4:4) and Rabbi Meir (Avot 4:12), while arrogance of spirit is identified as one of the tell-tale characteristics of an apparently frum individual who really follows the path of Balaam (Avot 5:22). And, for good measure, humility is listed as one of 48 things that enable a person to acquire Torah.  

We don't recite Avot three times a day and therefore have no excuse for routinely and thoughtlessly reciting it at the end of what might have been a long, heavy prayer session in which we bring more pressing matters before God: health, financial and political security, or whatever.  That's the advantage of Avot: we can learn and think about it in our own time, and in our own ways, which gives us a far better chance of being able to internalise its messages.

Avot and a vote ...

In a recent letter to the Cleveland Jewish News, the correspondents express their concern regarding the need to provide safe and secure ways of voting, and write:

This fall, Ohioans should not have to choose between their right to vote and their health. The chaotic and confusing primary election resulted in historically low voter turnout, and countless confused and disenfranchised voters. The uncertainty caused by the pandemic has made the situation worse. We must ensure that every Ohio voice is heard. As Rabbi Hillel said, “If I am not for myself, then who will be for me? And when I am for myself alone, then what am I? And if not now, when?” Pirkei Avot 1:14.

I have tried to find a way of persuading myself that Hillel's statement -- which may be construed as an endorsement of some form of democratic government -- supports the authors' proposition that voters' voices should be heard, but so far with little luck.  Suggestions, please!

Loving thy neighbour: the Torah got there first

Here's one from COLLive: in a piece entitled 'Crown Heights Jews “Stand With Our Black Neighbors" the text reads, in relevant part:

"Jews of all types held signs supporting the Black Lives Matter movement and proclaiming 'Human decency should be a frum value', 'Crown Heights Jews Stand With Our Black Neighbors' as well as the saying from Pirkei Avos, "Love Thy Neighbour"'.

While the sentiment about loving one's neighbour is laudable, this statement actually comes from Vayikra (Leviticus) 19:18.

Four types of person: a parody of Perek

Pirkei Avot, being part of the Oral Law (Torah sheb'al Peh) which was initially transmitted only by mouth from generation to generation, had to be memorable for the obvious reason that even fairly clever and learned people would forget it if it wan't.  Memorability is an important factor in our lives though, in the internet age, many of us simply save ourselves the trouble of learning things by heart and rely instead on a quick and usually painless an online search.

In the fifth chapter of Avot we came across a sequence of mishnayot that are expressed in a four-fold logical sequence of propositions (A but not B; B but not A; A and b: neither A nor B). This makes them far easier to commit to memory, and therefore to teach others. 

I recently received by WhatsApp a forwarded parody of this mishnaic style that points most effectively to two of the issues that the coronavirus pandemic raises -- social distancing and the wearing of masks. It runs like this:

There are four types of those who converse in the presence of their neighbors:  

 

He who wears a mask and does not practice social distancing, protects his friend but not himself.  

He who practices social distancing and does not wear a mask, protects himself but not his friend.  

He who wears a mask and practices social distancing protects both. 

He who does not wear a mask and does not practice social distancing, protects neither.

This parodic technique, which also reflects the content of at least two mishanyot in Avot (2:13, 2:14), works so well that I suspect it has been used elsewhere in the past, though I have yet to find similar examples. All advice from readers on this matter is welcome.

The person who forgets any of his Torah learning: request for clarification

In Avot 3:10 we learn in the name of Rabbi Dostai ben Yannai (citing Rabbi Meir) that a person who deliberately sets out to forget any of his Torah learning is regarded as though he has forfeited his spiritual life.  

Way back in the 1990s I heard a modern commentary on this Mishnah to the effect that it applies where a person possesses -- as most of us now do -- a reasonable set of sefarim from which he can easily and conveniently look up the things he forgets but he chooses not to do so, whether through lethargy or indifference. 

Unfortunately I do not recollect who said this. Can any reader please point me to a source for this explanation?

Responding to public disorder

The killing of George Floyd has had tragic consequences for his family, for inter-racial relations in the United States and beyond, and for many innocent people in Minneapolis and beyond.  Inevitably the Jewish community has sought the best response, in some cases summoning up thoughts and ideas from Pirkei Avot.

The obvious place to start, when addressing any breakdown in public order, is with Rabbi Chanina's plea that people should pray for the welfare of the government since, if people do not fear and respect authority, every man would swallow his neighbour alive (Avot 3:2). The problem here is that much of the widespread public outrage that characterises the current situation has come from suspicion of, or hostility to, the lawful authority of the police force.  

Other contributions to the debate address the fact that we do not know the full facts and background to Floyd's death; nor do we have an insight into the motives of the various participants. On this basis we would do well to judge our fellow humans favourably (Avot 1:6) and not to judge anyone at all until we have stood in their place (Avot 2:5). This approach may help us to be more fair-minded but it mends no bridges. And, as for judging people, George Floyd will never be tried at all and, in view of public opinion, it may prove hard to give his killers a fair trial either.

The task of rebuilding both race relations and public confidence in police enforcement is an immense one, which has caused some commentators to note the fact that, however hard that task will be, we cannot shirk it. In this regard they point to Rabbi Tarfon's teaching that it's not for us to finish the task but neither are we free to desist from tackling it (Avot 2:21).

Curiously, given that there seem to be so many different narratives concerning the causes and consequences of this killing, I have found no references to Avot 5:9, which indicates that one of the distinguishing feature of a wise man is to concede the truth.  At times like this, the truth can easily be sacrificed at the altar of political expediency and, as yet, we do not know the full facts. Once we have them, we should respect and recognise them if a sane and lasting solution to the problems that led to this death.

For some recent citations of Avot in the context of the George Floyd episode click here, here, here, here and here. 

Half-quotes, misquotes and false attributions

Here are a couple of small and, some would say, trivial episodes in the life of Avot and Jewish thought which are worth looking at.

The first is a recent post by Times of Israel blogger Michael Harvey ("Judaism vs. American Individualism"). He writes:

"As Pirkei Avot tells us, “For if one destroys one soul it is as if one destroys an entire world, ..."

The sentiment is sound, but the attribution is not: the quote comes from a mishnah in tractate Sanhedrin (4:1). 

The second is a piece in Communal News, in which David Wexelman (on the subject of responses to Covid-19) writes: 

 "The natural order of priorities is first yourself like it says in the ethics of the fathers, “If I will not be for myself, who will be for me.'” 

Pirkei Avot does indeed say this (Avot 1:14), but the quote is somewhat out of context because its author, Hillel, then appears to counterbalance it by adding ""And if I am for myself, what am I?" This addition appears to urge a person to find a happy medium, a path between being only for himself and not for himself at all.

Does any of this matter?

There is a principle, itself enshrined in Avot (6:6), that citing a teaching in the name of the person who teaches it is one of the 48 ways by which Torah is acquired -- and that, moreover, one who does so is viewed as bringing redemption into the world.  People are generally quite good at doing this, but there is a tendency to assume that any general principle that is repeated often enough somehow comes from Avot.  Other examples include "derech eretz kadmah leTorah" (i.e. good behaviour comes at the beginning of the Torah) and the maxim "if you chase after honour, honour runs away from you".  

I believe that we owe it to our readers, our friends, our families and our communities to be more careful with the words of our sages.  A correctly-cited axiom will more accurately reflect its author's meaning than an incorrectly-cited one, and will also spare the annoyance and frustration that can be inflicted on the poor soul who trawls through Avot in search of something that is not there at all.  Good habits of citation also enhance the credibility of the person who cultivates them. So let's get Avot right if we can!

Smiling through the mask

The current Coronavirus pandemic has changed our lives in many ways, some quite subtle and others highly noticeable.  One of the most obvious changes is that many of us have had to learn a new skill -- recognising people who are wearing face-masks. Along with this comes the challenge of assessing their mood: are they happy or sad, puckish or pensive?  Fortunately, the mouth is not the only part of the face that communicates a person's inner thoughts; the eyes -- assuming that they remain visible -- also express a person's mood.

The issue of smiling and face masks is discussed in this recent piece in the Jewish Journal that reminds us of Shammai's injunction (Avot 1:15) to greet everyone with a happy, smiling face.  This applies just as much to people who wear a face-mask, just as it should do to people one encounters in the dark. This is not just because a smile makes a favourable impact on the person greeted -- it also affects the mood of the person doing the greeting (the 'smilor' rather than the 'smilee'). So do remember to smile and greet others warmly: it's good for your health too! 

Avot in retrospect: a summary of last month's blogposts

In case you missed them, here's a list of items posted on Avot Today in May 2020.

Monday 11 May: Coronavirus: when to stick together?  The need to strike a balance between commitment to Judaism with obedience to official edicts is addressed by several mishnayot in Avot

Wednesday 13 May: Why do people die? Cause of death has both physical and metaphysical aspects -- so what conclusions may we draw from a person's death?

Friday 15 May: Is it really Rashi?  Rashi is one of the most important and best-appreciated commentator on Torah and Babylonian Talmud, but is he the author of the commentary on Avot that appears in his name?

Friday 15 May: The meaning of 'kapdan'.  We learn that a person who is a kapdan cannot teach -- but what exactly is a kapdan?

Sunday 17 May: Narrow Focus.  Many mishnayot in Avot are supported by verses drawn from Tanach, but the major classical commentators on Tanach seem reluctant to cite those mishnayot when discussing or explaining verses from Tanach.

Tuesday 19 May: The Ages of Man.  We take a look at Yehudah ben Tema's famous cradle-to-grave curriculum vitae of the typical Jew of his period and speculate as to how it might read if it had been written today.

Tuesday 21 May: Which Rabbi Yishmael?  There are several rabbis in mishnaic times whose name is Yishmael. This post seeks advice as to which one is the author of the outspoken mishnah at Avot 4:9.

Monday 25 May: Freedom: What it Means to Us. "Freedom" is not just a word; it is also a battle-cry in the wider world. But what do the Sages of Avot have to say about it?

Tuesday 26 May: The Ages of Woman.  Following on from the previous week's post ("The Ages of Man"), we wonder what an equivalent age-related curriculum vitae for the Jewish woman might contain.

Wednesday 27 May: The Ruling Classes. What sort of governance is best for the Jewish people -- and does it even matter?

Sunday 31 May: Overstating the Principle. Because so many mishnayot in Avot are deliciously quotable, it can be tempting to cite them as if they say much more than they actually do.