At Avot 2:13, Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai sets his five leading talmidim a test:
צְאוּ וּרְאוּ אֵיזוֹ הִיא דֶּֽרֶךְ טוֹבָה שֶׁיִּדְבַּק
בָּהּ הָאָדָם. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶֽזֶר אוֹמֵר: עַֽיִן טוֹבָה
[Translation] “Go out and take a look: what is
the good path that a person should stick to?” Rabbi Eliezer says: “A good eye”.
After the other four give their answers, Rabban
Yochanan, at Avot 2:14, sets a further test:
צְאוּ וּרְאוּ אֵיזוֹ הִיא דֶּֽרֶךְ רָעָה שֶׁיִּתְרַחֵק
מִמֶּֽנָּה הָאָדָם. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶֽזֶר אוֹמֵר: עַֽיִן רָעָה
[Translation] “Go out and take a look: what is
the bad path that a person should distance himself from?” Rabbi Eliezer says:
“An evil eye”.
Again, the other four talmidim offer their
answers. As it turns out, while none of the answers is “wrong”, Rabbi Eliezer’s
two answers are not those preferred by his teacher. But that is not what this
post is going to discuss. Instead, we will consider what is meant by “good eye”
and “evil eye” in this context.
But there is literally more to this than meets the
eye. The words עַֽיִן רָעָה
(“evil eye”) resurface in the fifth perek, at Avot 5:16, in an anonymous mishnah
that opens like this:
אַרְבַּע מִדּוֹת
בְּנוֹתְנֵי צְדָקָה: הָרוֹצֶה שֶׁיִּתֵּן וְלֹא יִתְּנוּ אֲחֵרִים, עֵינוֹ רָעָה
בְּשֶׁל אֲחֵרִים. יִתְּנוּ אֲחֵרִים וְהוּא לֹא יִתֵּן, עֵינוֹ רָעָה בְּשֶׁלּוֹ.
יִתֵּן וְיִתְּנוּ אֲחֵרִים, חָסִיד. לֹא יִתֵּן וְלֹא יִתְּנוּ אֲחֵרִים, רָשָׁע.
[Translation] One who wants to give but does not
want others to give—is begrudging of others. One who wants that others should
give but does not want to give—begrudges himself.
This translation, which is more or less identical as
between ArtScroll and Chabad.org, is more meaningful than literal translations
along the lines of “his eye is evil towards others” and “his eye is evil as
regards himself”. Again Rabbi Lord Sacks distinguishes himself by qualifying
the word “begrudge” and fleshing it out as “begrudges this merit to others” and
“begrudges this merit to himself”, the merit in question being that which a
person earns through making charitable donations.
Let’s return to Rabbi Eliezer’s reference to good and
evil eyes. He is using the same term, “evil eye”, as is found in the anonymous
mishnah about the giving of charity. But does this meaning of “evil eye” in
that later mishnah fit the context? Is the counsel that a person should not
begrudge the merit that another person might enjoy through performing a good
deed a piece of general advice that can steer a person through the vicissitudes
of daily existence?
The Maggid of Kozhnitz makes a connection between these
two mishnayot. Apart from his major work, Ahavat Yisrael, he also wrote
a short commentary on Avot, Avot Yisrael, which came to light in Lemburg
(Levov/Lviv) in 1866, more than half a century after his death. There, at Avot
2:13, he pins Rabbi Eliezer’s use of the term “good eye” to a verse in Proverbs
that reads: “One with a good eye will be blessed, for he has given of his bread
to the poor” (Mishlei 22:9). Taken literally, this citation does not
immediately appear to endorse the meaning of “good eye” in Avot 5:16 but the
Maggid appears to widen its application, the giving of bread to the poor being
a reflection on a person’s magnanimous frame of mind. Why is the person with
the “good eye” blessed? Because, being happy with his lot and rejoicing in it,
he displays happiness. This happiness is a sign that he is less concerned with gashmiut,
wealth and property, than he is with his role as an instrument in the execution
of God’s will when giving to others. This
is the path of contentment with what one has—and this, in Rabbi Eliezer’s view,
is the right attitude a person should cultivate as he or she faces each day.
Demonstrating a consistent approach, the Maggid applies the notion that “good eye” is synonymous with magnanimity at Avot 2:15—a mishnah that does not even mention the term—where the same Rabbi Eliezer teaches that one’s friend’s kavod (“honour”) should be as dear to him as his own. If one is truly magnanimous, one will not begrudge the honour and prestige to which others are entitled, a view that extends magnanimity from the field of gashmiut to that of social relations.
For comments and discussion of this post on Facebook, click here.
