NOT IN OUR HANDS

Rabbi Yannai is one of the lesser known Tannaim of Masechet Avot. From him we learn a single, somewhat perplexing lesson that is framed not as an instruction for good behaviour but as a general statement regarding the human condition. He states (at Avot 4:19):

אֵין בְּיָדֵֽינוּ לֹא מִשַּׁלְוַת הָרְשָׁעִים, וְאַף לֹא מִיִּסּוֹרֵי הַצַּדִּיקִים

The tranquillity of the wicked and also the suffering of the righteous—they are not in our hands.

Taken at face value, the plain meaning of Rabbi Yannai’s words does not look like a valuable lesson for life. Yes, many wicked people live enjoyable and fulfilling lives, and many fine and upstanding individuals find each day a painful and exacting struggle. We may not (and, if we are honest with ourselves, do not) know why.  The Gemara itself (Berachot 5a) posits that a person’s pain and suffering may be a sign not only of God’s displeasure but of quite the opposite: His wish may be to ensure that the ‘victim’ receive all his suffering in this world in order to provide him with a perfect and pain-free World to Come.

One practical use to which we might think of putting this teaching is in the implementation of Nittai haArbeli’s teaching at Avot 1:7 that we should keep well away from a bad neighbour and not team up with someone who is wicked.  But Rabbi Yannai has only described facts on the ground. He has not provided us with a litmus test by which to distinguish the virtuous from the vile; we cannot avoid calm and happy people who have peace of mind on the assumption that they must be wicked, nor can we seek out people who are tormented by pain and misfortune on the basis that they must be full of virtue.

Avot warns us of the dangers of living on credit. Thus Rabbi Shimon ben Netanel (Avot 2:14) cautions against borrowing but not repaying, whether our debt is owed to other people or to God. The person who does this is described by Rabbi Yaakov Hillel in Eternal Ethics From Sinai as living off the bounty of others, and he may do so with complete equanimity if he feels entitled to do so. Perhaps he is the wicked person that Rabbi Yannai has in mind. However, Rabbi Shimon ben Netanel neither mentions nor alludes to the corresponding personality of one who does not borrow—or borrows and repays—while living a life of suffering. Such a person may be a tzaddik, or not. Another mishnah with a credit warning is that of Rabbi Akiva at Avot 3:20. This teaching is however only about the fact that whatever you owe God is paid up one way or another, and is clearly remote from Rabbi Yannai’s scenario.

Perhaps the key to Rabbi Yannai’s mishnah is in the words that attract the least attention: אֵין בְּיָדֵֽינוּ (literally “not in our hands”). Arguably he is not telling us that these contrasting propositions relating to the happy scoundrel and the saintly sufferer are beyond our comprehension, our intellectual “grasp”. We know that. He is instead letting us know that we cannot realistically choose to be either of those persons.  Possession of a tranquil mind is not an automatic consequence of our having affluence, power and other tangible and intangible assets that are so often craved—and the more we seek to manipulate and harm others, the more our conscience is likely to trouble us, however reluctant we are to pay attention to it. Likewise, a person who is truly righteous in his dealings with others and his relationship with God may find it increasingly hard to wallow in his misery when he is so fully aware of the goodness of the path he has chosen in life and the rewards that will await him thereafter.  In other words, Rabbi Yannai is subtly teaching us that neither we nor those we know can be found at the polar extremes he describes. Rather, we are all to be found somewhere on the spectrum that spans them.

There is another “not at the extremes” explanation with which we leave this topic. It may not fit neatly with the words of the mishnah, but it carries a message that addressed to us all. According to the Kozhnitzer Maggid, as rendered by Rabbi Tal Mosher Zwecker, Ma’asei Avos:

“[W]e do not have the luxury of peace as the wicked do, as the wicked think they have no reason to repent for they have done nothing wrong. Neither do we have the suffering of the righteous, as their consciences bother them continuously, always pointing out their every shortcoming and sin. Rather, we must realize that while we always have hope, there are always things to work on and rectify. The middle road is best, balanced between both extremes”.

For comments and discussion of this post on Facebook, click here.

DOES IT MATTER IF WE QUOTE OUR SOURCES?

 At Avot 6:6 the 48^th and final element in the list of things one should acquire or practise in order to maximize one’s claim to be a true ben Torah is the habit of quoting the source of anything you say that does not originate from you but from some earlier source:

הָאוֹמֵר דָּבָר בְּשֵׁם אוֹמְרוֹ

One who says a thing in the name of the person who says it.

This practice is said to bring the ultimate redemption:

הָא לָמַֽדְתָּ, כָּל הָאוֹמֵר דָּבָר בְּשֵׁם אוֹמְרוֹ, מֵבִיא גְאֻלָּה לָעוֹלָם, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: וַתֹּֽאמֶר אֶסְתֵּר לַמֶּֽלֶךְ בְּשֵׁם מָרְדְּכָי

That’s what you have learned: One who says something in the name of its speaker brings redemption to the world, as it states: “And Esther told the king in the name of Mordechai” (Esther 2:22).

Why should a person quote his sources? Within Avot one can advance several reasons. For example:

·       The world is sustained by three things—truth, justice and peace (Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, Avot 1:18). Suppressing the identity of the person who first articulated one’s words can be viewed as concealing the truth, or at least as being highly economical with it, by creating the misleading impression that the words spoken were one’s own.  

·       Masquerading as the originator of a teaching is a form of self-promotion. Hillel warns at Avot 1:13 that a name made great is a name destroyed.

·       Rebbi, at Avot 2:1, asks what is the path that a person should choose for himself and answers his own question: it is the path that reflects creditably on himself and in the eyes of others. Holding oneself out as the author of another’s words does not comply with that proposition.

Even aside from these mishnayot, there are reasons for quoting one’s sources. Thus

“…the Rambam understood that the purpose of the directive of הָאוֹמֵר דָּבָר בְּשֵׁם אוֹמְרוֹ is not in order to prevent a person from falsely taking credit for someone else’s statement, but rather to demonstrate the authenticity of a particular halachah” (Rabbi Hershel Schachter, Rav Schachter on Pirkei Avos).

Frustratingly, Rav Schachter does not cite a source for this proposition. It cannot have been from Rambam’s commentary on Avot, since הָאוֹמֵר דָּבָר בְּשֵׁם אוֹמְרוֹ  is in the sixth perek of Avot; this consists entirely of baraitot and was not therefore part of his commentary on the Mishnah.

Rambam himself is no great champion of the principle of citation of teachings in the names of those who teach them. In his monumental Mishneh Torah he generally makes no mention of sources at all, and towards the beginning of the  Shemonah Perakim—ostensibly Rambam’s introduction to Pirkei Avot—he actually refuses to credit his sources:

“Take note—the concepts stated in this chapters and the forthcoming explanations are not new concepts that I have invented/ They are, rather, an anthology of the words of our Sages …, the works of philosophers of the early and late generations, and many other texts. Accept the truth [regardless of] the person who said it”

So, having denied any sort of original input, Rambam might be expected to produce a text that is literally bristling with sources. But he does not:

“[I have chosen not to mention my sources for two reasons:] a) because this prolongs the text without any advantage. b) By mentioning the name of an author of whom a particular person might not approve. I might cause him [to reject the concept, thinking] that it is harmful and that it contains an undesirable intent. For this reason I have chosen to omit the name of the author... ”.

Both of these propositions are debatable.

As for the first, how might any author know that there is no advantage to be gained by not giving a source? Subsequent events have shown rather the opposite: there has been something of a cottage industry in trying to find the very sources that Rambam concealed, generally because of the advantage that can be derived from gaining that information. 

As for the second, Rambam has already told his readers that they should accept the truth without regard for who said it. It seems inconsistent then to withhold the identities of his sources in case his readers do not follow his injunction.

If anyone can find a source for Rabbi Schachter’s proposition that Rambam supported citation of sources in order to demonstrate the authenticity of anything, can they please share it?

For comments and discussion of this post on Facebook, click here.

SO HOW DO WE HANDLE OUR LEADERS AND SUPERIORS?

Last week, in response to my post “Summoning Up Assistance From the Past” (here and here), Claude Tusk posted a comment that contained a link to Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks’ classic piece “Seven Principles of Jewish Leadership”.  I expressed sadness that Rabbi Sacks had not written a companion piece, "Seven Principles of Coping With Jewish Leadership".

This little exchange set me thinking and, over the past few days, I have been asking myself how Pirkei Avot itself advises us how to cope with our leaders.

The best-known advice on leadership in Avot is not particularly helpful. Rabbi Nechunyah ben Hakanah (Avot 3:6) tells us not to go into government or the employment market—but that is not the same thing at all as dealing with leaders. Shemayah (Avot 1:10) tells us not even to make ourselves known to the authorities and Rabban Gamliel ben Rebbi (Avot 2:2) tells us to be wary of them. But we rarely nowadays have the right or the ability to remain unknown when the leaders, their employees and agents choose to seek us out. And saying “be wary” is an item of general advice at so high a level that we still have to work out what it means in practice in each situation in which we may come into contact with leaders—whether political, communal or religious, for that matter. So what are we left with?

One possibility is the mysterious mishnah at Avot 3:16 where Rabbi Yishmael says:

הֱוֵי קַל לְרֹאשׁ, וְנֽוֹחַ לְתִשְׁחֽוֹרֶת, וֶהֱוֵי מְקַבֵּל אֶת כָּל הָאָדָם בְּשִׂמְחָה

Be yielding to a leader, pleasant to the young, and receive every person with joy.

The translation I have given here would appear to fit the bill perfectly, were it not for the fact that there never appears to have been any consensus as to what the mishnah means. The first two parts of this Mishnah, translated literally, are “Be light to the head, and be at ease before early manhood”.  How do commentators understand them? Here are a few possibilities:

Rashi: Don’t challenge the elders and judges of your city.

R’ Ovadyah Bartenura: Be deferential when serving your Rosh Yeshivah.

R’ Ya’akov Chagiz (Etz HaChaim): Even if you view yourself as the civic leader, make yourself easily accessible to others.

The Chida (Petach Einayim): 1. Be quick to stand up for the Rosh Yeshivah, 2. Be quick to gain control over your head and curb your evil inclination.

R’ Shalom Noach Berezowsky (Netivot Shalom): Cast off the burdens of egotism and the evil inclination while you are young.

None of these explanations, nor any that I have not listed here, really seem to address the issue of how to deal with leaders. So what is left?

At Avot 6:6 we find a baraita that lists the 48 qualities a person requires in order to qualify as a true Torah student. Some of these qualities are specifically related to the methodology of the learning process, while others promote the importance of human qualities that we need whether we are studying Torah or doing anything else. These include the middot of knowing one’s place and being content with one’s lot—and in them may lie the answer to our search.

Knowing one’s place is not just a matter of being submissive; one’s place may involve the exercise of authority within a hierarchy which contains both superiors and juniors. In order to relate successfully to those above and below, knowing one’s place must surely be a key requirement. It involves recognizing and respecting boundaries, providing the right degree of respect and cooperation to those above and being able to offer guidance, assistance, encouragement and admonitions to those below.  

For comments and discussion of this post on Facebook, click here.