If not now, when? A time for focus, a time for family

Hillel’s neat apothegm, “If I am not for me, who will be for me? And if I am only for myself, what am I? And if not now, when?” (Avot 1:14) is the subject of many explanations, ranging from the prosaic to the profound. Given the fact that we have so many details of Hillel’s life and times, as well as so many other sayings of his, it is almost too easy to find a real-life context to which this famous saying applies. There are also many context-free explanations, of which I have just came across the following one, brought in the Kerem Chemed of Rabbi Yehudah Rabinovitz in the name of the Chatam Sofer.

The words that open this mishnah—“If I am not for me, who will be for me?”—are spoken by the bachelor who, free of family responsibilities, can pursue his interests without hindrance. Learning Torah, he can push himself to the limit, burn the midnight oil when it suits him, bury himself the Gemara and generally focus fully on the object of his studies. There is no millstone round his neck; no demands are made upon him except those he imposes on himself.

The second part of the mishnah—“And if I am only for myself, what am I?”—is spoken by the married man who also pursues Torah learning. The Torah teaches: “it is not good for man to be alone” (Bereshit 2:18), and a man without a wife is man without Torah, without good and without blessing. And a good wife will help him find time for Torah learning despite his domestic responsibilities.

The final part of the mishnah--“And if not now, when?”—is recited by the bachelor and the married man together. Why, because if the bachelor were to say “if I am only for myself, what am I?”, or the married man were to say “If I am not for me, who will be for me?”, neither would have the right attitude towards the use they should immediately be making of their time.it

While the Chatam Sofer’s words are directed to students of Torah, it seems to me that they are clearly of wider application. In any sphere of activity, the time for focusing on it to the exclusion of all else, like the time for taking risks, is when a person does so at his or her own expense and not at the expense of dependants and loved ones. This is not always possible, particularly where changes in the employment market require the acquisition of complex and hard-to-learn skills, but equally one should avoid change for change’s sake if it jeopardises family security.

 

Mazikim pt 2: Refusal to admit responsibility for what happens in one's life

In the fifth perek of Avot (at 5:8) we learn of 10 things that were created at dusk on the eve of Shabbat and of a further four things that some people would add to this list. One of those things is "mazikim", evil and destructive demons. Some people believe that mazikim exist; others that they do not. 

Should the existence or non-existence of mazikim concern us? I think not. If they exist, it is axiomatic that God created them and that, since only man has free will, whatever mazikim do is mandated by God.  Furthermore, since God is the only authentic source of power that a Jew must acknowledge, it is absolutely wrong to treat mazikim as if they held any power in their own right, and therefore wrong to seek to propitiate them. If however they do not exist, then it is we who have created them in our minds. If we have done so, it is our own minds that we must turn in order to address their functional (or dysfunctional) utility within the World we inhabit and which God created.

 I believe the real question we face is not that of whether mazikim exist.  The real question is what we can learn from the undeniable fact that the author of this mishnah teaches us that there are those who say that they were created on the eve of the World’s first Sabbath.

 An argument can be made out that the inclusion of mazikim on this list is because it has a positive aspect, in common with the other 13. The argument runs as follows.  The idea behind the mazikim of our mishnah is that something adverse happens to an individual. That person has, at that moment, a choice. One option is to link that adverse consequence to his own conduct. This can be done in many ways and on different levels. For example he can accept that he was negligent (e.g. the car rolled down the hill because he didn’t check if the brake was on) or inadvertent (e.g. he switched the kettle on, forgetting that he already emptied it). On another level he can view the adverse consequence as a sort of retribution (e.g. why did he drop the bottle of Scotch in the street? Because he should have spent the money instead on a charity donation he was asked to give) or caution (e.g. he walked into an old lady while checking his phone and knocked her over, this being a warning to be more careful next time he goes out).

 What does all of this have to do with mazikim? In short, the idea that underwrites the usefulness of the mazik is that a person’s misfortune is unrelated to his own behavior: it is always the fault of others.  Let us return back to the examples above.  Why did the car roll down the hill? Because a mazik released the handbrake. Why did the kettle boil dry? Just his luck that a mazik must have distracted him.  If however a person is prepared to take responsibility for his actions, he recognizes that he is the mazik. Why did that bottle of Scotch fall from my hands? Maybe it was a lesson—annoying and expensive but at least it was painless—that I should think again about putting my own selfish interests ahead of the needs of others. Why did I knock that poor little old lady over? Because I was so preoccupied with my own affairs that I forgot I was sharing the sidewalk with my fellow humans. So, to summarize, "mazikim" is a sort of shorthand term for the potential of mankind to accept or reject responsibility for its own damaging actions.

 The significance of mazikim in this mishnah is that this concept was created just before Shabbat of the World’s first week.  The Torah is not a history book, but it does tell us in some detail about one event: the Fall of Man.  Our thoughts concerning the story of Adam and Eve tend to dwell on the sadly lost opportunity to do the one thing God asked: not to eat the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge. This mishnah however addresses another part of the story: the abrogation of responsibility on the part of both Adam and Eve. Adam’s position regarding their wrongful acts. Adam states that it was not his fault: it was Eve who gave him the fruit. Eve states that it was not her fault: the serpent told her to eat it. Here, with Shabbat coming in for the first time in Jewish history, we see the potential for accepting or denying responsibility for a person’s own damaging actions being actualized.