Doing something wrong? Then go with the flow

One of the three teachings we learn in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Netanel at Avot 2:18 is אַל תְּהִי רָשָׁע בִּפְנֵי עַצְמֶֽךָ. Most commentators and English translators take much the same view of the Tanna’s message. Typical of this consensus are the following:

• “Do not be wicked in your own eyes” (chabad.org; Rabbi Lord Sacks substitutes ‘evil’ for ‘wicked’)
• “Do not judge yourself to be a wicked person” (ArtScroll)

Some go further and incorporate further guidance. Thus:

• “Do not be wicked in your own esteem [lest you set yourself a low standard of conduct]” (Philip Birnbaum, HaSiddur HaShalem)
• “Do not consider yourself as wicked when left to depend on your own efforts” (Rabbi Shimshon Refael Hirsch, The Hirsch Pirkei Avos, tr. Hirschler/Haberman)

One aspect of this teaching that invites further discussion is the choice of the words “בִּפְנֵי עַצְמֶֽךָ”. This is the reflexive part of the mishnah. Rendered “yourself”, “in your own esteem” or “in your own eyes” in the translations quoted above, the words literally mean “before yourself” or “in front of yourself”—words that do not flow comfortably in English.

An interesting interpretation of these words in the context of this teaching appears in Rabbi Reuven Melamed’s Melitz Yosher. Here follows my expansion of his brief words.

We believe that, when a person performs a mitzvah or a generally meritorious act, this deed will attract a reward. Not all actions are equally rewarded. Those good deeds that are practised by everyone on a regular basis may be regarded as the products of good habits. They are unlikely to require a person to struggle against their yetzer hara, their evil inclination, in order to perform them. On the contrary, since everyone else around them is carrying on with the same conduct, there may even be peer pressure to continue do to those meritorious acts that attract rewards. This being so, since the effort involved in performing them is likely to be small, the reward for doing them will be small too. Only where the effort is great, and where a person exceeds the standards set by others, will the reward be great (“According to the effort, so is the reward”: Avot 5:26).

The same principles apply, mutatis mutandis, to averot (misdeeds) and generally poor conduct. Where a person’s breach of legal or social standards of behaviour is commonplace, shared by most or all fellow humans, it may have been the product of nothing worse than bad habits. All the miscreant is doing, after all, is to go with the flow. For such misdeeds, the punishment may be expected to be small. Indeed, as the Pele Yo’etz comments, a person who performs the same wrongful deeds as everyone else does at least have the virtue of respecting Hillel’s precept (Avot 2:5) of not separating himself from the rest of the community. However, if a wrongful act requires effort, initiative and individual action that goes beyond the norm of even bad behaviour, the punishment should be much bigger.

The teaching of Rabbi Shimon ben Netanel is therefore a wake-up call to anyone who is contemplating the performance of any wrongful act. We should ask ourselves whether our behaviour is normatively bad or whether it is בִּפְנֵי עַצְמֶֽךָ, a stand-out deed that others are not also doing. If it is, we should seriously think twice before doing it since the prospect of severe punishment lies ahead. The fact that we are in effect "going solo" should be sufficient warning.

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

Cull, control or cultivate: What should we do about self-esteem?

Many of my most interesting thoughts come to me through the medium of my breakfast reading materials. In the course of this unusually long repast, I usually have six or seven books on the go at the same time. Some, like Sefer Chafetz Chaim, are visited daily. Others are taken down and returned to the shelf every day but may not be opened more than three or four times in any given week. Much depends on a whim, and whether I stumble across something that retains my fancy or not.

It is the juxtaposition of books and authors that provides so much food for thought. A classical example earlier this week came from two modern “heavyweights”, Rabbi Abraham J. Twerski and Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks. Within two pieces of toast and marmalade I found Rabbi Twerski (Visions of the Fathers) stressing the importance of self-esteem and the damage suffered by those who lack it, followed by Rabbi Sacks (Morality) pointing to the adverse effects of inflated self-esteem on society as it apparently drifts inexorably from a “We” to an “I” culture.

It is not hard to synthesise these two superficially contradictory views of self-esteem. Taking every individual separately—as Rabbi Twerski did when he treated them as patients—the absence of an adequate degree of self-esteem can lead to a retreat from participation in society at large, leading to loneliness, a crushing feeling of inadequacy and a search to escape reality through the abuse of alcohol or drugs. In contrast, taking society as a whole, the ability of its constituent members to fulfil their potential through cooperation with others is hampered through the assertion of any individual who believes him- or herself to be too important to accept dependency or to contribute to the welfare of others.

Where does Pirkei Avot fit into this scheme? It is hard to decide. The term “self-esteem” does not have an obvious equivalent in Mishnaic Hebrew (the term in Ivrit is הערכה עצמית). Even in English it is not a precise term. It is clearly something more pointed than entry-level concepts of “self-awareness” and “self-consciousness”, jockeying for a place with “self-respect” and perhaps even “egoism”. Oxford Online offers the definition “confidence in one's own worth or abilities; self-respect”, but self-respect and self-esteem are not synonymous: one can possess self-respect while esteeming oneself very little.

The rabbis of Avot do not however leave us without guidance. They expect us to know our positive qualities for what they are, neither hiding them nor vaunting them, and also to respect the same qualities when we see them in others. Thus for example a person who has the ability to teach is expected to do so (Avot 1:13) and we are asked to rise to the occasion and face challenges when no-one else is around to do so (Avot 2:6), even if it means raising our performance level beyond our knowledge base (Avot 3:12, 3:22, 6:5). We should not indulge in self-promotion above our station (also Avot 1:13). We are to earn the esteem of others by the expedient of recognising their value too (Avot 4:1), though we should remain as humble as circumstances permit (Avot 4:4, 4:12).

There is also the catch-all teaching of Hillel at Avot 1:14: “If I am not for me, who am I? And if I am only for me, what am I?...”.  These two parts of the quoted mishnah do appear to correspond neatly with having too little, and then too much, self-esteem. But can we tie this interpretation in with its authorship by Hillel? Arguably, yes.

There is an aggadic passage in the Talmud (Pesachim 66a) that tells how the sons of Beteira, having forgotten whether the laws of Pesach override those of Shabbat, were taught the correct legal position by Hillel, whom they immediately appointed as their head. Hillel then rebuked them for not knowing the law and chided them for not having learned it at the feet of his own teachers Shemayah and Avtalyon. At this point, he was taken down a peg or two by being caused to forget a halachah himself.

We can restate this tale as follows: Hillel arrives in HJerusalem as a humble and unknown traveller from Babylonia, a man who has neither position nor protetzia. He reckons that he is equal to the task of telling the Temple authorities what they might or might not do, and has sufficient self-confidence to recognise himself as being worthy of this task. However, once he has astounded the Benei Beteira with his erudition and been honoured accordingly, his freshly-acquired feeling of importance leads him to rebuke his hosts—and this is a step too far.  With too little self-esteem, Hillel might never have had the confidence and the courage to make a ruling before his seniors; but when ultimately he displays too great a degree self-esteem, he suffers for it.