Rav Yitzchak Breitowitz: Even God is Not Above The Law

[music] [singing] [music] [music and singing] [singing] >> Everybody, thank you. Thank you for coming. Uh as always the sheer is dedicated for praying for the protection of Ami Israel, the unity of Ami Israel, especially appropriate Shavuot time, where we accept the Torah keisha of lev achad, uh and that unity will lead to victory. And we pray for all of those whose health has been affected by terror. A refuah shleimah to Leah Shoshana bas Yisrael Asura. Aliyat neshama for the grandfather of Shoshana Kaiser, Yitzchak Zvi ben Asher Aryeh. And finally in honor of the third yahrzeit of the mother of Moshe Citron, Leah bas Chaim, which is on Monday the 9th of Sivan. And here I do have to say a few words. Uh Dr. Eileen Citron was a clinical psychologist who was a member of my kahal uh in Silver Spring. And she was married to Dr. Leon Citron, who was a Holocaust survivor and a psychiatrist. So this was a very nice psychiatrist psychologist team. And uh Mrs. Dr. Citron uh was a very very kind, compassionate, modest person who uh really loved uh learning, loved Torah, loved helping people in any every way. And uh she was zocheh together with Leon, who was a Holocaust survivor and also an extraordinary man, uh to build a beautiful beautiful family. Uh Mark, you may know he comes here sometimes, or Moshe Citron, uh is an example of the very very fine children that the family produced. So, may her memory be a blessing. And uh, Mark even adds, her mother used to his mother used to attend my Sunday morning Kum and Share in Silver Spring, Maryland. Indeed, but you know, we've had many many connections besides uh, besides that one. He he is a Baruch. So, in case uh, you haven't noticed, we have a big holiday coming up uh, on uh, on Friday. It's Thursday night Friday, Shavuot. And uh, here in Eretz Yisrael, we get to commiserate a little bit with our brethren in Eretz who always have a two-day Yom Tov. Here, the second day of Yom Tov for them is actually going to be Shabbat. That raises some very very interesting questions. Uh, particularly if you are a Eretz guest who is invited to a uh, Shabbat meal. Where in Eretz Yisrael, it's only Shabbat and not Yom Tov, but for you, it's Yom Tov and Shabbat because you're still have to keep Yom Tov. So, although in terms of Malacha, there's not too much of a difference because Shabbat is stricter, but in terms of Kiddush, there is because you got to recite the Yom Tov and Shabbat Kiddush and not just the Shabbat Kiddush. So, a guest would not be out saying with the Eretz Yisrael host. And similarly, benching. Uh, normally, if you're eating at somebody's house, there's a very strong Halachic basis that you're out saying with their candle lighting. But uh, this would be a case where that wouldn't be the case simply because uh, the Israeli who lives here will make the Baracha candle lighting near Shabbat >> [snorts] >> and the Eretz person who keeps two days of Yom Tov will have to say candle lighting near Shabbat and Yom Tov. So, there's something to be something to be aware of in terms of the two-day Yom Tov. But obviously, when we think about what happened on Shavuot, so the obvious answer is it says in the Torah, Matan Torah Shavuot. The day that we got the Torah, the day that Hashem gave us the Torah. So, what I'm going to talk about tonight, and again, I I don't want to shatter illusions, is that that's not what happened on Shavuot. And actually, what happened on Shavuot was nothing. Nothing happened on Shavuot. Uh so, why do we celebrate nothing? Uh that'll be what I actually I'm going to talk about, the importance of nothing in the celebration of the holiday. What do I mean by all of this? So, first of all, let's clarify a very basic term. The Torah was given on Shavuot. What do we mean by the word Torah? What does Torah mean? The Torah was given on Shavuot. It clearly does not mean the five books of Moses, the safer Torah, because more than half of the Torah consists of events that didn't happen yet. We were not told about Korach and the Meraglim or even the Akeidah, you know, at the time of Matan Torah. Right? So, all of those things didn't happen until later, and they were not even written down until later. Again, Al Pi Sham, this is not a contradiction to the notion that every word of the Torah is dictated by Hakadosh Baruch Hu. That That That That's we do accept. But, Hashem didn't dictate it on Har Sinai. Hashem dictated it over a period of 40 years after each event happened. And indeed, therefore, there was no complete safer Torah till the day that Moshe Rabbeinu died. In fact, there are two opinions in the Gemara. Did Moshe Rabbeinu write the Torah at the very end, meaning nothing was written till the day of his death, or was it written in a piecemeal fashion over time? And that's a Machlokes. Uh and if it was written in a piecemeal fashion, did the people have access to it, or was it only Moshe's private manuscript? A lot of questions. So, clearly, when we say we got the Torah on Shavuos it doesn't mean all the narratives and it doesn't even mean all the commandments >> [snorts] >> simply because if you read the Torah Hashem is constantly giving commandments at various times and in various places the Mishkan, the plains of Moab so the way Chazal understand that aspect is we have to differentiate when did Moshe get the mitzvos and when were we when were we told those mitzvos from Moshe? Moshe got the mitzvos in the 40 days in Har Sinai. We got the mitzvos over a 40-year period. So if that's the case what does it mean that Shavuos is the day we got the Torah? We didn't get the narratives and we didn't even get all the mitzvos. So really at most the only thing that happened on Shavuos which of course is very important is the mass revelation of God to the entire nation and the giving of the 10 commandments. That's what it is. Every other mitzvah we didn't hear directly from God. Every other mitzvah we heard through Moshe. And even the Aseres Hadibros, the at least the sheetah of Rashi based on the Gemara in Makos is we only heard the first two. Anochi Hashem Elokecha, I am the Lord your God which is the mitzvah of emunah and you shall not have any other gods. The other eight we didn't even hear from Hashem either. So the whole concept of Matan Torah really has to be conflated with mass revelation, giluy Shechinah and the fact that in the Aseres Hadibros is a remez to all of the 613 mitzvos. So it essentially we got the foundation of the whole Torah even though we didn't get the actual Torah uh until over a period of 40 years until Moshe Rabbeinu's Moshe Rabbeinu's death. So, even that term needs to be defined, but we can we can give it a reasonable definition. But, is it true that that happened on Shavuos? So, here's the problem. The holiday of Shavuos is celebrated on the 6th of Sivan. Right? That's this Friday will be the 6th of Sivan. There was actually a machlokes in the Gemara between the Tanna Kamma and Rabbi Yossi. The Tanna Kamma says, "We heard the Aseres Hadibros on the 6th of Sivan." Which is good. But, Rabbi Yossi actually says, "We didn't hear the Aseres Hadibros on the 6th of Sivan. We heard the Aseres Hadibros on the 7th of Sivan." Now, it's very very clear that Rabbi Yossi is not changing the date of Shavuos. He's just recording a historical fact. He has various textual proofs that the Torah, which we're defining as the Aseres Hadibros, was not given on Sivan 6. It was given on Sivan 7. And it's based on a machlokes, which is really connected to how many days did they separate from their wives? Because on Wednesday they were told to separate, and according to the Chachamim, they separated Wednesday, Thursday. And I'm I'm sorry. I'm sorry. On on the on the 4th of Sivan they were told to separate. So, according to the Chachamim that say the 6th of Sivan, the 4th of Sivan was Thursday, Friday. We got the Torah on Shabbos. Cuz we did get the Torah on Shabbos. And according to the Chachamim, the 4th of Sivan was Wednesday. So, it's Wednesday, Thursday, Friday. Shabbos. In other words, everybody's mode that the end point is Shavuos, but Rabbi Yosi says that is the 7th of Sivan. The Chachamim say that is the 6th of Sivan, and it's based on how many days of separation there was. So, the question becomes, according to Rabbi Yosi at least, and the halacha we pass like Rabbi Yosi, why is Shavuos celebrated on the 6th of Sivan if Matan Torah is actually on the 7th of Sivan? Now, you might want to give the following answer. And that is, well, wait a second. Shavuos is actually very different than every other Yom Tov in the Torah. Every Yom Tov in the Torah is given a calendar date. Pesach is the 15th of Nissan, Rosh Hashanah is the 1st of Tishrei, Yom Kippur is the 10th of Tishrei, Sukkot is the 15th of Tishrei again. The Torah doesn't use the words Tishrei, it uses the 7th month, the 1st month. Shavuos is actually not given a calendar date. Shavuos is defined as the 50th day from the beginning of an Omer count, which starts the 2nd day of Pesach. Now, you have to understand that in our fixed calendar system, where we don't have witnesses seeing the new moon, generally speaking, months alternate between 30 days and 29 days. So, Nissan is a 30-day month. Iyar is a 29-day month. So, based on the 30 and the 29, it happens to be the 50th day of the Omer is always going to be the 6th of Sivan. But that's just because of the nature of the fixed calendar. In the olden days of the Beit Hamikdash, when Rosh Chodesh was not determined by by calendar, Rosh Chodesh was determined by witnesses signing uh sighting the moon. Any given month could be a 30 or a 29. So, the Gamara Taka says that Shavuos in terms of a calendar date can actually be a floating holiday. Because it's always going to be the 50th day of the Omer. But what day of Sivan will the 50th day of the Omer be? If both Nissan and Iyar are 30 30, so it'll be earlier in Sivan. Shavuos will be the 5th of Sivan. If both Nissan and Iyar are 29 29, then it'll be the 7th of Sivan. It is only because in our fixed calendar, Nissan is 30 and Iyar is 29, that you'll always get the 6th of Sivan. So, one might say, "I don't care if the Aseres Hadibros were given the 6th day of Sivan or the 7th day of Sivan. As long as whatever day that was, it happened to be the 50th day of the Omer." Right? That would be you would think a logical answer. Meaning, Shavuos is not connected to a date. Shavuos is connected to the 50th day of the Omer, and what day of the month that turns out to be depends on Iyar and Nissan. Those are the two Rosh Chodeshes uh that will I'm I'm sorry. Yeah, yeah, how long Nissan is, how long Iyar is, cuz that'll determine Sivan in terms of the 50th day of the Omer. Problem is, that's not true either. Meaning, not only was the Torah given on the 7th of Sivan, but I can prove to you or we can prove that the Torah was not given on the 50th day of the Omer. The Torah was given on the 51st day of the Omer. Meaning to say, that year the 50th day of the Omer was indeed the 6th of Sivan, and the Torah was still given a day later. What's the proof? Hazal bring in Maseches Shabbos, and again, I apologize this is a bit technical, but it's an interesting chronological point. Hazal bring Maseches Shabbos that we have a tradition, although it's not texturally demonstrable, that the Jewish people left Mitzrayim on a Thursday. So, let's figure this out. That means the first day of Pesach, the very first Pesach, was Thursday. If the very first day of Pesach is Thursday, the first day of the Omer count, which is the second day of Pesach, is Friday. Okay? So, the first day of the counting of the Omer was Friday. Now, if you count 50 days from Friday, right? 49 days, which is 7 weeks, gets you to Thursday. Day 50 will be Friday. And yet, the Gemara says Hakol Modim that the Torah was given on Shabbos. So, we have a real problem. Number one, and Shavuos fails to be the day of Matan Torah under any metric that you use. Number one, the calendar date of the 6th of Sivan is not the correct date because the Aseres Hadibros were given on the 7th of Sivan. And number two, the Torah was not given on the 50th day of the Omer. The Torah was given on day 51. Given the fact that the Jewish people left Mitzrayim on a Thursday, day 51, and so Sefirah started on Friday. Day 50 would be Friday. Shabbos is day 51. So, this is a famous, famous, famous question of the Magen Avraham, the great commentator on the Shulchan Aruch, who asks the kasha, why do we celebrate Shavuos as "Zman Matan Torahseinu"? The Torah was given on the 7th of Sivan. And that was the 51st day of the Omer, based on the braysa that says we left Mitzrayim on the Thursday. Quite amazing. So, someone will fudge it. That's what they say. I guess that's not really a teretz, but they want to say, "Well, that's why Shavuos is called Zman. It's not called Yom Matan Torah, because we didn't get it on that day. It's Zman, you know, it's a it's in the range." Okay, but that's uh First of all, that's not a teretz at all, because Pesach we say Zman Cheirusenu, even though we left Mitzrayim on that particular day. So, let me give you the answer that Magen Avraham himself gives. The Magen Avraham uh again, this is based on a Gemara in Maseches Shabbos, which discusses the chronology of Matan Torah. And that is that when Hashem said to Bnei Yis- Hashem said to Moshe, "Command Bnei Yisrael in preparation for Matan Torah that husbands should separate from their wives to be in a state of purity without seminal emission. And they should separate today and tomorrow. And be ready for the third day." Moshe didn't quite communicate that command. Moshe said, "Prepare yourselves for 3 days, [snorts] after which I'll give you the Torah." Note, Hashem said to Moshe, "They should sanctify themselves today and tomorrow and be ready for the third day." Moshe said, "Prepare yourselves for 3 days." So, this is what Rebbe Yosi said. Rebbe Yosi says, "Really, the would have been given on Friday. Hashem said on Wednesday, separate Wednesday, Thursday I'll give the Torah on Friday. Moshe on his own volition added an extra day saying the Jews need more preparation and that's why the Torah was delayed from Friday to Shabbat. So says the Magain Avraham the reason why we celebrate Shavuot on the 6th of Sivan which is the 50th day of the Omer is not because the Torah was given on that day but that is the day that would have been the day of Matan Torah had Moshe Rabbeinu not added an extra day on his own. You see, Hashem's plan was separate Wednesday, Thursday and I'll give you the Torah on Friday. Moshe said separate Wednesday, Thursday, Friday and you'll get the Torah on Shabbat. So Friday would have been the day of Matan Torah. Friday would have been the 6th of Sivan. Friday would have been the 50th day of the Omer. But Moshe Rabbeinu was mosif and again we'll explain how how how is that possible. He was mosif yom echad midato. He added an extra day of his own volition and God agreed to it. And the Gemara actually says there are three things that Moshe did on his own without Hashem telling him and after the fact Hashem agreed. One was he delayed, that's a pretty big decision, he delayed Matan Torah by a whole day on his own. And Hashem agreed. Hashem could have disagreed, right? And given to Hashem agreed. Number two 40 days later when he smashes the Luchos, when he sees the Egel Hazahav and he smashes the Luchos because Klal Yisrael is not deserving. Hashem didn't tell him to do that. Moshe figured they don't deserve the Torah. Hashem agreed that was a good decision. Yashar koach sheshi barta. But that was Moshe's own decision. And the third decision might be also very controversial that we know that from the time of Matan Torah Moshe Rabbeinu remained celibate. He was never intimate with his wife again. Meaning the Jewish people were only separated for either two or three days. Moshe on his own separated permanently. If you remember in the parsha that we're going to read in two weeks, parshas Balak, this was the lashon hara that Miriam said about Moshe to Aaron her brother saying, "What type of tzaddik does he think he is? We're prophets and we don't separate from our spouses. Why is he separating from his spouse?" And Hakadosh Baruchu gave Miriam very strong mussar and Miriam became a metzora'at etc. Uh now, Hashem didn't tell him to do it. And what And number one, we don't we do not hold that up as an example to be followed either. But Hashem said after the fact that was the right decision because Moshe had to be on call for prophecy 24/7 and therefore he could not allow himself to be involved uh in what you might call the more sensual aspect of life. So this is called Moshe Rabbeinu mosif shelosha devarim midato. Three things out of his own volition. One is he delayed Matan Torah. Number two, he broke the luchos. And number three, he was poresh me ishto even after Matan Torah uh even though Hashem did not give him a specific command. And the Gemara shows that in each of these cases Hashem approved of what he did after the fact. So going back to Shavuos, right, the Magen Avraham's kasha is, how can we keep the holiday of Shavuos on the 6th of Sivan and on the 50th day of the Omer the Torah was given, the 10 Commandments were given on the 7th of Sivan, which was the 51st day of the Omer, because if they left Mitzrayim on the Thursday, that's going to be your calculation. And the answer of the Magen Avraham is, we do not celebrate Matan Torah on the day the Torah was given. We celebrate the Matan Torah on the day it would have been given based on Hakadosh Baruch Hu's plan, even though it was not actually given till the day later. So, don't tell your children, they might be traumatized, but according to the Magen Avraham's answer, what event happened on the holiday of Shavuos? Nothing happened on the holiday of Shavuos. It was the day before Matan Torah. Now, at least in Chutz La'aretz, they actually get it right. In Chutz La'aretz, Matan Torah was actually given on the second day of Shavuos. In fact, um Rabbi Menachem Azariah Mi Pano, who's a great, great Mekubal, who's called the Ramaz Mi Pano, an Italian Mekubal. By the way, he also happens to be very, very wealthy. He printed the Shulchan Aruch. He was a friend of Rabbi Yosef Caro. He printed the Shulchan Aruch and the Kesef Mishneh. But, the Ramaz Mi Pano was one of the great, great Mekubalim who brought Kabbalah from Eretz Yisrael to Europe. He's one of the big spreaders of Kabbalah. Ramaz Mi Pano says that the reason why Moshe Rabbeinu added a day is he wanted to legitimate in the Galut a second day of Shavuos by making it the day of Matan Torah. Uh the reason and he makes a very powerful argument because if you think about this, logically, the reason for two days of the Tov in Chutz La'aretz should not to Shavuos at all. Precisely because Shavuos is based on a 50-day Omer count. Meaning, unlike Pesach or Rosh Hashanah where you have calendrical doubts, calendrical doubts are not relevant for Shavuos. So, there ought not to be a second day at all. Uh the and the Rambam says the only reason why there's a second day of Shavuos in Chutz La'Aretz is the Chachamim didn't want to differentiate Shavuos from other holidays because of confusion. But my Rabb my Ramami [clears throat] Pano says Mosha Rabbeinu wanted to strengthen the notion of Yom Tov Sheini of Shavuos and he made that the day of Matan Torah. Okay? So, that's a Chutz La'Aretz benefit, so to speak. But Lema'aseh, we don't celebrate that day. It's rare. I got So, so this year it this year it happens to be a Shabbos, so we are still I think in Kedusha, but normally it would be a weekday. It would be a weekday. There would be there would be no particular celebration. Okay. So, this is the Magen Avraham. Again, a very fascinating Magen Avraham that uh Vov Sivan is the day the Torah would have been given had Mosha Rabbeinu not added a Yom Echad Mid'eita. So, now I want to discuss a bit of a commentary or elaboration on this Magen Avraham. And that is why should the hypothetical day be more significant than the actual day? Yeah, Hashem wanted to give the Torah that day. But he didn't. He gave the Torah the day after. So, when Hakadosh Baruch Hu is Kove'a, when Hakadosh Baruch Hu establishes what day you commemorate Matan Torah why should the hypothetical day that Hashem would have given the Torah be more significant than the day in which he actually gave the Torah? Right? One would assume that the actual is more significant than the theoretical. So, the explanation that's given is the following. There's a And I've mentioned this story more than once. The famous Gemara in Bava Metzia about the oven of Akhnai, the oven of Akhnai. It's one of the most famous stories in Shas. There's so many things to learn from the story. Uh this involved an earthenware oven that was portable, meaning it was cut into hoops like hula hoops that you could carry, put on your arm and carry. And then when you wanted to reassemble it, you would put mud between the hoops. And when the mud dried, you had this oven. And then when it was time to move on, you just shook away, rinsed away the mud, and you had these hoops that were relatively lightweight. So, it's called tanur shel Akhnai literally means an oven that resembles a snake because the hula hoops resembled a coiled snake. So, there's a machlokes. It's a technical machlokes. Um normally, earthenware materials can become tamei if they're in contact with a dead body or a dead animal, but only through their internal airspace, meaning uh they don't become tamei from the outside, they become tamei from the inside. Okay, that's not relevant to this controversy. But the only thing that becomes tamei is a kli that is not a broken or smashed vessel. Once something is broken or smashed, it's not capable of becoming tamei. And the machlokes is, are the hula hoops, when you dismantle the oven, are the hula hoops considered to be a broken vessel and they're not susceptible to tumah? Or this is the way you carry it, so it's not really broken, and it is susceptible to tumah. It's a machlokes again, it's a technical machlokes. And the Gemara says, a majority of the sages, a majority [snorts] of the chachamim said, it is not a broken vessel and it is mekabel tumah." Rebbi Eliezer ben Hurkanus said, "It is tahor. It is not mekabel tumah." Right? This is a machlokes. This is the type of machlokes that Chazal had every day. Right? Arguing over this. And the Gemara gives us a whole story that Rebbi Eliezer brought many, many proofs to his position. And the Hahamim refused to accept his proofs. He was a minority of one. So, at the end, after they rejected all of his proofs, he started calling on Hashem to do miracles to show that he is correct. Meaning, "Listen to me because Hashem is on my side." And he said three miracles. "If the halacha is like me, let this carob tree, charuv, [snorts] uproot itself and fly away." And the tree uprooted itself and flew away. And the Hahamim said, "We don't listen to trees." Then he said, "If the halacha is like me, let the river change its course. The river should move in an opposite direction." And the river moved in an opposite direction. And once again, the Hahamim said, "We don't listen to rivers." And then he said, "If the halacha is like me, let the walls of this Beit Midrash collapse inward." And the walls began to collapse inward. And Rebbi Yehoshua said to the walls, "Don't you dare You know, go back." And the Gemara says, "The walls didn't know what to do. Rebbi Eliezer ordered the walls to collapse. Rebbi Yehoshua ordered the walls to come up straight. And the walls didn't know what to do, so they remained slanting." Explaining, "In this Beit Midrash, it's like the Leaning Tower of Pisa. Uh it remains slanting ad hayom hazeh." Okay, so that's a good excuse if you have an architectural defect. Oh, well, what can you do? This was the maaseh. Once again, as you can guess, the Chachamim said, "We don't listen to buildings. We don't listen to walls." So, finally, he made explicit what was implicit, and he said, "If the halacha is like me, let there be a voice from shamayim." Hashem should say beferesh, "Halacha k'Rabbi Eliezer." And a voice from shamayim declared, "The halacha is like Rabbi Eliezer." And what the Chachamim said was, "We don't listen to you, either. Because you, in your own Torah, Hashem, Hakadosh Baruchu, in his own Torah, said, 'Lo bashamayim hi.' The Torah is not in heaven. The Torah was given to the Chachamim to interpret and to apply. And you, Hashem, are bound by your own Torah. And therefore, we do not listen to heavenly voices or prophets who tell us what the halacha is. We have to use analogy, precedents, logic. We don't rely on heavenly voices. Now, this is quite astounding. Uh the Gemara recounts that years later, someone met Eliyahu Hanavi and said to Eliyahu Hanavi, "What was Hashem's response when they gave that chutzpadik answer? We don't listen to you, God. You're not in charge anymore." And Eliyahu Hanavi says, "Hakadosh Baruchu laughed." And he said, "Nitzchuni banai." "My children have been victorious over me. I will stay out of their fight." I'll come back and explain this. Quite amazing. I will say just even at this point that one fascinating point you see is which is often said in American law, "No one is above the law." No one is above the law, right? You know, under English common law, there was a doctrine which still exists in even in the United States in some context called sovereign immunity. You can't sue the government without its consent because theoretically the government is above the law, the monarch is above the law. Well, from a story like this, you see nobody is above the law because none other than Hakadosh Baruch Hu himself is bound by the laws of the Torah. God is not above the law. And if God is not above the law, certainly there is no human entity that can possibly be above the law. Again, the whole theory of sovereign immunity was predicated on the divine rights of kings. I mean, that was the predicate of sovereign immunity, which presupposes that God is above the law. But if God is not above the law, then the whole edifice fails. That's a preliminary point just to keep in mind. Okay. Now, the Gemara then goes on. The story has a bit of a sad ending, which is not really relevant to Shavuot, but I'll just finish the story. And that is Rabbi Eliezer refused to relent because he had all these miracles on his side and he had Hashem on his side. The Chachamim, led by Rabban Gamliel, the head of the Sanhedrin, excommunicated him. Now, that's a tragic thing. Rabbi Eliezer was one of the Gedolei Hador, maybe the Gadol Hador. And he was not allowed to teach Torah. And nobody could even stand within four amos of him. He was shunned. And he was sick and he was in bed, and Rabbi Akiva was chosen to give him the news that he has been excommunicated. So, he walks into the sick room, the bedroom, and he stands at a distance. And Rabbi Eliezer looks up and says, "What is wrong, my son? Why are you standing far from me?" And Rabbi Akiva said, in as diplomatic a way as he could, "It appears that your colleagues have separated themselves from you." He would He didn't say, "You're excommunicated." They have separated. So, Rabbi Eliezer started sobbing. Started weeping. He said, "He is like a safer Torah that's totally rolled up. There's so much knowledge, so much Torah, so much wisdom. And now he cannot give it anymore. He cannot share it anymore." He stopped. He wept. And the Gemara says a fascinating story that Rabban Gamliel, who was the head of the Sanhedrin that excommunicated him, was actually married I'm sorry, Rabbi Eliezer was married to Rabban Gamliel's sister. Right? So, Rabban Gamliel excommunicated Rabbi Eliezer. His sister was Rabbi Eliezer's wife. So, the Gemara says an interesting story that Rabbi Eliezer's wife >> [snorts] >> never let her husband say the Tachanun prayer after the Amidah. She would always interrupt him. Because Tachanun is when you pour your private anguish to God. And she was afraid that if Rabbi Eliezer would express the depth of his suffering to Hashem in Tachanun, Hashem would punish Rabban Gamliel for causing that pain. So, she always interrupted him in Tachanun. But, one time she made a mistake. She thought a certain day was Rosh Chodesh where you don't say Tachanun. So she wasn't watching, and it was not Rosh Chodesh. And she comes in, and she sees her husband saying Tachanun. She said to her husband, "You have killed my brother today." And that very moment, that very moment, an announcement came that Rabban Gamaliel the Nasi died. Now, again, I absolutely do not accept the idea that Rabbi Eliezer prayed that Rabban Gamaliel should die. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I He was simply expressing his pain. But when a great tzaddik expresses pain, Hakadosh Baruchu brings a middas hadin on those who caused that pain. And what's tragic is, even if Rabban Gamaliel was correct, that this is an interesting idea that's hard to understand sometimes. Divine wrath is not always a function of punishment for something wrong. There are consequences to causing pain in the world, even when it had to be done. In many ways, Rabban Gamaliel had to do what he did. Because this was too dangerous to allow people to go off in their own paths. He had to do it. But it's like, you know, you you jump into a fire to rescue a baby. You have to do it. But that doesn't immunize you from being in contact with fire. It's just a consequence. And that's kind of what's going on here. Okay. But now, let's go back to the basic idea that the Torah is not in heaven. That God himself has no say in the earth interpretation of halakha. In some ways, this idea is incomprehensible. Let's take a trivial example. Let's imagine that you have kids in a family and they're trying to figure out what would be a suitable birthday present for their father. So, one kid says a tie, another kid says a safer, another says uh whatever it is a uh a uh CD, new computer, new car, depending on the money that they have. Whatever it is that they're discussing. And dad walks by and dad overhears the conversation. And dad says, "You know, it's really so nice that you're discussing what I would like for my birthday, but let me tell you what I would really like." And they say to dad, "Dad, please stay out of this. This conversation has nothing to do with you. We are deciding what you'd like for your birthday. What you say you like for your birthday is not no geah." That's crazy. The whole issue under debate is what would our father like? So, we can say under those circumstances, what our father tells us he likes is not important? No. What is halakha? Halakha, when you have any machlokes in halakha, ultimately, what you're trying to figure out is what does Hashem wants me to do in a given circumstance. Now, granted, if I don't have the direct voice of God, which we don't have, so I have to look at sources, I look at psukim, I look at drashot, I look at precedent, I look at analogy, but all of that is an attempt to reconstruct probabilistically what the Almighty wants me to do. So, if Hashem tells me what he wants me to do, instead of relegating that to something inferior, that should be the best source of halakha. Now, you might answer pragmatically, "Well, maybe we don't listen to heavenly voices because they might be hallucinations, they might might be and that indeed is a is a legitimate concern, but that's not much more from the Gemara. The implication of the Gemara is not that we ignore heavenly voices because they're unreliable. Although that is true. But the implication of the Gemara is even if it's 100% reliable, it is halakhically irrelevant. And the question becomes why should that be so? Why should that be so? So Rabbeinu Nissim, the Ran, the Ran is of course one of the great great commentators on the Rif and on the Gemara. Uh Rabbeinu Nissim lived in Barcelona uh and uh in addition in the in the 14th century, the 1300s, >> [snorts] >> in addition to his great commentaries on the Rif and on and the Shas, which are learned in all yeshivas, he also wrote a very very fascinating philosophical book of Drashot called the Drashot of the Ran. ArtScroll even translated it into English and actually is one of the classics. It's the same Ran. People don't realize it is the same Ran who writes all of the pull them on Gemara, wrote the Drashot Ran, which addresses many interesting philosophical questions. And this is what the Ran says. The Ran says halakhic truth is not the same as what we call mathematical truth. Mathematical truth, at least on a basic level, advanced mathematics may not even have that, but in mathematics we generally assume that a given problem only has one answer. So 1 1 1 is 2. If you say 3, it's not a question that you're entitled to your opinion. You're simply wrong. Or how do they say it? Everyone's entitled to their opinion, but not everybody's entitled to their facts. Facts don't lie. Facts are unchangeable. So, in the context of mathematics, or at least arithmetic, there actually are advanced branches of mathematics where there's indeterminacy, but let's take arithmetic. There's either a right or a wrong, and that's it. In Halakha, you actually see not that way. For example, the Gemara discusses we have a All these machlokesem between Beis Hillel and Beis Shammai. Right? Scores of machlokesem. One says kosher, one says treif. One says mutar, one says assur. One says chayev, you're obligated to pay. One says you're patur to pay. Now, it's true we pasken like Beis Hillel. That's our Halakhic rule. But objectively, which one is right and which one is wrong? The Gemara says explicitly in the machlokes Beis Shammai and Beis Hillel, eilu v'eilu divrei Elokim chaim. These and those, they're both right. They are both right. In life, I got to make a choice. So, I choose one, but they're both objectively right. They are both true in God's eyes. Both of those pathways are considered to be equally legitimate. Now, the Ran says, "How can two paths be equally legitimate if they are opposites? >> [snorts] >> One says kosher, one says treif. One says pure, one says impure. How can they both be right? How can contradictions have equal validity as truth. So, the route says, "Halachic truth is not defined by objective reality. It is defined by the combination of the process that Hashem set up for Halachic resolution. Hashem said, "When you have uncertainties, there's a process, the 13 principles of interpretation, or analogy, or debate. And Hashem says, "As long as you follow the process that I lay down, and as long as you're qualified to engage in the process, I realize that I'm obscuring the answer to two fundamental questions. Exactly what is the process, and who is entitled to engage in it? But putting those pretty important questions aside, Hashem says, "I will accept the conclusions that have been arrived at." And then an analogy would be, let's take a complicated In fact, sometimes this is done even in mathematics, uh or physics, let's say. There's a very, very complicated problem, and it may take pages and pages and pages and pages, and you messed up at the very end because you didn't add two digits. >> [snorts] >> But your mastery of the material is you followed the process exactly. So, if the professor is not too mean of a person, there is a concept of full credit for process. That's how it works here. It is true that Hashem has an answer for every question. But Hashem didn't give us the answer to every question. This is also a big mistake. People say, "Oh, the oral law is given from Hashem, so every word of the Talmud was handed down from Hashem to Mosha. Now, that's a well-meaning religious approach, [snorts] but it's actually very foolish approach. It makes no sense. You open up a page of Gemara, people are talking to each other. Abaye says something, Rava asks a question. Are they reading from a script? First of all, it was oral. There was there would there wouldn't be a script, but are they, you know, having an earphone like these newscaster, some earphone in their ear? Hey, Abaye, on Monday of this date you are supposed to say this, and [snorts] Rava, you're supposed to say this. That's not how it works. It's very, very clear that what Abaye and Rava were doing in their debates is exactly the same thing that we're doing in our debates, although they were infinitely higher than us in their madrega. So, the oral law, so to speak, is largely a creation of human reasoning, human analysis, and I often put it this way, the oral law is not the word of God, but it's the will of God. It is Hashem's will that halakha be determined by the human effort of the hakhamim in taking the precedents, taking the principles, and applying them to the ever-changing panorama of human life. So, even if they get it wrong in the sense that objectively it was not God's answer, God says, "That's fine for me. You followed the process, I will validate it." See, this is this is an important corrective because, as I say, the idea that every word of the Gamara was handed down for 3,000 years is just ridiculous. I mean I mean any page of Gamara you can see this is a human interaction. Yeah, of course of course they were a million times greater than us. That's not the issue. I mean I mean no one is denying the absolute greatness and holiness of these people, but they were not just mechanically transmitting things they heard. They were actively involved. And that explains why both positions can be correct and that also explains why Hashem's voice is not irrelevant. Hashem and may be telling us objectively what his answer is, but Hashem is also saying, "But what determines your halacha is not my answer, it is your answer. So even when you're wrong my will is to go with the Hachamin. Now at the end of the day you might ask well, why would God create such a crazy system? Why doesn't Hashem just tell us what the laws are? Instead of saying, "I'm giving you raw materials and I'm leaving it to you and maybe you'll get it right, maybe you'll get it wrong, but we'll go with you." Hashem could have simply given us all the laws. And even if you're going to say, "Well, that's not possible because at Matan Torah there were a lot of I mean what are you going to say? Um we have debates about electricity. Right? We have debates about surrogate mothering. We have debates about nuclear war. We have debates about genetic engineering. That couldn't have been given at Matan Torah. We wouldn't have understood it. Well, okay, but Hashem could have given envelopes saying, "Not to open before 57 or 75 or 5786." And then we would see, "Oh, baruch Hashem." Life would be a lot easier. We have an exact answer from Hashem about genetic engineering and surrogacy. But Hashem didn't do it that way. He gave us principles. And then we have to grapple even today with how to apply those principles. Okay, Torah Shebaal Peh is not just about mechanically transmitting information. It is dynamic. It is creative. It is interactive. It is a partnership between the Chachmei HaTorah, Klal Yisrael, and HaKadosh Baruch Hu. Now, why did Hashem do it that way? So, let me give you a a very homey example. Let's imagine that you have a 4-year-old and you want to make a cake or get a cake, let's say for her birthday. There are two ways you can do it. You can go to a bakery and buy a great cake. Perfect. Or, if you're a little more involved, you could make the cake when your daughter is asleep or in gun. Be a beautiful cake. But the highest way you show your love >> [clears throat] >> for your child is not to buy them a bakery cake. Yeah, I don't want I mean, I I listen, when I was when we were raising a child, we we would tend to buy bakery cakes. I don't I'm not I'm not putting anybody down. But the highest madrega of showing love is when you make the cake with the child and involve them in the process. Now, in truth, in terms of the quality of the cake, it's almost certain that the cake you're going to make with a 4-year-old is actually going to be an inferior cake. You could have done it better yourself. And the bakery could do it probably better than you, unless you're a professional baker. You make your cake with the 4-year-old, there might be no egg shells in the batter. Uh there might be cocoa on the floor. Uh it might be under-baked at one end and and over-burnt at the other end. You could do a much better job yourself or go to the bakery. But the love is the sharing, the collaboration, the partnership. You do something together. This is all based on the run with some elaboration. So, what the run says is the following. Hashem didn't want to give us a Torah on a silver platter where we're given all the rules ahead of time. Hashem wanted us to be his partners in the creation of Halakhic truth. So, he basically said, "I'll give you the raw materials. I'll give you the foundations. And you got to figure out how to apply it." And the same way that the cake that you make with your 4-year-old is going to be messy and maybe not as perfect as you could have made yourself, yeah, there's going to be mistakes, ambiguities, errors, machlokes in a human Torah. But God says, "I want that relationship. And not only that, but if you come up with a certain conclusion, I will defer to your conclusion even if it's not the same as my conclusion. I like your conclusion better." Actually, this is also in the Ketzos HaChoshen. The Ketzos HaChoshen is one of the famous famous classic Yeshiva Sha'arim on Mamonus, civil law. And he actually develops this quite beautifully as well in his Hakdamah. The notion of the dynamism In fact, um one can give a whole course. They ought to do this in Yeshivas. You know, there are great great famous that everybody uses. But people often don't read the introductions. But there are a lot of times the introduction is not of any particular significance, but there are some in which the drama is an extraordinary essay in understanding. Again, it's actually a that is very very worthwhile. What you read. Also the of has different introductions about psychology. It's also very worthwhile to look at to see the methodology of the person who has the post post of the door. And that so it is and together they bring an interesting in us. The in says that the is not like the of the of the dam. By a of the dam if I sell you a precious heirloom. Let's assume I have a precious heirloom that I love. But I have to sell it. So generally the seller is sad and the buyer is happy. But with the Torah gave us the Torah and is rejoicing. Which means the is comparing giving the Torah with an owner parting with an heirloom. That's what it's saying. But what is the comparison? didn't give anything up. commanded us to keep the Torah. Why are we comparing Torah to the giving away or the sale of an heirloom? The answer is very low shamayami means exactly that. Hashem abdicated his control over the Torah by saying that the Hachamim's interpretation is going to be the ultimate standard. So, yeah. Hashem gave it up out of love for Am Yisrael. And that's why it is called Matan Torah, the giving away of the Torah. Matan Torah. You see? Uh okay. So, now let's go back a little bit. If we understand that Matan Torah doesn't just mean God commanded us to do mitzvahs, but it means that God entrusted Klal Yisrael with the koach >> [snorts] >> to determine halacha even if they get the answer wrong. When is the first time that that happened? It happened on the 6th of Sivan. That was a Friday. That was the day that Hashem intended to give the Torah. But Moshiach Rabbeinu misunderstood. The Gemara actually explains I didn't I should have said this before. It's not that Moshiach understood God's words and just violated them. He never would have done that. But [snorts] the Gemara says Moshiach misunderstood. Uh he thought you need three full days when all you need is two days and the like. So, he misunderstood the divine command. And yet what did Hashem respond? Well, if that's how you understand my words, that becomes my words. So, in other words, Matan Torah was not an act of commission. It was an omission by Hashem not giving the Torah on the day that Hashem wanted to give the Torah in deference >> [snorts] >> to the mistaken interpretation of Moshe Rabbeinu. Hashem is demonstrating conclusively the gift of Torah to Am Yisrael. And therefore we celebrate Shavuot not on the day of the 10 Commandments. We celebrate Shavuot on the day that God deferred to Moshe Rabbeinu's misunderstanding thereby exemplifying the principle of lo bashamayim Um it's very very remarkable. Now again there are some major questions. Obviously this does not mean that whatever interpretation anybody comes up with is going to be halakha. What has to be qualified? Who's qualified? Interesting question. Maybe only the Sanhedrin can really be zocheh to this. We don't have a Sanhedrin. >> [snorts] >> And what exactly are legitimate halakhic methodologies and what are not? The These are really good They're really really good questions. But all I'm saying is without fully addressing those things within the parameters of those limitations Hashem gave Klal Yisrael shlita control over the implementation of halakhic truth. Hashem says I would rather bake a messy cake with you than give you a perfect cake that I made in my divine kitchen. Right? I think I think it's I hope it's it doesn't sound too irreverent. I think it's safe to say that uh Gemara is a messy book. It is messy because it is filled with ambiguities, contradictions, debates going back and forth. You don't really get definite answers direct in a direct way. At most, you can squeeze it out in indirect ways. If you were trying to devise a way of communicating rules, >> [snorts] >> there are many, many simpler ways of doing it. And would have made life much easier. We would have a the Kitzur Shulchan Aruch instead of a Talmud Bavli. But Hashem says no. I want your engagement. I want your involvement. I want your participation in creating how my will will be implemented in this earthly existence. That is the meaning of Lo Bashamayim Hi. That is the meaning of Eilu v'Eilu Divrei Elokim Chaim. That is the meaning of Matan Torah. And that is why we celebrate Shavuot, not on the day of the Torah was given, but on the day that the Torah was not given. So, b'ezrat Hashem, I want to wish everybody a a Chag Sameach. And a tremendous Matan Torah. May we be zocheh to be mekabel Hashem's Torah with love and enthusiasm. And as I said at the very beginning, uh one of the great requirements for Matan Torah was that we be K'ish Echad U'veleiv Echad. And uh that's something we obviously need to very much focus on, that we should have unity, togetherness, love, and and and the like. And b'ezrat Hashem, to be zocheh to Matan Torah and to uh ultimately Geulah and Mashiach. Uh one little final point. You'll notice we call uh Shavuot the day of Matan Torah, the day of giving the Torah. We don't call it the day of accepting the Torah. And the reason is Matan Torah is either an event or even an omission of an event. But Kabbalat Torah is something you do every day. There's not a day that you accept the Torah. You accept the Torah every single day. Call Yom ViYom. Every single day. It must be as if it's the first day that you're accepting Hashem's Torah. With that enthusiasm and with that passion. So, may we be so kind not only to Matan Torah, but also to Kabbalat Torah. So, thank you. >> [music] [singing] [music] >> Yesh Am Yisrael Od Lo >> [music] >> Aleinu.