Wednesday, August 23, 2023

Misconceptions about marriage - asceticism is prime value

 Chazon Ish (Igros Kodesh #10): Question: Concerning a person who suffers from severe depression who has tried to commit suicide. Answer. Perhaps it would be helpful to teach his wife to speak to him words of endearment and affection. Perhaps he is one who takes a very ascetic approach to marital relations. In truth that is what he needs for a cure as the Yaavetz states in his Siddur, "There is someone I know who fell into a severe depression and it became apparent from what he said that it is the result of studying Musar books. Because of these pietistic studies he only has marital relations once a week and that only happens after he makes many religious preparations and he only does it exactly at midnight...I told him that he should increase the frequency of marital relations even having them 3 or 4 times a week – or more. And he should be involved in showing affection and hugging and kissing..." Thank G-d he recovered completely from his depression and thus we see clear proof that the advice of the Yaavetz is very helpful....

 Rav Yaakov Emden (Siddur):[[ "There is someone I know who fell into a severe depression and it became apparent from what he said that it is the result of studying Musar books. Because of these pietistic studies he only has marital relations once a week and that only happens after he makes many religious preparations and he only does it exactly at midnight...I told him that he should increase the frequency of marital relations even having them 3 or 4 times a week – or more. And he should be involved in showing affection and hugging and kissing... Thank G-d he recovered completely from his depression."

Steipler (Igros Kodesh #1): 1) While it is true that asceticism in dealing with the lusts of this world is an important thing [assuming that it is done for the sake of heaven to give pleasure to G-d and not just to be more developed in spirituality] but that is only if it is done after he has already fulfilled is Torah obligations. However if by being ascetic he nullifies the slightest of his Torah obligations then his deeds are credited to the Sitra Acher [evil] - G-d forbid and he doesn’t advance in true spirituality. So even though he views himself as becoming a more elevated being by his asceticism he in fact is burying himself in the grave of pride by considering himself a very spiritual person when in fact his spirituality is seriously defective. And this frequently manifests itself as degradation in that it leads him to committing an actual Torah prohibition and he is not able to restrain himself at all as we know from a actual case where this happened – G-d should preserve us!Conjugal rights of the wife is a Torah commandment just as serious as eating matzo. And even ignoring it when she is pregnant [when the wife has not truly excused him wholeheartedly from his obligations] makes into a complete sinner. And sins like this which are between two people are not atoned for even by Yom Kippur. He is like a robber or mugger who steals from his wife what is owed to her. This is comparable to killing his wife since it is known that the prime hope of a woman in this world is that she have a husband who loves her. Therefore when she see that he doesn’t love her, it is almost life threatening (pikuach nefesh) because of the great upset and anguish he causes her by making her like a widow while her husband is still alive.The conjugal obligations of workers is twice a week, for a talmid chachom it is once a week. The Achronim write that in modern times we do not have people who are called talmidei chachomim according to Chazal [that is because in modern times we are not properly careful about not nullifying ourselves from Torah study and there are other reasons], nevertheless the reason why a talmid chachom only has an obligation once a week is because the Torah weakens his physical strength. That reason would therefore apply also a talmid chachom in modern times. However a talmid chachom who knows that he has the strength retains the obligation of having intercourse twice a week. This is how it is explained in the Biur Halacha (O.C. 240). This was the practice of the Chasam Sofer as is known – see the Mishna Berura there. It is also the practise of most talmidei chachomim in modern times ]before they reach old age ] It is obvious that she married with the understanding that her husband would follow the accepted practise. And furthermore the husband is obligated by the kesuba to conduct himself according to normative practise [for those similar to himself]. It is obvious that if he wants to exempt himself by have intercourse only once a week and not twice that this is close to creating a situation of a genuine uncertainty regarding a Torah obligation. Aside from that there is a separate obligation for the husband when he is aware that she desires to have relations – even if she indicates this by very slight hints as is explained in Shulchan Aruch (O.C. 240:1 which is from Pesachim 72 and in a number of other places.2) The details of sexual intercourse of the mitzva of conjugal obligations are explained in the Siddur of Rav Yaakov Emden in the section of the laws of Shabbos night. It should be studied carefully because these are actual halachic obligations. Because according to the Torah it is prohibited to have intercourse in circumstances where the woman is not interested and therefore it is necessary to get her interested with intimate activities such as hugging and kissing until she is sexual aroused and desires intercourse. Because if this is not done first – it is like placing her before a lion who mauls and eats as is explained in Pesachim (49). [It is a terrible sin to deprive her of her sexual rights even if he is doing it for the sake of piety and asceticism. Taking what belongs to his wife can not be the basis of piety by theft and treating her as a slave]. Furthermore to have sexual intercourse against her will results in having children who are sinners and rejecters of Torah – they are call bnei anusa (children of rape).A husband who grabs and has intercourse immediately without preliminary intimacy and then separates immediate after ejaculation and leaves her, might think that he is acting like a highly spiritual angel. But in actual truth he has not lowered his lust at all even though he definitely has placated his desires for the time being sine he has in fact obtained full pleasure from this intercourse. In contrast his wife felt no pleasures at all from this abrupt sexual act. In fact she has been hurt and shamed and the tears she sheds in private will not go unanswered. That is because our Sages(Bava Metzia) tell us that the Gate of Tears has not been closed. They say that a man should be very careful with his wife honor because she readily cries. There is no question that such a brutal act arouses Divine judgment against him. Furthermore he does not merit to have Divine help either in spiritual or material issues. And this that he mistakenly thinks he becomes a highly spiritual person by trying to be insensitive to his wife in sexual matters – this is a worthless fantasy and a lie. That is because from sins and transgression, one becomes blemished and spiritually impure – not elevated.And this is stated in Shulchan Aruch (240:8) that it is done only after his wife is placated and is interested in doing it. Because otherwise it is prohibited to have intercourse without her consent as is explicit there in the Shulchan Aruch (240:3) and as is explained in the Siddur of Rav Yaakov Emden and this is actual Torah halacha. [In particular what is written in Shulchan Aruch (68). We see in Orchos Chaim in the name of Neziros Shimshon who writes that according to the Zohar and the writings of the Arizal – the halacha is in accord with the first explanation [that one should not have intent for the sake of pleasure but only for the sake of doing a mitzva]. However according to the second and third explanations [that they should be dressed during intercourse and that it should be done quickly] the opposite is true and there is a prohibition in doing this according to kabbalah. Nevertheless even according to the view of the Shulchan Aruch this is only if done with the full agreement of the wife. And thus is my understanding.3) One who is intimate with his wife with hugging and other things for the sake of Heaven because he wants to have mercy on her that she shouldn’t be pained and feel abandoned – this will not cause the slightest weakening of his fear of Heaven or succumbing to lust. The opposite is true – it will bring him to holiness (kedusha) and he will be fulfilling the Torah command of imitating G-d. Just as He is merciful so to you should be merciful. Besides that hugging and kissing or any other act of intimacy is an inherent part of the mitzva of onah (conjugal duties) as is explained by the poskim regarding Shulchan Aruch (Y.D. 184:10) concerning the obligation when a man goes on a trip just before the time for his wife’s menstrual period. 4) While it is true that many talmidei chachomm conduct themselves in an ascetic manner in a number of intimate things – but that is only with the complete agreement of his wife and with her forgiveness with a full heart. And this agreement comes in most cases after it is explained to her that in truth her husband loves her and it is only for the sake of heaven that he is restraining himself. Or alternatively she married someone who is known as a tzadik whose reputation compensates for her loss of intimacy with him. But G-d forbid that the husband should conduct himself as an ascetic when it causes pain to his wife who is dependent upon him and does not forgive him whole heartedly concerning that which he is obligated to do for her.5) Our Sages (Yevamos 62b) say, One who loves his wife as himself and honors her more than himself…is described by the verse "You should know that you will have peace with your wife…." It is important to note that our Sages are not saying to love one's wife with the natural love that man is attracted to a woman but rather to love her with the love that friends have for each other - as someone he knows and has a covenant with him and that they are partners in many things and each one helps and receives help from the other. In addition the love he feels for her should also come from gratitude. He needs to have the clear image in his mind that if he had not gotten a wife and would have remained alone and isolated - how much suffering and pain he would have from this. But now that he has a wife his life is in place and functioning. The significance of gratitude is immeasurably important. In fact our Sages state in the Mishna Rabbi Eliezer (Chapter 7) that all those who lack gratitude to their fellow men will eventually lack gratitude towards G-d. If you look there you will see how extremely stringent they are in this matter. This type of love is what our Sages say a man is obligated to have towards his wife. And again this love does not come from the lust a man has for a woman at all but from one of the good attributes which he is obligated to have. He needs to have this type of love and feeling towards her when he strives to cause her rejoicing at the time of intercourse and well as before and afterwards. Such a relationship is not disgusting – chas v'shalom – but rather it is a mitzva. In fact he should conduct himself in this manner even if he were not obligated by the Torah and surely now that the Torah does obligated it - as we mentioned before.

Rav Wolbe's advice to chasanim

  Rav Wolbe (Advice to chasanim #1): Please tell me my dear chasan  what is your view as to the joint basis that you want to build your marriage?. The chasan replied, “ The answer is obvious we should have  love for each other!” I assumed you would give me such an answer so now permit me to ask a harsh question and excuse me for my contrary view which might upset you but afterall the goal of this conversation is for the purpose of proper prepation for  the well being of your home. Therefore it is best thar you get used to being realistic in dealing with your wife. In many matters the reality of married life is totally contrary to that which the typical yeshiva student imagines it to be. And when you determine what the reality is you will see it is not according to your preconceptions. I have another  question for you. It is very likely that after you get married you will discover that you and your wife disagree on a number of issues.  It will become obvious that even in some matters there is absolutely no common understanding. Therefore relying on common understanding is a very poor foundation for the relationship. And as far as love is concerned . We know that only unconditional love lasts. Any conditional love can readily turn to actual hatred. Consequently it is not possible to be secure with conditional love and therefore it is not a strong foundation for your home. Furthermore concerning love, I don’t mean that which the masses call love which the Chazon Ish famously stated “that which is commonly called love we call “kares!” A Ben Torah who clings strongly to the values expressed by the Igros Kodesh which is attributed to the Ramban knows how great is the obligation to build a relationship of love and mutuality between himself and his wife.  It is correct nevertheless that if love alone is the foundation to the relationship – we are talking about a long term relationship-  day after day year after year until 120. In different circumstances and conditions – and there is no home that does have periodic crises - and then it is very likely that the love will turn to hatred. Even though I hope that will prove to be transient But still it can not be the reliable foundation of the relationship. You frighten me!  I hope that with G-d’s help matters will not degenerate.. I am not trying to scare you but to merely to assure you by showing you a stronger foundation yo your home than what you were thinking . it is “It is good for a man to assume responsibility when he is young. That is the responsibility (yoke) of a wife (Koheles Rabbah 3:24). The idea of responsibilty – not love - -is the best foundation. Meaning you need to accept the responsibility for the well being of your wife in all circumstances, at all times and never neglect it.

The Obligation to Speak and to Act based on an address by RABBI MOSHE FEINSTEIN at the 56th National Convention of Agudath Israel of America.

SHAMMAI SAID: "Say little and do much" (Avos 1: 15). In his commentary on this Mishna, the Rambam says, "The wicked speak much but do not even a little -like Ephron, who spoke of accommodating Avrohom to the fullest when he had sought to purchase a burial plot for Sarah, but in deed deducted not one cent from the top price for her field." Studying this commentary, a question arises: Why did the Rambam not confine himself to illustrating those which exemplify Shammai's ruling instead of citing an extreme exception?-or, instead, list the many gradations that fill the spectrum between Avrohom at one .extreme and Ephron at the other? By only citing the example of Ephron, the Rambam would seem to imply that Ephron was exceptional as a man who fell short of his promises, while people generally are inclined to live up to Shammai's dictum. Yet this is far from the way things are. It seems, therefore, that the Rambam was apparently concerned with under-scoring a common human failing: People, of course, respond to praise; and since so much attention and acclaim are heaped upon those who promise to do things, the result of this abundance of praise is that people are motivated to speak even more expansively. Action is postponed, often indefinitely-never to be embarked upon. Whenever one responds to the urge to "speak up" and demonstrate verbally what one is capable of doing, he always runs the risk that he will remain with the spoken word, and advance no further. Within every enthusiastic talker is an incipient Ephron. In citing the Ephron example, the Rambam highlights this all-too-common hazard. RESTRAINT IN SPEECH can be achieved by concentrating on what is required to be done for .fulfilling the needs of the hour. As an example, take note of . Rivka's response to Eliezer, the servant of Avrohom, when he was dispatched to find a suitable wife for Yitzchok. The crucial part of her response was that beyond drawing water for Eliezer, in keeping with his request, she also offered on her own to water the camels, as well. But there was an additional aspect of her response that was not part of Eliezer's spoken condition for Yitzchok's wife-a detail he later excluded from his report to Rivka's family: He had stipulated that the girl suitable for Avrohom's family must be so concerned for the welfare of others that she. reply to the request for water for himself with the assurance that she'll supply both the man and his animals with water. In the actual incident, Rivka first answered in the affirmative to Eliezer's personal request and filled her bucket with water on his behalf. Only after he drank did she inform him," and I will also draw water for your cam~ls." She kept announcements of her good in-tentions to the minimum, and postponed them to the last pertinent moment-in stark contrast to the conduct of Ephron, recorded in the previous passages in the Torah. She exemplified "speaking sparingly and acting expansively" to the fullest, in such an extreme way that Eliezer omitted this detail from his report to her family because such guarded speech was beyond their understanding. IF, AS DEMONSTRATED, there is an inherent hazard in talk, why does Shammai only admonish against speaking excessively? He should rather call for eliminating all words of promise to the effect of: "Say nothing, concentrate on action." Talk, however, cannot be eliminated, for indeed there are times when there is a need for articulating one's good intentions in advance. On one hand, the performance of some mitzvos requires the spoken word to accompany the deed, or else the actions are ineffective. When one contributes tzeddakah on behalf of a sick person, or fasts on his behalf, giving the money or refraining from eating in themselves are insufficient. In both cases, the donor must say," l am donating this ... " or" ... fasting so as to provide so-and-so with merit to recover from his illnes." Morover, a person must declare his intentions of fasting on the eve of his fast. This declaration is an integral part of the preparation required to endow the day of abstenance from eating with the status of a special day of fasting and introspection. Similarly, when a person intends to bring a korban (a sacrificial offering he must declare "This is to be a korban" in advance. Without this statement, the offering is a case of bringing chulin le'azora-the act of· bringing an un-consecrated animal into the Temple, which is strictly prohibited, rather than the elevating act it was meant to be. THESE CASES UNDERSCORE a general need to speak up in advance of em-barking on any worthwhile action, to give it a special status. In this way, there is a need to declare an action as a mitzva as much more than a ritual requirement in specific isolated cases. It is essential to the performance of every mitzva, as will be explained. The potency of a few well-chosen words is exemplified by the Viduy Ma'asros -a periodic declaration that was required when the Jewish People lived in Eretz Yisroel, and the various required gifts and tithes were set aside for eventual dis-position. Every three years, these gifts were to be completely distributed and the owner said a "Viduy Ma'asros"-a declaration that "I have removed all that is sacred from my home ... I gave it to the Leviite and to the impoverished ... I have done all that You have commanded me." The term viduy is usually associated with a confessional, such as the "Osham-nu, bogadnu, gozalnu ... we sinned, we rebelled, we robbed ... " recited on Yorn Kippur, as well as various other times. This is a far cry from the seemingly self-congratulatory "I have done all that You have commanded me" of the Viduy Ma'asros. In fact, it is difficult to find any element of confessional in this latter recitation. Upon further thought, however, a formidable challenge lies in its words-a challenge that qualifies it as a viduy. Who, in all honesty, can ever say in regard to any mitzva, "I have done precisely as You have commanded us"? Who can make such a statement in regard to the kavanos (intentions) required in tefilla or in wearing tefillin? Yet one must say these words regarding discharging his responsibility to the kohain, the Leviite, the stranger, the poor, the orphan .... Saying these words with honesty calls for a great deal of self-searching and teshuva (repentance). Any declaration that grows out of such introspection can rightly be termed as viduy-whether it is "oshamnu-we have sinned" or "I have done all that You have commanded me . ." SUCH WORDS-WORDS THAT CALL for thought, words that inspire reflec-tion, words that determine the coloration and tone of the actions that follow-are the type of few well-chosen words that Shammai calls for. One might assume that while a declaration of a fast or a Viduy Ma'asros calls for such words of impact, they represent exceptional circumstances. It might seem, then, that there is no need for such statements in regard to Shabbos, tefillos, or any other such mitzva. But this is not the case. One must endeavor to call upon his deepest feelings of commitment for the performance of any and all mitzvos. The "few well-chosen words" have their place in regard to all great endeavors-that is, they should be pronounced in advance of every contemplated action, to raise it to the level of a great endeavor. AS MUCH AS ONE MUST endow personal mitzvos with a high level of commitment, so must one approach communal responsibilities with a sense of dedication, developed and articulated in advance of one's actions. This is not a luxury, or an optional attitude to be used at the individual's convenience or inspiration. Unfortunately, people tend to think otherwise, comforting themselves that as long as they are confident of the strength of their own religious commit-ment and that of their children, the religious status of the community at large need not concern them. But this sense of security is ill-founded. As much as a person may think that he can limit his own sphere of activities to a self-imposed ghetto, one can never be certain of successfully sheltering his children. Exposure to market-place values is inevitable and as a result, one must truly endeavor to make the world a better place-at least to upgrade the level of his immediate community-if but for purely selfish reasons. Beyond this, no individual can truly function in a vacuum, for everyone has a genuine need for social interaction, for his spiritual well-being. Thus, every person must be concerned for the spiritual standing of his community and endeavor to upgrade it. Interestingly, a man's need to recognize the social aspect of his make-up is expressed in a Mishna that binds it with yet another need: "Make a Rav for yourself and buy yourself a friend" (Avos l,6). Much as a person must seek association with others of similar values and interests-even if at personal expense-so must he accept a spiritual mentor over himself as a source of guidance. While a sense of community responsibility can lead one into active involvement in behalf of yeshiva education, kashrus, neighborhood stability, basic rights as a human being, or other communal endeavors, all such activities must be under the guidance of a rav, as stated in Avos. It is because of this that I commend Agudath Israel of America as an organization of G-d fearing membership with an all-encompassing communal sweep. In addition, it is directed by a responsible leadership that is constant consultation with Torah authorities. It offers a welcome format for accomplishing much. IN SUMMARY, one's words must be few and well-chosen, and only spoken after much soul-searching. Such words are essential, however, to raise the ordinary actions to the level of great endeavors. They should .be part and parcel of our way of conducting our affairs

G-d's knowledge and free-will

 Ohr Someach (Hilchos Teshuva 4:4): Rambam (Avos 3:15) notes that it was appropriate that R’ Akiva be the one to state the profound ideas of that Mishna. R’ Akiva mentions the difficult issue of G‑d’s infinite knowledge and man’s total free will—which seem to be inherently contradictory. Since G‑d knows the future and all activities of all the creatures which He has made than it is obvious that there is no free will. Because if it were possible to do something different than what G‑d knows then it means that G‑d does not know the truth. That is greater heresy than saying G‑d simply doesn’t know something. Therefore, it must be that man chooses only that which G‑d knows will happen. Then that means man has no free will and all is predetermined. This is the paradox that the holy R’ Akiva notes in his brief deep words… In conclusion, there is no answer to the deep question. There are a number of analogies given such as two people covered by a single blanket which is only large enough to cover one person. Thus, when one person is properly covered the other is not. Thus, our limited minds cannot resolve the issue—when one aspect is clear the other is not… Furthermore, the Rambam says that G‑d’s knowledge is identical with Him as opposed to human knowledge which is external to man…. While man is not able to comprehend these things, it should not be viewed as our lacking but our glory. As the philosopher said: The purpose of knowledge is to know that you don’t know. Just as we can not see sound or hear light, how is it conceivable to understand the mind of G‑d… To be aware that G‑d’s mind is totally different than ours is not a reply of ignorance as Raavad mistakenly criticized the Rambam…



[1] אור שמח (הלכות תשובה ד:ד) על המאמר העמוק הזה כתב הרמב"ם בפירוש המשנה [אבות ג:טו] שראוי למי שאמרו הוא ר' עקיבא. והוא מעיר ענין סתום וחתום והיא ענין הידיעה והבחירה והגזירה והחריצות כי המה שני הפכים, כיון שיודע הבורא בעתיד ובכל מפעלות הנמצאים אשר יעשו, אם כן בטלה הבחירה, כי אם אפשרי לבחור היפך ממה שידע הבורא, אם כן לא ידע הבורא האמת וזהו כפירה יותר ממה שיאמר בהעדר הידיעה לגמרי, והנה על כן יבחור האדם כפי מה שהוא בידיעת הבורא, ואם כן שב האדם מבחירי למוכרח על זה התעורר האלקי ר' עקיבא במלותיו הקצרים ועמוקים: ... סוף דבר אין לך תירוץ על השאלה העמוקה, וכבר משלו משלים, כמו שנים מתכסים בשמלה אחת אשר אינה מחזקת לכסות רק אחד כאשר ימשוך ויתכסה זה יתגלה זה, ככה קצר מצע השכל לקבץ בידיעתו הידיעה עם הבחירה וכאשר יחזיק האחת תתנגד השנית. והשמאיל או היימין, לבך תשית לבן מימון, הוא רבינו משה בספרו המדע באורך, כי הבורא יתברך ודעתו אחד ודעתו אינו נוסף עליו כו' רק הוא עצמותו יתברך עד כי לא יכולים לגדור בשם מדע כלל כי הוא לא יוגדר בהשגות הנבראים, וכמו שלא יכול האדם להשיג הבורא ואם נשיג הבורא שאינו מושג כלום, אין זה קוצר השגתינו, והיא תפארתינו, כאשר אמר החכם תכלית הידיעה שלא אדעך, וכאשר לא יוכל החוש הראות להשיג דבר הנשמע ששניהם מוגבלים, איך יתכן שדעתינו תשיג דעת הבורא שאינו נוסף עליו רק ממעשיו הכרנוהו שהוא נעדר מהעדר הידיעה, ואיך ומה אינו מושג ואיך תרצה להתבונן איכות ידיעתו וזה ממש כאשר תשאל מהות ואיכות חלילה וחלילה בבורא יתברך ואין זה תשובה של איני יודע כאשר תשב הראב"ד שכתב עליו שלא נהג מנהג החכמים, רק הוא הראה בקוצר מה שהאריך במורה, כי הבורא יתברך אין דעתו נוסף ומחולק מאתו (כאשר היא אל האדם שנוספת תמיד ומתפרדת לפעמים ממנו) ואם כן הלא הוא אינו מושג ומוגבל, כך ידיעתו אינו מושג ומוגבל ואתה בן אדם האם דמית לעלות לרום רקיע ולתהומות החכמות לשאול במופלא ממך, הלא שמעתי עליך כי כביר מצאה ידך בחכמת המדידה והחשבון דבר המוגבל כמותך ומוקף ברעיונך ונושא שפל מאתך במקום ובזמן, אמור נא לי אם לא שמעת כי יש חשבון שאינו מקבל החלוקה כמו אמתא ברבוע אמתא ותרי חומשי באלכסונה האם תוכל להגיד השיעור האמתי, הלא כל חכמי ארץ אמרו בקירוב ולא הושפלת בעיניך כי אמרת לא מחסרון חכמה ולא מדלות תבונתי, רק החשבון עצמו מסיבתו אינו מקבל חלוקה (עיין דברי רבינו פי"ב מהלכות טומאת מת ודוק), ואף כי תחקור למצוא דעת אלקים, אשר בינות כי דעתו היא אינה נפרדת מעצמותו יתברך וד' אחד, ואם אינו מובן לך דעת השם הלא תייגע עצמך לחתור מסילות בדברים, לא יכונו ובתירוצים בדוים, ולא בינות כי עצם המושכל גבוה גבוה לאין סוף וחקר מחכמתך מבינתך הקרוצים לך מאלדי השמים, לכן אם תרצה לבלי לנטות הדרך שמאל או ימין, שמע נא בקול משה עבד השם כן מימון הוא נתן לך ...

Yetzer

 Rashi (Sotah 47a): Yetzer – that means the desire for sexual relations. It should be brought close with the right hand so as not to interfere with having children. And similar the child lest he run away and get lost. And also the woman is light headed and if she is single mindedly pursued - she will go away from Judaism.



[1]  רש"י (סוטה מז.): יצר - של תשמיש תקרבנו בימין שלא יקוץ בפריה ורביה וכן תינוק פן יברח ויאבד את עצמו ואשה אף היא דעתה קלה ואם ירדפוה תצא לתרבות רעה.

R’ Tzadok (Tzedkas HaTzadik #248): The essence of man is the desire he has in his heart and this is his superiority over the angels. This desire is called yetzer – and it manifests its self as the good yetzer (yetzer tov) and the bad yetzer (yetzer rah). When he strengthens his desire for good that is good and if not… Our Sages say that whoever is greater his yetzer his greater. That is because the superiority of one person over another is only according to the strength of his desire for good. That is the yetzer. The yetzer tov and the yetzer rah are balanced in strength against each other corresponding to the two chambers of the heart. The desire on the right side is for good and the left side is for evil. Therefore the yetzer rah is correspondingly as great as that for the good…



[1]  ר' צדוק (צדקת הצדיק - אות רמח): עיקר האדם הוא החשק שבלב שבו הוא יתרונו על המלאכים והוא הנקרא יצר, יצר טוב ויצר רע כאשר הוא מגביר חשקו לטוב הרי זה טוב ואם לאו וכו'. ואמרו ז"ל (סוכה נב.) כל הגדול יצרו גדול כי גדלות אחד על חבירו הוא רק כפי גודל החשק שלו לטוב דהיינו כח היצר כי יצר טוב ויצר רע אחד זה לעומת זה בשני חללי הלב כפי החשק שבלבו בימין לטוב כן בשמאל לרע ולכך יצר רע גם כן גדול:...

Lust and the nature of children

 R’ Tzadok (Takanas HaShavim #6): As is well known from scientist – all birth is only through lust. When a parent is overcome by lust then the child will be energetic and smart as we see that most mamzerim are intelligent. However if lust is not so much involved the child will be lazy and foolish and of course if there is no lust at all there is no child at all. We see this also in Yoma (69b) that when the yetzer harah wasn’t involved it was impossible to find fresh eggs and there are no children born without lust and desire involved. G‑d wanted man to be formed through lust and because of this there is a basis of having free‑will and effort and Torah. All of these only come through having the yetzer. We also see this in Shabbos (89a). Moshe said to the angels who wanted to keep the Torah in heaven. “Do you have a yetzer rah amongst you? You have no need for the Torah which was given only to counteract the influence of the yetzer by means of the 613 mitzvos. The basic inherent lust in a person is by means of the lust of the parents in his creation. The essence of the yetzer is not inherently evil since we also have a yetzer tov (good inclination). It is called yetzer because the desire of the heart is called yetzer. When a person has a desire, wanting, lust or longing for a particular thing whether it is good or bad – that is the power of the yetzer.



[1]  ר' צדוק (תקנת השבין - אות ו): והיינו כידוע מהטבעיים דכל הולדה הוא רק על ידי תאוה וכאשר הוא בתוקף התאוה אז יהיה הנולד זריז וממולא וחכם דעל כן רובן של ממזרים פקחים, ואם לא בתאוה כל כך יהיה עצל וסכל ושלא בתאוה כלל לא יוליד כלל, וכן איתא (יומא סט:) דכשכבשו יצר הרע לא אשתכח ביעתא בת יומא ולא אמרו דלא היה זיווג רק לא היה הולדה שאינו בלא יצר ותאוה, וכך רצה ה' יתברך שיהיה יצירת האדם על ידי תאוה ושיהיה בו יצר דתאוה בתולדה ועל ידי זה יהיה מקום לבחירה ולהשתדלות ומקום לתורה שהוא רק על ידי היצר, כמו שאמרו (שבת פט.) כלום יצר רע ביניכם ואינכם צריכים לתורה שהיא ניתנה רק להיות תבלין ליצר על ידי תרי"ג עטין שבה, ועיקר נטיעת היצר באדם הוא על ידי תאות האבות בשעת יצירה, ושורש היצר אינו לרע דהרי יש יצר טוב גם כן נקרא יצר דחשקות הלב הוא הנקרא יצר כאשר יש בו תוקף חשק והמיון חמדה ותשוקה לאיזה דבר טוב או רע זהו תוקף היצר:

Thoughts of sin are worse than the sin itself

 Rabbeinu Bachye (Devarim 29:18): It is also a well known fact that man's heart is the  source of the  existence of the body. His thoughts are like the branches, while  his deeds are like the fruit of  the tree. The Torah has stated (Genesis 6,5) that "all the  thoughts of the wicked  are about  evil throughout the day." They will not cease producing evil and bitter fruit (Jeremiah  17,8). Even if all their thoughts are not carried out they  are punished for their wicked thoughts . This is what Solomon meant when he said (Mishlei 15:13) "a happy heart makes for good face while a sad heart causes a pained spirit." The  meaning of the verse is that one should not think that mere  thoughts have no bearing on one's personality. If a person has a  positive attitude he should not view thought as insignificant  because joy and sadness are dependent on thought.  If so  that means that a persons thoughts reveal themselves through his body. It follows  that you can understand the great reward if he rejoices with mitzvos  and the great punishment if he rejoices in sin And thus the reward and punishment is proportional .  This is also what the sages (Yoma 29) meant when they  said that the thought of sins is more harmful than  the sin itself. That is because the sinful thoughts,  become deeds and also manifest themselves in the body.,which is not true of spontaneous sin consequently sinful thoughts are worse than spontaneous sin since you have sin together with thought as opposed to sin without thought This statement of our Sages is very valuable and there are many explanations and I only gave one  while another explanation is  that habitual thinking about sinning itself increases the likelihood of sinning. Another is that thinking about sin is more damaging spiritually  because thought depends on the mind where the soul is located so he corrupts his mind with sinful thoughts this worse than the sin in which the mind is not involved. Another explanation is thinking about sin leads him to think of dealing with opposition to his committing the sin and will consider killing another person who tries to stop him so while he might have initially thought of breaking into a house to steal or commit adultery he is now thinking about murder. You might therefore have a question. How can the Torah punish a thought which is not carried out since it is impossible  to control or stop evil thoughts? – so why be punished?

Proof of G-d's existence

 Ksav v'HaKabbala(Shemos 33:19): Clear logical proofs that G‑d exists were already known to Moshe Rabbeinu either on his own or from tradition or G‑d Himself informed him as the Rambam notes (Moreh Nevuchim 1:63) that G‑d showed Moshe all the intellectual proofs that would convince the sages. However it is universally agreed – even the great philosophers of the world concede this point – that all the logical proofs concerning G‑d's existence are imperfect and weak. … All the things which we accept as truly existing are material objects that we can detect with our physical senses. Accordingly it is appropriate to find causal links between those things that we perceive with our senses and say that something is the cause and something else the effect. However we don't look for an immaterial or intellectual construct as the cause…. According to this even if we accept the Rambam's view that Moshe knew all the logical proofs that G‑d exists and that He is a unity and that there is no other deity and even if we accept that Moshe taught the people all these proofs – nevertheless when it happened that some of the Jews greatly erred and sought out a false god – all the intellectual teaching that they had received did not help them concerning G‑d's true unity. Therefore [after the sin of the Golden Calf] Moshe now asked from G‑d to show him His Glory. Moshe wanted to understand and comprehend the true reality of His existence in the world with intellectual proofs that were far beyond the grasp of the ordinary intellect. In other words he wanted an intellectual comprehension which transcended a grounding in physicality and the senses. He wanted an abstract proof which needed no reference to common physical reality experience. This understanding of the Rambam can readily be seen in the various writings of the Rambam even though he doesn't say it directly…

Rav Yakov Kaminetsky - Sotah an explanation -

Emes LYakov (Bamidbar 5:15):The reason for this whole procedure is that when a man suspects his wife of  adultery only G- directly assures him that she is innocent, even though this isn't so for any other sin but rather 2 witnesses alone establish the facts, because the husband will not believe them. Because the husband would not believe even a prophet therefore for the sake of shalom bayis G-d allows His name to be erased and it is as if G-d is directly stating she is innocent therefore the foundation of the law of sotah is not to punish the wife but to ensure the husband believes she is innocent which is the basis of Chullin141a Great is the peace between man and wife, for the Torah has permitted the name of the Holy One, blessed be He, which is to be written in all sanctity, to be washed away in the waters of bitterness,

Rivkah was afraid of Yitzchok and felt inferior to him - Netziv

 Netziv(Bereishis 24:64): And Rivkah lifted her eyes – and she saw Yitzchok while he was still praying and he was at that moment like an angel of G‑d – extremely awesome. and she fell off her camel – Because of her great fear and awe. However she did not know who she was afraid of. If she had been sitting with Eliezer the servant on the same camel and she had been sitting behind him then she would have relaxed when she would have seen the man go and greet the servant and seen them talking together like all men. Then eventually when she would have been informed who it was – her fear would already have dissipated. But since she was sitting together with Eliezer she didn’t wait – but asked immediately who it was out of great fear. Who is that man - that makes me agitated and frightened? We see in Bereishis Rabbah that the term “that” implies someone fearsome and frightening. Therefore when she heard that it was her husband she took out her veil and covered her face out of her great fear and embarrassment because she realized she wasn’t fit to be his wife. From that moment on that fear was permanently planted in her heart and she was not able to have the relationship with Yitzchok that Sarah had with Avraham and Rachel had with Yaakov. In particular when the others objected to something their husbands had done they were not embarrassed to speak firmly with them.  Rivkah was different. All of this served as a necessary preliminary to the events that would follow in Parshas Toldos when Yitzchok and Rivkah had strongly different views. Nonetheless Rivkah could not find the courage to stand up to Yitzchok and defend her views – even though it was true that Esav was a fraud. The same thing happened at the time of giving the berachos. In fact all of this was the means by which G‑d caused the berachos to be given to Yaakov in this manner as we will explain later. All was done with Divine Providence from the beginning - that Rivkah should arrive when Yitzchok was praying and thus she should see him as an awesome and frightening spectacle – it all happened according to G‑d’s Will.

Why does G-d repent?

 R’ Tzadok (Pri Tzadik Shabbos Teshuva 16): It mentions in Vayikra Rabbah (35:3) that a human king makes a decree for others but he himself does not observe it. In contrast G‑d observes all the mitzvos. Similarly it says in Berachos (6a) that G‑d wears tefilin and He prays. Therefore we need to understand what it means that G‑d keeps the mitzva of repentance? A possible answer is based on the Sukka (52b) that there are four things that G‑d has regret. One of them is that He created the yetzer harah. It is necessary to understand how it is relevant for G‑d to have regret and to change His desire. This can be answered according to the medrash we just cited that all the mitzvos and decrees that G‑d makes He Himself keeps them first.  This is related to Bereishis Rabbah 11:5) in which someone asked that if G‑d keeps Shabbos how is it possible for it to rain on Shabbos? Concerning this it says about the creation of man (Bereishis 1:26): Let us make man in our image. That means man will do that which bears similarity to G‑d’s deeds. This is like it says in Bava Basra (58a) that man compared to the Divine Presence is like a monkey before a person.  Thus it says about the observance of Shabbos (Shemos 20:8): Remember Shabbos to sanctify it because in 6 days He made the heavens and the earth and on the 7th day He rested. Understanding it in this matter that man’s actions are not identical with G‑d’s but bear some similarity, we can explain the mitzva of repentance. The essence of it is having regret. In other words that a person should have regret concerning the past and what he has done. Concerning this understanding we say that G‑d in a manner of speaking had regret in order that man would also be able to have regret concerning his deeds. Thus we find in the Pesikta (#44) a parable about a king whose son became sick. The doctor gave the son some medicine but the son was afraid to take it. The king told his son that he would take the medicine first to show him that the medicine was good so that he would taste it afterwards. It mentions in Bereishis Rabba (27:4) this that it said in the generation of the Flood that G‑d had regret that He created the yetzer harah. This is to allude to our explanation, that by writing this about Himself it would be possible for thoughts of repentance and regret to be brought about for the generation of the Flood in order that He would not need to destroy the world.

Yashar (upright) vs Tzadik (righteous)

 Malbim (Mishlei 11:3): There is a distinction between yesharim (uprightness) and tzadikim (righteous). The yashar is one who naturally goes on the upright path – whether it is in religious thought or matters of understanding. That is because the majority of issues concerning yashar involve understanding (binah) or moral traits and deeds that are rooted in wisdom (chochma). Therefore when it comes to matters of wisdom (chochma) the yashar is distinguished from the tzadik in that the yashar naturally has the inclination in his heart to do good because of the uprightness which is implanted in him. In contrast the tzadik's conduct is based upon having learnt what righteous behavior is and constantly practicing it until the tzadik conquers his baser drives and trains himself to do the opposite of his nature. The yashar is simply expressing his nature. Furthermore the yashar is not concerned with the letter of the law but is concerned with the spirit of the law - until he conducts himself beyond that which the law actually requires…. Therefore in order to go in the good path it is needed that 1) his path is yashar and 2) that he is aided in going in that path. … Thus one who is not yashar, his path is not yashara and he needs help from Above to straighten his path. Even though the yashar conducts himself in the manner of uprightness because of his inner nature, nevertheless his physical needs sometimes cause him to deviate from that path. But if he has the additional aspect of temimus (purity) he will be totally consistent in his conduct of uprightness and not deviate from it because of physical needs….

Kabbala can increase sexual lust even amongst talmidei chochomim - Rav Tzadok

 Rav Tzadok (Shaar HaYichud): And thus I have seen written in a book which was written by a holy man and he said that the sect of Shabtsai Tzvi which did that which it did  - because they were involved in the study of Kabbala when their hearts were full of the lusts of this world. Consequentially they took literally the metaphors of kabbala. Thus when they saw in the Kabbala literature terms such as sexual relations, hugging, kissing and others similar expressions it aroused in them lusts and adultery until they became very wicked people. And similarly I am aware of one Rav from the previous generation who was considered to be a scholar and kabbalist and he printed a book on kabbalistic matters with the haskomos of the gedolim of that generation. And afterwards he sinned by committing adultery. There is no question that this was caused by his involvement in kabbala and his taking literally the metaphors of kabbala as is clear from what he wrote in his book. I am writing this in order that people are warned how carefully they must be when studying esoteric material as our Rabbis have said.

Video doesn’t show President Joe Biden dozing during event with Maui, Hawaii, wildfire survivors

 https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2023/aug/22/social-media/video-doesnt-show-president-joe-biden-dozing-durin/

President Joe Biden’s critics often inspect his public appearances for signs that he is unfit to lead. A common false claim is that he falls asleep during important events. The latest iteration is no different. 

Social media posts claimed President Joe Biden fell asleep during a recent event with survivors of wildfires in Maui, Hawaii. But a closer look at a video clip showed the president was blinking and nodding as a speaker spoke. Biden wasn't sleeping.