[Avodah] National Punishment

[Micha Berger via Avodah]

We were once again discussing on Areivim some rabbinic proclamation about
which sin led to which punishment -- this time, France, the Holocaust,
and last Shabbos's attacks.

Among the issues raised:

> Does thinking "whoa, he really got what's coming to him" make anyone a
> better Jew? Do you think those thoughts, even in the deepest recesses of
> your mind, when you hear about a kid killed in a car accident (because
> it wasn't an accident, right)? That type of thinking makes someone a
> better Oveid Hashem?

And -- if this were the reason, why France rather than Germany itself?


Then it was asked about the fact that most of the actual victims had
nothing to do with the Holocaust, and of those who did have a connection,
many of those hurt were more connected to the victims.

On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 7:49pm EST, R Zvi Lampel wrote on Areivim WRT
that last issue:
: I would like to make a suggestion regarding the meaning and
: rationale of collective punishment of nations:

: Each person is affected by the fortunes or misfortunes of others, as
: a member of that person's family, as a neighbor, etc. When things
: happen to individuals of a nation, every one of the nation's members
: relates to it in multiple ways: As, perhaps, a relative to a victim,
: someone who lives on the same street or same buiding or same city.

: Or as a member of the same nation. Think of how all Americans felt
: on 9/11, whether or not a relative or friend of someone physically
: harmed.

: I suggest that when Chazal or others speak of a nation being
: punished or rewarded for its actions, they are abstractly looking at
: one aspect of the effects, that which the nation qua nation
: experiences. They are not dealing with why one individual or
: another, or why or why not one individual and not another,
: experienced those consequences. G-d in His wisdom and perfect
: judgement coordinates everything appropriately.

: So when it is said that the Beis HaMikdash was destroyed because of
: sinnas hinnam, or idolatry, for instance, one does not legitimately
: object, "But this or that Tanna was among the victims! How can you
: assert he was guilty of such sins," or, "But so-and-so, who was
: guilty of that sin, escaped tragedy." The assertion did not mean to
: say that each individual was guilty of such sins and deserved that
: pain. It means that in the aspect of the nation qua nation, this is
: why it--the nation--was punished. This, too, is what is meant by
: saying a punishment or reward was brought upon a nation because of
: its king's actions, even though the individuals of the nation had no
: part in them. As to why this or that happened to this or that
: individual, that it something G-d in His infinite Wisdom and Justice
: decides and coordinates with the fortune of the nation as a whole.
: But whether or not the individual individually suffers, he
: nevertheless relates to the nation's general vicissitudes as a
: national, and it is fair, reasonable and legitimate to say that what
: happens to the "nation," qua nation, is a consequence of the
: actions of that nation, qua nation.

: The next issue is the legitimacy of pinpointing specific national
: behaviors as national crime that led to the national punishment. The
: next sentence read independently of all I said above will sound
: harsh, but hopefully will be read in the intended context: When the
: actions of a government or a nation as a whole are manifestly
: criminal, it is fair, reasonable and legitimate to attribute tragic
: events that occur to the nation as a whole to those criminal
: actions.

I was with you up to the last paragraph.

After all...

The relationship between avodas H' and one's material well being is
described very differently in the first and second paragraphs of
Shema. When speaking belashon yachid, Moshe tells us "Ve'havta...
uvkhol me'odekha". When speaking to us belashon rabbim, he instead says
"Vehayah im ... venasati eisev". An individual's weatlh is depicted as a
tool, the nation's wealth and stability are depicted as a consequence. How
do we deny this idea and still make sense of "vecharah af Hashem bakhem,
ve'atzar es hashamayim ..."?

(The tokhachos are less of an issue; they are arguably describing two
one-time events.)

Perhaps we could say it's specific to Hashem's relationship to the Jewish
People. But I see no motive to do so; limiting the question to Jewish
fate doesn't eliminate what is bothering those posing it.


And...

It fits the two reasons the Torah gives us for MRAH not entering EY. We
can understand Bamidbar 20:12 and 27:14 as saying that Moshe did not 
merit entering EY because of Mei Merivah. However, Devarim 1:37 ties
BY not meriting having Moshe lead us in EY to the cheit hameraglim.

Moshe was punished for one thing, BY for something else -- same event,
but each experiences it for a different reason.


This makes Iyov much easier to follow. We could picture that there were
numerous unwritten books -- one explaining why Iyov's wife experienced
all those tragedies, why each child died, etc... The book only explains,
Iyov's experiences, and thus why Iyov lived through each event. Not
the same even from everyone else's eyes.


But...

The whole thesis of the book of Iyov is that we cannot fathom the answer
of why bad things happen! "Mi zeh machshikh eizah vemilin
beli-da'as?" (38:2)

So how do we understand numerous maamarei chazal that do appear to offer
such explanations?

My rebbe-chaver, R' Jack Love, noted that every discussion of why
something tragic happens -- what the sin of Nadav and Avihu was, or
churban bayis rishon or sheini, or even what sin causes tzara'as -- the
response is a multiway machloqes with numerous shitos. One could say that
that in itself is the gemara's point; we can grapple with such questios,
and not get a single answer.

As for me, as in prior iterations, I would suggest that chazal were
taking lessons from the event, not actually attributing a cause. If
thinking about the infighting that was only halted (and even that,
only temporarily -- as per Rabbi Aqiva's talmidim) by churban bayis
sheini motivates one to work on ahavas Yisrael then by all means,
run with that motivation. "Yefashpeish [or: yemashmeish] bema'asav"
doesn't mean successfully finding a cause, it means using the fact that
the routine was broken and one is fired up to change.

Alternatively, one might say that seifer Iyov is only about individuals,
hashgachah peratis, not nations and hashgachah kelalis. OTOH, there is
nothing in HQBYH's answer to Iyov to suggest that chiluq. "Eifo hayisa
beyasdi-aretz, hageid im-yadata vinah" (38:4) applies either way.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             "I think, therefore I am." - Renne Descartes
micha at aishdas.org        "I am thought about, therefore I am -
http://www.aishdas.org   my existence depends upon the thought of a
Fax: (270) 514-1507      Supreme Being Who thinks me." - R' SR Hirsch
_______________________________________________
Areivim mailing list
Areivim at lists.aishdas.org
http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/areivim-aishdas.org