[Avodah] Ahavat Yisrael -- another point

[Samuel Svarc]

>From: "Shoshana L. Boublil" <toramada at bezeqint.net>
>Subject: [Avodah] Ahavat Yisrael -- another point
>
>I would like to move the Ahavat Yisrael/ hating thread in another
>direction - more machshava related.

While I'm in favor in discussing the machshava as well, I think there is
more value to be had in first clarifying the practical aspect.

>When we talk about Ahava, Rav Dessler and many others before him make it
>clear that there are 2 kinds of Ahava.
>
>a) I love a banana
>b) I love Hashem.
>
>Both use the same verb, but with regard to the banana, "I" am the focus of
>the love. It is a type of self-love. Loving Hashem, OTOH, is something
>totally different it is "Ko'ach HaNetina" the potential force of giving/
>the
>will to give... <SNIP>
>...
>It teaches us that Ahava is something completely different from the
>every-day colloquial usage of the word love, le'ehov.
>
>My question was whether it's possible that when the term hate comes up, it
>also has several meanings and intentions.  From what I've been reading, it
>appears so.
>
>There is the regular hate: "I hate bananas; I hate beans; I hate
>terrorists".  All these hates are based on self: what I like; what I
>suffer
>from. They are external manifestations of our most basic needs and fears.
>They are the opposite of the self-interest of loving a banana discussed
>above.

It's true that you hear "hate" being applied to things like food, but I
never understood it. I try to use the terminology "I strongly dislike" as I
feel that it gives the right mindset.

>When discussing a Sonei that one is supposed to help, we see some elements
>of this issue.  The Sonei is someone you hate, yet you are supposed to
>assist him, which is a manifestation of Ahava, an aspect of Ahavat Hashem.

But not a personal ahava; rather I'll do this in order to keep the Mitzvos
of Hashem whom I love.

<SNIP>
>
>But the pasuk, and Tosefot in Pesachim note that if we don't have anything
>to do with this Sonei, and note that the Sonei is defined by everyone
>(incl.
>the Mishna Berura) as someone who [by you personally?] was told off and
>shown the error of his ways, and he continued them.  The hatred here is
>not
>b/c "you don't like him".  It is something else.  And Tosefot says that if
>you were to turn you back on him, this would increase Sin'a -- AND THIS IS
>UNACCEPTABLE!!!  If we were talking about regular hate, this sentence
>would
>not make sense!

Why? You hate this person because he is slapping your Father. He then hates
you based on the dictum "K'mayim ponim al ponim". You, in turn, will now
acquire a hatred for him merely because he hates you, based on the same
dictum. This is not allowed, as one is not allowed to hate someone because
he is hated. In order to stop this from occurring, the Torah commanded you
to do an act of chessed, thus keeping your hatred limited to only the Torah
mandated one. This is what Tosfos says, and it makes eminent sense. Kindly
explain your difficulty. 

>But, if the Sin'a here is, as many sources note, an educational device; a
>way to make it clear to the transgressor how far he has moved off the
>path,
>then things come together.  You make it clear that you disaprove of his
>actions, but as you are Oheiv Yisrael, in the higher level of the concept,
>and b/c you are not allowed to Lisno Achicha Bil'Vavcha, you therefore aid
>him/his donkey when they need it.

This isn't correct. The hatred isn't an "educational device", it is a bona
fide hatred. (Tehilim 139:21-2) says 'I hate those who hate You and I will
fight against those who rebel against You and I hate them with pure hatred.
(Translation courtesy of RDE) No hint of educational anger. And someone that
you are mandated to hate doesn't full under the rubric of "Achicha", so I
fail to see the connection.

>I would like to finish with the thought that insulting the other is a
>human condition.  Hashem does not "get insulted".  The fact is that Hashem
>appears not to mind if people are Ovrei Aveira even and including Avodah
Zara --
>if they express Ahavat Yisrael to ALL members of Yisrael, and live their
>lives as one nation.  The Nach and Midreshei Chazal discuss this in many
cases,
>and not just the famous one at the time of Omri.

This is utterly not true! Chazal clearly say, "Kol h'omeir sh'hakodesh
borchu vadrin, vadrin al chayov". Quite clearly, Hashem does seem to mind if
people do aveiros. Unity of Klal Yisroel is a virtue, and it does protect by
a milchama, but this is no excuse for aveiros and Chazal use harsh language
(see above) for people who excuse aveiros.

As well, it's factually incorrect to present only unbiased ahavas Yisroel as
a virtue that protects from danger. In the beginning of parshas Pinchos we
find that Hashem was ready to wipe out Klal Yisroel - a real danger - and
only the act of Pinchos saved them. Although Pinchos had true ahavas
yisroel, that is not how his action was viewed by most of Klal Yisreol, who
didn't know in how much danger they were. Pinchos was rewarded with "brisi
Sholom", showing us how our un-halachically-informed perceptions of actions
are not always the best barometer. While Pinchos' actions are reserved for
special people, true kanoim, the lesson isn't. Not giving tochocha, etc.,
things that the Torah mandates for ALL Jews, exposes Klal Yisroel to great
danger.   

>So, perhaps, instead of taking Sin'a down to its lowest level, we should
>take Ahava up to its highest.

As I've shown above, true Ahavas Yisroel consists of also being concerned
with their relationship with their Father in Heaven and making sure His
happy with them as well. Not keeping His Mitzvos (discussed above) sunders
this relationship.

KT,
MSS