[Avodah] Timtum HaLev

[Micha Berger]

On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 05:59:27PM -0400, Zvi Lampel wrote:
: The Drashos HaRan (#5, I think) writes (regarding the imperative to
: follow the Sages):
...
: (He answers that the spiritual gains in obeying the mitzva of following
: the Sages counteracts the harmful consequences of the rare instances
: where the Sages may be wrong.) The point relevant to this discussion
: is the Ran's presumption that anything forbidden (things or actions)
: carries direct spiritual damage regardless of intent. Also relevant,
: of course, is the role of innocent intent (if one may generalize from
: intent of following the Sages--maybe not?) of counteracting the damage.

But this Ran is about sechar va'onesh, and explicitly not about other
metaphysical mechanics. Personally, I would argue that the Ran and the
Ikkarim (his talmid, who describes a very similar hashkafah) don't
actually believe there is such a thing.

It's interesting, because implied is the notion that Chazal could be wrong
in an Emes sense (permitting something dangerous), but they define Din
and following Din is of such value as to compensate for not conforming
to Emes.

In general, the Ran and the Ikkarim are sources I lean on heavily in my
booklet for Yamim Noraim, the section on teshuvah, "baasher hu sham",
and sechar va'onesh. This is of a piece with the Ran's general
mehalekh. E.g. from http://www.aishdas.org/10YemeiTeshuvah.pdf pg 4:
    If one puts a cup in the sink, and the cup doesn't fill as it ought,
    it could be fore at least one of two basic reasons. The first is
    that the cup's mouth isn't properly in the stream; this is the
    assumption that the utensil is fine, but not properly connected to
    the Source. Taking this approach to the human condition is suggested
    by the notion of the Ran (Derashos haRan ch. 10) and his student R'
    Yosef Albo (Seifer haIkarim 4:13), who hold that the effects of sin
    are to dirty the soul and that the punishment of sin is that barrier
    blocking the soul's access to Divine Good.

    The implication is that the sinful soul itself is fine, but it
    made for itself a layer blocking it from the Light. And in fact,
    the Ramchal (in the opening paragraphs of Mesilas Yesharim), among
    many others, articulates this as the goal we seek to accomplish
    with mitzvos, that they are acts that bring us closer to G d. In
    contemporary terminology, we would call this a deveiqus (/dbq/ =
    attach) approach.

    The other approach would be to assume the cup is flawed, perhaps
    its mouth could be widened, or there is a hole to repair. In this
    opinion, the purpose of life is to give us opportunities to perfect
    the self. Apparently this is the position of Rabbeinu Yona....

Or from the Ikkarim (quoting myself, pg 2):
    The Ikkarim describes gehennom a natural consequence of one's
    actions. He writes that the "'fires' of gehennom" are those of
    shame. (Ikkarim 4:33) Rabbeinu Yonah compares a sinful soul to a
    sick person. Just as a sick person suffers from his illness, the
    sinner suffers from his sins. (Sha'arei Teshuvah 4:2)

    R. Chaim Vilozhiner shows the same idea from a gemara in Eiruvin.
    "The wicked deepen gehennom for themselves." (Eiruvin 19a) What
    you get in the World to Come is the consequence of the mitzvos you
    do. R. Chaim takes this one step further. Each sin, he writes, causes
    a flaw in your soul. In true Divine Mercy, the punishment is both
    the natural consequence of this flaw and a key tool for healing it.
    (Derech HaChaim 1:21).

    The Ramchal writes, "Sin detracts from one's perfection." (Derech
    Hashem 1:4:5) Rav Eliyahu E. Dessler explains the expression
    "aveirah goreres aveirah -- one sin is followed by [another] sin"
    by saying that after repeatedly doing a given sin, it becomes part
    of one's nature; so that no conscious decision is required next time
    the situation arises. (Michtav MeiEliyahu vol 1 pp 113-114)

    We read on Rosh HaShanah that when Hagar and Yishm'ael were kicked
    out of Avraham's home, and were on the verge of death from thirst
    in the desert, G-d gave them a well. Yishma'el was not judged for
    the evil he did that made him unacceptable to Avraham's home, or the
    evil he will do, and his children still do. Yishma'el was repaid in
    terms of "ba'asher hu sham -- as he was there." (Bereishis 21:17)
    The way your soul stands at that moment is the direct cause of reward
    or punishment.

    Notice that this implies a major statement. We are not judged for
    what we did, we pay the consequences for who we are. ...

The question before us, though, isn't the existence of this kind
of metaphysical causality, it's whether there are other mechanisms
(in systems of machashavah other than Chassidus). As I wrote earlier,
I think the Nefesh haChaim explicitly excludes them.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

PS: If the above sounds to mechanistic, almost removing HQBH from the
whole concept of sechar va'onesh, I have an essay in that booklet (pp
9-11) about how the difference between this kind of causal view and a
"Hashem responded" view is purely in the eyes of those who are lemata
min hazeman. In actuality, both describe the same theodicy -- to the
best people can understand it.

-- 
Micha Berger             A wise man is careful during the Purim banquet
micha at aishdas.org        about things most people don't watch even on
http://www.aishdas.org   Yom Kippur.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                       - Rav Yisrael Salanter