[Avodah] mutav sheyihyu shogegim

[Rabbi Meir G. Rabi]

R' Yaakov [Jay],

I'm pretty sure this paragraph below, was a response from R Micha, to my
initial query -

"Maybe because mutav sheyihyu shogegim would lead me to conclude that if
they aren't accepting my tokhachah, I should give up rather than make
future chataim worse by adding to their bemeizid-ness."

my query

If one checks numerous Esrogim or blows countless Tekios, and all are
Passul, might one think that the duty no longer exists? In that case why
the special requirement in Tochacha?

I can't see how Mutav applies once we've ALREADY advised them of their
misdeed, they are ALREADY Mezid if they repeat and Mezid if they do not
repent [Bein ALaMakom] or do not make restitution [Bein ALeChaveiro].
It seems that R Micha recognises this by proposing that there are DEGREES
of Meized and with additional rebuke the sinners Meized-nedd is intensified.
It would be helpful to know where this notion originates.

Two observations
1]  If the Torah advocates continuing to admonish 'one thousand times' it
stands to reason that this person will not be likely to accept after the
many earlier admonitions
2] is the ongoing admonishment not intensifying this person's Mezid-ness?

It seems though, that Mutav applies for example, to a community that ignores
the duty to be Mossif MeChol Al HaKodesh and thus continue to eat right up
till Yom Kippur [ShA OCh 608:2 - this is a Torah obligation but it is not
Mefurash in the Torah] there is a duty to advise them once, publicly, but
not more; in private however, the duty persists until the sinner curses or
hits the admonisher.
But this too seems to be problematic, for once they KNOW they are ALREADY
Mezid and if they hold by their 'traditions' and think the rebuke is from
an overly Frum fellow, then they remain Shoggegim, no?

I suppose the fellow who believes the rebuker is mistaken, that there is no
reason to not eat strawberries, for example, because the concern for worms
is a Frumkeit, is a Meizid nonetheless because he ought to heed the rebuke
to at least check the halacha.

It appears that as a community they will continue their tradition, their '
Minhag', and will ignore the rabbi as being overly Frum, making them
 Shoggegim, they truly believe they are doing the right thing.
That is like the Zaken who is an expert in the Halachah , knows that BD has
erred in their Pesak but follows their ruling, and eats what THEY say is
NOT Cheilev but which HE knows IS Cheilev  He MUST bring a Chatos, his own
Chatos and he is not included in the Chatos the BD brings.
WHY
BECAUSE he KNEW it was Cheilev
If so he is a MEIZID - HOW can he bring a Chatos which is for a Shoggeg?
He ISa Shoggeg because he MISTAKENLY thought it is a Mitzvah to follow BD
EVEN when they are making a mistake - and THAT is his Shoggeg.

The individual however, must still be admonished, notwithstanding they are
Shoggeg and will in the future be a Mezid or more of a Meizid until they
abandon their erroneous mindset.

R Yaakov suggests that "mutav sheyihyu shogegim" only exempts us from
our obligation
to obey the Rabbinic extensions to Leviticus 19:17.
Would you please expand upon this; what are the Rabbinic extensions you
refer to?
And do you have a source for this?

R Yona [3:196] explains the obligation to rebuke is not applicable if this
sinner will listen to no-one, not even his Rosh Yeshivah. My translation -
If it is well-known to everyone [Galuy LaKol, YaduA, NivChan VeNechKar - he
seems to be pretty emphatic!] and supported and verified by previous
experience, that this person pays no heed [even] to his teachers - about
such people the verse declares Do not rebuke the Leitz; and the Gemara
declares there is a Mitzvah to not say that which will be ignored; and,
better they remain Shoggegim

Accordingly, it seems that we are not obligated to rebuke and certainly not
to compel those wearing ShaAtnez if they are utterly non-practising Jews.
BUT if you see your Rosh Yeshivah doing something wrong ..... and that too
is included in the double expression HoCheAch ToChiAch

For those who WOULD listen to their Rosh Yeshivah [but not anyone else] the
duty to rebuke is terminated only if they hit [or insult/curse] the rebuker.
The Gemara derives this from the episode of Yehonasan defending Dovid where
Shaul abuses, then curses and finally hurls his spear at his son.

And what might be the purpose of rebuking those even though I am fairly
certain I will be ignored?
Perhaps that duty is a requirement that determines the tone of the
community - as the Rebbe advised his students - Fear HKBH as much as you
fear people!
We keep T and Mitzvos primarily because we fear being shunned by our
community; because we are driven to earn their recognition and respect. It
is akin to, I believe it was R Aharon Leib who proposed that the Rosh
Yeshivah would be more successful if he was more motivated SheLo Lishmo
[have I got that legend right?]
The purpose of the Torah's obligation of ongoing duty for everyone to
admonish, is that this sets and maintains the tone and posture of the
community.  See the ShaAr HaTziyun 608:3 quoting Tashbatz that if we do not
rebuke the community standards continuously erode.

Indeed, the Torah may not, as R' Yaakov suggests, command us to do the
impossible - but it is possible to continue to rebuke even though it may be
IMpossible to correct the sinner, and this maintains the integrity of the
community.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20240325/ed6ac389/attachment.htm>