Parsha and Chagim ideas from the rabbis of Kerem B'Yavneh
Enjoyed? Your feedback means a lot to us. Click here to email us: https://tinyurl.com/thanksEN
The Torah in ืคืจืฉืช ืืืจ introduces us to the ืืืกืืจ of ืืื ืื.
There are really two separate ืืืกืืจืื of ืืื ืื.
There's ืืื ืืช ืืืื,
taking advantage of somebody in the marketplace,
whether that is selling an item for too high of a price or buying
an item for too low of a price.
And there's a separate ืืืกืืจ of ืืื ืืช ืืืจืื.
The ืืืกืืจ of ืืื ืืช ืืืจืื is very difficult to understand for at least two
reasons.
Number one:
Why does it share a name with ืืื ืืช ืืืื?
Why are they both called ืืื ืื?
They seem to be completely different.
ืืื ืืช ืืืื has to do with taking advantage in the marketplace,
whereas ืืื ืืช ืืืจืื has to do with belittling somebody or hurting somebody with words.
How does that have anything to do with ืืื ืืช ืืืื?
Not only do they share a name,
but the ืืฉื ื ืืื ืืฆืืขื says ืืฉื ืฉืืฉ ืืื ืื ืืืงื ืื ืืฉ ืืื ืื ืืืืจืื.
It draws a direct comparison between the two.
Just like there's ืืื ืื with ืืงื,
so too there's ืืื ืื with ืืืจืื.
The second question on ืืื ืืช ืืืจืื is that ืจืฉ"ื in our ืคืจืฉื in ืืืจ
uses the exact same ืืฉืื when explaining an example of ืืื ืืช ืืืจืื as he
uses for a different ืืืกืืจ from just two weeks ago.
ืจืฉ"ื on ืืื ืืช ืืืจืื says ืืื ืืืืืจ ืขื ืืื ืืช ืืืจืื.
This is ืคืจืง ืื ืคืกืืง ืื.
What is ืืื ืืช ืืืจืื?
ืฉืื ืืงื ืื ืืืฉ ืืช ืืืจื,
a person should not belittle his fellow,
ืืื ืืฉืืื ื ืขืฆื ืฉืืื ื ืืืื ืช ืื,
and you should not give him bad advice,
advice which is not proper for him.
The exact same phrase is used by ืจืฉ"ื in ืคืจืฉืช ืงืืืฉืื on the ืืืกืืจ
of ืืคื ื ืขืืจ.
ืจืฉ"ื says there in ืคืจืฉืช ืงืืืฉืื,
ืคืจืง ืื ืคืกืืง ืื,
ืืคื ื ืขืืจ ืื ืชืชื ืืืฉืื,
ืืคื ื ืกืืื ืืืืจ,
with somebody who's blind in a certain matter,
he doesn't know much about it,
it's a ืืฉื,
it's not a literal stumbling block,
ืื ืชืชื ืขืฆื ืฉืืื ื ืืืื ืช ืื.
Do not give him advice which is not proper for him.
The exact same ืืฉื.
So what is the difference between ืืื ืืช ืืืจืื and ืืคื ื ืขืืจ?
Both of them are violated when a person gives bad advice.
So why does the Torah need two separate ืืืืื?
Just say if you give someone bad advice,
you are placing a proverbial stumbling block in front of a proverbial blind person,
he's going to get messed over.
Right?
You tell him to buy a stock that you happen to know is definitely
going down and he loses a lot of money from that,
so that's ืืคื ื ืขืืจ.
Where is the Torah adding by telling us that this is also ืืื ืืช ืืืจืื?
So ืจืฉ"ื by ืืื ืืช ืืืจืื adds,
ืจืฉ"ื in our ืคืจืฉื in ืืืจ on the ืคืกืืง again,
ืคืจืง ืื ืคืกืืง ืื,
adds five more words.
And those five words I think are the key to understanding ืืื ืืช ืืืจืื.
ืจืฉ"ื says again,
ืฉืื ืืงื ืื ืืืฉ ืืช ืืืจื,
do not belittle your fellow,
ืืื ืืฉืืื ื ืขืฆื ืฉืืื ื ืืืื ืช ืื,
and do not give him advice which is not proper for him,
ืืคื ืืจืื ืืื ืืชื ืฉื ืืืืขืฅ,
according to the path and pleasure of the one giving the advice.
So ืจืฉ"ื's telling us an incredible ืืกืื,
and this ืืกืื is developed by ืจื J.
David Bleich ืฉืืื"ื in an article in the journal ืืืจืื.
ืืื ืืช ืืืจืื is not defined by the detriment to the person being spoken to,
but rather it's defined by the sense of superiority felt by the person speaking.
Meaning,
when a person gives bad advice,
if it doesn't matter whether the person who hears the advice actually follows,
but the fact that I think so lowly of somebody else that I would
try to trick them,
I think that his finances are not important,
they're not valuable to me,
I have no interest in helping him,
actually I'm trying to to do him in.
Or if I call him a not nice name,
or if I belittle him for a bad decision he made,
or for his history as being a ืืขื ืขืืืจื,
or for his family's history as being ืืขืื ืขืืืจื.
In all of those cases,
the what defines ืืื ืืช ืืืจืื is not the pain felt by the ืืชืื ื,
by the person who was spoken to.
Not that that pain is not important,
that is it's not good that he feels that pain,
but what defines ืืื ืืช ืืืจืื is the sense of superiority that a person thinks
he's so great and somebody else is so lowly and he wants to make
that person hear the words that that express his greatness.
That is what the Torah is focusing on.
Don't put down other people not because not just because they're going to feel
bad,
even if they wouldn't feel bad,
but because not to feed into your own selfish need,
your own selfish desire to feel good at his expense.
That is the ืืืกืืจ of ืืื ืืช ืืืจืื.
So to answer our two questions,
ืืื ืืช ืืืจืื is different than ืืคื ื ืขืืจ.
ืืคื ื ืขืืจ is focused on the harm that will come to the ืืื ืืช
ืืืจืื doesn't focus on the harm,
but rather focuses on the speaker.
Don't,
don't put down the guy who doesn't know anything in the stock market by
telling him bad advice that has to do with the stock market just to
make you feel good about yourself that you are such a ืืื in finance.
Number two,
we understand how ืืื ืืช ืืืจืื shares a term with ืืื ืืช ืืืื.
In both cases,
the Torah's focus is on value,
on value,
taking advantage or playing up differences in value.
When it comes to ืืื ืืช ืืืื,
the Torah is saying if something's worth X,
don't treat it as if it's worth Y,
whether Y is higher or lower.
And similarly,
when it comes to human beings.
A human being is worth X,
a human being is worth infinite value,
a human being is created ืืฆืื ืืืงืื.
Don't treat him like he's worth much less.
That is ืืื ืืช ืืืจืื.
ืืื ืืช ืืืจืื at its core is when a ืืขื ื looks at another human being
and sees him as less than,
as less valuable,
and treats him as such,
whether it's with speech or the ืจืืฉืื ืื say even without speaking a person could
do ืืื ืืช ืืืจืื with gestures and all of those things which are which which
demonstrate that the speaker or the actor thinks less of another human being,
that is what's included in ืืื ืืช ืืืจืื.
This is one of many ืืืืืช that the Torah gives us that show us
that when we talk about the Torah's view of civil law,
it's not merely to prevent anarchy,
it's not merely to ensure smooth running of the financial system,
but it's actually to build us up as individuals,
build us up as a society,
a society of ืืื ืืฉืจืื,
of an ืขื ืกืืืื,
a ืืื ืงืืืฉ,
and a society that is ืื ืืจืฆื ืืฉื getting closer to the great day
of ืืชื ืชืืจื that ืืงืืืฉ ืืจืื ืืื gave us in order to build us
up to be as close to him as we can.
Have a wonderful ืฉืืช.