Ellul and Rav Gifter

Here in Chicago we are graced with the presence of Harav Shimon Kalman Goldstein, a talmid chacham מובהק and exemplary yarei shamayim. He told me that in Cleveland (he learned bechavrusa with Rav Ausband for many years) they used to read from the Sha'arei Teshuva after Davening during Ellul, and he remembers Rav Gifter (who was in his mid forties at the time) reading the lines in Shaar II:7

כאשר יבואו ימי הזקנה והגיעו ימי השיבה ויכל כחו וימעט. וישח יצרו. גם יזכור קצו כי קרוב הוא ויבין לאחריתו וישוב אל ה' וירחמהו. ואשר אינו חוזר בתשובה בבוא ימי הזקנה יכפל ענשו ורבה משטמה עליו. כמו שאמרו רבותינו זכרונם לברכה שלשה הקב"ה שונאן דל גאה ועשיר מכחש וזקן מנאף. ונאמר (הושע ז) אכלו זרים כחו והוא לא ידע גם שיבה זרקה בו והוא לא ידע. ומן התמיהה והפליאה. כי יעמוד האדם בחצי ימיו ורואה כי הימים הולכים ודלים. ויחל הריסות הבנין. ויחסר המשג בטבעו ותראה בו היבשת. כענין שנאמר (תהלים קב) ימי כצל נטוי ואני כעשב איבש. איך טח מראות עיניו ומהשכיל לבבו. ולא יראה כי נוסע הוא אל המקום מקום בית עולמו. הלוך ונסוע יומם ולילה:

and Rav Gifter didn't say any droshos, he just said, in his inimitable voice (and it helps if you'd ever heard him, so you know how his Reish'es sound like a lion roaring and his vowels were wrung out to dry: For a low key sample, try this.  For Yiddish, here.),

 ימי שנותינו בהם שבעים שנה ואם בגבורת שמונים שנה-- ביז פערציג איז בארג ארוף: נאך פערציג איז בארג אראפ

Rabbeinu Yonah says that it is amazing that people reach the halfway point in their lives, and they start seeing the inexorable descent toward the end, and they still don't do teshuva.  Rav Gifter didn't interpret or darshen- he just declaimed "David Hamelech says in Tehillim that our productive lives are till seventy, maybe till eighty.  Until forty, it is up the mountain.  After forty, it is downhill....."

Ki Savo, Teshuva, and Elul. Inherent and Adherent Kedusha.

Note: I don't know why I wrote this in such an odd tone, but the thoughts are good anyway.  Also, there are three or four places where I should have said כביכול.  So כביכול, כביכול, כביכול.


Reb Yomtov Lippman Heller, the Tosfos Yomtov, had (through his daughter) a great great grandson who learned at the feet of Reb Meshulem Igra, and who was a great and creative Talmid Chacham. His name was Aryeh Leib Hacohen Heller. Reb Aryeh Leib wrote a sefer you might recognize, even though these days the sefer is out of style. It is called the Ketzos Hachoshen, and many say that it forever changed the model of how Gemara is learned. Because of the great respect and love the Torah world had for that sefer, its author is never called Reb Aryeh Leib, he is called the Ketzois. (Or the Xois.)  He also wrote a sefer called Shev Shmaitsa, which expanded the Divrei Torah he said at his Sheva Brachos. In both his introductions to the Ketzos and to the Shev Shmaitsa, he says many wonderful things. For Elul, I would like to be mefarseim and think about one particular thing that he says in his introduction to the Shev Shmaitsa. I don't know if it has any shaychus to Ki Savo.

Toward the beginning of the Hakdama, (if you've gotten to the part where he says that iluyim tend to say svaros that are not glatt, you've gone too far,) he says that many people have asked, "Why is it that Adam Harishon's teshuva was not fully accepted? He did teshuva, so why was he not reinstated to his status of before the Chet?" Why were the gzeiros of expulsion from Gan Eden and death not reversed? Why was he not restored to that divine splendor that misled some malachim into thinking he was God himself, but instead remained condemned to that woeful and harsh existence that is the human condition?

The Ketzos answers that the superhuman greatness of Adam's existence before the Chet was possible only for a Yetzir Kapav of the Ribono shel Olam, a creation formed directly by Hashem's hand. Adam's teshuva was a superlative achievement, and it saved Adam from untold suffering in Olam Hazeh and Olam Haba. We can even say that Adam, with his teshuva, had recreated himself, as the Rambam says about every ba'al teshuva. But this new creation was the doing of man, not Hashem. Adam had recreated himself, and that which Man creates cannot live forever, cannot exist in Gan Eden, and cannot shine with the splendor of Hashem. At first, Adam was Hashem's creation. With his teshuva, Adam created himself.

With this, he explains the words

הֲשִׁיבֵנוּ ה אֵלֶיךָ וְנָשׁוּבָה חַדֵּשׁ יָמֵינוּ כְּקֶדֶם

"Hashiveinu Hashem ei'lecha ve'nashuva, chadesh yameinu ke'kedem." If Hashem pushes us to teshuva, rather than our teshuva being the product of our own effort, then we will be, once again, like Adam before the Chet, because in that case, we will have been re-created by Hashem.


The Ketzos'es words are wonderful for many reasons. First, because what he says is exactly the kind of lomdus you would expect from the Ketzos. Second, because the idea that the renewal of teshuva is a true re-creation of the person to the extent that the original identity and characteristics no longer necessarily pertain, is very strong. Third, the idea that man is capable of creating himself is somehow very moving. In Adam's case, this came with a cost. In our cases, it is only beneficial.

But, it's a Ketzos, so it raises more questions than it answers.
1. Everyone, even a tzadik gamur, even if you haven't sinned and done teshuva, we are all constantly making choices about whether to sin or not to sin. Even if we choose the right thing, it is those choices, which we ourselves make, it is our Bechira, that maintains our spirituality, that keeps us spiritually alive. Why is this not also our own ma'aseh yadayim?
2. Isn't it true that "אלמלא הקב"ה עוזרו אין יכול לו?" If not for Hashem's help, we could not withstand the Yetzer Hara (B'B 75a). If so, it is not really "our" teshuva. It is Hashem's again.
3. Along the same lines: It seems to me that doing God-like work, the work of creating a man, is impossible if not by virtue of the God-given ability to rise above nature and to be God-like. If so, it doesn't seem right that the result would be a diminution of our similarity to Hashem. In other words: it's true that the object of the creation was created by a man, but the man who was doing the creating has become more, not less, God-like by doing so.
4. And most importantly: if the Ketzos is right, what's pshat in

מקום שבעלי תשובה עומדים צדיקים גמורים אינם עומדים

"makom she'ba'alei teshuva omdim sham, tzadikim einam omdim sham?" And don't tell me the glib answers, because in Sanhedrin 99 it's clear that this statement is an assessment of rank.

Before discussing these questions, I want to point out an interesting thing. In Ki Sisah, Shemos 34:29, the passuk says Karan ohr ponov, that when Moshe came down with the second luchos, his face shone with a powerful light of kedusha. Rabbeinu Bachya asks, why did this happen only after the Luchos Sheniyos? Why did this not happen when Moshe Rabbeinu came down with the first luchos?

The Beis Halevi in his drashos, and the Mabit in his introduction to his Kiryas Sefer, say the same answer (my taitch; best to see inside; also, please note that neither of them address Rabbeinu Bachya's question, but what they say answers the question anyway). The first Luchos were crafted by Hashem and included the entire Torah Sheba'al Peh, and once a person read them, he would never forget them. After those luchos were broken, Klal Yisrael did teshuva for the sin of the Egel, and their teshuva was accepted, and the Torah was given to them once again. Moshe Rabbeinu was told to craft new Luchos, but Hashem did not write the Torah Sheba'al Peh on them, and now it required hard work to learn and to remember the Torah. Moshe Rabbeinu, upon receiving the first luchos and knowing the Torah, was like Tashmishei Kedusha, an object that serves the Torah. But when Torah Sheba'al Peh existed nowhere but in his mind, and it came to reside there through his hard work, he became Kedusha Atzma, inherent kedusha in himself. Before, the kedusha was adherent. Afterwards, the kedusha was inherent.

The Torah itself didn't change. But where before it was Hashem's Torah, and we were the beneficiaries of that gift, afterward it became our Torah. Even after all the siyata dishmaya that is necessary to learn, understand, and retain the Torah, it is we, by our hard work and mesiras nefesh, who recreate ourselves, who do the ibbud and kesiva li'shma, to incorporate and reflect the Torah.

I think the same is true of Adam Harishon after his teshuva. Yes, by falling, he was irreparably diminished. Just as was the case with the Torah after the Luchos Sheniyos, whatever he would achieve from that point on was not a gift, it had to be worked for and guarded. But as a result of his work- his teshuva and his efforts to guard his teshuva- his accomplishments were his. My father zatzal used to say, how could it be that Adam, the yetzir kapav of the Ribono shel Olam, could have sinned? The answer is that he was lacking one thing: Chinuch. He was what he was as a gift from Hashem, and gifts are easily lost. Only that which you earn is truly yours. In a sense, he was diminished, but he was also far greater than before.

So, let's go back to the four questions we had on the Ketzos.
1. Everyone, even a tzadik gamur, even if you haven't sinned and done teshuva, we are constantly making choices about whether to sin or not to sin. Even if we choose the right thing, it is those choices, which we ourselves make, it is our Bechira, that maintains our spirituality, that keeps us spiritually alive. Why is this not also our own ma'aseh yadayim?
Answer: there's a difference between maintaining and recreating. Every day, with our bechira to do good and not do bad, we maintain Hashem's briyah, and it is still Hashem's briyah. With Teshuva, we are recreating something that was destroyed. There's a difference between a Shomeir and an Uman. There's no hava amina that a shomer that saves the pikadon from being destroyed is koneh the pikadon. But Uman koneh bishvach keli, because he is making something that was not there before.

2. Isn't it true that "ilmalei Hashem ozro. lo yachol lo?" If not for Hashem's help, we could not withstand the Yetzer Hara. If so, it is not really "our" teshuva. It is Hashem's again.
Answer: When it comes to Bechira, it is one of the fundamental rules of the briyah that Hashem does not mix into our decisions involving yiras shamayim. So our teshuva, even if it could not happen without Hashem's help, has a din of zeh eino yachol ve'zeh eino 'yachol' (kaviyachol). In such a case, both are considered to have done it.

3. Along the same lines: It seems to me that doing God-like work, the work of creating a man, is impossible if not by virtue of the innate ability to rise above nature and to be God-like. If so, it doesn't seem right that the result would be a diminution of our similarity to Hashem. In other words: it's true that the object of the creation was created by a man, but the man who was doing the creating has become more, not less, God-like by doing so.
Answer: There's a difference between the Gavra and the Cheftza. Of course, a baal teshuva, the gavra, has done something that elevates him to the kisei hakavod. But the cheftza, the body, will forever be different.

4. And most importantly: if the Ketzos is right, what's pshat in

מקום שבעלי תשובה עומדים צדיקים גמורים אינם עומדים

"makom she'ba'alei teshuva omdim sham, tzadikim einam omdim sham?" And don't tell me the glib answers, because in Sanhedrin 99 it's clear that this statement is an assessment of rank.
Answer: Again, that's the difference between the Gavra and the Cheftza. The Cheftza of our existence in Olam Hazeh is never the same, the same way the Torah of the Luchos Shniyos was not the same as it was in the Luchos Rishonos. By doing teshuva, the person gets a kinyan on his ruchnius and elevates himself to a madreiga that even a tzadik gamur never can reach.

Bekitzur: the luchos sheniyos were missing some of the unique Atzilus of the luchos rishonos, and after his teshuva, Adam Harishon was never the same as he had been before his chet. But only with the luchos sheniyos did Moshe have the Karnei Ohr, and the same was true for Adam Harishon and the same is true for every Baal Teshuva. In the final tally, the gifts you are given don't count for much at all. All that matters is what you make of yourself.



Here is the language of the Ketzos regarding Adam HaRishon.

דבר זה נתקשו בו רבים מדוע לא רצה ד' בתשובת אדם הראשון ולא השיב חרב המות אל נדנה ונ"ל במ"ש באות ג' בשם כתבי האר"י דבחטא האדם הרוח האלהי ישוב אל האלהים וע"י התשובה חוזר אליו וזה כוונת מאמרם ז"ל בעל תשובה כקטן שנולד דמי ועליו נאמר ועם נברא יהלל יה לפי"ז קודם חטא אדם הראשון היה הרכבתו מאתו יתברך והיה יציר כפיו של הקב"ה שנתן לו חלקו וראוי היה שלא יכלה ולהתקיים באיש אמנם לאחר החטא כשנסתלק חלק האלהי ואחר כך כשחזר בתשובה והחזיר החלק האלהי והרי הוא כאלו עשה את עצמו והיה בבחינת ועם נברא ומעשי אדם לא יוכלו להתקיים באיש רק במין ומאז עלה מות בחלונינו ובזה יובן הא דאיתא במדרש השיבנו ה' אליך ונשובה חדש ימינו כקדם כימי אדם הראשון והיינו שאנו רוצים שיהיה מקודם אתערותא דלעילא ויהיה התשובה ע"י הקב"ה ואח"כ ונשובה ואז נהיה יציר כפיו של הקב"ה ונחיה ולא נמות וזהו כימי אדם הראשון קודם חטאו אשר רק בשמרו לעשות מצות ד' יחזיק בקרבו החלק האלהי לעד ויהיה תמיד בבחינת באר וזהו כוונת מאמרם ז"ל וצדיק באמונתו יחיה היינו בבטחונו שאינו בוטח ברוב חילו כי הכסף איננה עצמות כי אם בד' נכון לבו ובאמונתו יחיה והוא הנקרא חיות שנובע מעצמו 

Here is where he says that illuyim aren't as glatt as lesser baalei kishron that have to work on themselves.

מיהר"ם אלמושנינו בביאורו לספר קהלת י א זבובי מות יבאיש יביע שמן רוקח יקר מחכמה ז ומכבוד סכלות מעט ע"ש שכתב דהישרים בשכלם אינם חריפים כל כך דהחריפות אינו אלא אגב שבשתא ולפי שאלו שאין שכלם ישר ויש להם מעכב בשכלם כאשר יגבר השכל עולה השכל בחריפות גדול כאשר אנו רואין בתבערת אש כאשר יוצק עליו מעט מים אז יגבר ויתלהב האש ביתר שאת ויתר עז ממוקדה מקדם בלעדי מעט המים כן הדבר הזה אם יש לשכל קצת מנגד והוא הסכלות מעט ואז יתגבר עליו השכל ויהיה מחודד יותר ויותר ע"ש ובזה נראה לפרש 

Eikev, Devorim 10:13. What Does Hashem Ask? Only That You Fear Him. Mah Hashem Elokechoa shoeil mei’imach ki im le’yir’ah Osso.

The Gemora in Brochos 33b asks, what does the passuk mean to say “All Hashem asks....” Is the attainment of the fear of God a little thing? The Gemora answers that from Moshe Rabbeinu’s perspective, this was, indeed, a minor request. This answer is difficult to understand; Moshe was our leader, and he should have understood that his people were not like him. But the truth is, the Gemora's question is even harder to understand than the Gemora's answer, as Reb Eliahu Lopian points out.

Rav Lopian, in Lev Eliahu, asks, why does the Gemora only ask about Yiras Shomayim? Yiras Shamayim is only the first of a long list of requirements in this passuk! “Laleches bichal derachav”, to walk in all His ways, which means to be behave in a manner that reflects the traits of God, to be domeh to Hashem in His mercy, etc, mah hu rachum, about which the whole sefer Tomer Dvorah was written, “uleahava oso”, which means to develop a love for Hashem through limud haTorah, “vela’avod...bechal levavcha” which means to convert the evil inclination into a tool that serves God, so that we serve Him with both the yeitzer tov and the yeitzer ra, “uvechol nafshecha”, which includes the mitzva of martyrdom, mesiras nefesh for kiddush Hashem. So, the end of the passuk is a list of requirements which demand every ounce of our strength and every moment of our time. So why does the Gemora ignore them all and simply ask about the fact that the Torah seems to minimize the difficulty of developing Yiras Shomayim?

Reb Eliah answers that once a person is a true Yorei Shomayim, all these other things follow naturally. So the real point of the passuk is that Hashem asks us to learn to be yerei’ei shomayim, which will lead to our developing all these other important qualities. In fact, the words of the passuk show this pshat to be correct. So the possuk is saying, all Hashem asks is that you strive toward yir’ah. If you do that, all these other things will follow. On that the Gemora asks, although all you have to do is strive towards yir’ah, that itself is an extremely difficult task.

When I made the second Siyum haShas for my shiur at my house in August ‘01, I gave an example of this. What baalabusteh would think that it makes sense to arrange a siyum for 60 people the night before the siyum? I had taken my boys on a Charter fishing trip, and we walked in at night with 50 pounds of half-cleaned just-caught fish. My wife said, Perfect. We are going to make a grand siyum tomorrow. Period! So at 9:30 that night, we got on the phone and start calling people. Then we had to move the furniture out of the living room and dining room. But that was that, and boruch Hashem it worked out beautifully— the fish was the best I ever tasted, moist and fresh and full of flavor (when guests began arriving at six, I was still out back scaling the last of the fish and rinsing them with the garden hose, and then cutting them into pieces, so it was served right out of the oven), to say nothing of the zucchini kugel and fruit salad that she made from scratch. This is because, as Rav Eliah Lopian says, the threshold issue is yiras shomayim, dedication. Once a person has yiras shomayim, once your mind is in the right place, all the difficulties become less important, the obstacles don’t appear insurmountable.

Yiras Shomayim is like the Annan in the Midbar— that it smoothed all the obstacles in front of the Bnei Yisroel. Ve’halach lefanecha tzidkecha means the same thing. Your own Tzedek is like the Annan, which travels before you and smooths the way.

I don’t like to be the bearer of gloom, but the fact is that Ellul is on the horizon. R’ Schwab here brings a Medrash Shocheir Tov that says that when Dovid Hamelech said in Ledovid Hashem Ori “Achas sho’alti...shivti..., lachzos..., ulevakeir..., ki yitzp’neini...etc., Hashem asked him, “are you asking ‘achas’ or for a whole bunch of things? (My mother likes to say that when she reads Le’dovid, she thinks that it is like someone saying “I’m not asking for much, I’m only asking for everything.”) The Medrash says that Dovid answered, Ribbono shel Olam, I learned how to ask from You-- You, too, said "Mah Hashem sho'eil...." R’ Schwab explains that just as in our parsha the other things flow from the first, Dovid was asking for ‘shivti,’ and that his shivti, his presence in the Beis Hashem, will result in all its natural concommitants. Everything looks different when your frame of reference, your point of view, is that of a person who is sitting in the Beis Hashem, just as everything is different when your frame of mind is Yiras Shamayim. Reb Meir Simcha said of the Rogotchover, he doesn’t have an unusual memory, it’s just that he’s always holding in middle of every sugya you talk to him about: the same can be said of certain askanim and gomlei chassadim– they’re not really so great. They just have this one little thing– their whole lives they feel that they are sitting in the Beis Hashem, so it’s just natural that they do what they do.

Vayeilech, Devarim 29:16. Exposure to Kedusha and Exposure to Tumah

29:16. Vatiru es shikutzeihem...giluleihem...pen yeish bochem...asher levovo poneh hayom...la’avod es elohei hagoiyim hoheim. Mishulchan Govo’a brings from the Brisker Rov in the stencils: the avoda zoro is described as stinking, disgusting and revolting, like golol and vermin. Why, then, does Rashi say in passuk 17 that since you saw them, pen yeish bochom— lefichoch ani tzorich lehashbiachem? The answer is that even if the aveira is disgusting, seeing it leaves a negative roshem on the neshomo, and this roshem can result in going to serve the avoda zoro. Once there’s a “Vatir’u,” there’s a danger of “levovo poneh.” (This reminds me of Tom Lehrer’s song about pornography– "Stories of tortures Used by debauchers Lurid, licentious and vile..... Make me smile." There are things that at first sight turn the stomach with disgust, but strike a responsive chord in the primitive mind and which can engender an appetite. Like many acquired tastes--e.g., coffee and vodka--the effect co-opts the natural distaste.)

This is the same idea as “kol horo’eh sottah bikilkula yazir atzmo min hayayin” in Emor, Vayikro 19:29. On the topic of indelible effect of exposure to rishus, see Breishis 27:1 about Rivkah being inured to avodoh zoroh because of her time at home, though she had left at the age of three.

The complementary idea is that exposure to kedusha is beneficial. See Vayeileich 31:10 about the mitzvah to bring infants to Hakheil.

So, people should realize that when it says “shivti b’veis Hashem,” it is referring to the need to engineer one’s environment so that he will be in the presence of kedusha and never in the presence of tumah. Many people say that a person should be able to live anywhere, that his faith should be strong enough to see anything and remain firm. This is true to the extent that if you know that you’re going to be exposed to all kinds of things, you have to develop resistance, which is probably not going to happen by simple avoidance before exposure. But the best thing is to do your best to ensure that the problem doesn’t arise in the first place, to create a environment that is suffused with kedusha and protected from tumah.