- This topic has 31 replies, 8 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 2 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
There are two things every [yes, I know, not every] schoolchild is taught, which seem to be contradictory:
a) Rashi famously writes that the order Moshe VeAhron and Ahron uMoshe is to tell you that ????? ???? ???????. The famous question is posed – Lo Kom BeYisroel keMoshe Oid; how can we say that Ahron reached Moshe’s level? The answer is always given that they both fulfilled their potential, and therefore were the same in Tzidkus.
b) The Gemara says that Moishe wouldn’t drink from the Mitzris because “the mouth that would once speak to Hashem” shouldn’t defile itself with the impure milk. It is bought lehalachah that one shouldn’t give ones child goyishe milk. The reason is given because “every child has the ability to be a Moshe Rabeinu”.
The two above explanations are contradictory. I think the second one isn’t true (I’ve never found anybody who says it either), and the first one is more accurate: Everybody is given a potential and is expected to live up to it.
(The Rambam writes that everybody can be a ???? ????, which R’ Elchonon explains to mean each on his own level).
So if two people invest the same amount of effort into their learning, and both spend the same amount of time learning, and one manages to complete more/understand better, I would tell you therefore that they would both receive the same amount of Schar. No?
Apparently not. The Rabeinu Yoina in Avois Perek Beis writes that the one who ended up with a better understanding will recieve more schar. Why is this so?
What do the first two things have to do with schar?
Also, where precisely is this Rabbeinu Yonah?
2:17 in the edition I saw.
Anyhow, a couple of possible explanations:
1) ????? ?? ?????? only means ?????, not ??????. I will admit, this is a ????.
2) Hashem did not create everyone equally. In one way, two people could be equal in that they fulfilled the same percentage of their potential. From a different perspective, the one who accomplished more is l’maaseh greater, and gets more schar.
What would you say in a comparison between two people; one was given 613 commandments and one 7, both did so to the same degree. Do they get equal schar? Same here. To further add, the one with more potential stands not only to potentially gain more schar if he fulfills his potential, he also stands to lose more (receive a bigger onesh) if he doesn’t.
Whenever the issue of feminism is brought up with regards to women wanting to take on halachos given to men, often they are told (or the point is raised) that there are ‘separate but equal” roles for each gender. that just because a women is required to learn torah or where a talis, that doesn’t mean she is any less or has any less schar overall possible for her then a man.
To me, assuming the above points are true, this would be evidence to support the “different potentials” theory, because the same way a woman and a man might have different halachos, but could still be equally great in God’s eyes, a talmid Chacham and a Shoemaker could be equally great as well.
Not quite, at least not the way I’d envision it…
Imagine Schar being a scale of 1-100.
Anyone who fulfills their potential gets 100 schar.
The fact that teh shoemaker “only” had to make shoes while the Torah Scholar “only” had to learn Torah is irrelevant, as long as they both fulfilled what they are supposed to do, they get 100 schar, and it is the same.
The reward is the same, the journey there is different.
Therefore, the man isn’t getting more schar then the woman, and the scholar isn’t getting more schar then the craftsman – which makes sense, as all are essential for the running of the society.
Source?
How about a wife who gets the same schar as her husband, for her enabling and assisting her husband to reach his level in Torah and Avoda. i.e. What Rabi Akiva said regarding his wife Rochel – all that is mine and yours (his talmidim) is hers, etc.
Yekke2: I am definitely unwilling to accept that.
Why?
Before anything, because he can “understand torah better” is a ridiculous reason to think someone will get schar.
And my neshama doesn’t let me believe that this world isn’t fair.
because he can “understand torah better” is a ridiculous reason to think someone will get schar.
Why? Isn’t understanding Torah better an important accomplishment?
What does “fair” mean?
Definitely an important accomplishment, but not the only one. Fair means equal opportunity.
If it’s important, why can’t you accept that there’s schar for it?
Do you think all of Hashem’s creations have equal opportunity?
DaasYochid: There is schar for it, but not more than the schar that someone who’s supposed to be a shoemaker gets for making shoes. Yes I think all Hashem’s creations have equal opportunity.
So a blade of grass can earn as much schar as you or I can?
I do not wish to play this game
It’s not a game.
We are not entitled to anything – not to schar, and not even to the opportunity to earn it.
All that we have, including our opportunities, is a gift from Hashem. We have no more right to mitzvos than does a blade of grass have a right to be a human being.
I have a different shaila-if not belief, in relation to this topic and wonder if some of you might provide svoros, and/or mkoros both pro and con:
We have the well known Rashi in Bereshis 4:10, where Hashem indicates to Kayin that the “bloods” (plural) of your brother cries out to Me from the earth, and there are two ma’morei Chazal (Sanhedrin, I think) referenced. The first is the one I’m wondering about. If one can be held responsible for the generations that did come into the world as a result of his act, can we also infer (admittedly something of a stretch, but still mistaber) that if one has not reached one’s potential-and that potential might have elevated others, present and future, is he held accountable for that, and accordingly, his Schar reduced commensurately?
yekke: The assumption is that a fair God wouldn’t do such a thing.
What is “fair”, and who decided that He is “fair”?
Derech Hashem makes it very clear that a person in olam haba is judged purely on ones own bechira “so no one has any claim against his fellow”. So a lowly doctor or a simple lawyer (why do we always have to make tailors and shoemakers the lowly guys?) will get as much schar as an accomplished and successful talmid chacham. Not every tzadik is a talmid chacham. Not every talmid chacham is a tazadik.
Regarding the blades of grass issue: we cannot understand the number of neshamos Hashem makes. We cannot truly understand the concept of infinity either.
Why does a blade of grass not get an “equal” neshama?
We will never know the answer to this in olam hazeh and to try to understand this is foolish. But to compare blades of grass and people to tailors and talmidei chachamim is also foolish.
Unlike blades of grass, people are capable of feeling pain in olam haba by the “chupa of ones fellow”. This pain cannot result in olam haba unless it is derived from “equality and fairness”.
“I understand that one is judged on one own bechira, but why does that mean he gets the same sechar?”
Because the entire purpose is that in the olam haba community no one will be able to point to “his” or “her” fellow and say this neshama gets more reward- it’s not just since they had it easier in life or they had more opportunity. Thats why the reward is purely given out based on ones bechira and no more.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.