- This topic has 30 replies, 13 voices, and was last updated 10 years, 1 month ago by .
-
Posts
-
There is a well-known story that a certain Godol (which one exactly depends on the version of the story – I heard it was R Yisroel Salanter) once said
If a Jew in Vilna does Averah X, then a Jew in Paris will do Averah Y
i.e. that one’s own actions can have an effect, somehow, on someone else miles away.
1. Can anyone corroborate whether this saying was actually said by any Godol?
2. Does anyone know of a Mekor in Chazal for this concept?
2. I would guess there is no Makor in Chazal for this (aside from a bad interpretation of Aveirah Goreres Aveirah in Avos).
3. It’s a seemingly major violation in Bechira Chofshis.
That wasn’t how he said it.
He was saying that the non-frum take their cues from us about what we treat as really important, and then they do only that.
So if a jew in vilna is mezalzel shabbos but still doesn’t do melacha, then the jew in paris does melacha.
Nothing mystical.
You can find this concept in the Noam Elimelech.
Sam, many things can seemingly violate the biggest Ikker (in some people’s mind). How can Moshe Rabbeinu Bentch Yehoshua not to fall into the trap of the Meraglim? The Ohr Hschayim Hakadosh writes that although Yiras Shamayim is not on hands of heaven, out os in the hands of Tzaddikim.
Why does physical influence not seem to contradict the free will rule and only a spiritual influence does?
HaLeivi, please quote that Noam Elimelech, or at least post the location – I own one.
A Google search brings up a good number of variations on this quote. As I expected, none are attributed to anyone other than R’ Yisrael.
Lich’oira, influence moves a person’s nekudas habechirah. Thus, the effect of a certain influence might be that a person will not consider a particular choice, though he is still a free agent. Anyone?
HaLeiVi: I can’t answer that. The vast majority of the Achronim who ask the question on the Gemara about Bruriah do not give a similar answer to the Or HaChayim you mentioned. I would be willing to accept a S’vara similar to R’ Moshe’s on this (and that it increases the likelihood). I cannot accept that it is an absolute.
What do you mean by physical influence?
Randomex: Lichora the concept of Nekudas Habechirah is based on a Gemara in Kiddushin but a parallel Gemara in Moed Kattan seems to apply it in a way that does not quite fit with R’ Dessler.
If I’m not mistaken, I think that quote (or something similar to that) was from the holy Chafetz Chaim.
Sam2: That’s nice, but I’m not a boki in Moed Katan!
LittleFroggie: I’ve found one attribution to the Chofetz Chaim with Google, and about ten for R’ Yisrael Salanter. (This time I included Chofetz Chaim in the search terms.)
The Maharsha in Berachos (10a) asks how you can daven for someone to do teshuva if yiras shamayim is not biday shamayim. He grants that you can daven for yourself to do teshuva because that falls under ???? ???? ???? ???? ??????? ???? and ????? ???? ??????? ??. He concludes with “v’yesh l’yasheiv.” The Orchos Tzadikim writes in Sha’ar Hateshuva ????? ??? ??? ???? ??? ??????? ?? ?????? ????? ?? ???? ???? which would be consistent with the Maharsha, but in Sha’ar Hasimcha he writes ?????? ??????? ????? ??? ???? ?????? ?????? ?????? ??? ??? ?? ?? ????? ?????? ??????? ??? ??? ?????? ?? ??? ????? ?????? ???? ???? ???? ?????? ???? ?? ??? ?????? ????? ?? ????? so he clearly holds that you can (and in fact should) daven for others to do teshuva.
???? ??? ????? [???”?] ?? ????? ????? ?????? ???? ?????
I think it’s obvious that the concept of ????? ????? is one that is far more complex than we can possibly understand, and it should not be too hard to make peace with one more question on the topic.
The fact that we have heard such statements repeated by our own Rebbeim should be enough for us to recognize that they are well grounded in ??”?.
In this particular case, I think it is the simple ??? in many statements of ??”?.
?? ??? ????? ????? ????? ??? ???
??”? ?? ????? ?? ????? ?? ???
????? ?? ????? ?? ??? ?? ????? ???
These are some examples that come to mind offhand, and I am sure that there are many more and stronger sources.
This discussion is retarded.
He was saying that the non-frum take their cues from us about what we treat as really important, and then they do only that.
So if a jew in vilna is mezalzel shabbos but still doesn’t do melacha, then the jew in paris does melacha.
Nothing mystical.
Sure, it’s mystical. It’s based on the yesod that what we do here influences the upper spheres, which then influences the lower spheres, which is why there is no geographical limitation.
What you’re saying is true, but if was limited to that, the example would not have been Vilna/Paris.
Lich’oira, influence moves a person’s nekudas habechirah. Thus, the effect of a certain influence might be that a person will not consider a particular choice, though he is still a free agent. Anyone?
I would say it differently; it can make the same choice easier, but it’s still within the realm of bechirah chofshis.
I think where R’ Dessler’s nekudas habechirah is not universally accepted is in his denial of bechirah in certain cases, but I don’t think anyone disagrees that some choices are more difficult than others, and that the level of difficulty changes.
It is pretty clear from different places in Chazal that a person has point to point choices rather than gradual. We find that a person who became a Tzaddik could have been a Rasha of a certain type, not everywhere in between. There is a Medrash that HKBH shows a person certain spots in Gan Eden or Gehenom that could have been his.
Sam, What I meant by physical is physical factors that affect a person’s choice. This is something we all agree to and deal with on a daily basis. Nobody thought to say that worrying about Chinuch violates the free will doctrine.
Likewise, we have a concept of ????? ??? by eating ?????? ??????. We also find that a person’s ?????? ????? are from Hashem. This we see in Rashi about Pharaoh that Hashem held him back from Teshuvah. This is also the famous Vort of the Baal Shem Tov that the point of the Bas Kol ???? ???? ?????? is that the person’s Neshama hears it and from there he gets a ????? ?????.
In general, a holy atmosphere causes holy thoughts and an Aveira is from a Ruach Shtus. Still, no one is forcing you to choose but they are affecting the surroundings.
The Ramchal writes that since a Zivug is the same Neshama, even before they know each other the actions of one affect the other. (I saw this a long time ago so don’t ask me where it is.)
Leyzer: Or maybe it’s because Vilna was a center of Frumkeit and Paris a center of the Haskalah.
Sam2: I believe what Leyzer means is that mentioning Vilna and Paris implies non-direct/derech hateva influence.
We say that Mitzvah goreres mitzvha and aveira goreres aveira. This is taking it to thinking outside the box. That the aveira that a Jew in one place does, has a ripple effect on another Jew somewhere else. I would not say it is outside the realm of possibility. We are all inter-connected.
So, just to be clear, we are over-Darshening inferences from an unsubstantiated statement possibly made by one great person or another to find the proper nuances in it?
Just so I understand this endeavor.
Sam, it’s a well known story, said over by enough learned people that it warrants understanding.
DY: I don’t think the Pratim of the city matter so much without firsthand documentation that those were the cities mentioned.
Still, my Hesber of those cities is probably right anyway.
Could be, but I’ve always heard the story in the context of the mystical concept I described, which is mevuar in Nefesh Hachaim and other places.
Just for fun (although I think it turned out educational), I’ve collected just about every instance of this quotation (and a similar one) that I could find via Google. So many versions…
In some cases, there were discussions of what it means and how this works. The CR’s own WolfishMusings had a blog post with a lengthy discussion on the subject in the comments… five years ago (no unique version, so not quoted). Here we go!
Rav [Mordechai] Gifter Ztzl once said in a yeshiva shmus, if a bochur by us in yeshiva eats cholov akum, then a yid in Paris will eat treif.
-Anonymous on Vosizneias
Rav Mordechai Gifter ztzl, the late rosh yeshiva of Telz, once said, “if a bochur in yeshiva eats cholov akum then a yid in Paris will end up eating treif”.
-Anonymous on Vosizneias
[Those just might be the same anonymous guy.]
Rav Gifter quotes (p. 80-81) [Collection of Rav Gifter’s letters -http://hebrewbooks.org/50397] the AB”D of Telz (I am assuming he means R’ Leizer Gordon here, unless it’s R’ Bloch?) as saying that if in Telz they don’t eat butter made of cholov aku”m, in Paris they will be careful and not eat pig meat, but if in Telz they are meikil on butter, in Paris they will eat tarfus. I have seen the same idea quoted in the name of R’ Yisrael Salanter[.]
-“Chaim B.”, blog post on Divreichaim
A yid in Paris is mechalel shabbos and that has an effect on Yidden around the world (I forget which godol quoted that).
– “amama” on Vosizneias
A gadol once said, if a Jew is makpid on xyz in Volozhin, a yid in Paris won’t intermarry.
– “jerusalem-girl” on Imamother
– “Emusing” on Matzav
In Belz they used to say:
“When a chossid in Belz begins to wear long pants (they have the custom to wear short pants and high socks), a Jew loses his religion in Paris”
– “chabakuk elisha”
followed by
Yitz, I heard once that Rav Elchanan Wasserman (I think) told his students that if we talk lashon hara in Lithuania, Jews in Paris will be mechalel Shabbos.
– “Moshe David Tokayer”
followed by
I heard a similar statement said in the name of Rav Israel Salanter (either way “they don’t say things like that about me”, to paraphrase a story about the Chofetz Chaim).
– “Neil Harris”
Conversation on a blog post on Asimplejew
-“F.M.S.”, letter to Hamodia
In the pithy words of Rav Yisroel Salanter, “If a bokhur battels in Eisheshok, some Jew in Paris will shmad.
-blog post on Hamavdil/innate-differences
Reb Yisroel Salanter would say that if we strengthen our observance of Shabbos in Lithuania, it will prevent a fellow Jew from desecrating the Shabbos in Paris.
-blog post on Baishamussar
Moreover, to quote […]
-Rabbi Yoel Schonfeld, letter to Jewish Action[H][.]
-Five Towns Jewish Times, regarding a speech by Rav Yitzchok Sheiner, rosh yeshiva of Kaminetz (Yerushalayim)
A great rabbi, Rav Yisrael Salanter, once said that if a Jew in Lithuania is lax in his learning, a Jew in Paris will forsake his religion.
-Leah Aharoni, Jewish Press guest op-ed
As Rav Yisrael Salanter put it, if a Jew in Moscow talks during davening, a Jew in Paris will leave the fold.
-Rabbi Moshe Grylak, Mishpacha column
If a Jew in Kovno speaks lashon hara in the Bet Midrash, a Jew in Paris will desecrate Shabbat.
-Rabbi Hanoch Teller, lecture on Naaleh(.com)
If someone talks lashon hara in the beis hamidrash in Kovna, Jews will desecrate the Shabbos in Paris.
-Lipa Goldwerth, Jewish Observer article
When they gossip in Vilna, they desecrate Shabbos in Paris. – Rav Yisrael Salanter
-Micha Berger, post on Aspaqlaria (a section of aishdas.org)
[T]
-Rabbi Jonathan Tawil, Torah Action Life parsha sheetRabbi Yisroel Salanter, the great founder of the Mussar movement once asserted that “when a Jew learns Mussar in Lithuania, he prevents the assimilation of another Jew in Paris.”
-Rabbi Raphael Wizman, NCYI Weekly Divrei Torah
The Chofetz Chaim declared that if Shabbos was kept properly in Warsaw, it would have a ripple effect on a Jew in Paris.
-M. Efrati, article on Dei’ah V’Dibbur/chareidi.org
Well, I hope you’re all
“Azoy gliklich (or glikor) vi a yid in Paris,”
as the expression used to go.
P.S. Would you believe there are NO Google results for “yidden of Vilna” or “yidden of Volozhin”?
No response? Really? Didn’t anyone find our national game of broken telephone amusing enough to say something?
“The Maharsha in Berachos (10a) asks how you can daven for someone to do teshuva if yiras shamayim is not biday shamayim. He grants that you can daven for yourself to do teshuva because that falls under ???? ???? ???? ???? ??????? ???? and ????? ???? ??????? ??. He concludes with “v’yesh l’yasheiv.” The Orchos Tzadikim writes in Sha’ar Hateshuva ????? ??? ??? ???? ??? ??????? ?? ?????? ????? ?? ???? ???? which would be consistent with the Maharsha, but in Sha’ar Hasimcha he writes ?????? ??????? ????? ??? ???? ?????? ?????? ?????? ??? ??? ?? ?? ????? ?????? ??????? ??? ??? ?????? ?? ??? ????? ?????? ???? ???? ???? ?????? ???? ?? ??? ?????? ????? ?? ????? so he clearly holds that you can (and in fact should) daven for others to do teshuva.”
While I was saying Avinu Malkeinu on Rosh Hashanah, it occurred to me that the lashon of ??????? ?????? ???? ????? is consistent with the Orchos Tzadikim and not the Maharsha. Then it occurred to me that I don’t need to use Avinu Malkeinu to show this since the same lashon is used in the everyday shemoneh esrei. Then it occurred to me that this doesn’t necessarily show anything because all the prayers in Avinu Malkeinu and shemoneh esrei b’lashon rabim. Then it occurred to me that I should not be thinking about something I wrote on Yeshiva World a month ago, in the middle of davening on Rosh Hashanah. But I kept thinking about it anyway.
I thought “v’yesh l’yasheiv” meant “and an answer can be given(:)”. How can you conclude with that phrase?
If you have an answer but you don’t want to say it for whatever reason (e.g. it’s super dochek).
r yisroel salanter brings it from a sipurno on the passuk of vayishmun yeshurun vayibat. ayin shum in the sipurno.
The Ramchal writes in Mesilas Yesharim that when a person sins he drags down the spiritual level of the entire world. (perek 1)
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.