Leviticus Rabba, chapter 2 (section 11): “New ones and old ones I have held aside for you, my beloved” (Song. 7:14) – Abraham, Isaac, Jacob are “old ones”; Amram, son of Kehat, and all the righteous ones who were in Egypt are “new ones.” The company of Moses and the company of Joshua, the company of David and of Hezekiah are “old ones”; the company of Ezra, of Hillel, of R. Yoḥanan ben Zakkai, of R. Meir and his colleagues are “new ones.” Of all these, it is said: “New ones and old ones.”1According to this midrash, the “old ones” and “new ones” have distinctive weights – reflecting the difficulty of living up to the Torah in their circumstances, as will be explained below. Pesaḥim 116a–b: Rabban Gamliel used to say: Whoever does not speak of these three matters on Passover has not fulfilled his obligations: pesaḥ [the paschal sacrifice], matza [unleavened bread], and maror [bitter herbs]. Rashbam2R. Samuel ben Meir (Troyes, 1085–1158) was a leading French Tosafist and grandson of Rabbi Shlomo Yitzḥaki (Rashi). explains: [“Who does not speak of” means] one who did not explain their reasons. So regarding these mitzvot, it is certainly permitted to explore and investigate their reasons. Let us look carefully: Why is maror placed after the matza? After all, in the actual event, [the sequence] was the opposite?3Maror commemorates the slavery whereas matza symbolizes the Exodus. Chronologically, slavery comes first, so it stands to reason that its commemoration should as well. Likewise, the reason for eating the maror is first chronologically.
Our Rabbis, of blessed memory, said in Kiddushin (40b): “[When on trial on Rosh HaShana,] a person should always view himself as equally balanced between guilty and exonerated…” although sometimes a person sees patently that this is not so, for better etc.4Or for worse. R. Salanter deliberately elides the negative alternative. Indeed, Rambam, of blessed memory, wrote in Mishneh Torah, the Laws of Repentance 3:1: Each individual person has merits and sins. One whose merits exceed his sins is a righteous person; one whose sins exceed his merits is a wicked man…. This weighing is not [simply] by the quantity of merits and sins, but according to their magnitude. One merit can outweigh several sins…and there are sins that outweigh several merits…. The weighing is only according to the judgment of the God of Understanding, who knows how to assess merits against sins. See further there.
Certainly this matter has many variables that increase the value of merits and sins. Let us explain a bit about one variable. It is known that commandments are evaluated according to the pain in the effort of observing them. As the Rabbis, of blessed memory, said: “According to the pain [of the effort] is the reward.”5Avot 5:23. Thus, sometimes a person does one mitzva at two different times. They are the same [mitzva] in outward appearance, yet with respect to the pain of observing them, the difference between them is an order of magnitude in the thousands, for everything can be broken down into many little parts, and the pain varies according to the format of the way they are done.6R. Salanter continues to shift the assessment of actions from their external performance level, in which they appear to be uniform from person to person or in the same person on different occasions and are taken at face value, to judging actions by Mussar standards, i.e., by their internal weight. Similar actions, externally, turn out to be vastly different when judged by the internal intentions and meanings brought by the individual, or in terms of the great variation between people as to their ease or propensity to observe or even within the same person on different occasions. The thrust of the Mussar approach is to turn religion into a highly individual and highly intentional set of actions and beliefs. Another far-reaching consequence of this approach is developed by R. Salanter in later letters. Actions that externally appear to be fulfillment of the Torah’s instructions may turn out to be just the opposite because of wrong intentions or because of psychological distortions, which turn the actions negative. For example, one learned for one hour at one time and his mind was clear for learning; his nature did not oppose it; he felt no pain or at least only a little when he learned. At another time, [however,] the situation was quite the contrary. The learning was like a heavy burden7Literally, “like the weight of sand.” See Proverbs 27:3. on his soul; his pain was fierce. In outward form, [the two acts] of learning one hour are equivalent. But the internal make-up has changed overwhelmingly, and so on with all matters. No hour resembles another with respect to its internal make-up. So too with his actions: even if he fulfills them with no change in their outward form, with respect to their internal make up, the difference between them is vast.
It is the same with respect to sins. Punishments vary according to the degree of pain involved in refraining from the sin. The less the pain, the greater the punishment, as the Rabbis, of blessed memory, said in Menaḥot (43b): “It was taught: R. Meir used to say: Greater is the punishment for [not wearing] the white [tzizit] string than the punishment for [not wearing] the sky-blue [string]….” See further there.8See previous letter. So it is with sins: although a person will be punished for every sin, whether in this [world] or the next, the punishment nevertheless varies according to context; the same sin, if committed by a person at a time when it was easy for him to refrain from the sin, will accordingly be punished more severely. Accordingly, with regard to sins, a person might commit the same sin on two different occasions that are identical with respect to severity, yet the punishment will vary on an order of magnitude in the thousands, based on different internal contexts9I.e., difficulty level. of refraining from the sin.
Based on this, one can contemplate – if he pays enough attention to delve deeply into it – the qualitative intensity of punishment for sins, be they doing what the Torah forbade, or not doing what the Torah commanded to do. When he considers the extent of his obligation to observe, whether by commission or omission, the law of the Torah, as transmitted to us from the Talmud and codes, against the pain incurred by observing it, [he will realize] that if he transgresses, his punishment will certainly be more severe than the pain he would incur by observing it, since by the very definition of variable punishment – which cautions the person to be vigilant about what he was commanded – [this pain] will be much greater than the pain of keeping the commandment. And afterward he will note how many thousands and thousands of levels his pain is lessened by keeping the commandments. And by this principle, his punishment [if he does violate] will multiply thousands upon thousands of times.
These words will strike roots in a person’s heart if he resolves to delve deeply into Torah study, each according to his own measure; to know to weigh obligations against pain, especially in those matters that are especially relevant to him. For almost every person, certain specific obligations apply especially to him, according to his nature and condition. For some, the obligation is to go deeper into laws of Torah study; for some it is laws of usury; for others, laws of exploitation; and the like.
These matters loom large during the Ten Days of Repentance: finding a way to abandon sin. This is the primary foundation, the cornerstone – but it is hard to find a way [to eliminate] things that are habitual. However, when a person closely scrutinizes all his activities in all their specifics, categorizing the easier and the more difficult, it will be easier for him to accept upon himself an enduring resolution to observe those that he regards as being easy, which belong in a separate category. He will thus, with relative ease, refrain from most of his sins, for the sins deemed easy are much more severe [with respect to punishment], as mentioned above.
Accordingly, we find that, in general, we can divide the commandments and the sins into categories of easier ones and more difficult ones. In each category, as noted above, there are many particulars. Sometimes a person errs, thinking this matter for him is in the difficult category, which is good for him – in a mitzva it increases his reward and in a sin it decreases punishment – but it is not so! For sometimes it is difficult for a person, not because of his inborn nature but because he attracted the [evil] urge upon himself – that is why it became difficult for him. Or, he brought the urge into another matter, which made this matter difficult, too – for human drives are connected and dependent on each other. In such a case, it is not considered a difficult condition for him but [is judged] in the “easy” category – because by his own free choice he has brought this evil upon himself.
The same is true for good. Sometimes, it is easy for a person to do a mitzva – not because of his inborn good temperament and the like, but rather by acquiring reverence, Mussar, and [proper] habituation in this matter or in something connected to this matter. Then it is considered a difficult category for him and the reward is very great – even though it is easy for him. So the quality of a mitzva or sin: whether they are [actually] in the difficult category or the “easy” one, and how and what is each specifically, can never be known to a person perfectly. Rambam’s words are right: only God, blessed be His name, Himself knows how to assess the value of good deeds and sins.
We can hang this [idea] onto the words of the Rabbis, of blessed memory, in Sukka (52a): “In the future, the Holy One, blessed be He, will bring the evil urge [and slaughter him]…. To the righteous, [the evil urge] appears as a huge mountain; to the wicked, it appears as a strand of hair….” See further there. It is an astonishing thing – why this variance? Indeed, this is what we said: for the wicked who brought the urge on themselves, of course, it was very difficult for them to conquer their urge; so they think that although they will certainly be punished, it would only be in the category of “difficult [to resist]” sins. But in truth, it is not so, because by their choice they brought the urge on themselves, making it become difficult for them. It is shown to them that their evil urge is really only a strand of hair – the opposite of what they imagine.
Similarly, the righteous, who by conditioning made service of God, blessed be His name, a pleasure, thought they would receive reward only in the category of “easy” observance. But it is not so. Since the ease was created by their choice and efforts, their “easy” observances are weighed as difficult ones and their reward is great. So [the evil urge] is shown to them [as big] as a mountain.
How much a person’s heart must tremble when he thoroughly considers his condition and nature! Who knows how many thousands of levels will afterward be considered “easy” for him [to have kept] because he brought the difficulty upon himself by his choices! His punishment will be much, much greater than he imagines. On the basis of these words, we can now illuminate the mishna in Avot (4:22): “Willing or not, in the future, you will give a reckoning and account [before the supreme King of kings]….” That is, the reckoning (din) is based on the state of the person, and the accounting is based on what his situation would have been had he not brought the urge upon himself, in which case it would have been much easier for him [to resist].
We find accordingly that what magnifies the aspect of a mitzva, that is, its weight, reduces the aspect of a sin. One observance will outweigh many sins in this aspect. So in Egypt, where the “difficulty” aspect was overwhelming, [Israel] was on so elevated a level that they were worthy of miracles and wonders. This is the [meaning of] the scriptural verse: “Their groaning went up…out of their travail” (Ex. 2:23).10Numerous statements by the sages (see, for example, Rashi on Ex. 12:6) note that the Israelites in Egypt were bare of mitzvot and even indistinguishable from the Egyptians. Nevertheless, under these oppressive circumstances, every mitzva and good deed carried tremendous weight. That is, why was their prayer accepted, which evinces a high level? Because it went up “out of their travail” – so these mitzvot exceeded the sins qualitatively, even though they were few in number.
[Returning to our opening questions,] matza [represents] the redemption, which is the effect, and maror [represents] the oppression, which was the cause [of the redemption]. So it is understandable that although in action, the cause precedes the effect, in a story we reverse the order. First we tell the effect, then [we explain] its cause. So first comes matza, then maror. And in Egypt, they were considered difficult as compared to the patriarchs,11Because of the greater degree of difficulty of doing the mitzvot. and so the second Temple as compared to the first.12Because of the greater degree of difficulty of doing the mitzvot. So they are categorized as “new ones,” a higher category, and this is the meaning of “new ones and old ones.”13See the opening paragraph of this letter, above.
Similarly, we can say: Mussar study in its own right is easy – to study sometimes at a set time, with enthusiasm of the soul. But it is a “new one” – so it enters into the category of difficult ones!14Notice that despite his continuing emphasis on the supremacy of Torah learning, de facto R. Salanter has described Mussar study as a “new one,” that is to say, it is weightier than the “old one,” Torah study. This ranking is because of the difficulties of the time, which Mussar is addressing. Take possession of it;15Compare Genesis 34:10. do not let it go; and your reward will be great. Let me know if my words have reached you, and may you be blessed with a good year as good as your own good souls! Your friend who seeks your peace. Israel. Erev Rosh HaShana, 1860
מִדְרַשׁ רַבָּה וַיִּקְרָא פָּרָשָׁה ב' חֲדָשִׁים גַּם יְשָׁנִים דּוֹדִי צָפַנְתִּי לְךָ, אַבְרָהָם יִצְחָק וְיַעֲקֹב יְשָׁנִים, עַמְרָם בֶּן קְהָת וְכָל הַכְּשֵׁרִים שֶׁהָיוּ בְּמִצְרַיִם חֲדָשִׁים, חֲבוּרָתוֹ שֶׁל מֹשֶׁה וַחֲבוּרָתוֹ שֶׁל יְהוֹשֻׁעַ, וַחֲבוּרָתוֹ שֶׁל דָּוִד וְשֶׁל חִזְקִיָּה יְשָׁנִים, חֲבוּרָתוֹ שֶׁל עֶזְרָא וְשֶׁל הִלֵּל וְשֶׁל רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן זַכַּאי, וְשֶׁל רַבִּי מֵאִיר וַחֲבֵרָיו חֲדָשִׁים, וַעֲלֵיהֶם הוּא אוֹמֵר חֲדָשִׁים גַּם יְשָׁנִים. (פְּסָחִים דַּף קט"ז) רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל הָיָה אוֹמֵר כָּל שֶׁלֹּא אָמַר שְׁלֹשָׁה דְּבָרִים אֵלּוּ בְּפֶסַח לֹא יָצָא יְדֵי חוֹבָתוֹ, וְאֵלּוּ הֵן פֶּסַח מַצָּה וּמָרוֹר, וּפֵרֵשׁ רַשְׁבַּ"ם שֶׁלֹּא פֵּרֵשׁ טַעֲמָן, וּבָזֹאת בַּמִּצְוֹת הַלָּלוּ בְּוַדַּאי הָרְשׁוּת נְתוּנָה לָתוּר וְלַחֲקֹר בְּטַעֲמֵיהֶן, וְיֵשׁ לְעַיֵּן מַדּוּעַ סִדְּרָן מָרוֹר אַחַר מַצָּה, הֲלֹא הַמַּעֲשֶׂה הָיְתָה בְּהִפּוּךְ וּלְפִי הַטַּעַם סִבַּת מָרוֹר קוֹדֵם:
Leviticus Rabba, chapter 2 (section 11): “New ones and old ones I have held aside for you, my beloved” (Song. 7:14) – Abraham, Isaac, Jacob are “old ones”; Amram, son of Kehat, and all the righteous ones who were in Egypt are “new ones.” The company of Moses and the company of Joshua, the company of David and of Hezekiah are “old ones”; the company of Ezra, of Hillel, of R. Yoḥanan ben Zakkai, of R. Meir and his colleagues are “new ones.” Of all these, it is said: “New ones and old ones.”1According to this midrash, the “old ones” and “new ones” have distinctive weights – reflecting the difficulty of living up to the Torah in their circumstances, as will be explained below.
Pesaḥim 116a–b: Rabban Gamliel used to say: Whoever does not speak of these three matters on Passover has not fulfilled his obligations: pesaḥ [the paschal sacrifice], matza [unleavened bread], and maror [bitter herbs].
Rashbam2R. Samuel ben Meir (Troyes, 1085–1158) was a leading French Tosafist and grandson of Rabbi Shlomo Yitzḥaki (Rashi). explains: [“Who does not speak of” means] one who did not explain their reasons. So regarding these mitzvot, it is certainly permitted to explore and investigate their reasons. Let us look carefully: Why is maror placed after the matza? After all, in the actual event, [the sequence] was the opposite?3Maror commemorates the slavery whereas matza symbolizes the Exodus. Chronologically, slavery comes first, so it stands to reason that its commemoration should as well. Likewise, the reason for eating the maror is first chronologically.
רַבּוֹתֵינוּ זַ"ל אָמְרוּ בְּקִדּוּשִׁין (דַּף מ') לְעוֹלָם יִרְאֶה אָדָם עַצְמוֹ, כְּאִלּוּ חֶצְיוֹ חַיָּב וְחֶצְיוֹ זַכַּאי, וְלִפְעָמִים יִרְאֶה הָאָדָם בַּעֲלִיל שֶׁאֵינוֹ כֵן הֵן לְטוֹב וְכוּ', אָכֵן הָרַמְבַּ"ם זַ"ל כָּתַב בְּהִלְכוֹת תְּשׁוּבָה פֶּרֶק ג', כָּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד מִבְּנֵי הָאָדָם יֵשׁ לוֹ זְכֻיּוֹת וַעֲוֹנוֹת מִי שֶׁזְּכֻיּוֹתָיו יְתֵרוֹת עַל עֲוֹנוֹתָיו צַדִּיק, וּמִי שֶׁעֲוֹנוֹתָיו יְתֵרוֹת עַל זְכֻיּוֹתָיו רָשָׁע כוּ', וְשִׁקּוּל זֶה אֵינוֹ לְפִי מִנְיַן הַזְּכֻיּוֹת וְהָעֲוֹנוֹת, אֶלָּא לְפִי גָּדְלָם, יֵשׁ זְכוּת שֶׁהוּא נֶגֶד כַּמָּה עֲוֹנוֹת כוּ', וְיֵשׁ עוֹד שֶׁהוּא נֶגֶד כַּמָּה זְכֻיּוֹת כוּ', וְאֵין שׁוֹקְלִין אֶלָּא בְּדַעְתּוֹ שֶׁל אֵל דֵּעוֹת, וְהוּא הַיּוֹדֵעַ אֵיךְ עוֹרְכִין הַזְּכֻיּוֹת נֶגֶד הָעֲוֹנוֹת עַד כָּאן לְשׁוֹנוֹ עַיֵּן שָׁם:
Our Rabbis, of blessed memory, said in Kiddushin (40b): “[When on trial on Rosh HaShana,] a person should always view himself as equally balanced between guilty and exonerated…” although sometimes a person sees patently that this is not so, for better etc.4Or for worse. R. Salanter deliberately elides the negative alternative. Indeed, Rambam, of blessed memory, wrote in Mishneh Torah, the Laws of Repentance 3:1:
Each individual person has merits and sins. One whose merits exceed his sins is a righteous person; one whose sins exceed his merits is a wicked man…. This weighing is not [simply] by the quantity of merits and sins, but according to their magnitude. One merit can outweigh several sins…and there are sins that outweigh several merits…. The weighing is only according to the judgment of the God of Understanding, who knows how to assess merits against sins.
See further there.
בְּוַדַּאי יֵשׁ בַּדָּבָר בְּחִינוֹת רַבּוֹת, מַה שֶּׁמַּגְדִּיל עֶרֶךְ הַזְּכֻיּוֹת וְהָעֲוֹנוֹת, וּנְבָאֵר מְעַט בְּחִינָה אַחַת. כִּי נוֹדַע כִּי הַמִּצְוֹת נֶעֱרָכוֹת נֶגֶד צַעַר קִיּוּמָם, כְּמַאֲמַר רַבּוֹתֵינוּ זַ"ל לְפוּם צַעֲרָא אַגְרָא, וְלָזֹאת לִפְעָמִים הָאָדָם עוֹשֶׂה מִצְוָה אַחַת בִּשְׁנֵי עִתִּים, הַשָּׁוִים בִּתְמוּנַת חָמְרָם, וּבְכָל זֶה בִּבְחִינַת צַעַר קִיּוּמָם, יֵשׁ בֵּינֵיהֶם הֶפְרֵשׁ כַּמָּה אֲלָפִים בְּחִינוֹת, כִּי כָּל דָּבָר תִּתְחַלֵּק לַחֲלָקִים דַּקִּים וְרַבִּים, כִּי בְּחִינַת הַצַּעַר תִּתְחַלֵּף לְפִי צוּרַת עֲשִׂיָּתָם, לְמָשָׁל מִי שֶׁלָּמַד בְּעֵת אַחַת שָׁעָה אַחַת. וְדַעְתּוֹ הָיְתָה אָז צְלוּלָה לַלִּמּוּד, טִבְעוֹ לֹא הָיְתָה מִתְנַגֶּדֶת לָזֶה, לֹא הִרְגִּישׁ צַעַר בְּנַפְשׁוֹ אוֹ לְכָל הַפָּחוֹת מְעַט בְּעֵת לִמּוּדוֹ, וּבְעֵת אַחֶרֶת הָיָה הַדָּבָר בְּהִפּוּךְ, כְּנֶטֶל הַחוֹל הָיְתָה עַל נַפְשׁוֹ הַלִּמּוּד, צַעֲרוֹ הָיָה לְמַכְבִּיר, הֲלֹא הַחָמְרִי שָׁוִים לִמּוּד שָׁעָה אַחַת, אָכֵן הַצּוּרָה נִשְׁתַּנָּה הַרְבֵּה לְמַעְלָה רֹאשׁ, וְכַיּוֹצֵא בְּכָל הַדְּבָרִים, אֵין שָׁעָה דּוֹמֶה לַחֲבֵרוֹ בִּבְחִינַת צוּרָתוֹ. וְלָזֹאת גַּם מַעֲשָׂיו גַּם אִם יְקַיֵּם בְּאֵין שִׁנּוּי בְּחָמְרָם, בְּכָל זֹאת בִּבְחִינַת צוּרָתָם הַהֶפְרֵשׁ בֵּינֵיהֶם מֶרְחָק רַב:
Certainly this matter has many variables that increase the value of merits and sins. Let us explain a bit about one variable. It is known that commandments are evaluated according to the pain in the effort of observing them. As the Rabbis, of blessed memory, said: “According to the pain [of the effort] is the reward.”5Avot 5:23. Thus, sometimes a person does one mitzva at two different times. They are the same [mitzva] in outward appearance, yet with respect to the pain of observing them, the difference between them is an order of magnitude in the thousands, for everything can be broken down into many little parts, and the pain varies according to the format of the way they are done.6R. Salanter continues to shift the assessment of actions from their external performance level, in which they appear to be uniform from person to person or in the same person on different occasions and are taken at face value, to judging actions by Mussar standards, i.e., by their internal weight. Similar actions, externally, turn out to be vastly different when judged by the internal intentions and meanings brought by the individual, or in terms of the great variation between people as to their ease or propensity to observe or even within the same person on different occasions. The thrust of the Mussar approach is to turn religion into a highly individual and highly intentional set of actions and beliefs. Another far-reaching consequence of this approach is developed by R. Salanter in later letters. Actions that externally appear to be fulfillment of the Torah’s instructions may turn out to be just the opposite because of wrong intentions or because of psychological distortions, which turn the actions negative. For example, one learned for one hour at one time and his mind was clear for learning; his nature did not oppose it; he felt no pain or at least only a little when he learned. At another time, [however,] the situation was quite the contrary. The learning was like a heavy burden7Literally, “like the weight of sand.” See Proverbs 27:3. on his soul; his pain was fierce. In outward form, [the two acts] of learning one hour are equivalent. But the internal make-up has changed overwhelmingly, and so on with all matters. No hour resembles another with respect to its internal make-up. So too with his actions: even if he fulfills them with no change in their outward form, with respect to their internal make up, the difference between them is vast.
וְכֵן בְּעִנְיַן הָעֲבֵרוֹת תִּתְחַלֵּף עָנְשָׁם לְפִי גֶּדֶר עֶרֶךְ צַעַר מְנִיעַת הָעֲבֵרָה, וְכָל אֲשֶׁר תִּפְחַת בְּצַעֲרָהּ כֵּן גַּם עָנְשָׁהּ גָּדוֹל כְּמַאֲמַר רַבּוֹתֵינוּ זַ"ל מְנָחוֹת (דַּף מ"ג) תַּנְיָא הָיָה רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר גָּדוֹל עָנְשׁוֹ שֶׁל לָבָן יוֹתֵר מֵעָנְשׁוֹ שֶׁל תְּכֵלֶת מָשָׁל כוּ' עַיֵּן שָׁם, וְלָזֹאת גַּם בְּעִנְיַן הָעֲבֵרוֹת, הֲגַם שֶׁעַל כָּל עֲבֵרָה עָנֹשׁ יֵעָנֵשׁ הָאָדָם, אִם בָּזֶה אוֹ בַּבָּא, מִכָּל מָקוֹם תִּתְחַלֵּף הָעֹנֶשׁ לְפִי צוּרָתוֹ, וְאוֹתָהּ הָעֲבֵרָה עַצְמָהּ כְּשֶׁיַּעֲשֶׂנָּה הָאָדָם, בְּעֵת אֲשֶׁר נָקֵל לְפָנָיו לְהִנָּזֵר מֵהָעֲבֵרָה כֵּן עָנְשָׁהּ תִּגְדַּל, וּלְפִי זֶה גַּם בְּעִנְיַן הָעֲבֵרוֹת, יַעֲשֶׂה הָאָדָם לִפְעָמִים עֲבֵרָה אַחַת בִּשְׁנֵי עִתִּים שָׁוִים בִּבְחִינַת חָמְרָם, וְעִם כָּל זֶה תִּתְחַלֵּף עָנְשָׁם בְּכַמָּה אֲלָפִים בְּחִינוֹת, לְפִי עֶרֶךְ הַהִתְחַלְּקוּת בְּצוּרַת הַנְּזִירָה מֵהָעֲבֵרָה אֵיךְ הָיְתָה:
It is the same with respect to sins. Punishments vary according to the degree of pain involved in refraining from the sin. The less the pain, the greater the punishment, as the Rabbis, of blessed memory, said in Menaḥot (43b): “It was taught: R. Meir used to say: Greater is the punishment for [not wearing] the white [tzizit] string than the punishment for [not wearing] the sky-blue [string]….” See further there.8See previous letter. So it is with sins: although a person will be punished for every sin, whether in this [world] or the next, the punishment nevertheless varies according to context; the same sin, if committed by a person at a time when it was easy for him to refrain from the sin, will accordingly be punished more severely. Accordingly, with regard to sins, a person might commit the same sin on two different occasions that are identical with respect to severity, yet the punishment will vary on an order of magnitude in the thousands, based on different internal contexts9I.e., difficulty level. of refraining from the sin.
וּמִזֶּה יִתְבּוֹנֵן הָאָדָם, אִם יִתֵּן לִבּוֹ לְדָבָר לְהַעֲמִיק בָּהּ הֵיטֵב — כַּמָּה גָּדְלָה אֵיכוּת הָעֹנֶשׁ עַל עֲבֵרוֹת, אִם בַּעֲשׂוֹת מַה שֶּׁאָסְרָה תּוֹרָה, אוֹ בְּהִמָּנַע עֲשׂוֹת מַה שֶּׁצִּוְּתָה הַתּוֹרָה לַעֲשׂוֹת, כְּשֶׁיִּתְבּוֹנֵן בַּתּוֹרָה עַל פִּי הַדִּין הַמְּסוּרָה לָנוּ מֵהַגְּמָרָא וּפוֹסְקִים, עַד הֵיכָן חִיּוּבָהּ מַגַּעַת לְקַיְּמָהּ, אִם בַּעֲשׂוֹת אוֹ בְּלִי לַעֲשׂוֹת, לְהִתְנַגֵּד אֶל הַצַּעַר אֲשֶׁר יִוָּלֵד בְּקִיּוּמָהּ, וְאִם יַעֲבֹר אָז עָנֹשׁ יֵעָנֵשׁ בְּוַדַּאי בְּעֹנֶשׁ יוֹתֵר גָּדוֹל, נֶגֶד הַצַּעַר שֶׁהָיָה לוֹ אִם הָיָה מְקַיֵּם, כִּי זֶה גֶּדֶר חֲלִיפַת הָעֹנֶשׁ לְהַזְהִיר הָאָדָם לְהִשָּׁמֵר עֲבוּר זֶה מֵאֵת אֲשֶׁר נִצְטַוָּה, שֶׁיִּהְיֶה הַרְבֵּה יוֹתֵר מֵהַצַּעַר שְׁמִירַת הַצִּוּוּי, וְאַחַר כָּךְ יַשְׁקִיף לְמַטָּה כַּמָּה וְכַמָּה אֲלָפִים בְּחִינוֹת תִּמְעַט צַעֲרוֹ בִּשְׁמִירַת הַדָּבָר, וְעַל פִּי זֶה תִּכְפַּל אֶלֶף אֲלָפִים פְּעָמִים עָנְשׁוֹ:
Based on this, one can contemplate – if he pays enough attention to delve deeply into it – the qualitative intensity of punishment for sins, be they doing what the Torah forbade, or not doing what the Torah commanded to do. When he considers the extent of his obligation to observe, whether by commission or omission, the law of the Torah, as transmitted to us from the Talmud and codes, against the pain incurred by observing it, [he will realize] that if he transgresses, his punishment will certainly be more severe than the pain he would incur by observing it, since by the very definition of variable punishment – which cautions the person to be vigilant about what he was commanded – [this pain] will be much greater than the pain of keeping the commandment. And afterward he will note how many thousands and thousands of levels his pain is lessened by keeping the commandments. And by this principle, his punishment [if he does violate] will multiply thousands upon thousands of times.
דְּבָרִים הַלָּלוּ יַכּוּ שֹׁרֶשׁ בְּלֵב הָאָדָם, אִם יָשִׂים לִבּוֹ לְהַעֲמִיק בְּלִמּוּד הַתּוֹרָה אִישׁ לְפִי עֶרְכּוֹ, לֵידַע הַחִיּוּב לְהִתְנַגֵּד אֶל הַצַּעַר, וּבִפְרָט בַּדְּבָרִים הַשַּׁיָּכִים לוֹ, כִּי כִּמְעַט לְכָל אִישׁ שַׁיָּכִים יוֹתֵר חִיּוּבִים פְּרָטִים לְפִי תְּכוּנָתוֹ וּמַצָּבוֹ, יֵשׁ אֲשֶׁר הַהֶכְרֵחַ לְהַעֲמִיק יוֹתֵר בְּהִלְכוֹת תַּלְמוּד תּוֹרָה, וְיֵשׁ בְּהִלְכוֹת רִבִּית, וְיֵשׁ בְּהִלְכוֹת אוֹנָאָה וְכַיּוֹצֵא:
These words will strike roots in a person’s heart if he resolves to delve deeply into Torah study, each according to his own measure; to know to weigh obligations against pain, especially in those matters that are especially relevant to him. For almost every person, certain specific obligations apply especially to him, according to his nature and condition. For some, the obligation is to go deeper into laws of Torah study; for some it is laws of usury; for others, laws of exploitation; and the like.
מַה מְּאֹד עַתִּיקִין הַדְּבָרִים הַלָּלוּ בַּעֲשֶׂרֶת יְמֵי תְּשׁוּבָה, לִמְצֹא דֶּרֶךְ קְצָת לַעֲזִיבַת הַחֵטְא, אֲשֶׁר הִיא הַיְסוֹד הָרָאשִׁי אֶבֶן הַפִּנָּה, וְכָבֵד לִמְצֹא דֶּרֶךְ בַּדְּבָרִים הָרְגִילִים, אָכֵן כְּשֶׁיִּתְבּוֹנֵן הָאָדָם הֵיטֵב עִנְיָנָיו בְּכָל פְּרָטֵיהֶם, בְּגֶדֶר הַקַּלּוֹת וְהַכְּבֵדוֹת נָקֵל לְפָנָיו לְקַבֵּל עַל עַצְמוֹ קַבָּלָה שֶׁל קַיָּמָא, לִשְׁמֹר אוֹתוֹ בְּגֶדֶר הַקַּלּוֹת לְפָנָיו, אֲשֶׁר לְמִין בִּפְנֵי עַצְמוֹ יֵחָשֵׁב, וּבָזֶה יִגָּזֵר כִּמְעַט מֵרֹב עֲוֹנוֹתָיו בְּנָקֵל, כִּי הָעֲבֵרוֹת בְּאֹפֶן הַקַּלּוֹת, הֵמָּה הַרְבֵּה יוֹתֵר בְּאֵיכוּתָן כַּנִּזְכָּר לְעֵיל:
These matters loom large during the Ten Days of Repentance: finding a way to abandon sin. This is the primary foundation, the cornerstone – but it is hard to find a way [to eliminate] things that are habitual. However, when a person closely scrutinizes all his activities in all their specifics, categorizing the easier and the more difficult, it will be easier for him to accept upon himself an enduring resolution to observe those that he regards as being easy, which belong in a separate category. He will thus, with relative ease, refrain from most of his sins, for the sins deemed easy are much more severe [with respect to punishment], as mentioned above.
נִמְצָא לְפִי זֶה בִּכְלָל נוּכַל לְחַלֵּק הַמִּצְוֹת וְהָעֲבֵרוֹת, בְּגֶדֶר הַקַּלּוֹת וְהַכְּבֵדוֹת, וּבֵינֵיהֶם פְּרָטִים רַבִּים כַּנִּזְכָּר לְעֵיל, אֲשֶׁר לִפְעָמִים יִטְעֶה הָאָדָם בָּזֶה, בְּסָבְרוֹ כִּי הַדָּבָר אֶצְלוֹ בְּגֶדֶר הַכְּבֵדוֹת, אֲשֶׁר זֹאת טוֹב לְהָאָדָם בְּאֹפֶן מִצְוָה לְהַגְדִּיל שְׂכָרוֹ, וּבְאֹפֶן עֲבֵרָה לְמַעֵט עָנְשׁוֹ, וְאֵינֶנּוּ כֵּן כִּי לִפְעָמִים הַדָבָר כָּבֵד לְהָאָדָם, לֹא מִפְּאַת מַצַּב טִבְעַת לֵידָתוֹ, רַק מִפְּאַת שֶׁהִמְשִׁיךְ עָלָיו הַיֵּצֶר, וְנַעֲשָׂה הַדָּבָר כָּבֵד לְפָנָיו, אוֹ שֶׁהִמְשִׁיךְ הַיֵּצֶר בְּדָבָר אַחֵר, אֲשֶׁר נוֹלְדָה מִמֶּנָּה הַכְּבֵדוּת גַּם בַּדָּבָר הַלָּזוֹ, כִּי הַכֹּחוֹת בְּהָאָדָם מְשֻׁלָּבִים הֵמָּה וּתְלוּיִים זֶה בָּזֶה, וְאָז לֹא יֵחָשֵׁב לְהָאָדָם בְּמַצַּב הַכְּבֵדוּת רַק גֶּדֶר הַקַּלּוֹת, כֵּיוָן שֶׁבִּבְחִירָתוֹ הִמְשִׁיךְ עָלָיו הָרָעָה:
Accordingly, we find that, in general, we can divide the commandments and the sins into categories of easier ones and more difficult ones. In each category, as noted above, there are many particulars. Sometimes a person errs, thinking this matter for him is in the difficult category, which is good for him – in a mitzva it increases his reward and in a sin it decreases punishment – but it is not so! For sometimes it is difficult for a person, not because of his inborn nature but because he attracted the [evil] urge upon himself – that is why it became difficult for him. Or, he brought the urge into another matter, which made this matter difficult, too – for human drives are connected and dependent on each other. In such a case, it is not considered a difficult condition for him but [is judged] in the “easy” category – because by his own free choice he has brought this evil upon himself.
וְכֵן לְטוֹב. לִפְעָמִים יֵקַל עַל הָאָדָם עֲשׂוֹת מִצְוָה לֹא בַּעֲבוּר טוֹב מִזְגּוֹ מִלֵּידָתוֹ וְכַיּוֹצֵא, רַק בַּמֶּה שֶׁקָּנָה הַיִּרְאָה וְהַמּוּסָר וְהַהֶרְגֵּל בַּדָּבָר הַלָּזֶה אוֹ בְּדָבָר מְשֻׁלָּב לָזֶה, וְאָז יַחֲשֹׁב לְהָאָדָם בְּגֶדֶר הַכְּבֵדוּת הֲגַם שֶׁנָּקֵל לְפָנָיו וּשְׂכָרוֹ מְרֻבֶּה יוֹתֵר, וְלָזֹאת אֵיכוּת הַמִּצְוָה וְהָעֲבֵרָה, אִם יִכָּנְסוּ בְּגֶדֶר הַכְּבֵדוֹת אוֹ הַקַּלּוֹת, וְאֵיךְ וּמַה בִּפְרָט, בַּל יִוָּדַע לְאִישׁ אֶל נָכוֹן, וְצָדְקוּ דִּבְרֵי הָרַמְבַּ"ם שֶׁה' יִתְבָּרַךְ שְׁמוֹ הוּא יוֹדֵעַ אֵיךְ עוֹרְכִין הַמִּצְוֹת וְהָעֲבֵרוֹת:
The same is true for good. Sometimes, it is easy for a person to do a mitzva – not because of his inborn good temperament and the like, but rather by acquiring reverence, Mussar, and [proper] habituation in this matter or in something connected to this matter. Then it is considered a difficult category for him and the reward is very great – even though it is easy for him. So the quality of a mitzva or sin: whether they are [actually] in the difficult category or the “easy” one, and how and what is each specifically, can never be known to a person perfectly. Rambam’s words are right: only God, blessed be His name, Himself knows how to assess the value of good deeds and sins.
וְנוּכַל לְהַעֲמִיס הַדָּבָר בְּדִבְרֵי רַבּוֹתֵינוּ זַ"ל בְּסֻכָּה (דַּף נ"ג) לֶעָתִיד לָבֹא מְבִיאוֹ הַקָּדוֹשׁ־בָּרוּךְ־הוּא לַיֵּצֶר הָרָע כוּ' צַדִּיקִים נִדְמֶה לָהֶם כְּהַר, וּרְשָׁעִים נִדְמֶה לָהֶם כְּחוּט הַשְּׂעָרָה כוּ' עַיֵּן שָׁם, וְהַדָּבָר מַפְלִיא יַעַן מַה הַהִשְׁתַּנּוּת הַלָּזֶה, אָכֵן הוּא הַדָּבָר אֲשֶׁר דִּבַּרְנוּ כִּי הָרְשָׁעִים שֶׁהִמְשִׁיכוּ עֲלֵיהֶן הַיֵּצֶר, בְּוַדַּאי הָיָה קָשֶׁה לָהֶם לִמְאֹד לִכְבֹּשׁ אֶת יִצְרָם, וְסוֹבְרִים הֵמָּה הֲגַם שֶׁבְּוַדַּאי יֵעָנְשׁוּ, אָכֵן רַק בְּגֶדֶר הַכְּבֵדוֹת, וּבֶאֱמֶת הַדָּבָר אֵינוֹ כֵן, כֵּיוָן שֶׁבִּבְחִירָתָם הִמְשִׁיכוּ עֲלֵיהֶן הַיֵּצֶר, וּמִזֶּה נַעֲשָׂה הַדָּבָר כָּבֵד לִפְנֵיהֶם, וְלָזֹאת מַרְאִין לָהֶם שֶׁהַיֵּצֶר הָרָע אֶצְלָם בִּבְחִינַת חוּט הַשְּׂעָרָה, הֵפֶךְ דִּמְיוֹנָם:
We can hang this [idea] onto the words of the Rabbis, of blessed memory, in Sukka (52a): “In the future, the Holy One, blessed be He, will bring the evil urge [and slaughter him]…. To the righteous, [the evil urge] appears as a huge mountain; to the wicked, it appears as a strand of hair….” See further there. It is an astonishing thing – why this variance? Indeed, this is what we said: for the wicked who brought the urge on themselves, of course, it was very difficult for them to conquer their urge; so they think that although they will certainly be punished, it would only be in the category of “difficult [to resist]” sins. But in truth, it is not so, because by their choice they brought the urge on themselves, making it become difficult for them. It is shown to them that their evil urge is really only a strand of hair – the opposite of what they imagine.
וְכֵן צַדִּיקִים אֲשֶׁר מֵהַרְגִּילָם נַעֲשָׂה אֶצְלָם עֲבוֹדָתוֹ יִתְבָּרַךְ שְׁמוֹ לְתַעֲנוּג, סְבוּרִים לְקַבֵּל שָׂכָר רַק בְּגֶדֶר הַקַּלּוֹת, וְהַדָּבָר אֵינוֹ כֵן כֵּיוָן שֶׁמִּבְּחִירָתָם וּמִצִּדָּם נוֹלַד, הַקַּלּוֹת לִכְבֵדוֹת יֵחָשֵׁב וּשְׂכָרָם מְרֻבֶּה, לָזֹאת מַרְאִים לָהֶם כְּהַר:
Similarly, the righteous, who by conditioning made service of God, blessed be His name, a pleasure, thought they would receive reward only in the category of “easy” observance. But it is not so. Since the ease was created by their choice and efforts, their “easy” observances are weighed as difficult ones and their reward is great. So [the evil urge] is shown to them [as big] as a mountain.
וּמַה מְּאֹד יֶחֱרַד לֵב הָאָדָם, בְּהִתְבּוֹנְנוֹ הֵיטֵב עַל מַצָּבוֹ וּתְכוּנָתוֹ, מִי יוֹדֵעַ כַּמָּה אֲלָפִים בְּחִינוֹת יֵחָשֵׁב לוֹ לְאָחוֹר לִבְחִינַת הַקַּלּוֹת, מִפְּאַת שֶׁהִמְשִׁיךְ בִּבְחִירָתוֹ עָלָיו הַכְּבֵדוֹת כַּנִּזְכָּר לְעֵיל, וְעָנְשׁוֹ יוֹתֵר וְיוֹתֵר הַרְבֵּה מֵאֵת אֲשֶׁר יְדַמֶּה, עַל פִּי הַדְּבָרִים הַלָּלוּ נוּכַל לָתֵת צִיּוּר לְהַמִשְׁנָה בְּאָבוֹת, עַל כָּרְחֲךָ אַתָּה עֲתִיד לִתֵּן דִּין וְחֶשְׁבּוֹן, הַיְנוּ דִּין כְּפִי מַצַּב הָאָדָם, חֶשְׁבּוֹן מַה שֶּׁהָיָה מַצָּבוֹ אִם לֹא הִמְשִׁיךְ עָלָיו הַיֵּצֶר, וְהָיָה הַדָּבָר נָקֵל עָלָיו הַרְבֵּה:
How much a person’s heart must tremble when he thoroughly considers his condition and nature! Who knows how many thousands of levels will afterward be considered “easy” for him [to have kept] because he brought the difficulty upon himself by his choices! His punishment will be much, much greater than he imagines. On the basis of these words, we can now illuminate the mishna in Avot (4:22): “Willing or not, in the future, you will give a reckoning and account [before the supreme King of kings]….” That is, the reckoning (din) is based on the state of the person, and the accounting is based on what his situation would have been had he not brought the urge upon himself, in which case it would have been much easier for him [to resist].
נִמְצָא לְפִי זֶה מַה שֶּׁמַּגְדִּיל בְּחִינַת הַמִּצְוֹת הַיְנוּ בְּחִינַת הַכְּבֵדוּת, מְמַעֵט בְּחִינַת הָעֲבֵרוֹת, וּמִצְוָה אַחַת תֶּעֱרַךְ נֶגֶד כַּמָּה עֲבֵרוֹת בַּבְּחִינָה הַלָּזוֹ, לָזֹאת בְּמִצְרַיִם שֶׁהָיָה בִּבְחִינַת הַכְּבֵדוּת לְמַעְלָה רֹאשׁ, הָיוּ בְּמַדְרֵגָה נִשְׂגָּבָה וְזָכוּ לְנִסִּים וְנִפְלָאוֹת, הוּא מַאֲמַר הַכָּתוּב וַתַּעַל שַׁוְעָתָם גוֹ' מִן הָעֲבוֹדָה, הַיְנוּ מִפְּנֵי מַה נִּתְקַבְּלָה תְּפִלָּתָם אֲשֶׁר הִיא מַדְרֵגָה נִשָּׂאָה, יַעַן הָיְתָה מִן הָעֲבוֹדָה, וְעָלוּ הַמִּצְוֹת בְּאֵיכוּתָן עַל הָעֲבֵרוֹת, הֲגַם שֶׁהָיוּ מְעַטִּים בְּמִסְפָּר:
We find accordingly that what magnifies the aspect of a mitzva, that is, its weight, reduces the aspect of a sin. One observance will outweigh many sins in this aspect. So in Egypt, where the “difficulty” aspect was overwhelming, [Israel] was on so elevated a level that they were worthy of miracles and wonders. This is the [meaning of] the scriptural verse: “Their groaning went up…out of their travail” (Ex. 2:23).10Numerous statements by the sages (see, for example, Rashi on Ex. 12:6) note that the Israelites in Egypt were bare of mitzvot and even indistinguishable from the Egyptians. Nevertheless, under these oppressive circumstances, every mitzva and good deed carried tremendous weight. That is, why was their prayer accepted, which evinces a high level? Because it went up “out of their travail” – so these mitzvot exceeded the sins qualitatively, even though they were few in number.
וּבָזֹאת מַצָּה הִיא הַגְּאֻלָּה הַמְסוֹבָב, מָרוֹר הַשִּׁעְבּוּד סִבָּה, וְזֹאת מוּבָן הֲגַם שֶׁבְּמַעֲשֵׂה הַסִּבָּה קוֹדֶמֶת לַמְסוֹבָב, אָכֵן בְּסִפּוּר הַדָּבָר הוּא לְהֵפֶךְ, בִּתְחִלָּה מְסַפְּרִין הַמְסוֹבָב וְאַחַר כָּךְ סִבָּתָהּ. לָזֹאת מַצָּה וְאַחַר־כָּךְ מָרוֹר. וְהִנֵּה בְּמִצְרַיִם הָיוּ בִּבְחִינַת הַכְּבֵדוּת נֶגֶד הָאָבוֹת, וְכֵן בְּבַיִת שֵׁנִי נֶגֶד הָרִאשׁוֹן, לָזֹאת הֵמָּה בְּחִינוֹת חֲדָשׁוֹת בְּחִינָה נַעֲלָה, זֶהוּ חֲדָשִׁים גַּם יְשָׁנִים:
[Returning to our opening questions,] matza [represents] the redemption, which is the effect, and maror [represents] the oppression, which was the cause [of the redemption]. So it is understandable that although in action, the cause precedes the effect, in a story we reverse the order. First we tell the effect, then [we explain] its cause. So first comes matza, then maror. And in Egypt, they were considered difficult as compared to the patriarchs,11Because of the greater degree of difficulty of doing the mitzvot. and so the second Temple as compared to the first.12Because of the greater degree of difficulty of doing the mitzvot. So they are categorized as “new ones,” a higher category, and this is the meaning of “new ones and old ones.”13See the opening paragraph of this letter, above.
וּבָזֹאת גַּם אֲנַחְנוּ נֹאמַר, לִמּוּד הַמּוּסָרִי קַלָּה הִיא מִפְּאַת עַצְמְהּ לִלְמֹד לִפְעָמִים עֵת סִדּוּרָהּ, בְּהִתְפַּעֲלוּת הַנֶּפֶשׁ, אָכֵן חֲדָשָׁה הִיא, לָזֹאת תִּכָּנֵס בִּבְחִינַת הַכְּבֵדוּת, הֵאָחֲזוּ בָּהּ וְאַל תַּרְפּוּהָ וּשְׂכַרְכֶם מְרֻבֶּה, תּוֹדִיעוּנִי נָא אִם הַגִּיעֲכֶם דְּבָרִי, וְתִתְבָּרְכוּ בְּשָׁנָה טוֹבָה כְּנַפְשְׁכֶם הַטּוֹב וְנֶפֶשׁ יְדִידְכֶם דוֹרֵשׁ שְׁלוֹמְכֶם יִשְׂרָאֵל, עֶרֶב רֹאשׁ הַשָּׁנָה תר"ך:
Similarly, we can say: Mussar study in its own right is easy – to study sometimes at a set time, with enthusiasm of the soul. But it is a “new one” – so it enters into the category of difficult ones!14Notice that despite his continuing emphasis on the supremacy of Torah learning, de facto R. Salanter has described Mussar study as a “new one,” that is to say, it is weightier than the “old one,” Torah study. This ranking is because of the difficulties of the time, which Mussar is addressing. Take possession of it;15Compare Genesis 34:10. do not let it go; and your reward will be great. Let me know if my words have reached you, and may you be blessed with a good year as good as your own good souls!
Your friend who seeks your peace.
Israel.
Erev Rosh HaShana, 1860