Sanctity in the Thought of R. Meir Simcha
MODERN RABBINIC
THOUGHT
By Rav
*********************************************************************
This shiur is
dedicated in memory of
our beloved father, Harry Meisles (Elchanan ben
Yitzchak) z"l,
whose yahrzeit
falls on 26 Adar the Meisles family.
**********************************************************************
The
VBM wishes a warm mazal tov to Rav
on
the bar mitzva of their son Zecharyah Shimon. May you continue
to
have nachas from Zecharyah and from the rest of your
children!
**********************************************************************
Lecture #19: Sanctity in the Thought of R. Meir
Simcha
R. Meir Simcha frequently cautions against attributing divinity or
inherent sanctity to physical items.
The human need to relate to something tangible makes it difficult to
focus our devotion towards an incorporeal God, and this naturally leads to
worship of limited entities that are not truly worthy of such reverence. R. Meir Simcha repeatedly emphasizes
that no physical entity harbors inherent sanctity. He contrasts physical items with God, the
only being with inherent sanctity.
He suggests that only positive human choices can create sanctified
objects and places. R. Meir Simcha
utilizes these themes to explain several biblical passages and
narratives.
The most famous example may be his explanation of Moshe's rationale for
shattering the luchot.[1] Many commentators wonder what motivated
Moshe to carry out this bold act.
After all, there is something brazen about breaking an object God gave to
you to deliver to the people. One
explanation suggests that Moshe wanted to perform a dramatic act in front of the
nation to shake them up. Rashbam
argues that Moshe did not actually decide to break them; he simply could not
hold them any longer once he saw the golden calf up close.[2] A midrashic perspective contends that
breaking the luchot represents the tearing up of the marriage contract
between God and the Jewish people.
R. Meir Simcha's interpretation begins with an understanding of the sin
of the calf. The people had grown
so dependent on Moshe that his absence sent them into a panic, a fright that led
to the making of the golden calf.
Apparently, they thought of Moshe as indispensible for encountering
divinity. Without Moshe's presence,
a substitute had to be found immediately.
Upon descending from the mountain, Moshe wanted to educate the people
that his presence was not necessary.
In fact, during the thirty-eight years of divine anger and wandering in
the desert after the sin of the spies, God did not communicate with Moshe. Moshe has a special prophetic role, but
only as the representative of the people and not as an independent
force.
Moshe understood the
people's desire for tangible representations. This desire led them to sanctify him and
to create a golden calf as a replacement if he remained unavailable. Were Moshe to bring the people the
luchot at that moment, they would simply shift their allegiance and
reverence to the luchot. He
therefore had to break them. The
ongoing presence of the broken shards of the first tablet in the aron
provided a permanent reminder of this message. Even though the first tablets were
fashioned by God Himself, transgressions can cause their breaking; only God
Himself possesses non-contingent sanctity.
The basic human
desire for something tangible to worship can lead to deification of a person or
place. The Torah takes steps to
prevent this from happening regarding
Interestingly, R.
Meir Simcha makes a similar claim about the
R. Meir Simcha notes
that the status of the Mikdash changes after the people sin. Once sins bring about destruction, the
same Holy of Holies that once caused trepidation to the High Priest each Yom
Kippur can be entered by Titus with a prostitute in tow. The providence that reigned in the
Mikdash when the people were worthy simply ceased, and Titus emerged
unscathed.
The Torah also
combats the possibility of deifying a person. How would the people relate to Moshe,
the man who had led them out of
One might contend
that this interpretation contradicts the Torah's explanation for why Moshe was
barred from entering the land. The
Torah attributes this to a sin committed by Moshe in the episode of Mei
Meriva. In defense of
This issue played an
influential role during the episode of the spies. According to Chazal, Eldad and
Meidad prophesied that Moshe would perish and Yehoshua would lead the entry into
the
Another relevant
passage in the Meshekh Chokhma explores the roots of paganism.[7] Humans naturally experience appreciation
for such things as beauty, love, and strength. The pagans chose to embody these traits
and associate them with individual gods.
They also attributed divinity to people who excelled in such traits. All this stems from a faith built on the
tangible and the visible. Avraham,
on the other hand, realized the true non-corporeal nature of God, a Divinity who
can not be touched, seen, or fully comprehended. While this represents the correct
perspective on the infinite God, it presents difficulty for those accustomed to
the tangible. Indeed, Rabbenu Bahya
writes that only the philosophers and prophets truly comprehend service of
God. Despite the complexity, the
entire Jewish people carry on this tradition from Avraham.
How do the Jewish
people accomplish this feat? The
Torah provides training for the intellect and purification of human
feelings. Torah study prepares the
mind for the abstract thought needed to comprehend God. At the same time, the Torah purifies
those feelings that might otherwise lead toward paganism by channeling them in a
monotheistic context. The Torah
channels love into love of friends, family, and one's nation. The Torah endorses beauty in the context
of hiddur mitzva. Even in
that context, R. Meir Simcha stresses that we throw out the beautiful
etrog after the holiday. The
Torah finds a place for aesthetics but will not allow a cult of beauty to
emerge.
This approach allows
for a powerful reading of R. Chanania ben Akashya's famous statement: "God
wanted to purify
In the continuation
of that passage, R. Meir Simcha states that true sanctity comes from humanity,
not from religious fiat. Har
Ha-Moriya is not holy for intrinsic reasons but because Adam was created
from its dirt and because Avraham brought Yitzchak to the akeida
there. The Torah describes it only
as "the place God will choose" to convey that its sanctity does not come from a
religious decision detached from humanity.
R. Meir Simcha repeats the idea that Sinai loses all its sanctity once
the revelation ends; even
Here, a second theme
in R. Meir Simcha's thought emerges.
His position on these issues intends, first and foremost, to preserve a
sense of the uniqueness of God. God
has inherent sanctity and no physical entity does. Secondly, he wants to generate a
strong sense of human responsibility.
We do not succeed in religious life by connecting with objects or
locations that exhibit intrinsic sanctity.
Rather, we humans generate that sanctity with proper behavior. The alternative and incorrect viewpoint
assumes that where you pray is more important than how you pray.
R. Meir Simcha
explicitly conveys this theme in his reading of the Bilaam story. The Torah attributes the Jews' sinning
with the daughters of Moav to the "word of Bilaam" (Bamidbar 31:16). Where do we find a hint to this in the
speeches of Bilaam? Some
commentators suggest that this was the counsel offered by Bilaam in
Bamidbar 24:14.[8] R. Meir Simcha offers an alternative
approach. Bilaam says that "God
does not see iniquity in
This theme also
emerges from R. Meir Simcha's explanation for the miraculous nature of the
In the context of his
analysis of the shattering of the luchot, R. Meir Simcha writes as well
regarding the sanctity of the
There is no
distinction in all the matters of the Torah, based on time or place. It is the same Torah in
Here,
Of course,
[1] Meshekh
Chokhma, Shemot 32:19.
[2] Rashbam, Shemot
32:19.
[3] Meshekh
Chokhma, Shemot 19:13.
[4] Ibid., Devarim
4:15.
[5] Abravanel, Bamidbar
20.
[6] Meshekh
Chokhma, Bamidbar 13:30.
[7] Ibid., Shemot
12:21.
[8] See Rashi,
Bamidbar 24:14.
[9] Meshekh Chokhma,
Bamidbar 31:16.
[10] Ibid., haftara
Devarim.
[11] Ibid., Bereishit
13:14.
This website is constantly being improved. We would appreciate hearing from you. Questions and comments on the classes are welcome, as is help in tagging, categorizing, and creating brief summaries of the classes. Thank you for being part of the Torat Har Etzion community!