Search Results for: mussar

From “Making of a Godol” pp. 577-578:

(Also cf. החוזה מליטא by חייים ע. קוליץ published by הוצאת ראובן מס בע”מ, ירושלים pp. 118-119 which demonstrates how R. Scher’s approach interlocked with that of the anti-Musar Hazon-Ish when it states: “Our teacher [the Hazon-Ish] did not generally ascribe importance to the ‘Musarite’ demand for ‘breaking the traits [שבירת המידות]’ [of the personality], or to extra bewonderment of one’s spiritual powers [כוחות הנפש], and even less to picking at someone else’s spirit [emphasis added].

He would say, ‘We need not tell a man all that we know about him.’ In his opinion, good deeds are not disqualified because their performer has self-interest in mind; and he also did not hold that some self-gain [טובת הנאה] — a ‘נגיעה [touching]’, in the Musar terminology — is a sore of leprosy [נגע צרעת] that requires constant scratching. Whoever does that becomes plagued by his scratching. Our teacher smiled and whispered, ‘The World’s Creator and his Torah have more faith in man than do the Musar masters of Novharodok.’*”)

*For G-d’s faith in mankind, see ספרי דברים, אות שז, to wit, “‘אל אמונה’: שהאמין בעולמו ובראו’ (G-d of faith’: Who had faith in the world and created it).” Also cf. p. 480, above, and fn. m ad loc.

The end.

[Rabbi Ben Tzion Rakow] would often tell the story of Reb Simchah Zissel, z”l, who, on several occasions, abandoned his normal routine and went into exile in the country. Reb Simchah Zissel and his talmidim once came to a farm. The farmer’s wife realizing that he was a saintly man, offered him the best food she had. When Reb Simchah Zissel offered to pay she refused to accept payment, saying that the fact that such important people had come to her farm was in itself sufficient payment.

Reb Simchah Zissel then asked her, “What is news in this place?” She could, of course, only tell of farm activities, how the egg production was going and the number of calves born. Reb Simchah Zissel sat, deeply engrossed and interested in her account. Noting his interest the woman happily continued to expand on her information with further stories of farm events.

In the meantime one of the talmidim, thinking that this was a bitul zeman, took out a Gemara and started to study. Reb Simchah Zissel noticed from the corner of his eye what this talmid was doing but said nothing and carried on listening to the woman. The talmid thought that he was using his time correctly by learning and not listening to the woman.

However, when the farmer’s wife left the room, Reb Simchah Zissel turned to his talmid and said, “Do you realize that you might be a thief!”

The talmid was shocked. “A thief? What have I stolen?”

Reb Simchah Zissel explained that the woman had requested no payment for the food, as she could see that they were important people. “The fact that we paid attention to her conversation was indeed her payment, but you took out a Gemara instead!” What right did you have to ignore the stories of a poor women’s livelihood. ‘Derech eretz kadmah la-Torah – Common decency takes precedence over Torah.‘“

My Father, My Rebbe, p. 156-157

One problem is it’s done in public, so the chances are low one will study what he himself needs to (let alone with “flaming lips”).

Observe. Who studies “Orech Apayim”, those who need it or those who don’t? Have you ever observed a Yeshiva youth focusing his Mussar time for months on, say pride, in sefer Orchos Tzaddikim? Me neither.

The book “Cheshbon Hanefesh” (English: “Self Accounting“; “Nefesh” here translates merely as “Self“, not “Soul” anything!) is in the Mussarite’s toolkit (at least officially). Cheshbon Hanefesh got its peculiar importance because Rabbi Yisrael Salanter encouraged reprinting the work. (Not to be confused with his encouragement of issuing a new edition for sound-alike “Tikkun Middos Hanefesh” by Rabbi Shlomo ibn Gabirol.)

Who authored Cheshbon Hanefesh? Mendel Lefin in 1845 (תר”ה), a Maskil. Mendel Lefin belonged to the bad part of the early Haskala movement (indeed, some of the actors were malicious heretics, while others were not)!

Did Rabbi Salanter ever condemn the author, at least? No.

The 1988 preface by Rabbi Yitzchak Isaac Sher in a mention of the author adds “not to be confused with Yitzchak of Stanov” (the infamous Seforim forger). Not one word about the author’s genuine sins.

In “Chochma Bagoyim – Using Secular Methodology for Personal Development” Rabbi David Lapin (no familial relation) records an enlightening written give and take between himself and Rabbi Lawrence Keleman.

Rabbi Lapin writes:

“… the Mussar system based on the thirteen Midot of behavior, first articulated by the Cheshbon Hanefesh and then taught and popularized by Reb Yisrael Salanter, was in itself an adaptation from the work of Benjamin Franklin.

Their debate concerns the permissibility of using secular wisdom from Ben Franklin, all the while happily unaware of the questions raised by the Cheshbon Hanefesh’s own authorship. Find a decidedly similar analysis in the introduction to Rabbi Nosson Kamentsky’s “Making of a Godol“, by the way…

*Although maybe there is an insinuation in the title page’s credentials: חברו הרב החכם מוהר”ר מענדל במוהר”ר יהודה ליב זבראב איש סאטנאב. The skimpy, pedestrian rank of “Harav” is crossed with often loaded “Hechacham”, followed straight away by the generic “MoHRaR” acronym and origin (and won’t bless his memory, either).

(For more thorough information on Cheshbon Hanefesh, possibly relating to the above, check out these two essays.)