עבודת ה'

Every man was endowed with a free will; if he desires to bend himself toward the good path and to be just it is within the power of his hand to reach out for it, and if he desires to bend himself to a bad path and to be wicked it is within the power of his hand to reach out for it. This is known from what it is written in the Torah, saying: "Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil" (Gen. 3.22), that is as if saying: "Behold, this species, man, stands alone in the world, and there is no other kind like him, as regards this subject of being able of his own accord, by his reason and thought, to know the good and the evil, and to do whatever his inclination dictates him with none to stay his hand from either doing good or evil; and, being that he is so, 'Lest he put forth his hand, and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever'" (Ibid.)¹Abodah Zarah, 16b; Megillah, 25a. G. Permit not your thought to dwell upon that which ridiculous fools of other peoples and a majority of asinine individuals among the children of Israel say, that the Holy One, blessed is He! decrees at the very embryonic state of every man whether he should be just or wicked. The matter is not so. Every man is capable of being as just as Moses our Master or as wicked as Jeroboam, wise or incony, merciful or human, miser or philanthropist, and so in all other tendencies. There is none to either force things upon him or to decree things against him; either to pull him one way or draw him another way, but he alone, of his own free will, with the consent of his mind, bends to any path he may desire to follow. It is concerning this that Jeremiah said: "Out of the mouth of the Most High proceedeth not the evil and the good" (Lam. 3. 38),²I am amazed that the English version of the American Jewish Publication Society, too, makes this sentence interrogatory. G. which is as if saying, the Creator decrees not that man should be either good or bad. Now, this being so, the consequence hereof is that the sinner alone brought harm upon himself. It is, therefore, meet that he should lament and shed tears because he sinned, and because of what he did to his soul and rewarded it with evil. Even this is the meaning of the succeeding Verse: "Wherefore doth a living man complain, or a strong man? Because of his sins" (Ibid.)³The English version in all existing translations is entirely opposed to what was an accepted doctorine by all medieval and modern Hebrew scholars. I corrected it to harmonize the texts. G. Again, he continues, in the succeeding Verse seeing that it all is in our power, and we did all the evil of our own free will and accord, it is, indeed meet for us to turn in repentance and abandon our wickedness, for our free will is in our hands now as well as at the time we committed the sins saying: "Let us search and try our ways, and return to the Lord" (Ibid.–40).⁴See Niddah, 16b; but the Maimoni doctorine does not contradict that text; you can not teach a brainless idiot wisdom, but a man with brains is often a charlatan; the choice is his. C. G. And, this matter is a great and component part, the very pillar of the Torah and its precepts, even as it is said: "See, I have set before thee this day life and good, and death and evil" (Deut. 30.15), and it is, moreover, written: "Behold, I set before you this day a blessing and curse" (Ibid. 11.26). This is as if saying, the power is in your hand, and whatever human activity man may be inclined to carry on he has a free will to elect either good or evil. And, because of this very subject it is said: "Oh, who would grant that they had such a heart as this, to fear Me, and to keep all my commandments at all times" (Ibid. 5.26). This is as if saying, that the Creator forces not the sons of man, and makes no decrees against them that they should do good or evil, but that it all is in their own keeping.⁵Since Maimoni no authority in Israel disputed this. G. Had the decree of God prompted man to be either just or wicked, or had there been a fundamentally inborn something to draw man to either of the paths, or to any one branch of knowledge, or to a given tendency of the tendencies, or to particular act of all actions as the astrologists maintain by their foolish inventions, how did He charge us by the prophets, to do thus and not to do such, improve your ways, and do not follow your wickedness, whereas man from his embryonic state already had a decree of his conduct issued, or his inborn nature draws him toward a given path of conduct from which he can not deviate? Moreover, what need would there be, under such circumstances, for the Torah altogether? And by what law, and under what system of justice could the wicked be punished, or the just rewarded? Shall the judge of the whole earth not exercise justice? Now, do not wonder and ask: "How is it possible for man to do what his heart desires, and have his entire course of action lodged within himself seeing that he can not do aught in the world without the permission of his Master and without His Will, even as the Verse says: "Whatsoever the Lord pleased, that hath He done, in heaven and in earth, in the seas and in all deeps" (Ps. 135.6)? Know all that man does is in accordance with His Will, although our actions are really in our own keeping. For example? Even as it is the Creator's Will that fire and air shall ascend upward, and that water and earth shall descend downward, or that the sphere shall revolve in a circle, and that other creatures of the universe should likewise follow their respective natural laws, as it was His Will for them to be, so was it His Will that man shall have the free choice of conduct in his own hand, and that all his actions should be lodged within him, and that he should be neither forced or drawn, but he, of his own free will and accord, as God endowed him with, he exercises in all that is possible for man to do. He is, therefore, judged according to actions; if he did good, his is rewarded with good; and if he did wrong, he is punished. This is in harmony with what the prophet said: "This hath been of your own doing" (Mal. 1.9); and: "According as they have chosen their own ways" (Is. 66.3); and of this very subject Solomon said: "Rejoice O young man, in thy youth, and let thy heart cheer thee in the days of thy youth, and walk in the ways of thy heart, and in the sight of thine eyes; but know thou, that for all these things God will bring thee into judgment" (Ecc. 11. 9); as if saying: "True, it is within the power of thine hand to do so, but thou art to render an accounting on the day of judgment".⁶See Shabbat, 156a; Maimonides, herein, does not deny the variations in human intelligence, nor native excellence of one and native shortcomings of another; what he maintains is that man is not governed in his conduct by natural laws, as is every creature below him. G.

There is room for concern. Perhaps they will remove you from office just as they removed Rabban Gamliel. He said to her, based on the folk saying: Let a person use an expensive goblet one day and let it break tomorrow. In other words, one should take advantage of an opportunity that presents itself and he need not concern himself whether or not it will last. She said to him: You have no white hair, and it is inappropriate for one so young to head the Sages. The Gemara relates: That day, he was eighteen years old, a miracle transpired for him and eighteen rows of hair turned white. The Gemara comments: That explains that which Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya said: I am as one who is seventy years old and he did not say: I am seventy years old, because he looked older than he actually was. It was taught: On that day that they removed Rabban Gamliel from his position and appointed Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya in his place, there was also a fundamental change in the general approach of the study hall as they dismissed the guard at the door and permission was granted to the students to enter. Instead of Rabban Gamliel’s selective approach that asserted that the students must be screened before accepting them into the study hall, the new approach asserted that anyone who seeks to study should be given opportunity to do so. As Rabban Gamliel would proclaim and say: Any student whose inside, his thoughts and feelings, are not like his outside, i.e., his conduct and his character traits are lacking, will not enter the study hall. The Gemara relates: On that day several benches were added to the study hall to accommodate the numerous students. Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Abba Yosef ben Dostai and the Rabbis disputed this matter. One said: Four hundred benches were added to the study hall. And one said: Seven hundred benches were added to the study hall. When he saw the tremendous growth in the number of students, Rabban Gamliel was disheartened. He said: Perhaps, Heaven forbid, I prevented Israel from engaging in Torah study. They showed him in his dream white jugs filled with ashes alluding to the fact that the additional students were worthless idlers. The Gemara comments: That is not the case, but that dream was shown to him to ease his mind so that he would not feel bad. It was taught: There is a tradition that tractate Eduyyot was taught that day. And everywhere in the Mishna or in a baraita that they say: On that day, it is referring to that day. There was no halakha whose ruling was pending in the study hall that they did not explain and arrive at a practical halakhic conclusion. And even Rabban Gamliel did not avoid the study hall for even one moment, as he held no grudge against those who removed him from office and he participated in the halakhic discourse in the study hall as one of the Sages. As we learned in a mishna: On that day, Yehuda, the Ammonite convert, came before the students in the study hall and he said to them: What is my legal status in terms of entering into the congregation of Israel, i.e., to marry a Jewish woman? Rabban Gamliel said to him: You are forbidden to enter into the congregation. Rabbi Yehoshua said to him: You are permitted to enter into the congregation. Rabban Gamliel said to Rabbi Yehoshua: Wasn’t it already stated: “An Ammonite and a Moabite shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord; even to the tenth generation shall none of them enter into the congregation of the Lord forever” (Deuteronomy 23:4)? How can you permit him to enter the congregation? Rabbi Yehoshua said to Rabban Gamliel: Do Ammon and Moab reside in their place? Sennacherib already came and, through his policy of population transfer, scrambled all the nations and settled other nations in place of Ammon. Consequently, the current residents of Ammon and Moab are not ethnic Ammonites and Moabites, as it is stated in reference to Sennacherib: “I have removed the bounds of the peoples, and have robbed their treasures, and have brought down as one mighty the inhabitants” (Isaiah 10:13). And although it is conceivable that this particular convert is an ethnic Ammonite, nevertheless, there is no need for concern due to the halakhic principle: Anything that parts from a group parts from the majority, and the assumption is that he is from the majority of nations whose members are permitted to enter the congregation. Rabban Gamliel said to Rabbi Yehoshua: But wasn’t it already stated: “But afterward I will bring back the captivity of the children of Ammon, says the Lord” (Jeremiah 49:6) and they have already returned to their land? Therefore, he is an ethnic Ammonite and he may not convert. Rabbi Yehoshua said to Rabban Gamliel: That is no proof. Wasn’t it already stated in another prophecy: “And I will turn the captivity of My people Israel and they shall build the waste cities, and inhabit them; and they shall plant vineyards, and drink the wine thereof; they shall also make gardens, and eat the fruit of them” (Amos 9:14), and they have not yet returned? In rendering the ruling, only proven facts may be taken into consideration. They immediately permitted him to enter the congregation. This proves that Rabban Gamliel did not absent himself from the study hall that day and participated in the halakhic discourse. Rabban Gamliel said to himself: Since this is the situation, that the people are following Rabbi Yehoshua, apparently he was right. Therefore, it would be appropriate for me to go and appease Rabbi Yehoshua. When he reached Rabbi Yehoshua’s house, he saw that the walls of his house were black. Rabban Gamliel said to Rabbi Yehoshua in wonderment: From the walls of your house it is apparent that you are a blacksmith, as until then he had no idea that Rabbi Yehoshua was forced to engage in that arduous trade in order to make a living. Rabbi Yehoshua said to him: Woe unto a generation that you are its leader as you are unaware of the difficulties of Torah scholars, how they make a living and how they feed themselves. Rabban Gamliel said to him: I insulted you, forgive me. Rabbi Yehoshua paid him no attention and did not forgive him. He asked him again: Do it in deference to my father, Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, who was one of the leaders of Israel at the time of the destruction of the Temple. He was appeased. Now that Rabbi Yehoshua was no longer offended, it was only natural that Rabban Gamliel would be restored to his position. They said: Who will go and inform the Sages? Apparently, they were not eager to carry out the mission that would undo the previous actions and remove Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya from his position as Nasi. This launderer said to them: I will go. Rabbi Yehoshua sent to the Sages to the study hall: The one who wears the uniform will continue to wear the uniform, the original Nasi will remain in his position so that the one who did not wear the uniform will not say to the one who wears the uniform, remove your uniform and I will wear it. Apparently, the Sages believed that this emissary was dispatched at the initiative of Rabban Gamliel and they ignored him. Rabbi Akiva said to the Sages: Lock the gates so that Rabban Gamliel’s servants will not come and disturb the Sages. When he heard what happened, Rabbi Yehoshua said: It is best if I go to them. He came and knocked on the door. He said to them with a slight variation: One who sprinkles pure water on those who are ritually impure, son of one who sprinkles water shall continue to sprinkle water. And it is inappropriate that he who is neither one who sprinkles nor son of one who sprinkles will say to one who sprinkles son of one who sprinkles: Your water is cave water and not the running water required to purify one exposed to ritual impurity imparted by a corpse and your ashes are burnt ashes and not the ashes of a red heifer. Rabbi Akiva said to him: Rabbi Yehoshua, have you been appeased? Everything we did was to defend your honor. If you have forgiven him, none of us is opposed. Early tomorrow you and I will go to Rabban Gamliel’s doorway and offer to restore him to his position as Nasi. The question arose what to do with Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya? They said: What shall we do? Remove him from his position. That is inappropriate as we learned a halakha through tradition: One elevates to a higher level of sanctity and does not downgrade. Therefore, one who was the Nasi of the Sanhedrin cannot be demoted. Let one Sage lecture one week and the other Sage one week, they will come to be jealous one of another, as they will be forced to appoint one as the acting head of the Sanhedrin. Rather, Rabban Gamliel will lecture three weeks and Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya will lecture as head of the yeshiva one week. That arrangement was adopted and that is the explanation of the exchange in tractate Ḥagiga: Whose week was it? It was the week of Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya. One final detail: That student who asked the original question that sparked this entire incident was Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai. We learned in the mishna: And the additional prayer may be recited all day. Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Nevertheless, one who postpones his prayer excessively is called negligent. The Rabbis taught in a baraita: If the obligation to recite two prayers was before him, one, the additional prayer and one, the afternoon prayer, he recites the afternoon prayer first and the additional prayer thereafter, because this, the afternoon prayer, is recited on a frequent basis, and this one, the additional prayer, is recited on a relatively infrequent basis. Rabbi Yehuda says: He recites the additional prayer first and the afternoon prayer thereafter, because this, the additional prayer, is a mitzva whose time soon elapses, as it may only be recited until the seventh hour and this, the afternoon prayer, is a mitzva whose time does not soon elapse as one may recite it until the midpoint of the afternoon. Rabbi Yoḥanan said: The halakha is that he recites the afternoon prayer first and the additional prayer thereafter, in accordance with the opinion of the Rabbis. The Gemara cites additional sources relating to this issue: When Rabbi Zeira would tire of his studies, he would go and sit in the doorway of Rabbi Natan bar Tovi’s study hall. He said to himself: When the entering and exiting Sages pass, I will rise before them and be rewarded for the mitzva of honoring Torah scholars. Rabbi Natan bar Tovi himself emerged and came to where Rabbi Zeira was seated. Rabbi Zeira said to him: Who just stated a halakha in the study hall? Rabbi Natan bar Tovi said to him: Rabbi Yoḥanan just said as follows: The halakha is not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda who said: He recites the additional prayer first and the afternoon prayer thereafter. Rabbi Zeira said to him: Did Rabbi Yoḥanan himself say this halakha? Rabbi Natan said to him: Yes. He learned this statement from him forty times, etching it into his memory. Rabbi Natan said to him: Is this halakha so dear to you because it is singular for you, as it is the only halakha that you learned in the name of Rabbi Yoḥanan, or is it new to you, as you were previously unaware of this ruling? Rabbi Zeira said to him: It is somewhat new to me, as I was uncertain whether this halakha was said in the name of Rabbi Yoḥanan or in the name of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi. Now it is clear to me that this halakha is in the name of Rabbi Yoḥanan. Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: With regard to anyone who recites the additional prayer after seven hours of the day, according to Rabbi Yehuda, the verse states: “Those who are destroyed [nugei] far from the Festivals, I shall gather from you, they who carried for you the burden of insult” (Zephaniah 3:18). From where may it be inferred that nugei is an expression of destruction? As Rav Yosef translated the verse into Aramaic: Destruction comes upon the enemies of the house of Israel, a euphemism for Israel itself, for they have delayed the times of the Festivals in Jerusalem. This proves both that nugei means destruction and that destruction comes upon those who fail to fulfill a mitzva at its appointed time. Similarly, Rabbi Elazar said: Regarding anyone who recites the morning prayer after four hours of the day, according to Rabbi Yehuda, the verse states: “Those who are in sorrow [nugei] far from the Festivals, I shall gather from you, they who carried for you the burden of insult” (Zephaniah 3:18). From where may it be inferred that nugei is an expression of sorrow? As it is written: “My soul drips in sorrow [tuga]” (Psalms 119:28). Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: The proof that nugei indicates suffering is from here: “Her virgins are sorrowed [nugot] and she is embittered” (Lamentations 1:4).