והלכת בדרכיו Kosher Extremism

(9) The LORD will establish thee for a holy people unto Himself, as He hath sworn unto thee; if thou shalt keep the commandments of the LORD thy God, and walk in His ways.

(5) One who is carefully self-reflective, and who thus moves oneself from one's norm toward one side or the other: this one is called pious. For instance, one who moves oneself away from proud-heartedness toward the opposite side and attains a lowly spirit: he is called pious, and his is the middah of piety. But if he moves himself only toward the middle [of the scale] and becomes humble, he is called wise, and his is the middah of wisdom. And so on: this is so with all the rest of the middot. The early pious ones would incline their dispositions from the middle of the scale toward one of the two extremes: some would incline toward the first extreme and others would incline toward the other. This is going beyond what the law requires. We are commanded to walk in these intermediate paths which are good and straight, as it is said: "Walk in [God's] ways." [Deuteronomy 28:9]

(1) It is a Mitzvah to walk and resemble the ways of the Holy Blessed one - as we are commanded to perform all actions in a manner of goodness and integrity with all our strength. To turn aside all our words that are between us and beside us, it is a way of kindness and compassion, when we found out from our Torah that this is the way of God, and this is God’s desire for God’s creations, so that you merit God’s goodness, because his desire is kindness as it is written (Deuteronomy 28:9): walk in God’s ways, and God added to this in another place, as it is written (Deuteronomy 10:12, 11:22): walk in all God’s ways.

(3) Neither of the two extremes within each trait are appropriate ways to live, and one should not practice these extremes, and if he finds himself naturally inclined to one of them, or he already learned one of them, he should work himself back to the good life, that is the "straight path."

(1) Every human being has many dispositions, and everyone is both different and very distant from anyone else: One person may have a violent temper, always angry; but another's mind is at ease and he is never angry, or if he does feel anger it is a soft anger once in several years. A person may be very haughty, but another has a very humble disposition. A person may have very strong desires, never satisfied; but another may have a very pure heart, not even desiring those few things that the body requires. A person may be very greedy, not satisfied by all the wealth in the world, as it says, "A lover of silver never has his fill of silver" (Ecclesiastes 5:9). But another may have modest desires, and is satisfied with the smallest thing even if it is not truly enough for him, and he will not exert himself to acquire what he needs.

(2) Between each pair of extremes, there is a middle disposition equidistant from each. There are some dispositions that are innate, and some that individuals are more predisposed to than other, and still others that are not innate at all, but are learned from others or self-taught either because he decided to acquire [this trait] or he heard from others that it is a good one to have and he practiced it until it became part of his personality.

(3) Neither of the two extremes within each trait are appropriate ways to live, and one should not practice these extremes, and if he finds himself naturally inclined to one of them, or he already learned one of them, he should work himself back to the good life, that is the "straight path."

(4) The "straight path" is (generally) the middle trait within each [pair of] dispositions, equidistant from each extreme. Therefore the early sages commanded that a person should constantly pay attention to her character, measure it, and keep it on the middle path so that he might be physically healthy (lit. wholesome). For example, one should not be temperamental and easily angered, nor should he be numb like a corpse. Rather, she should be somewhere in the middle -- not getting angry except over something important that is worth it, and then just enough to ensure it won't happen again. Similarly, only desire the things that the body actually needs to live as it says "The righteous man eats to satisfy his body." (i.e. he enjoys healthy food in moderation, neither an ascetic nor a glutton) Similarly, he should only work enough to earn a living as it says "a little is good for the righteous" (i.e. neither lazy nor a workaholic) neither overly cheap nor generous, rather give as much charity as she can afford and give sensible loans to those who need. He should not be constantly partying and clowning around, nor should he be depressed and morose rather be calm and content, with a pleasant face all his life, and so on for all other character traits. This is the way of the Sages; anyone whose character is completely balanced may be called a sage.

(5) One who is carefully self-reflective, and who thus moves oneself from one's norm toward one side or the other: this one is called pious. For instance, one who moves oneself away from proud-heartedness toward the opposite side and attains a lowly spirit: he is called pious, and his is the middah of piety. But if he moves himself only toward the middle [of the scale] and becomes humble, he is called wise, and his is the middah of wisdom. And so on: this is so with all the rest of the middot. The early pious ones would incline their dispositions from the middle of the scale toward one of the two extremes: some would incline toward the first extreme and others would incline toward the other. This is going beyond what the law requires. We are commanded to walk in these intermediate paths which are good and straight, as it is said: "Walk in [God's] ways." [Deuteronomy 28:9]

(6) They taught the following interpretation of this commandment: "Just as God is called 'gracious,' you too must be gracious. Just as God is called 'compassionate,' you too must be compassionate. Just as God is called 'holy,' you too must be holy." As such, the Prophets called God by many appellations: "Slow to Anger," "Abundant in Graciousness," "Just and Fair," "Pure," "Mighty," and "Powerful" - in order to demonstrate that these are good and proper ways for a person to accustom oneself to act, in imitation of God to the utmost of one's ability.

(7) This is how one trains himself towards these dispositions until they become part of his personality: By constant, repetitive practice of the actions [characteristic of] the golden mean and drill over and over, constantly until these actions are easy, and are no longer challenging. Through this practice, these traits will become part of the personality for they are attributes of the Creator and the middle road which we are obligated to walk, which is called the "Path of God." This is what our father Abraham taught his sons, as it says "for I know him, so that he will command his sons and his household, etc." and one who follows this path brings good to himself as it says "in order to bring to Abraham all that He spoke of him."

(1) GOOD deeds are such as are equibalanced, maintaining the mean between two equally bad extremes, the too much and the too little. 1 Virtues are psychic conditions and dispositions which are mid-way between two reprehensible extremes, one of which is characterized by an exaggeration, the other by a deficiency. Good deeds are the product of these dispositions. To illustrate, abstemiousness is a disposition which adopts a mid-course between inordinate passion and total insensibility to pleasure. Abstemiousness, then, is a proper rule of conduct, and the psychic disposition which gives rise to it is an ethical quality ; but inordinate passion, the extreme of excess, and total insensibility to enjoyment, the extreme of deficiency, are both absolutely pernicious. The psychic dispositions, from which these two extremes, inordinate passion and insensibility, result the one being an exaggeration, the other a deficiency are alike classed among moral imperfections.

(2) Likewise, liberality is the mean between sordidness and extravagance; courage, between recklessness and cowardice; dignity, between haughtiness and loutishness; humility, between arrogance and self-abasement; contentedness, between avarice and slothful indifference; and magnificence, between meanness and profusion. [Since definite terms do not exist in our language with, which to express these latter qualities, it is necessary to explain their content, and tell what the philosophers meant by them. A man is called magnificent whose whole intention is to do good to others by personal service, by money, or advice, and with all his power, but without meanwhile bringing suffering or disgrace upon himself. That is the medium line of conduct. The mean man is one who does not want others to succeed in anything, even though he himself may not thereby suffer any loss, hardship, or injury. That is the one extreme. The profuse man, on the contrary, is one who willingly performs the above-mentioned deeds, in spite of the fact that thereby he brings upon himself great injury, or disgrace, terrible hardship, or considerable loss. That is the other extreme.] Gentleness is the mean between irascibility and insensibility to shame and disgrace; and modesty, between impudence and shamefacedness. [The explanation of these latter terms, gleaned from the sayings of our sages (may their memory be blessed!) seems to be this. In their opinion, a modest man is one who is very bashful, and therefore modesty is the mean. This we gather from their saying, (Pirkei Avot 2:5) "A shamefaced man cannot learn". They also assert, (Pirkei Avot 5:20) "A modest man is worthy of Paradise", but they do not say this of a shamefaced man. Therefore, I have thus arranged them.] So it is with the other qualities. One does not necessarily have to use conventional terms for these qualities, if only the ideas are clearly fixed in the mind.

(3) It often happens, however, that men err as regards these qualities, imagining that one of the extremes is good, and is a virtue. Sometimes, the extreme of the too much is considered noble, as when temerity is made a virtue, and those who recklessly risk their lives are hailed as heroes. Thus, when people see a man, reckless to the highest degree, who runs deliberately into danger, intentionally tempting death, and escaping only by mere chance, they laud such a one to the skies, and say that he is a hero. At other times, the opposite extreme, the too little, is greatly esteemed, and the coward is considered a man of forbearance; the idler, as being a person of a contented disposition; and he, who by the dullness of his nature is callous to every joy, is praised as a man of moderation, [that is, one who eschews sin]. In like manner, profuse liberality and extreme lavishness are erroneously extolled as excellent characteristics. This is, however, an absolutely mistaken view, for the really praiseworthy is the medium course of action to which every one should strive to adhere, always weighing his conduct carefully, so that he may attain the proper mean.

(4) Know, moreover, that these moral excellences or defects cannot be acquired, or implanted in the soul, except by means of the frequent repetition of acts resulting from these qualities, which, practised during a long period of time, accustoms us to them. If these acts performed are good ones, then we shall have gained a virtue; but if they are bad, we shall have acquired a vice. Since, however, no man is born with an innate virtue or vice, as we shall explain in Chapter 8, and, as every one's conduct from childhood up is undoubtedly influenced by the manner of living of his relatives and countrymen, his conduct may be in accord with the rules of moderation; but, then again, it is possible that his acts may incline towards either extreme, as we have demonstrated, in which case, his soul becomes diseased.

(5) In such a contingency, it is proper for him to resort to a cure, exactly as he would were his body suffering from an illness. So, just as when the equilibrium of the physical health is disturbed, and we note which way it is tending in order to force it to go in exactly the opposite direction until it shall return to its proper condition, and, just as when the proper adjustment is reached, we cease this operation, and have recourse to that which will maintain the proper balance, in exactly the same way must we adjust the moral equilibrium. Let us take, for example, the case of a man in whose soul there has developed a disposition [of great avarice] on account of which he deprives himself [of every comfort in life], and which, by the way, is one of the most detestable of defects, and an immoral act, as we have shown in this chapter. If we wish to cure this sick man, we must not command him merely [to practise] deeds of generosity, for that would be as ineffective as a physician trying to cure a patient consumed by a burning fever by administering mild medicines, which treatment would be in-efficacious. We must, however, induce him to squander so often, and to repeat his acts of profusion so continuously until that propensity which was the cause of his avarice has totally disappeared. Then, when he reaches that point where he is about to become a squanderer, we must teach him to moderate his profusion, and tell him to continue with deeds of generosity, and to watch out with due care lest he relapse either into lavishness or niggardliness. If, on the other hand, a man is a squanderer, he must be directed to practise strict economy, and to repeat acts of niggardliness. It is not necessary, however, for him to perform acts of avarice as many times as the mean man should those of profusion. This subtle point, which is a canon and secret of the science of medicine, tells us that it is easier for a man of profuse habits to moderate them to generosity, than it is for a miser to become generous. Likewise, it is easier for one who is apathetic [and eschews sin] to be excited to moderate enjoyment, than it is for one, burning with passion, to curb his desires.

(7) On this account, the saintly ones were not accustomed to cause their dispositions to maintain an exact balance between the two extremes, but deviated somewhat, by way of [caution and] restraint, now to the side of exaggeration, and now to that of deficiency. Thus, for instance, abstinence would incline to some degree towards excessive denial of all pleasures; valor would approach somewhat towards temerity; generosity to lavishness; modesty to extreme humility, and so forth. This is what the rabbis hinted at, in their saying, "Do more than the strict letter of the law demands." When, at times, some of the pious ones deviated to one extreme by fasting, keeping nightly vigils, refraining from eating meat or drinking wine, renouncing sexual intercourse, clothing themselves in woolen and hairy garments, dwelling in the mountains, and wandering about in the wilderness, they did so, partly as a means of restoring the health of their souls, as we have explained above, and partly because of the immorality of the towns-people. When the pious saw that they themselves might become contaminated by association with evil men, or by constantly seeing their actions, fearing that their own morals might become corrupt on account of contact with them, they fled to the wildernesses far from their society, as the prophet Jeremiah said, (Jeremiah 9:1) "Oh that some one would grant me in the wilderness the dwelling of a wanderer, and I would quit my people and abandon them; for they are all adulterers, a troop of faith- less evil-doers."

(9) The perfect Law which leads us to perfection as one who knew it well testifies by the words, (Psalms 19:8) "The Law of the Lord is perfect restoring the soul; the testimonies of the Lord are faithful making wise the simple" recommends none of these things (such as self-torture, flight from society etc.). On the contrary, it aims at man's following the path of moderation, in accordance with the dictates of nature, eating, drinking, enjoying legitimate sexual intercourse, all in moderation, and living among people in honesty and uprightness, but not dwelling in the wilderness or in the mountains, or clothing oneself in garments of hair and wool, or afflicting the body. The Law even warns us against these practices, if we interpret it according to what tradition tells us is the meaning of the passage concerning the Nazarite, (Numbers 6:11) "And he (the priest) shall make an atonement for him because he hath sinned against the soul." The Rabbis ask, "Against what soul has he sinned? Against his own soul, because he has deprived himself of wine. Is this not then a conclusion a minori ad majus? If one who deprives himself merely of wine must bring an atonement, how much more incumbent is it upon one who denies himself every enjoyment." By the words of our prophets and of the sages of our Law, we see that they were bent upon moderation and the care of their souls and bodies, in accordance with what the Law prescribes and with the answer which God gave through His prophet to those who asked whether the fast-day once a year should continue or not. They asked Zechariah, "Shall I weep in the fifth month with abstinence as I have done already these many years?" His, answer was, (Zachariah 7:3-7) "When ye fasted and mourned in the fifth and in the seventh (month) already these seventy years, did ye in anywise fast for me, yea for me? And if ye do eat and if ye do drink are ye not yourselves those that eat and yourselves those that drink?" After that, he enjoined upon them justice and virtue alone, and not fasting, when he said to them, (Zachariah 7:9) "Thus hath said the Lord of Hosts. Execute justice and show kindness and mercy every man to his brother." He said further, (Zachariah 8:19) "Thus hath said the Lord of Hosts, the fast- day of the fourth, and the fast-day of the fifth, and the fast of seventh, and the fast of the tenth (month) shall become to the house of Judah gladness, and joy, and merry festivals; only love ye truth and peace." Know that by "truth" the intellectual virtues are meant, for they are immutably true, as we have explained in Chapter 2, and that by "peace" the moral virtues are designated, for upon them depends the peace of the world. But to resume. Should those of our co-religionists and it is of them alone that I speak who imitate the followers of other religions, maintain that when they torment their bodies, and renounce every joy, that they do so merely to discipline the faculties of their souls by inclining somewhat to the one extreme, as is proper, and in accordance with our own recommendations in this chapter, our answer is that they are in error, as I shall now demonstrate.

(2) Thou knowest that the improvement of the moral qualities is brought about by the healing of the soul and its activities. Therefore, just as the physician, who endeavors to cure the human body, must have a perfect knowledge of it in its entirety and its individual parts, just as he must know what causes sickness that it may be avoided, and must also be acquainted with the means by which a patient may be cured, so, likewise, he who tries to cure the soul, wishing to improve the moral qualities, must have a knowledge of the soul in its totality and its parts, must know how to prevent it from becoming diseased, and how to maintain its health.