We've said that Rav Leib Mintzberg comes down very strongly on the side that bitachon without hishtadlus is not the appropriate approach to avodas Hashem through bitachon. We questioned why Rav Mintzberg would start with this fusillade as an introduction to hishtadlus, when you consider that this is not the primary concept that he aims to teach us about hishtadlus, as we saw as soon as we got
past chapter 1. We are interested to see whether the sources that Rav Mintzberg brings, can also be used to support the more important ideas that Rav Mintzberg will put forth in the ensuing chapters.
As we learned through those concepts in hishtadlus are of real importance to Rav Mintzberg, we noticed that Rav Mintzberg did not put forward the level of proofs that he did when dealing with the basic and simple facets of hishtadlus. We will be looking to see whether the ideas that Rav Mintzberg's presents in later chapters of the essay, such as the idea that minimal hishtadlus is not sufficient and the idea that hishtadlus is gauged by what is darko shel olam, can find any support among these same sources that were brought to prove that hishtadlus is mandatory. It is also possible that Rav Mintzberg brought those four sources to prove his limited case of bitachon sans hishtadlus and that we will find that these same four sources actually contradict some of Rav Mintzberg's later ideas or at least cannot be proven to take one side or the other.
The second source brought in Ben Melech is much more clear in support of Rav Mintzberg's point, that hishtadlus is a requirement, not an option. In Chovos Halevavos in chapter 4 of Shaar ha-Bitachon, R. Bachya writes
As we learned through those concepts in hishtadlus are of real importance to Rav Mintzberg, we noticed that Rav Mintzberg did not put forward the level of proofs that he did when dealing with the basic and simple facets of hishtadlus. We will be looking to see whether the ideas that Rav Mintzberg's presents in later chapters of the essay, such as the idea that minimal hishtadlus is not sufficient and the idea that hishtadlus is gauged by what is darko shel olam, can find any support among these same sources that were brought to prove that hishtadlus is mandatory. It is also possible that Rav Mintzberg brought those four sources to prove his limited case of bitachon sans hishtadlus and that we will find that these same four sources actually contradict some of Rav Mintzberg's later ideas or at least cannot be proven to take one side or the other.
The second source brought in Ben Melech is much more clear in support of Rav Mintzberg's point, that hishtadlus is a requirement, not an option. In Chovos Halevavos in chapter 4 of Shaar ha-Bitachon, R. Bachya writes
וכך כתב בספר חובות הלבבות - ועם בירור אמונתו בי עניינו מסור אל גזרו ת
הבורא יתעלה ושבחירת הבורא לו היא הבחירה הטובה, הוא חייב להתגלגל לסיבות
תועלותיו ולבחור הטוב בנראה לו מן הענין ובו׳ ולא יניח את זה על האלוקים, שיאמר,
אם קדם בגזרת הבורא שאחיה ישאיר נפשי בגופי מבלי מזון בל ימי חיי, ולא אטרח
בבקשת הטרף ועמלו(שער הבטחון - פרק ד).
The entire paragraph in Chovos Halevavos reads as follows: Even though a human being's end and length of his days are determined by the Creator's decree, nevertheless, it is a man's duty to pursue means to survive such as food and drink, clothing, and shelter according to his needs, and he must not leave this to the Al-mighty, and think: "if the Creator has pre-decreed that I will live, then my body will survive without food all the days of my life, therefore I will not trouble myself in seeking a livelihood and toiling in it". If one's emunah (faith) is clear, that his matters are given over to the decrees of the Creator, and that the choice of the Creator for him is the best choice, nevertheless, it is one's duty to pursue means which appear to be beneficial to him and to choose what seems to be the best choice under the circumstances, and the Al-mighty will do according to what He has already decreed.
That is about as clear a support as you can find to the idea that it isn't enough to do a minimal amount of hishtadlus and on the contrary, you are required to do hishtadlus in a way that under normal circumstances can be expected to deliver the desired results.
However, there is also an indication found in other passages in Chovos Halevavos (below), that when Ben Melech cited the Rashba, R Bachya, R Yitzchak Arama and Ramchal, it was only intended to prove that you can't just stand idly by and expect Hashem to help you, without your doing any hishtadlus and it proves nothing more than that.
The indication coming logically from the fact, that if Rav Mintzberg really was trying to prove anything more from the four early sources, besides that bitachon without any hishtadlus is just not acceptable, for example, that hishtadlus had to be b'darko shel olam he should have quoted from this passage in Chovos Halevavos and not the quote that he inserted in Ben Melech. Because here R Bachya actually refers to the hishtadlus through normal human endeavors as a mitzvah and further makes the point that this kind of hishtadlus involvement in normal human endeavors will not harm his bitachon.
It is also worth noting that in the passage below, R. Bachya portrays hishtadlus in an even more positive light than what we have seen in Ben Melech. In Ben Melech, Rav Mintzberg refers to doing hishtadlus as being the ratzon HaShem, but does not go as far as R. Bachya does in this passage, where he points out that it is a positive commandment, an actual mitzvah.
That is about as clear a support as you can find to the idea that it isn't enough to do a minimal amount of hishtadlus and on the contrary, you are required to do hishtadlus in a way that under normal circumstances can be expected to deliver the desired results.
However, there is also an indication found in other passages in Chovos Halevavos (below), that when Ben Melech cited the Rashba, R Bachya, R Yitzchak Arama and Ramchal, it was only intended to prove that you can't just stand idly by and expect Hashem to help you, without your doing any hishtadlus and it proves nothing more than that.
The indication coming logically from the fact, that if Rav Mintzberg really was trying to prove anything more from the four early sources, besides that bitachon without any hishtadlus is just not acceptable, for example, that hishtadlus had to be b'darko shel olam he should have quoted from this passage in Chovos Halevavos and not the quote that he inserted in Ben Melech. Because here R Bachya actually refers to the hishtadlus through normal human endeavors as a mitzvah and further makes the point that this kind of hishtadlus involvement in normal human endeavors will not harm his bitachon.
It is also worth noting that in the passage below, R. Bachya portrays hishtadlus in an even more positive light than what we have seen in Ben Melech. In Ben Melech, Rav Mintzberg refers to doing hishtadlus as being the ratzon HaShem, but does not go as far as R. Bachya does in this passage, where he points out that it is a positive commandment, an actual mitzvah.
ויכווין בטרדת לבו וגופו בסיבה מן הסיבות והסבוב עליה, לעמוד במצוות הבורא שצווה האדם להתעסק בסיבות העולם בעבודת האדמה וחרישתה וזריעתה.
כמו שכתוב (בראשית ב) ויקח ה' אלוהים את האדם ויניחהו בגן עדן לבדה ולשמרה...
ויהיה ביטחונו באלוהים שלם, ולא יזיקנו הסיבוב על הסיבות להבאת טרפו בהם מאומה כשהוא מכווין בהם בלבו ובמצפונו לשם שמים.
And he should have intention when his mind and body is occupied with one of the means of earning a living to fulfill the commandment of the Creator to pursue the means of the world, such as working the land, plowing and sowing it, as written "And G-d took the man and placed him in Gan Eden to work it and to guard it" (Bereishis 2:15)... In this way, his trust in G-d will be intact, undamaged by the toiling in the means to earn a livelihood, as long as his intention in heart and mind is for the sake of Heaven.
An while we can’t bring a proof that R. Bachya holds that the correct way to measure proper hishtadlus is by using the darko shel olam yardstick, we do find indications that R. Bachya did not agree with the Rishonim who had an unfettered view of hishtadlus, with the sky being the limit. The other Rishonim had only one caveat; that the person who doing as much hishtadlus as he can muster, must at the same time keep in his mind and in his heart that the ultimate success of his hishtadlus, is solely dependent on HaShem’s deciding that his hishtadlus should bear fruit and be successful.
However, R. Bachya writes that a person should choose a vocation based upon the direction along which HaShem leads him and if at times his vocation doesn’t provide for his needs, he should not change the direction that he is following and should have bitachon that HaShem will always provide for his needs throughout his entire life. This would seem to indicate that you should not always be looking to maximize your hishtadlus efforts. Here are the words of R. Bachya:
An while we can’t bring a proof that R. Bachya holds that the correct way to measure proper hishtadlus is by using the darko shel olam yardstick, we do find indications that R. Bachya did not agree with the Rishonim who had an unfettered view of hishtadlus, with the sky being the limit. The other Rishonim had only one caveat; that the person who doing as much hishtadlus as he can muster, must at the same time keep in his mind and in his heart that the ultimate success of his hishtadlus, is solely dependent on HaShem’s deciding that his hishtadlus should bear fruit and be successful.
However, R. Bachya writes that a person should choose a vocation based upon the direction along which HaShem leads him and if at times his vocation doesn’t provide for his needs, he should not change the direction that he is following and should have bitachon that HaShem will always provide for his needs throughout his entire life. This would seem to indicate that you should not always be looking to maximize your hishtadlus efforts. Here are the words of R. Bachya:
ולכל אדם יש חפץ במלאכה או סחורה מבלתי זולתה. כבר הטביע האל לה בטבעו אהבה וחיבה
.
.
ומי שמוצא במידותיו וטבעו כוסף אל מלאכה מהמלאכות, ויהיה גופו ראוי לה ויוכל לסבול את טרחה, יחזר עליה ישים אותה סיבה להבאת מזונו, ויסבול מותקה ומרירותה, ואל יקוץ כשיימנע ממנו הטרף בקצת העתים, אך יבטח באלוהים שיספיק לו טרפו כל ימי חייו. ויכווין בטרדת לבו וגופו בסיבה מן הסיבות והסבוב עליה, לעמוד במצוות הבורא שצווה האדם להתעסק בסיבות העולם בעבודת האדמה וחרישתה וזריעתה. כמו שכתוב (בראשית ב) ויקח ה' אלוהים את האדם ויניחהו בגן עדן לבדה ולשמרה.
.
.
ומי שמוצא במידותיו וטבעו כוסף אל מלאכה מהמלאכות, ויהיה גופו ראוי לה ויוכל לסבול את טרחה, יחזר עליה ישים אותה סיבה להבאת מזונו, ויסבול מותקה ומרירותה, ואל יקוץ כשיימנע ממנו הטרף בקצת העתים, אך יבטח באלוהים שיספיק לו טרפו כל ימי חייו. ויכווין בטרדת לבו וגופו בסיבה מן הסיבות והסבוב עליה, לעמוד במצוות הבורא שצווה האדם להתעסק בסיבות העולם בעבודת האדמה וחרישתה וזריעתה. כמו שכתוב (בראשית ב) ויקח ה' אלוהים את האדם ויניחהו בגן עדן לבדה ולשמרה.
Every man has a preference for a particular work or business over others. G-d has already implanted in his nature a love and fondness for it
.
.
One who finds his nature and personality attracted to a certain occupation, and his body is suited for it, that he will be able to bear its demands - he should pursue it, and make it his means of earning a livelihood, and he should bear its pleasures and pains, and not be upset when sometimes his income is withheld, rather let him trust in G-d that He will support him all of his days. And he should have intention when his mind and body is occupied with one of the means of earning a living to fulfill the commandment of the Creator to pursue the means of the world, such as working the land, plowing and sowing it, as written "And G-d took the man and placed him in Gan Eden to work it and to guard it" (Bereishis 2:15)
.
.
One who finds his nature and personality attracted to a certain occupation, and his body is suited for it, that he will be able to bear its demands - he should pursue it, and make it his means of earning a livelihood, and he should bear its pleasures and pains, and not be upset when sometimes his income is withheld, rather let him trust in G-d that He will support him all of his days. And he should have intention when his mind and body is occupied with one of the means of earning a living to fulfill the commandment of the Creator to pursue the means of the world, such as working the land, plowing and sowing it, as written "And G-d took the man and placed him in Gan Eden to work it and to guard it" (Bereishis 2:15)
No comments:
Post a Comment