NUM301 See [[GEN805]] Genesis 13:13 sinners GATES 169-171

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

NUM302 The Second category [of scoffer] entails one who ridicules other people [i.e., the first category is referring to one who acts or speaks scornfully, while this category refers to one who derides others inwardly] – – he belittles them in his heart due to their limited attainment of virtues, or their limited current success in acquiring honor and power, or he derides them for their impoverishment and destitution. Pride brings about this characteristic, or [it is caused by] an abundance of tranquility and pleasure, as the pasuk says (Tehillim 123:4), "Much has our soul been sated with the ridicule of the tranquil, with the contempt of the arrogant." Sometimes the scoffer marks the holy ones and the prophets, as the pasuk says (Yirmeyahu 20:7), "Everyone mocks me." Shlomo, a"h, said (Mishlei 14;21), "One who derides his friend is a sinner," and (ibid., 11:12), "He who derides his friend lacks wisdom." He also said (ibid., 17:5), "He who mocks a pauper affronts his Maker; one who rejoices over [another's] misfortune will not be absolved." What this means is that one who mocks a pauper shows himself to regard success as due to man's efforts, attained through his intellect, as the pesukim say (Devarim 8:17), "You say to yourself,' 'My strength and the power of my hand have amassed this wealth for me,'" and (Yeshayahu 10:13), "For he said, 'With the strength of my hand I have achieved, and with my wisdom, for I am perceptive.'" For this reason he mocks the pauper, for inwardly he says that the other has not attained wealth because he lacks intelligence and adroitness. With this he affronts the Maker of both the pauper and the rich, for everything comes from Hashem, as the pasuk says (Mishlei 22:2), "The rich man and the pauper meet [their fate]; Hashem is the Maker of them all." Concerning one who rejoices over another's misfortune, the pasuk says that "he will not be absolved" – – even though he has not caused any harm in deed or speech he will not be absolved. Nonetheless, the evil of one who rejoices over another's misfortune does not reach the evil done by one who mocks the pauper. [Besides acting badly toward another, he also "affronts the Maker" by denying Divine providence (Sha'arei Teshuvah Hamevo'ar.)] Because scoffing is rooted in arrogance, which is the converse of humility, Shlomo, a"h, said (ibid., 3:34), "In truth the scoffers, He will scoff at; the humble, He will give a favor." This means: In truth, the scoffer who mocks people will be mocked by Hashem, as the pasuk says (Tehillim 2:4), "He Who sits in heaven will laugh, Hashem will mock them." The Hebrew word "im" [The first word of the verse in Mishlei 3:34, usually translated as "if," here means "in truth."] is to verify the matter. In a similar vein we find [this verse], "for in truth, Kayin will be expelled," and (Mishlei 23:18), "or in truth, there is a future [reward]." [Both verses use the word "im" to express "in truth."]

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

NUM303 See [[EXOD369]] Exodus 20:5 them DORFFRAG 66-7

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

NUM304 See [[EXOD979]] Exodus 32:10 thee COHON 196-7

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

NUM305 See [[EXOD155]] Exodus 12:17 matzos TZADIK 291-293

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

NUM306 See [[EXOD38]] Exodus 2:12 smote TZADIK 279-81

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

NUM307 From here it is derived that one does not enter the house of study with weapons. He had taken the blade and placed it in his tunic, and walked supporting himself on its shaft (Sanhedrin 82a)

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

NUM308 See [[EXOD43]] Exodus 2:13 strike TZADIK 339

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

NUM310 Is there, then, any instance in the Torah where a violent reaction to an anti-Semitic reaction is praised? Yes. In the story of the Midianite woman who committed sexual intercourse with the Prince of the tribe of Simon, Pinchas, the son of the High Priest, "took the law into his own hands" and killed them both, thereby stopping the plague (which had killed 24,000 people) (Numbers 25:6-9). Based on God's own words, Pinchas did the right thing and was rewarded handsomely for this courageous act (Numbers 25:10-13). Was this indeed the right thing to do, to take the law into one's own hands and kill two people? Although the Torah praises Pinchas's reaction, the Talmud (Jerusalem Talmud, Sanhedrin 48b) seems to condemn this type of reaction, saying that Pinchas was about to be excommunicated for what he did, and it was only the divine intervention in this unique case that saved Pinchas. In all other cases, however, this type of reaction would be punishable. This opinion disagrees with the generally accepted positive reaction to Pinchas's act. Although the initial act is not anti-Semitism per se, it was a desecration of God's name in public, a situation not unlike many anti-Semitic attacks. Thus, if the attack is public, may a person react violently? According to Maimonides (Maimonides, Hilchot Issurei Biah 12:4-5) it seems that if there is indeed public desecration of God's name, a violent reaction would be acceptable under three conditions: (1) the reaction to the attack must take place in the heat of passion, while the act is being committed, and not later, after cold reflection; (2) if permission to respond is asked of the authorities (even during the attack), the person will be denied permission by the authorities and he may not respond; (3) if the original attacker kills the Jew responding, the attacker is not guilty of murder. We see, therefore, that under certain conditions, one may be able to respond. This does not conclusively answer, however, which reaction is the most preferable.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

NUM312 When Pinchas became a zealot [Numbers 25:11] and "took the law into his own hands," killing Zimri, who was publicly desecrating God's name (Numbers 25:7-9), God gave Pinchas the reward of peace (Numbers 25:12). Although there are many explanations of what this reward actually entailed, the Netziv (Haamek Davar, commentary on Numbers 25:12) explains that this was a gift to Pinchas of inner peace. God was afraid that Pinchas' zealousness, although proper in this incident, might turn into a permanent anger. God thus changed Pinchas's personality, giving him a sense of inner peace, where he would no longer be an angry person. The Netziv further demonstrated this concept (Haamek Davar, commentary on Deuteronomy 13:18) regarding the mitzvah in which the Jews were commanded to completely eradicate a city of idol worship, and God promised a reward of mercy (Deuteronomy 13:18). This reward of mercy is granted to individuals who, in performing God's commandment to destroy the city, might develop into "angry personalities." This mercy granted them inner peace, so that this angry passion for God would be subdued. Another person who is known as a zealot was Elijah the prophet, who certainly helped to inspire the people via zealotry (I Kings 19:10). Nevertheless, God transformed Elijah, as well, into a man of peace, as his mission in the future is to usher in the Messiah, the ultimate man of peace. Thus, we see that achievement of inner peace, a sense of personal contentment, is the first goal.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT