Will you be writing an essay about what the modern orthodox do with the bitachon vs hishtadlus issue?
Do they simply write off all the pesukim and maamarei chazal, because "chazal make mistakes"? What exactly have you discovered that the chovos halevovos didn't know about? Do dinosaurs play a role in all this?
Interesting that you try to paint this as a chareidi issue.
Interestingly, the modern Orthodox (which I am not, if it matters) tend to have higher average incomes than the yeshiva world. This is by choice - they put more of an emphasis on college work the yeshiva world does, for better or for worse. I don't think it's because Hashem just happened to decree that MOs should be wealthier.
That may or may not be true, but it has nothing to do with bitachOn vs hishtadlus. This article is what you call a red herring.
The economies of M.O. and charedim are obviously very different, with pros and cons to each. I will just say that I don't know very many chareidim that are hungry or homeless. (The situation in EY may be different.) Generally the chareidim are in America are doing just fine economically, BH.
I think your comment about charedim in EY vs chul needs to be expanded. In my opinion, there is almost no comparison between charedim in EY and those in the USA (the only country outside of Israel that I have some knowledge about). I believe that when Rabbi Slifkin is making comments about charedim, it is always regarding EY charedim. Unfortunately, with the cost of Jewish education in the States being so high there is no way that a family could live without (usually) both parents working. And yes, there are exceptions; but they are the small minority.
Where do you see him disagreeing with that? All he is saying is that there are ma'amarei Chazal that on the one hand say that all Parnassah is decreed from Heaven and on the other hand extoll doing Hishtadlus. So why does Natan think that this is a Charedi issue? This is a very old discussion. How do MODOX reconcile it?
As an aside, entirely unrelated to the aoint above, although I will agree with you that the yeshivish world on average probably earns less than their MODOX counterparts, I am not sure that the Chassidim do on average. They tend to live very materialistic and extravagant lifestyles.
Another point- there is a sample bias. You cannot send your kids to the *extremely* expensive MO schools if you are not wealthy! Can't afford it? Too bad, the local public schools will be happy to take you. Whereas chassidish and yeshiviah schools are much cheaper and give huge tuition breaks to the poor. Depending on the city, some pay nothing.
Good point, but I think my point still stands. Think Teaneck, etc. Smart, driven Jews have been making a lot of money in the US for the past 100 years . . .
I just came across a letter (random? hashgacha?) from R Shlomo Fisher where he brings the גירסא change of the גרא and says that he feels it is unnecessary.
>>>In other words, for Chazal, and the Rishonim, increasing the amount of money that you make requires you to make the ordinary efforts that people engage in to increase the amount of money that they make.>>>
I wonder what this means.
Many years ago, people used to think a whole bunch of crazy things about human health and well being, and it's somewhat unfair to characterize it that way, because it's only crazy from today's perspective, so I'm not judging them. Just like in 100 years from now the way to treat cancer will be with gene editing and they'll look back and say that we did crazy things like infusing people with nonspecific poisons that kill the cancer but also kill the patient, but we titrated it just enough so that we maximize cancer death and minimize person death.
But people used to think that, let's say, bloodletting was a good medical procedure to have done to cure yourself of various ills. Now we would say we know better.
If we can't observe the universe to see the relationships between causes and effects, then where do we look for this information? R' Slifkin says that "[halacha] requires you to make the ordinary efforts that people engage in to increase [their] amount of money" but why do things that make no sense? Maybe doing things to increase one's income are like bloodletting? I presume that halacha does not endorse bloodletting.
The problem with disjointing cause and effect as we observe it in the universe and supplanting the way we see things with a mystical perspective that has never been tested and cannot be tested is that we actually don't even know what it means to "do the things that make sense" or that "people ordinarily do."
Without admitting that anything we see is connected to anything else we see, how can we know what is a relic of bygone times and what is something that currently makes sense? And if it currently makes sense, then why the need for mysticism at all? Isn't that what "makes sense" means? That we don't need to look at mysticism? No one would suggest fixing the "car with low gas" problem with anything other than more gas. Why is that never called into question, but fixing the "bank account with low funds" problem is seen as different? These are not asked sarcastically.
For those who are wondering about this girsa change of the Vilna Gaon:
In Niddah 70b, the Gemara says "what should one do to become rich? Do much business, trade faithfully. But many have done this, and it didn't work! *Rather*, pray for mercy from He that has the wealth (aka God). מאי קא משמע לן, what's the chiddush (ie we already knew that we must pray to God), that *neither works without the other*."
The Vilna Gaon removed the line "Do much business", but not the line "trade faithfully" (this gloss can be found on the side of the Gemara 70b). In context, this emendation doesn't make a lot of sense in comparison the two _other_ pieces of wisdom that the sages of Alexandria asked R. Yehoshua ben Chanina (69b) (how to become wise, and how to have boys). To both of those, R. Yehoshua b. Chanina responded with two phrases "increase Yeshiva, and decrease business", and "marry a worthy woman, and sanctify ones self with one's wife." If you delete the line "increase business" from the response about become rich, R. Yehoshua has only responded one thing: do business with faith.
Two more comments:
Even with the Vilna Gaon's girsa change, it still says "do business with faith", which is _still_ not what the Beis HaLevi quoted. The Beis HaLevi only quoted the middle, which says "יבקש רחמים ממי שהעושר שלו", not the previous line, which still says to do business, and not the next line, which says that one needs to both do business and also pray.
For זכרון דברים: You are combating עם ארצות with עם ארצות. The Gemara did in fact say "אלא", which rejects the previous line - and then clearly says that one needs to both do business and also pray. It was only rejecting doing business _without_ praying. This is so פשוט that I wonder if you in fact looked up the Gemara inside before commenting on it.
Natan, I must say, I was dazzled when I learned that you are smarter than R' Chaim Soloveitchik. But now that I see that you are even smarter than the Vilna Gaon, I shouldn't have been so impressed. I can only imagine who's coming next. Chazal? Moshe Rabbeinu? Hashem?
In terms of the substance of the post, it seems like you entirely missed the boat. Most people believe that as a general rule, the more hishtadlus one puts in, the more success they generally see, but of course only with siyyatta d'shmaya. So, without siyyatta d'shmaya, hishtadlus is meaningless. And with siyyatta d'shmaya, one can make it rich even with very minimal hishtadlus. Of course, there are people on lofty levels of bitachon such as the Gemara tells us about RSHBY whom did not need to expend any effort in providing income, but the Gemara tells us that most people are not on that level. This exactly what the many seforim about bitachon (such as the Chovos Halevavos (wait, was he Charedi?), the Bais Halevi, the Chazon Ish etc.) teach, and entirely consistent with reality and with Charedi (and it seems from the comments here, even MODOX) belief. Only you are scratching your head in confusion.
"Most people believe that as a general rule, the more hishtadlus one puts in, the more success they generally see, but of course only with siyyatta d'shmaya. So, without siyyatta d'shmaya, hishtadlus is meaningless. And with siyyatta d'shmaya, one can make it rich even with very minimal hishtadlus. Of course, there are people on lofty levels of bitachon such as the Gemara tells us about RSHBY whom did not need to expend any effort in providing income, but the Gemara tells us that most people are not on that level."
Thanks for that.
So, for example, which category does Putin belong to?
Articles like this are bait, they aren't seriously researched points of view.
There are many Gemaros, and to select some and ignore the others means you do not really care for what the Gemara says, you care to find a heter for what you want to believe.
Classic Torah sources, from Chovas Halevavos to Mesilas Yesharim and many others, make the same point. A person must work as much as necessary that בדרך הטבע he can sustain himself. Without that, Hashem will not make a miracle. But he does not have to account for every possibility, or increase the chances above that of 'not being a miracle'. A shoemaker who wins the lottery is a miracle, but a schoolteacher who supports his family is not. That is sufficient hishtadlus and anything more than that is not required by any classic Torah source. College education is unnecessary for a person to be able to make a living בדרך הטבע, even if it 'increases his chances'. Which is why hishtadlus does not include a requirement to go to college.
This is classic Jewish thought, and only someone who was not brought up with this education could not know this.
Classic Torah sources from the Talmud to Chovos Halevavos to the Rambam etc. etc. also say that one can rely on HaShem if he chooses to put himself in certain circumstances and HaShem will provide for him without the need for work. There is more than one derech in this matter and anyone who attempts to erase one of the drachim that is clearly in most of the sfarim that deal with this topic is being either ignorant or dishonest.
Rabbi Slifkin's ongoing point is that we've never had a Torah observing society that rejected your quote from the Mesilas Yesharim:
*Classic Torah sources, from Chovas Halevavos to Mesilas Yesharim and many others, make the same point. A person must work as much as necessary that בדרך הטבע he can sustain himself. Without that, Hashem will not make a miracle.*
Is this accepted by Charedi society in Israel today?
As far as I know, complete hishtadlus-free bitachon is not practiced anywhere. Nobardhok claimed to practice it in Europe, but they were not too popular at the time and have been forgotten nowadays.
Even in EY, people have some sort of cheshbon, at least for the short term. Nobody wakes up with nothing in the pantry, like the Rebbe of Lublin in the song.
But do these people not work at all, not them or their wives? Are they not members of paying Kollelim? Do they not apply for government benefits or Tzedaka?
If the answer is no, let's hear how they live. Perhaps Hashem does provide for such people. After all, on a scientific site like this, we wait for the data, we don't make it up according to our prejudices......................
Except no one in chinuch is going to magically make $150,000 a year, but someone who puts in the time and effort to get through medical school most assuredly will. Why do think that is?
Many doctors spend decades paying down their school loans and barely get by. Get real. There is no magic formula for making a great living. There are successful and unsuccessful people in every field. Hashem runs the world, and your hard work is only one small piece of the puzzle.
Really? Everywhere? Not in Israel and other countries with socialized medicine. And not in America, where they spend decades "making a lot of money" to pay off their school loans, while working like a dog and having very little time for anything else. That becoming a doctor is a path to wealth and living well is a myth. You're not living in the real world. Just facts.
But to address your point, considering all the people who can't get into medical school even with tons of effort, all the people who don't have the financial wherewithal to make it through medical school, all the people who are just not suited to be doctors, all the people who work themselves to the bone their whole lives without making even a quarter of a doctor's income, hishtadlus is actually a small part of what it takes to make the big cardiologist bucks.
On the flipside, many doctors would not make good mechanchim. And it can be very hard to land a job in chinuch.
You are dealing with a theoretical person who has the choice to put in a ton of effort to get through medical school, or put in very little effort and easily land a job in chinuch. Such people are rare, if they exist at all.
My point is that you see a clear correlation between the type of work you do and the money you make.
It doesn't seem to be as simple as "Hashem is gozer your money, just do a little work and you'll get whatever you were allotted", this guy will get 150k, and the other guy 50k for doing the same thing.
Also, as I mentioned before, people seem to have a level of bechira with what to do with their lives, i.e., a yeshiva guy choosing to stay in learning vs. go to law school. You won't have the same financial result.
Ok. Stay in learning vs. law school - I agree. Because that is basically a question of doing something vs. doing nothing. But going into chinuch vs. law school is not usually a simple choice, and is not even a matter of less hishtadlus vs. more hishtadlus, so doesn't enter this discussion.
When classic Torah sources say no correlation between parnasa and hishtadlus, they mean in the probabilistic zone -like college vs. no college. Or like the example of this gemara in Nidah, מרבה הסחורה, where the gemara says we see many don't become wealthy.
When staying in learning means the wife works, it is not 'doing nothing'.
But that is certain that the way Hashem runs His world is בהסתרה, as all classic Jewish texts teach us. Meaning, there is no way to empirically prove His methodology. Looking for the answer in the data is like looking for a Cohen in the Beis Hakvaros.
True, but the classic Jewish texts also acknowledge that for most people, hishtadlus has an effect. ואספת דגניך..אין סומכין על הנס...וכו. There is a balance. Hishtadlus may not include a requirement to go to college, but that may be one possible avenue of proper hishtadlus, just like getting a realtor or insurance agent license.
I write on Irrationalist Modoxism that for chareidim, Emunah in Hashem is a real experience, such that they speak the language of Emunah. Whereas for secularists, it is something they don't experience.
Classic Jewish thought is that Hishtadlus is less of a factor than Slifkin makes it out to be.
You have decided that empirical evidence (although you do not show us how you assembled your evidence) disagrees. Fine. I don't see that as a question, I can accept Chazal's words against yours.
But don't call it 'classic Jewish beliefs' when the sources are against you.
"Rather, he should seek mercy from the One Who has the wealth"
I'm not even sure you can take this at face value. Many people become wealthy without "seeking mercy from the One Who has the wealth"! Maybe the Gemara is talking about overturning a specific gezaira that one will NOT be wealthy.
Once again, it's complicated, and simplistic answers don't fully address the reality . . .
The Goan indeed takes out the words ירבה בסחורה, however it is completely irrelevant to the discussion at hand, because the Gemara concludes that wealth acquisition is grounded in רחמים. The question מאי קמ"ל proves this, as Rashi explained this passage in the previous Gemara למה ליה למימר להו ירבה כו' הואיל וברחמים הדבר תלוי, the only argument you would be able to make is that the Gemara's maskanah of דהא בלא הא לא סגי means that you need both equally, but certainly not that ירבה בסחורה is the key point of acquiring wealth.
It may mean that, however my analysis leads me to understand that although at first the Gemara was saying that wealth comes from ירבה בסחורה, after the question of הרבה עשו כן ולא הועילו, the Gemara falls off of this and concludes that wealth comes from rachamim. The word אלא signifies this change.
The subsequent question of מאי קמ"ל, and the answer דהא בלא הא לא סגי, are meant to be a clarification and qualification of the Gemara's conclusion, i.e. that although the key factor is rachamim, it is conditional on ירבה בסחורה, but it is only a condition (תנאי בעלמא).
This is effectively exactly the position of the Achronim that are refrenced in other comments, wealth is based on rachamim but it is conditional on work aka השתדלות.
This post motivated me to compose my own writeup of the sugya, where I explore the sugya and the (lack of manuscript, and existence of a few Rishonic) variants.
It is the #1 ethical book in the chareidi world today
They are not making it up
אמנם מה שיוכל לשמור את האדם ולהצילו מן המפסידים האלה הוא הבטחון, והוא שישליך יהבו על ה' לגמרי, כאשר ידע כי ודאי אי אפשר שיחסר לאדם מה שנקצב לו, וכמו שאז"ל במאמריהם (ביצה טז, א): כל מזונותיו של אדם קצובים לו מראש השנה וגו', וכן אמרו (יומא לח, ב): אין אדם נוגע במוכן לחבירו אפילו כמלא נימא, וכבר היה אדם יכול להיות יושב ובטל והגזירה היתה מתקיימת, אם לא שקדם הקנס לכל בני אדם, (בראשית ג, יט): בזעת אפך תאכל לחם, אשר על כן חייב אדם להשתדל איזה השתדלות לצורך פרנסתו, שכן גזר המלך העליון, והרי זה כמס שפורע כל המין האנושי אשר אין להמלט ממנו.
GreenButton UpArrow.svgמידת החסידות
על כן אמרו (ילקוט שמעוני דברים, רמז תתח): יכול אפילו יושב ובטל תלמוד לומר: בכל משלח ידך אשר תעשה, אך לא שההשתדלות הוא המועיל, אלא שהשתדלות מוכרח, וכיון שהשתדל הרי יצא ידי חובתו, וכבר יש מקום לברכת שמים שתשרה עליו ואינו צריך לבלות ימיו בחריצות והשתדלות, הוא מה שכתב דוד המלך ע"ה (תהלים עה, ז): כי לא ממוצא וממערב ולא וגו', כי אלהים שופט וגו' ושלמה המלך ע"ה אמר (משלי כג, ד): "אל תיגע להעשיר מבינתך חדל". אלא הדרך האמיתי הוא דרכם של החסידים הראשונים, עושים תורתן עיקר ומלאכתן תפלה, וזה וזה נתקיים בידם, כי כיון שעשה אדם קצת מלאכה משם והלאה אין לו אלא לבטוח בקונו ולא להצטער על שום דבר עולמי, אז תשאר דעתו פנויה ולבו מוכן לחסידות האמיתי ולעבודה התמימה.
Some people are taught how to 'make a leining' on a Gemara in their youth.
Basically, it is the lay of the land, how the text is to be understood, where to pause and how to finish sentences.
Quite young, we are taught the meaning of the word אלא. Basically, the Stam Gemara is discarding the previous pshat/halacha/answer as incorrect, and arriving at a new pshat/halacha/answer.
So the Gemara here attempts to tell us that more work = more money, but discards that and tells us that prayer is the answer.
The average tenth grader could tell you that.
The question now is, what happens to people that they could make a basic foolish mistake like this post, removing a critical word from the text to distort the pshat in the Gemara? Is it negi'us? Is it the warping of the brain that a college degree causes? Who knows?
A person has to do some hishtadlus, but more hishtadlus does not equal more money. The Gemara is quite clear on that. The קמ"ל is that work is insufficient, we need Tefilla.
There may be other Gemaros, I am not taking a stand here.
But Slifkin's basic misunderstanding of how to read a Gemara is a close partner of his absolute assuredness of his position. Another proof to the age-old adage, "the less you know, the more confident your opinion".
Perhaps he knows zoology, I don't know. But Gemara is not his forte.
Nah. The same ka mashma lan applies to all three statements of Rabbi Yehoshua.
1. How to increase wisdom - reduce business, increase yeshiva
2. How to increase wealth - increase business, deal honestly
3. How to have male children - marry correctly, sanctify yourself
All have a ka mashma lan of need for prayer. Just as for #1, it is reduce X, increase Y, and it isn't just that there is a minimum amount of yeshiva, for #2, it is increase X at play.
Saying the ka mashma lan means that there is only a bare hishtadlus doesn't match at all with the idea of increasing or decreasing current levels. The gemara is, at the very least, not "quite clear" on that. Your hostility might be pushing you to misread the gemara, and be extremely confident in your opinion. `And / or it might be a case of kol haposel.
The Gemara's question was that the empirical evidence shows that ירבה בסחורה doesn't help. The Gemara never retracts from this claim.
Yes, I am hostile. Because posts like this are so darned ignorant, they totally ignore half of the Sugya, and they can fool simpletons. Slifkin is a public nuisance, hiding behind a facade of a fool. His ignorance and low level of intellect is only visible to those who have a slight grounding in Jewish thought and law, and that is how he fools the weak of mind. That is why I am hostile. His mistakes are not בתום לב ונקיון כפים, they are malicious.
Oy. Of course it retracts. The question was why bother saying the first attacked statement, mai kamashma lan. And the answer, in all three instances, is that NEITHER first suggestion NOR prayer is sufficient by itself.
They didn't see the empirical evidence because their counterexamples only had increased work and honesty but not prayer.
Will you be writing an essay about what the modern orthodox do with the bitachon vs hishtadlus issue?
Do they simply write off all the pesukim and maamarei chazal, because "chazal make mistakes"? What exactly have you discovered that the chovos halevovos didn't know about? Do dinosaurs play a role in all this?
Interesting that you try to paint this as a chareidi issue.
Interestingly, the modern Orthodox (which I am not, if it matters) tend to have higher average incomes than the yeshiva world. This is by choice - they put more of an emphasis on college work the yeshiva world does, for better or for worse. I don't think it's because Hashem just happened to decree that MOs should be wealthier.
That may or may not be true, but it has nothing to do with bitachOn vs hishtadlus. This article is what you call a red herring.
The economies of M.O. and charedim are obviously very different, with pros and cons to each. I will just say that I don't know very many chareidim that are hungry or homeless. (The situation in EY may be different.) Generally the chareidim are in America are doing just fine economically, BH.
I think your comment about charedim in EY vs chul needs to be expanded. In my opinion, there is almost no comparison between charedim in EY and those in the USA (the only country outside of Israel that I have some knowledge about). I believe that when Rabbi Slifkin is making comments about charedim, it is always regarding EY charedim. Unfortunately, with the cost of Jewish education in the States being so high there is no way that a family could live without (usually) both parents working. And yes, there are exceptions; but they are the small minority.
Where do you see him disagreeing with that? All he is saying is that there are ma'amarei Chazal that on the one hand say that all Parnassah is decreed from Heaven and on the other hand extoll doing Hishtadlus. So why does Natan think that this is a Charedi issue? This is a very old discussion. How do MODOX reconcile it?
As an aside, entirely unrelated to the aoint above, although I will agree with you that the yeshivish world on average probably earns less than their MODOX counterparts, I am not sure that the Chassidim do on average. They tend to live very materialistic and extravagant lifestyles.
Great point. Believe it or not, the navi Malachi made the same point (3:14-15):
אֲמַרְתֶּ֕ם שָׁ֖וְא עֲבֹ֣ד אֱלֹהִ֑ים וּמַה־בֶּ֗צַע כִּ֤י שָׁמַ֙רְנוּ֙ מִשְׁמַרְתּ֔וֹ וְכִ֤י הָלַ֙כְנוּ֙ קְדֹ֣רַנִּ֔ית מִפְּנֵ֖י יְהֹוָ֥ה צְבָאֽוֹת׃
וְעַתָּ֕ה אֲנַ֖חְנוּ מְאַשְּׁרִ֣ים זֵדִ֑ים גַּם־נִבְנוּ֙ עֹשֵׂ֣י רִשְׁעָ֔ה גַּ֧ם בָּחֲנ֛וּ אֱלֹהִ֖ים וַיִּמָּלֵֽטוּ׃
Another point- there is a sample bias. You cannot send your kids to the *extremely* expensive MO schools if you are not wealthy! Can't afford it? Too bad, the local public schools will be happy to take you. Whereas chassidish and yeshiviah schools are much cheaper and give huge tuition breaks to the poor. Depending on the city, some pay nothing.
Come to the UK. Modox schools tend to be cheaper than charedi ones (usually free) as they follow national curriculum so can be state aided.
Good point, but I think my point still stands. Think Teaneck, etc. Smart, driven Jews have been making a lot of money in the US for the past 100 years . . .
This is called "whataboutery".
"the technique or practice of responding to an accusation or difficult question by making a counter-accusation or raising a different issue."
Your sense of irony does not seem to be very developed.
LOL!
I just came across a letter (random? hashgacha?) from R Shlomo Fisher where he brings the גירסא change of the גרא and says that he feels it is unnecessary.
קובץ אהל לאה חלק ג' עמ' קו
My father has a nice related interpretation of this interplay from a pasuk from last week's parsha, Beshalach.
ה' יִלָּחֵם לָכֶם וְאַתֶּם תַּחֲרִישׁוּן
"Hashem will provide you with bread. All you have to do is plow."
>>>In other words, for Chazal, and the Rishonim, increasing the amount of money that you make requires you to make the ordinary efforts that people engage in to increase the amount of money that they make.>>>
I wonder what this means.
Many years ago, people used to think a whole bunch of crazy things about human health and well being, and it's somewhat unfair to characterize it that way, because it's only crazy from today's perspective, so I'm not judging them. Just like in 100 years from now the way to treat cancer will be with gene editing and they'll look back and say that we did crazy things like infusing people with nonspecific poisons that kill the cancer but also kill the patient, but we titrated it just enough so that we maximize cancer death and minimize person death.
But people used to think that, let's say, bloodletting was a good medical procedure to have done to cure yourself of various ills. Now we would say we know better.
If we can't observe the universe to see the relationships between causes and effects, then where do we look for this information? R' Slifkin says that "[halacha] requires you to make the ordinary efforts that people engage in to increase [their] amount of money" but why do things that make no sense? Maybe doing things to increase one's income are like bloodletting? I presume that halacha does not endorse bloodletting.
The problem with disjointing cause and effect as we observe it in the universe and supplanting the way we see things with a mystical perspective that has never been tested and cannot be tested is that we actually don't even know what it means to "do the things that make sense" or that "people ordinarily do."
Without admitting that anything we see is connected to anything else we see, how can we know what is a relic of bygone times and what is something that currently makes sense? And if it currently makes sense, then why the need for mysticism at all? Isn't that what "makes sense" means? That we don't need to look at mysticism? No one would suggest fixing the "car with low gas" problem with anything other than more gas. Why is that never called into question, but fixing the "bank account with low funds" problem is seen as different? These are not asked sarcastically.
For those who are wondering about this girsa change of the Vilna Gaon:
In Niddah 70b, the Gemara says "what should one do to become rich? Do much business, trade faithfully. But many have done this, and it didn't work! *Rather*, pray for mercy from He that has the wealth (aka God). מאי קא משמע לן, what's the chiddush (ie we already knew that we must pray to God), that *neither works without the other*."
The Vilna Gaon removed the line "Do much business", but not the line "trade faithfully" (this gloss can be found on the side of the Gemara 70b). In context, this emendation doesn't make a lot of sense in comparison the two _other_ pieces of wisdom that the sages of Alexandria asked R. Yehoshua ben Chanina (69b) (how to become wise, and how to have boys). To both of those, R. Yehoshua b. Chanina responded with two phrases "increase Yeshiva, and decrease business", and "marry a worthy woman, and sanctify ones self with one's wife." If you delete the line "increase business" from the response about become rich, R. Yehoshua has only responded one thing: do business with faith.
Two more comments:
Even with the Vilna Gaon's girsa change, it still says "do business with faith", which is _still_ not what the Beis HaLevi quoted. The Beis HaLevi only quoted the middle, which says "יבקש רחמים ממי שהעושר שלו", not the previous line, which still says to do business, and not the next line, which says that one needs to both do business and also pray.
For זכרון דברים: You are combating עם ארצות with עם ארצות. The Gemara did in fact say "אלא", which rejects the previous line - and then clearly says that one needs to both do business and also pray. It was only rejecting doing business _without_ praying. This is so פשוט that I wonder if you in fact looked up the Gemara inside before commenting on it.
Beis HaLevi, not Brisket Rav
Fixed. Also, Brisker Rav, not Brisket. Though the brisket rav sounds like a good purim idea!
Natan, I must say, I was dazzled when I learned that you are smarter than R' Chaim Soloveitchik. But now that I see that you are even smarter than the Vilna Gaon, I shouldn't have been so impressed. I can only imagine who's coming next. Chazal? Moshe Rabbeinu? Hashem?
In terms of the substance of the post, it seems like you entirely missed the boat. Most people believe that as a general rule, the more hishtadlus one puts in, the more success they generally see, but of course only with siyyatta d'shmaya. So, without siyyatta d'shmaya, hishtadlus is meaningless. And with siyyatta d'shmaya, one can make it rich even with very minimal hishtadlus. Of course, there are people on lofty levels of bitachon such as the Gemara tells us about RSHBY whom did not need to expend any effort in providing income, but the Gemara tells us that most people are not on that level. This exactly what the many seforim about bitachon (such as the Chovos Halevavos (wait, was he Charedi?), the Bais Halevi, the Chazon Ish etc.) teach, and entirely consistent with reality and with Charedi (and it seems from the comments here, even MODOX) belief. Only you are scratching your head in confusion.
"smarter than the R' Chaim"... "smarter than the Vilna Gaon".
So boring. You don't need to be smarter than something to be able to see that they made a mistake.
"Most people believe that as a general rule, the more hishtadlus one puts in, the more success they generally see, but of course only with siyyatta d'shmaya. So, without siyyatta d'shmaya, hishtadlus is meaningless. And with siyyatta d'shmaya, one can make it rich even with very minimal hishtadlus. Of course, there are people on lofty levels of bitachon such as the Gemara tells us about RSHBY whom did not need to expend any effort in providing income, but the Gemara tells us that most people are not on that level."
Thanks for that.
So, for example, which category does Putin belong to?
Articles like this are bait, they aren't seriously researched points of view.
There are many Gemaros, and to select some and ignore the others means you do not really care for what the Gemara says, you care to find a heter for what you want to believe.
Classic Torah sources, from Chovas Halevavos to Mesilas Yesharim and many others, make the same point. A person must work as much as necessary that בדרך הטבע he can sustain himself. Without that, Hashem will not make a miracle. But he does not have to account for every possibility, or increase the chances above that of 'not being a miracle'. A shoemaker who wins the lottery is a miracle, but a schoolteacher who supports his family is not. That is sufficient hishtadlus and anything more than that is not required by any classic Torah source. College education is unnecessary for a person to be able to make a living בדרך הטבע, even if it 'increases his chances'. Which is why hishtadlus does not include a requirement to go to college.
This is classic Jewish thought, and only someone who was not brought up with this education could not know this.
Classic Torah sources from the Talmud to Chovos Halevavos to the Rambam etc. etc. also say that one can rely on HaShem if he chooses to put himself in certain circumstances and HaShem will provide for him without the need for work. There is more than one derech in this matter and anyone who attempts to erase one of the drachim that is clearly in most of the sfarim that deal with this topic is being either ignorant or dishonest.
Rabbi Slifkin's ongoing point is that we've never had a Torah observing society that rejected your quote from the Mesilas Yesharim:
*Classic Torah sources, from Chovas Halevavos to Mesilas Yesharim and many others, make the same point. A person must work as much as necessary that בדרך הטבע he can sustain himself. Without that, Hashem will not make a miracle.*
Is this accepted by Charedi society in Israel today?
As far as I know, complete hishtadlus-free bitachon is not practiced anywhere. Nobardhok claimed to practice it in Europe, but they were not too popular at the time and have been forgotten nowadays.
Even in EY, people have some sort of cheshbon, at least for the short term. Nobody wakes up with nothing in the pantry, like the Rebbe of Lublin in the song.
I know people who make no cheshbon whatsoever.
I don't claim that there are no exceptions.
But do these people not work at all, not them or their wives? Are they not members of paying Kollelim? Do they not apply for government benefits or Tzedaka?
If the answer is no, let's hear how they live. Perhaps Hashem does provide for such people. After all, on a scientific site like this, we wait for the data, we don't make it up according to our prejudices......................
Except no one in chinuch is going to magically make $150,000 a year, but someone who puts in the time and effort to get through medical school most assuredly will. Why do think that is?
Many doctors spend decades paying down their school loans and barely get by. Get real. There is no magic formula for making a great living. There are successful and unsuccessful people in every field. Hashem runs the world, and your hard work is only one small piece of the puzzle.
The vast majority of doctors make a lot of money and live well. Just facts
Really? Everywhere? Not in Israel and other countries with socialized medicine. And not in America, where they spend decades "making a lot of money" to pay off their school loans, while working like a dog and having very little time for anything else. That becoming a doctor is a path to wealth and living well is a myth. You're not living in the real world. Just facts.
"Except no one in chinuch is going to magically make $150,000 a year"
Uhhh... Are you sure about that? 😄
https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/200247649
But to address your point, considering all the people who can't get into medical school even with tons of effort, all the people who don't have the financial wherewithal to make it through medical school, all the people who are just not suited to be doctors, all the people who work themselves to the bone their whole lives without making even a quarter of a doctor's income, hishtadlus is actually a small part of what it takes to make the big cardiologist bucks.
On the flipside, many doctors would not make good mechanchim. And it can be very hard to land a job in chinuch.
You are dealing with a theoretical person who has the choice to put in a ton of effort to get through medical school, or put in very little effort and easily land a job in chinuch. Such people are rare, if they exist at all.
My point is that you see a clear correlation between the type of work you do and the money you make.
It doesn't seem to be as simple as "Hashem is gozer your money, just do a little work and you'll get whatever you were allotted", this guy will get 150k, and the other guy 50k for doing the same thing.
Also, as I mentioned before, people seem to have a level of bechira with what to do with their lives, i.e., a yeshiva guy choosing to stay in learning vs. go to law school. You won't have the same financial result.
Ok. Stay in learning vs. law school - I agree. Because that is basically a question of doing something vs. doing nothing. But going into chinuch vs. law school is not usually a simple choice, and is not even a matter of less hishtadlus vs. more hishtadlus, so doesn't enter this discussion.
When classic Torah sources say no correlation between parnasa and hishtadlus, they mean in the probabilistic zone -like college vs. no college. Or like the example of this gemara in Nidah, מרבה הסחורה, where the gemara says we see many don't become wealthy.
When staying in learning means the wife works, it is not 'doing nothing'.
But that is certain that the way Hashem runs His world is בהסתרה, as all classic Jewish texts teach us. Meaning, there is no way to empirically prove His methodology. Looking for the answer in the data is like looking for a Cohen in the Beis Hakvaros.
True, but the classic Jewish texts also acknowledge that for most people, hishtadlus has an effect. ואספת דגניך..אין סומכין על הנס...וכו. There is a balance. Hishtadlus may not include a requirement to go to college, but that may be one possible avenue of proper hishtadlus, just like getting a realtor or insurance agent license.
I write on Irrationalist Modoxism that for chareidim, Emunah in Hashem is a real experience, such that they speak the language of Emunah. Whereas for secularists, it is something they don't experience.
You are confusing issues.
Classic Jewish thought is that Hishtadlus is less of a factor than Slifkin makes it out to be.
You have decided that empirical evidence (although you do not show us how you assembled your evidence) disagrees. Fine. I don't see that as a question, I can accept Chazal's words against yours.
But don't call it 'classic Jewish beliefs' when the sources are against you.
"Rather, he should seek mercy from the One Who has the wealth"
I'm not even sure you can take this at face value. Many people become wealthy without "seeking mercy from the One Who has the wealth"! Maybe the Gemara is talking about overturning a specific gezaira that one will NOT be wealthy.
Once again, it's complicated, and simplistic answers don't fully address the reality . . .
The Goan indeed takes out the words ירבה בסחורה, however it is completely irrelevant to the discussion at hand, because the Gemara concludes that wealth acquisition is grounded in רחמים. The question מאי קמ"ל proves this, as Rashi explained this passage in the previous Gemara למה ליה למימר להו ירבה כו' הואיל וברחמים הדבר תלוי, the only argument you would be able to make is that the Gemara's maskanah of דהא בלא הא לא סגי means that you need both equally, but certainly not that ירבה בסחורה is the key point of acquiring wealth.
That means that they are both necessary conditions. That means that they are both key points.
It may mean that, however my analysis leads me to understand that although at first the Gemara was saying that wealth comes from ירבה בסחורה, after the question of הרבה עשו כן ולא הועילו, the Gemara falls off of this and concludes that wealth comes from rachamim. The word אלא signifies this change.
The subsequent question of מאי קמ"ל, and the answer דהא בלא הא לא סגי, are meant to be a clarification and qualification of the Gemara's conclusion, i.e. that although the key factor is rachamim, it is conditional on ירבה בסחורה, but it is only a condition (תנאי בעלמא).
This is effectively exactly the position of the Achronim that are refrenced in other comments, wealth is based on rachamim but it is conditional on work aka השתדלות.
As per Janis J: "YOU CAN'T ALWAYS GET WHAT YOU WANT, BUT IF YOU TRY SOMETIMES, YOU GET WHAT YOU NEED."
The Stones, not Joplin.
I think you meant "O Lord won't you buy me a Mercedes Benz"
Freewill vs Determinism. ACJA
This post motivated me to compose my own writeup of the sugya, where I explore the sugya and the (lack of manuscript, and existence of a few Rishonic) variants.
https://scribalerror.substack.com/p/all-you-need-to-do-is-plow
Interesting the Talmud says pray and not Talmud Torah!
מסילת ישרים פרק כ״א
Predates chareidism by quite some time
It is the #1 ethical book in the chareidi world today
They are not making it up
אמנם מה שיוכל לשמור את האדם ולהצילו מן המפסידים האלה הוא הבטחון, והוא שישליך יהבו על ה' לגמרי, כאשר ידע כי ודאי אי אפשר שיחסר לאדם מה שנקצב לו, וכמו שאז"ל במאמריהם (ביצה טז, א): כל מזונותיו של אדם קצובים לו מראש השנה וגו', וכן אמרו (יומא לח, ב): אין אדם נוגע במוכן לחבירו אפילו כמלא נימא, וכבר היה אדם יכול להיות יושב ובטל והגזירה היתה מתקיימת, אם לא שקדם הקנס לכל בני אדם, (בראשית ג, יט): בזעת אפך תאכל לחם, אשר על כן חייב אדם להשתדל איזה השתדלות לצורך פרנסתו, שכן גזר המלך העליון, והרי זה כמס שפורע כל המין האנושי אשר אין להמלט ממנו.
GreenButton UpArrow.svgמידת החסידות
על כן אמרו (ילקוט שמעוני דברים, רמז תתח): יכול אפילו יושב ובטל תלמוד לומר: בכל משלח ידך אשר תעשה, אך לא שההשתדלות הוא המועיל, אלא שהשתדלות מוכרח, וכיון שהשתדל הרי יצא ידי חובתו, וכבר יש מקום לברכת שמים שתשרה עליו ואינו צריך לבלות ימיו בחריצות והשתדלות, הוא מה שכתב דוד המלך ע"ה (תהלים עה, ז): כי לא ממוצא וממערב ולא וגו', כי אלהים שופט וגו' ושלמה המלך ע"ה אמר (משלי כג, ד): "אל תיגע להעשיר מבינתך חדל". אלא הדרך האמיתי הוא דרכם של החסידים הראשונים, עושים תורתן עיקר ומלאכתן תפלה, וזה וזה נתקיים בידם, כי כיון שעשה אדם קצת מלאכה משם והלאה אין לו אלא לבטוח בקונו ולא להצטער על שום דבר עולמי, אז תשאר דעתו פנויה ולבו מוכן לחסידות האמיתי ולעבודה התמימה.
Some people are taught how to 'make a leining' on a Gemara in their youth.
Basically, it is the lay of the land, how the text is to be understood, where to pause and how to finish sentences.
Quite young, we are taught the meaning of the word אלא. Basically, the Stam Gemara is discarding the previous pshat/halacha/answer as incorrect, and arriving at a new pshat/halacha/answer.
So the Gemara here attempts to tell us that more work = more money, but discards that and tells us that prayer is the answer.
The average tenth grader could tell you that.
The question now is, what happens to people that they could make a basic foolish mistake like this post, removing a critical word from the text to distort the pshat in the Gemara? Is it negi'us? Is it the warping of the brain that a college degree causes? Who knows?
Keep reading the stama, which then harmonizes and says both are necessary
To: זכרון דברים
So what do you with the last line:
" . .. קמ"ל ".
Regards from
a 4th Grader in Baltimore
A person has to do some hishtadlus, but more hishtadlus does not equal more money. The Gemara is quite clear on that. The קמ"ל is that work is insufficient, we need Tefilla.
There may be other Gemaros, I am not taking a stand here.
But Slifkin's basic misunderstanding of how to read a Gemara is a close partner of his absolute assuredness of his position. Another proof to the age-old adage, "the less you know, the more confident your opinion".
Perhaps he knows zoology, I don't know. But Gemara is not his forte.
Nah. The same ka mashma lan applies to all three statements of Rabbi Yehoshua.
1. How to increase wisdom - reduce business, increase yeshiva
2. How to increase wealth - increase business, deal honestly
3. How to have male children - marry correctly, sanctify yourself
All have a ka mashma lan of need for prayer. Just as for #1, it is reduce X, increase Y, and it isn't just that there is a minimum amount of yeshiva, for #2, it is increase X at play.
Saying the ka mashma lan means that there is only a bare hishtadlus doesn't match at all with the idea of increasing or decreasing current levels. The gemara is, at the very least, not "quite clear" on that. Your hostility might be pushing you to misread the gemara, and be extremely confident in your opinion. `And / or it might be a case of kol haposel.
The Gemara's question was that the empirical evidence shows that ירבה בסחורה doesn't help. The Gemara never retracts from this claim.
Yes, I am hostile. Because posts like this are so darned ignorant, they totally ignore half of the Sugya, and they can fool simpletons. Slifkin is a public nuisance, hiding behind a facade of a fool. His ignorance and low level of intellect is only visible to those who have a slight grounding in Jewish thought and law, and that is how he fools the weak of mind. That is why I am hostile. His mistakes are not בתום לב ונקיון כפים, they are malicious.
Oy. Of course it retracts. The question was why bother saying the first attacked statement, mai kamashma lan. And the answer, in all three instances, is that NEITHER first suggestion NOR prayer is sufficient by itself.
They didn't see the empirical evidence because their counterexamples only had increased work and honesty but not prayer.
This is basic gemara reading skills.
J waxman: This is basic gemara reading skills.
Word!
its not Niddah 70a, its Niddah 70b