Olam Ha-zeh, Olam Ha-ba - This World and the Next

 

 

 

The first topic we will explore is one which I think most people take for granted, and do not take the trouble to scrutinize seriously.  This notwithstanding, the fact is that our attitude on this issue can have considerable impact on our efforts to live according to the Torah, certainly from the vantage point of Mussar. 

 

For many, this issue is also linked to one of the major hindrances to Mussar study - namely, depression.  Mussar is often associated with melancholy; it is seen as engendering a psychological malaise which is ultimately counterproductive to the effort invested. 

 

Consider the following excerpt from Messilat Yesharim (chapter 1).  Bear in mind that as a Mussar work, Messilat Yesharim will not achieve its aim if it is merely understood; it must be accepted.  As you read, ask yourself - do I identify with this?  Moreover, CAN I identify?  Do I WANT to?[1]

 

Man was created solely in order to delight in God and derive pleasure from the glory of His Presence, which is the truest delight and the greatest possible pleasure.  And the place of this pleasure is truly the World to Come, for it was created with that very design.  But the way to arrive at this, our desired destination, is the Present World, as our Rabbis of blessed memory said: 'This world is like a corridor to the next.'  The means which bring a person to this end are the mitzvot which were commanded to us by God.  And the only place where mitzvot may be fulfilled is the Present World... Now, the Holy One has put man in a place where there are many forces which can distance him from God.  Such are those very physical lusts which, if he should tend after them, he would be removing himself continuously from the absolute good.  It follows that man is really in the midst of a great battle, for all the events of the world, for better or for worse, are moral trials ('nisyonot'): poverty on the one hand, and wealth on the other, as Shlomo said (Proverbs 30): 'Lest I grow satisfied, for then I might deny, saying - Who is God?  And lest I become impoverished, for then I might steal...' Thus, the prospects of contentment, on the one hand, and suffering, on the other, mean that the battle is upon man, from the front as well as from the rear.

 

Essentially, these sentiments can traced to Kohelet, who was disillusioned by the world and proclaimed it "vanity of vanities."  Undoubtedly, there are readers who will embrace this outlook wholeheartedly. 

 

Others may agree in principle with this view, but after introspection will be chagrined to find a lack of inner identification with it.  This second group has been conditioned by modern life, even by modern religious life, to seek fulfillment in this world.  The viewpoint which regards the world as a menacing existential minefield, whose raison d'etre can be known only after death, has been inimical to modern culture for over two hundred years.  In effect, the Messilat Yesharim is calling upon us to reject inwardly messages which many of us find deeply ingrained in our psyches, as well as inextricably woven into our upbringings.  An awesome undertaking, no doubt.

 

But there is yet a third possible reaction to this passage.  Rather than identify, or submit, there are those who will bridle.  They do not view their positive involvement with the world and society as a necessary evil, or as the result of massive conditioning, but as part of the way in which they would like to live their life.  In essence, without meaning to be impertinent, they find themselves taking issue with the Messilat Yesharim. 

 

A member of the first group, beginning to study Messilat Yesharim and encountering the above passage, will encounter no more difficulty than a student living two hundred years ago.  A member of group two, in order to continue to grapple seriously with this work, would have to grit his teeth and prepare for rough going.  As for group three - would we fail to understand if they were to conclude that Mussar is not for them?

 

At this point, I will introduce another excerpt, authored by an eminent halakhist who lived two generations ago, Rav Yechiel Yaakov Weinberg.  It is taken from an article (Seridei Eish, vol. 4) in which he describes the aims and achievements of Rav Shimshon Raphael Hirsch, the rabbi who saved German Orthodoxy from desiccation during the Enlightenment.  As you read, ask yourself how Rav Hirsch would view himself vis-a-vis the Messilat Yesharim:

 

The Israelite religion does not wish to uproot the Jew from the soil of his growth, and transplant him elsewhere.  Rather, it wishes to influence the whole man, to prepare his whole heart, his thoughts and deeds, for his exalted tasks.  All that is human is near to it, for Judaism is - as Rav Hirsch himself put it - flawless, perfected humanity, a Jewish humanity.  So it was in ancient Israel, and in the time of the Tannaim and Amoraim and Geonim, and partially so in the Golden Age experienced by the Jewish people in Spain.  Judaism was never a source of suffering for Israel.  Judaism for Israel was life in its fullness.  No one dreamed of a possible separation between religion and life, as though they were separate or opposing forces.

 

But the Jewish people underwent a mighty change during the time of the terrible Crusades.  The terrible persecutions, the banishment from the different areas of life, the deprivation of breathing space and limitation of movement, also damaged the religious strength of the Jew seriously and weakened it.

 

Together with the impoverishment of our life, the scope of our religion became increasingly narrower.  Broad, important areas of life were cruelly wrested from our people and its religion.  The Hebrew soul was torn to shreds.  That joy which results from the total correspondence of spirit and life, ceased in Israel.  Religion no longer had anything to do with life, and consequently, life ceased to be a matter of religion.  Concrete living lost its religious form, and became a secular affair.

 

The concept 'secular life,' which is foreign to the spirit of Israel, came into being during those dark times.  The religious sense no longer drew sustenance directly from life... and was sustained only by the fear of death, and terror of the severe penalties of the World-to-Come.  It is true, of course, that belief in divine reward and punishment is a basic Jewish principle... but extensive use of it, placing it at the center of religious feeling, turning it into the solitary propelling force for fulfilling mitzvot - can plunge a man into depression and induce spiritual malaise...

 

This 'separation from life' resulted in the adoption of a negative stance towards life's achievements.  The spirit of Israel wore black, donning a cloak of asceticism foreign to the spirit of Judaism.  The ghetto stood for hundreds of years, and brought forth great, pious, holy men... who benefited from the splendor of the Torah, and whose thoughts, speech and deeds were inspired by its holy Presence.  But within the ghetto walls lived multitudes who couldn't taste Torah or be inspired by it.  They thirsted for life, and their spirit was crushed by their inability to reach it...

 

But one day new winds began to blow in the world.  The ghetto walls fell.  Swirling currents of hope for light and freedom, for the prospect of life and productive activity, acquisition of wealth and social standing, flooded the furthest corners of the ghetto and its disenfranchised residents.  The thirst for healthy life, so natural to the Jews... awoke once more with storm and fury.  These revolutionary developments brought a crisis upon the congregation of Israel.  The one-sided, life-negating religiosity collapsed ...On the one hand stood the elders... who defended with all their might the accepted form of religion which was based on the negation of life and its achievements, and on the other hand raged the newly-liberated from the ghetto-prison, intoxicated and giddy with freedom, who destroyed without scruple all that was precious and sacred in traditional life.

 

At this time of peril appeared Rav Shimshon Raphael Hirsch of blessed memory and stood in the breach.  He stood and proclaimed the ancient truth of Judaism: Religion and life are one and the same...

 

We can easily see the diametrically opposing positions issuing from the two sources brought here: on the relative importance of Olam Ha-zeh (This World) and Olam Ha-ba (the World-to-Come), on the attitude of Torah Judaism toward productive activity in the social and economic spheres, on life in this world as a treacherous obstacle course or as an exhilarating challenge.  The conception of Rav Weinberg would undoubtedly strike a sympathetic chord with those people we referred to previously, who find it hard to identify with the view of Messilat Yesharim on these questions.  But then what?   Faced with this profound difference in world-view, shouldn't we be searching for a way to decide which opinion is correct?

 

I don't believe that it is to the point to try to arrive at a "pesak" (authoritative halakhic decision) in this matter.  The controversy is a given, and the question now is: What is the controversy's significance for us?  The important lesson I would learn from here is the very possibility of major differences in outlook within our traditional sources.

 

This lesson itself has an important corollary for the student of Mussar.  Little progress can be expected from working with a source which provokes strong inner resistance.  If there is another approach with which I can identify more easily, why should I, so to speak, knock my head against the wall?  Is it necessary to conform to a conceptual framework which doesn't speak to me?  Those who can't accept the approach of Messilat Yesharim still have the option of improving the quality and intensity of their spiritual life by following the approach of Rav Hirsch.

 

This methodological point about individual choice in Mussar study needs to be amplified.  Indeed, besides examining the topic at hand, it is important for us to draw out the implications of our analysis for Mussar study in general.  We will concentrate more on these broader consequences in our next shiur, God willing.  But there is one important general remark I should make here, related to the above sources, before resuming our main discussion. 

 

Besides the fact that the Messilat Yesharim and Rav Weinberg differ in their world-view, there is a basic difference between the AIMS of the two sources.  Messilat Yesharim is a classic Mussar text; its goal is explicitly didactic.  The passage written by Rav Weinberg is descriptive.  We may find the prose style stirring or inspiring, but the passage itself asks of the reader no more than intellectual comprehension.  How can such a detached, objective piece be of any significance to Mussar, which strives for actualization and application?

 

I would answer by referring to the definition of Mussar which I used in the first lesson: study whose AVOWED AIM is to learn how to live.  According to this definition, it is not the aim of the AUTHOR of the book which is relevant.  It is the goal of the READER which makes the difference.

 

            One of our greatest luminaries, the Ramban, put this idea tersely in a famous letter to his son, which has come to be known as "Iggeret Ha-mussar," the Epistle of Mussar.  "Whenever you get up from a book," he advised, "search in what you have learned for something that you can fulfill."  That says it all.  There are many Torah texts which are not overtly didactic, but which can yield precious insights when the reading is guided and followed up with the appropriate questions.  Rather than seeking objective understanding (what is the author saying?  what is the main point?), Ramban would have us ask: What did I get from this?   How can this impact on my life?  

 

            A student of Mussar will search for those instances when he can feel the text resonating within himself, pointing a direction towards growth, which may become manifest in one's concrete behavior or in one's fundamental orientation.  One who assimilates the viewpoint of Messilat Yesharim, for example, relates to life by recognizing the trials and pitfalls as part of a pattern which awaits its redeeming explication in the future world.  On the other hand, one who responds positively to the conception of Rav Hirsch orients himself to the present life as an end in itself, which awaits its redemption in the here-and-now through the path of Torah. 

 

With this in mind, we will not limit our studies to Mussar texts per se, but rather will utilize a wider spectrum of illustrative sources.  This is true also of our next excerpt, which was written by Rav Soloveitchik (Halakhic Man, Book I, chapter 8).  The Rav, of blessed memory, would as a rule write of his own experience and understanding, and avoid an openly didactic posture in matters not strictly halakhic.  It seems that mining his wisdom, in particular, requires a personal, searching stance.  Here he contrasts the spiritual world of "halakhic man" to that of the general "religious man." 

 

The difference between halakhic man and religious man is essentially one of orientation; they move in opposite directions.  Religious man starts from this world and concludes in Atzilut (i.e. the highest metaphysical realm); Halakhic man begins in Atzilut and concludes in this world.  Religious man, dissatisfied, disappointed, and unhappy, aspires to ascend from the 'vale of tears' of actuality, to escape the straits of sensed existence, into the divine expanses of transcendental existence, purged and distilled.  Halakhic man, to the contrary, yearns to bring transcendence into the 'valley of death' of our world and to transform it into the land of life.  While religious man throbs with the pining for flight from reality... halakhic man draws a line in the sand of this world and does not leave it.  He wishes to purify this world, not to flee it.  'Flight heralds defeat' (Sota 8:6).  Halakhic man is possessed of a stiffness of neck, a tremendous stubbornness.  He battles the evil and the demonic forces of life, and struggles valiantly against the rule of malice and the hosts of wickedness in the world.  His mission is directed not towards running away to another world which is all-perfect, but rather to bring down that eternal world into the midst of ours.

 

Where would you place this world-view - alongside Rabbis Hirsch and Weinberg, or together with Messilat Yesharim?  Clearly, halakhic man does not see Olam Ha-ba as his desired destination.  To the contrary, he scorns the impulse to "flee" from this world.  This would connect him to the ideal outlined by Rav Weinberg.  Yet halakhic man's point of departure seems strikingly similar to that of Messilat Yesharim.  He is not enthralled by "the prospect of light and freedom" extended by this world.  He holds this world to be a vale of tears, a valley of death, inhabited by demonic forces and malicious hosts.  But his conclusion is still thoroughly different than that of Messilat Yesharim.

 

We have seen, then, that the relationship of Olam Ha-zeh and Olam Ha-ba admits various attitudes.  This is one of the questions determining the direction of our spiritual life and activity.  Our claim here has been that discovering the approach that is right for a given individual can be crucial if he is to progress religiously.  In our next lesson, we will further develop the theme of individual adaptation, as we continue to examine the relationship of the physical and spiritual realms of existence.