Mentch Before Ruchnius?

I have read the idea "emotional health comes before spiritual growth" several times and have wondered about it.  Sometimes it's couched as "first he needs to become a mentch, then we can work on his ruchnius." It is in the context of those off the derech or those having personal problems.

I can see that if someone is an emotional mess, they are in no position to listen to a shiur.  But they could very well be encouraged to do a mitzvah!

In the book Incredible, the story is told of Yossi Gevili, an inmate in an Israeli prison who showed up at an Arachim seminar.  He was on furlough, only his second one in seven years because after he was allowed out the first time and got into a fight, they were hesitant about letting him out again.  This time, he figured the safest place for him was at an Arachim seminar.

Yossi Gevili had been one of the worst prisoners at the prison.  He did not get along with anyone, he argued constantly, was mean, and broke all the rules.  When he returned to the prison after the seminar, he was a different person, polite, and he started using a siddur.  Four days at the Arachim seminar made him into a baal teshuva and model citizen.

Arachim personnel found him a job when he was released and gave him the support he needed to stay on track. He married and settled down and gave his mother nachas.

So here was a man who was difficult inmate in a prison who did not first undergo therapy or any sort of program to address his emotional state of being, his obnoxious behavior, and his anger.  He was exposed to Torah lectures and this changed his life.

Gam Zu L'Tova

 

When you learn with someone who did not have a Jewish education, everything is new to them.  All the stories you heard a hundred times are new for them. 

 

One night, I told my learning partner the story of Nachum Ish Gamzu as related in the Gemara, how the jewels he was bringing to the emperor were exchanged for dirt by the thief of an innkeeper, and how it miraculously worked out for the best, gam zu l'tova.

 

The next day, I left the house and was a block away when I remembered that I left something important at home.  I said, "This is not good." I continued on my way, hoping I'd manage without it.

 

It later occurred to me that saying, "This is not good" is the antithesis of "gam zu l'tova." Not only do I know about gam zu l'tova, I had taught about it the night before! So I told the person I had said it to, "I need to make a correction.  I said, "This is not good, when I should have said gam zu l'tova."

 

We know lots of things but when it comes to integration, internalization, and what is instinctive to us, that's another story!

Who Are We Really?

I read a poignant story in an October issue of Hamodia's Inyan magazine, written by R' Avraham Y. Heschel.  It begins with a story that the author tells of a man, we'll call him Shimon, who protested nearly every week in shul, complaining that he should get the second aliya. 

The problem was, the rav of the shul was a Levi, but Shimon felt that as a Levi too, he should have a chance at that aliya.  The rav even frequently told the gabbai to let Shimon have the aliya at least some of the time, but the gabbai refused, saying it was the rav's aliya and Shimon had to make do with occasionally getting maftir and only receiving Levi on the rare occasions that the rav was away.

This went on for years.  Shimon remained a member of the shul but was always bothered about not receiving the Levi aliya.

One day, Shimon came to shul all excited about his older brother, we'll call him Yaakov, having received permission to leave Russia and come to America.  The rav told the gabbai that he absolutely must give Shimon's brother the second aliya, Levi, on Shabbos, and the gabbai agreed, considering the special circumstances. 

When Yaakov was called up he seemed puzzled.  He asked why he had been given this aliya.  The gabbai said, well, your brother is a Levi, so I assumed you are too.

Yaakov chuckled and said, "He thought he was a Levi? Shimon was a little kid when he had to run away during the war.  He doesn't remember.  We are not Leviyim."

R' Heschel says the story is true and he heard it from the rav of that shul.  He goes on to write a powerful lesson from the story.  For years, Shimon was upset because he thought he should be getting the second aliya.  Actually, the second aliya was not his and he could have had any of the other aliyos.  "Shimon's problem was that he didn't know who he really was."

Many people are stuck deep in negative feelings, struggling with painful memories or a difficult life.  They are convinced, he says, that they are not capable of moving forward, that their problems are too great, their hurts too deep, their challenges too mighty for them to live a relaxed, happy life.  But, this is only because they really don't know themselves!

to be continued

Kashering the Material

In the previous post, the message was Torah-true but the one conveying it was not up to par.  What about the other way around, when the message isn't coming from Torah but the one conveying it is a fine, frum Jew?

Many of us wonder about various approaches to life's issues that are taken by those in the helping professions.  Often, these approaches are not coming from Torah, but they are adapted for a frum audience.  For example, frum authors like R' Zelig Pliskin study secular self-help sources and then present the material for frum audiences with relevant examples.  Does this "kasher" the material? Do we say, there is wisdom there and we can and should benefit from that wisdom?

Perhaps the truth and the benefit of the model depends on how it was come by.  By that I mean, did the person already have an approach that he or she used, and only afterward try to see how it fit with Torah sources? In other words, it wasn't Torah that informed their decision.

Or, were they not invested in any approach but looked to see what tools "out there" might be useful to a Yid in his avodas Hashem, middos improvement, and general life.

For the most part, I read and hear of frum people who have already invested in a non-Jewish approach who then try and show how it "fits" with Torah. 

The Medium Must Match the Message

The story is told of a maggid (itinerant preacher) who gave inspiring speeches but did not live by the standards he preached.  However, people did not know of the indiscretions in his private life.

He was once invited to speak in Brisk.  His personal conduct became known to R' Chaim Soloveitchik who did not allow the man to speak.  The maggid tried to convince him otherwise saying, "But every thing I say is true! I quote the sources and the stories and points that I make are all appropriate to my audience!"

R' Chaim did not accept this reasoning.  "Even kosher meat, shechted by an expert shochet and soaked and salted according to halacha, becomes treif if cooked in a treife pot!"

This story left me wondering, when do we apply "kabel es ha'emes mimi she'omro" (accept the truth from the one who says it)? If what the maggid taught was true, how did his imperfect personal life which was not known to his audience, affect his message? Maybe because his words did not "emanate from his heart" and therefore, they would not enter the hearts of his listeners.

to be continued

Cultural Shift

I found the following description of the evolution of American culture in a book called Quiet.  The author quotes cultural historian Susman as saying that at the turn of the 20th century, America shifted from a Culture of Character to a Culture of Personality.

"In the Culture of Character," she writes, "the ideal self was serious, disciplined, and honorable.  What counted was not so much the impression one made in public as how one behaved in private.  The word 'personality' did not exist in English until the 18th century and the idea of 'having a good personality' was not widespread until the 20th.

"But when they embraced the Culture of Personality, Americans started to focus on how others perceived them.  They became captivated by people who were bold and entertaining."

"The advice manuals of the 19th century were less religious than previously, but still preached the value of a noble character.  By 1920, popular self-help guides had changed their focus from inner virtue to outer charm - 'to know what to say and how to say it.' 

"The earlier guides emphasized attributes that anyone could work on improving, described by words like:

Citizenship
Duty
Work
Golden Deeds
Honor
Reputation
Morals
Manners
Integrity

"The new guides celebrated qualities like:

Magnetic
Fascinating
Stunning
Attractive
Glowing
Dominant
Forceful
Energetic"

In an earlier post here, I posted a list of secular values that we are exposed to and influenced by.  If we look at the list of traits emphasized in the earlier guides, we see that every one of them reflects our Torah guidelines: dina d'malchusa dina, achrayus, gedola melacha ..., maasim tovim, kavod shomayim-kavod ha'briyos, sheim tov, yiras shomayim, derech eretz, yashrus-emes.  As for the second list ... 

No Inevitability

The Gemara says that we read the curses in Parshas Ki Savo before Rosh Hashana so that, “tichleh shana v’kililoseha” (may the year and its curses end).  Rabbi Breitowitz points out an astonishing concept:

It seems to us that the reason things are a certain way today, is because that is how they were yesterday and the day before and things don’t tend to change.  We are in a routine and our life is set up a certain way. We need to know that even if that is true as a rule, there is no connection between the last day in Elul and the first day of Tishrei. Whatever the decree is for the last day of Elul was decreed last Rosh Hashana, and whatever happens in Tishrei is rooted in the new year’s decrees! However, if things remain the same maybe it’s because we didn’t change.

The idea of there being a fundamental disconnection between the old year and new year can be reassuring or frightening, depending on how last year went. If it was a bad year, you can come to Rosh Hashana with thoughts of a fresh start, that if things were bad last year that doesn’t mean it will be that way this year. It gives us hope. But if things went well last year, on Rosh Hashana you can think – this may not continue!

To take Rosh Hashana seriously means that you realize a change and new decrees are taking place based on new considerations and this point is driven home by Chazal with “tichleh shana …” There is no inevitability of the curses of the previous year.  May we be inspired to make it a good new year.

Find Someone Capable and Pay!

I was listening to lecture #300 of R' Avigdor Miller's famous Thursday night classes in the course of which he denounced psychiatrists and psychologists.  In the question and answer session, someone asked who to turn to when that sort of help is needed and his answer was, go to someone capable.  He went on to say that in his experience, shlimazals become the psychiatrists and psychologists.  They are people with the same problems they purport to address.

He said people are foolish when they pay a lot of money for professional sessions but don't offer a single dollar to someone capable who is willing to give of his time when he is not a professional.  He said it's not so easy to find proper counselors but stay away from those with diplomas!

Well, R' Miller was not known for mincing words.  His bluntness was quite refreshing though sometimes hard to hear.  This lecture was probably said back in the 70's.  Would he feel any differently today? I don't know.  It's possible he responded to a similar question much later on on a tape I did not hear.

His main point is well taken - go to someone capable! Why does such an obvious thing need to be stated? Because many people think that a diploma means you're capable.  Counselors can be incompetent and give bad advice.  A degree does not confer wisdom on anyone.  Furthermore, a degree means the professional had to master material that goes contrary to Torah ideas. 

Are there capable, frum professionals today? Yes, I believe so.  Nevertheless, I think it's good to be reminded that competence is the key.

Two Questions to Ask Yourself

Rabbi Nivin is a life coach who runs chabura conference calls for women who are interested in personal growth.  He presents a Torah-based system of self-improvement based on classic Torah sources.  There was an article about him in Hamodia's magazine in which he talks about everyone having a unique life purpose.  How do you know what your life's purpose is?

R' Niven offers two thought provoking questions we can ask ourselves:

1) What would you do with your life if money was not an issue?

2) What were the most fulfilling moments of your life? About what can you say, "I can do this all day"?

Interesting questions! Do you have answers?