chayei sarah: a palm of merit
sholem aleichem,
a couple quick announcements before the dvar:
(1) preorders are live for tatir tz’rurah: an antizionist, traditional-egalitarian siddur for afternoon/evening services on weekdays and shabbos. if you like etz hi, you might enjoy (and recognize) some of the commentary in the siddur…
(2) my next class starts on december 8th! in every tongue will explore the role of translation in judaism. can the torah be understood in any language? does hebrew always take precedence? i can’t wait to explore these questions with y’all.
this dvar is dedicated to shel maala yeshiva: to its roshei yeshiva, its teachers, and its students. may we know the joys of torah, and may we merit to study together again in the worlds we dream of.
this parsha begins with sarah’s death. avraham approaches the bnei kheis, asks to purchase a burial site, and
וַיַּעֲנ֧וּ בְנֵי־חֵ֛ת אֶת־אַבְרָהָ֖ם לֵאמֹ֥ר לֽוֹ
the bnei kheis answered avraham, saying to him…
wait. did all the bnei kheis answer avraham, as one? according to or hachaim, the opposite is true:
אחד יאמר אליו בעד כולם
one speaks to him as witness of them all
נתכוון לומר שלא הסכימו ביניהם על הדבר
[in fact this verse] means to indicate: there was no agreement between them on the matter
so why does the torah say “bnei kheis” if there was no agreement, if only one spoke?
and why does the torah say “bnei kheis” not just once, but ten times in this section:
א"ר אלעזר כמה קולמסין נשברין וכמה דיו משתפכין לכתוב עשרה פעמים בני חת בתורה
rabbi elazar said: how many pens are broken and how much ink is spilled to write ten times “bnei kheis” in the torah
the torah wants us to notice this. the torah wants us to ask these questions: is true unanimity possible? can a people speak with one voice? is this even desirable?
this past sunday i had the joy of studying in the shel maala beis midrash (and any insights here come equally from all those in the beis midrash: my chevrusa colman, our teachers binya kóatz and r’ xava decordova, our fellow students).
we learned a section of masekhes sanhedrin 17a:
אמר רב כהנא סנהדרי שראו כולן לחובה פוטרין אותו
rav kahana said: a sanhedrin where every member sees only [the accused’s] guilt, acquits him
but why? if the court unanimously agrees that someone is guilty, should they not convict?
the gemara explains:
מ"ט כיון דגמירי הלנת דין למעבד ליה זכותא והני תו לא חזו ליה
what is the reason? since it is learned: [the sanhedrin must, in capital cases] delay judgement overnight, to work for the merit of the accused. and [the unanimous sanhedrin] cannot see his [merit]
there’s a deep suspicion here of unanimity. if no one on the sanhedrin can see any merit or possibility for acquittal, then something has gone wrong. without someone to stand as representative of the accused, without someone to work for the accused’s merit, the court has failed in its obligations and cannot convict.
rebbe nachman expands this obligation:
דַּע, כִּי צָרִיךְ לָדוּן אֶת כָּל אָדָם לְכַף זְכוּת, וַאֲפִלּוּ מִי שֶׁהוּא רָשָׁע גָּמוּר, צָרִיךְ לְחַפֵּשׂ וְלִמְצֹא בּוֹ אֵיזֶה מְעַט טוֹב, שֶׁבְּאוֹתוֹ הַמְּעַט אֵינוֹ רָשָׁע, וְעַל יְדֵי זֶה שֶׁמּוֹצֵא בּוֹ מְעַט טוֹב, וְדָן אוֹתוֹ לְכַף זְכוּת, עַל־יְדֵי־זֶה מַעֲלֶה אוֹתוֹ בֶּאֱמֶת לְכַף זְכוּת
know! that it is necessary to judge every person with a palm of merit. and even one who is completely evil, it is necessary to search and to find in them some tiny good, where there is no evil. and by the power of finding in them this tiny good, and judging them with a palm of merit, by this power one elevates them in truth to a palm of merit
to rebbe nachman, seeking out merit in someone is not just a legal obligation of the sanhedrin, but something we all are obligated to practice.
and even more radically, rebbe nachman believes that this practice actual impacts the person in question, truly elevating them in merit, not just in our perception.
there is so much to say here! but i hope you’ll forgive me if i take this in a smaller, more personal direction.
because sometimes i feel like i carry a sanhedrin in my mind, all of whom see only my guilt. i do try (and often fail) to work for the merit of others, but all the voices in my mind speak as one in my own condemnation.
rebbe nachman understands:
צָרִיךְ לְחַפֵּשׂ וְלִמְצֹא בְּעַצְמוֹ אֵיזֶה מְעַט טוֹב, כִּי אֵיךְ אֶפְשָׁר שֶׁלֹּא עָשָׂה מִיָּמָיו אֵיזֶה מִצְוָה אוֹ דָּבָר טוֹב, וְאַף שֶׁכְּשֶׁמַּתְחִיל לְהִסְתַּכֵּל בְּאוֹתוֹ הַדָּבָר הַטּוֹב, הוּא רוֹאֶה שֶׁהוּא גַּם כֵּן מָלֵא פְּצָעִים וְאֵין בּוֹ מְתֹם… עִם כָּל זֶה אֵיךְ אֶפְשָׁר שֶׁלֹּא יִהְיֶה בְּאוֹתָהּ הַמִּצְוָה וְהַדָּבָר שֶׁבִּקְדֻשָּׁה אֵיזֶה מְעַט טוֹב
it is necessary for a person to search and to find in themself some tiny good. for how is it possible that in their days they did not do some mitzvah, or some good thing?
and also, when they begin to reflect on themself for something good, they may see that even this [good] is full of wounds and not wholeness… even with all this, how is it possible that there isn’t some tiny good in the mitzvah or holy deed?
and as with others, searching for that little good in oneself actually brings oneself to a palm of merit:
וְעַל יְדֵי זֶה שֶׁמְּחַפֵּשׂ וּמוֹצֵא בְּעַצְמוֹ עֲדַיִן מְעַט טוֹב, עַל־יְדֵי־זֶה הוּא יוֹצֵא בֶּאֱמֶת מִכַּף חוֹבָה לְכַף זְכוּת
and by the power of this searching and finding in themself still a tiny good, by this power they in truth go out from a palm of guilt to a palm of merit
this is not to say, chas v’sholem, that one needs only to search for a little good in oneself and this makes up for any harms one has caused.
what rebbe nachman teaches is that this is the beginning of teshuvah: by searching and finding this little good, and thus moving ourselves in the direction of merit, we lay the groundwork for true teshuvah. we return ourselves, as it were, to the path of returning.
in other words: it is not possible to return or repair from a place where we see only guilt.
the unanimity of the sanhedrin, in the world and in my head, is inherently flawed. it is not possible to repair from this place. it is not possible to judge properly from this place.
so i’m waiting right now. i’m delaying judgement for a little while, like the sanhedrin, to see if i can find a voice that will work for my merit.
the word for that delay, הלנת, appears in another section of the torah:
וַיִּפְגַּ֨ע בַּמָּק֜וֹם וַיָּ֤לֶן שָׁם֙
[yaakov] came upon a place, and stayed there overnight
and the next morning?
וַיִּיקַ֣ץ יַעֲקֹב֮ מִשְּׁנָתוֹ֒ וַיֹּ֕אמֶר אָכֵן֙ יֵ֣שׁ יְהֹוָ֔ה בַּמָּק֖וֹם הַזֶּ֑ה וְאָנֹכִ֖י לֹ֥א יָדָֽעְתִּי
yaakov woke up from his sleep and said: truly there is HASHEM in this place, and i did not know it
when we take this pause. when we resist unanimity. when we find some part of ourselves and our communities that will work for someone’s merit — only then are we doing the work of finding god. only then are we doing the work of redeeming the sparks.
only then do we turn from false unanimity to the Oneness of the One Who Separates.
only then can we begin the path of return and repair.
good shabbos,
ada