One of the great paradoxes of human nature is the meeting of opposites, the fact that two conditions which are contrary to each other in the extreme can produce the same effects. How frequently are we amused to find the Vatican and the Kremlin toeing, with characteristic dogmatism, the same lines; occasionally we are astonished at the coincidence of views of the Wall Street Journal and the Daily Worker. Both extreme Right and extreme Left are alike in condemning the liberal centre, and in demanding blind obedience of their followers. Both were equally hostile, for instance, to the Marshall Plan. In the same vein, we find that affluence and plenty often produce the same results as do adversity and poverty. It is no secret that indigence breeds immorality and corruption. In the Middle Ages, the Black Plague and the universal poverty combined to cause the greatest crime wave in the recorded history of Europe. Murder, violence and theft were the immediate results of pestilence and destitution. Starvation and privation are bound to unleash the tidal waves of immorality and degeneracy whether in Nablus of Arab Palestine or in Harlem of enlightened New York. Sociologists usually blame low standards of morality on low standards of living. But the astounding fact is that there are people who would behave immorally and irreligiously and unethically when they earn $200 a week, whereas they did not do so when they barely eked out a living at $25 a week. Somehow prosperity will sometimes produce worse effects than will poverty. The recent basketball scandals have shown that boys from wealthy homes are not necessarily immune from the temptation of the fixer. Today, when America is enjoying comparatively high prosperity, the record for narcotics, sports scandals and government bribery is as black as ever. It is a well-established phenomenon that the nouveau riche, the man who has suddenly become wealthy, leaves his House of Worship and forgets his religion. Even political immoral…

The entire book of Devarim, when compared with the first four books of the Torah, is found to have a unique character, a personality all its own. Whereas in the other books the laws of Judaism are expressed in more or less legal form, and where the accompanying narrative is factual in nature, this fifth book of Moses is noted for its sweeping sentimentality, for its appeal to the heart and to the soul. The words lev and nefesh appear more often here than in all the other books combined. We are charged to uplift our hearts and souls, to give of ourselves emotionally, to experience Torah ecstatically, to feel it personally and intimately. In fact, the one word most characteristic of the book of Devarim is ahava – love. We are to do more than obey G-d and follow Him. We must also love Him; we must experience His presence with our deepest emotions. We read this morning, Ve’ahavta es Hashem Elokecha, thou shalt love the Lord thy G-d. Further, ve’ata Yisrael mah Hashem Elokecha doresh me’imach ki im… l’ahavah oso, G-d asks of us to love Him. And again in the book of Devarim, though not in this morning’s Sidra, the clarion calls of the Shema: v’ahavta… b’chol lvavcha…But lest anyone here this morning believe that this is merely gaudy sentimentalism, a sort of fatherly advice, let him be corrected quickly. The Halachah insists that ahavas Hashem is a mitzvah, a commandment. And as such it is a guiding principle of Jewish life. We are commanded to love G-d. And yet, this very idea, the idea that we are commanded to love, is a most perplexing notion. Maimonides and other Jewish philosophers were puzzled by it. They ask a simple, but a pointed question: how can you possibly “command” someone to love? Love is an emotion, a deep emotion, and as such is above, independent of and detached from volition or will. You can command me to do or give or act or walk, and I can obey; but you cannot possibly command me to love or hate and expect me to obey, no matter how much I want to. I …

Meeting of the Executive Committee of the Rabbinical Council of America, December 19, 1962, at the Esplanade Hotel, 305 West End Avenue, New York, N.Y. Present: Executive members: Rabbi Theodore L. Adams, Abraham N. AvRutick, Sidney Applbaum, Louis Bernstein, Bernard L. Berzon, Alexander Budin, Albert Feldman, Meir Felman, Isaac Filler, Sol B. Friedman, Leonard B. Gewirtz, Morris Gorelik, Rafael G. Grossman, Arnold Heisler, William Herskowitz, David B. Hollander, H. Hillel Horowitz, Israel Klavan, Sholem B. Kowalsky, Paul Z. Levovitz, Robert H. Marcus, Israel Miller, Herman Neuberger, Fabian Schonfeld, Solomon J. Sharfman, Morris Shmidman, Nisson E. Shulman, Mordecai J. Simckes, Joseph M. Singer, Zevi Tabory, Israel Turner, Azriel G. Weissman. Also Rabbis Charles B. Chavel, Eliezer Cohen, William Cohen, Pincus Dachowitz, Morris Finer, Solomon M. Friedland, Abner German, Hirsh Goldberg, Morton Gordon, Murray Grauer, Reuben Gross, Abraham Hartstein, Immanuel Jakobovits, Gilbert Klaperman, Kurt Klappholz, Ephraim Kolatch, Simon G. Konovitch, H. Joel Laks, Norman Lamm, Sidney Lebor, Elihu Marcus, Moshe Max, Ephraim Shimoff, Philip Tatz, Bernard M. Twersky.The meeting was opened by Rabbi AvRutick at 10:30 A.M. While the reading of the minutes of the previous meeting was dispensed with, one correction was made. Rabbi Max Schreier was named coordinator of the Sermon Manual.The President reported that Rabbi David Silver of Harrisburg, Pa., was elected president of the Beth Din.The President congratulated Rabbi Sholem B. Kowalsky, who has been designated the Man of the Year by Yeshiva Ner Israel, and bid farewell to Rabbi Robert Marcus who is settling in Israel.As a matter of procedure, Rabbi AvRutick suggested that discussion on committee reports will be withheld until all reports are in—this will save time.MEMBERSHIP COMMITTEE: In the absence of the chairman, Rabbi Israel Klavan reported. Rabbi Herbert Richtman, Far Rockaway, N.Y., was accepted to membership.MIDWINTER CON…

The last item of the last Mishnah in מסכת אבות, at the end of פרק חמישי, reads as follows: בן הא־הא אומר, לפום צערא אגרא. The Rabbi called Ben Hei-Hei said that “according to the pain is the reward.” This means that in performing a mitzvah, especially the study of Torah, your reward depends upon how much effort and struggle you put into it. If you work hard – so hard that it hurts – you get greater שכר or reward, and if it comes easy, without too much discomfort or suffering, the reward is less. Maybe this is the reason that Moshe tells us in the sidra עקב that Hashem punishes us in the same way that a father punishes his own son: כי כאשר ייסר איש את בנו, ה׳ אלקיך מיסרך – “as a father punishes his son, so does Hashem your God punish you.” When a child is disobedient and the parent disciplines him or her, it is for the child’s good (at least that is what my Dad has been telling me all these years...), and the child later appreciates all the more the reward that comes from leading a good life of Torah and mitzvos. If he were not disciplined, he might still behave well, but not with the same satisfaction. According to Rabbi Saadia Gaon, the principle of our Mishnah holds true for all times and circumstances. Rabbi Saadia Gaon asks, in his אמונות ודעות, why Hashem did not give each of us a completely happy and worry-free life without having to perform the mitzvos and avoid aveiros. He answers that if you don’t work for a thing, you don’t appreciate it. Only if you invest a great deal of effort can you enjoy the reward. So, this is the same idea that we learned in our Mishnah: לפום צערא אגרא. This last Mishnah of אבות ties in with its very beginning, where we are told that Moshe received the Torah from Mt. Sinai and gave it over to Yehoshua and Yehoshua to the Elders, and so forth: משה קבל תורה מסיני ומסרה ליהושע ויהושע לזקנים. Some of the מפרשים say that this whole list refers not to the Written Torah, תורה שבכתב, but to the Oral Torah, תורה שבעל פה, which contains muc…