Reb Yoel Gives Second Webcast

By COLlive reporter

The positive comments received on his first webcast had led Rabbi Yoel Kahn to agree to present a weekly short class on topics that are timely and relevant.

Known to his thousands of students as “Reb Yoel,” he serves as the head mashpia at the Central Tomchei Tmimim Yeshiva in 770. For over 40 years he served as the chief ‘choizer’ (transcriber) of all the Rebbe’s teachings and is the editor-in-chief of Sefer HoErchim Chabad, an encyclopedia of Chabad Chassidus.

The webcast is being called “The Chassidic Perspective” and is a project of Merkaz Anash, which was founded to provide Anash with practical education and inspiration, and Beis Hamedrash L’shluchim.

The title of this webcast is “Making Torah Our Reality” and you can watch it in Yiddish or read the transcript in English.

VIDEO:

With regard to Matan Torah, it says “all the people saw the thunder and the lightning.” The question is asked, a sound is not something that is seen, a sound is heard rather than seen?! The halachic midrash Mechilta says in the name of Rabbi Akiva, “they saw that which was heard, and heard that which is seen.” Thunder is something normally heard, but at Matan Torah it was seen. Similarly, though the possuk doesn’t say so explicitly, lightening is something normally seen, but at Matan Torah it was heard.

A simple question can be asked. In the possuk it only says that they “saw the thunder.” What about the lightning? Quite the opposite! The simple meaning of the possuk is that they saw both the thunder and the lightning. The word “saw” refers to both elements, the thunder and the lightning. Where did Rabbi Akiva get the notion that they heard that which is normally seen? Seeing that which is heard is explicitly stated in the possuk, they “saw the thunder.” But why did he conclude that they also “heard that which is seen”?

In fact, Rashi comments on the words they “saw the thunder,” that “they saw that which was heard.” Rashi also says that “this is something that is impossible to see elsewhere,” that it’s a special occurrence, but “hearing that which is seen” is not mentioned by Rashi. In the verse nothing like that appears. The word “saw” in the verse refers to both thunder and lightening. Where did Rabbi Akiva get if from that they heard what is normally seen?

Furthermore, what in general is the point of this? Did there have to be such “special effects” at the giving of the Torah? Why did Hashem do such a strange thing, that they should see that which is heard and hear that which is seen? It could have been the regular way, that which is heard is heard, and that which is seen is seen. Why the special effects?

The Rebbe explains, what is the qualitative meaning of hearing and of seeing? The difference between hearing and seeing is twofold, there is both a difference in the object that is seen and heard and for the subjective individual. The difference in the object is that when you see it you see its physical being, but hearing of it you hear something more spiritual. Hearing, if meant in the sense of “understanding” certainly refers to an idea, which is a spiritual thing. Even if hearing is meant in the simple sense, as in hearing a sound, a sound in comparison to a physical object is also spiritual.

That is the difference in the object, you see something physical and hear something spiritual. With regard to the subjective individual, when you hear about something it doesn’t become as deeply ingrained, and as certainly known as when you see it. “Hearing cannot be compared to seeing.” When you see something it is far more deeply ingrained then when it is heard.

What’s Your Reality?

Generally speaking, there are physical things and spiritual things. What do we see and what do we hear? What types of things are “things that are seen” and what types of things are “things that are heard.” The world, and all things of this world, these are things that we do not need any faith in, you don’t need to intellectualize, you see it with your eyes. Such things are ingrained as simple axioms.

But G-dly matters, matters associated with Torah and mitzvos, certainly we believe in them completely, there is nothing to talk about, we believe, and we have proofs for these beliefs, but to say that we “see” such things? We do not see it. It’s not with the same certainty, and not with the same impression, as that made by a physical thing.

Said Rabbi Akiva, what did they see at Matan Torah? At Matan Torah it was exactly the opposite. “They saw that which is heard and heard that which is seen.” “They saw that which is heard” means that they “saw” G-dly matters. Such things became simple axioms. But regarding the world on the other hand, which normally is seen, then it was only “heard,” they “heard” that there is a world. What does it mean that they heard? They understood, they had proofs that there is a world.

In Chassidus there is an example of this. What does it mean “they understood”? Chassidus discusses the concept that Hashem is one, that Hashem is not simply the only deity. Hashem is unique, there is no other being other than Him. There is nothing other than Hashem. You argue that the world exists too? Chassidus continuously strives to understand how it is that there is a world, and yet this doesn’t contradict unique oneness of Hashem.

But we could have given a very simple explanation, we could have said that the world is simply imaginary, just a dream! The entire idea never began at all! It just appears as though there is a world. Then it would be very easy to understand that Hashem is the only existence. That there isn’t a world at all.

But in Chassidus it says that we can’t say such a thing. What is the proof that we can’t say such a thing? It’s a possuk, an explicit possuk in the Torah, “In the beginning Hashem created the heaven and the earth.” Based on this verse we know with certainty that the world exists.

Or another proof is brought: Most mitzvos are connected to physical things. Tzitzis must be made from simple wool, tefillin must be made with simple parchment. Now, if the world was only imaginary then the wool too would only be imaginary, and the validity of the tzitzis would be problematic.

If you would say that the world is imaginary then what about the parchment? The validity of the tefillin would would be problematic. The tzitzis and the tefillin are certainly real, if so we are forced to conclude that there is actual wool and there is actual parchment, and that the world is actually not imaginary.

This is exactly what is meant by “seeing that which is heard and hearing that which is seen.” Seeing that which is heard, means those things that are normally heard, i.e. G-dly matters, these things were seen, they were axiomatic in the simplest sense. That there is a world, this they heard, they understood. We are forced to admit that there is a world. This was achieved at Matan Torah.

Matan Torah Today

Being that this occurred at Matan Torah, it similarly applies now. We say that Hashem is “the giver of the Torah”. Every day in the morning brachos we say He is the giver. Not that he gave in the past, but that he is the giver today. Every day the concept of Matan Torah applies. We may not feel it, but it is present.

The point is that Matan Torah can lift a Jew to such a plane, that what is normally heard will be seen, and what is normally seen will be heard. G-dly matters shall be axiomatic, Torah and mitzvos should be axiomatic, nothing else. Worldly matters? Of course they exist, but we hear what is seen.

However, Rashi on the Torah, we already said, brings only one half. “Saw what is heard” he brings, “heard what is seen” he doesn’t bring. Why? The simple reason is because that they saw what is heard is obvious from the possuk, but that they heard what is seen is not a required reading of the verse. But what is the meaning of this?

Rashi wrote his commentary, as the Rebbe would always say, for a five year old student. Simply speaking this means a child. But this also means a Jew who is at a level of still being a small child. A Jew who we yet need to begin to educate, or who needs to educate himself, to come to the concept of Torah.

To demand of a child, whether in the simple sense or a Jew of ninety who in Torah and mitzvos is like a child, to demand of him that he should hear that which is seen, that the entire existence of the world should be real for him due to a proof from the Torah? When he is an ‘adult’ we demand of him, that he perceive the only existence. The only thing that gives wool its existence is that you can make from it tzitizis. The only thing that gives parchment its existence is that you can make from it tefillin. But what about a child, a child who plays with toys, are you going to tell him that the toys are nothing? No.

‘Hearing what is seen’ we don’t demand of him. Whether it is a small child playing with toys in the simple sense, or we are talking of grown, older people, who is a child in such things, we do not demand this of them. What do we demand of them, however? ‘Seeing that which is heard.’ That G-dly matters should become simply axiomatic.

This is the answer. ‘Hearing that which is seen’ we don’t always demand. But ‘seeing that which is heard,’ Torah matters should be axiomatic.

For example, a Jew has a fixed time for learning, and every Jew must have a fixed time for learning, a time in the morning and a time in the evening. It happens sometimes that he is very tired, tired from his work, and instead of learning like every day for half an hour each night, for example, and since his head is bothering him anyway, he decided to learn two half hours sessions the next day instead. But if he has achieved a level where he ‘sees what is normally heard,’ the need for learning is so certain to him that he won’t forego it. Even if he is hungry or tired he won’t forego his learning.

Indeed he must eat and sleep. We aren’t expected to be oblivious to those things. It’s alright if he ‘sees that which is seen.’ So the world is axiomatic to him? Torah matters must also be axiomatic. And when Torah matters are axiomatic, then the entire individual is transformed. At the end of the day the world too is different, and all his affairs are transformed.

To receive the Merkaz Anash weekly email or to sponsor a webcast, email [email protected]