|
   |
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
         |
|
|
|
The Significance of Ubiquitous Crimes R. Amram said in the name of Rav: "From three sins a man cannot escape every day: sinful (lustful) thoughts, iyyun tefilah and lashon hara"....R. Yehudah said in the name of Rav: "Most people are involved in theft, a few in sexual crimes and all in lashon hara."(Bava Batra 164b) I avoided translating "iyyun tefilah" because one can not translate it neutrally without siding with a particular interpretation (thus revealing the flaw in all translations). Rashbam explains that it refers to one who becomes convinced that his excellent prayer cannot fail to bring about the desired result. This is religiously problematic as it converts prayer into a ritual guaranteed to manipulate God. Tosafot object to this interpretation because the gemara refers to common sins and treating tefilah in this fashion is unusual. Instead, Tosafot explains that the gemara refers to lack of kavanah during davening. This certainly reflects a constant problem. Why does the gemara feel compelled to point out the most commonly found transgressions? Firstly, it warns us to take these challenges seriously and to dedicate time to struggling with such thorny issues. Additionally, it instructs us not to become overwrought when we fail in these matters. Treating every uninspired mincha or each bit of gossip spoken as a religious failure of terrifying proportions probably leads to intense depression more than religious growth. Maharal sees the three frequent problems as reflecting three areas of religious endeavor. Iyyun tefilah refers to a person's relationship with God. Lashon hara relates to a person's relationship with fellow humans. Lustful thoughts belongs in the category of a person's relationship with themselves as these thoughts assault the dignity of the person having them. I believe that Maharal describes an important category that often goes unnoticed. Certain actions are fundamentally wrong because of their impact on the actor and what they reflect about that actor. It may be a mistake to criticize profanity or looking at dirty magazines as interpersonal crimes. Perhaps what is essentially wrong about them is that they degrade the human being involved. While R. Amram only mentions the ubiquitous crimes, R. Yehudah states the contrasting frequency of three significant transgressions. Rashbam explains that most people become entangled in theft when it comes to withholding another's profits in business dealings. Rashbam selects this example because most people would not decide to enter another's property and make off with stolen goods. Yet the same people fail to understand that one can be a thief without a dramatic act of taking. Any business involves all kinds of temptation to more subtle forms of theft. According to R. Yehudah, lashon hara is more common than theft and sexual immorality. Maharal offers a novel explanation for this phenomenon. He points out that both theft and sexual immorality come with a certain degrading quality that embarrasses the sinner. It is hard to work up much self righteousness about committing theft or adultery. Lashon hara, on the other hand, often involves an element of self righteousness as the speaker implicitly adopts an air of superiority in the relating of others' misdeeds. Maharal sees this hidden self congratulation as the root of the frequency of lashon hara.
|
|
||||
