Igrot Kodesh · Letter 166 — Personal Bias, Torah as Corrective Lens, and Tefillin Observance

By the grace of Hashem,

Thursday, 14 Menachem Av 5704,

To the dear Mr. Tzvi Palmer,

I greet you and bless you,

I would first like to apologize for not having been able to reply to your letter until now, for reasons beyond my control.

A) I agree with you when you say that everyone wears "his own spectacles"[1] through which he views all things. Nevertheless, I do not understand why you say this is so only when looking at the past. It seems to me that one more readily wears these spectacles when considering the present, which is far more decisive for one's current existence, and therefore far more difficult to view through the lens of absolute truth, setting aside personal interests and self-regard.

B) How can one avoid an error arising from perceiving things "through one's own spectacles" when analyzing an event of the past?

The most effective approach is to study the words of one who recounts that event, who lived it, who knew that era. If this is insufficient, one must also gather the testimony of those who were closest to the moment when that event took place.

Consequently, in order to properly understand the teaching that Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar* gives, concerning the mitzvah* of tefillin,* in tractate Shabbat* 130a,[2] I focused on a sentence of the Gemara* which seems, at first glance, entirely incomprehensible.

Rabbi Shimon* adopts very firm positions here:

1. No one went so far as to die in order to fulfill the mitzvah* of tefillin.*

2. Jewish observance of this mitzvah* is weak.

Yet the Gemara* seeks an explanation for this situation and cites the opinion of Rabbi Yanai*[3] on the matter. Why does it not simply observe what actually happens among Jews? Do they wear tefillin* or not? This is how one would verify whether there has indeed been a weakening of this practice, as Rabbi Shimon* claims.

And why cite the account of Elisha "who had wings"?[4] Does it reinforce Rabbi Shimon's* assertion? A narrative cited by the Gemara* must necessarily support the opinion, interpretation, or commentary previously set forth — but not serve as proof that the account of this sage actually occurred.

An explanation of all this is necessary. I therefore consulted the interpretation of Rashi* and the Tosafot,* who lived five or six centuries after the Talmudic era and who learned the plain meaning of the Gemara* from Rabbi Gershom Maor HaGolah,* transmitted from Babylon,* where the Talmud was composed.

These commentaries make it clearly understandable why the Gemara* cites these accounts, as well as the remark of Rabbi Yanai.* The words of Rabbi Shimon* should therefore not be understood in their primary sense. Here, in truth, is what must be determined:

1. How was it verified that they did not sacrifice themselves for the mitzvah* of tefillin* as they should have?

2. What was the weakness they displayed in this regard?

The answer to these questions is found in my previous letter.[5]

C) I cited the words of Rabbi Shimon* as an illustration:

1. of the importance that the mitzvah* of tefillin* deserves,

2. of the manner in which it was practiced when doing so could result in certain death. Indeed, some even wore tefillin* in the street throughout the entire day, as I noted in my previous letter.[5]

D) You write to me that in America, all practice circumcision, while, you say, many do not wear tefillin.* This is precisely what Rabbi Shimon* said. Circumcision is a strong mitzvah*[6] whereas a weakening can be observed with regard to tefillin.*

As I said, in my opinion, and based on the commentaries of men who lived nine centuries closer to us than Rabbi Shimon,* when he speaks of weakening, he means that this mitzvah* is not as strong as it should be. This is what I explained above.

Nevertheless, I agree with you on the following point, which I will introduce by way of an image. Several men walk together along a road. Suddenly, one of them, finding himself in the dark, strays from the straight path and gets lost. A little later, he finds himself in the middle of a forest, where there are no roads, no houses, no people.

How did he come to be there? For one does not go in an instant from the middle of the highway to the depths of a dark forest. He first strayed by an inch, then by another. And little by little, he found himself in the middle of the forest.

So it is with the matter we are discussing.

Already in the time of Rabbi Shimon,* a weakening was observed. They wore tefillin,* but they did not risk their lives by wearing them in the street throughout the entire day. Then, inch by inch, the straying continued, until certain Jews reached the situation that is currently theirs.

I would now like to ask you the following question. If one looks at the number of mixed marriages, the meetings between priests and rabbis, on Shabbat* and Sunday, the rabbinical seminaries in which rabbis and priests are trained together, a rabbi whom hundreds of thousands of American Jews consider a community leader, who discards a menorah* that has been in a synagogue for several centuries, boasts of his act in all the newspapers and retains his responsibilities, if one gathers all the "achievements" that belong to America in these various domains — what will remain of the Jewish people in the generation of our children?

With my best wishes and my blessing of immediate teshuvah,* immediate redemption,

Rabbi Menachem Schneerson,

Director of the Executive Committee

You cite in your letter the French philosopher Voltaire,* the life he led and his attitude toward other men. He is one of the best illustrations of the necessity of achieving harmony between the intellect and the passions of the heart, as I explained in my previous letter,[5] and of what can happen when that harmony is not achieved.

Notes:

(1) To his own personal vision of things.
(2) He says: "The Jews fulfill weakly a mitzvah for which they did not give of themselves — for example, that of tefillin."
(3) He says: "To wear tefillin, one must have a pure body, as was the case with Elisha 'who had wings.'" See the following note.
(4) Because the tefillin he was wearing, when he was pursued and caught by a Roman, transformed into dove's wings.
(5) Letter no. 159.
(6) This is also what Rabbi Shimon says, at the same reference, in tractate Shabbat.