A Charity Case

This Shabbos, the one that immediately proceeds the fast of Tisha B’Av is called as Shabbos Chazon after the Haftorah that is read, which comes from the first Perek of Sefer Yishayahu and begins with the words “Chazon Yishayahu Ben Amatz.” The basis for this name seems to be quite strong, as the Rama himself, in Hilchos Tisha B’Av, refers to “Shabbos Shel Chazon.” Clearly, then, the Shabbos itself is affected by the Haftorah, and we are meant to take a message from the words of the Navi that will enable us to prepare for the approaching Tisha B’Av.

For the most part, the Haftorah is quite difficult to read. The Pessukim discuss the reaction of Hakadosh Baruch Hu to the considerable inequities of Klal Yisroel. “Banim Gadalti V’Romamti V’Hem Pashu Bi”, says the Navi, “I raised and elvated my children, but they rebelled against me.” At times the fury of the Kaviyachol is apparent, as well as the disgust Hashem felt towards the Avodah of Klal Yisroel: “Ki Savou Liros Panai Mi Bikesh Zos Miyedchem Ramos Chatzeirai: When you come to see my face, who asked this of you, you who trample my coutyard”. The Dvar Hashem is clear: our Avieros and refusal to follow the Derech Hatorah has rendered our Korbanos revolting to Hashem, to the point that He exclaims: “Nilesi Neso: I cannot endure them.”

Indeed as the Navi continues, the picture becomes even more bleak, as the fate that awaits us becomes clear: “V’Im Tomarnu U’Mirisem”, if we do not heed the words of the Navi and do Teshuva, “Cherev Teuchalu”, the sword will devour us. Overall the Haftorah is quite appropriate for a time when we focus on the Churban and the events that led up to it—we are reminded that it was our own actions that led us to the destruction we endured. So upsetting are these words that ut truly is fitting that many Shuls have the Minhag to Lein these Pessukim in the melancholy Niggun of Eichah.

This being the case, the way that the Haftorah ends seems somewhat surprising. The final two Pessukim speak of a more hopeful future: destruction and destitution need not be an endless fate, we are told. Rather, there will come a time in which our judges are returned “Kivarishona” and our counselors reestablished “Kivatchila, at which point Yerushalayim will once more be called “Ir Hatzedek” and “Kirya Nemana.” The final Passuk seems to tell us how this can become reality: “Tzion B’Mishpat Tipadeh, V’Shaveha B’Tzdaka.”

As we Lein these final Pessukim a sense of hope prevails. In fact, these final Pessukim are almost universally read with the regular Niggun of Haftorah. The message is clear: just as we brought about the Churban with our actions, we can replace this reality with that which we yearn for. It is therefore integral to understand the meaning of this Passuk, as it seems to hold the key to all we wish for.

The beginning of this Passuk seems simple to understand: Yerushalayim, referred to a Tzion, will be redeemed through Mishpat, or justice. The final words “V’Shaveha B’Tzdaka” are a bit less clear: who does the Passuk refer to as Shaveha? Rashi tells us that it refers to those who lives in Yerushalayim and do Teshuva through Tzedaka, but others, such as Radak explain that it refers to us, the Golim, those who are spread out across the globe. In this understanding, the Passuk is telling us that we will return to Tzion only through Tzedaka. It would seem vital, then to understand what is meant by this word, so that we may set out on a path back to Tzion.

In a sense it may seem odd to question the meaning of the word “Tzedaka”—even the youngest child understands the concept of putting a coin in a Pushka, of giving to the needy—and these words should therefore be easy to understand. The truth is that most Meforshim on this Passuk, including the Metzudos and Radak, do not even explain the word “Tzedaka”, indicating that its usage here does refer to its most common meaning: charity. With this approach the words of the Passuk are clear: if we hope to bring the Geula, we have to reinforce our acts of Tzeddaka and Chessed.

This understanding of the Passuk is reflected in Halacha as well. The Rambam, in Hilchos Matnas Aniyim, writes that we must be more vigilant with regard to the Mitzvah of Tzedaka than any other Mitzvas Asei for a number of reasons, including the fact that “Ain Yisroel Nigalin Ela B’Tzedaka.” The source brought for this idea, that our Geulah can come about only through Tzedaka, is our Passuk: “Tzion B’Mishpat Tipadeh, V’Shaveha B’Tzdaka.” Other Rishonim include similar words in their versions of Hilchos Tzedaka, and this is in fact based on a Gemarah in Shabbos.

This understanding of the word Tzedaka fits with our general understanding of the Churban Habayis as well. We know, because Chazal tell us, that Bayis Sheni was destroyed due to Sinas Chinam, baseless hatred between members of our Am Kadosh. It would therefore follow that the way to bring the Geulah is to act in the opposite way, by strengthening our Kiyum of the Mitzvah of Tzedaka in a way that it increases Ahavas Chinam. This is an approach taken by many, and certainly an important part of our Avodah, especially in these days.

It seems, however, that there may be other understandings of the word Tzedaka as used in this Passuk.

The Malbim, in his Pirush here, establishes that there are really two parts to the Nevuah. The bulk of the Pessukim speak to Shevet Yehudah, who lived in the area surrounding Yerushalayim, and only a few Pessukim at the end, after the words “Eicha Haysa L’Zonah Kiryah Nemana” speak about Yerushalayim itself. Interestingly, the Malbim points out, the Pessukim that speak to Shevet Yehudah refer to Aveiros that are Bein Adam Lamakom, and only those that speak of Yerushalayim talk about Avieros Shebein Adam L’Chaveiro. He explains that this is because at the time only those inside the bustling capital of Yerushalayim were really involved in trade to the point that they could be corrupt and so the Tochacha regarding business practice was limited to Yerushalyim itself.

This being the case, we may question why the Passuk refers to Tzedaka when speaking of the Shavim, those outside Yerushalyim. Why would the Passuk tell us that Mitzvos Bein Adam L’Chaveiro are the key to our return when the initial Tochecha referred to Mitzvos that are Bein Adam Lamakom? The Malbim explains, however, that this is really not a question, because of an important Klal, which he establishes based on a number of Pessukim: the word Tzedaka, when used in Tanach, refers to Mitzvos Bein Adam Lamakom, while Mishpat refers to those that are Bein Adam L’Chaveiro. Therefore, the Passuk says “Tzion B’Mishpat Tipadeh, V’Shaveha B’Tzdaka” because each will find redemption through its original inequities.

Though the approach of the Malbim helps explain the Nevuah as a whole, it seems to turn our precepts on their head. If we wish to be among the “Shaveha”, should we focus on interpersonal Mitzvos, and increase our Tzedaka, as the Gemarah and Halachic authorities seem to indicate, or on our Mitzvos Bein Adam Lamakom, as the Malbim seems to say? While it goes without saying that we must improve on all fronts, the Passuk seems to be putting a particular stress on “Tzedaka”, and it would therefore behoove us to understand what this word refers to.

Perhaps there is another way to view the word “Tzedka” that can help us understand this Passuk.

It is brought from the Gr”a that in order to fully understand a word, one must look at the first time it appears in the Torah, for this is its most elemental usage. Let us apply this precept to the term we wish to explain.

The first time the word “Tzedaka” is used in the Torah is just prior to the Bris Bein Habesarim, when Hashem tells Avraham “Habet Nah Hashamayim…Ko Yihiyeh Zarecha.” The Torah tells us how Avraham reacted to this news: “V’Hemin B’Hashem VaYachsheveha Lo Tzedaka.” While it is clear that the first half of the Passuk refers to the Emunah that Avraham had in Hashem, it is a Machlokes to whom the Passuk refers when it says “VaYachsheveha Lo Tzedaka.” Rashi maintains that the Passuk means that Hashem considered Avraham’s Emunah to be an act of Tzidkus, but the Ramban and others, write that it refers to Avraham, who considered the promise issued by Hashem, “Ko Yihiyeh Zaracha” to be in the category of Tzedaka.

It is a bit difficult to undetstand, according to the Ramban, who something that Hashem does can be considered Tzidkus. We generally think of something that is beyond the call of duty, above and beyond the norm, to be Tzidkus. Is this possible with relation to the Kol Yachol? Is not every action of Hashem considered Tzedek and Mishpat?

Rav Hirsch however explains that the root of the term Tzedek means to bring perfection closer, to accelerate the realization of a goal. When one gives charity, he gives to someone else that which they require—he fulfils a need, replaces a lack, and brings them one step closer to their own personal fulfilment—he has given Tzedaka and done an act of Tzidkus. Thus, beyond acts of kindness, the term Tzedek refers to anything that brings closer the fulfilment of the Ratzon Haborei.

It would follow then that Avrohom considered the promise of “Ko Yihiyeh Zaracha” was an act of Tzidkus, because he understood that it was a part of fulfilling the ultimate Ratzon Haborei. Why was this case?

R’ Yosef Yavetz, a Kadmon who was expelled in Gerush Sefarad, and is known as the Chassid Yavetz, discussed these words in his Sefer Chasdei Hashem. He cites a Zohar which says that the promise of “Ko Yihiyeh Zaracha” was both B’Kamus and B’Eichus. Yes, Hashem promised Avraham that his children would be many, like the stars, but also that they would have the Middos of their forefather Avraham. Though there may be times that it would be tried, the Emunah and Middos of Avraham would always be present in his offspring. It was the latter part of this promise, explains the Chassid Yavetz, that Avraham considered Tzedaka.

It emerges, then, that Avraham Avinu understood that the promise of “Ko Yihiyeh Zaracha B’Eichus” was itself Tzedka—part of fulfilling the ultimate Ratzon Haborei. No matter what was to happen throughout the years, the nation of Avraham would somehow hold on to Umnas Avosam, and be Mamnim—this itself was part of the fabric of the world, part of the overall Ratzon Haborei and therefore itself an act of Tzidkus.

The original use of the word Tzedaka, then, refers to the fact that the Kiyum of Klal Yisroel is a necessary element of the Ratzon Hashem. It is in this light that we can understand our Passuk.

The Navi tells us “V’Shaveha B’Tzedaka” and we are left to wonder what Tzedaka is being referenced. Perhaps, however, the key is not what we do, but how and why we do it.

Whether we are working on our connection with the Borei Olam, through “Mitzvos Bein Adam Lamakom” or our relationship with others through Mitzvos Bein Adam L’Chaveiro, we must do it keeping in mind the Tzedaka of Avraham Avinu. We must perform each Mitzvah, each part of our Avodas Hashem cognizant of the fact that this is our destiny, and that of the world at large. If we look at ourselves as those Kochavim, the fulfilment of the promise of “Ko Yihiyeh Zaracha B’Eichus”, our Avodas Hashem takes on new meaning, for we are not only contributing to our own Ruchnias, but to the fulfilment of the overall Razton Hashem.

This is why the Navi speaks about Tzedaka here, to show us the way home, so to speak. Only if we are able to carry out the various parts of our Avodas Hashem while keeping in mind that original Tzedaka, are we assured that we will see a Kiyum of the ultimate Ratzon Haborei—a return to Tzion.

As we sit on the floor this Tisha B’Av, and reflect on all that we are missing, we must also think about how we can regain lost ground. Let us take stock of all our relationships—with Hashem and with others—and ask ourselves if we are leading lives that reflect the ideals of our forefather such that we are living up to the promise of “Ko Yihiyeh Zaracha B’Eichus”? Are we reflected the Tzidkus that Avrohom Avinu recognized in that promise? If we work toward that goal, perhaps next year we will be Zoche to celebrate the Moed of Tisha B’Av in Yerushalayim having seen a fulfilment of “Tzion B’Mishpat Tipadeh V’Shaveha B’Tzdaka”.