Intellectual Decisions

As we begin the yearly cycle of Krias HaTorah anew we once again approach the Parshios that we are most familiar with from our earliest ages. Precisely because we are so well acquainted with the various stories that occur in the Parshios, it is important to remind ourselves of the precept mentioned by Rashi in his very first comment: the Torah is not a story book or a history tome. Each story that is mentioned in the Torah is there for a reason, and within these various episodes we can find much meaning and guidance for our own lives.

A very important example of this idea is found in this week’s Parsha: the story of Kayin and Hevel.

The Torah tells us that Hevel was a shepherd while Kayin was a farmer, and Oved Adama. After a time, Kayin decided to bring a Korban to Hashem from his fruits, and Hevel followed his example, bringing some of his animals as a Korban. The response to their offerings, however, were not the same: “VaYisha Hashem El Kayin V’El Minchaso V’el Hevel U’Minchaso Lo Sha’a.” Hakadosh Baruch Hu accepted the Mincha of Hevel but not that of Kayin.

Kayin saw that Hashem did not desire his Korban, while his brother’s was accepted, and the Passuk tells us how he reacted: “VaYichar L’Kayin Meod, Vayiplu Panav.” The Ohr HaChaim HaKadosh and others explain that this belies two separate emotions: Kayin was upset, and he was disappointed. Kayin’s reaction was directly addressed by Hashem himself, who asked him why he expressed these two sentiments: “HaLo Im Sativ Se’es V’Im Lo Sativ L’Pesach Chatas Rovetz.”

While these words, spoken to Kayin by Hashem, are difficult to understand in a literal sense, the consensus of Meforshim is that Hashem was telling Kayin that he could do Teshuva: “Im Setiv Se’es” if you improve you ways your Mincha will be accepted. On the other hand, Rashi explains, if he would not do Teshuva, “L’Pesach Chatas Rovetz” your Aveiros will await you at the opening of your Kever.

In order to fully comprehend the message of this story we must understand what exactly the Aveira of Kayin was—why did Hashem speak to him about doing Teshuva after he brought his Korban? In grade school we were told, and indeed the Pashut Pshat seems to be, that while Hevel brought his Korban from the choisest of his flock, “Bechoros Tzono,” Kayin brought a Korban from what was left of his crop after he selected the best produce for himself. In this view, Kayin would seem to have behaved in a miserly or begrudging manner, showing less that complete Kavod to Hashem in his choice of Korban, warranting a message about Teshuva.

A more detailed exploration of Kayin, however, seems to indicate that this may not have been the case.

The Pessukim indicate that Kayin brought his Korban first. In fact some point out the the Passuk says “V’Hevel Hevi Gam Hu” indicating that Hevel only brought his Korban because Kayin did—he was inspired, or at least motivated, by his brother’s actions. While the idea of bringing a Korban is familiar to us, Kayin and Hevel had not been exposed to the concept: the Ramban explains that Kayin and Hevel understood the secret of Korbanos like their father before them and like Noach after them. Kayin brought a Korban of his own volition, without any prior exposure to this idea, out of his desire to thank Hashem for his bounty. In addition, the Rambam in Hilchos Bais Habechira explains that the Makom of the Mizbeach was fixed and that a select few had known where that spot was before the Bais Hamikdash was built—among them Kayin and Hevel.

It is therefore clear that Kayin was no simple man. He instinctively understood the concept of a Korban, and he was able to locate the Makom of the Mizbeach. In addition, the mere fact that Hashem spoke to him directly, seeming to comfort him after his Korban was not accepted, is further indication of his lofty level—surely one who is not on an elevated Madreigah would not be Zoche to this experience.

Why then did Kayin in fact bring a Korban of lesser value? Why did he not bring a fattened sheep like his brother? If he was acting L’Shem Shamayim, as it seems he was, would he not understand that an animal is a more desirable Korban and that his expression of thanks to Hakadosh Baruch Hu would be more respectful with a Korban of that type?

Once we have a clearer understanding of the mistake that Kayin made, perhaps we can also better comprehend the message that Hashem gave him regarding Teshuva.

The Ohr HaChaim Hakadosh points out that there would seem to be some extra words in the Passuk when the Torah describes how the Korbonos were received: “VaYisha Hashem El Hevel V’El Minchaso V’el Kayin U’Minchaso Lo Sha’a.” The Torah could have said “VaYisha Hashem El Minchas Hevel” and “V’el Minchas Kayin”, the extra words indicate that Hashem turned to Hevel and did not turn to Kayin themselves, perhaps in addition to their Karbonos.

R’ Zalman Sorotzkin, in Aznayim L’Torah, asks the same question as the Ohr HaChaim and explains that indeed Hashem was not only rejecting Kayin’s Mincha because it was of lesser value as it was from produce, he was also rejecting the premise of Kayin’s choice to bring that type of Korban. As we mentioned, Kayin was on a very lofty level, but he had a mistaken idea, which R’ Sorotzkin explains as follows.

We know that Adam HaRishon was not allowed to eat from the flesh of animals—that was not allowed until later on after the Mabul when Noach was told that he could eat animal meat. Kayin felt that if humans could not consume other living beings, than it would be inappropriate to bring that type of Korban, and he therefore brought his Mincha from produce. In doing so, Kayin showed that he felt that humans were in some way equal to Hashem, and that whatever prohibition applies to us on the earth would apply to Hakadosh Baruch Hu. It was this sense of Gaava, this apparent lack of proper Kvod Shamayim, that Hashem rejected: besides not accepting the actual Korban, the Torah wished to show that Kayin’s assumption was rejected as well, “V’el Kayin U’Minchaso Lo Sha’a”.

With this in mind, we may also be able to understand the Mussar that was given directly to Kayin after he expressed his displeasure at the rejection of his offering.

We know that the best protection from the evils of the Yetzer Harah is the Torah itself: “Barasi Yetzer Harah, Barasi Lo Torah Tavlin,” What is not as well know is the source for this Mamar Chazel, which the Gemarah in Kedushin learns from the words that Hashem said to Kayin “Im Sativ Se’es V’Im Lo Sativ L’Pesach Chatas Rovetz.” Chzal explain the Passuk as follows: “Im Sativ, if you learn, Se’es, you can prevail, V’Im Lo, and if you don’t learn, L’Pesach Chatas Rovetz, you will be given over to the Yetzer Harah and Chet.” Based on this Gemarah it would appear that Hakadosh Baruch Hu was admonishing Kayin for not learning Torah—explaining that if he had learned he would have been protected from the Atzas Yetzer Harah and that he could avoid future Aveiros by adhering to this precept.

This is a bit difficult to understand seeing as Kayin clearly lived well before Matan Torah. While we know that the Avos Hakedoshim kept the Torah even before it was given, there is no indication that Kayin did, and even then it would have been in a situation of Aino Metzuveh V’Oseh—could Kayin really be expected to learn Torah in a way that would have protected him from the Yetzer Harah?

R’ Yitzhok Issac Scher, in Leket Sichos Mussar, cites as Rabbeinu Nissim who explains that those who lived prior to Mattan Torah were Mechuyav to keep any Mitzvah that could be derived from Sechel. Based on this R’ Scher explains that for those people the Sechel was their Torah. Their ability to look at a situation and understand it based on their in-born intellect could dictate their actions, this was the way in which they were supposed to lead their lives.

Kayin and Hevel understood that they could bring a Korban, this was a conclusion that they reached based on their Sechel, and was therefore like a Mitzvah to them. The fact that Kayin did not reach the correct conclusion—that the creator of the world is not on the same level as those on this earth, and that he is not restricted in the same way they were—perhaps indicated a lack of Sechel, or a failure to examine the situation to his fullest capability. It was for this reason that Hashem rejected his Korban and admonished him for a lack of “Limud HaTorah”. For Kayin, although there was no actual Torah, he could have better applied what R’ Scher calls the Toras HaSechel, which would have guided him to the proper conclusion.

We must ensure that we do not fall into the same trap as Kayin. Our daily lives are filled with choices and sometimes it is difficult to know how to act or respond. Luckily we do not have to rely on our own Sechel to make decisions—we have the Torah itself to help us do so. If we properly apply ourselves to Limud HaTorah and connect to those who have the ability to guide us in the Derech HaTorah, we will be able to take full advantage of the Tavlin provided to us by Hashem, and live in a state of “Im Setiv Se’es”