Considering our impact upon others

Considering our impact upon others

Rabbi Yehoishophot Oliver

“Why should I care about the impact my actions might have upon others?” some ask. “It’s not my problem. Let them mind their own business!” The Rebbe responds:

Those who don’t behave modestly do not only defy the path of Torah. Their behavior contravenes basic decency, basic morality, and simple common sense.


When one behaves immodestly by exposing a part of the body that ought to be covered, one’s intent is to provoke the evil inclination—the wicked side of the other person.


This does not bring the other person to work better. Nor will it stimulate his mind, and make him smarter. Nor will it improve his character traits by positively affecting the respect he accords to his parents, brothers, or sisters, or even for his own wife. Nor will it influence him to donate more charity.


What is the impact of dressing in violation of the requirements of modesty? If until now, the other person’s wicked side was hidden, or not excited and aroused—one provokes that person and inflames that side.


And then one shares in the [responsibility] for the wickedness of the other person. One doesn’t benefit in any way, because it’s the other person’s wickedness—the other person fulfills his desire, whether through gazing, or in another form. Yet it is worthwhile to do everything, as long as one provokes another person—and not his good side, but his wicked side.


One does damage, may G–d save us, and not only to one’s own Divine Soul, but also to another person, and still another—in fact, to everyone one meets. What an utterly degenerate path—may Hashem protect us.

Sichos of 12 Tammuz, Balak, and 14 Tammuz 5730

(kudos to Rabbi Moshe Wiener, shlita, for sending me the Hebrew original)

Obviously, the principle in the above address applies not only to the realm of modesty.


Everyone has both a good inclination and an evil inclination, two forces that are in constant conflict over the course of our entire lives.[1] Thus, every interaction we have with others can involve either inclination.


Now, we are all blessed with free choice, and so one who chooses to follow his evil inclination can refuse to be allow himself to be positively influenced by a person who is a good influence; conversely, one who chooses to follow his good inclination can refuse to allow himself to be negatively influenced by a person who is a wicked influence.


However, the fact that the recipient of the negative influence chose to succumb to temptation by his or her own free choice does not absolve the influencer of wrongdoing any more than the fact that the recipient of a positive influence chose to accept this influence by his or her own free choice does not divest the one who chose to exert that influence of any reward and credit.


And so the one who brings others to Teshuvah and spiritual growth will be rewarded, while the one who exerts the opposite influence on others will receive the opposite consequence, may Hashem save us.[2]


Moreover, although we all have the ability to choose “life and goodness” instead of choosing “death and evil,”[3] the struggle might be extremely difficult.[4] The foundation of Torah is “what is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow,”[5] Thus, putting another person through such a struggle is not only a sin against Hashem (of course, evil in and of itself), but also a sin against one’s fellow, a fundamental violation of the commandment to love one’s fellow Jew.


Whether we like it or not, our behavior has a powerful impact upon those around us. It will evoke, or at least apply a certain amount of pressure to evoke, one of their inclinations. Which will it be?


_________________________
[1] Cf. Tanya chs. 9, 29.
[2] Cf. Avos 5:18—“One who causes the multitude to be meritorious, no sin will come through his hand. One who causes the multitude to sin is not given the opportunity to do Teshuvah.” Moreover, “One who causes another to sin is worse than one who kills him” (Bamidbar Rabbah 21:4-5) for “Spiritual death is worse than physical death” (Derech Chaim 5a; Igros Kodesh Admur HaRayatz, Vol. 3, p. 520; Likkutei Sichos, Vol. 1, p. 111).
[3] Devarim 30:15.
[4] Cf. Tanya ch. 30.
[5] Shabbos 31a.




Dedicated in the merit of a speedy release for the captives Yonasan ben Malka (Jonathan Pollard), Sholom Mordechai Halevi ben Rivka (Sholom Rubashkin), and Zeva Rochel bas Chaya (Wendy Weiner Runge).



Also dedicated by Rivkah Katz and family lizchus refuah sheleimah for her mother, zol gezunt zein, Ettel Nechama bas Baila.



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Like what you read? The articles I write take a lot of time and effort. Please contact me to sponsor an article for (at least) $36 in honor of the birthday, wedding anniversary, or yarhtzeit of a loved one, or for a refuah shleimah or the like. Also, see here concerning the tremendous merit of supporting the dissemination of Chassidus, and the blessings that one receives for doing so.

Sincere inner conflict

When we think of sincerity and honesty, we often define them in absolute terms—either we mean it sincerely, or we are faking.


For instance, how is it possible to go from excitement for Hashem during prayer to excitement about worldly pleasures afterward? At first glance, this radical transition demonstrates that one’s excitement about G–dliness was fake, and to a certain extent there is truth to this.


However, we do not consist of a single persona with contradictory urges. Rather, there are two opposing sides within us, and an ongoing battle is being waged between them, with both sides struggling valiantly for total domination. When we consider this, the definition of inner truth and consistency becomes more complicated.


Our Animal Soul naturally yearns for the physical, while our Divine Soul naturally yearns for the spiritual.


During prayer, when our Divine Soul is aroused, we can and should reach an inner state in which we yearn to embrace the spiritual and reject the constraints of the physical. This yearning is totally sincere—sincere from the perspective of our Divine Soul.


Yet afterward, we can crave the physical, to the point that all the inspiration attained in prayer is almost completely forgotten (Tanya ch. 12). This is truthful from the perspective of the Animal Soul.

Tanya ch. 28, Sefer HaMa’amarim 5670, p. 147.

Understanding the conflicting sides within

The Torah says that our lives are a constant inner struggle, and Chassidus teaches that in order to succeed, we need to thoroughly understand the parties to that struggle. 


In pre-Chassidic terminology, these parties are traditionally known as the Evil Inclination and the Good Inclination. However, Chassidus often also refers to these respective forces as the Nefesh Ha’Behamis, the Animal Soul, and the Nefesh Ha’Elokis, the Divine Soul. If in fact these terms are synonymous, why are additional terms needed?


The answer is that Chassidus, devoted as it is to explaining the inner workings of the soul, seeks to be more precise by adding additional terms in order to refer to different subparts of the same general soul entity. These subparts are the complementary intellectual and emotional elements of the respective souls:


Divine Soul: This refers specifically to the aspect of intellect that has a natural affinity for grasping G–dliness.


Good Inclination: This refers to this soul’s emotions, which consist primarily of love and awe of Hashem.


Animal Soul: This refers to the intellect of the Evil Inclination, which naturally grasps the pleasure of selfish instincts and lusts, and provides the person with the knowhow to satisfy these instincts. In this respect its intellect is animal-like, for an animal too uses its intellect to secure its survival, as it is written, “The ox knows its master, and the mule, its feeding trough” [Yeshaya 1:3]. Similarly, the animalistic intellect grasps the pleasure of selfish instincts and lusts, and provides the person with clever schemes in his quest to indulge in his lusts and commit sins and crime. Concerning this it is said, “They are shrewd to do evil” [Yirmiyahu 4:22].


Evil Inclination: This refers to this soul’s emotions, such as the desire for the physical, the fear of bodily harm, and the like. In the animal soul, the emotions are primary.


Although both souls contain intellect and emotions, they differ in terms of which of the two soul-powers is primary:


The Divine Soul is compared to a human, in which the intellect dominates (or at least ought to dominate) over the emotions. Thus, in the Divine Soul, the intellect is dominant and primary, while the emotions are subordinate to the intellect, and thus secondary.


In contrast, the Animal Soul is likened to an animal (hence the name), whose intellect is entirely subordinate to its instincts and emotions. Thus, just as an animal may be very intelligent, such as a fox, the most clever of the animals, its intellect can only be used to satiate its desires and instincts. Likewise, no matter how highly the intellect of the Animal Soul may be developed, it will use that force as a tool to pursue self-interest, and it will never be able to attain true impartiality and objectivity.

Torah Ohr, 38b.