Professional Documents
Culture Documents
htm
INSIGHT
5757 - #22, 23
The above equation of the Talmud also demands contemplation. Many simply
understand the gemara as asserting that the concern for the ethical, for the
relationship between man and man, should override the concern for the ritual, for
the relationship between man and G-d.4 Thus hatred among people is deemed
worse than even the breach of the three cardinal sins.5 Yet included among these
three cardinal sins is the greatest violation of another human being: murder.6
Clearly, the violations preceding the destruction of the First Temple included
transgressions bein adam l'chaveiro and with murder, there must have been
hatred and enmity.7 It is not sina, hatred, that is the reason for the Second
Temple's destruction but specifically sinat chinum, a certain type of hatred.
Furthermore, as the gemara explains, this is a hatred that can also be
accompanied by good deeds and proper conduct between individuals.8 What is
1 of 6 5/27/11 6:42 PM
Insight 5757-22,23: Defining Sinat Chinum http://www.nishma.org/articles/insight/insight5757-22, 23.htm
The difficulty with the approach of the Shiltot, though, lies in the original verse
itself. Vayikra 19:17 continues: hoche'ach tochi'ach et
BeDerech Tovim 7:11, note 15, though, explains that even according to the
Shiltot, it is possible to see the verse as one connected command: do not simply
hate but act correctly upon your hate, inform your neighbour of your feelings and
correct the misdeed. A close reading of Rambam, Sefer Hamitzvot, Lo Ta'aseh
302 actually indicates that this approach can be incorporated in Rambam's view as
well. The issue is not whether the hate is hidden or not but rather how the hate is
directed. The violation according to Rambam occurs not only if someone acts as a
friend when really an enemy but even when it is clear that there is enmity. The
problem of lo tisna is not acting upon the hate: not informing the other of your
feelings. While an act of violence yields other transgressions, it does not constitute
a violation of lo tisna in that the hate is communicated. The Shiltot, though,
demands not only communication but correct communication thus an act of
violence still represents a violation of lo tisna.
Sinat chinum, thus, is not causeless hatred but rather purposeless hatred. The
concern is not why we hate -- its cause -- but rather what we do with the hate --
our response. It is "free hate" because it lacks direction. In Part Two, we will
investigate why this is such a great evil.
PART TWO
2 of 6 5/27/11 6:42 PM
Insight 5757-22,23: Defining Sinat Chinum http://www.nishma.org/articles/insight/insight5757-22, 23.htm
The concern of the Torah in the commandment of lo tisna, not to hate a fellow Jew
in one's heart,1 is not the cause of the hate but rather the response to the hate. As
indicated by the command of hoche'ach tochi'ach, to rebuke your neighbour,2 one
is not allowed to simply hide one's hate but must communicate this hate to the
other person.3 It is how one acts when feeling hatred that is the essence of this
mitzvah. In connecting the command of lo tisna with the concept of sinat chinum,
we can conclude that the correct translation of this concept is not "baseless
hatred" but rather "purposeless hatred". It is not the source of the hatred, its lack of
reason, that marks the extreme evil of sinat chinum but rather our response to the
hatred, its lack of purpose and direction. Hate ultimately is an emotion arising
within the human being, sometimes with clear cause and sometimes without; it a
natural consequence of human existence. As with all the lessons of Torah, it is
how we respond to the general existence of mankind that marks the Jew.
Hatred is ultimately the human emotional reaction to that which offends us and, as
such, in itself, hatred is neither good nor bad. The nature of the stimulus which
causes us to hate, which offends us, obviously is a factor in our determination of
whether the hatred is acceptable or not. We are indeed called upon to hate evil.4
The mitzvot of lo tisna and choche'ach tochi'ach, though, further inform us that the
determination of hate as positive or negative is also dependent on how we
respond to the hate. To be positive, our emotion of hate must also demand of us
that we confront evil and attempt to correct the wrong. Remarkably, in that
process, we also gain knowledge of the true enemy, the true nature of the
offensive stimulus, and the essence of the hate itself also changes.
Malbim, Vayikra 19:17 points out that rebuke is only possible when the one
rebuking is also willing to receive rebuke. The process of rebuke is ultimately a
dynamic one; the interchange is not one way but flows in both directions.5 As we
challenge our neighbour who has offended us, he or she will respond: perhaps
admitting their wrong, perhaps justifying their actions, perhaps challenging our
critique. Only one who in turn can accept rebuke will allow the dynamics of this
3 of 6 5/27/11 6:42 PM
Insight 5757-22,23: Defining Sinat Chinum http://www.nishma.org/articles/insight/insight5757-22, 23.htm
process to unfold to the greatest extent possible. And the only way that can be
achieved is in recognition that the enemy is not the person but evil - the evil within
others and the evil within oneself. Choche'ach tochi'ach is not just a call to confront
evil, it is a charge to recognize the true nature of evil and to accept the
commitment to fight it in all of its manifestations, including within oneself. The hate
is transferred from the person to the evil itself -- and as the evil is defeated through
knowledge and growth, the hate subsides.
Rabbi Shimshon Raphael Hirsch, Horeb 2:33 categorizes the sins that led to
the destruction of the Second Temple as "self-seeking". One of the great tragedies
of religion is that it can create self-righteousness as individuals use their
observance6 to project themselves as closer to the Deity. For self-righteousness to
exist, though, there must always be an object of comparison, the one that I am
better than. Maharsha explains that in the time of the Second Temple, cliques
were formed - there were my friends and there were my enemies. Evaluation was
comparative and so evolved sinat chinum - to gain value in myself, there had to be
the other that I hated.
4 of 6 5/27/11 6:42 PM
Insight 5757-22,23: Defining Sinat Chinum http://www.nishma.org/articles/insight/insight5757-22, 23.htm
hate. Humanity is divided. The goal is not to lead the individual into a confrontation
with evil but rather to maintain the individual's self-perception as better than the
other. In fact, correct action upon the hate is avoided because it may lead to
self-critique. Is it no wonder why sinat chinum is so vile?
2
Rabbi Yisrael Meir Kagan (the Chafetz Chaim), Kuntras Ahavat Yisrael in Kol Kitvei Chafetz
Chaim Hashalem, volume 1.
3
Vayikra 19:17.
4
This argument is deemed to be supported by the stress various commentators place on idolatry in
regard to the destruction of the first Temple. See, for example, the above noted Kad HaKemach,
including Rabbi Chavel's notes #16 and "Evel", #120.
5
Within this argument, reference is also made to Maharal, Chiddushei Aggadot, Gittin 55b. As we
shall see, the reduction of this comparison to the issue of the ethical versus the ritual, of concern for
bein adam l'chaveiro, the relations between man and man, versus the concern for bein adam
l'Makom, the relation between man and G-d, is just simplistic.
6
See, further, Rambam, Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Rotze'ach 4:9.
7
The argument can also be made, based upon the gemara in Yoma, that, in fact, it was the positive
aspects of the relationship between the Jewish People and G-d, bein adam l'Makom, that shielded the
nation from greater tragedy as a result of the destruction of the first Temple. See, further, Maharsha,
T.B. Shabbat 139b.
8
Indeed, if the problem with sinat chinum is simply that it leads to incorrect behaviour between
individuals, which in the extreme would include shfichat damim, murder, then the violations of murder
in the first Temple period, by definition, must compare to the sinat chinum of the second Temple
period.
9
Our gemara in Yoma clearly supports this view. See also Maharsha. The classic source for the
extreme evil in acting as a friend to someone when really you feel enmity, is Bereishit Rabbah 84:9
which praises Yosef's brothers for being honest about their feelings although it still does critique the
hatred itself.
10
See T.B. Nedarim 65b; T.B. Sotah 3a.
2
In the same verse of Vayikra 19:17.
5 of 6 5/27/11 6:42 PM
Insight 5757-22,23: Defining Sinat Chinum http://www.nishma.org/articles/insight/insight5757-22, 23.htm
3
See Insight 5757 - #22 for a further discussion on this topic.
4
See Mishlei 8:13. See also T.B. Pesachim 113b.
5
See, also, Ramban, HaEmek Davar, Meshech Chachmah on this verse.
6
Note how T.B. Yoma 9b states that the people were involved in Torah, mitzvot and gemilat
chassidim.
Return to top
© 2002 NISHMA
6 of 6 5/27/11 6:42 PM