Avinu took to fulfill Hachnasat Orchim to the maximum extent possible. From the א, we learn אכילה, feeding them; from the ש, we learn שתיה, giving them drinks; from the ל, we learn לויה, giving them shelter. Avraham Avinu made sure his guests were as comfortable as possible. 

But why does the Torah only hint at the Hachnasat Orchim through אשל instead of saying the actions explicitly? Furthermore, why does the Torah relate the Hachnasat Orchim performed with the Malachim – who do not need hospitality – instead of humans who need a place to eat, drink, and sleep? The answer is profound: there are two types of Chessed; the first category is when someone is clearly in need of help, and only then receives help, which is a great act of Chessed. However, a higher level is being proactive, anticipating that someone will need Chessed and mitigating the problem, or performing acts of Chessed towards everyone, not only the needy. 

Avraham Avinu showed the enhanced type of Chessed when he took care of the Malachim who don't need eating, drinking, or serving. In our lives, we need to help those requiring help, but it is also important to assist perfectly independent people, if only for the sake of spreading Chessed: because it is the right thing to do.

Authenticating a Navi Sheker Part Two

By Rabbi Chaim Jachter

A Major Dilemma 

Our people faced a major dilemma in the year 593 BCE. Nevuchadnetzar seized control over Eretz Yisrael. They had not yet exiled most Jews from the Land, nor destroyed the Beit HaMikdash.

There was a major movement amongst Eretz Yisrael’s Jews to rise and revolt against the Babylonian occupiers. However, such action was fraught with the danger of complete exile and the destruction of the Beit HaMikdash. Thus, we were unsure of how to proceed. As a result, much debate and conflict ensued, as recounted in Yirmiyahu Perakim 27-28 (and Rashi on Devarim 18:21).

We consulted the contemporary Nevi’im for guidance. The Nevi'im of the time were Yirmiyahu and Chananiah Ben Azor. Yirmiyahu warned not to revolt because Babylon’s conquest of Israel was from Hashem, and they were to control Israel for seventy years. Yirmiyahu explained that Babylonian rule was a punishment and a summon from Hashem to do Teshuva. If we do Teshuva, Hashem will restore Jewish sovereignty at the end of the seventy years. Chananiah Ben Azor claimed that Hashem said to revolt, and in two years’ time, Jewish authority over Eretz Yisrael would be restored, and Babylon would be gone.

How were we supposed to know who the authentic Navi was? Retrospectively we know Chanania Ben Azor was a fraud since his prophecy did not materialize. However, how were we supposed to determine in the year 593 BCE which spiritual leader was presenting the true word of Hashem? The Torah’s test to see who's Nevu’ah comes true (Devarim 18:21-22) is helpful only when the two years predicted by Chananiah Ben Azor pass (in 591 B.C.E.). However, how were we supposed to know how to act in 593 B.C.E. when a decision was needed?

A Suggested Answer

As we mentioned in our previous issue, the Chumash states (Devarim 18:15, 18:18) that an authentic Navi has to match Moshe Rabbeinu. Accordingly, in 593 B.C.E., our task was to gauge whose message better corresponded to that of Moshe Rabbeinu. 

Yirmiyahu said that due to our sins, we are suffering Babylonian domination. However, Chananiah ben Azor argued that despite our sins, we would defeat the powerful Babylonian Empire led by the mighty Nevuchadnetzar.

If we had made an honest assessment, we would have concluded that Yirmiyahu’s message is a far better link to that of Moshe Rabbeinu than Chananiah Ben Azor’s. This is because one of the most important, if not most important, themes in the Torah is “you reap what you sow,” meaning that Hashem treats us depending on our behavior. The second Parashah of Keriat Shema (Devarim 11:13-21) directly expresses this point. Yirmiyahu’s message reflected this Torah principle, and Chananiah Ben Azor’s did not. The true Navi was Yirmiyahu.

 Unfortunately, our ancestors chose Chananiah, and ostracized and humiliated Yirmiyahu. Sadly, in 591 BCE, the resulting situation was not very pretty: the Babylonian control further entrenched, Jewish suffering increased, and Chananiah Ben Azor was dead (as predicted by Yirmiyahu). 

Confirmation Bias

Why did our ancestors choose to follow Chananiah when it was obvious that the truth lay with Yirmiyahu?  The answer seems to be that Yirmiyahu told us what we needed to hear, while Chananiah told us what we wanted to hear. Humans have a natural tendency to be biased to that which they want to hear. Psychologists refer to this as confirmation bias.

Contemporary Application

The same test should be applied to the Jewish spiritual leadership of each generation. Are the leaders telling you what you want to hear or what you need to hear? The authentic spiritual leader tells you what you need to hear, not what you want to hear.

A good example is the 1950 Conservative movement ruling permitting driving on Shabbat to services. While very popular and well-received at its time of issuance, this ruling proved disastrous to the Conservative movement. This ruling eviscerated the sense of a Jewish community living within walking distance of a synagogue. As a result of this and many other decisions that ran counter to tradition, the Conservative movement is plummeting in popularity from its peak in the mid-to-late twentieth century. A 2020 Pew study found that only eight percent of American Jews between the ages of eighteen and twenty-nine identify as Conservative.

Conclusion

The same principle applies to intra-Orthodox debates. Today, some call themselves Orthodox, but many others reject their claim of Orthodoxy. So how is one to determine who is an authentic Orthodox leader? The answer remains the same as always. We should ask ourselves if the rabbi’s messages match that of Moshe Rabbeinu and the Chachmei HaMesora who followed his glorious path. If, upon sober reflection, his messages are not a match, then he is not an authentic Orthodox rabbi.