* The most cherished of all the positive attributes, and the source of them all, is – truth. Hence, all the paths and doings of a person who does not delude himself should be transparent and known to him.
* * *
Whoever seeks to correct flaws in another’s character must observe the following three points. Without them, not only will he fail to improve matters: he may even cause damage.
1. Knowing the Disciple’s Spiritual Personality and Status. In this context, “his spiritual personality” (his mahus) means his innate gifts and qualities. It can well be that if a particular thing is done by one person, this would be considered a wrongdoing and would disgrace him in the eyes of others, whereas that would not be the case if the same thing were done by a person of lesser spiritual standing. If the former person were to indulge in pointless conversation, this would be regarded as a chillul HaShem, a desecration of the Divine Name. In fact in many contexts the Gemara teaches that [unusually high standards of conduct are expected of certain individuals because] “a man of stature is different [from the man in the street].”1 Another example: if such a man were to devote highly-focused attention to the finer esthetic points of his clothing, or were to curl his hair, and the like, for him that would be counted as a serious fault, whereas for a woman, this would be legitimate dressiness. Accordingly, if one wanted to upgrade a mediocre individual and to remove his subtle flaws of character in order to make him equal a person of superior standing, not only would he fail to achieve anything, but moreover, those [misguided] efforts would ruin the recipient and push him off the path. The same would apply if one were to try to invest a woman with the qualities of a man, for her gifts are not appropriate for his role.
All of the above is self-evident from Chovos HaLevavos, Shaar Cheshbon HaNefesh, section 2, as follows:
Question: Is everyone’s accounting identical?
Answer: It has been taught that the effort that is expected of people regarding their Torah study and [their prospects with regard to] their World, meaning their portion in the World to Come, varies in relation to their awareness, and their minds, and the degree to which their understanding is refined. Each of them must consider within his own soul what are his obligations in the service of the Creator, and this varies according to the extent of his recognition of the Creator’s benevolence, both comprehensive and particular.
See also chapter 6 of the first maamar in Sefer HaIkarim,2 which states that “no individual alone constitutes the ultimate purpose of the [human] species,” and also the discussion there on the roots3 of the faith.
The above-quoted axiom [regarding individual differences] is so universally accepted that it needs no proof. It underlies the statement of the Sages that “many scholars followed the example of Rashbi [and refrained from earning their living, relying instead on supernatural benevolence from Above], but for them it did not work.”4
As to the status of the disciple: A businessman cannot possibly live his life like a fulltime Torah scholar, and one should never expect that which is impossible. Doing so would weaken the effect of the mentor’s realistic and necessary expectations. True, the above occupational differences are sometimes modified by the gifts of a particular individual, which enable him to engage in his business in a manner that is superior to that of his peers. Nevertheless, his conduct will not equal that of a scholar with similar gifts – because of his bothersome distractions, and the insistent demands of his business, and his unavoidable encounters with people of all kinds. That is why there are practices which in his case are not considered to be sinful, whereas this would not be the case with a fulltime Torah scholar, who anyway would consider them to be odd and would keep his distance from them.
This recalls the statement in chapter 27 of Tanya – Sefer shel Beinonim: “On the contrary, such sadness [over the fact that one is troubled by unsavory thoughts] is due to conceit, for he does not know his place, and that is why he is distressed by the fact that he has not attained the level of a tzaddik.” Chapter 30 there speaks of forbidden things, and hence adds: “In truth, even he who is extremely passionate by nature, [and whose livelihood obliges him to sit all day at the street-corners,] has no excuse whatsoever [for his sins]…”
However, when it comes to things that are permissible and are in no way linked to anything forbidden, there is certainly a significant difference [between a businessman and a fulltime Torah scholar], as was pointed out above. This point is often made in the context of the davenen of businessmen. See, for example, the [first] epistle in Tanya – Iggeres HaKodesh, whose opening words are Pos’chim biverachah (“We begin with a blessing”), and the maamar beginning Mayim rabim in Torah Or, Parshas No’ach.
Not everything that is a dispensable luxury for a poor man is a dispensable luxury for a rich man – such as fine garments, and a beautiful home, and good food, such as bread made specifically of wheat, and meat and fish. For a rich man, or for a refined individual, even if he is not rich, these are essentials, because as a result of lifetime habituation, it is by them that his body and soul are held together. The refined person knows that his diet governs his mind and his innermost faculties, as is discussed elsewhere. Thus, Chovos HaLevavos (in Shaar HaPerishus, chapter 2) writes that for the refinement of one’s mind and understanding one should prefer refined food. So, too, it is taught that “having a beautiful home gives a man ease of mind.”5 If the refined individual were to eat the poor man’s food, this would harm his body and soul, whereas for the poor man or a commoner such food is completely acceptable. Indeed, if that pauper or commoner were to worry over the fact that he lacks the rich man’s food and take it to heart, that would be sinful. And if he were to manage to secure that kind of food it would coarsen his materiality, because he does not need it and consumes it only because he hankers after the physical pleasure that it gives him.6 This underlies the teaching of the Sages that “an ignoramus is forbidden to eat meat.”7
The rich man does not have this problem, because he has been accustomed to such food since his childhood. Not so the refined person, but since for him such food is a necessity, it will not coarsen his personal materiality. It is true that the Sages teach: “Sanctify yourself [by self-imposed abstention] within the realm of that which is permissible.”8 Nevertheless, in the spirit of what was stated above, this directive applies to each individual according to his personal standing, according to what is considered a dispensable luxury in his particular case. As is stated at the end of chapter 27 of Tanya – Sefer shel Beinonim, this, too, counts as a fulfillment of the directive to “Sanctify yourself…”9
In addition to the innate differences between individuals, another variable that influences one’s conduct is the place of residence, together with its human environment. The resident of a little township is quite comfortable wearing simple (through clean) clothes, even a sheepskin, and living in an unsophisticated home with plain furniture. If a city-dweller does not do the opposite, his neighbors will naturally look down on him, especially if he is a Torah scholar. (On this point, see the comment of R. Yitzchak Abarbanel, cited in Midrash Shmuel10 4:8, on the teaching of the Sages11 that “Whoever honors the Torah [is himself honored by others].”) Moreover, [ignoring the above argument that a Torah scholar should pay attention to his external appearance] is no mark of pious abstinence.12 (On this, see Chovos HaLevavos, Shaar HaPerishus, chapter 3.)
To sum up: A conscientious mentor needs to know his disciple’s environmental background in detail, and to attune his efforts accordingly.
2. Distinguishing between Desirable and Undesirable Behaviors. A mentor must first closely consider every detail of his disciple’s conduct, and only then, with carefully-chosen words, should he point out what conduct is proper and what is not. When a disciple observes that his mentor is weighing his words, he will heed the counsel that he hears, even if he does not understand its underlying reason. If, however, a mentor acts otherwise, without pausing to carefully consider whether the behaviors he is addressing are desirable or undesirable, he will soon find himself trying to justify his hasty statements – and in the course of doing so, positive behaviors will be held up as negative, and so too the reverse.
Such thoughtless advice will no doubt be ignored by his listener. As to the mentor, he will have harmed and saddened both himself and his disciple. And if in fact he lacks either the ability or the time to weigh the above considerations judiciously, better that he remain silent than speak.
3. Correcting Unfavorable Conduct. Even if a mentor satisfies the above two requirements, there is a further consideration which, if ignored, will bring ruin upon the educational relationship that will be difficult to heal. That consideration is – that the mentor must know in advance how to go about the task of correcting undesirable behaviors.
For a start, he must proceed slowly, and not seek to correct everything all at once. Thus, if two behaviors need to be distanced, only one should be addressed and the other must wait. Otherwise, since his listener’s desire is drawn to both, and since no one by nature is willing to forego every desire simultaneously, he would feel so fenced-in that he would not try to tackle even one of the two challenges. Instead, the mentor would be well advised to focus his efforts on the more urgent fault, and in the meantime allow his listener’s desire to continue attracting him towards the less urgent fault.
The listener will then be freely willing to correct that fault and, in due course, the other one too – for two reasons, both of which are rooted in the nature that G‑d invested in human beings. The first reason was just explained. The other reason is that the listener will realize that his well-meaning friend has no interest in making his life difficult by denying him whatever he desires. The link between them will thus be strengthened, the mentor’s advice will be heeded, and the listener will shake off the second undesirable behavior.
Counsel needs to be expressed in a relaxed manner, in judiciously-chosen words that explain why the listener ought to avoid a certain behavior. The reason given might be that this behavior is to some extent forbidden, or that it would compromise the respect to which his family (or he himself) is entitled, or that for him this particular behavior would be inappropriate. If the above words of counsel are offered without any trace of irritation, they will be accepted. As it is written, “Words spoken softly by wise men are heeded.”13 The result will be the opposite if the mentor’s words are spoken thoughtlessly, or angrily, or offensively. Not only will they fail to achieve their present goal, but beyond that, they will ensure that any future admonition, even if justified, will be rejected, because people despise such a speaker, especially if he is a Torah scholar. By such speech, that speaker becomes counted among those of whom it is said that “he who shames his fellow in public [has forfeited his share in the World to Come].”14 The same is said of “a person who calls his fellow by [an offensive] nickname.”15
The Sages teach that the enormity of this offense “depends completely on the identity of the person giving the insult and the person who has been insulted.”16
Regarding the person giving the insult: If he is a Torah scholar, he demeans himself, which means his Torah learning, because he thereby brings the Torah into disrepute. A person who safeguards the respect due to his Torah learning will not insult even the commonest of men, and in no case will he ever utter an unworthy word. After all, we are commanded to “cleave to His attributes,”17 for “the Torah [which includes no superfluous words] added eight [seemingly dispensable] letters in order to avoid using a negative term, as it is written, ‘and of the animals which are not clean’ [instead of ‘which are tameh,’ meaning that they are ritually impure].”18 Accordingly, all the words spoken by a Torah scholar ought to be gentle and pure, in the spirit of the teaching of the Sages: “Who is honored? He who honors others,”19 and likewise, “Whoever honors the Torah is honored by others.”20
And regarding the person receiving the insult: Even if he is a common person, insulting him is a grievous sin. If he is a highly-regarded individual from a reputable family, humiliating him [publicly] or giving him an insulting nickname “is equivalent to the sin of bloodshed.” Indeed, his sin is “too weighty to be forgiven.”21 It is likewise written in Shnei Luchos HaBris,22 Shaar HaOsiyos, in the section on the letter shin, page 109a: “Anyone who takes vigilant care of his soul should keep his distance [from such talk]. If, however, he falters [and transgresses], he should regret the past, and plead with his fellowman: ‘I beg of you, forgive [me]!’23 He should repent for that sin and throughout his life be vigilant [regarding his speech] – and then things will be good for him.”
[Carelessness in this area] gives rise to many arguments between a mentor and his subject, because the latter ignores what he has been told. In this spirit, my revered father24 once advised an individual who had to correct certain matters in the conduct of his home: “Say nothing harsh, for that will only cause arguments and your goal will not be attained. Just explain to them that they should not do such and such – but say so gently and moderately, as one speaks to a friend. That way your words will be effective and your goal will be reached. This is the indispensable and fundamental principle upon which the whole of the edifice of ‘the little world’ – a human being – stands. Without it, the edifice is unstructured and its walls eventually fall apart, and no edifice can be rehabilitated unless first of all its foundations are fortified. And once this is done, it will stand up firmly and last forever.”
The very first and principal requirement is that the soul25 of the person offering guidance should itself be in good order and condition. If that is so, his listener will not be able to take the speaker’s words of moral rebuke and bounce them back at him...
As the Sages expressed it, “Correct yourself, and only then correct others.”26
* * *
It is commonly said that there is no obligation to reveal the truth, and that is so. However, when this is essential to the educational process, the educator should not be bashful about revealing to his disciple the truth as his heart perceives it, and enumerating the disciple’s challenges to the extent required. And since his intention is only to correct faults, he is in fact obligated to reveal everything to his disciple – in the manner that was discussed in point number 3 [on p. 372 above] – in order that his efforts, with help from Above, should bear fruit.
