I have seen your words: “Many tried to do it but did not succeed,1Compare Berakhot 35b, where the Talmud records a dispute between R. Yishmael and R. Shimon bar Yoḥai. R. Shimon ruled that one should study Torah all the time and not spend time pursuing a livelihood. R. Yishmael asserted that one must work for a living. Abaye concludes the discussion by saying that “many tried to act according to R. Shimon’s view but did not succeed, and many acted according to R. Yishmael and succeeded.” The recipient of this letter has reported to R. Salanter that the people in the community were comparing the idea of serious study of Mussar to R. Shimon’s utopian and unworkable idea of exclusively learning Torah. This student was concerned that pursuing a policy of serious Mussar study will fail, and the backfire will damage the credibility of any learning of Mussar. and they caused a desecration of [God’s] name. So I feared to dress myself in a garment of which I am not worthy.”2I.e., one who studies Mussar seriously appears to be posturing as a paragon of piety, which he is not. Compare Bava Metzia 113b and Shita Mekubetzet on Bava Metzia 114a. It is with your last statement that I take issue, for you have fallen into the same mistake the world makes: to consider Mussar study in a house set aside for it as achieving some exalted level or pious virtue. Therefore, when they see someone going to the Mussar House, they raise their eyebrows at him: “Who is this who presumes to do this3Compare Esther 7:5. and hold himself on an exalted level?” So they nitpick his every behavior: “How can a person like this do such a thing!?”
This is not the way it is, my brother. [Learning Mussar] is no [act of] superiority, no exalted state, but a necessity for a sick person, plagued with transgressions and sins that will [lead to a] bitter end, to go there to pour out his soul in study of Mussar. Perhaps it will save him a little from his troubles and subdue his [evil] urge somewhat so that he does not go, uncontrolled, in the way of his heart. In truth, there is no room for concern about the desecration of [God’s] name. It is out of place here. The parameter of guarding against the desecration of God’s name is that it leads one to hold more strongly to observance – not to diminish. This [argument expresses] only the desire of a person not wanting his peers to mock him – [a desire that] hypocritically4Lit. “sticks out its hooves” – as a non-kosher pig “hypocritically” shows off its split hooves as if it were a kosher animal. dresses itself in clothes of righteousness.
What can words give or add? If a person forgets his end and does not seek any help, small or great, for his soul…? With regard to physical needs, or when sick, a person seeks with all his might to do whatever he can to at least lighten his distress and suffering and sickness. Why wouldn’t a person do the same for his soul?5In Halakhic Man, R. Joseph B. Soloveitchik reports R. Chaim Soloveitchik’s (of Brisk) rejection of R. Isaac Blazer’s proposal to introduce the study of Mussar at the Volozhin Yeshiva. R. Blazer, one of R. Salanter’s preeminent students, was attempting to spread the Mussar movement through the Lithuanian yeshivot at the end of the nineteenth century. R. Hayim replied: “If a person is sick, we prescribe castor oil for him. However, it is certain that if a healthy person ingests castor oil, he will become very sick” (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1983, p.75). In the view of the Lithuanian yeshiva establishment, the average healthy religious person can meet all of his spiritual needs by studying Torah regularly. In fact, by implication, the study of Mussar may encourage or induce spiritual illness. Only a person who is spiritually troubled or sick needs to study Mussar. R. Salanter, for his part, is convinced that everyone is troubled spiritually and falling short of the Torah’s ideal. Therefore, Mussar is a necessity, not a pious luxury and certainly not a spiritual excess. Further historical development showed that, when not fortified by Mussar study and the internalization of the religious way, both yeshiva students and the laity were more vulnerable to being religiously undermined by the modern cultural values that conflicted with tradition. A sick person would not be ashamed to do things that are beneath him, so why, when it comes to his soul, should he look at or pay attention to the talk of people who know nothing about this! [This hesitation] is only like diverting a man by inundating and preoccupying his mind with the proliferation of bodily needs that stultify the human heart, so he does not pay attention to his eternal purpose.
There is only one way for a person – especially one overloaded by business: to make a hard-and-fast rule to go to the Mussar House, to pour out his soul and spirit. All the winds in the world must not blow him back from this at all. Then he can be called “alive,” not an unfeeling corpse (God forbid).6R. Salanter returns to one of his central images: a person who learns Mussar – is self-critical, grows emotionally, and improves his character – is alive, with genuine emotions such as guilt and yearning for improvement. One who is complacent and not self-critical, even if he is going through the motions of doing good things, is really “dead” and not sensitive to the need for kindness or the need for repentance; a kind of zombie. Compare elements of Letters 1, 2, 3, 6, and 9. And as long as he is connected to life, he can rest assured.7This inner assurance and rootedness in life enables the person to be indifferent to the opinions and dismissals of others.
מעמיל שְׁנַת תר"ך כוּ'.
Memel, 1860…
רָאִיתִי דְּבָרָיו, הַרְבֵּה עָשׂוּ וְלֹא עָלְתָה בְּיָדָם, וְגָרְמוּ חִלּוּל הַשֵּׁם, וְיָרֵאתִי לְהַלְבִּישׁ אֶת עַצְמִי, בְּאִצְטָלָא שֶׁאֵינָהּ רְאוּיָה לִי עַד כָּאן לְשׁוֹנוֹ — עַל סוֹף דְּבָרָיו אֶתְוַכַּח, כִּי נָפַל בְּטָעוּת הָעוֹלָם לְהַחֲזִיק לִמּוּד הַמּוּסָר בְּבַיִת מְיֻחָד לָזֶה, לְאֵיזֶה מַדְרֵגָה אוֹ לְמִדַּת חֲסִידוּת, בָּזֹאת כַּאֲשֶׁר יִרְאוּ אֶחָד הוֹלֵךְ לְבֵית הַמּוּסָר, יִרְמְזוּן עָלָיו בְּעֵינֵיהֶם, מִי הוּא זֶה אֲשֶׁר מְלָאוֹ לִבּוֹ לַעֲשׂוֹת וּלְהַחֲזִיק בַּמַּדְרֵגָה, וִידַקְדְּקוּ עַל הַנְהָגָתוֹ, הָאִישׁ כָּזֶה יַעֲשֶׂה כָּכָה:
I have seen your words: “Many tried to do it but did not succeed,1Compare Berakhot 35b, where the Talmud records a dispute between R. Yishmael and R. Shimon bar Yoḥai. R. Shimon ruled that one should study Torah all the time and not spend time pursuing a livelihood. R. Yishmael asserted that one must work for a living. Abaye concludes the discussion by saying that “many tried to act according to R. Shimon’s view but did not succeed, and many acted according to R. Yishmael and succeeded.” The recipient of this letter has reported to R. Salanter that the people in the community were comparing the idea of serious study of Mussar to R. Shimon’s utopian and unworkable idea of exclusively learning Torah. This student was concerned that pursuing a policy of serious Mussar study will fail, and the backfire will damage the credibility of any learning of Mussar. and they caused a desecration of [God’s] name. So I feared to dress myself in a garment of which I am not worthy.”2I.e., one who studies Mussar seriously appears to be posturing as a paragon of piety, which he is not. Compare Bava Metzia 113b and Shita Mekubetzet on Bava Metzia 114a. It is with your last statement that I take issue, for you have fallen into the same mistake the world makes: to consider Mussar study in a house set aside for it as achieving some exalted level or pious virtue. Therefore, when they see someone going to the Mussar House, they raise their eyebrows at him: “Who is this who presumes to do this3Compare Esther 7:5. and hold himself on an exalted level?” So they nitpick his every behavior: “How can a person like this do such a thing!?”
לֹא כֵן אָחִי הַדָּבָר, אֵין זֶה מַעֲלָה וְלֹא מַדְרֵגָה רַק הֶכְרֵחִי — לָאִישׁ הַחוֹלֶה נָגוּעַ בַּעֲוֹנוֹת וּפְשָׁעִים, אֲשֶׁר מָרָה תִּהְיֶה בָּאַחֲרוֹנָה, לֵילֵךְ שָׁמָּה לִשְׁפֹּךְ נַפְשׁוֹ בְּלִמּוּד הַמּוּסָר, אוּלַי תַּצִּילֵהוּ מְעַט מִצָּרָתוֹ, תַּכְנִיעַ מַה יִּצְרוֹ, לְבַל יֵלֵךְ שׁוֹבָב בְּדֶרֶךְ לִבּוֹ, וּבֶאֱמֶת אֵין מָקוֹם לָחוּשׁ לְחִלּוּל ה', אֵין כָּאן מְקוֹמוֹ, כִּי גֶּדֶר שְׁמִירַת חִלּוּל ה', לְהַחֲזִיק יוֹתֵר בִּשְׁמִירַת הַתּוֹרָה וְהַמִּצְוָה, לֹא לְמַעֲטָהּ, הִיא רַק תַּאֲוָה מַה שֶּׁהָאָדָם אֵינוֹ רוֹצֶה שֶׁיִּלְעֲגוּ עָלָיו חֲבֵרָיו, פּוֹשֶׁטֶת טְלָפֶיהָ לְהַלְבִּישָׁהּ בִּמְעִיל הַצֶּדֶק:
This is not the way it is, my brother. [Learning Mussar] is no [act of] superiority, no exalted state, but a necessity for a sick person, plagued with transgressions and sins that will [lead to a] bitter end, to go there to pour out his soul in study of Mussar. Perhaps it will save him a little from his troubles and subdue his [evil] urge somewhat so that he does not go, uncontrolled, in the way of his heart. In truth, there is no room for concern about the desecration of [God’s] name. It is out of place here. The parameter of guarding against the desecration of God’s name is that it leads one to hold more strongly to observance – not to diminish. This [argument expresses] only the desire of a person not wanting his peers to mock him – [a desire that] hypocritically4Lit. “sticks out its hooves” – as a non-kosher pig “hypocritically” shows off its split hooves as if it were a kosher animal. dresses itself in clothes of righteousness.
מַה יִּתֵּן וּמַה יּוֹסִיף דְּבָרִים, אִם הָאָדָם יִשְׁכַּח אַחֲרִיתוֹ, לְבַל לְחַפֵּשׂ אֵיזֶה תְּעָלָה לְנַפְשׁוֹ אִם מְעַט כוּ'. בְּצָרְכֵי הַגּוּפָנִי וּבְחָלְיוֹ, הָאָדָם מְחַפֵּשׂ בְּכָל עֹז, אֶת אֲשֶׁר יִהְיֶה לְאֵל יָדוֹ, לְכַל הַפָּחוֹת לְהָקֵל מַה עָנְיוֹ וּמְרוּדוֹ וּמַחֲלָתוֹ, וּמַדּוּעַ לֹא יַעֲשֶׂה הָאָדָם כֹּה לְנַפְשׁוֹ — הַחוֹלֶה לֹא יִתְבַּיֵּשׁ עֲשׂוֹת דְּבָרִים, אֲשֶׁר אֵינָם לְפִי כְּבוֹדוֹ, וּמַדּוּעַ לְנַפְשׁוֹ יָצִיץ וְיַשְׁגִּיחַ עַל דִּבְרַת הָאָדָם, אֲשֶׁר אֵינָם יוֹדְעִים מְאוּמָה מַה הוּא — הוּא רַק טִפּוּל הָאָדָם, בְּטִרְדַּת רַעְיוֹנוֹ לְמַעְלָה רֹאשׁ, לְהַרְבּוֹת צָרְכֵי הַגּוּפָנִי, אֲשֶׁר תְּטַמְטֵם אֶת לֵב הָאָדָם, מִבְּלִי לְהַשְׁגִּיחַ עַל תַּכְלִיתוֹ הַנִּצְחִי:
What can words give or add? If a person forgets his end and does not seek any help, small or great, for his soul…? With regard to physical needs, or when sick, a person seeks with all his might to do whatever he can to at least lighten his distress and suffering and sickness. Why wouldn’t a person do the same for his soul?5In Halakhic Man, R. Joseph B. Soloveitchik reports R. Chaim Soloveitchik’s (of Brisk) rejection of R. Isaac Blazer’s proposal to introduce the study of Mussar at the Volozhin Yeshiva. R. Blazer, one of R. Salanter’s preeminent students, was attempting to spread the Mussar movement through the Lithuanian yeshivot at the end of the nineteenth century. R. Hayim replied: “If a person is sick, we prescribe castor oil for him. However, it is certain that if a healthy person ingests castor oil, he will become very sick” (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1983, p.75). In the view of the Lithuanian yeshiva establishment, the average healthy religious person can meet all of his spiritual needs by studying Torah regularly. In fact, by implication, the study of Mussar may encourage or induce spiritual illness. Only a person who is spiritually troubled or sick needs to study Mussar. R. Salanter, for his part, is convinced that everyone is troubled spiritually and falling short of the Torah’s ideal. Therefore, Mussar is a necessity, not a pious luxury and certainly not a spiritual excess. Further historical development showed that, when not fortified by Mussar study and the internalization of the religious way, both yeshiva students and the laity were more vulnerable to being religiously undermined by the modern cultural values that conflicted with tradition. A sick person would not be ashamed to do things that are beneath him, so why, when it comes to his soul, should he look at or pay attention to the talk of people who know nothing about this! [This hesitation] is only like diverting a man by inundating and preoccupying his mind with the proliferation of bodily needs that stultify the human heart, so he does not pay attention to his eternal purpose.
אַחַת הִיא לְהָאָדָם, בִּפְרָט לְהֶעָמוּס בְּמַשָּׂא וּמַתָּן, לַעֲשׂוֹת חֹק חָזָק לֵילֵךְ לְבֵית הַמּוּסָר, לִשְׁפֹּךְ נַפְשׁוֹ וְרוּחוֹ, וְכָל הָרוּחוֹת שֶׁבָּעוֹלָם לֹא יִנָּזְרֶנּוּ אָחוֹר מְאוּמָה מִזֶּה, אָז חַי יִקָּרֵא, לֹא מֵת חַס וְשָׁלוֹם שֶׁאֵינוֹ מַרְגִּישׁ מְאוּמָה, וְכָל אֲשֶׁר אֶל הַחַיִּים יְחֻבַּר יֵשׁ בִּטָּחוֹן:
There is only one way for a person – especially one overloaded by business: to make a hard-and-fast rule to go to the Mussar House, to pour out his soul and spirit. All the winds in the world must not blow him back from this at all. Then he can be called “alive,” not an unfeeling corpse (God forbid).6R. Salanter returns to one of his central images: a person who learns Mussar – is self-critical, grows emotionally, and improves his character – is alive, with genuine emotions such as guilt and yearning for improvement. One who is complacent and not self-critical, even if he is going through the motions of doing good things, is really “dead” and not sensitive to the need for kindness or the need for repentance; a kind of zombie. Compare elements of Letters 1, 2, 3, 6, and 9. And as long as he is connected to life, he can rest assured.7This inner assurance and rootedness in life enables the person to be indifferent to the opinions and dismissals of others.