Torah.org Home Subscribe Services Support Us
  LifeLine
Print Version

Email this article to a friend

Ki Sisa

by Rabbi Yaakov Menken


"Moshe stood in the gate of the camp, and he said, 'whomever is for G-d, let him come to me,' and all the children [tribe] of Levi gathered around him." [32:26]

There is a Medrash that asks an obvious question: who wouldn't want to be for HaShem? "Who doesn't want to be a member of the king's household?" But Moshe only allowed those who had not given their gold to create the Golden Calf to gather around him. "Whomever is for G-d," meaning only for G-d without including idol-worship as well.

The Chofetz Chaim says that we can take a truly profound lesson from this. Sometimes we need to realize that compromise is crucial for harmony at home, makes peace, and is good for political life - but deadly where matters of principle are concerned. One cannot "compromise" with idolatry and evil.

It is almost guaranteed - whenever a person decides to take a step forward towards G-d and moral conduct, the next day someone or something will require a little "flexibility." This is a test of your "emergency response system:" do you have principles, or guidelines subject to change without notice? Do you follow Ten Commandments, or look up to Ten Nice Ideas?

The Chofetz Chaim goes on to explain that Eliyahu issued this challenge in Kings I 18:21 [idiomatic translation]: "until when will you continue to straddle both sides of the fence?" Eliyahu told the people to make the decision: whose side are you on? Do you worship G-d, or the idol Ba'al?

Eliyahu continues, "if HaShem is G-d, then go after him, and if the Ba'al, then follow him." He seems to say that fence-straddling is worse than pure idolatry - and the Chofetz Chaim concludes that this is very much the case. The fence-straddlers send the message that it is OK to sometimes go to the Ba'al, whereas if they would always go to the Ba'al, then everyone would know that they were idol-worshippers rather than followers of the G-d of Israel, and people would withdraw themselves from them.

At times, we must make a choice, and this goes well beyond whether we can "import" Buddhist meditation into Judaism. If we have principles, and then demonstrate "flexibility" where they are concerned, we send a message that we lack sincerity in our overall convictions. Even becoming angry or defensive shows that one is considering the alternative. A calm denial is not "intransigence," but a demonstration that principles are not for sale.


 


ARTICLES ON MIKETZ AND CHANUKAH:

View Complete List

The Master Plan
Rabbi Shlomo Jarcaig - 5763

Associated Press
Rabbi Mordechai Kamenetzky - 5761

Thanks for What?
Shlomo Katz - 5774

> A Little Oil Goes a Long Way
Rabbi Eliyahu Hoffmann - 5766

Dreams etc.
Rabbi Yisroel Ciner - 5760

Behind the Gray Blur
Rabbi Naftali Reich - 5768

ArtScroll

Royalty and Redemption
Rabbi Aron Tendler - 5762

Light From Darkness, Take Two
Rabbi Pinchas Winston - 5766

Enlightening the Present From the Past
Rabbi Yehudah Prero - 5766

Looking for a Chavrusah?

To Fergin Or Forget
Rabbi Yochanan Zweig - 5771

Vengeance vs. Conciliations
Rabbi Berel Wein - 5765

The Triumph of Quality Over Quantity
Rabbi Yehudah Prero - 5756

Frumster - Orthodox Jewish Dating

Tightening the Hellenistic Screws: A History of Chanukah, Part I
Rabbi Naphtali Hoff - 5774

Yehuda, Yosef and Chanukah
Shlomo Katz - 5763

Chanukah and Mechiras Yosef: The Hidden Connection
Shlomo Katz - 5764

The Ideal Answer, or the Answer of Ideals
Rabbi Dovid Green - 5759



Project Genesis

Torah.org Home


Torah Portion

Jewish Law

Ethics

Texts

Learn the Basics

Seasons

Features

TORAHAUDIO

Ask The Rabbi

Knowledge Base




Help

About Us

Contact Us



Free Book on Geulah!




Torah.org Home
Torah.org HomeCapalon.com Copyright Information