Return To TorahWeb.org Homepage
The Gemarah (Berachos 7a) teaches: "Every statement uttered by HaKadosh Baruch Hu in a person's favor, even if formulated on a particular condition, will not be rescinded." In citing this Gemarah, the Rambam notes (Introduction to the Perush HaMishnayos) that it appears to contradict an earlier Gemarah in the very same Masechta. On 4a, the Gemarah relates that, despite Hashem's unqualified promise of protection to Yaakov Avinu, Yaakov Avinu nonetheless feared for his life, "shema yigrom hacheit" - lest a sin result in the revocation of the promise. The Rambam thus questions: if HaKadosh Baruch Hu will never rescind a favorable promise, why did Yaakov Avinu fear for his life?
The Rambam resolves this apparent contradiction by distinguishing between two types of divine promises. While HaKadosh Baruch Hu will never rescind a promise which He conveys to an individual through an intermediary prophet, promises which Hashem makes directly with an individual are indeed subject to reversal. Hence, because Yaakov Avinu received the promise directly from HaKadosh Baruch Hu, he justifiably feared the possibility that his misdeeds might result in revocation of the promise.
The Meshech Chochmah (Bereishis 18:13) utilizes the Rambam's distinction to explain HaKadosh Baruch Hu's apparent disapproval of Sarah Imeinu's laughter in last week's parsha. Although Avraham Avinu similarly laughed upon hearing the promise of Yitzchak's birth, Avraham Avinu received the promise directly from Hashem. Because any promise heard directly from HaKadosh Baruch Hu is subject to reversal, Avraham Avinu's apparent doubt of the promise's fulfillment was justifiable. Sarah Imeinu, however, heard Hashem's promise from Avraham Avinu, who held the status of a prophet. Because any positive promise conveyed through a prophet will never be rescinded, HaKadosh Baruch Hu reprimanded Sarah Imeinu for her doubt.
While the Rambam's distinction accounts for HaKadosh Baruch Hu's response to Sarah's laughter, the Chessed L'Avraham (Shemoneh Perakim ch. 7) notes that the Rambam's aforementioned distinction appears to contradict the Rambam's own comments in Shemoneh Perakim. In Shemoneh Perakim (ch. 7), the Rambam delineates the requisite qualities for receiving prophecy. The Rambam emphasizes that a prophet need not exhibit complete perfection of character, as Tanach relates the shortcomings of numerous prophets, including Shlomo HaMelech's many wives, Shmuel HaNavi's trepidation towards Shaul, and Yaakov Avinu's fear of meeting Esav. The Chessed L'Avraham questions the Rambam's inclusion of Yaakov Avinu's fear as a "shortcoming." If the Rambam maintains that the promise of HaKadosh Baruch Hu to Yaakov Avinu was subject to reversal (since it did not employ a prophetic intermediary), Yaakov Avinu's fear of Esav was certainly justified: "shema yigrom hacheit". If so, why would this realistic fear be considered a "shortcoming?"
R' Elchanan Wasserman (sefer Kovetz He'oros s'eef 5) explains the Rambam in light of the Vilna Gaon's understanding of the possuk: "byir'as Hashem mivatach oz u'l'vanav yihye machse - In the fear of Hashem is a powerful stronghold, and for his children it will be a shelter" (Mishlei 14:26). The Gaon explains that this possuk alludes to two different forms of belief in HaKadosh Baruch Hu. "Bitochon - trust" - refers to a person's faith that HaKadosh Baruch Hu will fulfill that which He promises. "Chisoyon - Taking refuge" - refers to a person's placing his trust in Hashem to provide even that which He has not promised. The Gaon adds that the notion of "chisoyon" accounts for the numerous comparisons between HaKadosh Baruch Hu and a rock ("tzur") throughout Tanach. Just as man knows that a rock will unconditionally provide shelter from rain and harmful elements, despite the fact that the rock never "promised" him to do so, man can place his complete trust in HaKadosh Baruch Hu to provide all of his needs, even those which have never been promised.
R' Elchanan employs the Gaon's explanation to resolve the apparent contradiction in the Rambam. From a pragmatic perspective, Yaakov Avinu's questioning was certainly understandable, as a promise made without a prophetic intermediary is subject to the limitation of "shema yigrom hacheit". Rather, the Rambam's apparent critique of Yaakov Avinu's actions relates to the trait of "chisoyon" which mandates unwavering trust in HaKadosh Baruch Hu's assistance, independent of any accompanying promises or guarantees. Even if a subsequent sin would entirely abrogate the original promise, Yaakov Avinu should have maintained "chisoyon" in HaKadosh Baruch Hu's continued protection in the absence of any promises. Therefore, explains R' Elchanan, the Rambam lists Yaakov Avinu's fear as a "shortcoming."
R' Elchanan's analysis underscores the paramount importance of maintaining not only "bitochon", but also "chisoyon" in the assistance of Hashem in all of our endeavors. May our unwavering "bitochon" and "chisoyon" in the salvation of HaKadosh Baruch Hu merit a speedy redemption in our time.