Pray (with, and) for Emotion.

It’s Shabbos morning.

We are singing Ashrey, the song written by King David three thousand years ago, a song that I read three times a day for the past twenty years.

The words roll out of my mouth as my eyes drift around the room. I look at an individual who just began coming to Shul. He is looking into his prayer book, I can see him saying each word with care, one at a tome, savoring its meaning and rhythm. I ask myself, can the words have the same meaning for me after saying them all these years?

I begin to listen closely to the words I am saying. By now we are reading the blessings that precede the Shmah. I read “enlighten our eyes in your Torah, cause our hearts to cleave to your commandments and unite our heart to love and fear your name”.

I begin to realize that a person’s basic emotional needs don’t change. I want to love and feel loved, I want to be understood and I want to be appreciated. These needs never change. I really don’t need a new emotion every day.

I spend most of my life trying to re-experience the same basic feelings. When I was fourteen I felt something while Davening, I’m not sure how to describe it perhaps a feeling of connectedness, I spent the next six years in search of that feeling. Every now and then teaching makes me really happy. When I walk into a class I don’t wish for anything other then to feel that same joy.

The night after my wife and newborn daughter came back home from the hospital, I was lying in bed with my hospital band still around my wrist, I took out my green pad attempting to write down what I was feeling at that moment. Unable to accurately describe what I was feeling I just wrote, Guess what, I wish I can always feel what I feel right now.

So, just because I took the time yesterday to ask Hashem for my emotional needs of love, understanding, connectedness, does not mean that I want them any less today. So, after praying three times a day for twenty years, I could go to Shul on Shabbos and ask for what I really need right now. I need my heart to feel pure “Purify our heart to serve you with truth”

Audacity

The Talmud analyses the following case: Shimon the owner of a fog tree is out of town. Reuben announces that he is going to harvest Shimon’s fig tree, because he has Shimon’s permission to do so. The question is whether or not the court should interfere and deny Reuben access to Shimon’s tree, and demand that Reuben prove his claim.

Rabbi Yehudah rules that the court should not interfere. He explains that there is a legal principle that assumes that “a person does not have the audacity” to publicly harvest someone else’s tree without permission. The court must therefore assume that Reuben is telling the truth.

The Gemara takes this legal principle a step further, applying the same reason to a far more complicated case.

In the second case, Shimon the owner of the fig tree comes back to town and sues Reuben for harvesting his fruit without permission. Reuben claims to have bought the rights to the fruit for a period of a few years and the term of the agreement is not yet over and he still has the right to collect the fruits in the future.

Rav Zvid rules that Shimon, the owner of the tree, could keep the fruit in the future, however, Reuben can keep the fruit that he has already harvested. Now, this is not a compromise. Rav Zvid’s reason is identical to the first case, we believe Reuben because “a person does not have the audacity” to harvest his friends tree without permission.

It seems that Rabbi Zvid is taking this legal principle to far. For in the second case Shimon, the owner, is challenging Reuben. One of them is lying, so how can we just assume “a person does not have the audacity” and Reuben is telling the truth?

The first case is very different, as the owner did not yet challenge Reuven. In the absence of a challenger we assume that “a man does not have the audacity” and Reuben is telling the truth.

Perhaps we can explain as follows:

There is a legal principle that “the burden of proof is upon the one (the plaintiff) who wishes to exact from his friend”. In other words in the lack of any other evidence the person in possession has the upper hand. How do we determine possession? Possession of movable property is determined by physical possession. The person known to own real property is considered to be in possession.

In our case there is no evidence, it’s Reuben’s word against Shimon’s. So we must examine who is in possession. At first glance it would seem that Shimon is in possession, after all he is the undisputed owner of the tree.

Rav Zvid’s novel idea is that Shimon would be considered the “possessor” of the fruits, if Reuben’s entrance to Shimon’s field was unauthorized and illegal. But now that we established that the court allowed Reuben to Harvest the tree for ““a man does not have the audacity”, the law’s assumption that Reuben is telling the truth is what makes Reuben the legitimate “possessor”. Therefore he has the upper hand in the absence of any evidence.

In summary: the legal principle that “a man does not have the audacity” is not what causes us to belive Reuben. It just allows Reuben to be the “possessor”, shifting the burden of proof to Shimon.

Tanya? In 2008?

The Alter Rebbe wrote a bestseller. He wrote it because too many people were flocking to his door for advice. They were asking about the most important aspect of their lives: the quest to serve Hashem.

They flocked to him, poured out their deepest frustration: the inner battle the good and the evil. Frustrated by their inability to attain self mastery. Unable to stop the flow of negative thoughts and desires threatening to destroy the pure and holy life they were working so hard to create.

So the Alter Rebbe wrote the Tanya to empower, inspire and comfort.

It would empower the individual to understand the nature of his soul(s). The Tanya would inspire the individual to become the best he can become (for most people that’s a Bey’nu’ney). It comforts the frustration of the continues battle, by finding meaning and significance in the struggle.

So, the Tanya became a bestseller, changing the lives of hundreds of thousands of people.

In the year 2008 people are looking for meaning. We don’t have the same struggles as the students of the Alter Rebbe. We aren’t looking to master every selfish impulse, in fact we very much enjoy the pleasures of this very physical world.

So, can the Tanya do anything for us? Does it speak our language?

I sit down with the Tanya. Thank G-d life is good. Once in a while I struggle with negativity that I wish I can rid myself of, but the struggle doesn’t threaten to throw me of balance. It certainly does not bother me enough to take off two months and travel in the freezing Russian winter to seek advice from the Alter Rebbe. I’m content.

I open the Tanya. I discover that at least fifty percent of my personality is suppressed. I have an unbelievable amount of energy that’s just sitting there. If I can express it I would be a transformed person. Smarter, more thoughtful, more caring, more sensitive and bursting energy and drive to do what I believe is good and just.

One minute, I say to myself. If all of this is true then why cant I feel it? Why do I need a book to tell me what’s going on inside of me? Something is wrong.

Yes, says the Tanya, something is wrong.

The G-dly soul – the other fifty percent of your personality – needs garments to express itself to others and even to yourself. The human being only has one brain and it’s been taken over by the bully – the animal soul. Loosen his grip on the mind and you will feel the G-dly soul in all it’s glory, with all its intensity, with its desire, it’s will, it’s intelligence, and it’s emotions. You will be shocked to discover all of this within yourself.

Oh, but you must be careful, the bully wants complete control. He will never concede the use of the garments to the G-dly soul. You are in for a long, intense and perhaps an un-winnable battle.

Frustrated? Good. Now you are on the same page as the Alter Rebbe’s Chasidim. Pick up the Tanya and get some advice.