Parshas Vayeira
1. It is stated in the Gemara: “There are three signs by which this nation is recognized: they are merciful, bashful, and doers of kindness. Merciful—as it is written, ‘And He will give you mercy, and have mercy on you, and multiply you.’ Bashful—as it is written, ‘So that His fear shall be upon your faces’ [as it says in Nedarim: ‘So that His fear shall be upon your faces’—this refers to bashfulness, etc., for the fear that is visible on the face is bashfulness]. Doers of kindness—as it is written, ‘So that he will command his children and his household after him, etc.’ Anyone who possesses these three signs is fit to attach himself to this nation.” And so it is ruled in halachah by the Rambam regarding families of proper lineage (as will be discussed below in section 2).
This teaching is also brought in the Jerusalem Talmud, but there (and likewise in several Midrashim), the sign of “doers of kindness” is not derived from the verse (about Avraham) “so that he will command his children and his household, etc.,” but rather from what is written, “And the L‑rd your G‑d will keep for you the covenant and the kindness.”
One can say that this difference is connected to another distinction between the derivation in the Bavli and that in the Yerushalmi: In the Bavli it says, “There are three signs in this nation,” but in the Yerushalmi (and similarly in several of the Midrashim mentioned above), the wording is “Three good gifts the Holy One, blessed be He, gave to Israel.”
According to the Bavli, the main emphasis is that these traits are “signs” of the essential character of the members of “this nation.” Therefore, it brings proof from what is said about Avraham (“so that he will command, etc.”), for Avraham (in his own right) was a doer of kindness and likewise commanded his household after him. From this it is evident that Avraham was a man of kindness by the very nature of his soul, and consequently, that kindness is a sign of the essential nature of the souls of the members of this nation.
Whereas in the Yerushalmi, the precision is that these traits are “good gifts that the Holy One, blessed be He, gave to Israel.” Thus, the discussion is not about the trait of kindness that is inherent in the soul of Avraham (and his descendants after him) by its own nature, but rather about a kind of kindness that is a special gift from G‑d to Israel. Therefore, it brings the verse “And the L‑rd your G‑d will keep for you the covenant and the kindness.”
This requires explanation:
a) What is the substance of the difference between the Bavli and the Yerushalmi—whether the discussion is about the natural trait of kindness of Avraham, or about the trait of kindness given as a gift from above? What practical difference does it make?
b) Regarding mercy and bashfulness, even in the Bavli verses are brought that indicate these are gifts from G‑d to Israel: for mercy—“And He will give you mercy,” and likewise for bashfulness—“So that His fear shall be upon your faces,” which refers to the giving of the Torah, for the sounds and the lightning at the giving of the Torah caused “that His fear shall be upon your faces, etc.”
Now, regarding bashfulness, this is understandable, based on what is explained in the Maharsha, that the nature of bashfulness was indeed established in the souls of the Jewish people only through the giving of the Torah, for the Jewish people by themselves are, on the contrary, “the most brazen of the nations” [which is why the Sages were precise in saying, “Whoever does not have bashfulness on his face, it is known that his ancestors did not stand at Mount Sinai”]:
But regarding mercy, this is the natural character of the souls of this nation, inherited from Avraham our father, as is explicitly stated by our Sages: “Anyone who is merciful toward creatures, it is known that he is a descendant of Avraham our father.” The simple reason it says “descendant of Avraham our father” is because Avraham was merciful by nature, as the Maharsha explains: “He used the phrase ‘descendant of Avraham’… for with Avraham the trait of charity is explicit: ‘For I have known him, so that he will command his children, etc.’” Yet the Bavli brings the verse “And He will give you mercy, etc.” (which implies that the trait of mercy is a gift from above).
2. Furthermore, we find another difference between the Bavli and the Yerushalmi:
In the Bavli, it concludes: “Anyone who possesses these three signs is fit to attach himself to this nation.” In contrast, the Yerushalmi concludes: “But these [the Gibeonites] did not have even one of them; immediately he distanced them,” meaning that in the Yerushalmi it is explicit that the Gibeonites did not possess even one of these three signs.
Accordingly, it would seem there is a practical difference in halachah between the Bavli and the Yerushalmi: According to the Yerushalmi, a person is only distanced if he lacks all three of these traits (but if he is missing only one [or two] of them, he is not distanced); whereas the plain wording of the Bavli, “Anyone who possesses these three signs is fit to attach himself to this nation,” implies that a person must possess all three signs.
However, it is possible to say that this is not necessarily so, because:
a) The version in Ein Yaakov reads: “Anyone who possesses… is fit, etc. If he does not have these three signs, he is not fit to attach himself to them”—which can be interpreted (like the Yerushalmi) to mean that only if he lacks all three signs is he not fit to attach himself to them, and thus there is no need to increase the disagreement between the Bavli and the Yerushalmi, as is well known regarding such cases.
b) The Rambam writes: “The signs of Israel, the holy nation, are that they are bashful, merciful, and perform acts of kindness. And regarding the Gibeonites it says, ‘And the Gibeonites were not of the children of Israel,’ because they brazened their faces… and did not have mercy on the children of Shaul, nor did they bestow kindness upon Israel, etc.” Thus, the Rambam is precise (like the Yerushalmi) that the Gibeonites did not possess “even one of them,” which implies that one is not distanced unless he lacks all three of these traits.
[And in the Rambam’s own words—according to accurate manuscripts: “Anyone who possesses brazenness and cruelty (not “or cruelty,” as in the common editions of the Rambam) and hates people and does not bestow kindness upon them, we are especially concerned that perhaps he is a Gibeonite” (and this is also the version of the Tur and Shulchan Aruch)—for we are only concerned if he does not possess even one of the three traits],
If so, if we were to say that this is a dispute between the Bavli and the Yerushalmi—why did the Rambam rule like the Yerushalmi against the Bavli (especially since he uses the Bavli’s language, “the signs of Israel”)?
Therefore, it is reasonable to say that the Bavli also holds that the reason David distanced the Gibeonites is because “they did not possess (even) one of them.” According to this, the question remains: Why do we not find this emphasis explicitly in the Bavli, but only in the Yerushalmi?
It is also noteworthy in the Rambam’s wording above—“the signs of Israel… bashful, merciful, etc.”—that he changes the order of the traits from that in the Talmud (both Bavli and Yerushalmi), placing “bashful” before “merciful.” And even though we do find such a version in one place in the Midrash, it is puzzling: why did the Rambam not use the common version found in the Talmud (and Midrashim)?
3. The explanation of all this may be as follows:
The essential difference between the Bavli and the Yerushalmi is: In the Bavli, it is precise in saying, “Three signs are in this nation” (and not “three traits,” or the like), meaning that the discussion is not about the virtues of these traits in and of themselves, but rather that they serve as “signs” (for something else); and since all of them are a sign for one thing, it is understood from this that all three traits stem from a single specific quality. In contrast, the Yerushalmi says, “Three good gifts the Holy One, blessed be He, gave to Israel,” meaning that it is speaking about these three traits as they are in themselves, and thus it is possible that each is a virtue on its own (for if not, it would be just one, only divided into three gifts).
It can be said that this is also a difference in the way these three traits are practiced, for they can be in two ways (as is plainly observed):
a) In the usual manner, the three traits are dependent on one another, such that one trait brings about the next as a natural consequence—for example, someone who is bashful and soft-hearted is also merciful, and because of his trait of mercy, he performs acts of kindness for those in need.
b) Sometimes, these three traits are not dependent on each other; one may perform acts of kindness for another simply because he wishes to do good for him, and not because he has mercy on him (and similarly for the others)—for, after all, bashfulness, mercy, and kindness are three distinct traits, and therefore it is possible for one to exist without the others.
This is the difference between the Bavli and the Yerushalmi: The Yerushalmi emphasizes that each of the three traits is a virtue (and a gift) in its own right, because it is speaking about the essence of the traits, each distinct from the other; whereas in the Bavli, they are “three signs” of a single quality, so that the traits (generally) all come together, in a cause-and-effect relationship with one another.
4. It can be said that this is the reason why the Bavli brings the verse “For I have known him, so that he will command…” (regarding Avraham) only in connection with performing acts of kindness, and not regarding being merciful:
The relationship of “those who perform acts of kindness” to the traits of mercy and bashfulness (when they come together in a cause-and-effect manner) is such that performing acts of kindness is the result of mercy and bashfulness. That is: the intent of “those who perform acts of kindness” is not the feeling of kindness in the heart, but rather the actual deed of kindness that one does for another (as is the straightforward meaning of “those who perform acts of kindness”). The reason for doing kindness is the feeling of mercy in the heart and the nature of bashfulness in the soul (as will be explained at length below in section 5). Therefore, the verse “For I have known him, so that he will command his children and his household…” is brought only in connection with “those who perform acts of kindness” (which refers to the act of kindness, as above), and not regarding mercy and bashfulness (which are feelings of the heart and traits of the soul), because, simply, Avraham’s command to his household after him was that they should behave with kindness and mercy, etc. (and not regarding the feeling in the heart and the nature of the soul, concerning which a command is not applicable).
[This also explains why the Yerushalmi does not bring the verse “so that he will command…” as proof for “those who perform acts of kindness,” because in the Yerushalmi, the intent of “those who perform acts of kindness” is the trait of kindness in the heart. The fact that every Jew has a feeling of kindness in his heart is not due to Avraham’s command to his children and household after him, but rather because G‑d implanted this in the heart of every Jew, as it says, “And the L‑rd your G‑d will keep for you the covenant and the kindness.”]
And based on the above distinction between the Bavli and the Yerushalmi, we can also understand why it is specifically in the Yerushalmi that it is necessary to specify that the Gibeonites “do not possess even one” of these traits, whereas in the Bavli this emphasis is absent:
Even according to the Bavli, the Gibeonites did not possess even “one of them.” However, since the Bavli is precise in calling them “three signs,” meaning, as above, that they are all the result of a single point [and the difference between the three signs is only in their “place” within the person’s soul: performing acts of kindness is in action; mercy is a feeling of the heart; and bashfulness is a trait of the soul], it is self-understood that they are a single entity that cannot be separated from one another. When this point (this quality) exists, then all three “signs”—the traits (in all parts of the soul)—will naturally follow; and if it is lacking, the opposite will occur: the brazenness within him will give rise to a feeling of cruelty in the heart, which will cause hatred of others and a lack of acts of kindness. Therefore, there is no need to emphasize that the Gibeonites “do not possess (even) one of them,” because they are all a single entity.
By contrast, in the Yerushalmi, which speaks of these traits as each (a virtue and) a gift in its own right, it is necessary to specify that the Gibeonites did not possess even one of the three traits, because it is possible for one to be found without the other two.
5. Based on all the above, it can be said that this is the intent of the Rambam in changing the order of the traits and placing bashfulness before mercy—to emphasize that here (in the “signs of Israel”) we are speaking of the three traits as they come in a cause-and-effect relationship with one another. In that case, their order is: bashful, merciful, and those who perform acts of kindness. As explained above, “those who perform acts of kindness” refers to the act of kindness, whose cause is the feeling of mercy in the heart, and what causes the heart to be aroused with mercy for another is the very nature of softness in the soul—bashfulness.
It can be said that this order is also relevant to the essential content of these “signs”: When are these three traits signs of Israel? Only when performing acts of kindness is the result of mercy, and mercy is the result of bashfulness:
It is possible for acts of kindness to be done (not out of mercy and bashfulness, but the opposite) out of self-importance and arrogance, like the kindness of Yishmael, and as our Sages say, “All charity and kindness that the nations of the world do is only to make themselves great and to boast about it.” Similarly, there can be mercy that comes specifically from arrogance: since a person considers himself great and exalted above the people, he sees the other as a lowly person upon whom to have mercy.
And this is what the Rambam is teaching us: that the signs of “the holy nation” depend on this—that the cause of kindness is mercy, and the source of mercy is the nature of bashfulness and softness in the person.
On a deeper level, it can be said: As explained above, these three traits are “signs” of a single point—the essential core of a Jew, and this point is the concept of bittul (self-nullification), that he is not an independent existence for himself, but his entire being is to serve his Creator, as Avraham Avinu said, “And I am dust and ashes.”
This is why the Rambam places the trait of bashfulness before mercy and kindness—because the feeling of bashfulness (which indicates a nature of softness and the negation of brazenness, etc.) expresses the point of bittul in a revealed way. Therefore, this is the first and primary sign of Israel, and the completeness of the sign is when the point of bittul permeates his entire being, to the extent that even his mercy and kindness are not due to arrogance, but only due to bittul—“And I am dust and ashes.”
6. However, according to this, a difficulty arises in the opposite direction—why does the Gemara list “merciful” before “bashful”?
Simply, it can be said that the main fault of the Gibeonites, for which King David distanced them, was their cruelty—they were not merciful, and they killed the sons of Shaul.
But another reason can be given (in the manner of moral instruction): Through this, the Gemara negates a feeling of arrogance that could arise as a result of (genuine) mercy. When a person is aroused with a true feeling of mercy for another (to the point that he acts kindly toward him)—then, through contemplating the other’s situation, he may come to a sense of self-importance, since through this contemplation he sees and recognizes the other’s lowly state. Therefore, specifically after mercy, one must arouse within oneself a feeling of bashfulness and bittul.
On a deeper level, it can be said—there is a “bashfulness” that is itself a result and comes as a consequence of mercy itself. This is based on what is explained in the Midrash, that the reason G‑d created poor people in the world is because “Kindness and truth will preserve him”—“if everyone were wealthy… who would be able to perform kindness?” Thus, the fact that the other is in a state that requires mercy is only in order to give the wealthy person the merit to fulfill the mitzvah of charity. In this way, it turns out that he himself is the cause that his fellow finds himself in a state of pain and distress! When one contemplates this well, he is immediately aroused with a true sense of bashfulness—for in order to give him the merit of the mitzvah of kindness, his fellow is made to suffer, to be in a situation that requires mercy upon him!…
I heard from my father-in-law, the Rebbe, that when he was on the ship returning from his visit to the Holy Land (in the year 5689/1929), and the news reached him about the riots that had then occurred in Chevron, G‑d spare us, he fell ill from the tremendous pain, etc. On the ship with him was a G‑d-fearing doctor who treated him with medicines, etc., until he recovered. After some time, the doctor entered to see my father-in-law, the Rebbe, to request a tikkun (rectification), and when my father-in-law asked him for what and why, he replied: It is clear that the Rebbe, being the leader of Israel whom many depend on, must be healthy. If I had not been on the ship together with the Rebbe, and there would have been no natural way to heal him, the Rebbe would not have fallen ill in the first place. It turns out that the very fact that I was on the ship caused the Rebbe to suffer for a period of time, and for this (he concluded) I have come to request a tikkun…
This is the order of “merciful” and then “bashful”—that when a Jew possesses bittul, the mercy itself gives rise within him to a feeling of true bashfulness and self-nullification.
(From a talk of Shabbos Parshas Vayakhel-Pekudei, 5747)
Key Lesson
The three signs of the Jewish people — bashfulness, mercy and kindness — are not three separate virtues but expressions of one inner point: bittul, the sense that one does not exist for oneself but to serve G‑d. Real kindness flows from mercy, and real mercy flows from humility, not from a feeling of standing above the one being helped. And when we do help another, the right response is not pride but bashfulness: perhaps the other's distress exists only to give us the merit of the mitzvah, as the doctor on the Rebbe's ship felt.