????? ???? ????

Home Forums Decaffeinated Coffee ????? ???? ????

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 15 total)
  • Author
  • #612428
    holy brother

    Question: Assuming Reuven would want to be treated in a specific form, Shimon feels that this form is not good for Reuven, does the torah want Shimon to treat Reuven in the form Reuven wants, or the form Shimon feels is right?

    In other words for example, Shimon disagrees with what Reuven feels is good for him, If Shimon was Reuven he would not want to be treated in that form, so by treating Reuven the way he (Shimon) feels is good for him, he is treating him the way he would treat himself.

    Common sense would dictate that this would not work; we all know that every individual has his own needs etc. therefore the simple meaning of “????” should mean the same as Reuven would want.

    If Shimon feels that what Reuven wants is not good for him, assuming that Shimon has a right for his own opinion, this does not give him a right to treat Shimon accordingly, rather he should refrain from helping Reuven, he should be open with Reuven saying that although he loves him he disagrees with his choice and therefore cannot help.

    Thank you

    Avram in MD

    holy brother,

    Assuming Reuven would want to be treated in a specific form, Shimon feels that this form is not good for Reuven, does the torah want Shimon to treat Reuven in the form Reuven wants, or the form Shimon feels is right?

    I do not think that ????? ???? ???? means that Reuven should do something for Shimon that he feels is not good just because Shimon wants it. Saying no to someone does not contradict the idea of loving them. The no should be respectful, just as you would want to be treated when someone says no to you.

    holy brother

    Avram: Thank you for your reply! I don’t understand your answer, what you replied was the basis for the question, if what reuven want’s is clearly not good, then your right.

    The question was in general what is the intention of “kumocha” the way the person in need understands it, or the way we understand it.

    Are you saying that generally speaking shimon should only love with his understanding? Hard to beleive.


    I think it just means you should treat others the way that you yourself would want to be treated- not with specific things, just in general. Like if you wouldn’t want to be talked about behind your back then don’t talk about others behind your back or if you would want someone to cheer you up when you’re in a bad mood then when you see someone else in a bad mood, cheer them up instead of ignoring them. I don’t think it means that if you like licorice then you should by your friend licorice even though he HATES licorice just cause you want it.

    it’s just saying a general rule of treating others with kindness and respect the same way that you want kindness and respect.

    Shopping613 🌠

    I think the best example of this is the famous story of the heretic and Hillel, the heretic goes to the sage and says teach me the entire Torah while standing on one foot so Hillel stands on one foot and says that which is hateful to you do not do to someone else.


    R’ Yisrael Salanter says clearly that you give someone what they want, despite it not being in their best interest spiritually, I believe his example is kavod. Others disagreed.

    I always pose the OP’s question with the following example: You’re driving, and see someone, whose health requires exercise, walking. You know they’d want a ride. Do you offer ?


    The problem we now have is that Reuven pulled out a knife and stabbed Shimon in the back, and announced that the world would be a better place with people like Shimon in it. This complicates life greatly.


    I dont remember the entire Ramban offhand, (perhaps some seminary graduate here can cite it verbatim – now that I think about it, it might not be th Ramban either), but he focuses on the word “Lireacha”and the fact that it doesnt simply say Viahavta Es Reacha kamocha. The “li” implies someting active on your part. Do things for him, that you would do for yourself and dont do things to him that you wont want done to yourself. In your scenario it seems that reuven is just an egotistical maniac and is abusing the passuk to suit his needs. If you think about the next person and their needs you will do what suits them, not what you know works for you and therefore decide works for them.

    holy brother

    Logician and Akurperma seem to have understood question! Can someone please provide a source for whats quoted above in the name of R yisroel s.?

    My point is obvious, happy to see someone is aware of the depth. Question is how to properly address this question?

    Dr. Nat

    Let’s pose the question like this:

    You love your teenage son. He wants something that he thinks is good for him, but you, with your wisdom acquired through twenty more years of life experience feel that this is the worst thing for him. Do you get it for him, or do you say, “I know what is best for you and I love you, and I believe that this is the worst thing for you, therefore I will not get it for you.” And if your answer is the latter, is a friend, whom one is required to love, different from a son? We are going with the assumption that we are dealing with someone who truly knows what is best for his friend, and not some phony friend whose judgment is clouded by negiyos.


    1. EVERYONE has negiyos

    2. That doesn’t absolve you of doing your best

    3. Your responsibility for your child is different than that of a friend.

    R’ Yisroel sort of says it towards the beginning of Michtav 30.

    Rav Kook quotes him as saying such, and disagrees, don’t remember exact source.

    holy brother

    Logician: I searched through michtav 30, and I’m not sure what your referring too?

    “R’ Yisrael Salanter says clearly that you give someone what they want”

    where does he write this?

    If you mean the concept of doing the opposite for your friend, this would establish an important concept, but I don’t think this would answer the question, even if shimon were to understand that his “avodas hamidos” should be practiced on himself, this does not define “kumocha”.


    Yes, as I said he doesn’t speak it out clearly, but its implied. You run away from kavod yourself, because you know its spiritually destructive, yet you give kavod to your friend. So that places a certain limit on kumocho as far as whats ‘good for him’.

    Its a very intriguing question.

    holy brother

    Logician, I hear what your saying, Thank you!

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 15 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.