Introduction: When Man Rules Over Man
In this chapter, King Solomon continues to observe what takes place under the sun, arriving at one of the harshest phenomena in human life: one person dominating another. We are focusing here on verse 9, which serves as a kind of summary of everything we have seen earlier - that no man has mastery over the wind to restrain the wind, that no one knows what will be - and from all of this emerges the conclusion regarding man's dominion over man.
אֶת־כָּל־זֶה רָאִיתִי וְנָתוֹן אֶת־לִבִּי לְכָל־מַעֲשֶׂה אֲשֶׁר נַעֲשָׂה תַּחַת הַשָּׁמֶשׁ, עֵת אֲשֶׁר שָׁלַט הָאָדָם בְּאָדָם לְרַע לוֹ. - All this I have seen, and applied my heart to every deed that is done under the sun: a time when man rules over man to his hurt.
Two Interpretations of "To His Hurt"
The Midrash states: "'A time when man rules over man to his hurt' - there is a time when it is to the hurt of the ruler, and a time when it is to the hurt of the ruled." There are cases where the dominion itself is harmful to the ruler. He imagines that he is riding high, in complete control, lording over the other; yet sometimes it would have been far better for him had he not ruled over him at all, because all of this will bring him nothing but trouble.
Let us take an example from modern reality. After the Six-Day War, there was tremendous euphoria. People felt that the Jewish people reigned supreme; Israelis were received with awe all over the world, and there was a perception of an invincible army. Soldiers drove around Gaza in open jeeps, and IDF troops were universally feared. The territories were in our hands, and people already thought the final redemption was arriving, the complete Land of Israel. And what became clear? "To his hurt." How much blood has been spilled since then until today because of those very territories! At a certain point, with deep heartache and anguish, we were forced to uproot everything we had built there, and to this day we continue to bleed because of agreements we were compelled to make. Wouldn't it have been better to return it to Egypt, return it to Jordan, and say: "Take it, we do not need this hot potato, you deal with it"? But the feeling was that we were in control. Man ruled over man - to his own hurt. It only caused harm, bringing upon you far greater trouble.
It can also be interpreted in the other direction: "to his hurt" - referring to the ruled. A person is subjugated by another, and it is terrible for the one who is subjugated, when the ruler is a tyrant, violent, and dangerous.
Who Is Held Accountable for the Damage
The Midrash states in the name of Rabbi Elazar: No one is held liable for harming a person except a fellow human being like him. That is to say, for what is punishment meted out in this world? For one who harms a human being. From whom does Heaven exact retribution? From the person who harms his fellow. Rabbi Natan adds: Even a wolf and a dog are held liable - Heaven exacts retribution from them as well when they harm a person. There is Heavenly judgment even upon a wolf and a dog. Rabbi Huna ben Guryon said: Even a stick, even a strap is held liable. Retribution is exacted even from the stick or strap used to strike a person. This is what is written: "For the yoke of his burden, and the staff of his shoulder, the rod of his oppressor, You have broken as in the day of Midian" - "as in the day of Midian" means as in the Day of Judgment. The yoke, the staff, and the rod used to strike will all be broken and destroyed. Heaven exacts retribution from the striking rod, from the biting dog, and certainly from the person who harms his fellow; retribution is exacted from all of these on the Day of Judgment. Therefore Solomon says: "when man rules over man" - know that it is to his hurt, to the hurt of the ruler, for Heaven will exact retribution from him on the Day of Judgment for having dominated another.
Why Retribution Is Exacted from a Stick and a Dog
Of course, this is not to be understood as an actual punishment of the stick. Did the stick exercise free choice? The one who chose was the person holding it. And did the dog or the wolf make a moral choice? Why would retribution be exacted from them, and what is the meaning of their coming to the Day of Judgment? Rather, the explanation is as Rav Dessler taught, and as discussed on several occasions regarding Michtav Me-Eliyahu: many of the things to which Chazal attribute personification, or when they speak of judgment executed upon angels or inanimate objects from which retribution is exacted, are not for the sake of that creation itself, but for the sake of our message, for the moral lesson we must derive from it.
This is also like what is written regarding Moshe Rabbeinu not showing ingratitude toward the dust and the Nile. Did the Nile do him a favor that required gratitude? No. Rather, so that a positive trait of gratitude (hakarat hatov) would develop within a person, one is told: if you benefited from something, do not harm it. Everything comes to teach man. So too with the retribution mentioned here: to show that Heavenly judgment applies to everything. They are not telling you that the stick is wicked and therefore struck and burned, but rather the message of the matter is to demonstrate how Heavenly judgment extends to all things, and from this a person will learn fear of Heaven.
The Fate of the Ruler
The Pesikta Zutreta explains: "All this I have seen" - everything we saw above, that no man has mastery over the wind to restrain the wind, and everything mentioned earlier. "And applied my heart to every deed" - I applied my heart to every deed of mankind, and I see a time when a man rules over his fellow and overpowers him, and in the end it turns out to his own detriment.
Rashi brings examples: Amalek overpowered Israel - and his ultimate end is destruction. Haman overpowered Israel, received the signet ring, and decreed to destroy, kill, and annihilate - and his end was destruction. So too Pharaoh, Nebuchadnezzar, Sennacherib. When man rules over man - know that it is to his own harm.
The Imrei Shefer: The Parable of the Quarreling Children
The Imrei Shefer explains: "All this I have seen, and applied my heart" - all these things strengthen a person's heart to cling to the service of Hashem. What did I see? That for every matter there is a time and a judgment, that man does not know what will be, that no man has mastery over the wind - everything we have seen until now. All these I saw, and I applied my heart to realize that they pertain to every deed done under the sun: everything that happens to a person here, the hardships he suffers, the questions he has about the Creator of the world. I saw all of this - and through it, I found relief. I realized that everything is from the hand of Hashem, no man has mastery over the wind, and whatever is decreed and allotted - a person receives everything according to the Supreme Will. If so, why be distressed and anxious? You cannot delay your death by even a single moment, and whatever has been decreed will surely come to pass.
Even more beneficial to me was: "a time when man rules over man to his own detriment." When you see an oppressed and robbed person crying out: Where is the justice of Heaven? How does the Holy One, blessed is He, allow them to dominate me like this and do this to me? - Shlomo says: These matters appeared in my eyes like two small children fighting over their toys. One gets up and snatches the toy from his friend, and the other comes running with terrible shrieks, until you are certain that at least someone died. What happened? "He took it from me, he took it from me!" And the adult sees all these screams over a toy and dismisses it - he laughs at all his crying and scorns them in his heart, for both of them are engrossed in futility: what nonsense are you fighting over?
So it is in my eyes as well, says Shlomo: both the oppressor and the oppressed are engrossed in vanity. Why? Because neither pays attention to their ultimate end. If the oppressor were to pay attention to his end, he would understand: you oppressed and thought you profited - but in truth, it is to his own harm. And if the oppressed were to pay attention to his end, he would understand, as we saw earlier, that often, while you may weep today - tomorrow you will rejoice. Therefore, a person who contemplates this will not weep or grieve over what happens to him, nor will he rejoice excessively over the good things he has, for you do not know what a day will bring forth. Consequently, his life is more peaceful and serene: he knows that he is in the hands of Hashem, and he is neither distressed nor pressured, neither hurting nor grieving.
Sarah in the House of Pharaoh: The Sparks That Were Taken
In the teachings of Moharan (Rebbe Nachman of Breslov), it is brought that the verse speaks of Sarah being taken to the house of Pharaoh. Who ruled over man? Pharaoh ruled over Sarah, forcibly seized her, and took her to his palace. "To his own detriment" - in the plain understanding, as Rashi explains: he was struck with plagues, and that was to his detriment. But in truth, he explains differently. Does Pharaoh have free will to harm someone against whom it was not decreed? And why was Sarah truly taken there?
The words of the Ramban are well known: the deeds of the fathers are a sign for the children. Just as Sarah went down to the house of Pharaoh, the path was paved for her children to come to the house of Pharaoh as well; and just as Sarah left there through severe and enduring plagues, so Israel left while Pharaoh was struck with plagues; and just as Pharaoh gave her gifts, so later on, "and let every man ask of his neighbor, and every woman of her neighbor."
Yet beyond this, according to the mystical dimension: when a tzaddik arrives at a certain place - it is in order to rectify. There were sparks of holiness in Pharaoh's house that needed to be extracted. If so, was it good for Pharaoh or bad for him? Until now there were sparks of holiness there; you took Sarah to yourself - she gathered the sparks of holiness, and you remained empty. This is "to his own detriment."
Lavan and Yaakov
This is also how this was explained regarding Lavan, as presented in Mishnat HaGilgulim. The verse states, "And behold, the face of Lavan was not toward him as yesterday and the day before." The Kabbalists explain: As long as Lavan possessed some sparks of holiness, he had a connection to Yaakov, and by virtue of that connection he was still somehow able to get along with him. But the moment Yaakov took all the sparks of holiness from him, including those that were in Lavan's flock - those souls that were later reincarnated in Egypt and became the Children of Israel in Egypt - then "his face was not as yesterday and the day before": the radiance of his face changed, because even the last sparks of holiness within him were stripped away. Suddenly he could no longer stand Yaakov, pursued him, and was even ready to kill him. Why? Because there was no longer any connection to him.
And this is what the sons of Lavan meant when they said: "Yaakov has taken all that was our father's" - perhaps they did not understand what they were saying themselves, but this was the deeper meaning. "All that was our father's" refers to the sparks of holiness: the two fine offshoots (and in truth four, together with the maidservants - Sarah, Rivkah, Rachel, and Leah were noble offshoots and holy sparks in his house), the sparks of holiness in Lavan's flock, and the sparks of holiness in Lavan himself; he took everything from our father. Then Lavan could no longer tolerate Yaakov. This is "man rules over man": you ruled over him, you changed his wages ten times - "to his own hurt," for you were left stripped of everything.
And They Despoiled Egypt
The same occurred with Pharaoh: "And they despoiled Egypt," which the Targum renders as "and they emptied out the Egyptians." This, too, is discussed in another essay in Mishnat HaGilgulim: they essentially drained Egypt of its sparks of holiness. This is why it is forbidden to return to Egypt - because there is nothing left for a Jew to do there. When a Jew enters exile, as the Ohr HaChaim HaKadosh explains, he comes to gather sparks of holiness; and Egypt was already completely depleted, leaving not a single holy spark behind. This is also the deeper meaning of the "great wealth" with which they departed: internally, this does not refer merely to silver and gold, but to the great wealth of holy sparks they extracted from Egypt, which is called "the nakedness of the land," where the place needed to be rectified.
Dinah and Shechem
Based on this, a wondrous teaching of the Kabbalists is cited in Mishnat HaGilgulim: Dinah was a reincarnation of Amatlai bat Karnevo, the wife of Terach. In that previous incarnation, it is related that Terach cohabited with Amatlai while she was in a state of niddah. The holy books write that in those times even the gentiles were scrupulous about this, and there it occurred during her actual state of niddah - it is a wonder how she conceived, but evidently it was supernatural. Because of that incident, Amatlai was reincarnated as Dinah, and she was now violated by Shechem ben Chamor - a gentile who was entirely unconcerned with matters of ritual immersion. Thus she was reincarnated into his hands because of that blemish of niddah she carried.
What was the purpose of this? Regarding one who cohabits with a niddah, Scripture states, "and her impurity shall be upon him" - the impurity of niddah transfers onto him. Thus Shechem ben Chamor took the impurity from her, absorbing from Dinah the impurity that had remained from Amatlai bat Karnevo, leaving her pure and rectified. This is also reflected in her name: Dinah shares the Hebrew letters of niddah, as this was essentially her rectification. This is based on the holy Ari in Likkutei Torah (Sha'ar HaPesukim on Iyov), and also in Sefer HaGilgulim, chapter 50. It turns out, therefore, that he actually did her a great favor by purifying her.
The author of Lev Aryeh explains: In light of this, one can understand the verse, "And the sons of Yaakov answered Shechem and Chamor his father with deceit, and spoke because he had defiled their sister Dinah." See how wondrous this is: the very claim they made - "because he had defiled their sister Dinah" - was itself the "deceit," for in truth he had not defiled her but purified her, drawing the impurity out of her. The deceit lay in making a great outcry as though he had brought harm upon their sister, whereas according to the mystery of reincarnation, it was for her benefit. This exemplifies "man rules over man to his own hurt" - to the detriment of the ruler, since through this all his sparks of holiness were stripped from him.
Sha'ar HaSimchah: The Body Ruling over the Soul
In the book Sha'ar HaSimchah, an explanation is offered: Scripture states, "You are called Adam (man)," upon which the Sages remark: "You are called Adam, but the nations of the world are not called Adam." Rabbeinu Tam explains, as cited in Tosafot, that when Scripture uses the term "HaAdam" (the man) with the definite article heh, it includes the nations of the world as well. Following this distinction between "Adam" and "HaAdam" - Jew and gentile - a parallel distinction can be drawn: "Adam" represents the soul, while "HaAdam" represents the body. The soul is invisible, whereas "HaAdam" is visible, the tangible aspect one can point to - the physical body.
This, then, is the meaning of the verse: "Wherein man rules" - the body - "over man" - the soul - "to his own hurt." This is profoundly damaging. When the body rules over the soul, when a person is driven by lust and drawn after physical desires while the soul fails to govern the body, it brings only harm, dealing severe damage to his spiritual life.
Arvei Nachal: The Man of the Kelipah
The Arvei Nachal explains based on the holy Ari: The "man of the kelipah" (the impure shell) dominates the "man of holiness," not allowing the lofty soul to descend into an elevated setting - and this is the meaning of "man has power over man." There is an aspect known as a corrupt man, termed the "man of the kelipah," the Satan, the primeval serpent, among other names. When he sees that a great and holy soul is poised to descend into the world - as discussed several times at length - he does not permit such a soul to enter the world.
And what does the Holy One, blessed be He, do? As it were, He outwits him: He brings that soul down into an impure, flawed place. Then the Satan lets it be, reasoning that "from the wicked comes forth wickedness," and surely nothing good could emerge from there. This is why we see that all the greatest things emerge from the lowliest places: Mashiach ben David descends from the act of Lot's daughters; Avraham Avinu came from that incident discussed, where his mother, Amathlai bat Karnevo, was in a state of niddah. And so it is in many other examples. Why? So that a great soul could descend into the world.
In summary: "A time when man has power over man to his own hurt" - from every angle it becomes evident that control is no gain. It is "to his own hurt" for the ruler, who will be held to account on the Day of Judgment, and whose end is destruction, like Amalek and Haman; it is "to his own hurt" in a deeper sense, as the subjugated righteous person extracts all the sparks of holiness from the ruler and leaves him completely empty - like Pharaoh, Lavan, and Shechem ben Chamor. And it is "to his own hurt" within a person's inner self, when the body dominates the soul and drags it after physicality. On the other hand, contemplating all of this brings inner peace: everything is in the hands of Hashem, whatever is decreed will be, and the oppressor and the oppressed are merely like two children quarreling over a toy. One who pays attention to his ultimate end will neither weep over misfortunes nor rejoice excessively over worldly goods, and his life will be tranquil and serene, grounded in faith and the fear of Heaven.