We stopped in the middle of chapter 32 of Tanya, on page 41a, two lines before the bottom of the page, where the Alter Rebbe opens a new passage. Before we continue, let us briefly review the main points we have learned until now.
In the first part of the chapter we learned about the demand of ahavas Yisrael: when the Torah says "ואהבת לרעך כמוך," "you shall love your fellow as yourself," it means "כמוך ממש," literally as yourself, at the very highest level, the way a person loves his own self with the natural love he has for himself. And how can a person possibly arrive at such a love for someone else? The Alter Rebbe explains that it becomes possible when a Jew looks at his fellow from the perspective of the soul, when he makes the soul primary and the body secondary. For from the perspective of the soul, "אב אחד לכולנה," we all have one Father, and therefore we are all one single point, one and the same essence.
We also mentioned that the love for another Jew should not rest only on that lofty level of "one Father to us all," but also on the particular virtues that this specific Jew possesses, and in the words of the Tanya: "מי יודע גדולתן ומעלתן" - who knows their greatness and their virtues.
In the previous lesson we discussed the statement of Hillel the Elder, that "ואהבת לרעך כמוך" is "the entire Torah," and the two reasons for this:
The foundation and root of the whole Torah is to elevate the soul and make it dominant over the body. That is the purpose of the entire Torah and all its mitzvos, in every single mitzvah. And since ahavas Yisrael is possible only when one makes the soul dominant over the body, it is literally the key to the entire Torah.
The whole point of fulfilling mitzvos is to draw down a lofty divine light, and not only upon the one performing the mitzvah, but upon all of the House of Israel. And the rule is that a lofty divine light is drawn below only on condition that the lower realm is a fitting vessel for it, meaning that unity prevails. "ברכנו אבינו כולנו כאחד" - "Bless us, our Father, all of us as one": when is the blessing fulfilled? When "all of us" are "as one."
The Alter Rebbe's question:
"ומה שכתוב בגמרא שמי שרואה בחבירו שחטא מצוה לשנאותו וגם לומר לרבו שישנאהו" - "And as for what is written in the Gemara, that one who sees his fellow sinning is obligated to hate him, and even to tell his teacher so that he too should hate him." The Gemara states explicitly that there is a situation in which it is a mitzvah to hate a Jew, and moreover, even to report it to his teacher so that the teacher should hate him as well. Let us first see where the Gemara says this, and then understand how it fits with what we have learned, that every Jew must be loved at the very highest level.
The Gemara in Tractate Pesachim:
The Gemara is discussing the verse "כי תראה חמור שונאך רובץ תחת משאו" - "When you see the donkey of one who hates you crouching under its burden." The verse speaks of someone traveling on the road who sees the donkey of his enemy. The Gemara asks: who is this enemy? Who is this donkey's owner, about whom the Torah says that there is hatred between you? If we say he is a non-Jew, we have a tradition that the verse is speaking of a Jew. And if the verse is speaking of a Jew, this is astonishing: how can there be a Jew whom you hate? Yet the Torah does not pause to wonder about it at all; it simply goes on to discuss the law of the donkey. Hence the Gemara's question: "מי שרי למיסניה?" - is it permitted to hate him? Does the Torah not say "לא תשנא את אחיך בלבבך," "do not hate your brother in your heart"?
The Gemara answers: the case is one in which he saw him commit a matter of immorality. The Gemara then challenges: if witnesses testify about him in beis din that he transgressed the laws of the Torah and sins brazenly, then "כולי עלמא נמי סני ליה," everyone hates him, so why does the verse use language implying that this is a matter between the two of them alone? Rather, the case is that he alone saw it, there are no other witnesses, and he cannot testify by himself. About such a person Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak says: it is a mitzvah to hate him, as it says "יראת ה' שנאת רע," "fear of G-d is to hate evil."
Rav Acha the son of Rava further asked Rav Ashi: "מהו למימרא ליה לרביה דליסניה?" - should he go and tell their teacher (where they share a common teacher) that he saw him do such and such, thereby causing the teacher to hate him too? He answered: "אי ידע דמהימן לרביה כבי תרי - לימא ליה, ואי לא - לא לימא ליה" - if he knows that his teacher trusts him like two people, like two witnesses, let him tell him; and if not, let him not tell him.
Over this passage the Alter Rebbe cries out: we have learned that every Jew must be loved with a true love, since at their root "one Father to us all," and this is said of every single member of the seed of Israel, whoever he may be, and he is one with you. How then can the Gemara state so matter of factly that there is a situation in which it is permitted to hate? And not only permitted, for there are two expressions in the Gemara: Rav Shmuel bar Rav Yitzchak said in the name of Rav that it is permitted to hate him, and Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak said that it is a mitzvah to hate him. And more than that: that if he knows his teacher will believe him, he should go and tell him so that the teacher will hate him as well?
The Alter Rebbe's answer: two conditions
The Alter Rebbe answers: "היינו בחבירו בתורה ומצוות וכבר קיים בו מצוות הוכח תוכיח את עמיתך" - "this refers to one who is his companion in Torah and mitzvos, and he has already fulfilled with him the mitzvah of 'you shall surely rebuke your fellow.'" In other words, this is not a simple matter at all, and it is not said about anyone at all in whom he saw a matter of immorality, but only when two conditions are met:
"בחבירו בתורה ומצוות" - "his companion in Torah and mitzvos." This does not necessarily mean a friend in the ordinary social sense, but someone who observes Torah and mitzvos just as he does, who knows and is careful, a G-d fearing person and a Torah scholar: his companion in Torah and in mitzvos.
"וכבר קיים בו מצוות הוכח תוכיח את עמיתך" - "and he has already fulfilled with him the mitzvah of 'you shall surely rebuke your fellow.'" He has already rebuked him for his conduct, and even so the man does not stop his negative behavior. "עמיתך," your fellow, is a contraction of two words, "עם שאתך," one who is with you, who stands with you on the same level in Torah and mitzvos.
But if these conditions are not met, that is, if he is not his companion in Torah and mitzvos, then even if he rebuked him and the man did not change his ways, the ruling that it is a mitzvah to hate him does not apply to him. Only regarding one who is his companion in Torah and mitzvos, and only after he has already rebuked him, were the words of the Gemara said.
And this needs to be understood: what exactly is lacking in this Jew, such that precisely because he is a companion in Torah and mitzvos, precisely because he is G-d fearing and observes Torah and mitzvos, there can be a situation where we say it is a mitzvah to hate him, while about someone who does not keep Torah and mitzvos we do not say this? Is a person worse off, in the minus, because he keeps Torah and mitzvos?
To summarize: In this section we reviewed the foundations of ahavas Yisrael that we learned, "כמוך ממש," literally as yourself, both from the side of the soul, where "one Father to us all," and from the side of each Jew's particular virtues, and the two reasons why ahavas Yisrael is "the entire Torah": making the soul dominant over the body, and unity being the vessel for drawing down the divine light. From there we moved to the Alter Rebbe's question from the Gemara in Pesachim, that regarding one who saw his fellow commit a matter of immorality it is a mitzvah to hate him and even to tell his teacher so that he too should hate him, and to his answer that this applies only under two conditions: that he is his companion in Torah and mitzvos, and that he has already fulfilled with him the mitzvah of "you shall surely rebuke your fellow."
In the next section we will propose a possible explanation for what is lacking specifically in this Jew, we will reject it, and through that we will arrive at the true point in the Alter Rebbe's words.