694. Great Is a Transgression that Is Lishma

“Rabbi Nachman Bar Yitzhak said, ‘A transgression Lishma [for Her sake] is greater than a Mitzva [commandment] Lo Lishma [not for Her sake],’ and this is what Rabbi Yehuda said, ‘Rav said, ‘One should always engage in Torah and Mitzvot [commandments], even Lo Lishma, since from Lo Lishma he will come to Lishma.’ Rather, say, ‘as a Mitzva that is Lo Lishma,’ as it is written, ‘Blessed than women is Ya’el, the wife of Heber the Kenite, more blessed than women in the tent.’ Who are the women in the land? Sarah, Rebecca, Rachel, and Leah’” (Nazir 23b).

In the literal meaning, some interpret that the forefathers acted out of envy. It follows that they had multiplication Lo Lishma. Others interpret that because a woman is relieved from multiplication, it is called Lo Lishma. Also, we should understand the question about “From Lo Lishma, one comes to Lishma,” etc.

But in ethics, we should ask what it means that a transgression that is Lo Lishma is preferable, or the explanation of the Gemara that it is as a Mitzva that is Lo Lishma, meaning that they are of equal weight. Why does it matter to the Tana which is greater than which? After all, it is written, “Be careful with a minor Mitzva as with a major one, for you do not know the reward for the Mitzvot.” Thus, what does it come to teach us?

There is a rule: “If you come across a Mitzva, do not miss it.” Thus, if he comes across a Mitzva in Lo Lishma, he must do it even if we say that the transgression of Lo Lishma is greater, since it is forbidden to breach the Mitzvot. Also, if he comes across a transgression Lishma, he must also do it first.

In ethics, we should understand that here the question is which way a man will walk when he performs a Mitzva Lo Lishma. Should he be happy that he has performed a Mitzva, or should he be sorry that he now transgressed by not aiming Lishma, meaning that his transgression is that he did not act in Lishma.

There are two things to discern here concerning the Mitzva that is Lo Lishma: 1) He performed a Mitzva in practice. 2) He performed a transgression in thought, since before he did the Mitzva, it was still not revealed to him that he is engaging Lo Lishma. Rather, by doing the Mitzva, the transgression was revealed in the matter of Lishma—that he cannot aim Lishma.

Hence, the question is what should one do? Should he be happy about the Mitzva that he did or sad about the transgression in Lishma? At that time, Rabbi Nachman Bar Yitzhak said, “A transgression that is Lishma is great,” meaning it is more important that he will know that he is committing a transgression in Lishma. The importance is that he will afflict himself and pray to the Creator, which will cause him to come to be able to aim Lishma.

The Gemara asks about this: “And this is what Rabbi Yehuda said, ‘Rav said, ‘One should always engage … since from Lo Lishma he will come to Lishma.’’” This means that the Mitzva that he does Lo Lishma will bring him to Lishma by way of “a Mitzva induces a Mitzva.” The Gemara answers, “but rather say, ‘as a Mitzva that is Lo Lishma,’” and RASHI interpreted that the two are the same, and the RA’ASH interprets that both enter.

In general, we should ask why there is a link from “From Lo Lishma, one comes to Lishma,” to a transgression Lishma, since there he will come to perform a Mitzva Lishma, and with a transgression Lishma, he has already acted Lishma in doing the transgression, and there is nothing to add to it. Conversely, in Lo Lishma he has more to add, meaning to achieve Lishma.

With Ya’el, the act was a transgression and the thought was for the sake of the Creator. We should ask, If she intended for the sake of the Creator, why is it called “a transgression,” for by this she did a lot of good to the people of Israel?

We should say that the act was only a preparation for a Mitzva and not an actual Mitzva, since her aim was to tire him in order to kill him, so you could say that preparation for a Mitzva is not a Mitzva, since the killing was a Mitzva and tiring him was only a preparation.

This implies that where the act itself is the end of the act of Lishma, this can be like a Mitzva Lishma. For example, had he died because of his exhaustion, the thought Lishma would have been carried out with doing the act. But here we should discern between a preparation for a Mitzva and the actual Mitzva, since tiring him was only a preparation.

According to what Rabbi Nachman Bar Yitzhak said, “A transgression Lishma is greater,” etc., he would interpret the verse, “Blessed than women,” meaning more than women. According to the explanation, “but rather say, ‘as a Mitzva that is Lo Lishma,’” we interpret “blessed than women” as “like the women,” and not “more than women.”

We should learn from the story with Ya’el, for there the transgression was in the act, and a Mitzva in the thought. But sometimes the Mitzva is in the act and the transgression is in the thought, and this is called Lo Lishma. But the Gemara says that they are of equal weight.

We should discern in the work of Lo Lishma that there is a Mitzva in action, meaning to be happy about performing the Mitzva, and say that a Mitzva induces a Mitzva, and there is regretting about the transgression in regard to Lishma, that he did not aim for the sake of the Creator. By this we should understand, “Even if the whole world tells you that you are righteous,” that it is in terms of the action. But in terms of the thought, meaning the intention, if it is still not for the sake of the Creator, he is regarded as wicked in that sense.

This is the meaning of “in your eyes.” That is, in regard to the thought, the world should not know. Rather, the aim is given to man himself, and others cannot know what is in his mind. Hence, “Be wicked in your eyes.” If the aim is not for the sake of the Creator, it follows that in the place of making the Mitzva, the transgression in Lishma immediately awakens.