Friday, August 24, 2012

The Fruits Of Man


בס"ד

"כי תצור אל עיר ימים רבים להלחם עליה לתפשה לא תשחית את עצה לנדח עליו גרזן כי ממנו תאכל ואתו לא תכרת כי האדם עץ השדה לבא מפניך במצור" [דברים כ:יט]
"If you will lay siege to a city for many days to do battle against it and capture it, you must not ruin its trees to destroy them by the axe, for from these trees you shall it and these (trees) you shall not chop down, are they a man – these trees of the field – that you consider them your enemies in this siege ?! " [Devarim 20:19]

The Torah emphatically states that while we may lay siege to an enemy city, and deal death and destruction to its inhabitants, upon capture, we may not destroy their orchards or vineyards. This is not merely military strategy. There is a deeper issue at stake here.
At first glance, the Torah is limiting and guiding us – even during periods of battle. "I know you are fighting a war", says the Torah, "and I know that you are laying waste to living things right and left." But, we must guard ourselves from willful destruction for destruction's own sake. After all, this is Hashem's world we are talking about and we may not cast our axe about with no regard for the Creator. Rather, we must be calculating in every action – destroying what needs to be (our enemies - who are called Hashem's enemies by extension) and preserving that which need not fall under our hatchet.

But the Torah makes an interesting analogy – are the trees of the field similar to the men that you fight against ? the passuk asks rhetorically.
On a pshat level – the answer is no. Our enemies are men, capable of free will and choice – and when they choose to persecute Hashem's people and defy His word – they righteously "earned" their fate. But trees have no control over who planted them and should not suffer for the sins of their caretakers.
The baalei mussar, however, read this passuk with the exact opposite message. (technically,  this too is pshat – a straightforward reading of the words. The inflection on the phrase "is this tree a man ?" is a questioning one – but one can also read it as a statement. i.e. "man is a tree of the field")

How exactly is man a "… tree of the field" ?
The answer can be found by analyzing the prohibition associated with the trees. It is only fruit trees which are spared the army's ire. Non fruit bearing trees are fair game for the besieging army to chop away at. Why ?
Because that is the level at which the fundamental comparison (between man and tree) lies. If man is comparable to a tree – it is only because, like the tree, he is designed to give fruit.
A tree is known by its fruit. It is that fruit that goes far and wide bringing praise, or heaping scorn, upon its parent tree. So it is with the fruits of man.
Man's fruits are not his children (they, too are fruits but not in this context). Man's fruits are his actions and accomplishments. It is by them that man is known and through them he will garner eternal rewards or reap the bitter sprouts of failure.
Why is a fruit tree spared the army's axe ? because it has a higher purpose. Even as a marauding army, we are enjoined not to undermine this tree's potential for accomplishment.
So too, man is a fruit tree. He has achievements. They are his potential – they are the 'calling card' he leaves behind him and the one he sends on ahead.

During this introspective month of Elul – we may ask ourselves – what 'fruits' am I producing ? And would they be sufficiently important to save me from the besieging army's blade ?

Hatzlacha !

No comments: