Gashmius: Two Random Thoughts and a Question
Random Thought #1: I have always felt uncomfortable when a person compliments me for something I own or recently purchased. I was not the artisan who made the item, I did not manufacture it, I only bought it...something anyone with a few dollars could do.
Random Thought #2: If a person is not a gemologist one can easily confuse cubic zirconium with a real diamond. Yet there are people who must have a diamond and cannot live knowing that they have cubic zirconium. What is the difference? It is the person's knowledge concerning the true essence of the item.
Question: How do the thoughts above relate to the Baal Shem Tov's teaching in Tzava'as Harivash #109?
4 Comments:
Wow, your "random thoughts" would be classified as "ultra-majorly-deep thoughts" to most of us run-of-mill people ;)
My responses:
RT#1--I started responding to this, and it got me thinking more. My first reaction was to agree that it's odd, but that we should do the chessed of accepting others' compliments graciously, even if it logically doesn't make sense to. And then I started thinking about it, about WHY it's illogical. As you said, YOU didn't do anything, it was the artisan that did it, and yet you have to accept the compliment. And then I was thinking--why is accepting any other compliement any more logical? When you think about it, the correct response is "Oh, but it's not me. It's the Artisan who created it (and me) that should be thanked." Ties in perfect with this past week's parsha--"Biladai", Yosef says, putting his life into jeopardy with that one word. "Paroah, you say I can interpret dreams? Na, it's not me. Only Hashem can interpret dreams. Sometimes he speaks through my mouth."
RT#2--And that's why everyone out there in bloggerdom should IY"H tell my chosson to buy me an authentic looking piece of glass and save the money for something more important. *hears gasps* Yes, ladies, the rock isn't the important thing. Nor is the wedding day. It's what comes afterwards that symbolizes his love for you more than anything else...
Question--Hmmm...I'm a bit confused on this, but don't have time to post my confusions right now...
Thank you for your thoughts. The connection you made with this past week's parsha was beautiful.
Locke said that when a person works the land, they become part of the land, which is the foundation of property rights. Therefore someone (especially English monarchs) can't just take it from you. I was going to say that this is the opposite concept, in a way. But maybe it's more that when God makes the object, He is in it- it's His. So when we use it, when need to do so to serve Him and we need to acknowledge Him. And we are His too! So we need to use our lives to sanctify Him.
And I'm looking at a finger with one gold band, no diamonds. When I found a man who was a real gem, I didn't need that gem on my finger. And yes, I'm a sap. I think for some people the diamond represents the willingness of the man to work to be with the woman. It's like she's asking him to show how many hours of his work will be dedicated to simply making her his queen. In fact, if memory serves, the diamond engagement ring has its birth in the Victorian era and was started by a royal- check that before you quote me. There's that queen thing again.
Alice - I appreciate your insight. Thanks.
Post a Comment
<< Home