Rage, you bring up some good points... I could spend all day on this topic, but I don't have time  . But see this page for something I once wrote on the subject. Let me know what you think.

Rage ATM wrote on 08 Dec 2009 14:30:

What should i say Rage?? You were mechavin to the Chafetz Chaim on why he created us. You were mechavin to alot of the Baalei Musser in why we were created. Just check out the hakdamah of nefesh Hachaim.

i really really like this thread

The Gemora (it could be a Medrash) says that the Ribono Shel Olam (RS”O) can’t be in the same place as a Baal Gayvah (B’G), there is no room for both.  Why, because a B”G world revolves around himself and such a person has no room for the RS’O.  Similarly a B’G automating can’t have Ben Adam Lachaveiro because it’s all about ME.

Thus we see that as soon as someone doesn’t have Ben Adam Lachaveiro the RB”S wants nothing to do with that person. Therefore by default Ben Adam Lachaveiro should be worked on first.

Habib - Why don't you share your opinion?!

Reb Moshe, I'm not sure I follow your logic. i agree that someone who's a ba'al gaivah is obviously going to have issues with bein adam l'chaveiro (and depending on the situation, that might come out in obvious or subtle ways - for example, someone may be a B"G about the fact that he helps people so much, and he may truly be helping people. This will adversely affect his bein adam l'chaveiro, though, because that will stop him from being objective, and in some cases will cause him to make bad decisions. So it's still affecting his bein adam l'chaveiro, but his bein adam l'chaveiro might be far above the level of any of us! except for R' Guard, obviously).

So up to there, I'm following you. But I don't understand the next step you take (when you say thatMoshew wrote on 08 Dec 2009 21:04:
)

There might be lots of reasons why a person is bad at bein adam l'chaveiro, and for most of those other reasons, it doesn't say that hashem can't be in the same world.

silentbattle wrote on 09 Dec 2009 00:12:


my opinion means nothing, you guys are quoting gmara and sfarim and stuff... i just like listening to all the ideas...

habib613 wrote on 09 Dec 2009 03:37:


But, my opinion means something, and I think that your opinion does too! 

Habib - your opinion means plenty.

Besides - you can quote sforim, too!

IT25 - can I ask for a specific mare'eh makom in the chofetz chaim? And if possible, nefesh hachaim (though aside from Sha'ar daled, I've been told is very kabbalistic)?

Sure. The Nefesh Hachaim is in the hakdamah. Which was written by his son R Itzele. Its actually in big letters. He writes there that his father told him "LO NIVRAH HA'ADOM ELAH L'HOIL L'ACHRINI". Im not sure i have the wording exact being that i dont have one with me right now. And the Chafetz Chaim mekor ill have to get back to you on. The Ramchel in Da'as Tevunos ( and if im not mistaken in Mesillas Yeshorim as well) writes plenty of times that we were created so that Hashem can be Maytiv/do good to us.

This is a good thread, if I'm allowed to write that.

Habib, anyone should feel free to write what they think, even if they don't quote anybody but themselves. Since I started this thread, I grant you and everyone else the rights to post your opinion, if you'd like to.  :D

Personally, I think man to man wins. No fancy proof, but it feels right. I don't think Hashem is happy with someone who follows the man to G-d commandments but treats people lousy.

thanks kedusha, sb, momo... i think i'll still just sit and watch

Momo wrote on 09 Dec 2009 12:28:


I don't think Hashem is happy with a kind person who is Oved Avodah Zara and is Mechallel Shabbos either.  We need to keep both.  Your question was only which one is MORE important.

Not so fast Kedusha.
Remember the fact that the generation of the flood were destroyed because they stole from one another, but the generation of migdal bavel weren't because there was unity, even though they worshiped idols.

I never suggested HaShem is happy with nice people who worship idols, but as you wrote, if you had to choose one, which one should you choose.

Sometimes we're actually required to choose the Mitzva that's less important.  "Gadol Talmud Torah Yosair Me'Hatzalas Nefashos."  So learning Torah is a greater Mitzva than saving lives.  Yet, if you're learning and someone is, c"v, having a heart attack, we all know that you're required to stop learning and help him.

Good point, Momo - I thought of that, and was going to mention it, which seems to imply that there is something to bein adam l'chaveiro, even without bein adam l'makom. Not sure, though it might have been the final straw, since I don't think they were big on bein adam l'makom, either, and the level of evil in their bein adam l'makom may have shown just how far they'd fallen in general.

Talking my thoughts over with an older and wiser friend. As a result, let me modify/clarify my opinion...

The question implies that there are two different categories - bein adam l'makom, and bein adam l'chaveiro. And that there's the possibility of choosing one instead of the other.

The truth is that although they are two categories, they're part of one big category - mitzvos. Mitzvos are mitzvos are mitzvos, and we have to do all of them. Which to do first, what to do when there's a conflict? We look in the shulchan aruch.

But the reason we do all of them - is because they're mitzvos, because that's what hashem told us to do.