Reacting to what he considered an incorrect display of frivolity, R' Zeira told R' Yermiya the posuk in Mishlei 14:23 -- ''Bechol etzev yiye Moser.'' Rashi (Gem.) implies that when one exhibits sadness, he receives reward. From Eitz Yosef (quoted in Artscroll Hebrew Gem. comm.), it seems that this is intended as an external display of sadness, for the purpose of not appearing as one who is ''poreik ol malchus shomayim,'' since actual sadness is undesirable and detrimental to serving Ha-shem.

So the main concern here seems to be not appearing as ''poreik ol..'' But what about the Rambam which states that one should have simcha on his face even though sadness is in his heart? And also, a teaching of the Baalei Mussar that one's face is in the category of a ''rechus harabim,'' and since one seeks to refrain from causing damage in a reshus harabim, it is appropriate to radiate joy(?)

How can these lofty considerations be reconciled with the concern for not appearing as ''porek ol.."?

Thank you,

Y. Gesser

It is clear that one has to try to be in a state of Simchah as per the dictum "Mitzvah Gedolah Lihiyos b'Simchah," and it is equally clear that this excludes Simchah Shel Holelus (excessive frivolity). See Shabbos 30b regarding the apparent contradiction in Koheles. Various verses are quoted there and analyzed. In particular, see Koheles 8:15 ("And I praised the [attribute of] Simchah") which the Gemara says refers to the Simchah of doing a Mitzvah (as per the inverted version of the aforementioned dictum, "Simchah Gedolah Lihiyos b'Mitzvah).

Rashi in Koheles there says that it refers to the Simchah which one experiences when he is happy with his lot. See also Sefer Kol Ephraim (by my grandfather zt'l) and his most original explanation of Koheles 5:19, "... while Hash-m provides him with the Simchah of his heart:" That is, with the Simchah with which he rejoices in his heart in that he is involved in Ma'asim Tovim... for it is through this that he provides and pays back to Hash-m, as it were, for all of the goodness that He has given to him. (See inside the Sefer for more.)

The Gemara in Shabbos continues to make it abundantly clear that the Shechinah will not come through Sechok (frivolous laughter) or through the wrong sort of pleasure (such as raucous laughter or hedonistic indulgence) but only through Simchah Shel Mitzvah. It proceeds to give the example of Elisha the Navi. Such a Simchah will undoubtedly manifest itself in inner serenity leading to a sunny countenance and a calm Hadras Panim which can be seen on any of our Gedolim.

On the other hand, quite apart from Simchah Shel Holelus which is totally unacceptable, there are at least two other aspects that restrict uninhibited Simchah today:

1) The destruction of the Beis ha'Mikdash. See Berachos 31a: "It is prohibited for a person to fill his mouth with laughter in this world, for it says, '[Only] then will our mouths be filled with laughter' (Tehilim 126:2)." (See, however, Rabeinu Yonah there who rejects this proposition that the Gemara and verse are referring to the Churban. He says it applies in this world even when the Beis ha'Mikdash is standing, "For Simchah accustoms a person to forget Mitzvos" (see there at length, and see his earlier explanation there to the Sugya at the beginning of the Perek regarding "Ivdu Es Hash-m b'Yir'ah" and "Ivdu Es Hash-m b'Simchah," and the verse, "... because you did not serve Hash-m, your G-d, with Simchah and with goodness of heart" (Devarim 28:47)).

Similarly, see Bava Kama 59a-b in the incident of Eliezer Ze'ira who wore black shoes and mourned constantly for the Churban. Only he -- because of his elevated spiritual level -- was permitted to do this. For the average person, it would be forbidden as hypocritical. This will be important for our purposes as will become clear soon.

2) There is a point in being sad over our own sins. (See Berachos 60a, that it is a sin to express anxiety, but one should do so when it comes to Divrei Torah, and Rashi explains lest one forget one's learning.) Paradoxically, the greater the person, the more he tends to be afraid of the sins he may have committed (see, for example, Berachos 28b, regarding Rebbi Eliezer and Raban Yochanan ben Zakai on their deathbeds).

Now we know that Rebbi Zeira was a great Tzadik and could not be accused of hypocrisy if he went way beyond the norm in his Tzikdus. See, for example, Nidah 23a, regarding how hard Rebbi Yirmeyah tried to get him to produce a smile, and see Rashi there (DH Liydei Gichuch) who says, "[This refers to] laughter; Rebbi Yirmeyah resorted to all of these tactics in order to bring Rebbi Zeira to laughter, but he did not laugh for 'it is prohibited for a person to fill his mouth with laughter,' and Rebbi Zeira was very Machmir." See the Aruch la'Ner there for an explanation of the different views of Rebbi Zeira and Rebbi Yirmeyah.

It is significant, therefore, that in Berachos 30b the participants are the same Rebbi Zeira and his pupil, Rebbi Yirmeyah! Rebbi Zeira was very Machmir in these matters for the reasons advanced above and he refrained from laughter, Sechok. (It is also significant that the Gemara in Nidah does not say he refrained from Simchah, but only from "Gichuch," which Rashi translates as "Sechok." Similarly, in Berachos, Rashi (DH b'Chol Etzev) says, "When a person shows himself to be sad, he will receive reward...," indicating an external portrayal of somberness, but not an internal disposition. See Malbim to Yeshayah 22:13 and 35:1 on the exact delineation of Simchah, Sason, etc., where he says that Simchah is internal .)

Thus, to sum up-

1. One should strive always to have Simchah Shel Mitzvah.

2. One should never indulge in Simchah Shel Holelus.

3. There are occasions where one can display external Sechok, as did Rabah and Rebbi Yirmeyah in Berachos 30b, and as Rebbi Yirmeyah tried to encourage Rebbi Zeira in Nidah 23a but did not succeed. These have to be monitored carefully (cf. Berachos 31a).

4. There are Tzadikim Gemurim, like Rebbi Zeira and Eliezer Ze'ira (it is interesting to note that both were very humble and were called "Zeira," or "small!") who were very Machmir and showed somberness because of the Churban and in order to fulfill the dictum not to fill one's mouth with laughter.

5. There could well be a stage in between internal Simchah and external Sechok. The latter may involve positive physical acts (handclapping, laughter, overjoy). The former, however, could well include not only internalized joy, but also a facial display of happiness, contentment, and Hadras Panim such as seen on all of our Gedolim.

Applying the foregoing to the questioner's inquiry, Rebbi Zeira saw that Rebbi Yirmeyah "was excessively happy" -- that is, he saw that he displayed external laughter of a degree unacceptable to Rebbi Zeira to whom it seemed like an act of Porek Ol (throwing off the responsibility of serving Hash-m) and that Rebbi Yirmeyah had gone too far. He criticized him with the verse in Mishlei (perhaps l'Shitaso as per #4 above). Rebbi Yirmeyah responded with #3 above, that this is a permitted situation (either per Rashi, as Tefilin negate the concept of Porek Ol, or per Rabeinu Yonah as he had been ill and unable to wear them for a while and now at this first new opportunity it was a true Simchah Shel Mitzvah).

The serenity of their faces, I am sure, would have been quite unaffected by the foregoing and I am sure they retained their Hadras Panim, benevolent and pure countenances throughout (and perhaps even while displaying somberness, Etzev, which believe it or not can be done! This is comparable to the time of Aveilus, where the Gadol mourns but retains his dignity).

Finally, see my great-grandfather's explanation of this Gemara in Berachos 30b and the contradiction between the respective cases and verses brought in them by Rabah and Rebbi Zeira to rebuke Abaye and Rebbi Yirmeyah respectively. It is in a Sefer (out of print for many years, but a copy of this explanation has been faxed to the Kollel and is summarized below) published in 1928 called "Imrei Chayim" (posthumously by one of his Talmidim). I think you will find that what he writes fits in with the above.

Kol Tuv,

Joseph Pearlman

JP:ys

The Amora'im Raba and Rebbi Zeira use two different verses to rebuke their Talmidim who were overly joyful because they had two different approaches to joy. In Shabbos (30b) we find that Rabah would introduce his lectures with humor, after which he would sit with awe and teach the class. Rebbi Zeira, on the other hand, was totally removed from laughter and never laughed, as the Gemara in Nidah (23a) says, because, as Rashi there explains, Rebbi Zeira was very Machmir with the prohibition against filling one's mouth with laughter.

Therefore, when Rabah saw that Abaye was overly joyful he told him "v'Gilu bi'Re'adah," to say that it is true that one should start off with joy, but afterwards one should sit with fear and awe. Rebbi Zeira, on the other hand, told Rebbi Yirmeyah that there is no point in being overly joyful and expressing joy at all, rather "b'Chol Etzev Tiheyeh Mosar" -- somberness is always beneficial.