Our Gemara on Amud Aleph questions the practice of the people of Kefar Temarta, who ate the zarzir bird even though it was deemed as non-kosher. The response was that their practice was without basis in tradition and “They too will be accountable in judgment in the future.”

Presumably, the future the Gemara is referring to is the afterlife, where a person is judged for his sins. The phrase in Hebrew was “Liten es ha-din.” This phrase is used many times in the Gemara, almost uniformly referring to the same idea, a time in the future when the person is judged by the heavenly court. It ranges from the righteous to the evil - the same phrase because they all must submit to judgement. For example, see Avodah Zara (54b) where this is referring to the foolish pagans, while Shabbos (97a) uses this phrase when one colleague rebukes Rabbi Akiva.

Let us examine the phrase itself, which literally translates as “give the judgment.” It seems like the phrase should be “Stand in judgment” or “Accept the judgement/penalty.” What does it mean to “Give the judgment”? Presumably, it means to pay up the penalty when being found guilty. The meaning is then to pay the judgment. This likely comes from Pirke Avos (3:1):

“Akabyah ben Mahalalel said: mark well three things and you will not come into the power of sin: know from where you come, and where you are going, and before whom you are destined to give the judgment and reckoning.”

In Pirke Avos, the language is “before whom you are destined to give judgement and reckoning.” The Hebrew matches: “liten din v’cheshbon.”

One final question. What is the additional clause “din v’cheshbon - judgement AND reckoning”? And, why does the Gemara only use “din” and Pirke Avos uses “din v’cheshbon”?

Sichas Avodas Halevi (80) explains that din is the judgement, such as the penalty for the actual sin, and Cheshbon is the accounting of its implications. For example, someone could steal a poor man’s bicycle. There is the crime of theft and it has its penalty, but there are also the effects that it had on the victim. This was a poor man, and his bicycle was his only mode of transportation that he used to get to his job. Now he lost his job, eventually lost his home, etc. 

According to this interpretation, it is difficult to understand why our Gemara skipped that word. It is just as relevant that those who ate the forbidden zarzir would be subject to a penalty in the heavenly court and also subject to a penalty for its implications and consequences.

Rav Yisroel Salanter (Ohr Yisroel 8) has a more complex explanation. Din is the judgement, as in the word “verdict,” and cheshbon is the process of determining the punishment and penalty. More specifically he says, a person is not only judged by the severity of the transgression, but also the difficulty and context. A sin committed due to extraordinary temptation may have the same verdict, as he is guilty, but the punishment cheshbon may be more lenient. However, Rav Salanter says the cheshbon does not look at the subjective personal circumstances alone, but also the development of the circumstances and holds people liable for neglect. Therefore, if one sinned due to great temptation, he may receive a reduced penalty. But if the temptation was only great due to poor attitudes and prior moral choices, then he will be judged as if the temptation was not great and receive a harsher penalty, since he is responsible for the circumstances that made it more tempting.

Rav Yisroel adds that it plays both ways. Consider a person who developed himself and cultivated certain attitudes, and personal strengths that make fulfilling mitzvos and observing the commandments easy, even if objectively for most, such commandments are challenging. He says the person will be rewarded as if he overcame a difficult temptation, even if for him it was no longer hard.

Rav Yisroel’s understanding of cheshbon is indeed complex because it is a calculation of subjective, objective and personal, which determines the actual punishment. While din is simply the verdict, cheshbon is a multifaceted determination of what degree of punishment the person deserves. According to this interpretation, it is easier to understand why our Gemara only used din, since the subject matter was simply determination of right and wrong, not the degree of penalty. The point was the people that ate this bird are guilty, and they’ll be held accountable for it in judgment in the world to come.

Rav Salanter’s system of moral accounting offers comfort as well as anxiety. The comfort comes from knowing that the actual punishment is subject to the degree of difficulty. Also, graciously the heavenly rewards are viewed from the lens of the general difficulty even if the person has already overcome many of the temptations and so it is easy for him. The hard part is that one is only granted a mitigation of the sin if it is challenging intrinsically. However, if the person created personal and subjective circumstances that made him more tempted, he is not granted clemency.

There are genuinely situations in life where the circumstances or temptation were so great that we might even say the person had no choice, or hardly had a choice. Yet, if those circumstances came from continuous disregard and neglect, there is still full moral responsibility. A person might have an addiction or predisposition towards certain sins; that alone could be cause to receive a lighter punishment. On the other hand, if obstinacy and refusal to get help led to more and more loss of control, Rav Yisroel asserts the liability remains the same with no softening of judgment.

sponsored by https://empowermentaftertrauma.com/

Translations Courtesy of Sefaria, except when, sometimes, I disagree with the translation

Free resource for couples/families:

The Chosson and Kallah Shmooze You Wish You Had But Never Got

Over 80 lectures on heathy communication, marriage and sexuality from a Torah perspective  Click here

If you liked this, you might enjoy my Relationship Communications Guide. Click on the link above.

Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, LCSW-R, LMFT, DHL is a psychotherapist who works with high conflict couples and families. He can be reached via email at simchafeuerman@gmail.com