At the start of relating the cause for the churban, R. Yochanan is quoted as stating that it was due to the enmity between Kamtza and bar Kamtza. However, at the end R. Yochanan is quoted as stating the churban was due to the humility of R. Zecharyah.
1. How is this difference in attributing the cause resolved?
2. Why was the enmity between Kamtza and bar Kamtza specified? The enmity in question was between the host of the party and Bar Kamtza (there is no mention of Kamtza having an issue with Bar Kamtza).
Thank you in advance for your response.
Harry Stark, Los Angeles, USA
The Maharal of Prague, in his commentary on the Agados of Shas, explains at length this very important and tragic period in Jewish history.
1) (a) There was really a much deeper and more basic cause of the destruction than the actual story of Kamtza and Bar Kamtza. In fact, possibly one could say that the episode of Kamtza and Bar Kamtza was the symptom rather than the disease. The Gemara in Yoma 9b tells us that the Beis ha'Mikdash was destroyed because of "Sin'as Chinam," causeless hatred. This is, in fact, something that is apparent throughout the Gemara's entire account of the destruction, that there was an underlying lack of unity and love amongst the people.
The Maharal of Prague explains that the great gain that the Jewish people received from Jerusalem and the Beis ha'Mikdash was that this created harmony throughout the Jewish people. Once the Beis ha'Mikdash was built, the people now had only one place to bring offerings to Hash-m, on the Mizbe'ach in Yerushalayim, and not on the Bamos (the private altars) where it previously had been permitted for every one to offer according to his wishes. Once it became clear that there was a deep split among Yisrael, the Beis ha'Mikdash could not exist any more because quibbling is the opposite of what Yerushalayim is there for.
The fact that a petty dispute between two individuals could lead to a national crisis proved that there was something rotten in people's hearts. There was a deep hatred among the people which came to the surface through this disturbing episode.
(b) The Maharal also writes that what Rebbi Zecharyah did was not really the cause of the destruction, because Hash-m had already decreed that the Beis ha'Mikdash should be destroyed due to Klal Yisrael's sins. However, the other Sages were still trying to save the situation and annul the decree by seeing to it that methods could be taken to make peace with the king. When Rebbi Zecharyah made sure that these compromise suggestions would not be implemented, he was actually carrying out the Shelichus of Hash-m, that the destruction should come about.
So really the destruction had already been ordained and Rebbi Zecharyah was an actor in this master plan.
(c) The Maharsha (DH Yomru) gives an explanation on similar lines in slightly different words. He writes that even though exile had already been decreed upon the Jewish people because of Sin'as Chinam, nevertheless if the Roman Emperor would have had compassion on the Beis ha'Mikdash it still possible that it would have been spared. Now that Rebbi Zecharyah did not allow the offering to be brought, the Emperor became angry with the Beis ha'Mikdash because he felt it redundant since the Jews were not prepared to offer his sacrifice there.
2) (a) The way I understood the Gemara there is that no specific mention is made of enmity between Kamtza and Bar Kamtza. The simple reading of the Gemara would be that the episode of Kamtza and Bar Kamtza led to the destruction. There was a mistaken identity and this confusion led up to the problems. Therefore, one might say that Kamtza had nothing to do with the whole story. He was merely an individual who never got involved in history.
(b) However, the Maharal of Prague does understand that Kamtza had a significant part in the story. He asks, "What did Kamtza do so wrong in order that the Gemara should say that because of Kamtza, Jerusalem was destroyed?" It seems that since the Gemara states that "because of Kamtza and Bar Kamtza, Yerushalayim was destroyed," this must mean that Kamtza also played a key role, because if his involvement was merely a mistake the Gemara would not have implied that he was also a part of the story.
(c) The Maharal explains that the mere fact that Kamtza was a friend of the host was sufficient to suggest that he had emnity with Bar Kamtza. As we know, causeless hatred and arguments were rife at that time. In such an atmosphere everyone takes sides. In fact, the host of the party was only interested in Kamtza being his friend, so that he could help him in his arguments with Bar Kamtza. The Maharal writes that sometimes when two people are friends, in reality this friendship is divisive because its real purpose is to make trouble with others.
Kol Tuv,
Dovid Bloom
Rebbe,
I heard an interesting pshat about R. Zecharya. Anvenuso shel R. Zecharya. His modesty destroyed the Bais Hamikdash. What would modesty have to do with this? He gave a psak - they will say he who inflicts a blemish on a korban is chayav misa, the death penalty, so we can't do it. He was such an anav that he didn't realize he was the gadol hador or one of the gedolei hador and people would be compelled to follow his psak. That anivut, which in retrospect seems misplaced in this case, caused the destruction of the bet hamikdash.
Sam Kosofsky
Sam, that is a very nice Peshat.
Maybe this is what Shmuel ha'Navi meant when he said to Shaul ha'Melech (Shmuel I 15:17), "Even though you are small in your own eyes, you are the head of the tribes of Yisrael." I think we saw in our own times an example in Rav Moshe Feinstein zt'l, who was a very big Anav but when it came to Psak Halachah he knew that the world was relying on him. His close Talmid, Rav Efraim Greenblatt zt'l, said that in Halachah, Rav Moshe fulfilled the verse, "You shall fear no man" (Devarim 1:17).
Actually, this idea is relevant also for ordinary people like us, because at least our families may be looking up to us and expecting guidance from our behavior even if we do not always appreciate this.
Kol Tuv,
Dovid Bloom