Showing posts with label Rabbeinu Yonah. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Rabbeinu Yonah. Show all posts

Thursday, July 15, 2021

Hunting for Treasure vs. Panning for Gold on the Beaches of Nome

This week's Torah content is sponsored by the Reznik family in dedication to the loving memory of Silvia Tanzer (Sora Hesha bas Chaim Moshe) and Irving Tanzer (Yisroel ben Yechezkel).

Click here for a one-page printer-friendly version of this article, and click here for an audio version.




Hunting for Treasure vs. Panning for Gold on the Beaches of Nome

According to Mishlei (Proverbs), you will achieve success in your quest for chochmah (wisdom) and tevunah (understanding) if you search for it “like you search for hidden treasures” (2:4). Rabbeinu Yonah explains:

[This means] that the wisdom is sweet to his soul, and working for it will not be a toil for him, due to the abundant love, in the manner of: “it was like a few days in his eyes, due to his love of her” (Bereishis 29:29). It will be like one who searches for hidden treasures, who is told that there is a treasure in this house or in this valley: the quest for the hidden treasure will not be a toil for him, due to [the prospect in] his mind of finding great wealth in one location and becoming instantly rich.

In other words, if you learn with the mentality of a treasure hunter who hopes to hit the mother lode, then learning will not be a toil for you, since it will be fueled by excitement and the hope of being rewarded with instant wealth. But unlike the treasure hunter, whose hope will likely prove to be a fantasy, the seeker of chochmah and tevunah really can strike it rich!

Thank God, the more I learn, the more this treasure hunting mentality has come to characterize my own learning. However, this same mentality has occasionally proven to be an impediment when it comes to teaching. When I was a high school teacher, I had no problem teaching “basic ideas,” since my students were all new to learning. Once I started teaching in yeshiva in the Fall of 2020, I felt a tremendous pressure to come up with major chidushim (new insights) in everything I taught. I’d feel this way in many of my daily shiurim and especially when I’d give a shiur to the whole community. But this wasn’t the first time I’ve experienced this type of pressure. I’ve gone through phases in which my writing suffers from the same problem. I end up feeling like I shouldn’t write an article unless it contains some groundbreaking chidush that will be seen as valuable to all, laypeople and chachamim alike, and this leads to writer’s block.

I am pleased to report that my “Summer 2021 Experiment” of writing one-page articles has counteracted this pressure. I am reminded of another Mishleic mashal (metaphor) for chochmah, stated in the previous chapter: “Chochmah calls out in the streets, in the public squares she gives forth her voice, at the heads of noisy [streets], at the entrances of gates, she gives forth her words” (1:20-21). In contrast to the treasure hunting mashal of Chapter 2, which depicts the scarcity and hidden nature of chochmah, the mashal of Chapter 1 emphasizes its ubiquity and vociferousness: chochmah is on every street corner, wherever you look, and it’s constantly shouting and clamoring to get your attention! In my case, now that I’m looking for “one-page ideas” to write about, I’m noticing them everywhere, which is fantastic!

If I were to create a highly specific mashal which combines these two mashalim, I’d borrow from Shlomo ha’Melech’s comparison of chochmah to gold (see 8:10,18 and 16:16) and I would liken my Summer 2021 experience to panning for gold on the golden beaches of Nome. According to Wikipedia:

The Nome Gold Rush was a gold rush in Nome, Alaska, approximately 1899–1909. It is separated from other gold rushes by the ease with which gold could be obtained. Much of the gold was lying in the beach sand of the landing place and could be recovered without any need for a claim. Total production of gold from the area is estimated to be 112 metric tons.

Chochmah is like Nome’s gold: it’s there in the sand, ready for the taking, and there’s plenty to share.
___________________________________________________________________________________
If you've gained from what you've learned here, please consider contributing to my Patreon at www.patreon.com/rabbischneeweiss. Alternatively, if you would like to make a direct contribution to the "Rabbi Schneeweiss Torah Content Fund," my Venmo is @Matt-Schneeweiss, and my Zelle/Chase QuickPay and PayPal are mattschneeweiss at gmail.com. Even a small contribution goes a long way to covering the costs of my podcasts, and will provide me with the financial freedom to produce even more Torah content for you

If you would like to sponsor an article, shiur, or podcast episode, or if you are interested in enlisting my services as a teacher or tutor, you can reach me at rabbischneeweiss at gmail.com. Thank you to my listeners for listening, thank you to my readers for reading, and thank you to my supporters for supporting my efforts to make Torah ideas available and accessible to everyone. 

Be sure to check out my YouTube channel and my podcasts: "The Mishlei Podcast""The Stoic Jew" Podcast"Rambam Bekius" Podcast"Machshavah Lab" Podcast"The Tefilah Podcast"  For the full guide to all of my Torah content, click here

Thursday, July 8, 2021

Sameach b'Chelko as Unconditional Happiness

Click here for a one-page printer-friendly version of this article, and click here for an audio version.

Artwork: Weather the Storm, by Justin and Alexis Hernandez



















Sameach b'Chelko as Unconditional Happiness

Ben Zoma (Avos 4:1) taught: “Who is wealthy? One who is sameach b’chelko (happy with his portion).” This is the type of idea that can easily become cliché if it is not reexamined, refreshed, and revised from time to time. The latest update came to me this morning. I just started reading Awareness: The Perils and Opportunities of Reality (1990), by Anthony de Mello. The author makes the seemingly outlandish claim: “You don’t want to be happy.” He clarifies his meaning a few pages later:

I was saying that we don’t want to be happy. We want other things. Or let’s put it more accurately: We don’t want to be unconditionally happy. I’m ready to be happy provided I have this and that and the other thing. But this is really to say to our friend or to our God or to anyone, “You are my happiness. If I don’t get you, I refuse to be happy.” It’s so important to understand that. We cannot imagine being happy without those conditions. That’s pretty accurate. We cannot conceive of being happy without them. We’ve been taught to place our happiness in them.

In other words, to be sameach b’chelko means to be unconditionally happy. Stated differently, so long as your idea of happiness includes particulars which you regard as indispensable, then you cannot be sameach b’chelko. Your chelek (portion) is determined by Hashem, not by your idea of what your chelek should be. It is He Who sets the conditions, not you. The only condition is His will.

After writing the first half of this article, I decided this would be a good time to skim the meforshim (commentators) on Ben Zoma’s statement in light of this new insight. To my surprise, I didn’t find a single one who explained sameach b’chelko along these lines. The Meiri’s commentary is representative of the approach that most (if not all) of them took. He writes: “the definition of wealth is to be content and not lust after excesses; anyone who has what he needs and doesn’t seek excess is truly wealthy.” Rabbeinu Yonah takes the same approach but expands on what is implied by “needs:”

Who is wealthy? One who is sameach b’chelko – [namely,] a person who says, “My chelek is sufficient for me, since I am able to support myself and my household and be involved in Torah. Why should I concern myself with someone else’s money, so long as I have what I need in order to uphold the word of Hashem?” For one who is not sameach b’chelko and not satisfied with what Hashem gave him is poor … Thus, it is an exceedingly good trait to be sameach b’chelko, and he is called “wealthy” because Hashem gave him what he needs to sustain himself and be involved in Torah and in mitzvos. For what profit is there for man in all his toil, but to fulfill Torah and mitzvos?

These meforshim do not explain sameach b’chelko as “being content with one’s portion, no matter what that portion is” but rather “being content with one’s portion, on the condition that one’s needs are sufficiently met to be involved in Torah and mitzvos.” Their sameach b’chelko is conditional.

This leaves me in a quandary. On the one hand, de Mello’s explanation rings true to me as a philosophical ideal. On the other hand, the meforshim on Ben Zoma’s statement are consistent with my understanding of Torah values. The simple answer is that they’re talking about different things: de Mello is talking about happiness and Ben Zoma is talking about wealth. And yet, the definition of wealthy as “sameach b’chelko” is predicated on a definition of simchah (happiness), which leaves me wondering what the relationship is between that simchah and de Mello’s. Tzarich iyun (this question needs further analysis).
___________________________________________________________________________________
If you've gained from what you've learned here, please consider contributing to my Patreon at www.patreon.com/rabbischneeweiss. Alternatively, if you would like to make a direct contribution to the "Rabbi Schneeweiss Torah Content Fund," my Venmo is @Matt-Schneeweiss, and my Zelle/Chase QuickPay and PayPal are mattschneeweiss at gmail.com. Even a small contribution goes a long way to covering the costs of my podcasts, and will provide me with the financial freedom to produce even more Torah content for you

If you would like to sponsor an article, shiur, or podcast episode, or if you are interested in enlisting my services as a teacher or tutor, you can reach me at rabbischneeweiss at gmail.com. Thank you to my listeners for listening, thank you to my readers for reading, and thank you to my supporters for supporting my efforts to make Torah ideas available and accessible to everyone. 

Be sure to check out my YouTube channel and my podcasts: "The Mishlei Podcast""The Stoic Jew" Podcast"Rambam Bekius" Podcast"Machshavah Lab" Podcast"The Tefilah Podcast"  For the full guide to all of my Torah content, click here

Wednesday, July 24, 2019

Mishlei 11:2 - Mishleic Tznius 1.0

Click here for a printer-friendly version of this blog post



Mishlei 11:2 - Mishleic Tznius 1.0

משלי יא:ב
בָּא זָדוֹן וַיָּבֹא קָלוֹן וְאֶת צְנוּעִים חָכְמָה:

Mishlei 11:2
When zadon comes, disgrace will come, but wisdom is with those who are tzenua.

There are plenty of questions on this pasuk
  1. What is "zadon" in this context? Even on a simple level, the term is difficult to translate. Common translations include "willfulness," "aggression," "malice," "wantonness," "brazenness," but it's difficult to know which of these applies here, or if it means something else entirely.
  2. What is "tznius" in this context? This term is also tricky. It is often translated as "modesty," with an emphasis on physical modesty - usually in terms of attire. Some prefer to translate it as "humility," but then again, we have another word for humility: anavah
  3. What is "kalon" (disgrace) in this context? Specifically, what type of disgrace, shame, or infamy is this talking about?
  4. What is "chochmah" (wisdom) in this context? Although chochmah is a basic term in Mishlei, it can mean different things in different contexts.
  5. What is the cause and effect relationship between zadon and disgrace? How is disgrace an inevitable result of zadon? And if, as many of the meforshim explain, the pasuk means that the ish zadon causes others to be disgraced, why not say so directly? Why phrase so awkwardly: "when zadon comes, disgrace will come"
  6. What is the relationship between tznius and chochmah? On the surface, it would seem that a person could have tznius without chochmah, but the pasuk makes it sound like they go hand in hand. Why? 

[Time to think! Read on when ready.]

Here's my four-sentence summary of the main idea, which I will follow with some thoughts on Mishlei's take on tznius:
“Zadon,” in this context, refers to self-assertive, domineering, kavod-seeking behavior; an “ish zadon” is a person who aggressively seeks gratification by putting others down in order to boost his own self-image. The ish zadon fails to realize that by embracing a competitive, relative, image-based value system, in which his own happiness is contingent on the approbation of other people, he has ipso facto subjected himself to the fate of regularly suffering social disgrace. In contrast, an ish tzenua’s value system is objective insofar as it is based on chochmah (wisdom), and his happiness is not dependent on his image in the eyes of others. Therefore, he is immune to social disgrace, since he relates to any social “failures” as inconsequential, or as opportunities for wisdom and growth, rather than as “disgraceful” losses of kavod.
You may have noticed that the title of this post is followed by a "1.0." That's because I consider my concept of Mishleic tznius to still be "in the works." Still, I felt confident enough in my approach to share my findings thus far. I'd like to further clarify the ideas in my four-sentence summary by giving a play-by-play of how I arrived at my current understanding. 

This post began with a "Yom Iyun" ("Day of Study" = "Special Program") held at the high school where I teach. Every other year or so we have a school-wide program on tznius. In planning that year's event we expressed dismay over how easy it is for a girl to shut down during such tznius programs, saying, "Ugh! Another program where we're lectured on how long our sleeves and skirts can be!" 

This led to an epiphany: What if we designed a tznius program which has nothing to do with how people dress? We realized that many girls probably aren't aware that tznius a middah (character trait), and not merely a dress code. If we could craft a program which explored what the middah of tznius is, and we didn't mention dress codes at all, then even the most close-minded girl wouldn't walk away thinking that the program was about telling her how she can and can't dress. And if the only message she left with was, "Tznius is not just about the length of sleeves and skirts," then we would have accomplished something. 

Each of the teachers involved in the program chose one aspect of tznius to focus on. I volunteered to take on the topic of "tznius and chochmah" because I wanted to focus on Mishlei, and I recalled this pasuk. I was intrigued by two non-intuitive features of the pasuk: (1) the fact that it identifies "zadon" as the opposite of tznius, as opposed to something like "immodesty" or even "arrogance," and (2) the assertion that tznius and chochmah go together. 

In preparing my lesson I found four clues which ultimately led me to the idea summarized above. The first was Saadia Gaon's Arabic translation of the pasuk as: "If azus (brazenness / assertiveness) comes, disgrace comes, and with anavim (humble people) is wisdom." This provided me with my first clue: according to Saadia Gaon, the tznius in our pasuk is synonymous with anavah (humility), and is the opposite of brazenness / assertiveness. 

Rabbeinu Yonah provided a second and third clue by expanding on the definition of zadon, and by commenting on the relationship between tznius and chochmah. Here is a translation of his commentary on our pasuk
when zadon comes, disgrace will come - It is the nature of [an ishzadon to mock and insult people, because he will deride and degrade his fellow for the temporary pleasure of taking pride in [the latter's] shame, or he will not be willing to tolerate the immediate pain of controlling his anger; is there a greater or more powerful zadon than that which culminates in words of shame and insult? 
but wisdom is with those who are tzenua - Tznius prevents a person from [speaking] words of disgrace and obscenity, and minimization of speech is one of the characteristics of those who are tzenua. And tznius causes wisdom for those who possess it, for it is a trait of the wise on account of which they are called wise, for they listen and pay close attention and do not desire to reveal their hearts, as it is stated: “Even a fool who is quiet will be considered wise,[and] one who seals his lips is understanding” (Mishlei 17:28)

This is a difficult Rabbeinu Yonah, and I'll admit up front that I don't fully grasp what he is saying. Nevertheless, I took away several important points about zadon from his commentary:
  • Whatever zadon is, its fullest expression is derision, mockery, and rejoicing in the shame of one's fellow. 
  • The unwillingness to restrain one's anger at another person is also symptomatic of zadon
  • A third feature of zadon is the inability to listen to other people, due to the need "to reveal one's heart" (i.e. to express one's own thoughts and feelings). 
At this point my picture of zadon started to come into focus. What type of person feels compelled to mock others for his own ego-gratification, is unable to hold back from retaliating when he's angry, and is so intent on expressing his own thoughts and feelings that his mind is closed to chochmah? Someone who operates in a competitive, relative, image-based value system, in which the most efficient way to boost your own standing is to put other people down. Bullying is a common form of zadon behavior. 

And what, then, is tznius if the term is being used as the opposite of zadon? Tznius must refer to the type of humility exhibited by a person who operates in an objective value system, whose self-image is based on chochmah rather than the opinions of other people. 

The fourth and final clue supported this conclusion. I looked up the chapter on tznius in Mivchar ha'Peninim - a collection of Jewish and Arabic ethical teachings widely quoted by the meforshim on Mishlei and Pirkei Avos - and I found the following three proverbs: [Full disclosure - there were more proverbs about tznius than these, and even these weren't presented in this order, but since they're proverbs, I feel that it's okay to pick and choose and rearrange.]
They asked the wise man: “What is tznius?”
He answered: “Chochmah.” 
They asked the wise man: “What is tznius?”
He answered: “That a person feels shame from himself.” 
They asked the wise man. “What is the tznius?”
He answered: “That a person shouldn’t do in secret what he is ashamed to do in public.”
The first proverb goes even further than our pasuk. Whereas Mishlei merely asserts that chochmah is found with tznius, Mivchar ha'Peninim says that chochmah is synonymous with tznius, or is at least an essential component of what tznius is. This is what planted the notion in my head that when Mishlei says, "chochmah is with those who are tzenua," it means that tznius cannot exist without chochmah.  

The other two proverbs fill in a missing piece of our pasuk in Mishlei by explaining the relationship between tznius and shame. In contrast to the ish zadon, who feels shame from other people (which he perceives as "disgrace," since views it as a negative thing), the ish tzenua "feels shame from himself," to the extent that his personal conduct will not change based on whether is being observed by others. In other words, the ish zadon might refrain from doing something wrong if it would cause others to look down on him, but he would act differently if nobody were watching. The ish tzenua, whose value system is based on chochmah, which is objective, would refrain from doing the wrong thing even if nobody saw him do it. 

At this point I was able to answer all six questions on the pasuk. Although Rabbeinu Yonah played a major role in helping me to understand the pasuk, I deviated from his approach in one major way. He explains "When zadon comes, disgrace will come" to mean that the ish zadon brings disgrace to other people by putting them down, whereas I explain that not only does he bring disgrace to other people, but he subjects himself to disgrace by pledging allegiance to a relative value system which ascribes importance to how other people view him. Likewise, Rabbeinu Yonah explains "wisdom is with those who are tzenua" to mean that the ish tzenua will acquire chochmah by listening to others, whereas I understand it to mean that chochmah is what makes him tzenua in the first place, as the Mivchar ha'Peninim implies. I think this is a more satisfactory explanation of the awkward phrasing in the pasuk: "When zadon comes, disgrace will come." 

So that's my basic understanding of tznius according to Mishlei. As we emphasized in our Yom Iyun, Mishlei teaches that tznius is about more than the way we dress. And yet, it is easy to see how the importance we place on clothing and appearances can be either consonant with or antithetical to the middah of tznius. A person who lacks tznius will relate to her clothing and appearance as a barometer for her own self-worth, and will make fashion choices designed to garner maximum admiration from other people in order to achieve "success" in the arena of public opinion. A person who has the quality of tznius will base her sense of self-worth on that which is objectively good (i.e. her knowledge, her middos, her mitzvos), and will not attach any real value to how much people admire her external beauty. To the contrary, she will recognize how easy it is to get caught up in such a relative value system, and will take measures to safeguard herself from its allure, and she will find that her dress code is a good method for such safeguarding.

Wednesday, July 26, 2017

Mishlei 11:1 - How to Neutralize the Yetzer ha'Ra

Click here for a printer-friendly version of this blog post.

Artwork: Counterbalance, by Joseph Meehan


Mishlei 11:1 - How to Neutralize the Yetzer ha'Ra

משלי יא:א
מֹאזְנֵי מִרְמָה תּוֹעֲבַת יְיָ, וְאֶבֶן שְׁלֵמָה רְצוֹנוֹ:

Mishlei 11:1
Deceitful scales are an abomination to Hashem, but a perfect weight is His desire.

The questions on this pasuk are:
(1) What are "deceitful scales" and "a perfect weight"? Factually, what are we talking about here? 
(2) What is the meaning of the phrases "abomination to Hashem" and "His desire"? "Abomination of Hashem" is a loaded term, and is used to describe a wide variety of actions throughout Tanach. "Hashem's desire" is vague. And while we're at it, why does Mishlei characterize the two halves of the pasuk in terms of Hashem at all? What does this add?
(3) What makes "deceitful scales" an "abomination to Hashem"? Why is "a perfect weight" considered to be "His desire"? Essentially, this is asking, "What is the pasuk teaching us?"
[This is a difficult one. I recommend thinking about it before reading my explanation.]

If memory serves me correctly, I heard this explanation from one of my rabbeim. Here is my four-sentence summary:
“Deceitful scales” refers to scales which are falsely calibrated to earn illicit profit by clandestinely skimming money from the buyer. This pasuk refers not to the prohibition against using deceitful skills, but the separate prohibition of owning deceitful scales, as it is stated, “You shall not have in your pouch a weight and a weight etc. for anyone who does this is an abomination to Hashem” (Devarim 25:16). Shlomo ha’Melech reiterated this prohibition in Mishlei in order to highlight the underlying principle of decision-making to be gained therefrom, namely, that the time to do battle with the yetzer ha’ra (evil inclination) is not in the heat of the moment, but far in advance – before the temptation is even awakened. Although it might be possible to overcome the temptation in the moment through sheer will-power, chances are that this will be a losing battle.
There are many approaches out there for dealing with the yezter ha'ra, some of which attempt to confront the yeter ha'ra head on. According to Mishlei, this approach is rarely successful. The emotions are too overwhelming. If a person says, "I don't need to get rid of my unbalanced scales. I'll just resist the temptation to use them if the urge ever arises," then that person is just setting himself or herself up for failure. You can't count on winning that battle.

Inherent in the method of Mishlei is the idea that - as cliche as it sounds - the best defense against the yetzer ha'ra is a good offense. Those who strategically prepare themselves adequately ahead of time will be able to thwart the yetzer ha'ra before it even gets going "Do not approach the path of the wicked, and do not walk in the way of evildoers. Reject it; do not pass on it; veer away from it and pass on" (Mishlei 4:14-15).

Now, perhaps you'll have noticed that this explanation doesn't answer Question #2. That is true, and that is fine. I've mentioned in previous Mishlei posts that there are "major questions" and "minor questions," and that the majority of the meforshim (with the exception of the Malbim) focus on getting the main idea of the pasuk and don't always concern themselves with the details. The difficulty lies in knowing what is a detail and what is an essential part of the main idea.

When it comes to our pasuk we must ask: is "abomination of Hashem" a technical term which must be defined in order to access the main idea, or is it merely a poetic, emotionally charged term for describing something as "bad" in the eyes of Hashem? Undoubtedly, the meforshim will disagree on questions like this, and the student of Mishlei has no choice but to consider both views and then follow his or her intuition.

In this case, my rebbi - whose idea this is - didn't delve into the meaning of the terms "abomination" or "desire." That's fine. If you can come up with an answer to Question #2 which brings out a subtlety in this idea, or opens the door to a new idea, then that's fine as well.

Either way, we've come away from this pasuk with a clear, practical idea - which is why Shlomo ha'Melech wrote Mishlei in the first place.

There's one last methodology point I'd like to mention, even though it doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the idea of the pasuk. Rabbeinu Yonah, in his commentary on this pasuk, writes:
Deceitful scales are an abomination of Hashem. This is explicitly stated in the Torah, as it is said: "You shall not have in your pocket a stone and a stone etc." (Devarim 25:13), "for all who do this are an abomination of Hashem" (ibid. 25:16). [Therefore,] you need to seek out a reason why Shlomo (peace be upon him) found it necessary to rewrite this without adding any explanation or clarification of meaning.
One of the common mistakes that new Mishlei students make is to offer "explanations" of the pasuk which amount to little more than affirming that "the Torah says this is bad" or "the Torah says this is good." Rabbeinu Yonah confirms what logic itself tells us, namely, that Shlomo ha'Melech isn't going to waste his time merely repeating what the Torah already told us. And if he seems to be repeating the Torah verbatim or near-verbatim, like he does here, then our task is to figure out what he is adding by reiterating the Torah's statement in Mishlei. 

Monday, June 22, 2015

Some Musings on Achdus (Jewish Unity)

Originally posted in July 2013



Some Musings on Achdus (Jewish Unity)

The term "achdus" (Jewish unity) often comes up in discussions about social and political issues concerning the Jewish community. This concept is often invoked with unspoken qualifiers, such as "absolute achdus" or "unconditional achdus" or "achdus irrespective of our differences." Such calls for achdus are often bolstered with statements such as "kol Yisrael areivim zeh la'zeh" ("Every Jew is responsible for one another") and "ve'ahavta l'reiecha kamocha" ("You shall love your fellow [Jew] as yourself"). Some go so far as to hurl accusations of sinas chinam (baseless hatred) at anyone whose views are perceived as a threat to this achdus.

There is a simple truth which could stand to be reiterated from time to time: there is good achdus and bad achdus. In order to achieve the former, we must be able to understand, identify, and avoid the latter. That is the topic of this blog post.

We can examine this distinction from many different angles, but in this post we will focus on the statement of Hillel in Avos 2:4: "Al tifrosh min ha'tzibur" ("Do not separate from the community"). The Rishonim take a number of different approaches on this mishnah. I will now present excerpts from the commentaries of three Rishonim. As you read through their explanations, see if you can spot the common denominator. 

We will begin with the commentary of Rabbeinu Yonah:
When the community is involved with a mitzvah, this a crown for the Life of Worlds and an honor for His entire dominion, for when the multitude of the nation gathers to fulfill His mitzvos, it is a "glory for the King" (Mishlei 14:28), and it isn't right to separate from them, as it is stated, "He became King over Yeshurun when the numbers of the nation gathered - the tribes of Israel in unity" (Devarim 33:5)
All of this applies to when the congregation is following a good path and is gathered to do mitzvos. But when the congregation turns to a bad path and their actions are corrupt, it is not right to join with them, and one who separates from them is praiseworthy. Concerning this, Yirmiyahu ha'Navi said: "If only someone would give me a travelers' lodge in the wilderness, then I would forsake my people and leave them, for they are all adulterers, a band of traitors" (Yirmiyahu 9:1). 
Next, the Meiri:
There are those who explain "do not separate from the community" in reference to their customs (i.e. a person shouldn't deviate from the customs of the community). This isn't a valid interpretation, for if [their customs] are good, then the same would apply even to an individual (i.e. one shouldn't deviate from the good customs of even a single person), but if they are bad, it is proper to rebuke them and to guide him on the straight path - that is, if he is worthy [to rebuke them]. But if he is not worthy [to rebuke them] or if they don't listen to him, then it is definitely proper to separate from them, and even to distance oneself from them exceedingly, in order to be saved from their companionship - even if he is their relative or close friend, as it was stated, "Go for yourself, from your land and from your birthplace" (Bereishis 12:1). And if he doesn't do this, he should be fearful for his soul, lest he perish on account of the sin of the city (cf. Bereishis 19:15). 
Lastly, the Rashbatz:
When the actions of the community are corrupt, one who separates from them is praiseworthy. Concerning this, Yirmiyahu ha'Navi said: "If only someone would give me a travelers' lodge in the wilderness, then I would forsake my people and leave them, for they are all adulterers etc." (Yirmiyahu 9:1). And David said: "I hated the gathering of evildoers, and I did not sit with the wicked" (Tehilim 26:5). And Yeshaya said: "Don't talk about a 'unified group,' for everything this people speaks of is a 'unified group'" (Yeshaya 8:12, translated according to Metzudas Tzion). And the Torah says: "Do not go after the majority for evil" (Shemos 23:2). 
But if their actions aren't too corrupt, you shouldn't separate from them ... 
Did you figure it out? That's right. Although these three Rishonim differ in their interpretation Hillel's statement, they are unanimous in their rejection of "absolute achdus," "unconditional achdus," and "achdus irrespective of our differences." 

Achdus Yisrael is beneficial for society and brings glory to God, but only when that achdus is harmonious with His ratzon. Rebbi Yochanan ha'Sandlar expressed this point when he said: "Any congregation which is for the sake of heaven will ultimately prevail, but one which isn't for the sake of heaven will ultimately not prevail" (Avos 4:11). No matter how this mishnah, it is clear that he is not advocating unconditional achdus.

Artwork: False Peace, by Zina Saunders
To my mind, one of the best depictions of the good type of achdus Yisrael is the Rosh ha'Shanah edition of the third brachah of the shemoneh esreh:
You are kadosh (transcendent) and Your Name is kadosh, and kedoshim praise You every day, forever. And so, too, O Hashem, our God, instill Your awe upon all Your works, and Your dread upon all that You have created. Let all works fear You and all creatures prostrate themselves before You. Let them all become a single society, to do Your will wholeheartedly. For as we know, Hashem, our God, that the dominion is Yours, might is in Your hand and strength is in Your right hand, and Your Name inspires awe over all that You have created. 
The natural question is: How can this achdus be achieved?  On the surface, it would seem that this is an unanswerable question. The question of how to achieve peace has plagued every society since the dawn of mankind. The problem is so multifaceted and daunting that it doesn't even seem worthwhile to ask the question.

Thankfully, Judaism provides a clear answer to this question. How can true achdus be achieved? Through knowledge. I can't express this point any better than the Rambam in the Moreh ha'Nevuchim 3:11, so I'll just quote him in full (with my own paragraph breaks):
All the great evils which men cause to each other because of certain intentions, desires, opinions, or religious principles, are likewise due to non-existence, because they originate in ignorance, which is absence of wisdom. 
A blind man, for example, who has no guide, stumbles constantly, because he cannot see, and causes injury and harm to himself and others. In the same manner, various classes of men, each man in proportion to his ignorance, bring great evils upon themselves and upon other individual members of the species. 
If men possessed wisdom, which stands in the same relation to the form of man as the sight to the eye, they would not cause any injury to themselves or to others: for the knowledge of truth removes hatred and quarrels, and prevents mutual injuries. 
This state of society is promised to us by the prophet in the words: “The wolf will live with the sheep [and the leopard will lie down with the kid; and a calf, a lion whelp, and a fatling together, and a young child will lead them.] A cow bear will graze and their young will lie down together; [and a lion, like cattle, will eat hay.] A suckling child will play by a viper’s mouth; [and a newly weaned child will stretch his hand toward an adder’s lair” (Yeshaya 11:6-8). 
The prophet also points out what will be the cause of this change, for he says that hatred, quarrel, and fighting will come to an end, because men will then have a true knowledge of God. “They will neither injure nor destroy in all of My holy mountain; for the earth will be as filled with knowledge of Hashem as water covering the sea bed” (ibid. 11:9). Note it.
The key to achdus Yisrael is knowledge: knowledge of ourselves, knowledge of Torah, knowledge of the world - all in the framework of knowledge of Hashem. "But let him that glorify himself glory in this: understanding and knowing Me, that I am Hashem, Who does kindness, justice, and righteousness on the earth, for in these is My desire – the word of Hashem" (Yirmiyahu 9:23).

Of course, the Rambam does not mean to suggest that all we need to do is learn Torah 24/7 and everything will automatically take care of itself. People are complicated, and the problems we make for ourselves and for each other are equally complicated. Rather, the Rambam is saying that since ignorance is the root of all problems bein adam l'chaveiro, then all efforts to solve those problems must be based upon, guided by, and move towards knowledge. 

There is one last point I'd like to raise in this post - and this is where it gets tricky. The quest for knowledge must, of necessity, involve disagreement. It must also involve opposition to falsehood - opposition in in mind, in speech, and in action. In an ideal world, this would take place in the spirit of mutual respect and truth-seeking, untainted by ego and other negative emotions. The mishnah in Avos 5:17 points to the disagreements of Hillel and Shammai as the paradigm of "good disagreement" (a.k.a. "machlokes l'shem shamayim" or "disagreement for the sake of heaven").

Unfortunately, we do not live in an ideal world. Our world is filled with people who are intellectually and emotionally immature. We, ourselves, are intellectually and emotionally immature in comparison to others - and even the greatest thinkers are prone to bouts of immaturity. This makes things a lot more contentious and difficult. "Machlokes she'lo l'shem shamayim" ("disagreement not for the sake of heaven") prevails, and threatens to disrupt "the good achdus" at every step of the way.

How are we to conduct ourselves in a world divided by machlokes she'lo l'shem shamayim? Generally speaking, there are only two directions in which we, as members of Jewish society, can move in seeking a solution: either we can move towards knowledge, or away from it.

There is a trend among those who promote "unconditional achdus" to point out all of the ugliness that is generated by machlokes she'lo l'shem shamayim. On this score, they are correct: it can get quite ugly, and cause many problems. 

The mistake, however, is the solution that "unconditional achdus" proponents tend to adopt: they tend to believe that shalom can only be achieved by uncritically embracing and/or tolerating all beliefs and opinions as equally valid. Their approach is founded on a lack of basic epistemological yesodos and an erroneous understanding of concepts like shivim panim l'Torah and eilu v'eilu divrei Elokim chayim. They fail to realize that this approach leads away from knowledge, down the road of ignorance, and - according to the Rambam cited above - to increased harm and suffering.

It would behoove us to remember the example set by Korach and his assembly, in their rebellion against Moshe Rabbeinu. Their machlokes with Moshe is identified by the mishnah in Avos as a machlokes she'lo l'shem shamayim - and yet, we do not see Moshe tolerating their views as "equal." The same is true of all the neviim and chachamim throughout Tanach. No matter how steeped in falsehood their society was, they never abandoned their commitment to defending knowledge and truth against the voices of ignorance and falsehood. Ahavas Yisrael they had, but not to the point where it compromised their ahavas Hashem, which is inextricably bound up with their ahavas ha'emes

The endeavor to treat all opinions as equally valid will, at best, only achieve a superficial and short-lived achdus - one which will erode the true foundations of true achdus. The only way to secure long-term achdus Yisrael is through the continual and communal pursuit of knowledge. If only we could overlook our differences to the point where we could all engage in an honest and open pursuit of knowledge without validating all opinions. It is possible to treat others with respect, compassion, and genuine empathy without compromising one's commitment to truth-seeking.

I sincerely hope and pray that we all live to see the true achdus in the fulfillment of Tzfania's prophecy: "For then I will change the nations [to speak] a pure language, so that they all will proclaim the Name of Hashem, to worship Him with a unified resolve" (Tzfania 3:9).