Meaning of “Not holding on that level of emuna/bitachon”Pesach/PassoverSefirat Haomer leading to...
Will I be more secure with my own router behind my ISP's router?
Putting Ant-Man on house arrest
Why do people think Winterfell crypts is the safest place for women, children & old people?
Unix AIX passing variable and arguments to expect and spawn
tabularx column has extra padding at right?
Providing direct feedback to a product salesperson
Has a Nobel Peace laureate ever been accused of war crimes?
What is the definining line between a helicopter and a drone a person can ride in?
Why aren't these two solutions equivalent? Combinatorics problem
Why aren't road bike wheels tiny?
Proving inequality for positive definite matrix
Why these surprising proportionalities of integrals involving odd zeta values?
Etymology of 見舞い
Compiling and throwing simple dynamic exceptions at runtime for JVM
Why did Bronn offer to be Tyrion Lannister's champion in trial by combat?
What's the connection between Mr. Nancy and fried chicken?
2 sample t test for sample sizes - 30,000 and 150,000
Sorting the characters in a utf-16 string in java
What could prevent concentrated local exploration?
Can a Wizard take the Magic Initiate feat and select spells from the Wizard list?
Who can become a wight?
Is there a verb for listening stealthily?
Is it OK if I do not take the receipt in Germany?
Weaponising the Grasp-at-a-Distance spell
Meaning of “Not holding on that level of emuna/bitachon”
Pesach/PassoverSefirat Haomer leading to Shavuot
Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara
Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 23:30 UTC (7:30pm US/Eastern)
Best Answer Contest winners! Second quarter of 5779
To celebrate Mi Yodeya's tenth birthday, let's divide and conquer the entire…Conversion: If G-d really wanted me to be a Jew (and observe mitzvot), why was I not born into a Jewish familyIs there a source where Emuna and Bitachon are described as separate ideas?Clarifications on FaithHow do we logically know that there are not 2 Gods (according to the Chovos HaLevavos)?Why do Jews believe the entire Torah, as opposed to parts or most, was given by God to Moses?Meaning of “emunah shlaima”?If voting doesn't do anything, should one vote?Explanation of Alter Rebbe's proof of G-d?How does Hashem relate to the bitachon (faith) of a wicked person?How does one know his balance between Hishtadlus and Bitachon?
(Hi newbie here :) I hope I'm writing this post correctly.)
What does it mean when people say "I'm not holding on that level of emuna/bitachon"?
I've seen and heard countless times when people say that really whatever is supposed to happen will happen just "I'm not holding on that level" therefore they do more hishtadlus.
How does this make sense? Either you believe or you don't.
If you believe then why do you need more hishtadlus if you don't believe aren't you considered a heretic?
hashkafah-philosophy faith-bitachon-emunah
New contributor
add a comment |
(Hi newbie here :) I hope I'm writing this post correctly.)
What does it mean when people say "I'm not holding on that level of emuna/bitachon"?
I've seen and heard countless times when people say that really whatever is supposed to happen will happen just "I'm not holding on that level" therefore they do more hishtadlus.
How does this make sense? Either you believe or you don't.
If you believe then why do you need more hishtadlus if you don't believe aren't you considered a heretic?
hashkafah-philosophy faith-bitachon-emunah
New contributor
how do you know what is the proper amount of hishtadlus?
– michael
9 hours ago
1
Not sure I've ever heard that said
– Double AA♦
9 hours ago
@michael let's take an easy example. Winning a raffle. One ticket is enough hishtadlus. But ask someone if they would rather have 9 tickets in a 10:1 raffle.
– Chaim
9 hours ago
add a comment |
(Hi newbie here :) I hope I'm writing this post correctly.)
What does it mean when people say "I'm not holding on that level of emuna/bitachon"?
I've seen and heard countless times when people say that really whatever is supposed to happen will happen just "I'm not holding on that level" therefore they do more hishtadlus.
How does this make sense? Either you believe or you don't.
If you believe then why do you need more hishtadlus if you don't believe aren't you considered a heretic?
hashkafah-philosophy faith-bitachon-emunah
New contributor
(Hi newbie here :) I hope I'm writing this post correctly.)
What does it mean when people say "I'm not holding on that level of emuna/bitachon"?
I've seen and heard countless times when people say that really whatever is supposed to happen will happen just "I'm not holding on that level" therefore they do more hishtadlus.
How does this make sense? Either you believe or you don't.
If you believe then why do you need more hishtadlus if you don't believe aren't you considered a heretic?
hashkafah-philosophy faith-bitachon-emunah
hashkafah-philosophy faith-bitachon-emunah
New contributor
New contributor
edited 6 hours ago
Al Berko
6,7132529
6,7132529
New contributor
asked 10 hours ago
ChaimChaim
162
162
New contributor
New contributor
how do you know what is the proper amount of hishtadlus?
– michael
9 hours ago
1
Not sure I've ever heard that said
– Double AA♦
9 hours ago
@michael let's take an easy example. Winning a raffle. One ticket is enough hishtadlus. But ask someone if they would rather have 9 tickets in a 10:1 raffle.
– Chaim
9 hours ago
add a comment |
how do you know what is the proper amount of hishtadlus?
– michael
9 hours ago
1
Not sure I've ever heard that said
– Double AA♦
9 hours ago
@michael let's take an easy example. Winning a raffle. One ticket is enough hishtadlus. But ask someone if they would rather have 9 tickets in a 10:1 raffle.
– Chaim
9 hours ago
how do you know what is the proper amount of hishtadlus?
– michael
9 hours ago
how do you know what is the proper amount of hishtadlus?
– michael
9 hours ago
1
1
Not sure I've ever heard that said
– Double AA♦
9 hours ago
Not sure I've ever heard that said
– Double AA♦
9 hours ago
@michael let's take an easy example. Winning a raffle. One ticket is enough hishtadlus. But ask someone if they would rather have 9 tickets in a 10:1 raffle.
– Chaim
9 hours ago
@michael let's take an easy example. Winning a raffle. One ticket is enough hishtadlus. But ask someone if they would rather have 9 tickets in a 10:1 raffle.
– Chaim
9 hours ago
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
Chaim, welcome to Mi Yodeya.
I am not overly familiar with the changing nuances of "yeshivish", so I can't say that this particular phrase is something that I have heard verbatim. But, in addressing the concept implied by your question, you may want to gain some clarity between two similar terms - bitachon and emunah.
There are numerous articles on this topic, but I think this summary from "The Shmuz" is good:
The Rambam defines emunah as the knowledge that HASHEM created and
continues to run all of Creation. Simply put, nothing can exist and no
activity can occur without HASHEM.
Bitachon, however, is a quite different. The Chovos Halevovos defines
bitachon as trusting in HASHEM. It is a sense of relying on HASHEM to
watch over and protect me, as if to say, “I take my heavy burden and
place it on HASHEM.” While I am responsible to be proactive, I am not
in charge of the outcome, and I am not the determinant of the results.
I rely on HASHEM to care for me.
Emunah is a state of understanding; bitachon is a state of trust.
Emunah means knowing that HASHEM is involved in every activity on the
planet; bitachon means trusting in HASHEM in every situation.
A person can have emunah and not bitachon
So, to clarify the expression that you've probably heard, you are correct in that either you have emunah or not. This is kind of an absolute degree of understanding and appreciation. Either you believe that God is responsible for everything that happens or not. You can't just believe that God is responsible for some things and not for others. The concept of emunah is that God is involved in everything. If you don't believe that, you have a lack of emunah. I think a heretic involved specific stronger action then just a lack of emunah. I.e. this doesn't deny that there is a God, and it doesn't mean that you convince others of the idea. It's that you think that some things, perhaps, happen by God, but not other things. A heretic denies that God is involved in anything at all.
Now bitachon - yes, there are definitely levels to this. We see this every day in numerous people. Many people believe that if they invest in Amazon stocks today, that almost guarantees that they will make a profit in a year. What happens when that fails? They mope, they suffer distress, etc. They didn't trust that the ultimate outcome is up to God. They lacked bitachon. Or, opposite, I'm sure you've seen shidduchim break off because someone found a minor flaw in the other and thought that was major to not make the marriage work. If they had a greater level of bitachon, and trusted that God decides the outcome, they might have continued the shidduch.
In summary, I think people really mean to say "My level of bitachon is not great; I need to work on that." It is, possible that they were referring to "emunah", but, as I explained, above, it seems that emunah doesn't have degrees or partiality.
Thanks for the response. I'm not understanding how the word "trust" relates to bitachon. Is there anybody that thinks God has a reason not to do what He usually does? Even after this distinction between emuna and bitachon I still have a hard time understanding how it's possible to have different levels of bitachon. How is it possible for you to believe someone always does something but not "trust" them that they will?
– Chaim
5 hours ago
Chaim, I think you may be missing a significant nuance. A comparison may help. A son may believe that his father is the person who is responsible for his welfare. I.e., the son understands the role of his father to do that. However, he may not trust that his father will be there to care for him under all circumstances and every situation.
– DanF
4 hours ago
add a comment |
I'll give you an example: It is very clearly seen here in Jerusalem's HMOs when the residents of all kinds bring their kids to vaccinate. First, come the secular, then Kipah Sruga, then the Litvakes, then the Chassidishers and the last (but not least) the Yerushalmi. And some never come.
And we can rate them clearly according to their level of Bitachon in Hashem. So each previous group can say "I don't have that level of Bitachon of the next group ... to put my kids in danger".
Lol I was going to write vaccines as an example but I figured I'll stick away from the controversy
– Chaim
6 hours ago
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Chaim, welcome to Mi Yodeya.
I am not overly familiar with the changing nuances of "yeshivish", so I can't say that this particular phrase is something that I have heard verbatim. But, in addressing the concept implied by your question, you may want to gain some clarity between two similar terms - bitachon and emunah.
There are numerous articles on this topic, but I think this summary from "The Shmuz" is good:
The Rambam defines emunah as the knowledge that HASHEM created and
continues to run all of Creation. Simply put, nothing can exist and no
activity can occur without HASHEM.
Bitachon, however, is a quite different. The Chovos Halevovos defines
bitachon as trusting in HASHEM. It is a sense of relying on HASHEM to
watch over and protect me, as if to say, “I take my heavy burden and
place it on HASHEM.” While I am responsible to be proactive, I am not
in charge of the outcome, and I am not the determinant of the results.
I rely on HASHEM to care for me.
Emunah is a state of understanding; bitachon is a state of trust.
Emunah means knowing that HASHEM is involved in every activity on the
planet; bitachon means trusting in HASHEM in every situation.
A person can have emunah and not bitachon
So, to clarify the expression that you've probably heard, you are correct in that either you have emunah or not. This is kind of an absolute degree of understanding and appreciation. Either you believe that God is responsible for everything that happens or not. You can't just believe that God is responsible for some things and not for others. The concept of emunah is that God is involved in everything. If you don't believe that, you have a lack of emunah. I think a heretic involved specific stronger action then just a lack of emunah. I.e. this doesn't deny that there is a God, and it doesn't mean that you convince others of the idea. It's that you think that some things, perhaps, happen by God, but not other things. A heretic denies that God is involved in anything at all.
Now bitachon - yes, there are definitely levels to this. We see this every day in numerous people. Many people believe that if they invest in Amazon stocks today, that almost guarantees that they will make a profit in a year. What happens when that fails? They mope, they suffer distress, etc. They didn't trust that the ultimate outcome is up to God. They lacked bitachon. Or, opposite, I'm sure you've seen shidduchim break off because someone found a minor flaw in the other and thought that was major to not make the marriage work. If they had a greater level of bitachon, and trusted that God decides the outcome, they might have continued the shidduch.
In summary, I think people really mean to say "My level of bitachon is not great; I need to work on that." It is, possible that they were referring to "emunah", but, as I explained, above, it seems that emunah doesn't have degrees or partiality.
Thanks for the response. I'm not understanding how the word "trust" relates to bitachon. Is there anybody that thinks God has a reason not to do what He usually does? Even after this distinction between emuna and bitachon I still have a hard time understanding how it's possible to have different levels of bitachon. How is it possible for you to believe someone always does something but not "trust" them that they will?
– Chaim
5 hours ago
Chaim, I think you may be missing a significant nuance. A comparison may help. A son may believe that his father is the person who is responsible for his welfare. I.e., the son understands the role of his father to do that. However, he may not trust that his father will be there to care for him under all circumstances and every situation.
– DanF
4 hours ago
add a comment |
Chaim, welcome to Mi Yodeya.
I am not overly familiar with the changing nuances of "yeshivish", so I can't say that this particular phrase is something that I have heard verbatim. But, in addressing the concept implied by your question, you may want to gain some clarity between two similar terms - bitachon and emunah.
There are numerous articles on this topic, but I think this summary from "The Shmuz" is good:
The Rambam defines emunah as the knowledge that HASHEM created and
continues to run all of Creation. Simply put, nothing can exist and no
activity can occur without HASHEM.
Bitachon, however, is a quite different. The Chovos Halevovos defines
bitachon as trusting in HASHEM. It is a sense of relying on HASHEM to
watch over and protect me, as if to say, “I take my heavy burden and
place it on HASHEM.” While I am responsible to be proactive, I am not
in charge of the outcome, and I am not the determinant of the results.
I rely on HASHEM to care for me.
Emunah is a state of understanding; bitachon is a state of trust.
Emunah means knowing that HASHEM is involved in every activity on the
planet; bitachon means trusting in HASHEM in every situation.
A person can have emunah and not bitachon
So, to clarify the expression that you've probably heard, you are correct in that either you have emunah or not. This is kind of an absolute degree of understanding and appreciation. Either you believe that God is responsible for everything that happens or not. You can't just believe that God is responsible for some things and not for others. The concept of emunah is that God is involved in everything. If you don't believe that, you have a lack of emunah. I think a heretic involved specific stronger action then just a lack of emunah. I.e. this doesn't deny that there is a God, and it doesn't mean that you convince others of the idea. It's that you think that some things, perhaps, happen by God, but not other things. A heretic denies that God is involved in anything at all.
Now bitachon - yes, there are definitely levels to this. We see this every day in numerous people. Many people believe that if they invest in Amazon stocks today, that almost guarantees that they will make a profit in a year. What happens when that fails? They mope, they suffer distress, etc. They didn't trust that the ultimate outcome is up to God. They lacked bitachon. Or, opposite, I'm sure you've seen shidduchim break off because someone found a minor flaw in the other and thought that was major to not make the marriage work. If they had a greater level of bitachon, and trusted that God decides the outcome, they might have continued the shidduch.
In summary, I think people really mean to say "My level of bitachon is not great; I need to work on that." It is, possible that they were referring to "emunah", but, as I explained, above, it seems that emunah doesn't have degrees or partiality.
Thanks for the response. I'm not understanding how the word "trust" relates to bitachon. Is there anybody that thinks God has a reason not to do what He usually does? Even after this distinction between emuna and bitachon I still have a hard time understanding how it's possible to have different levels of bitachon. How is it possible for you to believe someone always does something but not "trust" them that they will?
– Chaim
5 hours ago
Chaim, I think you may be missing a significant nuance. A comparison may help. A son may believe that his father is the person who is responsible for his welfare. I.e., the son understands the role of his father to do that. However, he may not trust that his father will be there to care for him under all circumstances and every situation.
– DanF
4 hours ago
add a comment |
Chaim, welcome to Mi Yodeya.
I am not overly familiar with the changing nuances of "yeshivish", so I can't say that this particular phrase is something that I have heard verbatim. But, in addressing the concept implied by your question, you may want to gain some clarity between two similar terms - bitachon and emunah.
There are numerous articles on this topic, but I think this summary from "The Shmuz" is good:
The Rambam defines emunah as the knowledge that HASHEM created and
continues to run all of Creation. Simply put, nothing can exist and no
activity can occur without HASHEM.
Bitachon, however, is a quite different. The Chovos Halevovos defines
bitachon as trusting in HASHEM. It is a sense of relying on HASHEM to
watch over and protect me, as if to say, “I take my heavy burden and
place it on HASHEM.” While I am responsible to be proactive, I am not
in charge of the outcome, and I am not the determinant of the results.
I rely on HASHEM to care for me.
Emunah is a state of understanding; bitachon is a state of trust.
Emunah means knowing that HASHEM is involved in every activity on the
planet; bitachon means trusting in HASHEM in every situation.
A person can have emunah and not bitachon
So, to clarify the expression that you've probably heard, you are correct in that either you have emunah or not. This is kind of an absolute degree of understanding and appreciation. Either you believe that God is responsible for everything that happens or not. You can't just believe that God is responsible for some things and not for others. The concept of emunah is that God is involved in everything. If you don't believe that, you have a lack of emunah. I think a heretic involved specific stronger action then just a lack of emunah. I.e. this doesn't deny that there is a God, and it doesn't mean that you convince others of the idea. It's that you think that some things, perhaps, happen by God, but not other things. A heretic denies that God is involved in anything at all.
Now bitachon - yes, there are definitely levels to this. We see this every day in numerous people. Many people believe that if they invest in Amazon stocks today, that almost guarantees that they will make a profit in a year. What happens when that fails? They mope, they suffer distress, etc. They didn't trust that the ultimate outcome is up to God. They lacked bitachon. Or, opposite, I'm sure you've seen shidduchim break off because someone found a minor flaw in the other and thought that was major to not make the marriage work. If they had a greater level of bitachon, and trusted that God decides the outcome, they might have continued the shidduch.
In summary, I think people really mean to say "My level of bitachon is not great; I need to work on that." It is, possible that they were referring to "emunah", but, as I explained, above, it seems that emunah doesn't have degrees or partiality.
Chaim, welcome to Mi Yodeya.
I am not overly familiar with the changing nuances of "yeshivish", so I can't say that this particular phrase is something that I have heard verbatim. But, in addressing the concept implied by your question, you may want to gain some clarity between two similar terms - bitachon and emunah.
There are numerous articles on this topic, but I think this summary from "The Shmuz" is good:
The Rambam defines emunah as the knowledge that HASHEM created and
continues to run all of Creation. Simply put, nothing can exist and no
activity can occur without HASHEM.
Bitachon, however, is a quite different. The Chovos Halevovos defines
bitachon as trusting in HASHEM. It is a sense of relying on HASHEM to
watch over and protect me, as if to say, “I take my heavy burden and
place it on HASHEM.” While I am responsible to be proactive, I am not
in charge of the outcome, and I am not the determinant of the results.
I rely on HASHEM to care for me.
Emunah is a state of understanding; bitachon is a state of trust.
Emunah means knowing that HASHEM is involved in every activity on the
planet; bitachon means trusting in HASHEM in every situation.
A person can have emunah and not bitachon
So, to clarify the expression that you've probably heard, you are correct in that either you have emunah or not. This is kind of an absolute degree of understanding and appreciation. Either you believe that God is responsible for everything that happens or not. You can't just believe that God is responsible for some things and not for others. The concept of emunah is that God is involved in everything. If you don't believe that, you have a lack of emunah. I think a heretic involved specific stronger action then just a lack of emunah. I.e. this doesn't deny that there is a God, and it doesn't mean that you convince others of the idea. It's that you think that some things, perhaps, happen by God, but not other things. A heretic denies that God is involved in anything at all.
Now bitachon - yes, there are definitely levels to this. We see this every day in numerous people. Many people believe that if they invest in Amazon stocks today, that almost guarantees that they will make a profit in a year. What happens when that fails? They mope, they suffer distress, etc. They didn't trust that the ultimate outcome is up to God. They lacked bitachon. Or, opposite, I'm sure you've seen shidduchim break off because someone found a minor flaw in the other and thought that was major to not make the marriage work. If they had a greater level of bitachon, and trusted that God decides the outcome, they might have continued the shidduch.
In summary, I think people really mean to say "My level of bitachon is not great; I need to work on that." It is, possible that they were referring to "emunah", but, as I explained, above, it seems that emunah doesn't have degrees or partiality.
answered 7 hours ago
DanFDanF
35.5k529137
35.5k529137
Thanks for the response. I'm not understanding how the word "trust" relates to bitachon. Is there anybody that thinks God has a reason not to do what He usually does? Even after this distinction between emuna and bitachon I still have a hard time understanding how it's possible to have different levels of bitachon. How is it possible for you to believe someone always does something but not "trust" them that they will?
– Chaim
5 hours ago
Chaim, I think you may be missing a significant nuance. A comparison may help. A son may believe that his father is the person who is responsible for his welfare. I.e., the son understands the role of his father to do that. However, he may not trust that his father will be there to care for him under all circumstances and every situation.
– DanF
4 hours ago
add a comment |
Thanks for the response. I'm not understanding how the word "trust" relates to bitachon. Is there anybody that thinks God has a reason not to do what He usually does? Even after this distinction between emuna and bitachon I still have a hard time understanding how it's possible to have different levels of bitachon. How is it possible for you to believe someone always does something but not "trust" them that they will?
– Chaim
5 hours ago
Chaim, I think you may be missing a significant nuance. A comparison may help. A son may believe that his father is the person who is responsible for his welfare. I.e., the son understands the role of his father to do that. However, he may not trust that his father will be there to care for him under all circumstances and every situation.
– DanF
4 hours ago
Thanks for the response. I'm not understanding how the word "trust" relates to bitachon. Is there anybody that thinks God has a reason not to do what He usually does? Even after this distinction between emuna and bitachon I still have a hard time understanding how it's possible to have different levels of bitachon. How is it possible for you to believe someone always does something but not "trust" them that they will?
– Chaim
5 hours ago
Thanks for the response. I'm not understanding how the word "trust" relates to bitachon. Is there anybody that thinks God has a reason not to do what He usually does? Even after this distinction between emuna and bitachon I still have a hard time understanding how it's possible to have different levels of bitachon. How is it possible for you to believe someone always does something but not "trust" them that they will?
– Chaim
5 hours ago
Chaim, I think you may be missing a significant nuance. A comparison may help. A son may believe that his father is the person who is responsible for his welfare. I.e., the son understands the role of his father to do that. However, he may not trust that his father will be there to care for him under all circumstances and every situation.
– DanF
4 hours ago
Chaim, I think you may be missing a significant nuance. A comparison may help. A son may believe that his father is the person who is responsible for his welfare. I.e., the son understands the role of his father to do that. However, he may not trust that his father will be there to care for him under all circumstances and every situation.
– DanF
4 hours ago
add a comment |
I'll give you an example: It is very clearly seen here in Jerusalem's HMOs when the residents of all kinds bring their kids to vaccinate. First, come the secular, then Kipah Sruga, then the Litvakes, then the Chassidishers and the last (but not least) the Yerushalmi. And some never come.
And we can rate them clearly according to their level of Bitachon in Hashem. So each previous group can say "I don't have that level of Bitachon of the next group ... to put my kids in danger".
Lol I was going to write vaccines as an example but I figured I'll stick away from the controversy
– Chaim
6 hours ago
add a comment |
I'll give you an example: It is very clearly seen here in Jerusalem's HMOs when the residents of all kinds bring their kids to vaccinate. First, come the secular, then Kipah Sruga, then the Litvakes, then the Chassidishers and the last (but not least) the Yerushalmi. And some never come.
And we can rate them clearly according to their level of Bitachon in Hashem. So each previous group can say "I don't have that level of Bitachon of the next group ... to put my kids in danger".
Lol I was going to write vaccines as an example but I figured I'll stick away from the controversy
– Chaim
6 hours ago
add a comment |
I'll give you an example: It is very clearly seen here in Jerusalem's HMOs when the residents of all kinds bring their kids to vaccinate. First, come the secular, then Kipah Sruga, then the Litvakes, then the Chassidishers and the last (but not least) the Yerushalmi. And some never come.
And we can rate them clearly according to their level of Bitachon in Hashem. So each previous group can say "I don't have that level of Bitachon of the next group ... to put my kids in danger".
I'll give you an example: It is very clearly seen here in Jerusalem's HMOs when the residents of all kinds bring their kids to vaccinate. First, come the secular, then Kipah Sruga, then the Litvakes, then the Chassidishers and the last (but not least) the Yerushalmi. And some never come.
And we can rate them clearly according to their level of Bitachon in Hashem. So each previous group can say "I don't have that level of Bitachon of the next group ... to put my kids in danger".
answered 6 hours ago
Al BerkoAl Berko
6,7132529
6,7132529
Lol I was going to write vaccines as an example but I figured I'll stick away from the controversy
– Chaim
6 hours ago
add a comment |
Lol I was going to write vaccines as an example but I figured I'll stick away from the controversy
– Chaim
6 hours ago
Lol I was going to write vaccines as an example but I figured I'll stick away from the controversy
– Chaim
6 hours ago
Lol I was going to write vaccines as an example but I figured I'll stick away from the controversy
– Chaim
6 hours ago
add a comment |
how do you know what is the proper amount of hishtadlus?
– michael
9 hours ago
1
Not sure I've ever heard that said
– Double AA♦
9 hours ago
@michael let's take an easy example. Winning a raffle. One ticket is enough hishtadlus. But ask someone if they would rather have 9 tickets in a 10:1 raffle.
– Chaim
9 hours ago