The Butterfly Effect

In 1961, Edward Lorenz used a numerical computer model to rerun a weather prediction. As a shortcut on a number in the sequence, he entered the decimal .506 instead of the full .506127 the computer would hold. The result was a completely different weather scenario. Lorenz published his findings in a 1963 New York Academy of Sciences paper: “One meteorologist remarked that if the theory were correct, one flap of a seagull’s wings could change the course of weather forever.” Later speeches and papers by Lorenz used the more poetic butterfly. According to Lorenz, upon failing to provide a title for a talk he was to present at the 139th meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science in 1972, Philip Merilees concocted, “Does the flap of a butterfly’s wings in Brazil set off a tornado in Texas?” as a title. Hence the popular term “The Butterfly Effect.”

How does the Torah view The Butterfly Effect? Would one be responsible for a possibly unforeseeable consequence of his actions?

The Gemara relates an interesting episode (Bava Basra 73b). Rabbah bar Bar Chanah came across geese in the desert who were excessively fat. Their feathers were falling off because of their corpulence. Underneath them, rivers of oil (excess fat) flowed. Following Rabbah bar Bar Chanah’s query about whether he was destined to receive any part of them as his reward in the World to Come, one of the birds raised its wing and another its thigh, intimating that they represented his reward. Rebbi Elazar commented that Yisrael would have to give reckoning for this.

What did Rebbi Elazar mean by his enigmatic statement? The Rashbam explains that he was referring to Klal Yisrael committing sins, thereby delaying Mashiach’s arrival. As a result of the delay, these geese were getting fatter and fatter, causing them increased suffering. Klal Yisrael will be taken to task for causing these geese to suffer.

Presumably, if a person sinned, he would be unaware of these birds. Yet the totally unintended consequence of his action is that geese will suffer. The sinner is held accountable even for that!

A Daf Yomi learner would know that this story is the tenth in a series of fantastic and wild stories. Perhaps one may argue that this story, like the others, is not meant to be taken literally. It seems from the Rashbam that this one is meant literally. However, there is no need to debate this. The same lesson can be derived even if the story is understood homiletically. The Ritva explains that the geese in the story represent the nations of Yishmael and Edom. They do not recognize Hashem and engage in sinful behavior. When Mashiach comes, they will realize the error of their ways and repent. Rebbi Elazar says that a Jewish sinner will be held accountable for delaying Mashiach’s arrival and thereby postponing the repentance of these nations.

When a sinner sins, does he realize that he is delaying Mashiach, thereby postponing Yishmael or Edom’s teshuvah? Certainly not. Yet Rebbe Elazar is teaching us that one is responsible for the consequences of his actions, even unintended ones. My rebbi and father, shlita, remarked that one can derive a similar lesson from Neviim.

Yehonasan heard his father, King Shaul, pronounce a death sentence on his dear friend Dovid for rebelling against him. Yehonasan advised Dovid to flee from his father but did not offer any food for the journey. While fleeing, Dovid passed Nov, a city of kohanim. Since he had no provisions and was sick from starvation, he asked the high priest, Achimelech, to give him bread. Dovid led Achimelech to believe that he had been hurriedly sent out on some urgent errand by the king and therefore possessed no food. The Kohen Gadol trusted Dovid and handed him bread. Consulting the Urim v’Tumim about whether he should assist Dovid further, he was answered affirmatively. He then delivered to Dovid the giant Golias’s sword, which was stored in the Mishkan. Doeg, who was studying Torah in the vicinity of the Mishkan, found out about Dovid’s visit to the city of Nov.

Doeg, who secretly harbored great animosity towards Dovid, told King Shaul, “I saw Dovid appear before the high priest Achimelech in Nov. Achimelech supplied him with provisions and gave him Golias’s sword after he first inquired of the Urim v’Tumim regarding him.” These were slanderous words, insinuating that Achimelech and Dovid were in intimate association, conspiring together against the king. In particular, the report that the High Priest had consulted the Urim v’Tumim on behalf of Dovid could not miss its effect, for it was forbidden to consult the Urim v’Tumim for a private person; their advice was sought only for the king himself or for an emissary of the community. Shaul would conclude, Doeg knew, that Dovid was proclaiming himself king in front of the people.

Shaul accused Achimelech, saying, “Why did you support Dovid by giving him bread and a sword? You acknowledged him as the king, or else why did you inquire of the Urim v’Tumim for his sake? You are conspiring with him, attempting to demote me!”

Achimelech was most surprised at this charge and answered in all sincerity, “Is this the first time that I have inquired of the Urim v’Tumim for Dovid? I thought he was an emissary of the community for whose sake it is permitted to consult the Urim v’Tumim! Chas v’shalom that I should rebel against you! I have no idea what you refer to!”

However, Shaul was adamant. “For this threat to my throne, you all must pay with your lives,” he decreed.

Shaul commanded his generals Avner and Amasa to slay all the kohanim of Nov for being in conspiracy with Dovid, thereby committing treason which warranted the death penalty.

However, these two generals refused, knowing that according to Torah law, one must disobey the king should he demand a service that involves the transgression of the Torah. Certainly, slaying the kohanim was sinful because Shaul’s verdict was based on slander, and he had not investigated the matter objectively. Shaul then turned to Doeg, telling him, “You claim that the kohanim deserve capital punishment. It is the witnesses’ duty to assist in the execution of the accused!”

Doeg agreed and singlehandedly slew 85 kohanim and had the entire city of Nov – men, women, and children – exterminated, thus demonstrating what would happen to anyone lending support to Dovid.

Shaul’s punishment for the annihilation of the city of Nov was his death and the death of three of his sons in battle. Doeg was punished with a premature death and lost his share in the World to Come.

According to the Gemara in Sanhedrin (104a and Rashi there), Yehonasan was punished as well for causing the death of the city of Nov, Shaul, and Doeg.

Yehonasan?! What did he do wrong? He simply failed to provide some food for his friend Dovid when they were making an emotional and tearful departure. Yet that one simple oversight set the whole story above in motion. He is, therefore, held to some degree responsible for all the deaths that resulted.

Let us consider how unforeseeable the above story was from Yehonasan’s point of view. Of all the cities that Dovid would flee to, would he choose Nov? The Kohen Gadol resided in Nov. It was his use of the Urim v’Tumim that cemented the treason charge. If Dovid had fled to any other city, the results would likely have been different. Was the use of the Urim v’Tumim foreseeable by Yehonasan?

Further, what were the odds that when Dovid sought help from Achimlelech, Doeg would be learning nearby? Further, Doeg was revered as a gadol b’Yisrael. He was appointed to one of the highest rabbinical posts, the av beis din, head of the Torah courts. Why should Yehonasan even entertain the thought that Doeg would transgress the Torah prohibition against slander and malign the city of Nov to King Shaul?

Further, King Shaul himself was a big tzaddik. So much so that sometime after his death, Hashem brought drought and famine upon Eretz Yisrael because he was not eulogized and appropriately mourned in the way befitting a man of his outstanding spiritual stature. Was it foreseeable that he would accept lashon hara and wipe out an entire city without performing a proper investigation which was against halacha? Achimelech offered a credible explanation of his actions. Could Yehonasan have foreseen that his father would be blinded to the truth? Further, King Shaul was a very compassionate person. The Gemara in Yoma 22b relates, “On his way to wage war against Amalek, Shaul said, ‘If for one dead soul the Torah tells us to bring an Eglah Arufah, then all the more so for all of these souls! And if the men sinned, did the animals sin? [And if the men sinned, did the women sin? Pirkei D’Rebbe Eliezer 44.] And even if the adults sinned, did the children sin?’” He was reluctant to wipe out Amalek, the sworn enemy of the Jewish people. Could Yehonasan foresee that he would the do the very thing that he found abhorrent to his own people?

Moreover, even if Shaul decided to wipe out the entire city, is it foreseeable that he would find people to carry out his orders? Avner and Amasa, his generals, refused because it was against halacha. Doeg nevertheless agreed. Once again, is it foreseeable that the av beis din would willfully violate halacha?

Yehonasan is held accountable for more than the deaths of the inhabitants of Nov. He is held responsible for the death of his own father and brothers. Since Yehonasan did not give Dovid bread, Dovid was forced to beg for food in Nov. Shaul wiped out the city of Nov, so Hashem punished Shaul. Yehonasan is held accountable for causing Shaul’s punishment. Can we even conceive that Yehonasan in any way wanted his family to perish? Obviously not. Yet, Yehonasan is to some degree held accountable for the deaths of members of his immediate family, Doeg, and the city of Nov.

It is awesome to contemplate the tremendous responsibility we have for the consequences of our actions, no matter how far afield or unforeseeable they are. Baruch Hashem, the bright note is that whatever is valid for aveiros is also true for mitzvos. If our actions cause someone to do a mitzvah, we will get credit no matter how unforeseeable or far afield it is.