I have seen several people mention the position of the R' Shlomo Elyashiv z"l, the "Baal Haleshem", on trust, bitachon. He seems to be one of the main sources for a position different from the famous one of the Chazon Ish in Emunah Uvitachon. See for instance this article for some of the differences.
What is a precise reference to the words of the Baal Haleshem on this topic? Is the source available online?

  • This is an excellent question - I also have some questions on that article that I may post soon
    – zunior
    Commented Feb 18 at 15:16
  • 1
    These ideas are not contradictions. The Possuk says, והבוטח בה' חסד יסובבנו. See the Peirush of Rabbeinu Yona to Mishlei 3:26 (brought in Kad Hakemach of R' Bachye) that bitachon has two meanings. The primary one is that everything is directed by Hashem, the secondary one is that therefore there is always hope for the best.
    – N.T.
    Commented Feb 18 at 18:51
  • @N.T. I'm just asking for a reference.
    – MichoelR
    Commented Feb 18 at 23:52
  • The Chazon Ish tells you he is responding to Mussar's take on Bitachon. So I personally would have gone to the maamarim on Bitachon in Madreigas haAdam, by the Alter of Novhardok. Although that kind of prescriptive "if you have Bitachon things will work out" approach to Bitachon is pretty fundamental to Chassidus (including Chabad) and is also found in the Beis haLevi's essay on Bitachon. I am trying to decide exactly where the Chovos haLvavos stood -- whether Bitachon is a way of getting Divide Aid for my plans or the path of accepting His Plans. Commented Feb 19 at 14:22
  • @MichaBerger would you say all Chassidus or only some? I know for sure Breslav and Chabad would take that approach. For me its difficult to believe its a universally held position.
    – zunior
    Commented Feb 19 at 18:54

1 Answer 1


Lesham Shevo veAchalma, Seifer HaDa'h cheleq 2, 5:4:3, pg קלה \ 269 col 2 (available here, within the last paragraph):

האמת הוא שאין דבר עומד נגד הביטחון וכמ"ש במדרש תהלים מזמור ל"ב. והבוטח בה' חסד יסובבנו. אפי' רשע הבוטח בה' חסד יסובבנהו. ואמרו שם עוד. רבים מכאובים לרשע לפי שאינו תולה בטחונו בקב"ה והבוטח בה' אפי' רשע כו' ע"ש וכן אמר הרמב"ן בספר האמונה והביטחון פ"א כי זהו שנאמר בטח בה' ועשה טוב ולא אמר עשה טוב ובטח בה' כי הביטחון אינו תלוי במעשים טובים כלל, אלא בטח בה' בין שתהיה צדיק בין שתהיה רשע בטח בה', אלא שאחר כך אמר ועשה טוב כי אם לא כן הרי יפרע ממך עכ"פ, כי הקב"ה מאריך רוחיה וגבי דיליה וימצא עת וזמן לפרע ממך עכ"פ, ואולי גם דברי חובות הלבבות הוא ג"כ רק עד"ז. ע"ש אבל הביטחון עצמו. במה שהוא בוטח. אין דבר עומד לנגדו

  • Thank you! But I don't see that this quote goes very far. It just says that even reshaim are eligible for chesed. It doesn't say your very helpful summary "if you have Bitachon things will work out".
    – MichoelR
    Commented Feb 21 at 5:06
  • I had heard that the Leshem goes through a list of reasons why the בוטח doesn't get what he trusts in - because otherwise he would have to get it.
    – MichoelR
    Commented Feb 21 at 13:46
  • R' Micha, am I guessing right that this is a common issue? I've seen several articles that bring Rishonim like the Chovos Halevovos (or Rashi) as evidence for the ""if you have Bitachon things will work out" system, and usually the Rishonim at least are saying something much fuzzier near as I can tell.
    – MichoelR
    Commented Feb 21 at 17:07
  • @MichoelR, R Dr Seth Mandel was niftar this past summer. He was a Rebbe-Chaver who had a PhD in Semitic Languages from Harvard. (And the OU's rav in charge of all shechitah.) Shiv'ah wasn't over before I was wondering if that is what the Chovos haLvavos was really saying. There are a few words in Shaar haBitachon that I wish I could have discussed with someone who knows both hashkafah and Medieval Judeo-Arabic. Commented Feb 21 at 19:24
  • @MichoelR, I also think the fact that the Chazon Osj wrote Emunah uBitachon in 1951 is very significant. So many people with true Emunah and real Bitachon had just been slaughtered.... The prescriptive "Bitachon earns positive outcomes" wasn't a derekh for the people of that time and place. (And it is a bit difficult in 5784, too.) Commented Feb 21 at 19:28

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .