The Gemara (Gittin 55) relates that Bar Kamtza was invited to a party in error. When the host noticed him dining at his celebration, he thought, "I wanted to invite Kamtza, my friend. I hate Bar Kamtza; I don't want him here." The host asked Bar Kamtza to leave. Bar Kamtza pleaded that he let him stay. He even offered to pay him for the entire meal, but the host unceremoniously ejected him. Bar Kamtza said, "There were rabbanim at the meal. Why didn't they speak up in my defense? Apparently, they consented to me being treated that way; I will slander them to the king."
The Gemara (Gitten 57) says, היכלו את ושרף ביתו את והחריב קמצא בר את ה''הקב סייע שהרי בושה של כחה גדולה כמה וראה בא, "Come and see [from this story] the power of shame. Hakadosh Baruch Hu helped Bar Kamtza, and He destroyed His house [the Beis HaMikdash]..." all because of the shame that Bar Kamtza endured.
Let this be a lesson to be cautious with the honor of our fellow man. The Gemara connects this episode to the pasuk (Mishlei 28:14) ברעה יפול לבו ומקשה תמיד מפחד אדם אשרי, "Fortunate is the man who is always afraid, but he who hardens his heart will fall into evil." Rashi explains, תמיד מפחד, "He is aware and fears the consequences of his actions, and therefore distances himself from aveiros."
Chazal (Gittin 55:) say, ירושלים חרוב קמצא ובר אקמצא, "Yerushalayim was destroyed because of Kamtza and Bar Kamtza." We understand the connection between the destruction of the Beis HaMikdash and Bar Kamtza. He slandered the Jewish nation and roused the wrath of the Roman emperor. But how did Kamtza cause the Churban?
The Maharsha writes that perhaps Kamtza was the father of Bar Kamtza. Following this approach, we can explain that Kamtza, the father, also bears responsibility for the Churban because had he trained his son Kamtza to pursue peace, to forgive and forget, and to remain silent during a machlokes and when humiliated, Bar Kamtza would have reacted very differently when he was offended. So Kamtza is also responsible for the Churban.
Yirmiyahu HaNavi told Tzidkiyahu HaMelech (Yirmiyahu 38: 17-18), "Hashem said, if you go out to the officers of the king of Bavel [to make peace with them] the city [Yerushalayim] will not be burned, and you and your family will live. But if you do not go to them, this city will be conquered...they will burn it in fire, and you will not survive."
The Rebbe of Kamarna zy'a asks, since the decree for the destruction of Yerushalayim was already sealed in heaven, how could Tzidkiyahu’s going out to the officers of Bavel help?
The answer is that humility has the power to annul harsh decrees. If Tzidkiyahu had surrendered humbly, it would have protected Klal Yisrael, and the Beis HaMikdash would have been spared.
The Gemara concludes, "Reb Zecharyah ben Avkulas's humility destroyed our house, burned the heichal, and exiled us from our land."
The Meor Einayim (Gittin) asks:
- Was it Reb Zecharyah ben Avkulas's humility that caused the destruction? It seems that it was his excessive caution in halachah that caused the Churban.
- It is permitted to transgress most halachos of the Torah to save a Jew's life. So why didn’t they offer the korban with the mum or kill Bar Kamtza to save the Jewish nation?
The Meor Einayim answers that Reb Zecharyah ben Avkulas was the gadol hador. The proof is that his position was accepted by all scholars. Being a gadol, he also had ruach hakodesh, and with his ruach hakodesh he knew that the Churban was imminent and that nothing could be done to change that decree. This is why Reb Zecharyah didn't allow them to sacrifice the korban with the mum, and he didn't allow them to kill Bar Kamtza. Logically, it made sense to do one of these options to protect the Jewish nation from the king's wrath, but he knew it wouldn't help. The Churban would occur, regardless. With his ruach hakodesh, he knew that the Churban was decreed and finalized in heaven. He decided that he should at least preserve the continuation of the Torah. So, he told the chachamim that they shouldn't bring the korban with a mum, so people wouldn't think bringing a korban with a mum is permitted. And he said that they shouldn't kill Bar Kamtza, so people shouldn't think that for bringing a korban with a mum, one is chayav misah. He understood that the Churban would occur no matter what they did, so they might as well make sure that the Torah wouldn't be forgotten.
But Reb Zecharyah didn't tell the chachamim that he had ruach hakodesh, and he knew that the Churban was imminent. But why didn't he? He should have told them, "You're right, it's pikuach nefesh, and we should do whatever we can to avoid the king's wrath. But I know with my ruach hakodesh that it anyway won't help. The Churban will occur no matter what we do. Therefore, let us at least preserve the halachos." Why didn't Reb Zecharyah tell them this?
This was because of Reb Zecharyah's humility. He didn't want to reveal to them that he had ruach hakodesh. The Meor Einayim writes, "This is the meaning of החריבה אביקילוס בן זכריה רבי של ענותנותו, 'The humility of Reb Zecharyah ben Avkulas destroyed...' If it weren't for his humility, he would have told them about the Churban, they would have davened, done teshuvah, beseeched Hashem to have compassion on them, and the decree would be rescinded. Thus, it was Reb Zecharyah's humility that caused the destruction."
The Meor Einayim teaches that if he had told them what he knew with ruach hakodesh, the chachamim would have davened that the Churban shouldn't occur, and they would rouse people to do teshuvah, and this would have saved them. But he didn't want to tell them what he knew with ruach hakodesh, and this caused the Churban.
For our purposes, we see another source that the Churban could have been prevented with tefillos. Teshuvah and tefillah are always effective. They would have prevented the Churban.
Following a slightly different approach, we can explain that Reb Zecharyah didn't believe he had the power of tefillah. He also didn't believe that others have the power of tefillah, which is why he didn't feel it was necessary to tell them to daven to prevent the Churban. This is an example of a negative form of humility. It is when one doesn't believe in his strengths. This misplaced humility resulted in the Churban.
The haftarah of Tisha b'Av describes the Churban. Among the descriptions is (Yirmiyahu 8:13) בתאנה תאנים ואין בגפן ענבים אין, "There are no grapes on the vines, there are no figs on the fig tree." Why is this mentioned? Lacking fruit seems trite and trivial when we discuss the Churban.
A Holocaust survivor told the story of his survival. He related how he jumped out of a speeding train headed to the camps. Someone listening to the story asked him, "Was it a hot or cold day?" The survivor replied, "I see you don't understand. My life was saved! What difference does it make whether it was hot or cold? I was saved!" When someone's life was at stake, the subject of the weather seemed irrelevant. Similarly, when we discuss the Churban, it seems irrelevant to mention that there were no fruits on the trees.
Incidentally, Pesach is in the spring, so we can remember Hashem's kindness in taking us out of Mitzrayim when the weather was pleasant for travel. When we praise Hashem, we shouldn't forget even the smallest detail.
A granddaughter of Reb Hillel Kalimaya zt'l survived the Holocaust. She said that on Tisha b’Av, in Auschwitz, the Nazis forced them to sit on sharp stones and listen to a musical concert. They did this to break their spirit, robbing them of the luxury of mourning on Tisha b'Av. This woman was upset by the chilul Hashem. She prayed, "Hashem, don't answer me in my honor nor the honor of Your nation. Answer me for Your honor, which the goyim are disgracing. I pray that it should begin to pour." The skies were clear, but shortly after this tefillah, dark clouds rolled in, and it began to pour. The musicians ran for cover, and everybody returned to their barracks.
