B"H
Bereshit (Genesis) Ch. 24:10 reads:
ויקח העבד עשרה גמלים מגמלי אדניו וילך וכל טוב אדניו בידו
Loosely translated:
And the servant (=Eliezer) too ten camels from his master's (=Avraham) stock and he went on his way and the entire wealth of his master in his hand.
Rash comments on the words "and the entire wealth of his master in his hand":
...שטר מתנה כתב ליצחק על כל אשר לו
Loosely translated:
Avraham wrote a bill-of-gifting to Yitzhak of his entire wealth.
In other words, prior to sending Eliezer to find a wife for his son Yitzhak, Avraham wrote his entire wealth over to Yitzhak and gave the bill to Eliezer as proof of Yitzhak's immense wealth, so that the parents of the prospective bride will be more willing to give their daughter's hand in marriage.
So, a few issues arise from Avraham's transaction:
1. How would Avraham sustain himself without any worldly possession or any money. This question is especially troubling considering that Avraham is known to live about 50 years after this episode.
2. Why would Avraham gift everything over to his son? Since Avraham was super-rich, he could have gifted him a portion of his entire wealth which would have still be considered a very respectful sum in the eyes of the prospective bride.
3. Avraham's wealth is destined to be given to Yitzhak as inheritance in any event, why bother gifting it. Essentially, Avraham has given to Yitzhak his inheritance while Avraham's still alive.
4. Why would Yitzahak even accept such a gift, since, As the Rambam write in the very last halacha in Sefer Kinyian that a righteous person should not accept gifts...
An explanation:
Hashem has created imperfection in the world so that the Jewish people can occupy themselves with rectifying the world through the performance of mitzvas i.e., G-d's will. Since the world itself is physical in nature, to rectify it one needs physical tools. However, since the master plan (being G-d's plan) is spiritual, one needs spiritual faculties to perceive it. In other words, in order to implement G-d's plan one spiritual faculties combined with physical tools.
Yitzhak symbolizes the Jewish neshama (=soul), while Rivka symbolizes the Jewish body (need citation). Their marriage symbolizes the descent and infusion of the Jewish neshama with the Jewish body. This combination, i.e., a Jewish person, is exactly what's needed in order to put G-d's plan into motion and rectify the world -- spiritual neshama on the one hand, and a physical body on the other.
Yitzhak's marriage to Rivka is also the first Jewish wedding history. (Avraham and Sarah were both converts, and their wedding occurred prior to their conversion.) Since Yitzhak's wedding to Rivka is the first Jewish wedding, it sets the tone for all subsequent weddings for the rest of eternity. As is the case with a neshama infusion with a body, a Jewish marriage is a vehicle to enable the bride and groom to perform G-d's will at a level higher than at which the bride and groom may have been able to perform on their own.
This then explains Avraham's behavior: The marriage of Yitzhak and Rivka paves the road to Jewish wedding for the rest of eternity through which enables a couple can perform G-d's will at a higher level (hence rectify the world at a higher level.) The end product of the rectification of the world is the revelation of G-d in every aspect of physical existence. It will be as clear as day that Hashem is running the show and is involved in every minuet detail. This is essentially Avraham life's mission: to spread G-d's name throughout the world through love and kindness by teaching people how to acknowledge, recognize and thank Hashem in every aspect of life. Ultimately, his mission is to expose Hashem in every aspect of physical existence.
Since Yitzhak's marriage to Rivka embodies Avraham's life's mission, he completely invested himself in their marriage. This is true in the spiritual/emotional sense. But this is just as true in the physical sense, which explains why Avraham wrote his entire wealth over to Yitzhak, thereby completely investing himself in his marriage, paving the road of Jews to walk on for all the generations, rectifying the world though the performance of mitzvas and acts of kindness.
Sunday, November 4, 2007
Tuesday, October 30, 2007
Fulfilling one's potential
B"H
Bereshit (Genesis) Ch. 18:33 reads:
וילך ה' כאשר כלה לדבר אל אברהם ואברהם שב למקמו
Loosely translated;
And Hashem departed when he finished speaking to Avraham, and Avraham returned to his tent.
This takes place right after Hashem notifies Avraham of his intention to destroy Sodom which is followed by a passionate plea by Avraham to Hashem to reconsider. After Avraham managed to bargain Hashem down to sparing the city on the account of ten righteous individuals Avraham went back home.
One of the criticisms that's leveled against Avraham is that he didn't do enough! Contrast this with Moshe's statement after the sin of the golden calf. Hashem is ready to annihilate the Jewish nation (G-d forbid!) and offers to start all-over with Moshe himself. The Torah records in Shmot (Exodus) Ch. 32:32 Moshe's response:
ועתה אם תשא חטאתם ואם אין מחני נא מספרך אשר כתבת
Loosely translated:
And now forgive the nation! And should you not, erase me from this book that you've written (i.e, the Torah.)
We see that Moshe was willing to put his own life (and portion of the world to come) in order to save his fellow Jews. Avraham made no such gesture -- he simply returned to his tent. This is especially puzzling in light of the fact that Avraham is known of his pure Chessed (kindness.)
If we go back, we find a similar criticism leveled against Noach relative to Avraham (see Rashi on Bereshit (Genesis) 6:9): Noach built the ark for 120 years so everyone becomes aware of the impending doom. But he did not pro-actively attempt to make people repent to avert it.
So, ultimately, we have Noach, Avraham and Moshe in increasing order of willingness to doing for others to save them from destruction. Why the difference?
An explanation:
In the days of Noah, the concept of repentance evidently did not exist (save for Adam of Kain.) See the article Praying for Others' repentance for a detailed explanation. Since people were unable to repent, Noah did not take a proactive approach. He fulfilled the maximum potential with the act of publicly building an ark. Only after the deluge was the concept of repentance introduced into the main-stream.
So, in the time of Avraham, there was a possibility that there would be some individuals in Sodom that repented and become righteous. Avraham was after these individuals hoping that in their merit Sodom (as a whole) will be saved. However, in this point in time, there was no concept of mutual culpability and responsibility, as nothing bound one individual to another, save a family-tie. Hence, Avraham essentially could not take the same stance as Moshe did hundreds of years later. Avraham has no additional tools left in his toolbox, so he returned home. Effectively, Avraham also fulfilled the potential of his generation.
However, it wasn't until the time of Moshe, after Matan-Torah (and the getting of the Torah), that the Jewish people were formed into a nation. The concept of כל ישראל ערבים זה לזה (tran. all the Jews are culpable for one-another) came into being. Only after this point in time, could Moshe make such a claim: "erase me from your book -- I don't want this world and I don't want the next world if you're going to annihilate (G-d forbid) the Jewish nation." Moshe then also fulfilled the maximum potential of his generation (and beyond -- now that we have Torah.)
So, leveling criticism against Noah or Avraham because they did not meet the standard of the next level up is somewhat undue. They all maxed out their potential, within the spiritual limitations their respective generations were subjected to.
Another way to look at it:
In the time of Noah, he was able to be righteous, but his righteousness could not be extended beyond himself, to influence other and to prevent a disaster.
In the time of Avraham, he righteousness could be extended further by influencing other individual , to avert a catastrophe, but not at the price of מסירת נפש (=giving one's soul over.)
In the time of Moshe, due to mutual culpability within the Jewish nation, one could give himself over completely to save his fellow Jews.
We can take this one step further, though:
When Mashiach comes, speedily please G-d, we are told that the whole world will be a more peaceful, wholesome and pure place. In this new world the highest desire and delight will be to bask in Hashem's wisdom by engaging in Torah study. Spiritual pleasures are going to be heavily sought after. Since this will be done at the expense of one's physical pleasures, one will, essentially, give oneself and one's own physical desires over to Hashem (with true מסירת נפש). This will be so even without a pending disaster -- as a matter of course.
Bereshit (Genesis) Ch. 18:33 reads:
וילך ה' כאשר כלה לדבר אל אברהם ואברהם שב למקמו
Loosely translated;
And Hashem departed when he finished speaking to Avraham, and Avraham returned to his tent.
This takes place right after Hashem notifies Avraham of his intention to destroy Sodom which is followed by a passionate plea by Avraham to Hashem to reconsider. After Avraham managed to bargain Hashem down to sparing the city on the account of ten righteous individuals Avraham went back home.
One of the criticisms that's leveled against Avraham is that he didn't do enough! Contrast this with Moshe's statement after the sin of the golden calf. Hashem is ready to annihilate the Jewish nation (G-d forbid!) and offers to start all-over with Moshe himself. The Torah records in Shmot (Exodus) Ch. 32:32 Moshe's response:
ועתה אם תשא חטאתם ואם אין מחני נא מספרך אשר כתבת
Loosely translated:
And now forgive the nation! And should you not, erase me from this book that you've written (i.e, the Torah.)
We see that Moshe was willing to put his own life (and portion of the world to come) in order to save his fellow Jews. Avraham made no such gesture -- he simply returned to his tent. This is especially puzzling in light of the fact that Avraham is known of his pure Chessed (kindness.)
If we go back, we find a similar criticism leveled against Noach relative to Avraham (see Rashi on Bereshit (Genesis) 6:9): Noach built the ark for 120 years so everyone becomes aware of the impending doom. But he did not pro-actively attempt to make people repent to avert it.
So, ultimately, we have Noach, Avraham and Moshe in increasing order of willingness to doing for others to save them from destruction. Why the difference?
An explanation:
In the days of Noah, the concept of repentance evidently did not exist (save for Adam of Kain.) See the article Praying for Others' repentance for a detailed explanation. Since people were unable to repent, Noah did not take a proactive approach. He fulfilled the maximum potential with the act of publicly building an ark. Only after the deluge was the concept of repentance introduced into the main-stream.
So, in the time of Avraham, there was a possibility that there would be some individuals in Sodom that repented and become righteous. Avraham was after these individuals hoping that in their merit Sodom (as a whole) will be saved. However, in this point in time, there was no concept of mutual culpability and responsibility, as nothing bound one individual to another, save a family-tie. Hence, Avraham essentially could not take the same stance as Moshe did hundreds of years later. Avraham has no additional tools left in his toolbox, so he returned home. Effectively, Avraham also fulfilled the potential of his generation.
However, it wasn't until the time of Moshe, after Matan-Torah (and the getting of the Torah), that the Jewish people were formed into a nation. The concept of כל ישראל ערבים זה לזה (tran. all the Jews are culpable for one-another) came into being. Only after this point in time, could Moshe make such a claim: "erase me from your book -- I don't want this world and I don't want the next world if you're going to annihilate (G-d forbid) the Jewish nation." Moshe then also fulfilled the maximum potential of his generation (and beyond -- now that we have Torah.)
So, leveling criticism against Noah or Avraham because they did not meet the standard of the next level up is somewhat undue. They all maxed out their potential, within the spiritual limitations their respective generations were subjected to.
Another way to look at it:
In the time of Noah, he was able to be righteous, but his righteousness could not be extended beyond himself, to influence other and to prevent a disaster.
In the time of Avraham, he righteousness could be extended further by influencing other individual , to avert a catastrophe, but not at the price of מסירת נפש (=giving one's soul over.)
In the time of Moshe, due to mutual culpability within the Jewish nation, one could give himself over completely to save his fellow Jews.
We can take this one step further, though:
When Mashiach comes, speedily please G-d, we are told that the whole world will be a more peaceful, wholesome and pure place. In this new world the highest desire and delight will be to bask in Hashem's wisdom by engaging in Torah study. Spiritual pleasures are going to be heavily sought after. Since this will be done at the expense of one's physical pleasures, one will, essentially, give oneself and one's own physical desires over to Hashem (with true מסירת נפש). This will be so even without a pending disaster -- as a matter of course.
Sunday, October 14, 2007
Praying for others' repentance
B"H
Bereshit (Genesis) Ch. 6:14 reads:
עשה לך תבת עצי גפר
Loosely translated:
[G-d says to Noah:] Make for yourself an ark, out of gofer trees.
Rashi bring "Make for yourself an ark" and give the following commentary:
הרבה ריוח והצלה לפניו ולמה הטריחו בבנין זה כדי שיראוהו אנשי דור המבול עוסק בה ק"כ שנה ושואלין אותו מה זאת לך והוא אומר להם עתיד הקב"ה להביא מבול לעולם אולי ישובו
Loosely translated:
Question: G-d is a savior so why did he bother Noah with building this ark? Answer: So that the generation of the deluge should see him toiling in building it (=the ark) for 120 years. This will peek their curiosity and they might ask "why do you bother?" To which he shall answer "G-d will ultimately cause a deluge!". Hearing his answer, perhaps (=hopefully) they'll repent.
One criticism that's brought upon Noah is that he did not do enough to help the people of his generation to repent. A comparison is drawn between Noah's apparently passive approach to educating his generation and Avraham's proactive approach of praying for the protection of the people of Sodom (see Bereshit (Genesis) Ch. 18:23-32.)
We also see this is Pirkei Avot (Ethics of the Fathers) Ch. 5:2
Ten generations exited between Adam and Noah to demonstrate G-d's patience, for they angered Him until he brought upon them the deluge. Ten generations existed between Noach and Avraham to demonstrate G-d's patience, for they angered Him until Avraham came and took all their rewards.
The question then is, why did Noah not pray to save his generation, the way Avraham did? After all, we know that Noah was righteous (6:9) and also we learned from Ramban on 6:8 that all of Noah's actions were beautiful and pleasant to Hashem. There are other pointers to the fact that Noah was a great man. So, in all likeliness he should have prayed for the wellbeing of the generation?!?!
One is forced to conclude that Noah could not pray for the generation. We can work this out backwards: After 120 years of seeing Noah toil in the ark and foretelling the prophecy of the deluge one would expect that at least some people repent. Evidently no one did (since there were no other human passengers on the ark except Noah and family.) Perhaps the actual concept (or attribute) of repentance was foreign to the very make up of the world? People could simply not repent since there was no repentance, so Noah had nothing to pray for?
This raises some additional questions:
1) Why then did he take 120 years to build the ark?
2) What's the justification of Rashi's comment on 6:14, as indicated above?
3) How could Adam and Kain repent (eating of the fruit and killing Hevel, respectively)?
Question 1 can possibly be answered that Noah was given a task that's simply too great to finish single-handedly in a shorted span, considering the gigantic proportions of the ark. This flies in the face of question 2, where Rashi assigns a different reason for the long duration of the project. Reconciling the two is still open in my book...
As for question #3 perhaps the explanation is as follows: Both Adam and Kain were created in Gan Eden (=the Garden of Eden). Since Gan Eden was elevated above the physical world, both Adam and Kain exhibited traits that transcended the limitation of the world. So, despite the world being limited in a sense, for it lacked the attribute and possibility of repentance, Adam and Kain did not lack this attribute, and so they could repent.
After the deluge, on the other hand, the Zohar records that Noah came out of the ark and into עולם חדש (lit. A new wold.) A wold so new, in fact, that Hashem was able to make a covenant with the world that He shell never wholly flood it again. Hold on, what if the world gets to the very same corruption that preceded the deluge? Surely Hashem would want to flood it again and start over.... In fact, this is not so -- this new world, evidently was also new in a sense that it now possesed the attribute of repentance. This is evident in Avraham's prayers for saving Sodom.
Bereshit (Genesis) Ch. 6:14 reads:
עשה לך תבת עצי גפר
Loosely translated:
[G-d says to Noah:] Make for yourself an ark, out of gofer trees.
Rashi bring "Make for yourself an ark" and give the following commentary:
הרבה ריוח והצלה לפניו ולמה הטריחו בבנין זה כדי שיראוהו אנשי דור המבול עוסק בה ק"כ שנה ושואלין אותו מה זאת לך והוא אומר להם עתיד הקב"ה להביא מבול לעולם אולי ישובו
Loosely translated:
Question: G-d is a savior so why did he bother Noah with building this ark? Answer: So that the generation of the deluge should see him toiling in building it (=the ark) for 120 years. This will peek their curiosity and they might ask "why do you bother?" To which he shall answer "G-d will ultimately cause a deluge!". Hearing his answer, perhaps (=hopefully) they'll repent.
One criticism that's brought upon Noah is that he did not do enough to help the people of his generation to repent. A comparison is drawn between Noah's apparently passive approach to educating his generation and Avraham's proactive approach of praying for the protection of the people of Sodom (see Bereshit (Genesis) Ch. 18:23-32.)
We also see this is Pirkei Avot (Ethics of the Fathers) Ch. 5:2
Ten generations exited between Adam and Noah to demonstrate G-d's patience, for they angered Him until he brought upon them the deluge. Ten generations existed between Noach and Avraham to demonstrate G-d's patience, for they angered Him until Avraham came and took all their rewards.
The question then is, why did Noah not pray to save his generation, the way Avraham did? After all, we know that Noah was righteous (6:9) and also we learned from Ramban on 6:8 that all of Noah's actions were beautiful and pleasant to Hashem. There are other pointers to the fact that Noah was a great man. So, in all likeliness he should have prayed for the wellbeing of the generation?!?!
One is forced to conclude that Noah could not pray for the generation. We can work this out backwards: After 120 years of seeing Noah toil in the ark and foretelling the prophecy of the deluge one would expect that at least some people repent. Evidently no one did (since there were no other human passengers on the ark except Noah and family.) Perhaps the actual concept (or attribute) of repentance was foreign to the very make up of the world? People could simply not repent since there was no repentance, so Noah had nothing to pray for?
This raises some additional questions:
1) Why then did he take 120 years to build the ark?
2) What's the justification of Rashi's comment on 6:14, as indicated above?
3) How could Adam and Kain repent (eating of the fruit and killing Hevel, respectively)?
Question 1 can possibly be answered that Noah was given a task that's simply too great to finish single-handedly in a shorted span, considering the gigantic proportions of the ark. This flies in the face of question 2, where Rashi assigns a different reason for the long duration of the project. Reconciling the two is still open in my book...
As for question #3 perhaps the explanation is as follows: Both Adam and Kain were created in Gan Eden (=the Garden of Eden). Since Gan Eden was elevated above the physical world, both Adam and Kain exhibited traits that transcended the limitation of the world. So, despite the world being limited in a sense, for it lacked the attribute and possibility of repentance, Adam and Kain did not lack this attribute, and so they could repent.
After the deluge, on the other hand, the Zohar records that Noah came out of the ark and into עולם חדש (lit. A new wold.) A wold so new, in fact, that Hashem was able to make a covenant with the world that He shell never wholly flood it again. Hold on, what if the world gets to the very same corruption that preceded the deluge? Surely Hashem would want to flood it again and start over.... In fact, this is not so -- this new world, evidently was also new in a sense that it now possesed the attribute of repentance. This is evident in Avraham's prayers for saving Sodom.
Monday, August 27, 2007
Wholly entrance into the land
B"H
Dvarim (Deut) Ch. 26:1 reads:
והיה כי תבוא אל הארץ אשר ה' אלקיך נתן לך נחלה וירשתה וישבת בה
Loosely translated:
And it shall come to pass when you enter the land which the L-rd your G-d gives you as inheritance and you shall inherit it and dwell in it....
Rashi comments on the sentence:
והיה כי תבוא וגו' וירשתה וישבת בה: מגיד שלא נתחייבו בבכורים עד שכבשו את הארץ וחלקוה
Loosely translated:
When you come etc... and you shall inherit it and dell in it: teaches us that they were not obligated to bring the first-fruits until after the conquered the land and divided it (amongst the tribes.)
Rahi gets this interpretation for the juxtaposition of 16:1 which talks about conquering the land with 16:2 which talks about bring the first-fruits as a thankgiving offering:
ולקחת מראשית כל פרי האדמה אשר תביא מארצך אשר ה' אלקיך נתן לך ושמת בטנא
Loosely translated:
And you shall take from all first-fruit of your land which you shall harvest from the land that the L-rd your G-d gives you and you shall put it in a basket.
Because conquering the land (and diving it) is juxtaposed to bringing the first-fruits as an offering to Hashem, it's clear that the former is a prerequisite for the second, as Rashi points out.
But Rashi is telling us something a bit deeper:
Conquering the land took 7 years. Dividing it took another 7. The whole process took 14 years, then. However, once the conquering was over and the division process has began, some people would have gotten their potion earlier-on, while other got their portion toward the end of the 14 years.
One might think that the people who got their portion earlier would be obligated to bring the first-fruit thanksgiving offering earlier (i.e. once their fields yielded crop, which could even be the very same year they got their portion.)
Rashi therefore clarifies this for us: despite the fact that by the end of the 14 years the land was fully divided, those who got their portion earlier-on did not bring their first-fruit thanksgiving offering until after EVERYONE got their portion. (Goes to show us that a Jew cannot be fully happy with their lot if he/she knows that their's another Jew out there somewhere who is lacking theirs!)
So, according to this Rashi, the term והיה כי תבוא (=And it shall come to pass when you enter the land) does not mean "as soon as you enter the land". In other words, "when you enter" does not mean "when you physically set foot". Instead, Rashi tells us that "when you enter" means "when you wholly enter, every last Jew enters and gets their allotted portion."
Put differently, the שלמות (=wholeness, completion and perfection) of entering the land only occured when everyone got their portion. Until that time (14 years after physically entering the land) it cannot be said that the Jews "entered the land" in the complete sense.
Some sources (need citation) also give a homiletic interpretation of 16:1
והיה כי תבוא: And it shall come to pass that when the Jewish neshama (=soul) enters
אל הארץ: into the earthly (mundane) body
אשר ה' אלקיך נתן לך: that the L-rd G-d has provided you with
And Rashi comments (as derived above) that the wholeness and perfection of this entrance is only once the land (=homiletically the mundane body) is fully conquered and divided. What does it mean to conquer and divide the mundane body?
An answer:
Each person has within him-/herself the pull towards mundane, earthly things (=ארציות) . The Torah is teaching us that the neshama isn't fully finished entering the body, in שלמות, until the Jew battles his animalistic-self and conquers his/her ארציות and subjugates it to the service of Hashem, thereby rectifying it and making bringing it into the realm of holiness.
Once that's done, and a person's ארציות has been elevated and conquering is therefore complete, it is time to divide the mundane body: each part of the body is involved in a different manner of serving Hashem: the hand is set aside for giving Tzdaka (charity) and downing Teffilin. The foot is set aside for walking to study hall. The head is set aside for learning Hashem's Torah. The heart for loving Hashem, etc...
When a person reaches this level of conquering his/her ארציות and then dividing and giving each body part the prescribed mitzvot specific to it and engaging it in its specific service of Hashem, then it can be said that the neshama has "Wholly entered the body with שלמות."
On the surface, this presents one small complication: battling with the body's inclinations and conquering one's ארציות is something that's related to בעלי תשובה (=penitents). However, for צדיקים (=righteous individuals) there's no war to fight and no ארציות to conquer: a צדיק has no animalistic self. By such a person, there's only the division part that needs to take place, without a prerequisite war. Where is this hinted to in the Torah?
A possible answer: In Bamidbar (Numbers) Ch. 21:32 we find:
וישלח משה לרגל את יעזר וילכדו בנתיה
Loosely translated:
And Moshe sent spies to spy on Yahzer, and they conquered [it and] it's suburbs (see Rashi on the verse).
So, the spies were able to conquer the whole land of Israel, if they did not go off the path of righteousness and drag the whole nation with them.
Therefore, theoretically, if the spies did indeed conquer the land during the 40 days they spent there then the Jewish people would have maintained the status of צדיקים and would have have not needed to resort to fighting a war -- simply enter the land and divide it amongst themselves -- as is the case of a צדיקים. However, since they allowed themselves to follow the spies they ended falling from the level of צדיקים to the point that they needed to repent and become בעלי תשובה, which necessitate fighting with ארציות.
Good shabbos!
Dvarim (Deut) Ch. 26:1 reads:
והיה כי תבוא אל הארץ אשר ה' אלקיך נתן לך נחלה וירשתה וישבת בה
Loosely translated:
And it shall come to pass when you enter the land which the L-rd your G-d gives you as inheritance and you shall inherit it and dwell in it....
Rashi comments on the sentence:
והיה כי תבוא וגו' וירשתה וישבת בה: מגיד שלא נתחייבו בבכורים עד שכבשו את הארץ וחלקוה
Loosely translated:
When you come etc... and you shall inherit it and dell in it: teaches us that they were not obligated to bring the first-fruits until after the conquered the land and divided it (amongst the tribes.)
Rahi gets this interpretation for the juxtaposition of 16:1 which talks about conquering the land with 16:2 which talks about bring the first-fruits as a thankgiving offering:
ולקחת מראשית כל פרי האדמה אשר תביא מארצך אשר ה' אלקיך נתן לך ושמת בטנא
Loosely translated:
And you shall take from all first-fruit of your land which you shall harvest from the land that the L-rd your G-d gives you and you shall put it in a basket.
Because conquering the land (and diving it) is juxtaposed to bringing the first-fruits as an offering to Hashem, it's clear that the former is a prerequisite for the second, as Rashi points out.
But Rashi is telling us something a bit deeper:
Conquering the land took 7 years. Dividing it took another 7. The whole process took 14 years, then. However, once the conquering was over and the division process has began, some people would have gotten their potion earlier-on, while other got their portion toward the end of the 14 years.
One might think that the people who got their portion earlier would be obligated to bring the first-fruit thanksgiving offering earlier (i.e. once their fields yielded crop, which could even be the very same year they got their portion.)
Rashi therefore clarifies this for us: despite the fact that by the end of the 14 years the land was fully divided, those who got their portion earlier-on did not bring their first-fruit thanksgiving offering until after EVERYONE got their portion. (Goes to show us that a Jew cannot be fully happy with their lot if he/she knows that their's another Jew out there somewhere who is lacking theirs!)
So, according to this Rashi, the term והיה כי תבוא (=And it shall come to pass when you enter the land) does not mean "as soon as you enter the land". In other words, "when you enter" does not mean "when you physically set foot". Instead, Rashi tells us that "when you enter" means "when you wholly enter, every last Jew enters and gets their allotted portion."
Put differently, the שלמות (=wholeness, completion and perfection) of entering the land only occured when everyone got their portion. Until that time (14 years after physically entering the land) it cannot be said that the Jews "entered the land" in the complete sense.
Some sources (need citation) also give a homiletic interpretation of 16:1
והיה כי תבוא: And it shall come to pass that when the Jewish neshama (=soul) enters
אל הארץ: into the earthly (mundane) body
אשר ה' אלקיך נתן לך: that the L-rd G-d has provided you with
And Rashi comments (as derived above) that the wholeness and perfection of this entrance is only once the land (=homiletically the mundane body) is fully conquered and divided. What does it mean to conquer and divide the mundane body?
An answer:
Each person has within him-/herself the pull towards mundane, earthly things (=ארציות) . The Torah is teaching us that the neshama isn't fully finished entering the body, in שלמות, until the Jew battles his animalistic-self and conquers his/her ארציות and subjugates it to the service of Hashem, thereby rectifying it and making bringing it into the realm of holiness.
Once that's done, and a person's ארציות has been elevated and conquering is therefore complete, it is time to divide the mundane body: each part of the body is involved in a different manner of serving Hashem: the hand is set aside for giving Tzdaka (charity) and downing Teffilin. The foot is set aside for walking to study hall. The head is set aside for learning Hashem's Torah. The heart for loving Hashem, etc...
When a person reaches this level of conquering his/her ארציות and then dividing and giving each body part the prescribed mitzvot specific to it and engaging it in its specific service of Hashem, then it can be said that the neshama has "Wholly entered the body with שלמות."
On the surface, this presents one small complication: battling with the body's inclinations and conquering one's ארציות is something that's related to בעלי תשובה (=penitents). However, for צדיקים (=righteous individuals) there's no war to fight and no ארציות to conquer: a צדיק has no animalistic self. By such a person, there's only the division part that needs to take place, without a prerequisite war. Where is this hinted to in the Torah?
A possible answer: In Bamidbar (Numbers) Ch. 21:32 we find:
וישלח משה לרגל את יעזר וילכדו בנתיה
Loosely translated:
And Moshe sent spies to spy on Yahzer, and they conquered [it and] it's suburbs (see Rashi on the verse).
So, the spies were able to conquer the whole land of Israel, if they did not go off the path of righteousness and drag the whole nation with them.
Therefore, theoretically, if the spies did indeed conquer the land during the 40 days they spent there then the Jewish people would have maintained the status of צדיקים and would have have not needed to resort to fighting a war -- simply enter the land and divide it amongst themselves -- as is the case of a צדיקים. However, since they allowed themselves to follow the spies they ended falling from the level of צדיקים to the point that they needed to repent and become בעלי תשובה, which necessitate fighting with ארציות.
Good shabbos!
Wednesday, August 22, 2007
Compulsory or voluntary?
B"H
Dvarim (Deut.) Ch. 21:10 reads:
כי תצא למלחמה על איביך ונתנו ה' אלקיך בידך...
Loosely translated:
When you go to war against your enemies, the L-rd G-d will deliver him into your hands...
Rashi's commentary reads:
כי תצא למלחמה - במלחמת הרשות הכתוב מדבר
Loosely translated:
When you go to war - Scripture refers to a voluntary war...
So, the war appears to be one which the Jewish people were not coerced into, but rather one that's fought for other reasons.
However, a homiletic interpretation of "Your enemy" is the יצר הרע (=evil inclination) that a person possesses within. In other words, the scripture says that when you do battle with the evil inclination, Hashem will surly help by helping you defeat it.
Now, battle with one's evil inclination is not voluntary. In other words, one is obligated (and indeed compelled) to fight his/her own evil inclination at all times, as is alluded to in many verses in Torah. (For instance: Dvaim 17:7)
So then, what is this war being fought here? Is it voluntary (as Rashi explains) or is it compulsory?
A possible approach:
Possibly both approaches are true, but they relate to different individuals. The individual who cannot successfully provoke his/her evil inclination and do battle with it and defeat it is told that this is a voluntary war, i.e., "go for it, if you feel up to the challenge." After all, not everyone's up to the challenge and even those that are may end up loosing the battle. So, the battle is tagged as voluntary. Should the evil inclination be kindled and attach the Jew, on the other hand, then of-course the Jew is obligation to defend him- or herself.
An altogether different individual, on the other hand, who is very strong in his yiddishkait and will not be swayed by his/her evil inclination (because his evil inclination cannot exercise control over his/her actions) is commanded to actually provoke and go to war on the evil inclination until it's totally defeated and nullified.
It's also noteworthy that the term used here is על איביך which literally translates to "[go to war] over your enemies", and not עם איביך (...with your enemies) or נגד איביך (...against your enemies.) This would indicate that the Almighty give the Jew all the necessary strength to go to war with his evil inclination, but from the very get-go to be at an advantageous position -- "over you enemies." The evil inclination has no chance if a Jew is approaching the battle-field with the knowledge the the outcome of the battle has already been decided in advance: evil inclination TKO'ed in the first round.
Good shabbos.
Dvarim (Deut.) Ch. 21:10 reads:
כי תצא למלחמה על איביך ונתנו ה' אלקיך בידך...
Loosely translated:
When you go to war against your enemies, the L-rd G-d will deliver him into your hands...
Rashi's commentary reads:
כי תצא למלחמה - במלחמת הרשות הכתוב מדבר
Loosely translated:
When you go to war - Scripture refers to a voluntary war...
So, the war appears to be one which the Jewish people were not coerced into, but rather one that's fought for other reasons.
However, a homiletic interpretation of "Your enemy" is the יצר הרע (=evil inclination) that a person possesses within. In other words, the scripture says that when you do battle with the evil inclination, Hashem will surly help by helping you defeat it.
Now, battle with one's evil inclination is not voluntary. In other words, one is obligated (and indeed compelled) to fight his/her own evil inclination at all times, as is alluded to in many verses in Torah. (For instance: Dvaim 17:7)
So then, what is this war being fought here? Is it voluntary (as Rashi explains) or is it compulsory?
A possible approach:
Possibly both approaches are true, but they relate to different individuals. The individual who cannot successfully provoke his/her evil inclination and do battle with it and defeat it is told that this is a voluntary war, i.e., "go for it, if you feel up to the challenge." After all, not everyone's up to the challenge and even those that are may end up loosing the battle. So, the battle is tagged as voluntary. Should the evil inclination be kindled and attach the Jew, on the other hand, then of-course the Jew is obligation to defend him- or herself.
An altogether different individual, on the other hand, who is very strong in his yiddishkait and will not be swayed by his/her evil inclination (because his evil inclination cannot exercise control over his/her actions) is commanded to actually provoke and go to war on the evil inclination until it's totally defeated and nullified.
It's also noteworthy that the term used here is על איביך which literally translates to "[go to war] over your enemies", and not עם איביך (...with your enemies) or נגד איביך (...against your enemies.) This would indicate that the Almighty give the Jew all the necessary strength to go to war with his evil inclination, but from the very get-go to be at an advantageous position -- "over you enemies." The evil inclination has no chance if a Jew is approaching the battle-field with the knowledge the the outcome of the battle has already been decided in advance: evil inclination TKO'ed in the first round.
Good shabbos.
Sunday, August 19, 2007
To live or not to live?
B"H
Tractate Erovin, Ch. 1, pg. 13b reads:
נחלקו ב"ש וב"ה הללו אומרים נוח לו לאדם שלא נברא יותר משנברא והללו אומרים נוח לו לאדם שנברא יותר משלא נברא נמנו וגמרו נוח לו לאדם שלא נברא יותר משנברא עכשיו שנברא יפשפש במעשיו
Loosely translated:
The followers of Shamai and the followers of Hillel had a disagreement: The formers argued "it's more beneficial for Adam not to have been created, more so that having been created" while the latter argued "it's more beneficial for Adam to have been created, more so than not having been created." They debated the matter and concluded that "it's more beneficial for Adam not to have been created, however, now that he has been created he should examine his deeds..."
This verse uses the term "Adam" which could be understood to mean the first human being Adam, but could also be understood to mean all Adam's descendants (i.e., all of humanity), by extension.
The above disagreement is a bit odd, to say the least. While the position of the followers of Hillel can be understood plainly, what do the followers of Shamai mean by it's better not having been created?
After all, we were created. Having said that how could they come to the conclusion that it's better than we weren't created?
An explanation:
An analogy is in order: suppose a person is requested to invest a very large sum of money in some business venture. He is told that there's 248 possible outcomes in which he's going to double his/her investment, while there are 365 other outcomes in which he/she will loose everyting. Any reasonable investor is going to back out of the deal really quickly. Why the odds of loosing are significantly greater than those of gaining.
Now, the analog in the Jewish soul: when it descends into this world it invests itself in a corporeal body. The Jew is obligated to keep 248 positive commandments. When a positive commandment is perform, a Jew's bond to the Almighty gets stronger. While the Jew is also obligated to keep 365 prohibitive commandments. When a prohibition is transgressed, heaven forbid, a Jew's bond to the Almighty weakens.
A straight forward calculation reveals that "it's more beneficial for Adam not to have been created..." because there are just so many more ways Adam (i.e., a person) can get hurt from this, than he/she can benefit from it."
This is also alluded to in the word נמנו, which the Gmarah uses: in this context it means "debated" but it is etymologically related to מנו (=the counted.) I.e., the students of Shamai and Hillel counted the mitzvot and came to the conclusion that there are too many prohibitions relative to the positive commandments.
So the question then becomes: Why were we created after all, then?
To answer it, we can dig a bit into the Jewish understanding of performing a commandment. The performance of mitzvot (commandments) can be in one of three ways:
1. the mitzvah is performed with all the right intention, livelihood, joy and enthusiasm, or
2. the actual mitzvah-action is performed, but it's not accompanied by any of the above or
3. all the intentions etc are right, but there's no actual physical performance.
It's explained that when a person does a mitzvah, an angel is created (to advocate for that person.) However, כמים פנים אל הפנים i.e., just as a person performs the mitzvah so to is the angel that's created. Each angel has a "body" (albeit noncorporeal) and a "soul". So:
1. when the performance of a mitzvah is done with all the right spirit, the angel is created with a good body and a health soul.
2. when the performance of the mitzvah is done without the right intentions, i.e., it's lacking in spirit, so too is the angel: a strong body, but it's lacking a soul.
3. when the performance of a mitzvah is lacking in the actual doing, but there's all the right intention is spirit, then a soul of an angel is created but there's no body to vest it into.
G-d Almighty does something very neat, as it alluded to in Kiddushin Ch. 1, pg, 40a:
מחשבה טובה מצרפה למעשה
Loosly translated:
(G-d) joins a good thought to a deed.
In the context above: there's a number of soul-less angels out there that resulted from a mitzvot performed without the right intentions and a number of body-less angel-souls out there resulting from Jews having the right intentions but not following up on them. So, the Almighty takes a these souls (=good thoughts) and joins them in these angel bodies (=deed), thereby creating a good and healthy angel!
So, in a sense each positive mitzvah can be counted twice: once on the count of the intentions, and once on the count of the actual deed. And rewards for the mitzvah are dished out.
On the other hand, a person can have all the intentions in the world to transgress, but never actually does anything to actualize these intentions, then there's no punishment dished out -- since there's no deed associated with these intentions.
So, we find that on the account of positive commandments there's twice the reward per mitzvah than prohibitions. This can explain why Adam was indeed created: true there are many more possibly paths leading away from the almighty, but each path leading to the almighty is twice as wide. That is, indeed there are 365 prohibitions that detract from a persons connection to the Almighty, but there are 2x248=496 ways to connect to the Almighty), so to speak. The landscape changes because with positive commandements, intentions alone carry weight, while with prohibitions they do not!
While on the subject of deeds, the Gmarah continues:
עכשיו שנברא יפשפש במעשיו
I.e., now that the person is created, he should examine his deeds, to ensure that he/she is heading in the 2x248 direction rather than in the 365 direction, heaven forbid.
This also connects to the month of Elul (which we're in, at the time of writing). The month of Elul has been specifically set aside as the month of introspection and self-adjustment and self-refinement. A person should examine his/her deeds and ensure that he/she is on the correct path as we approach the days of Awe which immediately follow the month of Elul.
Leshana tovah tikatevu vetichatemu.
Tractate Erovin, Ch. 1, pg. 13b reads:
נחלקו ב"ש וב"ה הללו אומרים נוח לו לאדם שלא נברא יותר משנברא והללו אומרים נוח לו לאדם שנברא יותר משלא נברא נמנו וגמרו נוח לו לאדם שלא נברא יותר משנברא עכשיו שנברא יפשפש במעשיו
Loosely translated:
The followers of Shamai and the followers of Hillel had a disagreement: The formers argued "it's more beneficial for Adam not to have been created, more so that having been created" while the latter argued "it's more beneficial for Adam to have been created, more so than not having been created." They debated the matter and concluded that "it's more beneficial for Adam not to have been created, however, now that he has been created he should examine his deeds..."
This verse uses the term "Adam" which could be understood to mean the first human being Adam, but could also be understood to mean all Adam's descendants (i.e., all of humanity), by extension.
The above disagreement is a bit odd, to say the least. While the position of the followers of Hillel can be understood plainly, what do the followers of Shamai mean by it's better not having been created?
After all, we were created. Having said that how could they come to the conclusion that it's better than we weren't created?
An explanation:
An analogy is in order: suppose a person is requested to invest a very large sum of money in some business venture. He is told that there's 248 possible outcomes in which he's going to double his/her investment, while there are 365 other outcomes in which he/she will loose everyting. Any reasonable investor is going to back out of the deal really quickly. Why the odds of loosing are significantly greater than those of gaining.
Now, the analog in the Jewish soul: when it descends into this world it invests itself in a corporeal body. The Jew is obligated to keep 248 positive commandments. When a positive commandment is perform, a Jew's bond to the Almighty gets stronger. While the Jew is also obligated to keep 365 prohibitive commandments. When a prohibition is transgressed, heaven forbid, a Jew's bond to the Almighty weakens.
A straight forward calculation reveals that "it's more beneficial for Adam not to have been created..." because there are just so many more ways Adam (i.e., a person) can get hurt from this, than he/she can benefit from it."
This is also alluded to in the word נמנו, which the Gmarah uses: in this context it means "debated" but it is etymologically related to מנו (=the counted.) I.e., the students of Shamai and Hillel counted the mitzvot and came to the conclusion that there are too many prohibitions relative to the positive commandments.
So the question then becomes: Why were we created after all, then?
To answer it, we can dig a bit into the Jewish understanding of performing a commandment. The performance of mitzvot (commandments) can be in one of three ways:
1. the mitzvah is performed with all the right intention, livelihood, joy and enthusiasm, or
2. the actual mitzvah-action is performed, but it's not accompanied by any of the above or
3. all the intentions etc are right, but there's no actual physical performance.
It's explained that when a person does a mitzvah, an angel is created (to advocate for that person.) However, כמים פנים אל הפנים i.e., just as a person performs the mitzvah so to is the angel that's created. Each angel has a "body" (albeit noncorporeal) and a "soul". So:
1. when the performance of a mitzvah is done with all the right spirit, the angel is created with a good body and a health soul.
2. when the performance of the mitzvah is done without the right intentions, i.e., it's lacking in spirit, so too is the angel: a strong body, but it's lacking a soul.
3. when the performance of a mitzvah is lacking in the actual doing, but there's all the right intention is spirit, then a soul of an angel is created but there's no body to vest it into.
G-d Almighty does something very neat, as it alluded to in Kiddushin Ch. 1, pg, 40a:
מחשבה טובה מצרפה למעשה
Loosly translated:
(G-d) joins a good thought to a deed.
In the context above: there's a number of soul-less angels out there that resulted from a mitzvot performed without the right intentions and a number of body-less angel-souls out there resulting from Jews having the right intentions but not following up on them. So, the Almighty takes a these souls (=good thoughts) and joins them in these angel bodies (=deed), thereby creating a good and healthy angel!
So, in a sense each positive mitzvah can be counted twice: once on the count of the intentions, and once on the count of the actual deed. And rewards for the mitzvah are dished out.
On the other hand, a person can have all the intentions in the world to transgress, but never actually does anything to actualize these intentions, then there's no punishment dished out -- since there's no deed associated with these intentions.
So, we find that on the account of positive commandments there's twice the reward per mitzvah than prohibitions. This can explain why Adam was indeed created: true there are many more possibly paths leading away from the almighty, but each path leading to the almighty is twice as wide. That is, indeed there are 365 prohibitions that detract from a persons connection to the Almighty, but there are 2x248=496 ways to connect to the Almighty), so to speak. The landscape changes because with positive commandements, intentions alone carry weight, while with prohibitions they do not!
While on the subject of deeds, the Gmarah continues:
עכשיו שנברא יפשפש במעשיו
I.e., now that the person is created, he should examine his deeds, to ensure that he/she is heading in the 2x248 direction rather than in the 365 direction, heaven forbid.
This also connects to the month of Elul (which we're in, at the time of writing). The month of Elul has been specifically set aside as the month of introspection and self-adjustment and self-refinement. A person should examine his/her deeds and ensure that he/she is on the correct path as we approach the days of Awe which immediately follow the month of Elul.
Leshana tovah tikatevu vetichatemu.
Tuesday, July 24, 2007
Access denied (for now...)
B"H
Dvarim (Deuteronomy) Ch. 3:25-26 read:
אעברה נא ואראה את הארץ הטובה אשר בעבר הירדן...
...ויאמר ה' אלי רב לך אל תוסף דבר אלי עוד בדבר הזה
Loosely translated:
[Moshe beseeches Hashem, pleading with him:] Please let me cross over to see the good land that is on the other side of the Jordan river...
...And Hashem said to me: "You had enough! Do not continue to ask this thing of me."
The context that this exchange is in is Moshe pleading for permission to enter the Holy Land, but his requests are denied.
The question is why did Hashem say that Moshe had enough? Enough of what?
An interesting insight into this can be gained if we consider what King David wrote in the book of Psalms 90:10:
ימי שנותינו בהם שבעים שנה
Loosely translated:
The alloted days of our lives is 70 years.
If King David says that we're all alloted 70 years then why is it that certain people live longer lives or others, G-d forbid, do the opposite?
The answer is (as is explained in a number of places) that a person's merits (or that of his/her ancestors) may extend his/her lifespan (=bonus extension). The opposite is also true. Nonetheless, a person gets a 70-year quota by default (and it's subject to change.)
Moshe, pleading with Hashem on Mt. Nevo is at the last days of his life. He was already informed that he's not going to enter the land of Israel and that indeed his burial place is in the wilderness. Moshe is 120 years old at that point.
So, taking King David's assertions that a person gets 70 years, it turns out that Moshe is 70 years old, plus a 50 year extension Moshe says to Hashem:
אעברה נא ואראה את הארץ הטובה
Which was loosely translated at as "Let me please cross [the Jordan river] so that I shall see the Good Land", however it can also be rendered as: "Let me cross נא so that I shall see the Good Land." What is נא? Aside from "Please" it also has the numerical value of 51. Moshe in effect is asking Hashem: "Please let me cross into the 51'st year of my bonus, that is allow me to live into my 121'st year, and therefore I shall be able to see the good land."
Hashem's answer: "רב לך"
Which was loosely translated as "You had enough", however it can also be rendered as: "לך is enough." What is לך? Aside from "You" it also has the numerical value of 50. Hashem in effect is answering to Moshe: "Fifty is enough. You're 50 year bonus is plenty. You will not live into your 121'st year."
The Midrash says that Moshe pleaded with Hashem over 500 times to enter the land and was refused every single time, until Hashem finally, explicitly and unequivocally told him to continue to ask no more, in verse 26.
A lesson for all of us: when it comes to matters of holiness one should never give up.
But Moshe's passing in the wilderness serves another lesson: Moshe being the loyal and devoted shepherd that he was will never leave behind his flock. He is buried in the desert together with the entire generation that left Egypt. Moshe will still lead them into the Holy Land of Israel at the end of days (the time of resurrection) just as he set out to do -- speedily in our days.
Dvarim (Deuteronomy) Ch. 3:25-26 read:
אעברה נא ואראה את הארץ הטובה אשר בעבר הירדן...
...ויאמר ה' אלי רב לך אל תוסף דבר אלי עוד בדבר הזה
Loosely translated:
[Moshe beseeches Hashem, pleading with him:] Please let me cross over to see the good land that is on the other side of the Jordan river...
...And Hashem said to me: "You had enough! Do not continue to ask this thing of me."
The context that this exchange is in is Moshe pleading for permission to enter the Holy Land, but his requests are denied.
The question is why did Hashem say that Moshe had enough? Enough of what?
An interesting insight into this can be gained if we consider what King David wrote in the book of Psalms 90:10:
ימי שנותינו בהם שבעים שנה
Loosely translated:
The alloted days of our lives is 70 years.
If King David says that we're all alloted 70 years then why is it that certain people live longer lives or others, G-d forbid, do the opposite?
The answer is (as is explained in a number of places) that a person's merits (or that of his/her ancestors) may extend his/her lifespan (=bonus extension). The opposite is also true. Nonetheless, a person gets a 70-year quota by default (and it's subject to change.)
Moshe, pleading with Hashem on Mt. Nevo is at the last days of his life. He was already informed that he's not going to enter the land of Israel and that indeed his burial place is in the wilderness. Moshe is 120 years old at that point.
So, taking King David's assertions that a person gets 70 years, it turns out that Moshe is 70 years old, plus a 50 year extension Moshe says to Hashem:
אעברה נא ואראה את הארץ הטובה
Which was loosely translated at as "Let me please cross [the Jordan river] so that I shall see the Good Land", however it can also be rendered as: "Let me cross נא so that I shall see the Good Land." What is נא? Aside from "Please" it also has the numerical value of 51. Moshe in effect is asking Hashem: "Please let me cross into the 51'st year of my bonus, that is allow me to live into my 121'st year, and therefore I shall be able to see the good land."
Hashem's answer: "רב לך"
Which was loosely translated as "You had enough", however it can also be rendered as: "לך is enough." What is לך? Aside from "You" it also has the numerical value of 50. Hashem in effect is answering to Moshe: "Fifty is enough. You're 50 year bonus is plenty. You will not live into your 121'st year."
The Midrash says that Moshe pleaded with Hashem over 500 times to enter the land and was refused every single time, until Hashem finally, explicitly and unequivocally told him to continue to ask no more, in verse 26.
A lesson for all of us: when it comes to matters of holiness one should never give up.
But Moshe's passing in the wilderness serves another lesson: Moshe being the loyal and devoted shepherd that he was will never leave behind his flock. He is buried in the desert together with the entire generation that left Egypt. Moshe will still lead them into the Holy Land of Israel at the end of days (the time of resurrection) just as he set out to do -- speedily in our days.
Wednesday, July 18, 2007
Moshe did not answer
B"H
We find four occurrences at in the book of Bamidbar (Numbers) that seem to stand out (from all of scripture) in that Moshe was either unable or unwilling to answer questions put to him.
We find the first occurrence in Bamidbar (Numbers) Ch. 25:6 which reads:
והמה בכים פתח אהל מועד
Loosely translated:
(When Zimri brought the Midianite women, before Moshe and the entire congregation) they were all crying by the opening of the Tent of Meeting.
Rashi brings a midrash about the reason they were crying:
Zimri brought the Midianite women to Moshe and asked him: "Am I permitted to marry this woman or not? And should you say 'no', who permitted Tziporah to you?!?" Moshe was silent.
We find the second occurrence in Bamidbar (Numbers) Ch. 27:4-5, which read:
למה יגרע שם אבינו מתוך משפחתו כי אין לו בן תנה לנו אחזה בתוך אחי אבינו
ויקרב משה את משפטן לפני השם
Loosely translated:
(The daughters of Tzlofchad came to Moshe and made the following argument:) Why must the name of our father be removed from his family as he has no sons. Give us a portion of land amongst our Father's brothers.
And Moshe brought their claim to the Almighty.
Rashi again brings the midrash: The daughters of Tzlfchad made the following statement to Moshe: our father was killed for a private sin (=violation of Shabbat). He was not part of Korach's followers and he did not commit trison aginst you. Why must he be punished in the same manner as Korach and his gang by loosing his portion of the land of Israel?!?!
Here again, Moshe did not answer on his own. He went to Hashem to get guidance.
We find the third occurrence in Bamidbar (Numbers) Ch. 36:2-3,6, which read:
ויאמרו את אדני צוה השם לתת את הארץ בנחלה בגורל לבני ישראל ואדני צֻוָּה בהשם לתת את נחלת צלפחד אחינו לבנתיו
...ומגרל נחלתנו יגרע
זה הדבר אשר צוה השם לבנות צלפחד לאמר, לטוב בעיניהם תהיינה לנשים
Loosely translated:
The tribe of Menashe came to Moshe arguing as follows: Our master (=Moshe) was commanded by the Almighty to portion the land amongst the Jews and our master was further commanded by the Almighty to give the portion of Tzlofchad our brother to his daughters.... and our portion be reduced (when they get married to someone from a different tribe)... Moshe (consulted Hashem and said this is what Hashem commanded to the daughers of Tzlofchad: they shall marry who they desire (so long as they are from the same tribe, thereby not reducing the total portion of the tribe.)
Here again, Moshe did not answer on his own. He went to Hashem to get guidance.
Lastly, with a bit of time-travel we find the fourth occurrence in Bamidbar (Numbers) Ch. 9:7-8, which reads:
ויאמרו האנשים ההמה אליו אנחנו טמאים לנפש אדם למה נגרע לבלתי הקריב את קרבן יהוה במעדו בתוך בני ישראל
ויאמר אלהם משה עמדו ואשמעה מה יצוה השם לכם
Loosely translated:
(The people from the burial society came to Moshe) and they said: We are defiled with the impurity of death, why should we loose-out by not being able to bring the Pascal sacrifice at the right time with the rest of the Jews?
And Moshe said to them: stand here while I hear what Hashem shall command for you to do.
Evidently, here again Moshe did not answer on his own. He went to Hashem to get guidance.
Obviously the common thread here is that Moshe didn't answer directly when a question was posed to him. Why?!?!
To refine the question, let us look at the following:
In the first instance, Moshe could have answered very simply as follows: Tziporah was permitted to me because 1) we were married before the receiving the Torah and its prohibitions against marrying Midianites, 2) she accepted upon her the yolke of heaven, in other words, she converted.
In the second instance, Moshe could have also answered the daughters of Tzlofchad. The subject matter that we're dealing with here is not a very complicated issue in the laws of inheritance. And Moshe certainly knew the laws pertaining to this situation. He could have paskened (=make a rulling) himself.
In the third instance, Moshe could have replied the very same way without consulting with Hashem, for the answer was very straight-forward. He could have paskened again, on his own.
In the fourth instance (which happens to have occurred first, chronologically) Moshe could have come up with some answer himself. It may be somewhat unlikely that he would have commanded a Second Passover (which is what Hashem commanded) but nonetheless he didn't even try to answer.
Yes in all four instances, Moshe did not answer and did not pasken... Evidently, he was either unwilling or unable....
What's going on?
An explanation:
If we examine closely what transpired in the first two instances we will understand what caused Moshe's inhibition. We will then be able to extrapolate to the last two instances.
In the first instance Zimri ask Moshe a question. But before even giving Moshe the opportunity to answer he also offered criticism (or even an accusation.) Moshe surly had a very good answer (as stated above), but he abstained from presenting it. Had Moshe answered, an outside observer might have concluded that Moshe is attempting to defend his actions in order to maintain authority. In other words Moshe's answer might have been misinterpreted as trying to safeguard his personal interests, G-d forbid.
Moshe then, decided not to give a legal ruling and leave the matter to others, lest it be misinterpreted. Moshe did not want to be involved under these circumstances.
In the second instance the daughters of Tzlofchad came and asked for a legal ruling from Moshe, but along with the problem-statement they also added that their Father was not in the camp of Korach. Had they simply made a she'ela (presented their case and seeked advise) Moshe would have been very likely to give them ruling (as stated above). However, once they mentioned that their father was not on Korach's side (i.e., he was on Moshe's side) Moshe was no longer willing to give them a ruling. Had Moshe paskended a ruling, to an outside observer it may have been misinterpreted as if the daughters of Tzlofchad bribed Moshe to receive their father's portion. In other words, an outside oberserver may have misinterpreted Moshe's answer as a pay-back for their father's support, G-d forbid.
Again, Moshe decided not to give a legal ruling under these circumstances, lest it be misinterpreted. Instead he left it to Hashem to answer.
So, we see how great a leader Moshe was! In either cases, he could have answered and ruled, and yet when there's even a tiny chance that his actions may be misinterpreted he removed himself from the situation and deferred to others. Moshe's integrity is exemplary to the nth degree.
We can now also understand what happened in the last two instances:
In the instnace of the tribe of Menashe approaching Moshe regarding the ruling on the matter of the daughters of Tzlofchad: even though the ruling came from Above, and the matter at hand is only a derivative of the original matter, Moshe told the tribe of Menash: "I cannot hand this file. Because the genesis of this file was not for me to handle, I will not touch it even now." Again, Moshe demonstrating exemplary integrity.
In the last instance of the burial society approaching Moshe because they did not want to loose out on the very special Pascal sacrifice: there are varying opinions as to why their were ritually impure. According to one option they were impure at that point in time because they just handled the burial of Datan and Aviran. According to a different option they were impure because their were carrying the bones of Yosef to the Land of Israel.
If we go with the opinion that the burial society was impure due to handling Datan and Aviran's (i.e., Moshe's nephews') burial, had Moshe benefited the burial society in any way (such as ruling for them a second Passover), an out side observer may have misinterpreted this as payback for their services. In other words, in may have been misinterpreted as Moshe having vested interest in their actions.
If we go with the second option that the burial society was impure due to handling Yosef's bones, had Moshe benefited the burial society in any way, an outside observer may have misinterpreted this as payback for doing Moshe's work for him -- Moshe was handling Yosef's bones at first, and had given the task over to the burial society. Again, Moshe's ruling may have been misinterpreted as a form of payback.
All in all we get a glimpse into Moshe's personality and leadership, specifically by what he wasn't saying. His abstention from matters that may have had a tiny chance of being misconstrued is a true testament of his character and integrity as the proto-leader of the Jewish nation.
Please G-d may we merit many more leaders in Moshe's image, speedily!
Good Shabbos.
We find four occurrences at in the book of Bamidbar (Numbers) that seem to stand out (from all of scripture) in that Moshe was either unable or unwilling to answer questions put to him.
We find the first occurrence in Bamidbar (Numbers) Ch. 25:6 which reads:
והמה בכים פתח אהל מועד
Loosely translated:
(When Zimri brought the Midianite women, before Moshe and the entire congregation) they were all crying by the opening of the Tent of Meeting.
Rashi brings a midrash about the reason they were crying:
Zimri brought the Midianite women to Moshe and asked him: "Am I permitted to marry this woman or not? And should you say 'no', who permitted Tziporah to you?!?" Moshe was silent.
We find the second occurrence in Bamidbar (Numbers) Ch. 27:4-5, which read:
למה יגרע שם אבינו מתוך משפחתו כי אין לו בן תנה לנו אחזה בתוך אחי אבינו
ויקרב משה את משפטן לפני השם
Loosely translated:
(The daughters of Tzlofchad came to Moshe and made the following argument:) Why must the name of our father be removed from his family as he has no sons. Give us a portion of land amongst our Father's brothers.
And Moshe brought their claim to the Almighty.
Rashi again brings the midrash: The daughters of Tzlfchad made the following statement to Moshe: our father was killed for a private sin (=violation of Shabbat). He was not part of Korach's followers and he did not commit trison aginst you. Why must he be punished in the same manner as Korach and his gang by loosing his portion of the land of Israel?!?!
Here again, Moshe did not answer on his own. He went to Hashem to get guidance.
We find the third occurrence in Bamidbar (Numbers) Ch. 36:2-3,6, which read:
ויאמרו את אדני צוה השם לתת את הארץ בנחלה בגורל לבני ישראל ואדני צֻוָּה בהשם לתת את נחלת צלפחד אחינו לבנתיו
...ומגרל נחלתנו יגרע
זה הדבר אשר צוה השם לבנות צלפחד לאמר, לטוב בעיניהם תהיינה לנשים
Loosely translated:
The tribe of Menashe came to Moshe arguing as follows: Our master (=Moshe) was commanded by the Almighty to portion the land amongst the Jews and our master was further commanded by the Almighty to give the portion of Tzlofchad our brother to his daughters.... and our portion be reduced (when they get married to someone from a different tribe)... Moshe (consulted Hashem and said this is what Hashem commanded to the daughers of Tzlofchad: they shall marry who they desire (so long as they are from the same tribe, thereby not reducing the total portion of the tribe.)
Here again, Moshe did not answer on his own. He went to Hashem to get guidance.
Lastly, with a bit of time-travel we find the fourth occurrence in Bamidbar (Numbers) Ch. 9:7-8, which reads:
ויאמרו האנשים ההמה אליו אנחנו טמאים לנפש אדם למה נגרע לבלתי הקריב את קרבן יהוה במעדו בתוך בני ישראל
ויאמר אלהם משה עמדו ואשמעה מה יצוה השם לכם
Loosely translated:
(The people from the burial society came to Moshe) and they said: We are defiled with the impurity of death, why should we loose-out by not being able to bring the Pascal sacrifice at the right time with the rest of the Jews?
And Moshe said to them: stand here while I hear what Hashem shall command for you to do.
Evidently, here again Moshe did not answer on his own. He went to Hashem to get guidance.
Obviously the common thread here is that Moshe didn't answer directly when a question was posed to him. Why?!?!
To refine the question, let us look at the following:
In the first instance, Moshe could have answered very simply as follows: Tziporah was permitted to me because 1) we were married before the receiving the Torah and its prohibitions against marrying Midianites, 2) she accepted upon her the yolke of heaven, in other words, she converted.
In the second instance, Moshe could have also answered the daughters of Tzlofchad. The subject matter that we're dealing with here is not a very complicated issue in the laws of inheritance. And Moshe certainly knew the laws pertaining to this situation. He could have paskened (=make a rulling) himself.
In the third instance, Moshe could have replied the very same way without consulting with Hashem, for the answer was very straight-forward. He could have paskened again, on his own.
In the fourth instance (which happens to have occurred first, chronologically) Moshe could have come up with some answer himself. It may be somewhat unlikely that he would have commanded a Second Passover (which is what Hashem commanded) but nonetheless he didn't even try to answer.
Yes in all four instances, Moshe did not answer and did not pasken... Evidently, he was either unwilling or unable....
What's going on?
An explanation:
If we examine closely what transpired in the first two instances we will understand what caused Moshe's inhibition. We will then be able to extrapolate to the last two instances.
In the first instance Zimri ask Moshe a question. But before even giving Moshe the opportunity to answer he also offered criticism (or even an accusation.) Moshe surly had a very good answer (as stated above), but he abstained from presenting it. Had Moshe answered, an outside observer might have concluded that Moshe is attempting to defend his actions in order to maintain authority. In other words Moshe's answer might have been misinterpreted as trying to safeguard his personal interests, G-d forbid.
Moshe then, decided not to give a legal ruling and leave the matter to others, lest it be misinterpreted. Moshe did not want to be involved under these circumstances.
In the second instance the daughters of Tzlofchad came and asked for a legal ruling from Moshe, but along with the problem-statement they also added that their Father was not in the camp of Korach. Had they simply made a she'ela (presented their case and seeked advise) Moshe would have been very likely to give them ruling (as stated above). However, once they mentioned that their father was not on Korach's side (i.e., he was on Moshe's side) Moshe was no longer willing to give them a ruling. Had Moshe paskended a ruling, to an outside observer it may have been misinterpreted as if the daughters of Tzlofchad bribed Moshe to receive their father's portion. In other words, an outside oberserver may have misinterpreted Moshe's answer as a pay-back for their father's support, G-d forbid.
Again, Moshe decided not to give a legal ruling under these circumstances, lest it be misinterpreted. Instead he left it to Hashem to answer.
So, we see how great a leader Moshe was! In either cases, he could have answered and ruled, and yet when there's even a tiny chance that his actions may be misinterpreted he removed himself from the situation and deferred to others. Moshe's integrity is exemplary to the nth degree.
We can now also understand what happened in the last two instances:
In the instnace of the tribe of Menashe approaching Moshe regarding the ruling on the matter of the daughters of Tzlofchad: even though the ruling came from Above, and the matter at hand is only a derivative of the original matter, Moshe told the tribe of Menash: "I cannot hand this file. Because the genesis of this file was not for me to handle, I will not touch it even now." Again, Moshe demonstrating exemplary integrity.
In the last instance of the burial society approaching Moshe because they did not want to loose out on the very special Pascal sacrifice: there are varying opinions as to why their were ritually impure. According to one option they were impure at that point in time because they just handled the burial of Datan and Aviran. According to a different option they were impure because their were carrying the bones of Yosef to the Land of Israel.
If we go with the opinion that the burial society was impure due to handling Datan and Aviran's (i.e., Moshe's nephews') burial, had Moshe benefited the burial society in any way (such as ruling for them a second Passover), an out side observer may have misinterpreted this as payback for their services. In other words, in may have been misinterpreted as Moshe having vested interest in their actions.
If we go with the second option that the burial society was impure due to handling Yosef's bones, had Moshe benefited the burial society in any way, an outside observer may have misinterpreted this as payback for doing Moshe's work for him -- Moshe was handling Yosef's bones at first, and had given the task over to the burial society. Again, Moshe's ruling may have been misinterpreted as a form of payback.
All in all we get a glimpse into Moshe's personality and leadership, specifically by what he wasn't saying. His abstention from matters that may have had a tiny chance of being misconstrued is a true testament of his character and integrity as the proto-leader of the Jewish nation.
Please G-d may we merit many more leaders in Moshe's image, speedily!
Good Shabbos.
Sunday, July 1, 2007
Pinchas' gift
B"H
Bamidbar (Numbers) Ch. 25:11,13 reads:
פינחס בן אלעזר בן אהרן הכהן השיב את חמתי מעל בני ישראל בקנאו את קנאתי בתוכם ולא כליתי את בני ישראל בקנאתי
והיתה לו ולזרעו אחריו ברית כהנת עולם
Loosely translated:
Pinchas son of El'azar son of Aaron the Kohen (i.e., priest) has turned away my wrath from the Jewish people in his act of zealousness for Me, and I shall therefore not annihilate the Jewish people in my jealousy... And it shall be to him an eternal covenant of priesthood.
Two questions pop out immediately:
1) Why does the Torah find it necessary to list the entire lineage of Pinchas back to Aaron the Kohen.
2) Why was to covenant of priesthood bestowed upon Pinchas, for priesthood is not something that's transferable, purchasable or giftable -- it's can only be hereditaraly given from father to son. Nowhere else in scripture such an unusual gift can be found.
An explanation, but first some background:
Rashi on 25:11 writes:
The tribes were disapproving of Pinchas' actions saying: have you seen the son of Puti, whose mother's father has fattened calves for idol-worship. This person (=Pinchas) has murdered an prince of a tribe of the Jewish nation. Therefore scripture has traces his linage to Aaron the High-Priest.
Why did Rashi uses the long winded "whose mother's father fattened calves for idol-worship" where it could more simply stated "whose grandfather fattened..."?
Yitro (Pinchas' maternal grandfather) was the high-priest of Midian. In his capacity as high-priest he would take calves and feed them to satiation but he wouldn't stop there. After the calves were satiated he continued to stuff them with food until they could hardly function, and then he stuffed them with more food still. The sole purpose of this exercise was to really fatten the calves. But for what purpose, you might ask... Answer: for the sole purpose of bringing a delicious, fat dribbling, juicy sacrifice to idols.
Essentially, Yitro was performing acts of cruelty to animals just for the loathsome activity of idol-worship. Indeed he embodied the attribute of cruelty. (This, of course, was before he turned away from idol-worship and in fact converted to the Jewish belief.)
There's a known principle (need citation) that a father's character traits are inherited by his daughters, while a mother's character traits are inherited by her sons.
So, in saying "whose mother's father fattened calves for idol-worship", the tribes were claiming that Yitro has given his character trait of cruelty to his daughter and she has given it, in turn, to Pinchas. Indeed, with this line of thought, they reasoned that Pinchas has killed Zimri, the prince of the tribe of Shimon, not out of zealousness to G-d, but rather out of cruelty!!! They were prepared to kill him for that....
To settle the matter, the Torah writes "Pinchas, son of El'azar, son of Aaron the Koeh". This is to say, don't look at Pinchas' pedigree on his mother's side, but rather on his father's side. Who's his father? El'azar son of Aharon the Kohen. About Aharon the Kohen it is stated in Pirkei Avot (Ethics of the Fathers) Ch. 1:12:
אהרון - אוהב שלום ורודף שלום אוהב את הברייות ומקרבן לתורה
Loosely transslated:
Aaron (the Kohen) -- loves peace, chases after peace, loves all creatures and draws them closer to the creator.
So, we find that Aaron's attribute is that of love. Since Aaron is the prototype and first Kohen, we must conclude that this attribute of love is inherited by all priests, since priesthood is modeled after Aaron.
So, the Torah is telling us: one might conclude that Pinchas killed Zimri out of cruelty, but know this: Pinchas has done so only out of love for the Jewish nation, in order to stop the plague that was ravaging the Jewish nation at the time -- his turned away G-d wrath.
This then explains why priesthood was gifted to Pinchas: he always had that attribute of love for the Jewish people, though up to this point it was buried and concealed within him -- it did not manifest in the open. But now, that he has demonstrated his love for the Jewish nation, in the most grandiose way, he essentially taken that attribute of love and pulled it out from obscurity and into plain sight. The most appropriate gift to give him, then, is to officially brand him a Kohen -- "loves peace, chases after pease, loves all creatures...."
Bamidbar (Numbers) Ch. 25:11,13 reads:
פינחס בן אלעזר בן אהרן הכהן השיב את חמתי מעל בני ישראל בקנאו את קנאתי בתוכם ולא כליתי את בני ישראל בקנאתי
והיתה לו ולזרעו אחריו ברית כהנת עולם
Loosely translated:
Pinchas son of El'azar son of Aaron the Kohen (i.e., priest) has turned away my wrath from the Jewish people in his act of zealousness for Me, and I shall therefore not annihilate the Jewish people in my jealousy... And it shall be to him an eternal covenant of priesthood.
Two questions pop out immediately:
1) Why does the Torah find it necessary to list the entire lineage of Pinchas back to Aaron the Kohen.
2) Why was to covenant of priesthood bestowed upon Pinchas, for priesthood is not something that's transferable, purchasable or giftable -- it's can only be hereditaraly given from father to son. Nowhere else in scripture such an unusual gift can be found.
An explanation, but first some background:
Rashi on 25:11 writes:
The tribes were disapproving of Pinchas' actions saying: have you seen the son of Puti, whose mother's father has fattened calves for idol-worship. This person (=Pinchas) has murdered an prince of a tribe of the Jewish nation. Therefore scripture has traces his linage to Aaron the High-Priest.
Why did Rashi uses the long winded "whose mother's father fattened calves for idol-worship" where it could more simply stated "whose grandfather fattened..."?
Yitro (Pinchas' maternal grandfather) was the high-priest of Midian. In his capacity as high-priest he would take calves and feed them to satiation but he wouldn't stop there. After the calves were satiated he continued to stuff them with food until they could hardly function, and then he stuffed them with more food still. The sole purpose of this exercise was to really fatten the calves. But for what purpose, you might ask... Answer: for the sole purpose of bringing a delicious, fat dribbling, juicy sacrifice to idols.
Essentially, Yitro was performing acts of cruelty to animals just for the loathsome activity of idol-worship. Indeed he embodied the attribute of cruelty. (This, of course, was before he turned away from idol-worship and in fact converted to the Jewish belief.)
There's a known principle (need citation) that a father's character traits are inherited by his daughters, while a mother's character traits are inherited by her sons.
So, in saying "whose mother's father fattened calves for idol-worship", the tribes were claiming that Yitro has given his character trait of cruelty to his daughter and she has given it, in turn, to Pinchas. Indeed, with this line of thought, they reasoned that Pinchas has killed Zimri, the prince of the tribe of Shimon, not out of zealousness to G-d, but rather out of cruelty!!! They were prepared to kill him for that....
To settle the matter, the Torah writes "Pinchas, son of El'azar, son of Aaron the Koeh". This is to say, don't look at Pinchas' pedigree on his mother's side, but rather on his father's side. Who's his father? El'azar son of Aharon the Kohen. About Aharon the Kohen it is stated in Pirkei Avot (Ethics of the Fathers) Ch. 1:12:
אהרון - אוהב שלום ורודף שלום אוהב את הברייות ומקרבן לתורה
Loosely transslated:
Aaron (the Kohen) -- loves peace, chases after peace, loves all creatures and draws them closer to the creator.
So, we find that Aaron's attribute is that of love. Since Aaron is the prototype and first Kohen, we must conclude that this attribute of love is inherited by all priests, since priesthood is modeled after Aaron.
So, the Torah is telling us: one might conclude that Pinchas killed Zimri out of cruelty, but know this: Pinchas has done so only out of love for the Jewish nation, in order to stop the plague that was ravaging the Jewish nation at the time -- his turned away G-d wrath.
This then explains why priesthood was gifted to Pinchas: he always had that attribute of love for the Jewish people, though up to this point it was buried and concealed within him -- it did not manifest in the open. But now, that he has demonstrated his love for the Jewish nation, in the most grandiose way, he essentially taken that attribute of love and pulled it out from obscurity and into plain sight. The most appropriate gift to give him, then, is to officially brand him a Kohen -- "loves peace, chases after pease, loves all creatures...."
Thursday, June 21, 2007
Why disguise?
B"H
Bamidbar (Numbers) Ch. 21:1 reads as follows:
וישמע הכנעני מלך ערד ישב הנגב כי בא ישראל דרך האתרים
Loosely translated:
And the Canaanite king of Arad, who dwells in the Negev, heard that the Jews arrived through Atarim.
Rashi brings an interesting interpretation that the Amalekites were the ones who attacked the Jews at this point, but they disguised themselves as Canaanites by speaking the Canaanite tongue. (Some versions of Rashi, as well as other sources such as Yalkut Shimoni, hold that the Jews also changed their dress to that of the Canaanites.) Whatever the exact disguise was aside, Rashi points out the reason for the disguise: So that the Jews pray to Hashem to save them from the Canaanites and since they were in reality battling Amalek, the Jews' prayers would have no effect.
So a question stands out here:
If Amalek wanted to deceive the Jews so that their prayers are off-target then why did they not employ the same deceptive tactic in Shmot (Exodus) 17:8, as it is written:
ויבא עמלק וילחם עם ישראל ברפידם (=And Amalek came and battled with the Jews in Refidim)? Clearly they didn't attempt to disguise themselves in this case.
So, what's the difference between the first battle in Shmot 17:8 and the second one in Bamidbar 21:1?
An explanation:
In the first battle the Jews were fresh out of Egypt. Ahead of them was 40 years (in hindsight) of miraculous existence: the food was taken care by Mana, the water by Miriam's portable well, the clothing grew with them, the land ahead of them was flattened by the clouds of glory, etc... They were totally exempt from worldly-worries. The analog nowadays is a Jew living his/her entire life in the 4 cubits of Torah study -- shunning away from involvement with the mundane world.
At this time comes Amalek, undisguised, and does battle with the Jews. More than a purely physical battle, this was an ideological battle: the Amalekite's claim was that both Jews and Amalek come from the same forefather Abraham. Their issue with the Jews was the preferential treatment that the Jews are being given. After all the Jews and the Amalekites were cousines, why is it then that the Jews can live this miraculous life and the Amalekites cannot. Perhaps G-d forbid, the Jews don't deserve this either? Perhaps the Jews are like any other nation out there? The attack was on the Jew's belonging in the 4 cubits of Torah.
To make such claims, the Amalekites needed to come as themselves -- the grandchildren of Abraham. They of course lost that battled proving once-and-for-all that a Jew does indeed belong in the 4 cubit of Torah.
However, Amalek was defeated but wasn't out yet. Amalek was just waiting for another opportunity to battle the Jews. The opportunity presented itself in this second battle: the Jews were about to enter the land of Cannaan (=Israel). What's ahead of them is many centuries of working the land, paying the mortgage, selling one's ware at the market place, etc... In other words, mundane daily existence.
Comes Amalek and says, the battle over miraculous existence we lost, but now you're entering a phase of mundane existence. We will do battle again! To make such a declaration they disguised themselves as Canaanites, dwellers of the ארץ כנען (=the land of Canaan), representing ארציות (=mundane life).
Of course they lost the second battle as well. Their mistake: divine providence extends beyond the 4 cubits of Torah, even into the lowest levels (i.e., ארציות) of Jewish existence.
This teaches us that even when a Jew is involved in mundane life he should maintain his connection to the divine, for that's where his protection comes from. As a matter of fact, he/she is given the opportunity to infuse the mundane daily life with the holiness of Torah through the performance of physical mitzvot (commandments) thereby fulfilling the verse "בכל דרכך דעהו" (=Know G-d in all your dealings.)
Good Shabbos!
Bamidbar (Numbers) Ch. 21:1 reads as follows:
וישמע הכנעני מלך ערד ישב הנגב כי בא ישראל דרך האתרים
Loosely translated:
And the Canaanite king of Arad, who dwells in the Negev, heard that the Jews arrived through Atarim.
Rashi brings an interesting interpretation that the Amalekites were the ones who attacked the Jews at this point, but they disguised themselves as Canaanites by speaking the Canaanite tongue. (Some versions of Rashi, as well as other sources such as Yalkut Shimoni, hold that the Jews also changed their dress to that of the Canaanites.) Whatever the exact disguise was aside, Rashi points out the reason for the disguise: So that the Jews pray to Hashem to save them from the Canaanites and since they were in reality battling Amalek, the Jews' prayers would have no effect.
So a question stands out here:
If Amalek wanted to deceive the Jews so that their prayers are off-target then why did they not employ the same deceptive tactic in Shmot (Exodus) 17:8, as it is written:
ויבא עמלק וילחם עם ישראל ברפידם (=And Amalek came and battled with the Jews in Refidim)? Clearly they didn't attempt to disguise themselves in this case.
So, what's the difference between the first battle in Shmot 17:8 and the second one in Bamidbar 21:1?
An explanation:
In the first battle the Jews were fresh out of Egypt. Ahead of them was 40 years (in hindsight) of miraculous existence: the food was taken care by Mana, the water by Miriam's portable well, the clothing grew with them, the land ahead of them was flattened by the clouds of glory, etc... They were totally exempt from worldly-worries. The analog nowadays is a Jew living his/her entire life in the 4 cubits of Torah study -- shunning away from involvement with the mundane world.
At this time comes Amalek, undisguised, and does battle with the Jews. More than a purely physical battle, this was an ideological battle: the Amalekite's claim was that both Jews and Amalek come from the same forefather Abraham. Their issue with the Jews was the preferential treatment that the Jews are being given. After all the Jews and the Amalekites were cousines, why is it then that the Jews can live this miraculous life and the Amalekites cannot. Perhaps G-d forbid, the Jews don't deserve this either? Perhaps the Jews are like any other nation out there? The attack was on the Jew's belonging in the 4 cubits of Torah.
To make such claims, the Amalekites needed to come as themselves -- the grandchildren of Abraham. They of course lost that battled proving once-and-for-all that a Jew does indeed belong in the 4 cubit of Torah.
However, Amalek was defeated but wasn't out yet. Amalek was just waiting for another opportunity to battle the Jews. The opportunity presented itself in this second battle: the Jews were about to enter the land of Cannaan (=Israel). What's ahead of them is many centuries of working the land, paying the mortgage, selling one's ware at the market place, etc... In other words, mundane daily existence.
Comes Amalek and says, the battle over miraculous existence we lost, but now you're entering a phase of mundane existence. We will do battle again! To make such a declaration they disguised themselves as Canaanites, dwellers of the ארץ כנען (=the land of Canaan), representing ארציות (=mundane life).
Of course they lost the second battle as well. Their mistake: divine providence extends beyond the 4 cubits of Torah, even into the lowest levels (i.e., ארציות) of Jewish existence.
This teaches us that even when a Jew is involved in mundane life he should maintain his connection to the divine, for that's where his protection comes from. As a matter of fact, he/she is given the opportunity to infuse the mundane daily life with the holiness of Torah through the performance of physical mitzvot (commandments) thereby fulfilling the verse "בכל דרכך דעהו" (=Know G-d in all your dealings.)
Good Shabbos!
Friday, June 15, 2007
Fitting fates
B"H
Bamidbar (Numbers) Ch. 16:31-32 reads:
ויהי ככלתו לדבר את כל הדברים האלה ותבקע האדמה אשר תחתיהם
ותפתח הארץ את פיה ותבלע אתם
Loosely translated:
And when [Moshe] finished speaking all these words and earth split open below them [=Korach and his gang] and the earth opened its mouth and swallowed them...
Interestingly enough, the rest of Korach's rebellious gang met its demise differently. We find that 16:35 reads:
ואש יצאה מאת ה' ותאכל את החמשים ומאתים איש מקריבי הקטרת
Loosely translated:
And they fire came from Hashem and consumed the two hundred and fifty men, those who sacrificed incense.
The earth opening its mouth and swallowing Korach and his immediate gang, when put in contrast with the rest of the gang (250 people) who was bringing incense who were burnt up brings up and interesting point:
The whole dispute Korach had with Moshe was as a result of the tragedy with the 10 spies: Korach recognized all along that Moshe is above and beyond everyone spiritually so there was no dispute at first.
However when the spies came back with their report they were rebuked (and indeed punished): while their intentions may have been good, the end does not justify the means. The spies were unwilling to live in the mundane physical world and engage in mundane physical deeds. This was at the root of their desire to stay in the desert. While in the desert they were subjected to constant divine providence: the needed not worry about food (they had manah), they needed not worry about water (they had Miriam's portable well), their clothing grew on them and the path was flattened and "sanitized" by the clouds of glory. Indeed their lived a miraculous life and could be totally immersed in Torah study without a worry in the world.
They reasoned that this miraculous lifestyle is something they would have to give-up upon arriving in the land of Israel. All of a sudden there's something called Mortgage that gets in the way. They will need to work the land. They'll have to go to the market place, etc... In other words, they realized that they'll have to live a mundane life.
So the net effect is that they gave a skewed report with some interpretive comments about the land of Israel, hoping that the whole nation will give-up the idea of entering the land, and they'd be able to continue this supernatural lifestyle in the desert, indefinitely. They succeeded convincing a great majority of this skewed opinion.
They were punished because although ideally a person should aim to study Torah non-stop, nonetheless Torah requires us to be involved in the mundane existence while keeping a finger on our Jewish pulse, and bringing Torah into the mundane existence in order to elevate it to holiness. Korach took this too far though:
When Korach saw the punishment being executed, he said to himself: "At first I thought that existence should be aimed at purely spiritual pursuits and I had no objections to Moshe. But now that I see that the spies were wrong (on the count of spiritual pursuit) and we should also engage in the physical mundane world, Moshe is no better than the rest of us! So, I'm going to go there and get my fair share of leadership!"
So, Korach was more interested in the physical deeds, while the rest of the gang that was offering incests was obviously more interested in the spiritual. Since Korach's argument was more on the mundane physical plain he was swallowed by the earth (in a downward direction.) However since the others' argument was on a spiritual plain, they were consumed by heavenly fire (in an upward direction.)
Everyone got what they were looking for: Korach went down, the other 250 men burned up, the rest of the nation, which agreed that desert life is preferable lingered around the desert for the next 40 years.
What a fine example of how Hashem conducts this world measure-for-measure with how we conduct ourselves.
Good shabbos!
Bamidbar (Numbers) Ch. 16:31-32 reads:
ויהי ככלתו לדבר את כל הדברים האלה ותבקע האדמה אשר תחתיהם
ותפתח הארץ את פיה ותבלע אתם
Loosely translated:
And when [Moshe] finished speaking all these words and earth split open below them [=Korach and his gang] and the earth opened its mouth and swallowed them...
Interestingly enough, the rest of Korach's rebellious gang met its demise differently. We find that 16:35 reads:
ואש יצאה מאת ה' ותאכל את החמשים ומאתים איש מקריבי הקטרת
Loosely translated:
And they fire came from Hashem and consumed the two hundred and fifty men, those who sacrificed incense.
The earth opening its mouth and swallowing Korach and his immediate gang, when put in contrast with the rest of the gang (250 people) who was bringing incense who were burnt up brings up and interesting point:
The whole dispute Korach had with Moshe was as a result of the tragedy with the 10 spies: Korach recognized all along that Moshe is above and beyond everyone spiritually so there was no dispute at first.
However when the spies came back with their report they were rebuked (and indeed punished): while their intentions may have been good, the end does not justify the means. The spies were unwilling to live in the mundane physical world and engage in mundane physical deeds. This was at the root of their desire to stay in the desert. While in the desert they were subjected to constant divine providence: the needed not worry about food (they had manah), they needed not worry about water (they had Miriam's portable well), their clothing grew on them and the path was flattened and "sanitized" by the clouds of glory. Indeed their lived a miraculous life and could be totally immersed in Torah study without a worry in the world.
They reasoned that this miraculous lifestyle is something they would have to give-up upon arriving in the land of Israel. All of a sudden there's something called Mortgage that gets in the way. They will need to work the land. They'll have to go to the market place, etc... In other words, they realized that they'll have to live a mundane life.
So the net effect is that they gave a skewed report with some interpretive comments about the land of Israel, hoping that the whole nation will give-up the idea of entering the land, and they'd be able to continue this supernatural lifestyle in the desert, indefinitely. They succeeded convincing a great majority of this skewed opinion.
They were punished because although ideally a person should aim to study Torah non-stop, nonetheless Torah requires us to be involved in the mundane existence while keeping a finger on our Jewish pulse, and bringing Torah into the mundane existence in order to elevate it to holiness. Korach took this too far though:
When Korach saw the punishment being executed, he said to himself: "At first I thought that existence should be aimed at purely spiritual pursuits and I had no objections to Moshe. But now that I see that the spies were wrong (on the count of spiritual pursuit) and we should also engage in the physical mundane world, Moshe is no better than the rest of us! So, I'm going to go there and get my fair share of leadership!"
So, Korach was more interested in the physical deeds, while the rest of the gang that was offering incests was obviously more interested in the spiritual. Since Korach's argument was more on the mundane physical plain he was swallowed by the earth (in a downward direction.) However since the others' argument was on a spiritual plain, they were consumed by heavenly fire (in an upward direction.)
Everyone got what they were looking for: Korach went down, the other 250 men burned up, the rest of the nation, which agreed that desert life is preferable lingered around the desert for the next 40 years.
What a fine example of how Hashem conducts this world measure-for-measure with how we conduct ourselves.
Good shabbos!
Take two Almonds and call a Kohen in the morning...
B"H
Bamidbar (Numbers) Ch. 17:23 reads:
ויהי ממחרת ויבא משה אל אהל העדות והנה פרח מטה
אהרן לבית לוי ויצא פרח ויצץ ציץ ויגמלש קדים
Loosely translated:
And it came to be on the following morning that Moshe came to the Tent of Meeting and behold the staff of Aharon from the tribe of Levi has blossomed, and a flower grew out of it, and it budded, and bore Almonds.
A couple of questions come to mind right away:
First, why specifically Almonds?
Also, by picking the Almond, in a way it would seem that G-d diminished from the miracle:
We find in Talmud Yerushalmi, Tractate Taanit, Chapter 4, page 23a:
שקד אני רואה מה הלוז הזה משהוא מוציא את ניצו ועד שהוא גומר את פירותיו כ"א יום
Which indicates that an Almond goes from budding to complete fruit in 21 days.
So, if G-d wanted to make a miracle and make a dry staff bear fruit overnight, why pick the fruit that's already the fastest? Theoretically for the miracle to be "big" G-d should have chosen, say, an Avocado or a Banana or some other slow-to-ripen fruit. So, the second question is: why specifically Almonds?
Rashi answers the Almond question saying that Almonds are the fastest fruits which teaches us that to those who oppose the institution of kehunah (=priesthood), like Korach and his gang, punishment comes quickly and swiftly, much like an Almond's ripening.
However, the reason for the Almond appears to go a bit further with its connection to the kehunah But first, some background:
A general philosophical question is as follows: if G-d Almighty decides what we will be getting in terms of בניי חיי ומזוניי (=offspring, life, and income) for the entire year, all on Rosh-Hashana, and the decision is sealed and signed on Yom-Kippur, then why does a person need to come to shul 3 times a day and pray for the very same things? Are we worried that Hashem will "forget" what was decided?
After all, if it's all been decided on Rosh-Hashana then the person might as well sit at the beach -front, put his/her feet up, seep Margaritas, and just wait for בניי חיי ומזוניי to come pouring down from High. No?!?!
Actually, no! The abundance of בניי חיי ומזוניי that is decided on Rosh-Hashana and sealed on Yom-Kippur is purely spiritual. In other words, each person has sort of a spiritual bank account up High, and on Rosh-Hashana G-d make a deposit for the whole year. However, a person still needs to show up three times in synagogue each day to ask for a currency conversion: please G-d, take some of the abundance that was deposited in my spiritual bank account and convert it into tangible בניי חיי ומזוניי in the physical sense.
Now, there's a rule that no prayer goes unanswered, as we find in Talmud Bavli, Tractate Brachot, Chapter 5, page 32b:
כל המאריך בתפלתו אין תפלתו חוזרת ריקם (=anyone who prays with intent, his/her prayer does not go unanswered.) In other words, a person's prayers ascend to the Throne of Glory up High, and are heard by- and acted upon by G-d.
So, the question can then be asked: if that's the case, why don't we always get what we prayed for? Simply answered, some hold that no prayer goes unanswered, though sometimes the answer is "no!" This is a tongue-in-cheek, answer. What's the real deal?
The real deal is that when G-d hears a prayer He certainly answers by sending abundance down to the petitioner, of whatever the petitioner asks for. However, as the abundance flows down from higher loftier worlds, it makes a few stops at Customs (the borders between the higher worlds.) At each border crossing there are Customs agents (aka administering angels.) When the flow arrives these Custom agents start looking at the books: does the petitioner deserve any of the abundance, and if so how much does the petitioner actually deserve? etc, etc...
So, the net effect is that a person prays for spiritual-to-physical currency conversion, but the flow of abundance sent down from High doesn't always arrive when the petitioner expects it, or even in it's original form or in the manner that a person expects. All this is due to Customs...
To help with that, G-d Almighty, in His infinite mercy, sent us help in the form of the Kohamim (=priests). In fact they are commanded to bless us, as we find in Bamidbar (Numbers) Ch. 6:23,27:
דבר אל אהרן ואל בניו לאמר כה תברכו את בני ישראל אמור להם...
ושמו את שמי על בני ישראל ואני אברכם
Loosely translated as:
Speak onto Aharon and his sons: so you shall bless the Jewish people, say to them (=the Jewish people).... And they (=the kohanim) shall place My Name on the Jewish people and I shall bless them.
It is interesting to note that there are two opposites, so to speak, built into these verses: on the one hand it's the kohanim who are commanded to bless the Jewish people (verse 23), while on the other hand it's G-d Almighty who blesses the Jewish people (verse 27). So, who really blesses the Jewish people?
It's quite clear that Hashem holds all the abundance, so really the blessing is coming down from High, per verse 27, so what's the role of the kohanim?
To answer that, we look in Talmud Bavli, Tractate Beya, Chapter 2, page 18a, amongst other places, where it states:
כהנים זריזין הם
I.e., the kohanim are "quick" in their sacred duties. Our sages interpret this also as
"מזרזין הם" = "זריזין הם", i.e., not only are they fast (זריזין), but they also cause other things to speed up (מזרזין).
When a person's abundance is held up at Customs pending review by the Customs agents, the blessing of the kohanim (as quoted above from Bamidbar 6:23) speeds things up. When the abundance is rushed through Customs, there's less time and opportunity for the Customs agents to do proper and thorough analysis of the petitioner's worthiness. Things are rushed through so the abundance arrives better resembling its original form when it left the Throne of Glory, less changed, more pristine, more like what was asked of Hashem. This is the secret of the blessing of the kohanim -- to rush the abundance down.
We see from this that the whole concept of a kohen and his blessings, as well as his tasks around the Temple, are intrinsically connected to the concept of speed. In other words, at the the very essence of a kohen is the concept of speed.
It is natural therefore that the staff of the "real kohen" be adorned specifically with Almonds -- the fastest of fruit, for only the "real kohen" affects the speed of the flux of abundance. Once the other tribal leaders saw the Almond fruit on Aharon's staff, it was abundantly clear who possess the attribute of kehunah -- it's all in the Almond.
Good Shabbos with lots of abundance (and Almonds)!
Bamidbar (Numbers) Ch. 17:23 reads:
ויהי ממחרת ויבא משה אל אהל העדות והנה פרח מטה
אהרן לבית לוי ויצא פרח ויצץ ציץ ויגמלש קדים
Loosely translated:
And it came to be on the following morning that Moshe came to the Tent of Meeting and behold the staff of Aharon from the tribe of Levi has blossomed, and a flower grew out of it, and it budded, and bore Almonds.
A couple of questions come to mind right away:
First, why specifically Almonds?
Also, by picking the Almond, in a way it would seem that G-d diminished from the miracle:
We find in Talmud Yerushalmi, Tractate Taanit, Chapter 4, page 23a:
שקד אני רואה מה הלוז הזה משהוא מוציא את ניצו ועד שהוא גומר את פירותיו כ"א יום
Which indicates that an Almond goes from budding to complete fruit in 21 days.
So, if G-d wanted to make a miracle and make a dry staff bear fruit overnight, why pick the fruit that's already the fastest? Theoretically for the miracle to be "big" G-d should have chosen, say, an Avocado or a Banana or some other slow-to-ripen fruit. So, the second question is: why specifically Almonds?
Rashi answers the Almond question saying that Almonds are the fastest fruits which teaches us that to those who oppose the institution of kehunah (=priesthood), like Korach and his gang, punishment comes quickly and swiftly, much like an Almond's ripening.
However, the reason for the Almond appears to go a bit further with its connection to the kehunah But first, some background:
A general philosophical question is as follows: if G-d Almighty decides what we will be getting in terms of בניי חיי ומזוניי (=offspring, life, and income) for the entire year, all on Rosh-Hashana, and the decision is sealed and signed on Yom-Kippur, then why does a person need to come to shul 3 times a day and pray for the very same things? Are we worried that Hashem will "forget" what was decided?
After all, if it's all been decided on Rosh-Hashana then the person might as well sit at the beach -front, put his/her feet up, seep Margaritas, and just wait for בניי חיי ומזוניי to come pouring down from High. No?!?!
Actually, no! The abundance of בניי חיי ומזוניי that is decided on Rosh-Hashana and sealed on Yom-Kippur is purely spiritual. In other words, each person has sort of a spiritual bank account up High, and on Rosh-Hashana G-d make a deposit for the whole year. However, a person still needs to show up three times in synagogue each day to ask for a currency conversion: please G-d, take some of the abundance that was deposited in my spiritual bank account and convert it into tangible בניי חיי ומזוניי in the physical sense.
Now, there's a rule that no prayer goes unanswered, as we find in Talmud Bavli, Tractate Brachot, Chapter 5, page 32b:
כל המאריך בתפלתו אין תפלתו חוזרת ריקם (=anyone who prays with intent, his/her prayer does not go unanswered.) In other words, a person's prayers ascend to the Throne of Glory up High, and are heard by- and acted upon by G-d.
So, the question can then be asked: if that's the case, why don't we always get what we prayed for? Simply answered, some hold that no prayer goes unanswered, though sometimes the answer is "no!" This is a tongue-in-cheek, answer. What's the real deal?
The real deal is that when G-d hears a prayer He certainly answers by sending abundance down to the petitioner, of whatever the petitioner asks for. However, as the abundance flows down from higher loftier worlds, it makes a few stops at Customs (the borders between the higher worlds.) At each border crossing there are Customs agents (aka administering angels.) When the flow arrives these Custom agents start looking at the books: does the petitioner deserve any of the abundance, and if so how much does the petitioner actually deserve? etc, etc...
So, the net effect is that a person prays for spiritual-to-physical currency conversion, but the flow of abundance sent down from High doesn't always arrive when the petitioner expects it, or even in it's original form or in the manner that a person expects. All this is due to Customs...
To help with that, G-d Almighty, in His infinite mercy, sent us help in the form of the Kohamim (=priests). In fact they are commanded to bless us, as we find in Bamidbar (Numbers) Ch. 6:23,27:
דבר אל אהרן ואל בניו לאמר כה תברכו את בני ישראל אמור להם...
ושמו את שמי על בני ישראל ואני אברכם
Loosely translated as:
Speak onto Aharon and his sons: so you shall bless the Jewish people, say to them (=the Jewish people).... And they (=the kohanim) shall place My Name on the Jewish people and I shall bless them.
It is interesting to note that there are two opposites, so to speak, built into these verses: on the one hand it's the kohanim who are commanded to bless the Jewish people (verse 23), while on the other hand it's G-d Almighty who blesses the Jewish people (verse 27). So, who really blesses the Jewish people?
It's quite clear that Hashem holds all the abundance, so really the blessing is coming down from High, per verse 27, so what's the role of the kohanim?
To answer that, we look in Talmud Bavli, Tractate Beya, Chapter 2, page 18a, amongst other places, where it states:
כהנים זריזין הם
I.e., the kohanim are "quick" in their sacred duties. Our sages interpret this also as
"מזרזין הם" = "זריזין הם", i.e., not only are they fast (זריזין), but they also cause other things to speed up (מזרזין).
When a person's abundance is held up at Customs pending review by the Customs agents, the blessing of the kohanim (as quoted above from Bamidbar 6:23) speeds things up. When the abundance is rushed through Customs, there's less time and opportunity for the Customs agents to do proper and thorough analysis of the petitioner's worthiness. Things are rushed through so the abundance arrives better resembling its original form when it left the Throne of Glory, less changed, more pristine, more like what was asked of Hashem. This is the secret of the blessing of the kohanim -- to rush the abundance down.
We see from this that the whole concept of a kohen and his blessings, as well as his tasks around the Temple, are intrinsically connected to the concept of speed. In other words, at the the very essence of a kohen is the concept of speed.
It is natural therefore that the staff of the "real kohen" be adorned specifically with Almonds -- the fastest of fruit, for only the "real kohen" affects the speed of the flux of abundance. Once the other tribal leaders saw the Almond fruit on Aharon's staff, it was abundantly clear who possess the attribute of kehunah -- it's all in the Almond.
Good Shabbos with lots of abundance (and Almonds)!
Sunday, June 3, 2007
Kosher spies vs. Hoshea's name change.
B"H
Bamidbar (Numbers) Ch.13:3 reads:
כלם אנשים ראשי בני ישראל המה
Loosely translated:
There were all אנשים (pron.: Anashim = men), the heads of the Jewish people.
Rashi interprets "Anashim" in 13:3 to mean that at the time of calling there were all kosher righteous individuals, i.e., proper upstanding leaders of the community and of their respective tribes.
Interestingly in 13:16 we find:
ויקרא משה להושע בן-נון יהושע
Loosely translated:
And Moshe renamed Hoshea son of Nun to Yehoshuah (Joshua)
Rashi (on 13:16) states that Moshe added the leading י to Hoshea's name (thus resulting in Yehoshua) so that "Hashem will protect Joshua from the conspiracy of those wicked spies" (referring to the 10 spies are are destined to produce an evil report about the land of Israel.)
So, the obvious question is this: if these 10 men were indeed wicked, why did Moshe call them "Anashim" (=righteous, proper and upstanding leaders of their respective tribes.) Why indeed did he choose them to lead the mission? If on the other hand they were indeed kosher "Anashim", why did Moshe have to add a letter to Hoshea's name to draw down divine protection from these Anashim?
What were they? Anashim or wicked?
At the literal level, we must conclude that they were indeed "Anashim" as the Torah states, which means that they were kosher at the time the were chosen for the mission. So, the question falls back onto Moshe as to his decision to add a letter to a perfectly valid name.
An explanation, but first some background:
We find that there are two types of righteous individuals, as it states in Tehilim (Psalms) 93:13:
צדיק כתמר יפרח כארז בלבנון ישגה
Loosely translated:
A righteous person will grow like a palm-tree, [and] like a Lebanon-ceder tree he shell become great.
What's the differences between a palm-tree and a ceder? A ceder tree is much bigger, wider, stronger, taller and resistant to the elements. It's a really massive tree, especially the Lebanese variety. A palm-tree, on the other hand is smaller, slimmer and shorter and not as resistant. Though a palm-tree posses one very important quality that a ceder lacks: the ability to bear fruit! Not only does a palm-tree produces dates, but anyone who eats those dates gains sustenances, vitality and strength.
This is likened to two types of Tzakdikim (=righteous individuals):
There are those that are like a ceder: they are massive! the devote 100% of themselves to study of Torah and spiritual pursuit. They are constantly in heavenly involvement and absolutly nothing else. Their entire existence evolves around the axis of Torah.
On the other side of the spectrum there are those Tzakdikim that that are like a palm-tree: their not devoting 100% of their time to Torah study. They are not constantly involved with heaven. In fact they devote some of their time, effort, money and abilities to help other people. They bear fruits -- they're actions and interactions with other individuals -- in the way of spiritual and material help are indeed the "fruits" they produce. The palm-tree tzadikim reach out to the simple folk. Those who consume their fruits indeed gain both physical and spiritual sustenance, vitality and strength.
Though this outreach may come at the expense of these palm-tree tzadikim, because they certainly don't have all the Torah study that the ceder tzadikim have.
Back to the problem at hand:
Moshe sees in the 10 other spies that they are indeed kosher, as Rashi explains, and that they're indeed tzadikim of the ceder variety: they much rather stay in the desert and live a supernatural life where food is miraculously provided daily, the clothing grows with the person wearing them, the clouds of glory provide divine protection and a person is free to pursuit spirituality to their heart's content without interference from the physical realm. On the other hand the Land of Israel represents, to them, a spiritual decent because: a person would have to be involved in manual labor to work the land, go to the marketplace to buy and sell, cook, put food on the table, clean after the meal, change diapers, take the donkey in for an oil-change, take the kids to sand-hockey and be otherwise involved in earthy matters, leaving less time for spiritual pursuits.
Moshe wants Hoshea to become a palm-tree tzadik, on the other hand. Moshe reasons that it's not enough to be all spiritual and lead a completely spiritual life, for if that was the case, the Jewish nation would have not received physical bodies and a Torah that affects (and indeed utilizes and refines) the physical world. For Torah to be truly applied in one's day-to-day life, one must infuse the day-to-day mundane life with Torah -- that is the true purpose of receiving the Torah at Mt. Sinai.
Retrospectively we see that Moshe was correct: the 10 spies were punished severely for trying to hijack the divine plan (i.e., to stay in the desert and live an exclusively spiritual life) while Yehoshuah (nee: Hoshea) is chosen by the Almighty as Moshe's replacement and indeed the person who will eventually lead the Jewish people into the Land of Israel. There, in the Land of Israel, under Yehoshua's leadership the Divine Will and Divine Purpose of giving of the Torah (and indeed creation as a whole) can be fulfilled, specifically by affecting, utilizing and refining the mundane with the light of Torah.
Bamidbar (Numbers) Ch.13:3 reads:
כלם אנשים ראשי בני ישראל המה
Loosely translated:
There were all אנשים (pron.: Anashim = men), the heads of the Jewish people.
Rashi interprets "Anashim" in 13:3 to mean that at the time of calling there were all kosher righteous individuals, i.e., proper upstanding leaders of the community and of their respective tribes.
Interestingly in 13:16 we find:
ויקרא משה להושע בן-נון יהושע
Loosely translated:
And Moshe renamed Hoshea son of Nun to Yehoshuah (Joshua)
Rashi (on 13:16) states that Moshe added the leading י to Hoshea's name (thus resulting in Yehoshua) so that "Hashem will protect Joshua from the conspiracy of those wicked spies" (referring to the 10 spies are are destined to produce an evil report about the land of Israel.)
So, the obvious question is this: if these 10 men were indeed wicked, why did Moshe call them "Anashim" (=righteous, proper and upstanding leaders of their respective tribes.) Why indeed did he choose them to lead the mission? If on the other hand they were indeed kosher "Anashim", why did Moshe have to add a letter to Hoshea's name to draw down divine protection from these Anashim?
What were they? Anashim or wicked?
At the literal level, we must conclude that they were indeed "Anashim" as the Torah states, which means that they were kosher at the time the were chosen for the mission. So, the question falls back onto Moshe as to his decision to add a letter to a perfectly valid name.
An explanation, but first some background:
We find that there are two types of righteous individuals, as it states in Tehilim (Psalms) 93:13:
צדיק כתמר יפרח כארז בלבנון ישגה
Loosely translated:
A righteous person will grow like a palm-tree, [and] like a Lebanon-ceder tree he shell become great.
What's the differences between a palm-tree and a ceder? A ceder tree is much bigger, wider, stronger, taller and resistant to the elements. It's a really massive tree, especially the Lebanese variety. A palm-tree, on the other hand is smaller, slimmer and shorter and not as resistant. Though a palm-tree posses one very important quality that a ceder lacks: the ability to bear fruit! Not only does a palm-tree produces dates, but anyone who eats those dates gains sustenances, vitality and strength.
This is likened to two types of Tzakdikim (=righteous individuals):
There are those that are like a ceder: they are massive! the devote 100% of themselves to study of Torah and spiritual pursuit. They are constantly in heavenly involvement and absolutly nothing else. Their entire existence evolves around the axis of Torah.
On the other side of the spectrum there are those Tzakdikim that that are like a palm-tree: their not devoting 100% of their time to Torah study. They are not constantly involved with heaven. In fact they devote some of their time, effort, money and abilities to help other people. They bear fruits -- they're actions and interactions with other individuals -- in the way of spiritual and material help are indeed the "fruits" they produce. The palm-tree tzadikim reach out to the simple folk. Those who consume their fruits indeed gain both physical and spiritual sustenance, vitality and strength.
Though this outreach may come at the expense of these palm-tree tzadikim, because they certainly don't have all the Torah study that the ceder tzadikim have.
Back to the problem at hand:
Moshe sees in the 10 other spies that they are indeed kosher, as Rashi explains, and that they're indeed tzadikim of the ceder variety: they much rather stay in the desert and live a supernatural life where food is miraculously provided daily, the clothing grows with the person wearing them, the clouds of glory provide divine protection and a person is free to pursuit spirituality to their heart's content without interference from the physical realm. On the other hand the Land of Israel represents, to them, a spiritual decent because: a person would have to be involved in manual labor to work the land, go to the marketplace to buy and sell, cook, put food on the table, clean after the meal, change diapers, take the donkey in for an oil-change, take the kids to sand-hockey and be otherwise involved in earthy matters, leaving less time for spiritual pursuits.
Moshe wants Hoshea to become a palm-tree tzadik, on the other hand. Moshe reasons that it's not enough to be all spiritual and lead a completely spiritual life, for if that was the case, the Jewish nation would have not received physical bodies and a Torah that affects (and indeed utilizes and refines) the physical world. For Torah to be truly applied in one's day-to-day life, one must infuse the day-to-day mundane life with Torah -- that is the true purpose of receiving the Torah at Mt. Sinai.
Retrospectively we see that Moshe was correct: the 10 spies were punished severely for trying to hijack the divine plan (i.e., to stay in the desert and live an exclusively spiritual life) while Yehoshuah (nee: Hoshea) is chosen by the Almighty as Moshe's replacement and indeed the person who will eventually lead the Jewish people into the Land of Israel. There, in the Land of Israel, under Yehoshua's leadership the Divine Will and Divine Purpose of giving of the Torah (and indeed creation as a whole) can be fulfilled, specifically by affecting, utilizing and refining the mundane with the light of Torah.
Sunday, May 27, 2007
Why name the recepients
B"H
Pirkei Avot (Ethics of the Fathers), Ch. 1:1 reads:
משה קיבל תורה מסיניי ומסרה ליהושוע ויהושוע לזקנים
וזקנים לנביאים ונביאים מסרוה לאנשי כנסת הגדולה
Loosely translated:
Moshe received the Torah from Sinai and gave it over to Joshua, and Joshua gave it over to the elders, and the elders to the prophets, and the prophets gave it over to the sages of the great assembly.
Based on a drasha heard from the Rabbi at the pulpit, an interesting דיוק (=clarification) follows:
The obvious question here, which has already been addressed by many mishna commentators already, is: why does it say משה קיבל תורה מסיניי (=Moshe Moshe received the Torah from Sinai) where in fact it should have said משה קיבל תורה מהשם (=Moshe received the Torah from the Almighty) or perhaps משה קיבל תורה בסיניי (=Moshe Moshe received the Torah at Sinai).
However, we can compound it with a question from another angle: why does the mishna goes to such great length to list all the recipients after Moshe -- it could have just as easily stated:
משה קיבל תורה מסיניי, ומסרה לדורות הבאים (=Moshe received the Torah from Sinai and transmitted it to the following generations.) Why does the mishna find it necessary to list the recipients by name or title?
An explanation to both questions follows. But first, some background:
When Moshe was at the scene of the burning bush, Hashem tried to enlist Moshe to go on a rescue mission. Moshe retorted by giving a list of arguments why he's not suitable, and indeed Hashem should choose someone else. Hashem responded with His reasoning, and the whole thing repeated. The midrash and commentators teach us that these negotiations went on for a few days(!)
However, when Hashem tells Moshe to come up the mountain and receive the Torah, there were no such arguments. There was no negotiations. Moshe simply went up and did it. Why is that? Why the difference?
And explanation can be given as follows: according to the midrash one reason why mount Sinai has been chosen as the address to receive the Torah is because it doesn't stand out! As a matter of fact, it's the lowest mountain in the area. Sinai was chosen, in other words, because it represents humility.
So, when Moshe was asked to go up the mountain to receive the Torah he did not object, simply because he figured out: since it's mount Sinai that's chosen, the lowest of all mountains, I have no problem going up that mountain, just don't ask me to go up a taller mountain, because I'm really not worthy. However, mount Sinai is acceptable.
Back to the two questions posed at the top:
The wording מסיניי (=from Sinai) can be understood to mean ממדת סיניי (=from/through the character trait of Sinai.) What is the character trait of Sinai? Answer: humility.
How can a person receive the Torah? Only when he/she has humility. We see this in a number of cases, such as the siddur, end of amidah: "ונפשי כעפר לכל תהייה" (=my soul should be like dust before anyone else) humility and only then "ופתח ליבי בתורתך" (=and open my heart to your Torah._
Another case is the verse (G-d's words about an arrogant person): "אין אני והוא דרים תחת כפיפה אחת" (=I will not dwell with him under one roof.) Bottom line, in the context of transmission of Torah, the beginning needs to be מסיניי = through Humility.
Next the mishna continues to ומסרה ליהושוע (=and transmitted it to Joshua.) What is the meaning of Joshua in the context of Torah transmission? Joshua was not only a student of Moshe, but the commentators record that he has never left אוהל מועד (=the Tent of Meeting) while Moshe was there. Joshua represents astuteness and consistency.
So, a person might receive the Torah with humility and be very astute and consistent in learning it. However, there's just so much that he/she can achieve on their own. So, the mishna continues
לזקנים (=[Joshua transmitted it] to the elders.) What is the meaning of the Elders in the context of Torah transmission? Wisdom is associated with old age. (citation needed). A person needs to approach those who are wiser than him/her -- a great Torah scholar, or sage.
However, human wisdom is still limited regardless to whom one approaches. At this point in time, after receiving the Torah through humility and learning it with exemplary astutenesses and under the tutelage of a wise scholar, one hits the roof of what can be achieved through human effort. To continue to grow Jewishly what's needed at this point is לנביאים (=[the elders transmitted it] to the prophets.) Prophecy represents super-human, super-rational connection to the divine. Just as prophecy came down from High to a prophet after much preparation on the side of the prophet, so to transmission of Torah. After a person goes through the process of receiving the Torah through humility and learning it with exemplary astutenesses and under the tutelage of a wise sage, the next stage is that he/she is helped from High, because one can only rely on סיאתה דישמיה (=Heaven's help.)
Finally, when all is said and done, a person comes to the stage of לאנשי כנסת הגדולה (=[and the prophets transmitted it] to the sages of the great assembly.) The great assembly was responsible for laying-down the foundation upon which Halacha (=practical law) will later be based on. In other words, the sages of the great assembly represent the ability to take Torah learning and apply it in day-to-day living.
Thus both original questions are answered:
1. From Sinai means through humility, but it doesn't stop there, because:
2. The transmission of Torah is restricted to transmission through the generations, but also through one's own life -- one receives it with humility, learns it with astuteness and consistency, gets tutelage from a scholar which brings upon help from above (in order to advance above and beyond human ability) which finally culminates in a person applying his/her studies in daily life -- a Torah-true life.
Pirkei Avot (Ethics of the Fathers), Ch. 1:1 reads:
משה קיבל תורה מסיניי ומסרה ליהושוע ויהושוע לזקנים
וזקנים לנביאים ונביאים מסרוה לאנשי כנסת הגדולה
Loosely translated:
Moshe received the Torah from Sinai and gave it over to Joshua, and Joshua gave it over to the elders, and the elders to the prophets, and the prophets gave it over to the sages of the great assembly.
Based on a drasha heard from the Rabbi at the pulpit, an interesting דיוק (=clarification) follows:
The obvious question here, which has already been addressed by many mishna commentators already, is: why does it say משה קיבל תורה מסיניי (=Moshe Moshe received the Torah from Sinai) where in fact it should have said משה קיבל תורה מהשם (=Moshe received the Torah from the Almighty) or perhaps משה קיבל תורה בסיניי (=Moshe Moshe received the Torah at Sinai).
However, we can compound it with a question from another angle: why does the mishna goes to such great length to list all the recipients after Moshe -- it could have just as easily stated:
משה קיבל תורה מסיניי, ומסרה לדורות הבאים (=Moshe received the Torah from Sinai and transmitted it to the following generations.) Why does the mishna find it necessary to list the recipients by name or title?
An explanation to both questions follows. But first, some background:
When Moshe was at the scene of the burning bush, Hashem tried to enlist Moshe to go on a rescue mission. Moshe retorted by giving a list of arguments why he's not suitable, and indeed Hashem should choose someone else. Hashem responded with His reasoning, and the whole thing repeated. The midrash and commentators teach us that these negotiations went on for a few days(!)
However, when Hashem tells Moshe to come up the mountain and receive the Torah, there were no such arguments. There was no negotiations. Moshe simply went up and did it. Why is that? Why the difference?
And explanation can be given as follows: according to the midrash one reason why mount Sinai has been chosen as the address to receive the Torah is because it doesn't stand out! As a matter of fact, it's the lowest mountain in the area. Sinai was chosen, in other words, because it represents humility.
So, when Moshe was asked to go up the mountain to receive the Torah he did not object, simply because he figured out: since it's mount Sinai that's chosen, the lowest of all mountains, I have no problem going up that mountain, just don't ask me to go up a taller mountain, because I'm really not worthy. However, mount Sinai is acceptable.
Back to the two questions posed at the top:
The wording מסיניי (=from Sinai) can be understood to mean ממדת סיניי (=from/through the character trait of Sinai.) What is the character trait of Sinai? Answer: humility.
How can a person receive the Torah? Only when he/she has humility. We see this in a number of cases, such as the siddur, end of amidah: "ונפשי כעפר לכל תהייה" (=my soul should be like dust before anyone else) humility and only then "ופתח ליבי בתורתך" (=and open my heart to your Torah._
Another case is the verse (G-d's words about an arrogant person): "אין אני והוא דרים תחת כפיפה אחת" (=I will not dwell with him under one roof.) Bottom line, in the context of transmission of Torah, the beginning needs to be מסיניי = through Humility.
Next the mishna continues to ומסרה ליהושוע (=and transmitted it to Joshua.) What is the meaning of Joshua in the context of Torah transmission? Joshua was not only a student of Moshe, but the commentators record that he has never left אוהל מועד (=the Tent of Meeting) while Moshe was there. Joshua represents astuteness and consistency.
So, a person might receive the Torah with humility and be very astute and consistent in learning it. However, there's just so much that he/she can achieve on their own. So, the mishna continues
לזקנים (=[Joshua transmitted it] to the elders.) What is the meaning of the Elders in the context of Torah transmission? Wisdom is associated with old age. (citation needed). A person needs to approach those who are wiser than him/her -- a great Torah scholar, or sage.
However, human wisdom is still limited regardless to whom one approaches. At this point in time, after receiving the Torah through humility and learning it with exemplary astutenesses and under the tutelage of a wise scholar, one hits the roof of what can be achieved through human effort. To continue to grow Jewishly what's needed at this point is לנביאים (=[the elders transmitted it] to the prophets.) Prophecy represents super-human, super-rational connection to the divine. Just as prophecy came down from High to a prophet after much preparation on the side of the prophet, so to transmission of Torah. After a person goes through the process of receiving the Torah through humility and learning it with exemplary astutenesses and under the tutelage of a wise sage, the next stage is that he/she is helped from High, because one can only rely on סיאתה דישמיה (=Heaven's help.)
Finally, when all is said and done, a person comes to the stage of לאנשי כנסת הגדולה (=[and the prophets transmitted it] to the sages of the great assembly.) The great assembly was responsible for laying-down the foundation upon which Halacha (=practical law) will later be based on. In other words, the sages of the great assembly represent the ability to take Torah learning and apply it in day-to-day living.
Thus both original questions are answered:
1. From Sinai means through humility, but it doesn't stop there, because:
2. The transmission of Torah is restricted to transmission through the generations, but also through one's own life -- one receives it with humility, learns it with astuteness and consistency, gets tutelage from a scholar which brings upon help from above (in order to advance above and beyond human ability) which finally culminates in a person applying his/her studies in daily life -- a Torah-true life.
Sunday, May 13, 2007
How is shmita related to Mt. Sinai?
B"H
In Pirkei Avot (Ethics of the Fathers) Ch. 5 it reads:
גלות באה לעולם על עבודה זרה, ועל גילוי עריות, ועל שפיכות דמים, ועל שמיטת הארץ.
Loosely translated:
Exile manifests in the world due to idol-worship, immoral relations, murder and not obeying shmita laws (=laws pertaining to the sabbatical year we must give the land on a 7-year cycle.)
What immediately jumps out are two questions. But first some background:
1) The prohibition of idol-worship is at the very foundation (and indeed fabric) of Jewish belief and practice.
2) Murder is a very serious crime which warrens an equivalently serious punishment. Practically every civilized society has laws pertaining to murder.
3) Immoral relations are also very serious crime in Judaism to the point that any product of such relations is forever branded a mamzer. These relations are also widely outlawed in most civilized societies.
Indeed all of the above three appear as prohibitions in the ten commandments as well as the 7 Noachide laws, outlawing them for all of humanity.
In light of this, we can see why the exile be brought-upon by transgressing these three prohibitions, as they are very serious indeed.
So, the first question here is: what does transgressing shmita have to do with exile and why does it appear at the same place and said with one breath along with idol-worship, murder and immoral relations? The question becomes even stronger when we consider that the first three are prohibited to all of humanity, whereas shmita only applies to the Jewish people. Not only that, but not even all Jews, just those living in the Land of Israel. And amongst those, even, it only applies to Jews who work the land.
The second question is: if the exile is a product, by divine decree, for transgressing the laws of shmita, then while the Jewish people are being punished in exile, they certainly cannot keep the laws of shmita (which only apply in the Land of Israel, as previously stated.) In other words, how does the punishment fit the crime, since by the very nature of the punishment (=exile) the laws of shmita cannot be kept? Indeed, during the time of the Babylonian exile, which lasted 70 years, the Jewish people have "missed" 10 potential shmitas that they could have kept, had they not been exiled for not keeping shmita. (See Rashi on Vayikra (Leviticus) Ch. 25:18)
A possible answer:
Rashi begins his commentary on the portion Behar with the following idea:
Why are the laws of shmita listed in great detail at the beginning of Behar? To teach us that just as the laws of shmita were given in detail and at great length, right there at mount Sinai, so too were all other Torah laws given in great detail on the same occasion.
On this very Rashi, a child might pose the question: Why specifically all the laws of shmita given? The Torah could have chosen any other law and listed its details at great length -- and Rashi could have had the very same commentary with a slight change of wording to account for the specific law chosen. We're forced to conclude, therefore, that there's a special connection between the laws of shmita and the revelation at mount Sinai during the giving of the Torah. In other words, somehow the laws of shmita, specifically, are representative of all other Torah laws, more so than any other law. But How?
To answer, we need to delve into some Jewish philosophy:
According to Jewish philosophy there is one level of emunah (=trust and belief in the Almighty) that a Jewish farmer may posses where he/she believes that the Almighty created nature and instilled in it everlasting laws. And because we trust the Almighty, we also trust that his laws are eternal. The farmer's emunah then is that if he/she plows, plants, waters and takes care of the field, and all the other conditions are just right (e.g., the temperature, humidity and wind are just right) then according to the laws of nature, which the Almighty himself created, there will be a good yield of crop.
Above that there's a higher level of emunah: the Jewish farmer believes that the Almighty is actively involved in the laws of nature. In other words, this emunah is at that the Almighty is pro-active in the development of the crop, not merely by orchestrating nature as a whole, via some laws, but rather in detail.
Both these levels of emunah are confined to nature, since they are solely within the framework of nature: either at the macro level (the first level of emunah) or at a micro level (the second level of emunah).
However, there's a higher level of emunah yet, as we can see in Vayikra Ch. 25:3-4 which read:
שש שנים תזרע שדך ושש שנים תזמר כרמך ואספת את תבואתה
ובשנה השביעת שבת שבתון יהיה לארץ שבת להשם שדך לא תזרע וכרמך לא תזמר
Loosely translated:
For six years you shall seed your wine and you shall harvest it, and the seventh year shall be a sabbatical to the land (i.e., shmita), a sabbatical to G-d, your field you shall not seed and your vine you shall not prune.
At this is the level of emunah that the farmer believes that really everything is in the hands of the Almighty. On the seventh year the Jewish farmer is not required to plow, plant, water or otherwise take care of the field. As a matter of fact, he/she is prohibited to do so. Yet the land will continue to produce. This teaches us that really, it's the Almighty in control -- not us, for if it was up to us, inaction of the seventh year would mean no food. See the article about Superrational Trust for further clarification on this point.
Whereas the first two levels of emunah are limited by the framework of nature, the third level is not. At the third and higher level of emunah the Jew (farmer or otherwise) believes that although the Almighty acts within nature (making the crop give good yield, for instance) however the flux of abundance comes from a level higher than nature. In other words, Hashem acts within nature but from beyond nature.
What better mitzvah (=commandment), from the set of 613, is there to demonstrate that the flux of abundance originates beyond nature? What better mitzvah is there to demonstrate that the Almighty's ways are incomparable to nature?
Even the mitzvah of the Red Heifer, which is the most irrational mitzvah (as testified by Shlomo HaMelech, King Salomon, the wisest of all people) lacks in this respect. Whereas the Red Heifer defies logic to demonstrate the Hashem is beyond logic and understanding, more so than any other mitzvah, by purifying the tainted while tainting the pure in the process, there is no visible difference to the human eye. An impure person looks no different than a perfectly pure one. We know that there's a difference, but we cannot perceive it. This is precisely where the laws of shmita excel: there is nothing more tangible to a person than food on the table. There's nothing that announces that "The Almighty manipulates nature from beyond the laws of nature" than when the Jewish farmer abstains from working the land on shmita years, and yet there's food in the field, on the table and in the tummy. The farmer made no effort on his-/herown behalf, and yet all his essential needs were taken care of by Hashem.
This is then the connection between Behar and shmita: Rashi's comment can now be understood to also mean that just as the laws of shmita were given in their entirety (that is, in a way that would announce loud and clear that Hashem works within nature but from beyond nature, i.e, just as the laws of shmita affect this lowly world, but are rooted in higher realms) so too all the other mitzvahs. This includes those that we can logically explain -- although there's a logical explanation, you should know that at their essence these mitzvahs are rooted in higher reals, they're all supernal and super-rational. To come to this realization, we specifically need the most tangible instance of such a mitzvah -- shmita laws.
We can now undertand better Pirkei Avot: The first question was asked why shmita was mentioned in the same breath as the prohibition of idol worship, murder and improper relation, in lieu of these three being fundamental laws. The explanation is, then, that shmita is most fundamental from a philosophical point of view as it reflect the supernal source of all Torah laws.
The second question was what's the connection between shmita and the exile, especially in lieu of the fact that shmita laws can certainly not be kept while in exile. The explanation to that is already given at length in the Superrational Trust article. See the part about Hashem defying logic due to the promise/blessing that on the sixth year the land gives the greatest yield.
Good shabbos with lots of emunah and yield both physically and spiritually.
In Pirkei Avot (Ethics of the Fathers) Ch. 5 it reads:
גלות באה לעולם על עבודה זרה, ועל גילוי עריות, ועל שפיכות דמים, ועל שמיטת הארץ.
Loosely translated:
Exile manifests in the world due to idol-worship, immoral relations, murder and not obeying shmita laws (=laws pertaining to the sabbatical year we must give the land on a 7-year cycle.)
What immediately jumps out are two questions. But first some background:
1) The prohibition of idol-worship is at the very foundation (and indeed fabric) of Jewish belief and practice.
2) Murder is a very serious crime which warrens an equivalently serious punishment. Practically every civilized society has laws pertaining to murder.
3) Immoral relations are also very serious crime in Judaism to the point that any product of such relations is forever branded a mamzer. These relations are also widely outlawed in most civilized societies.
Indeed all of the above three appear as prohibitions in the ten commandments as well as the 7 Noachide laws, outlawing them for all of humanity.
In light of this, we can see why the exile be brought-upon by transgressing these three prohibitions, as they are very serious indeed.
So, the first question here is: what does transgressing shmita have to do with exile and why does it appear at the same place and said with one breath along with idol-worship, murder and immoral relations? The question becomes even stronger when we consider that the first three are prohibited to all of humanity, whereas shmita only applies to the Jewish people. Not only that, but not even all Jews, just those living in the Land of Israel. And amongst those, even, it only applies to Jews who work the land.
The second question is: if the exile is a product, by divine decree, for transgressing the laws of shmita, then while the Jewish people are being punished in exile, they certainly cannot keep the laws of shmita (which only apply in the Land of Israel, as previously stated.) In other words, how does the punishment fit the crime, since by the very nature of the punishment (=exile) the laws of shmita cannot be kept? Indeed, during the time of the Babylonian exile, which lasted 70 years, the Jewish people have "missed" 10 potential shmitas that they could have kept, had they not been exiled for not keeping shmita. (See Rashi on Vayikra (Leviticus) Ch. 25:18)
A possible answer:
Rashi begins his commentary on the portion Behar with the following idea:
Why are the laws of shmita listed in great detail at the beginning of Behar? To teach us that just as the laws of shmita were given in detail and at great length, right there at mount Sinai, so too were all other Torah laws given in great detail on the same occasion.
On this very Rashi, a child might pose the question: Why specifically all the laws of shmita given? The Torah could have chosen any other law and listed its details at great length -- and Rashi could have had the very same commentary with a slight change of wording to account for the specific law chosen. We're forced to conclude, therefore, that there's a special connection between the laws of shmita and the revelation at mount Sinai during the giving of the Torah. In other words, somehow the laws of shmita, specifically, are representative of all other Torah laws, more so than any other law. But How?
To answer, we need to delve into some Jewish philosophy:
According to Jewish philosophy there is one level of emunah (=trust and belief in the Almighty) that a Jewish farmer may posses where he/she believes that the Almighty created nature and instilled in it everlasting laws. And because we trust the Almighty, we also trust that his laws are eternal. The farmer's emunah then is that if he/she plows, plants, waters and takes care of the field, and all the other conditions are just right (e.g., the temperature, humidity and wind are just right) then according to the laws of nature, which the Almighty himself created, there will be a good yield of crop.
Above that there's a higher level of emunah: the Jewish farmer believes that the Almighty is actively involved in the laws of nature. In other words, this emunah is at that the Almighty is pro-active in the development of the crop, not merely by orchestrating nature as a whole, via some laws, but rather in detail.
Both these levels of emunah are confined to nature, since they are solely within the framework of nature: either at the macro level (the first level of emunah) or at a micro level (the second level of emunah).
However, there's a higher level of emunah yet, as we can see in Vayikra Ch. 25:3-4 which read:
שש שנים תזרע שדך ושש שנים תזמר כרמך ואספת את תבואתה
ובשנה השביעת שבת שבתון יהיה לארץ שבת להשם שדך לא תזרע וכרמך לא תזמר
Loosely translated:
For six years you shall seed your wine and you shall harvest it, and the seventh year shall be a sabbatical to the land (i.e., shmita), a sabbatical to G-d, your field you shall not seed and your vine you shall not prune.
At this is the level of emunah that the farmer believes that really everything is in the hands of the Almighty. On the seventh year the Jewish farmer is not required to plow, plant, water or otherwise take care of the field. As a matter of fact, he/she is prohibited to do so. Yet the land will continue to produce. This teaches us that really, it's the Almighty in control -- not us, for if it was up to us, inaction of the seventh year would mean no food. See the article about Superrational Trust for further clarification on this point.
Whereas the first two levels of emunah are limited by the framework of nature, the third level is not. At the third and higher level of emunah the Jew (farmer or otherwise) believes that although the Almighty acts within nature (making the crop give good yield, for instance) however the flux of abundance comes from a level higher than nature. In other words, Hashem acts within nature but from beyond nature.
What better mitzvah (=commandment), from the set of 613, is there to demonstrate that the flux of abundance originates beyond nature? What better mitzvah is there to demonstrate that the Almighty's ways are incomparable to nature?
Even the mitzvah of the Red Heifer, which is the most irrational mitzvah (as testified by Shlomo HaMelech, King Salomon, the wisest of all people) lacks in this respect. Whereas the Red Heifer defies logic to demonstrate the Hashem is beyond logic and understanding, more so than any other mitzvah, by purifying the tainted while tainting the pure in the process, there is no visible difference to the human eye. An impure person looks no different than a perfectly pure one. We know that there's a difference, but we cannot perceive it. This is precisely where the laws of shmita excel: there is nothing more tangible to a person than food on the table. There's nothing that announces that "The Almighty manipulates nature from beyond the laws of nature" than when the Jewish farmer abstains from working the land on shmita years, and yet there's food in the field, on the table and in the tummy. The farmer made no effort on his-/herown behalf, and yet all his essential needs were taken care of by Hashem.
This is then the connection between Behar and shmita: Rashi's comment can now be understood to also mean that just as the laws of shmita were given in their entirety (that is, in a way that would announce loud and clear that Hashem works within nature but from beyond nature, i.e, just as the laws of shmita affect this lowly world, but are rooted in higher realms) so too all the other mitzvahs. This includes those that we can logically explain -- although there's a logical explanation, you should know that at their essence these mitzvahs are rooted in higher reals, they're all supernal and super-rational. To come to this realization, we specifically need the most tangible instance of such a mitzvah -- shmita laws.
We can now undertand better Pirkei Avot: The first question was asked why shmita was mentioned in the same breath as the prohibition of idol worship, murder and improper relation, in lieu of these three being fundamental laws. The explanation is, then, that shmita is most fundamental from a philosophical point of view as it reflect the supernal source of all Torah laws.
The second question was what's the connection between shmita and the exile, especially in lieu of the fact that shmita laws can certainly not be kept while in exile. The explanation to that is already given at length in the Superrational Trust article. See the part about Hashem defying logic due to the promise/blessing that on the sixth year the land gives the greatest yield.
Good shabbos with lots of emunah and yield both physically and spiritually.
Thursday, May 10, 2007
Super-rational trust
B"H
Vayikra (Leviticus) Ch. 25:20-21 reads:
וכי תאמרו מה נאכל בשנה השביעת הן לא נזרע ולא נאסף את תבואתנו
וצויתי את ברכתי לכם בשנה הששית ועשת את התבואה לשלש השנים
Loosely translated:
And should you say "what will we eat on the seventh year, since we will not seed nor shall we harvest our crops?" And I shall command upon you My blessing on the sixth year, and [the land] shall produce its crop for three years.
In the previous post it was pointed out that the whole shmitah-cycle and associated laws fit nicely with emunah (=trust in G-d.)
Further analysis reveals how super-rational emunah is:
The nature of things is that the more they're used, the more wear and tear they're exposed to, and the weaker they become. Take a car, as an example: typically it's in a much better condition when the odometer reads 1,000, than when it reads 218,000.
Since a Jewish person is expected to "work the land" for 6 years before letting it rest on the seventh, one might expect that on the first year of the cycle the land is fresh and revived and by the time the 6th year rolls around the fields are overworked and depleted of nutrients. Not so, says Hashem! The natural order of things and rationality not withstanding, on the 6th year when the land should really be depleted that's when fields produce three-fold. All is required of us is to have emunah that indeed that's what going to happen.
When it comes to matters of trust and our connection to the Almighty, rationality can (and often will) get in the way.
Normally a person will refrain from operating a complex device before reading the manufacturer's instructions. Who knows better than the manufacturer of the device to tell you how to make proper use of it. On a incomparably greater scale, who knows better than the Manufacturer of the universe to tell us how to make proper use of the land. All we need to do is read the instruction manual (i.e., Torah).
At a higher level this matter also relates to the situation the Jewish people are in nowadays: as generations pass, we descend further and further spiritually. One might rationally conclude that by the time the sixth millennium ends and the seventh one rolls around the Jewish people will be completely spiritually-depleted, G-d forbid. To say noting about the pogroms, expulsions, forced conversions, mobbings, executions, evil decrees, wars, mayhem and the rest of what the Jewish people gone through, also left deep and painful marks. (This is another meaning for "working the land" -- being involved in lowliest of things.)
In reality it's quite wondrous that we're even here, at this day and age. Rationality cannot explain us. We need to go beyond the rational: in this 6th millennium, Hashem provides us with spiritual strength and stamina -- three-fold -- to overcome all obstacles and succeed in the face of adversity and to arrive into the 7th millennium which is likened to Shabbos (יום שכולו שבת). We can all go from strength to strength (לעלות מחייל לחייל). It's all in the instruction manual: וצויתי את ברכתי לכם בשנה הששית which can now be understood as "and I shall command upon you my blessing on the sixth millennium."
Good Shabbos!
Vayikra (Leviticus) Ch. 25:20-21 reads:
וכי תאמרו מה נאכל בשנה השביעת הן לא נזרע ולא נאסף את תבואתנו
וצויתי את ברכתי לכם בשנה הששית ועשת את התבואה לשלש השנים
Loosely translated:
And should you say "what will we eat on the seventh year, since we will not seed nor shall we harvest our crops?" And I shall command upon you My blessing on the sixth year, and [the land] shall produce its crop for three years.
In the previous post it was pointed out that the whole shmitah-cycle and associated laws fit nicely with emunah (=trust in G-d.)
Further analysis reveals how super-rational emunah is:
The nature of things is that the more they're used, the more wear and tear they're exposed to, and the weaker they become. Take a car, as an example: typically it's in a much better condition when the odometer reads 1,000, than when it reads 218,000.
Since a Jewish person is expected to "work the land" for 6 years before letting it rest on the seventh, one might expect that on the first year of the cycle the land is fresh and revived and by the time the 6th year rolls around the fields are overworked and depleted of nutrients. Not so, says Hashem! The natural order of things and rationality not withstanding, on the 6th year when the land should really be depleted that's when fields produce three-fold. All is required of us is to have emunah that indeed that's what going to happen.
When it comes to matters of trust and our connection to the Almighty, rationality can (and often will) get in the way.
Normally a person will refrain from operating a complex device before reading the manufacturer's instructions. Who knows better than the manufacturer of the device to tell you how to make proper use of it. On a incomparably greater scale, who knows better than the Manufacturer of the universe to tell us how to make proper use of the land. All we need to do is read the instruction manual (i.e., Torah).
At a higher level this matter also relates to the situation the Jewish people are in nowadays: as generations pass, we descend further and further spiritually. One might rationally conclude that by the time the sixth millennium ends and the seventh one rolls around the Jewish people will be completely spiritually-depleted, G-d forbid. To say noting about the pogroms, expulsions, forced conversions, mobbings, executions, evil decrees, wars, mayhem and the rest of what the Jewish people gone through, also left deep and painful marks. (This is another meaning for "working the land" -- being involved in lowliest of things.)
In reality it's quite wondrous that we're even here, at this day and age. Rationality cannot explain us. We need to go beyond the rational: in this 6th millennium, Hashem provides us with spiritual strength and stamina -- three-fold -- to overcome all obstacles and succeed in the face of adversity and to arrive into the 7th millennium which is likened to Shabbos (יום שכולו שבת). We can all go from strength to strength (לעלות מחייל לחייל). It's all in the instruction manual: וצויתי את ברכתי לכם בשנה הששית which can now be understood as "and I shall command upon you my blessing on the sixth millennium."
Good Shabbos!
Monday, May 7, 2007
Agriculture brings upon trust?
B"H
Vaikra (Leviticus) Ch. 25:3-4 reads as follows:
שש שנים תזרע שדך ושש שנים תזמר כרמך ואספת את תבואתה
ובשנה השביעת שבת שבתון יהיה לארץ שבת להשם
Loosely translated:
Six years you shall seed your fields, and six years you shall prune your vineyard and you shall collect its harvest. And on the seventh year shall be a sabbatical of the land, a sabbatical to the L-rd.
The Torah here speaks of a seven-year cycle wherein the Jewish farmers would work the land for six years and then abstain from any cultivation on the seventh year, giving the land a good shabbos.
Rashi (on Ch. 25:1) explain that the reason the laws dealing specifically with working the land (known as "Shmita laws") are given in this Torah portion (i.e., Behar) is to teach us that just as shmitah laws were given in their entirety, all other laws were given in their entirety right there at the Mountain (=Behar) Sinai.
The obvious question is: "Why did he Torah single out specifically shmitah laws and not some other ones for Rashi to make his comment about?"
An explanation:
This cycle of six years that a person cultivates and harvests the land and rests on the seventh comes to teach simple wholesome אמונה (pron. emunah = belief & trust) in the Almighty:
There is a level of emunah that a person experiences when he/she plants the field that stems from their awareness that the Almighty created nature and instilled in it a certain behavior: if you plant a seed, give it water and protect it from the elements, it will grow and flourish and you can expect to harvest and benefit from your effort.
A much higher level of emunah is that a person experiences knowing that the Almighty expects us to
plant the field (שש שנים תזרע שדך) and do other type of effort, but ultimately it is the Almighty is the one that provides the harvest by actively being involved in the produce-growing.
These two levels of emunah both relate to working within the framework of nature: In the first level of emunah a person places his/her trust in Hashem that nature will continue to function "naturally", the way it always does because Hashem made it so. So by planting the seed, nature will take its course, with G-d's help, there will be produce. In the second level of emunah a person places their entire trust in G-d, however there must still be some activity within the framework of nature -- namely plating the seed, but in reality Hashem takes a proactive role.
Comes the seven-year cycle and teaches yet a higher form of emunah, one which does not even require a person to take action within the framework of nature. In fact, shmitah laws state that any such activity on the seventh year is strictly prohibited. (It is said that the First-Temple 70-year exile occurred partly because the Jewish farmers neglected to let the land rest every seventh year!)
This type of total and complete rest required the Jewish farmers to produce on the sixth year of the cycle enough produce to have enough food on the sixth and seventh years of the cycle, plus on the first year of the following 7-year cycle -- a total of 3 years!
So a farmer may say: "I cannot! It's unreasonable! How can it be?!?! Surely the land cannot produce enough crop to feed us for 3 whole years!" (See Ch. 25:20) To which the answer is "emunah!" Trust the the One who instituted the laws of nature and set it in motion, and indeed keeps it functioning each and every-day is also able to sustain you and your beloved for three whole years -- without any action on you own. (See Ch. 25:21) In other words, the One who created the laws of nature also created shmitah laws and they surely complement each-other, and certainly there's no conflict.
Jewish mysticism attaches a significance to the number 7. Seven days of creation. 7 year shmitah cycle, etc... The number 7 signifies the working of nature, natural progression etc. So, in a sense Torah is expecting the Jew to work within the framework of nature, by planting, pruning and harvesting the natural way and yet it expects a Jewish farmer to go beyond nature and having trust in Hashem that plentifulness will come from a level that's above nature.
We can also note that the original verse can be understood to mean that the purpose of the six years on which person works the land is indeed to arrive at the seventh year on which he/she shall exhibit total emunah.
This is a general motif in performance of all 613 mitzvot (=commandments): a person should act within the boundaries of nature (and indeed utilize nature), but at the very same time be aware that he/she is connection to- and tapping into G-dliness that goes beyong (and indeed transcends) nature. Indeed the performance of the 613 mitzvot is suppose to cultivate within us total and complete trust in G-d Almightly.
This motif, then, is the connection between the laws of shmita and their appearance specifically here at Mt. Sinai (Behar) as they exemplify our performance of mitzvot.
In a wider sense the laws of shmitah also teach more about our daily conduct:
Just as working for six years is a means to get to the seventh year of rest, so too working for six days in the office (שש שנים תזרע) is a means to get to Shabbos (ובשנה השביעת שבת).
Moreover, a soul comes down to this earth (i.e, gets born) to live and toil (שש שנים תזרע) but ultimately it prepares for itself a nice nest in heaven once a person passes on (ובשנה השביעת שבת).
And finally, for nearly six thousand years we're been toiling to repair this פארשטינקינע גלות (=unbearable exile, שש שנים תזרע) and with every additional mitzvah we do, with every act of kindness, and every coin we place in the charity box, we are getting this much closer to the ultimate redemption (ובשנה השביעת שבת) also know as יום שכולו שבת.
May we all merit ובשנה השביעת שבת this very week!
Vaikra (Leviticus) Ch. 25:3-4 reads as follows:
שש שנים תזרע שדך ושש שנים תזמר כרמך ואספת את תבואתה
ובשנה השביעת שבת שבתון יהיה לארץ שבת להשם
Loosely translated:
Six years you shall seed your fields, and six years you shall prune your vineyard and you shall collect its harvest. And on the seventh year shall be a sabbatical of the land, a sabbatical to the L-rd.
The Torah here speaks of a seven-year cycle wherein the Jewish farmers would work the land for six years and then abstain from any cultivation on the seventh year, giving the land a good shabbos.
Rashi (on Ch. 25:1) explain that the reason the laws dealing specifically with working the land (known as "Shmita laws") are given in this Torah portion (i.e., Behar) is to teach us that just as shmitah laws were given in their entirety, all other laws were given in their entirety right there at the Mountain (=Behar) Sinai.
The obvious question is: "Why did he Torah single out specifically shmitah laws and not some other ones for Rashi to make his comment about?"
An explanation:
This cycle of six years that a person cultivates and harvests the land and rests on the seventh comes to teach simple wholesome אמונה (pron. emunah = belief & trust) in the Almighty:
There is a level of emunah that a person experiences when he/she plants the field that stems from their awareness that the Almighty created nature and instilled in it a certain behavior: if you plant a seed, give it water and protect it from the elements, it will grow and flourish and you can expect to harvest and benefit from your effort.
A much higher level of emunah is that a person experiences knowing that the Almighty expects us to
plant the field (שש שנים תזרע שדך) and do other type of effort, but ultimately it is the Almighty is the one that provides the harvest by actively being involved in the produce-growing.
These two levels of emunah both relate to working within the framework of nature: In the first level of emunah a person places his/her trust in Hashem that nature will continue to function "naturally", the way it always does because Hashem made it so. So by planting the seed, nature will take its course, with G-d's help, there will be produce. In the second level of emunah a person places their entire trust in G-d, however there must still be some activity within the framework of nature -- namely plating the seed, but in reality Hashem takes a proactive role.
Comes the seven-year cycle and teaches yet a higher form of emunah, one which does not even require a person to take action within the framework of nature. In fact, shmitah laws state that any such activity on the seventh year is strictly prohibited. (It is said that the First-Temple 70-year exile occurred partly because the Jewish farmers neglected to let the land rest every seventh year!)
This type of total and complete rest required the Jewish farmers to produce on the sixth year of the cycle enough produce to have enough food on the sixth and seventh years of the cycle, plus on the first year of the following 7-year cycle -- a total of 3 years!
So a farmer may say: "I cannot! It's unreasonable! How can it be?!?! Surely the land cannot produce enough crop to feed us for 3 whole years!" (See Ch. 25:20) To which the answer is "emunah!" Trust the the One who instituted the laws of nature and set it in motion, and indeed keeps it functioning each and every-day is also able to sustain you and your beloved for three whole years -- without any action on you own. (See Ch. 25:21) In other words, the One who created the laws of nature also created shmitah laws and they surely complement each-other, and certainly there's no conflict.
Jewish mysticism attaches a significance to the number 7. Seven days of creation. 7 year shmitah cycle, etc... The number 7 signifies the working of nature, natural progression etc. So, in a sense Torah is expecting the Jew to work within the framework of nature, by planting, pruning and harvesting the natural way and yet it expects a Jewish farmer to go beyond nature and having trust in Hashem that plentifulness will come from a level that's above nature.
We can also note that the original verse can be understood to mean that the purpose of the six years on which person works the land is indeed to arrive at the seventh year on which he/she shall exhibit total emunah.
This is a general motif in performance of all 613 mitzvot (=commandments): a person should act within the boundaries of nature (and indeed utilize nature), but at the very same time be aware that he/she is connection to- and tapping into G-dliness that goes beyong (and indeed transcends) nature. Indeed the performance of the 613 mitzvot is suppose to cultivate within us total and complete trust in G-d Almightly.
This motif, then, is the connection between the laws of shmita and their appearance specifically here at Mt. Sinai (Behar) as they exemplify our performance of mitzvot.
In a wider sense the laws of shmitah also teach more about our daily conduct:
Just as working for six years is a means to get to the seventh year of rest, so too working for six days in the office (שש שנים תזרע) is a means to get to Shabbos (ובשנה השביעת שבת).
Moreover, a soul comes down to this earth (i.e, gets born) to live and toil (שש שנים תזרע) but ultimately it prepares for itself a nice nest in heaven once a person passes on (ובשנה השביעת שבת).
And finally, for nearly six thousand years we're been toiling to repair this פארשטינקינע גלות (=unbearable exile, שש שנים תזרע) and with every additional mitzvah we do, with every act of kindness, and every coin we place in the charity box, we are getting this much closer to the ultimate redemption (ובשנה השביעת שבת) also know as יום שכולו שבת.
May we all merit ובשנה השביעת שבת this very week!
Friday, May 4, 2007
Which Shabbos?!?!
B"H
Vaikra (Leviticus) Ch. 23:15 reads:
וספרתם לכם ממחרת השׁבּת
Loosely translated:
And you shall count for yourself, on the day following the שׁבּת (Sabbath).
This verse refers to the mitzvah of counting the Omer. More specifically it instructs us when to start counting.
The tzdokim (Sadducees) have misinterpreted this verse to mean that the counting should start on the day following the Shabbos literally, that is on Motzei-Shabbos or Sunday. Rashi answers them by stating that if that was the case we would not know which specific shabbos in the year we should start from.
Side note: some further confuse matters by answering the above with: "שבת בראשית" referring to the Holy Shabbos -- the 7th day of creation. This answer also leads to yet another misunderstanding, because שבת בראשית can also mean the Shabbos on which we read the Torah portion of Bereshit.
Be it as it may, the halacha is that שׁבּת in the original verse's context means Pesach (Passover). It would seem that it has nothing to do with שבת בראשית (as the Sadducees claim) and certainly it has nothing to do with the Shabbos we read Bereshit on (which would place Shavuot something around Chanukah).
But there must still be a connection between שׁבּת literally and Pesach -- for otherwise the Torah should have chosen different wording. What's the connection?
Explanation:
Upon exiting Egypt, the Jewish people were confronted with a dilemma: one one hand they need to go and receive the Torah at Mt. Sinai, on the other hand they have sunk into the 49th portal of tumah (=spiritual impurity.) How can one receive the holiest of the holiest while being at the depths of impurity.
To help-out Hashem did a marvelous thing: Hashem in his infinite kindness has elevated the Jewish people by revealing himself in Egypt (אני ולא מלאך, אני ולא שרף) and at the Sea of Reeds (Red sea) whereby a lowly servant could phonetically see more than a bona fide Prophet.
Essentially the great giluy (=revelation) at Mitzrayim (=Egypt) was a gift bestowed upon the Jews, from above. The Jews did not have to work and toil for it at all, and in fact it was out of their control -- this giluy was a pure eetorerut (=awakening) from Above that temporarily removed the jews from the 49 portal of tumah. In fact, it was a model and prototype for all subsequent awakenings.
However, after that event Hashem concealed Himself again, causing the Jews to go back to tumah. At their very essence, the giluy did not change them -- this giluy was an external force that extracted them out of the tumah of Egypt. When external stimulus was gone the Jewish people descended back to their old self.
So Hashem, with His infinite mercy, gave them a recipe for successfully attaining Torah (viz. purity): for the following 49 days leading to the reception of the Torah on Shavuos, the Jewish people should work on their midos (character traits). Each day they shall remove themselves from one of the portals of Tumah, and place themselves into a portal of holiness. Then after the 49th day, they will be free of tumah and in the 49 portal of Holiness, ready to receive the Torah. Essentially where they were (spiritually) at the time of the exodus from Egypt.
However, unlike at the exodus where the giluy was an eetorerut from Above, at the time they arrive at Mt. Sinai to receive the Torah they have refined themselves with their own effort and hard-work. Their self refinement is an "eetorerut from below".
So, to summarize: the eetorerut from above brought upon by Hashem (without any impetus from the Jewish nation, and indeed out of their control) and then the return to normal-reality has brought upon a period in which the Jewish people can reach the the same level of holiness they experienced at the exodus, on their own, through their toil to refine their character traits (viz. eetorerut from below)
This is essentially the same idea as Shabbos, which is an eetorerut from above. We see this in the prayers: "מקדש השבת וישראל והזמנים" (="He who sanctifies the Shabbos, the Jewish nation and [through them] the holidays.") The text does not read: "מקדש ישראל והשבת והזמנים" (="He who sanctifies the Jewish nation, and [through them] the Shabbos and the holidays.") In other words, the sanctity of the Shabbat is something that's not in the hands of the Jewish nation. (Not so for the holidays which are subject to when Beit Din determines when months start and end.)
That's where the parallel between Shabbos and Pesach is seen. Both are outside the control of the Jewish nation. Both are awkaning from Above. Both are gifted to us by Hashem with no connection to our spiritual standing, out desire, or even our deeds.
So, now the original verse וספרתם לכם ממחרת השׁבּת can be understood to mean: and you shall count for yourselves from the day following the שׁבּת, the great proto-awakening from above -- Pesach.
Any cyber-Sadducees out there who are still unclear about this, should feel free to comment.
Good Shabbos with a lot of eetorerut.
Vaikra (Leviticus) Ch. 23:15 reads:
וספרתם לכם ממחרת השׁבּת
Loosely translated:
And you shall count for yourself, on the day following the שׁבּת (Sabbath).
This verse refers to the mitzvah of counting the Omer. More specifically it instructs us when to start counting.
The tzdokim (Sadducees) have misinterpreted this verse to mean that the counting should start on the day following the Shabbos literally, that is on Motzei-Shabbos or Sunday. Rashi answers them by stating that if that was the case we would not know which specific shabbos in the year we should start from.
Side note: some further confuse matters by answering the above with: "שבת בראשית" referring to the Holy Shabbos -- the 7th day of creation. This answer also leads to yet another misunderstanding, because שבת בראשית can also mean the Shabbos on which we read the Torah portion of Bereshit.
Be it as it may, the halacha is that שׁבּת in the original verse's context means Pesach (Passover). It would seem that it has nothing to do with שבת בראשית (as the Sadducees claim) and certainly it has nothing to do with the Shabbos we read Bereshit on (which would place Shavuot something around Chanukah).
But there must still be a connection between שׁבּת literally and Pesach -- for otherwise the Torah should have chosen different wording. What's the connection?
Explanation:
Upon exiting Egypt, the Jewish people were confronted with a dilemma: one one hand they need to go and receive the Torah at Mt. Sinai, on the other hand they have sunk into the 49th portal of tumah (=spiritual impurity.) How can one receive the holiest of the holiest while being at the depths of impurity.
To help-out Hashem did a marvelous thing: Hashem in his infinite kindness has elevated the Jewish people by revealing himself in Egypt (אני ולא מלאך, אני ולא שרף) and at the Sea of Reeds (Red sea) whereby a lowly servant could phonetically see more than a bona fide Prophet.
Essentially the great giluy (=revelation) at Mitzrayim (=Egypt) was a gift bestowed upon the Jews, from above. The Jews did not have to work and toil for it at all, and in fact it was out of their control -- this giluy was a pure eetorerut (=awakening) from Above that temporarily removed the jews from the 49 portal of tumah. In fact, it was a model and prototype for all subsequent awakenings.
However, after that event Hashem concealed Himself again, causing the Jews to go back to tumah. At their very essence, the giluy did not change them -- this giluy was an external force that extracted them out of the tumah of Egypt. When external stimulus was gone the Jewish people descended back to their old self.
So Hashem, with His infinite mercy, gave them a recipe for successfully attaining Torah (viz. purity): for the following 49 days leading to the reception of the Torah on Shavuos, the Jewish people should work on their midos (character traits). Each day they shall remove themselves from one of the portals of Tumah, and place themselves into a portal of holiness. Then after the 49th day, they will be free of tumah and in the 49 portal of Holiness, ready to receive the Torah. Essentially where they were (spiritually) at the time of the exodus from Egypt.
However, unlike at the exodus where the giluy was an eetorerut from Above, at the time they arrive at Mt. Sinai to receive the Torah they have refined themselves with their own effort and hard-work. Their self refinement is an "eetorerut from below".
So, to summarize: the eetorerut from above brought upon by Hashem (without any impetus from the Jewish nation, and indeed out of their control) and then the return to normal-reality has brought upon a period in which the Jewish people can reach the the same level of holiness they experienced at the exodus, on their own, through their toil to refine their character traits (viz. eetorerut from below)
This is essentially the same idea as Shabbos, which is an eetorerut from above. We see this in the prayers: "מקדש השבת וישראל והזמנים" (="He who sanctifies the Shabbos, the Jewish nation and [through them] the holidays.") The text does not read: "מקדש ישראל והשבת והזמנים" (="He who sanctifies the Jewish nation, and [through them] the Shabbos and the holidays.") In other words, the sanctity of the Shabbat is something that's not in the hands of the Jewish nation. (Not so for the holidays which are subject to when Beit Din determines when months start and end.)
That's where the parallel between Shabbos and Pesach is seen. Both are outside the control of the Jewish nation. Both are awkaning from Above. Both are gifted to us by Hashem with no connection to our spiritual standing, out desire, or even our deeds.
So, now the original verse וספרתם לכם ממחרת השׁבּת can be understood to mean: and you shall count for yourselves from the day following the שׁבּת, the great proto-awakening from above -- Pesach.
Any cyber-Sadducees out there who are still unclear about this, should feel free to comment.
Good Shabbos with a lot of eetorerut.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)