← All works

Akeidat Yitzchak

Sefaria · Jewish Thought > Rishonim · 1,212 sections

1. _.55.1.9

   Some problems in the text of our Parshah. 1) Why is the word "My Sabbath days" in the plural? Since the reference is to a single day, namely the seventh day of the week, the reference cannot be to G-d. Also, since the verse continues in the singular i.e. "it is a sign," we are evidently speaking about that Sabbath only, not other holy convocations that do not qualify for the description ot, sign! 2) Why does the Torah repeat here once more what has been discussed in the previous Parshah, i.e. "observe the Sabbath...he who desecrates it shall be executed?" We find the same repetition in connection with the paragraph of "va-yechullu." 3) How can the words "whosoever desecrates it will be executed," (i.e. by a human tribunal) be followed by "whosoever performs work on that day, his soul will be cut off from his people," (suggesting death by heavenly tribunal Exodus 31, 14-15.) How does one statement lead to the other? 4) Since the objective of the Sabbath legislation is rest, inactivity, why is it always linked with the order "six days you shall work?" The reason cannot be to "permit" work on the six days, since there had never been reason to believe that it was forbidden. Although our sages in Mechiltah 20, commented that it means that even thinking about work is forbidden on the Sabbath, the statement is repeated too frequently not to have additional meaning. 5) If, as explained traditionally, the words "remember the Sabbath" and "observe the Sabbath" were uttered at Mount Sinai simultaneously, why did the Torah not record both expressions each time the text of the ten commandments is recorded in the Torah?

2. _.55.1.10

   (1) The first principle to be appreciated in order to hold a true belief in the creation of the universe ex nihilo, a belief upon which all the other dogmas of faith are based, is the belief in the ability of the Creator to exercise His will upon all creatures in all spheres of the universe, and His ability to create new facts in heaven and on earth for the benefit of His followers, or to the detriment of His enemies. (as explained in connection with the story of the creation and the deluge) We are exhorted to observe the Sabbath by refraining from activity since in this way we testify to the fact that creation commenced from an absolute void. (4) One could ask that since chidush, a new creation is essentially an activity, should it not best be remembered by our observing the six days of creation (the work week) as a memorial to that fact, since that is when the activity took place? When we examine the concept of rest more closely, we realise that what best testifies to the concept of creation ex nihilo, is that from which He has already rested ever since; only that kind of creative activity is not ongoing. This excludes evolutionary changes that start from somewhere rather than from nowhere, and are going on forever. Therefore the Torah writes on the occasion of the very first Sabbath, "for on that day He desisted from all His work which He had created to be carried out in an ongoing fashion i.e. la-assot.” (Genesis 2,3) This is to counter the idea prevalent among some Jews that the story of creation is compatible with the view of kadmut ha-olam, the primacy of matter. This is dealt with in chapter 4. (2) In order to reinforce our appreciation of the special Providence that guides the fortunes of our people through all the miracles G-d has performed, He arranged a second New Year for calculating months and festivals, and handed us the key to this as explained in chapter thirty seven. This is what our sages had in maind when they instituted kiddush, the sanctification of the Sabbath. First we recite: "a memorial to the work of creation," then we follow by reciting "the first of the holy convocations, a memorial to the Exodus from Egypt." The reason that these two remembrances could not be combined in one single phrase is that the Sabbath reminds us of chidush ha-olam, creation ex nihilo which is the foundation that all moadim, festivals have to be based on. These moadim testify to the complete freedom with which G-d conducts history. Had He not created ex nihilo, the moadim could not testify to that fact. The essence of the Sabbath legislation then is to implant in our hearts the belief in chidush ha-olam, from which flows the belief in G-d’s unimpaired Omnipotence. The festivals remind us that G-d’s potential power was in fact translated into practice. Both of these facts are remembered by abstaining from work on the Sabbath, as we will demonstrate in detail. Abstention from work by any person usually consists of two parts. A) The quiet and respite experienced by the person who is prohibited to work. B) The non performance of the labour which would normally have been performed. If one looks only at the first part, it seems that as long as the work that one abstains from could be performed automatically, mechanically, or without causing fatigue to the person performing it, there would be no objection to such work being performed on the Sabbath. On the other hand, if we look only at the second aspect, the fact that the work does not get performed, i.e. consideration of the labourer's fatigue or otherwise, does not concern us. Work prohibition on the Sabbath demonstrates that G-d is concerned with both aspects. On the one hand the Torah writes (Exodus 20,9) "six days you shall labour and do all your work;" on the other hand the Torah writes "the seventh day is a day of rest to the Lord your G-d, you must not do any work etc....because G-d did...and He rested on the seventh day." The repetition of "you must not do any work," clearly shows that the "rest," or "physical fatigue" factor is not the only criterion in the Sabbath observance. The major objective to be achieved by the respite resulting from work abstention, is the chance to reflect on the meaning of the day, and on the revelation in which G-d demonstrated His freedom. Since the word zechirah, remembrance can be applied to matters involving action, whereas the word shemirah suggests matters involving inaction, he Torah uses zechirah when it emphasises respite, i.e. remember to rest!. When the Torah wishes to emphasize abstention from work per se, it uses the word shemirah, "be careful not to do any work!"(see Talmud Berachot 20) The Torah's wording then corresponds to the two objectives of the Sabbath legislation. In the first instance, the Torah writes zachor, reminding us of the need to rest, since it will enable us to appreciate that He blessed the day by instituting rest as a corollary to creation ex nihilo. On the second set of tablets, when the major objective is abstention from work, cessation thereof, the term shamor is appropriate. So is the reminder that we were not able to cease work while enslaved in Egypt. For this reason the Torah adds in that instance "in order that your servant rests just like you," a comment not found on the first set of tablets recorded in Parshat Yitro. In response to the freedom G-d had displayed in practicing hashgachah peratit, personal guidance of the Jews' fates in Egypt, we are told "Therefore the Lord your G-d commanded you to keep the Sabbath day." This is going a step beyond the injunction in Yitro which merely said "therefore G-d blessed the Sabbath and sanctified it." Since the major significance lies in the menuchah-nefishah-shavat aspect, the men of the great assembly when referring to the Sabbath in our prayers, always call it "this day of rest," not just "Sabbath," since that latter word combines rest and non-activity in equal measure. By this little addition of "this day of rest," we know that this is the major factor. Therefore, on the first tablets it says "He rested" on the seventh day, to counter the non believers in creation ex nihilo. Similarly, Onkelos translates Leviticus 25,5, "it shall be a year of Shabbaton for the land," as "a year of idleness, abstention from work." But the words “shabbat shabbaton lashem,” he translates as "a day of restfulness" (ibid verse 4) Since we have established rest and relaxation as being associated with the word zachor, and the abstention from work with the word shamor, and it is clear that abstention from work will lead to rest and relaxation, our sages said that these two terms were uttered simultaneously. (Psalms 62, 12) "One thing the Lord has spoken, I have heard the dual meaning." This refers to the total of textual variants between the first and the second sets of tablets. This also answers the question raised by Maimonides that belief in creation ex nihilo depends on the ability to perform changes, and the ability to perform changes in nature depends in turn on the ability to create ex nihilo. To illustrate: Reuben gave Shimon a dollar to fulfil the mitzvah of tzedakah. He also wanted to express his compassion with Shimon in this way. If we remove one of the two reasons, the mitzvah was fulfilled although some element of it had been lacking. In the first set of tablets there is a causal relationship between the reason for the mitzvah and the mitzvah itself. Without the zechirah remembrance, the mitzvah becomes meaningless; in the second set of tablets (ten commandments) the reason merely becomes subordinate, i.e. "therefore G-d commanded you to do." The mitzvah will be fulfilled, la-assot by its very performance, regardless of the reason associated with it.

3. _.55.1.11

   The other important aspect of this mitzvah is, that by observing it we are enabled to familiarise ourselves with the entire Torah, commentaries etc.

4. _.55.1.12

   By appointing a day a week when we forsake preoccupation with all matters that are of a transient nature, we have the opportunity to listen to the Torah's instruction, each person according to the level of the faculties he has been endowed with, of course. Spiritual contentment is attained through such Torah study. The Talmud Yerushalmi Shabbat 16, halachah 3, goes so far as to say that the Sabbath was given to Israel primarily to enable us to study. This is an aspect of the neshama yeteyrah, additional soul, which the Talmud Beytzah 16, says we possess on that day, due to the preparations we make to welcome the arrival of the Sabbath. This refers to preparations made by both lecturers and listeners. This is also one of the reasons we find the Sabbath described as "equivalent to all the other commandments combined." Scriptural proof is available from all three parts of the Bible. All of this is due to the intensive preparation involved in getting ready to observe the mitzvah of Shabbat. We could find additional proof in our very Parshah where we have the juxtaposition " these are the words which the Lord commanded to be kept," followed by "six days work shall be done and the seventh day shall be a holy Sabbath for you unto G-d." It seems as if the rest of Torah legislation is equated with Sabbath observance. The Rabbis who composed the grace after meals, have expressed the same juxtaposition in the insert we recite on the Sabbath. "Be pleased, O Lord our G-d, fortify us by Your commandments,"-- "and by the commandment pertaining to the seventh day." Because of the importance of this day, we find many more types of prohibitions associated with this commandment than with any other commandment. We also have the penalty of "stoning" for wilful transgression after due warning. We learn from the frequent repetition of the Sabbath laws in the Torah that even mental preoccupation with weekday matters is taboo, see Isaiah 58, 13. A true Sabbath observer is someone who does not engage in idle chatter on that day. (Shabbat 150) One's conversation should not be like that on weekdays. Some people do not speak anything but Hebrew on the Sabbath. The definition of melachah work, is usually an activity planned in advance. (machashavah) It is only this kind of work that is subject to the severe penalties of the Torah. All manner of activity which tends to sow hatred, disharmony etc. is likewise forbidden under the euphemism "do not light fire in any of your dwellings," (35,3) which appears adjacent to the main legislation. Anyone who fails to utilise the opportunity the Sabbath offers him to study Torah, is in fact contributing to his own death. It is this that Rabbi Ami had in mind when he went on record (Yerushalmi Moed Katan 2, halachah 3) "If I had found someone who would agree with me, I would have permitted work on the intermediate days of the festival.." Since the work prohibition on those days has as its purpose to free people to eat, drink and study Torah, and the people ignored the part about studying Torah, better they should at least work than belittle the sanctity of these days by not studying Torah.

5. _.55.1.13

   The experts of the Kabbalah have revealed to us another fine spiritual aspect of this day, inasmuch as it possesses the distinction to help also those who seek out wisdom and Torah. This great day alluded to the seventh of the ten sefirot, emanations, which is called Sabbath, and which is like a hallway leading to the illustrious palace which is called Shabbat hagadol, the meaning of which will be discussed later. All of this is included in the commandment "six days you shall work," i.e. expend your energy performing mitzvot in this world of "vanity," so that on the seventh and holy day you will be able to enjoy contemplative rest. We can now answer the question of why the Torah speaks about "My Sabbaths." (plural) Since, as we have demonstrated, there are in reality three dimensions to the Sabbath idea, the Torah is at pains to include them all when listing the commandment. After stating the idea, each dimension is explained individually. Concerning the first dimension, it says "for it is a sign between Me and you for generations, so that you know that I, the Lord, sanctify you." Abstention from work is the visible sign for all future generations to know that He has hallowed us through this commandment, and that this distinction will make us take part in the hidden world reserved in the future. This is the key, the gateway to that ultimate Sabbath. (3) Concerning the second dimension of the Sabbath, the Torah states "Observe the Sabbath for it is holy for you, anyone desecrating it will be put to death, since anyone doing work on it, his soul will be cut off from his people." He who osseh bo, will use Torah and mitzvot to enrich himself, uses the idea of the Sabbath for transient personal gain, studies for ulterior motives, mot yumat, deserves death in both worlds, will never experience the ultimate Sabbath. On the other hand, "kol ha-osseh melachah beyom hashabbat,” he who performs physical labour (of the forbidden categories) will be put to death by human tribunal. Hillel said in in Avot 1, according to Rashi, that "anyone using," i.e. abusing the "crown,” i.e. holy scriptures, religion, loses his claim to eternity. "Anyone eating" (mundane satisfaction) from words of Torah, is really taking away from his life. (Rashi on Avot 4,7) Concerning the third dimension, it says "veshamroo..,the eternal covenant." When the first two dimensions of the Sabbath have been fulfilled, we will be party to the third dimension, the treasure reserved for us by G-d, concerning which the prophet Isaiah 64,3, said "no eye has beheld such treasure, it is reserved for the Lord alone to grant to him who waits for Him. We find all three dimensions of the Sabbath alluded to in our Sabbath prayers. 1) "You have not given this day of the Sabbath to the nations of the world." 2) "You have not given an inheritance to idol worshippers." 3) "Also on His day of rest, an uncircumcised person must not rest." Line one, corresponds to the idea of ot, sign, it is sufficient to set us apart from them. Line two tells us that the granting of the Sabbath legislation applies only to believers; non believers do not benefit from the gift of the Sabbath. Our sayes (Eycha Rabbati 2) tell us that if a gentile claims that he possesses Torah, do not believe him, if he claims to possess wisdom however, you may believe him. The gentiles have no share in the Torah of Israel. Line 3 tells us that as long as he is uncircumcised and impure, the most well intentioned gentile cannot be included in the community of Israel. Only conversion can make him part of the Jewish nation. The prayer continues "for to Your people of Israel You have given it, to the seed of Jacob whom You have chosen." The Talmud Shabbat 119, relates that the emperor asked Rabbi Joshua ben Chananyah "why does the Sabbath food exude such a pleasant fragrance?" The Rabbi answered that we have a special seasoning called shevet which we put into it. Thereupon the emperor requested to be given some of this seasoning. The Rabbi told him that that seasoning was effective only when used by people who observe the Sabbath. The emperor had realised that the seasoning of our lives provided by the Sabbath, permeates the world, so that Jews could inherit it; he wanted to know by what means and what merit Jews achieve their ultimate triumph. The Rabbi told him that it was due to compliance with the two dimensions of the Sabbath legislation discussed previously. When the emperor said "let me participate anyways," he had to be told that without accepting the burden of all the commandments first, all of which depend on these two dimensions of the Sabbath, this could not be. Let us return now to the opening statement in this chapter, that all the tasks G-d has allotted to man specifically are included in the commandment "six days work shall be performed, and the seventh day shall be holy for you, a Sabbath to G-d." (35,2) G-d has given this day three names (dimensions) which between them remove the obstacle to Sabbath observance represented by the six malachey chabbalah, angels of destruction. The Sabbath therefore is the source of all blessings and sanctities; the sanctity of all the other holy days is derived from the Sabbath. A sign of this is the fact that all holy days are called holy convocations because they take this name from the Sabbath, and are hallowed by its sanctity. However, the Sabbath itself, seeing that it does not need to draw on outside inspiration to achieve its own sanctity, is nowhere referred to as a holy convocation except in Parshat Emor,where it is like a guest in the paragraph dealing with all the festivals, heading the list. At any rate, the Sabbath is the source of sanctity and blessing from which blessing and sanctity flow to all those who prepare themselves to welcome it. Under the aegis of the seventh sefirah, Israel received the Torah under oath. It is all one great mystical experience for them. This in turn confers upon its adherents the atzilut, spiritual nobility, that is the reward for observing this commandment. The reason that the Sabbath is considered equal to all the other commandments then is the sefirah Shabbat, the mystical domain from which all commandments have been issued to Israel. It is this which Isaiah has in mind in chapter 58, 13. This is also what Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai meant when he interpreted the Midrash which has G-d’s consoling the Sabbath that Israel would be its mate. (Bereshit Rabbah 11) For this reason, the Sabbath legislation took chronological precedence over all the other mitzvot having been taught to the people already at Marah, prior to the revelation at Mount Sinai. (Sanhedrin 56) We welcome the shechinah every Sabbath, calling it a bride, since it is a tangible expression of G-d love for us. (Shabbat 119) This also explains the strange statement in Shabbat 118, that if someone had committed adultery such as Enosh, as long as he observed the Sabbath meticulously, he would be forgiven. The scriptural proof for this statement is brought from Isaiah 56,2, "hail ENOSH (person?) who does this..who observes the Sabbath, not to desecrate it." Anyone who observes the Sabbath in all the aforementioned aspects, must already have been truly repentant. We apply the principle then that the position occupied by repentant sinners cannot even be matched by the perfectly righteous. (Berachot 34) Such a person is referred to as enosh, just as the original Enosh of whom the Torah states that he "proclaimed the name of G-d." (Genesis 4,26) The common denominator then between how the two aspects of Sabbath observance affect us is, that this noble, holy day paves the way for study and understanding of, and eventual observance of all the mitzvot.

6. _.55.1.14

   The third principle we learn from the Sabbath is that this holy day contains a veiled reference to the everlasting world, otherwise known as kullo shabbat. (see end of tractate Tamid) It is this aspect which is meant when we talk about the "great Sabbath," i.e. the true greatness of the Sabbath. If we have stated in the first principle that the six days of creation are reminders of things that are transient and subject to motion, whereas the Sabbath reminds us of rest, conclusion of work, so it is also a veiled hint of man's life as such. He moves and strives towards those activities that lead him towards his true purpose. The Sabbath then is a symbol of man's true destiny and purpose. The Talmud Berachot 56, says that the Sabbath is 1/60th of the world to come, and they comment that though the Sabbath itself is something visible in public, the reward for observing it is not visible in public. (Shabbat 10) We see there are two names for the Sabbath, the visible one and the invisible one. The invisible Sabbath will be granted to those who observe the visible Sabbath. Compare this to the lady who has been entrusted with the key to his treasure chamber, by the king. Obviouly, he means for her to be in command of the treasures hidden in that room. The Talmud Shabbat 118, states that if Israel were to observe two Sabbaths, they would immediately be redeemed. The meaning is that if Israel were to observe both aspects of the Sabbath as we have outlined them, redemption would follow in its wake. We would immediately merit the "great Sabbath," redemption of the soul and its salvation. It is clear that such tremendous results cannot be achieved without the expenditure of great amounts of energy. Therefore, the Rabbis tell us, (Avodah Zarah 3) that he who has toiled on the Sabbath eve will eat on the Sabbath, whereas he who did not toil on the Sabbath eve "what will he eat?" Therefore, as we have said earlier, true happiness is found in the efforts expended by man commensurate with his standing in nature, not idleness. How remarkably is this concept reflected in the fact that the "do's" in the Torah correspond to the 248 limbs in our body, and the "dont's" to the 365 days of the year. (Makkot 27) Each limb exhorts us daily to avoid preoccupation with the vain things in life, the pursuit of which results in our failing to acquire the true acquisitions which have enduring value. (this has been discussed in Psalms 119)

7. _.55.1.16

   The first name (principle) of the Sabbath, helps remove two obstacles to Sabbath observance, namely the profound nature of the inadequate perceptual powers of the people who are to observe the Sabbath. By allowing us to stop work on the Sabbath, G-d has enabled us to grasp spiritual truths no gentile has an inkling of. By removing our work load, He has given us the time to study Torah and thus add an extra dimension to our soul. In this way, we can correct our faults, shortcomings, and advance towards perfection, something no other people can accomplish. The second name (principle) of the Sabbath removes two further obstacles to Sabbath observance, namely the natural tendencey to opt for a life of ease and indulgence, and the obstacle to the arduous task of performing mitzvot and acquire Torah knowledge. The Sabbath provides an incentive to learn. The moral and ethical truths learned on that day provide a bulwark against our baser instincts and traits. The third name (principle) helps to deal with the remaining two obstacles, namely the need to attend to the task of earning a livelihood, ensure our material well being, as well as the need to ensure our physical well being, health. Once one has absorbed the lesson of the third Sabbath principle, namely the lack of substance of everything material, one is well on the way to achieving mastery of the mind over the body. All the examples of apparently superhuman limitation in food intakes such as Rabbi Chaninah ben Dotha subsisting on a "kav of carobs," or Moses going without food and drink for forty days, are then understood quite easily.

8. _.55.1.17

   Exodus Rabbah 25, raised the question why the Torah uses the word re-oo, see, instead of de-oo, know! in the verse "see I have given you the Sabbath." (Exodus 16,29) The answer is simple. Should the nations of the world ask us why we keep the Sabbath, we can simply point out that on the Sabbath the manna did not fall. This was visible evidence of Sabbath observance from on high, ergo Sabbath observance of the Jewish people down on earth. At the same time this proves that the legislation, or gift rather, was given only to us since no one else was given the manna. For the rest of mankind the operative line in the Bible is yom valaylah lo yishbatu, neither by day nor by night will they cease, rest. In fact a gentile who chooses to observe the Sabbath is guilty of the death penalty. (Sanhedrin 68) This prohibition and penalty for the gentile is similar to the prohibition and penalty for the Jew who is not a priest and who undertakes to assume the functions of priesthood, offers sacrifices on the altar. He too will die, since he arrogated to himself privileges he had not been granted. (Numbers 18,7) The exclusive nature of the gift of the Sabbath is documented in the verse "between Me and you it is an eternal sign." (Exodus 31, 17.) Clearly, the day was granted only to the Jewish people. We relate to G-d like a bride to a bridegroom. Therefore, the first Sabbath observed by the Jewish people at Marah, when the manna fell (or rather, did not fall) was like a betrothal; the Sabbath on the occasion of the revelation at Mount Sinai represented the wedding canopy. The visible sign, chibbur of this union is the Sabbath, much like the wedding band received, worn and treasured by the bride. The Friday night prayer, i.e. the benediction attah kidashta You have sanctified, reflects these thoughts. The Friday night prayer is like kidushin, betrothal, the Sabbath morning prayer yismach Moshe represents the wedding ceremony. The Minchah prayer atta echad stresses the union that has been achieved between Israel and its G-d. Our Parshah starts with the words "These are the words which the Lord has commanded to do them; six days work shall be performed, the seventh day shall be holy for you, a Shabbaton of solemn rest to the Lord; anyone performing work on that day shall be put to death. You must not light any fire in any of your dwellings on the Sabbath day." Rabbi Yehudah in Shabbat 97, interprets the words eyleh hadvarim, these are the words, as hinting at the thirty nine categories of work prohibited on the Sabbath which were communicated to Moses orally at Mount Sinai, (see Rashi's comment on how this is arrived at) The fact that the words "these are the words" refer to the subsequent Sabbath legislation is proved by the grammar. It does not say shishah yamim (six days), but sheyshet yamim. (on the six days previously mentioned, a possessive form.) Had the subject matter been new, the Torah would have had to use the word shishah. Even the singling out of the one commandment "do not light any fire," which is discussed in Shabbat 70, still permits our previously expressed concept that the tabernacle and its resultant legislation is seen as a microcosm of the world at large. (1) The fact that the entire Sabbath legislation concludes with the words "observe My Sabbath days!" points at the three way division which we find in the sanctuary, and its ascending scales of sanctity. A) the outer courtyard; B) the sanctuary; C) the holy of holies, site of the holy ark. We find the parallel relationship between the three aspects of the Sabbath in the use of the plural "observe My Sabbath days and revere My holy place!" (Leviticus 19,30) G-d’s instructions in Parshat Terumah, chapter twenty five, begin with an overall description of the total tabernacle, to afford the artisans an overview of what the parts are to be used for. We find the same order again when G-d instructs in chapter thirty one. Subsequently, the details are listed, beginning with the furnishings, ending with the tabernacle itself. In the case of the actual construction, however, the tabernacle is constructed first, the furnishings later.

9. _.55.1.18

   The reason may be closely linked to what is referred to in our opening Midrash. Since both the Sabbath and the tabernacle are microcosms of the total Jewish world philosophy, the fact that the tabernacle was constructed first, is cited by the Midrash also. It is a reminder that our philosophy is based on what the Psalmist has described "He stretches the heavens like a carpet," (Psalms 104,2) meaning G-d created the universe out of nothing and only subsequently supplied the matter in it. This is something which needed to be acknowledged by kol chacham lev, every wise hearted man who was employed in the construction of the tabernacle. Preoccupation with the donations for and building of the tabernacle, were strong antibodies against the natural difficulties encountered by man in rising to his full potential. Therefore, the Midrash lists the furnishings as well, since the construction of each was a way of overcoming natural obstacles to becoming a servant of the Lord in the full sense of the word. If the Midrash quotes the verse from Isaiah "and the light of the moon will be like the light of the sun, and the light of the sun will be sevenfold the strength of what it was during the seven days of creation," (Isaiah 30,26) this is a hint that in the future we will merit enlightnement from G-d directly, our spiritual capacities will have been expanded so that no intermediaries will be needed any longer. The holy ark in the tabernacle is the symbol then of the third dimension of the Sabbath, discussed earlier in this chapter.

10. _.56.1.1

    How to synthesize events due to Providence with the natural cause of events.

11. _.56.1.2

    Parashat VeEle Pekudei

12. _.56.1.3

    Exodus Rabbah 52, explains Proverbs chapter 31, as follows. "She is garbed in might and beauty, smiling towards the latter day." This refers to Moses, of whom it is written that he emitted rays from his forehead. "He smiled toward the latter day," refers to Moses, who said to Israel "let us erect the tabernacle" and found that it would not stand. This in spite of the fact that the elders participated in the effort, as it says "every man of wise heart did participate." They could not erect it until they brought it to Moses since it says "they brought the tabernacle to Moses." They said to him "Rabbi, we have the beams, the bolts, the carpets and the clasps." As soon as Moses saw this, the shechinah came to rest on him and he erected the structure. This is what is referred to by Solomon in Proverbs 31, "many daughters have done valiantly, but you have excelled them all." Do not say that Moses erected it, for the tabernacle was erected with the help of a miracle and stood up all by itself. It is written "on the first of the first month of the second year, the tabernacle was erected." In other words, it was erected by itself."

13. _.56.1.4

    Since we have established that events in this world can be due to natural law or G-d’s direct intervention, and that the latter is reserved for the Jewish people, it is proper to show how construction of the tabernacle fits into the second category. When events are the result of natural law, the fate of the righteous and the fate of the sinner are alike, since natural law does not distinguish between good and evil, rich and poor etc. This is not so when events are due to Divine intervention. Then the guilty gets his just deserts and the innocent, i.e. the righteous reaps the reward due him. It is crucial therefore, to have chosen the right way of life. He who chooses the lifestyle of a sinner, is in effect choosing death. This fact is spelled out in the Torah on several occasions, such as Deut.30, 16, et al. We have discussed G-d’s Personal Providence in chapters 15 and 31. Since we have explained in chapter 48, that the tabernacle was a microcosm of the universe, we will explain how Israel is taught a lesson by G-d exercising His Personal Providence in connection with the tabernacle and its parts, about His macrocosm. When one speaks about how the world is being run, this "running" can be subdivided into three aspects. 1) Availability of food and shelter. Both are available in equal measure for the righteous as well as for the sinner, as stated in Deut. 4, 19, "sun, moon and stars have been allocated to all nations." 2) The availability of free choice within the framework of natural law. (compare chapter 3) This is necessary in order not to make good conduct something that is merely functional. If bad conduct were to be followed automatically and immediately by punishment, good behaviour could not qualify for reward since it would be due merely to fear and other functional considerations. 3) Sometimes, matters that had been preordained in accordance with natural law, are synchronised to occur at a time when they demonstrate G-d’s pleasure or displeasure with the conduct of man. If Nebuchdnezzar's star rose at the time of Yehoyakim so that he became the world's ruler, Israel, by reason of its wicked conduct was not excluded (saved) by special Divine intervention. Normally, when prophets make predictions they have in mind those preordained events. They announce their knowledge of these events and the time they would occur. Should the people repent, the preordained event will be cancelled, i.e. Divine intervention in Israel's fate will become manifest. False prophets base their predictions on their knowledge of natural law, not being privy to these preordained happenings that are timed to coincide with certain actions, resp. inactions of the Jewish people. Thus they deny Divine Personal intervention. Chapter twenty seven in Jeremiah is a case in point. Personal Providence does not apply to Nebuchadnezzar, but it would apply to Israel if they would follow the urgings of the prophet. Proof that the chapter discusses events due to natural law, is the prophecy concerning Nebuchadnezzar's son and grandson who had as yet not proven themselves, and whose dominion, if preordained, had nothing to do with Divine intervention. In such circumstances, intervention by hashgachah peratit, Personal Divine Providence, cannot be expected. Also, by means of natural law, the seventy years of Babylonian exile were to have the psychological effect of bringing about repentance by those who had to live in Babylonia as strangers. King Cyrus responded to their seventy year exile when he granted permission to re-establish the Jewish state, (province within the Persian empire) When king Solomon states in Kohelet 8,5, "he who obeys the commandments will know no evil, and a wise mind will know time and justice, for everything has its time and justice for man's evil overwhelms him..l have taken this to heart," this passage does not mean that all fates are determined exclusively by natural law. It merely means that there is such a thing as natural law, but that G-d works according to His timetable. Those who believe that there is only natural law err. Therefore, all attempts to calculate the coming of the Messiah in advance are doomed to failure. When G-d has said in Isaiah 63,4, "the day of vengeance is in My heart," He means that He will not reveal the timing, but it remains in His heart. Sanhedrin 97, curses those who calculate the timing of the Messiah's arrival beforehand. Such calculations actually delay his arrival. If someone had calculated that the Messiah would not arrive until the year seven thousand, using astronomic and astrological data, we would resign ourselves to a lengthy exile and slacken our efforts to hasten his arrival through the performance of good deeds. We must believe that a) "My redemption is close at hand," (Isaiah 56, 1) and that when least thought about, it may arrive. (Sanhedrin 94) Experience has taught us that G-d may hasten the end, (Haggadah of Passover) when He shortened our exile in Egypt." I the Lord, at its time, I will hasten it" (Isaiah 60,22). G-d reserves the right to accelerate His timetable, if warranted. At this point we learn that "natural law" can be supplanted by hashgachah perartit. When Jeremiah expresses the hope that the prediction of the false prophet Chananyah ben Azzur who had predicted the return of the captured holy vessels within two years, would come true, (Jeremiah 28, 6) he did so because the principle of hashgachah peratit can override the dictates of natural law. G-d’s prerogative to employ this method has certainly not been abrogated. When Jeremiah expressed doubt however, that this would happen, and predicted the false prophet's imminent death, he merely indicated that the conditions to bring about G-d’s personal intervention on behalf of the Jewish people did not exist at that time. The people simply did not merit it. The acid test of whether a prophet speaks the truth is when he predicts something "good" and it does not come true exactly as promised. Prediction of disaster merely serves to arouse feelings of fear and, hopefully, remorse. The reverse is achieved when the false prophet predicts something "good," lulling his listeners into a false sense of security, an impediment to arousing feelings of remorse and repentance. This is what was the case in Jeremiah chapters 27 and 28. In Jeremiah 27, 18, Jeremiah exhorts those prophets that if they were indeed prophets of the Lord, they would pray to G-d not to lose the remaining holy vessels of the temple, and for their king not to be taken into captivity. At least, if they did that, they would attempt to ward off a decree already in the process of being executed. The reason the "good" prophecy has to come true is that hashgachah peratit supersedes natural law, and a good prophecy is always based on hashgachah peratit being employed. The reverse is not true, since prophesies of doom are based on G-d’s intervention having been forfeited. Hence there is a chance of doom. When no doom occurs, it proves that Divine intervention did take place on our behalf and superseded the natural law which would have proved fatal to us had it been allowed to run its course. (more on this in chapter 96) When two prophets prophesy simultaneously about the same people however, the true prophet threatening doom in order to arouse feelings of repentance, and the false prophet assuring the same people that regardless of their conduct the good will come true since their merit suffices, then only by the "good" coming true can we have proof positive of who was the true prophet and who was not.

14. _.56.1.5

    Divine intervention when applied to the Jewish people is the norm rather than the exception. Divine intervention, when applied to gentiles is restricted to a small segment of the people and occurs at rare intervals. Examples are: the deluge, Sodom, Nineveh, Avimelech and Pharaoh being punished on account of Abraham, Egypt's ten plagues and the kings of Canaan in their war against Joshua. We read in Psalms 33, 14, "G-d looks down from the heavens and relates to all the inhabitants of earth from His residence...the eye of the Lord is directed towards those who fear Him." Clearly, the application of Divine intervention when dealing with the gentiles has as its objective the protection of His people. When Isaiah 44,28, quotes G-d as saying "who says about Cyrus "He is My shepherd," it refers to Cyrus' dream in which he had seen himself as rebuilding Jerusalem and the temple in G-d’s honour. This is an instance of Divine intervention in the life of a gentile for the sake of the Jewish people. Since the tabernacle became the seat from which Divine intervention would emanate, we understand the Midrash which states that until the building of the tabernacle, prophecy was found amongst the nations of the world, only to be removed from them once the tabernacle had been erected. When Bileam prophesied, it was only for the benefit of Israel. The problem with the Midrash is that we do not really find gentile prophets either prior to or subsequent to the erection of the tabernacle. The few instances of visions in a dream that Pharaoh and Avimelech or Laban had experienced, are not to be equated with prophecy. (Maimonides Moreh section three, chapter 2) On the other hand, were we to assume that such prophets did exist, it seems unfair to remove such powers from them merely because of the erection of the tabernacle. Regarding Moses’s prayer (Exodus 33, 16) to withhold the shechinah from non Jews, and G-d’s acquiescence, this too seems a case of an improper request by a student, and a response by his teacher that hardly seems appropriate. One must consider however that the very paucity of Divine intervention until that time, had made it difficult for people to recognise G-d and His power, since people had only seen natural law at work. They believed these laws to be inexorable. For that reason, G-d had to allow prophets among the nations, so that people would become aware of an alternative to natural law, namely G-d’s Personal intervention in the affairs of man. Prophecy at that time, meant that astrology and such would be used by wise men to forecast the future. Once the string of miracles that had preceded the building of the tabernacle and continued afterwards became the norm, the relative wisdom of the astrologers, soothsayers etc. faded into insignificance. This is why Bileam said "Jacob has neither charms nor enchantments." (Numbers 23,33.) What he meant was that those who had the powers of charms and enchantments could not bring them to bear upon this nation, since that people was not subject to the rule of natural law as evidenced in horoscopes and the like. This is the removal of prophecy from the nations of the world that Moses had prayed for. In other words, Moses prayed that such enchantments become irrelevant to Israel's fate. He did not ask that real prophetic powers which the nations never possessed be removed from them. Moses wanted veniflinu, let us be distinguished; G-d responded "I shall do wonderful things." Israel, on the other hand, would be guided only by hashgachah peratit, and astrologers, enchanters etc. should not exist among them. This realisation came to the gentiles in stages. First, the Egyptians acknowledged "a finger of G-d." Vitro came to acknowledge "for I know that G-d is greater than any other deity." Rahav, who had harboured the spies that Joshua had sent to Jericho, expressed herself in similar fashion.

15. _.56.1.6

    Exodus Rabbah 81, says, "had the nations realised the value of the tabernacle, they would have built castles surrounding it." Until that time, the nations heard the voice of G-d, and whenever something occurred that was inexplicable in terms of natural law, they were frightened. Once hashgachah peratit became a fact in the life of Israel, supernatural events no longer automatically caused panic among the nations of the world. Nebuchadnezzar's experience with the three men who were saved from the furnace, and Daniel who was saved from the lions, are examples of this. (Daniel chapter 3) However, as stated, among the gentiles such occurrences are rare and serve exceptional circumstances, whereas among the Jewish people such events became frequent, almost commonplace as long as the Jewish people were loyal to G-d and the Torah. Some Israelites, of course, treat such awareness as being of secondary significance in their daily lives, though they are aware of G-d and His power. Such people do not rate Divine intervention if and when it would be the only thing that can save them. People like that are like village dwellers who know that a king rules in the capital, but who are not even aware of the king's name, status, etc. Such people are no better than the best of the gentiles, except that they are saved from destruction because of the people around them who do not deserve to be destroyed. Another category are those who, while calling on the G-d of Jacob and wishing to know His whereabouts, are still not close to Him and His temple, like city dwellers who while aware of the palace and who it is that resides in it, content themselves to have dealings only with the king's lowest ranking servants. This group does not deserve Divine intervention on its behalf, and would be saved only by a ness nistar, a hidden miracle, which occurs daily and is not credited as proof that the hand of G-d is at work. The third category are those who are fully devoted to the king, who register joyfully to offer him their services. Such people are as if at home in the king's palace, the king knows them and the work they perform for him. It is this kind of person who on occasion rates Divine intervention to protect him, and on whose behalf the king does not hesitate to change the laws temporarily. Such a person, in turn, becomes the instrument by means of which G-d’s omnipotence and awareness of what occurs in each person's life is demonstrated. It is the prayer of Moses in Psalm 90, that Israel's deeds be such that they can merit Divine intervention at all times, (last verse) After that, Moses details various aspects of hashgachah peratit in Psalm 91. First, he refers to those who complain about the hidden nature of Divine manifestations and tells such people not to worry. G-d would protect them even if the person himself will be unaware how this is done. "For He will save you." If you attain a greater degree of closeness, you will even qualify for protection against commonplace dangers "because His angels he will command for you." This is still not the level of nissim geluyim, visible miracles, since such things as stepping on vipers underfoot do not make the headlines when we speak about hashgachah peratit going out of its way. The help experienced by the likes of Daniel, when the scoffers who attributed his survival to the fact that the lions had not been hungry, were thrown into the same pit and consumed by the lions, demonstrated that kind of hashgachah peratit. Darius' letter proclaiming the power of the Almighty and other such examples, testify to the power of G-d. The reason that such miracles occur, is to enhance G-d’s reputation among the gentiles. Moses states in Psalms 91, 14, "for he has clung to Me, therefore I will deliver him, I will elevate him because he knew My name." In Psalm 98,9, we find Moses acknowledging that G-d judges the world in fairness. This in itself is unnatural, since natural law would favour the physically strong over their weaker adversaries. Only the special blessing "and the fear of you and the dread of you will be on all the living creatures of the earth," (Genesis 9, 2) enables physically inferior man to extend his dominion over the more powerful animal kingdom. This blessing, however, is restricted to deserving man. In that Psalm then, homage is paid to the miracle that notwithstanding inferior status, justice prevails over brute force. This is viewed as a manifestation of hashgachah peratit. Israel is as powerful relative to other nations, as animals are to man. The condition in either case is the preservation of the tzelem elokim the Divine image, in accordance with the respective demands made upon either "man" or "Israel." The prophecy concerning "the latter days" in Isaiah chapter eleven, in which powerful animals are described as no longer molesting the weaker species, is the vision of a world when natural law will have ceased to prevail. Since the degree of personal intervention is in direct proportion to the degree of saintliness of the persons concerned, as we have demonstrated, extraordinary examples of such intervention may occur from time to time, testifying to the deserving nature of the person for whose sake they occur. Once we have seen that quality and not quantity governs the value G-d places on human beings, the fact that we are told that G-d selected the Jewish people "not because of your numerical strength" begins to assume some significance. "For you are numerically smallest" (Deut.7,7) means from you I expect what can be expected only from the select few, due to their elevated moral standards G-d’s army is not distinguished by the number of its divisions, but by the excellence of its soldiers. The Exodus from Egypt became possible not due to collective endeavour, but because of the merit of a few select individuals, especially the ones already in their graves, who had been the recipients of G-d’s oath due to their merit. (Abraham)

16. _.56.1.7

    Leviticus Rabbah 1, illustrates the point made previously, beautifully. Under natural law, a load that appears heavy to one person, appears relatively light when shouldered by two people. Similarly, something difficult for six hundred thousand people to suffer, should be impossible for a single person to endure. So we find the whole people telling G-d that they could not continue to listen to G-d’s voice. Yet Moses, alone, was able to listen to G-d’s voice without difficulty. (Deut. 5,24) This fact illustrates the principle of quality versus quantity. When the Talmud (Shabbat 94) describes the qualities required to attain the level of moral and intellectual greatness of a prophet, we can see that such people were extremely rare even amongst the Jewish people. The people of Deut. 5, realising their lack of moral preparedness knew that under the prevailing conditions they could not both survive physically and be recipients of G-d’s direct communication all at the same time.

17. _.56.1.8

    Our opening Midrash reflects the same theme. Although all of Israel had contributed in providing the various sections of the tabernacle and its furnishings, when it came to assembling it, the people could not manage, whereas Moses unassisted did manage. The people's contribution then consisted only in preparing the material, providing the basis for the tabernacle's ultimate form, to be erected when it would be ready for use. We find a parallel at the time of the creation of the universe. During six days of creative activity, G-d created all the individual parts and sections of the universe. On the seventh day though, the Torah says "heaven and earth had been completed," this referred only to its constituent parts, not to the whole. Subsequently, "G-d completed on that day," something which follows the statement of "and the heavens and the earth had been completed." Similarly, we find in connection with the completion of the work of the tabernacle "all the work on the tabernacle had been completed," whereas afterwards we read "Moses erected it." Most of this has been explained in chapter four. Midrash Tanchuma points out many parallel expressions employed by the Torah both during creation and during construction of the tabernacle. The common denominator is that the former is a macrocosm whereas the latter is a microcosm designed to mirror the universe. If Moses had been unaware that his face emitted rays, and the fact that he alone could erect the tabernacle is remarkable, it reflects the idea that or with the letter ayin and with the letter aleph can be used interchangeably. The Divine, inner light illuminating the soul of Moses, was visible in the form of his skin giving off a glow, sending out rays.

18. _.56.1.9

    When our sages warn that we should not assume that Moses had erected the tabernacle by his own strength and ability, they imply that it required all the five ingredients that can contribute to the successful execution of a project.

19. _.56.1.10

    They are: 1) Favourable external conditions, commonly called mazzal) Expertise by those engaged in the project. 3) Command of the theory underlying the project. 4) Divine assistance in overcoming human inadequacy. 5) Outstanding moral and intellectual stature, which freely translated means "Divine inspiration." Since Moses possessed all these qualities, even if he was deemed to have erected the tabernacle, "the tabernacle was erected by itself," i.e. no human effort by itself would have sufficed, not even that of Moses.

20. _.57.1.2

    Rabbi Berechya in the name of Rabbi Ezra, explains the first verse in the book of Leviticus in Vayikrah Rabbah 7 by means of a parable. "Someone amongst you who wishes to offer a sacrifice etc." A king had two pastry cooks. The first one prepared a pastry for him which the king ate and enjoyed. The second one prepared a pastry for him also, and the king also ate that pastry and enjoyed it. It was impossible to tell which pastry the king had enjoyed more until the king asked the second pastry cook to prepare another pastry for him like the first one he had prepared for the king. We observe that Noach had offered a sacrifice to G'd which G'd had enjoyed. (Genesis 8,20-21 "He savoured the sweet odour") Israel too was asked to offer sacrifices on its holy days. (Numbers 28,4, "you shall observe to do, each day at its appointed time") Only when Moses commanded the Jewish people (Leviticus 6,2) "this is the instruction concerning the total offering"), did we find out that G'd preferred our offerings, as stated by the prophet Maleachi. (Maleachi 3,4, "and the gift offering of Yehudah and Jerusalem will be pleasing to G'd as in the days of old, in former times") "The days of old," refers to the time of Moses, and the "former times," refers to the years of Solomon. An alternative interpretation is that "the days of old," refers to Noach's offering, as Isaiah says in Isaiah 54,4, "this is like the waters of Noach for Me." The "former times" would then refer to the time of Abel, when idolatry was as yet unknown.

21. _.57.1.3

    Whenever the matter of animal sacrifices is discussed, there are some difficult questions that cannot be ignored. 1) Is it not unavoidable that sacrifices will be viewed as attempts to bribe G'd to forego the anger caused Him by the sinner who offers the sacrifice? 2) Does it not seem that the donor tries to placate G'd just as he would attempt to placate a mere mortal ruler, thereby insulting G'd, reducing His stature? 3) If, on the other hand, the offering is in the nature of a pennance, payment for trespass from which G'd receives no more benefit than from say the imposition of corporal punishment on the sinner, what good is it? 4) Is the purpose of the sacrifices perhaps merely to provide the priests with a livelihood, or simply the destruction of the animals that are being offered up? It is clearly erroneous to view the offerings as an attempt to restore the perfection or wholeness of G'd by means of a sacrifice that would complement something incomplete in Him. In Psalms 50, 11-13, "I will not accept bullocks from you, since all the animal kingdom is Mine; if I were hungry, would I have to call you? After all, the whole universe belongs to Me." Isaiah 43,24, states this even more succinctly. "You have not bought for Me fragrant reeds with money..nor have you tired yourself out on My behalf. You have not brought Me the lambs of your total offerings, not honoured Me with your meat offerings;..you have not bought Me with your money! I, I forgive you for MY sake!" Clearly, what the prophet stresses is that none of the things Israel did to placate G'd or bribe Him, has had the slightest impact on the well being of G'd Himself. G'd forgives for His own sake. He emphasizes that there is no other consideration, repeats His name when He proclaims that He dispenses forgiveness, in order to stress that there is no personal benefit involved. There is no aspect of G'd that can be enhanced by the gift of man. If there were a price tag on forgiveness, it would have to be set in motion through mutual action. Since however, there is no exchange of values for the forgiveness, it occurs only through "My righteousness." "I will not remember your sins," so as not to shame you. However, "remind Me of them," you tell of them, so that you can become righteous. (Isaiah 43,26) It is evident that the prophet endeavours to squash the foolish notion of "our contribution" in the matter of sacrifices. It is noteworthy that the term avodah, service, is not used in the Torah concerning offerings that are brought on the altar in order to obtain forgiveness. When Moses did use that term when talking to Pharaoh, (Exodus 10,26) "we do not know what we will serve the Lord," he simply used terminology familiar to Pharaoh. It is the manner of pagans to employ the term avodah for their religious observances. (Deut. 13,7) "Let us go and serve other deities." We find a similar warning (Deut 12,30) "lest you inquire into their deities, saying," how do these nations serve their deities?" The Torah in that instance, continues "do not do thus, for the Lord your G'd etc.," meaning that worship of the G'd of Israel is not of that order. Positive proof that worship of our G'd is of a totally different calibre, is the fact that "they burn their own children in fire to their deities," something the G'd of Israel has described as an abomination. True worship of G'd consists of obeying His commandments, neither adding nor subtracting therefrom. (Deut. 13, 1.) When referring to that kind of worship, the Torah does not shrink from employing the term avodah as in Deut. 10, 12, or Exodus 23,25, and other places. In all matters of piety of the heart, performance of good deeds, the benefit that accrues to the practitioner is stressed. (Deut. 10, 13) "for your own good." "Serving" is for our benefit, not G'ds. It is significant that the rasha, wicked person quoted in Parshat Bo, describes the Passover ceremonial as an avodah, service, stressing "what is in it for you?" It is precisely this attitude to sacrificial service that needs to be debunked. Similarly, the second possible rationale suggested for the requirement of sacrifice, namely atonement, cannot be true. It is obvious that the object used for atonement would have to be in some value relationship to the subject against whom the sin had been committed. Since it is imposible to relate to the Creator in this fashion, the idea of sacrifice sufficing as an act of compensation is quite erroneous. This is what the High Priest Eli (Samuel 1,2,23-24) tells his sons when he remonstrates with them. He had heard that they had acted improperly. "When man sins against man, the judge can mediate and determine fair compensation; but when man sins against G'd, who can determine the amount of compensation due to G'd?" How will one know that one had atoned adequately? Similarly, Michah 6,7, calls out: "Does the Lord want thousands of rams, tens of thousands rivers of oil?" The meaning is "could even the greatest amount of sacrificial animals compensate for the iniquity committed?" Obviously then, the idea of compensation is not the rationale for sacrificial rites. Regarding the third possibility mentioned, that the priests should be provided with a livelihood, the many offerings which are completely burned up, demonstrate that this could not have been the thought behind this legislation. Moreover, the idea that priests should be happy to consume the proceeds of man's sins, that their livelihood would improve in direct ratio to the number of sins committed by their brethren, could hardly be pleasing in the eyes of G'd. The fourth possibility mentioned, the wanton destruction of part of the animal kingdom is also difficult to accept as a possible motivation behind this legislation.

22. _.57.1.4

    In addition, the fact that the Torah provides animal sacrifice as a means of atonement primarily for unintentionally committed misdemeanours, is difficult to understand for two reasons. The majority of people sin due to a lack of self control, but knowingly. It would seem logical therefore to legislate an atonement procedure for that majority. Secondly, the shogeg, unintentional sinner, did not really sin, and therefore, should the one who lacks the proper remorse bring the sacrifice, instead of the one who will at least feel properly guilty and can be presumed to be remorseful?

23. _.57.1.5

    It is fair to assume therefore, that the animal sacrifice is required from the unintentional sinner because of what this does for him, not because of what it does for G'd. If the sacrifice does not reflect the respective value of the sinner and the one sinned against, it demonstrates the extent of G'ds kindness. He does not slam the door in the face of the repentant and the remorseful. The whole legislation demonstrates that G'd has waived some of His claims on man, when it comes to the way He deals with His chosen people. This principle has been dealt with in chapter forty eight.

24. _.57.1.6

    The Yalkut Shimoni on Ezekiel item 358, relates the following: "They asked 'wisdom' what is a suitable punishment for the sinner? 'Wisdom' replied "evil will pursue the sinners." (Proverbs 13,21) When they asked 'prophecy' the same question, 'prophecy' replied "the person who sins will die” (Ezekiel 18,4) When the asked ‘Torah', the answer was “he will bring an offering and obtain forgiveness." When they asked G'd, G'd said “let him repent and confess and he will obtain atonement,” as we know from Hoseah 14,2, "take with you words and return to the Lord” This is also the meaning of the verse in Psalms 25,8, “good and upright is the Lord, therefore He instructs the sinners in the path of life.” It is apparent that the sages wished to explain the four approaches possible to the problem of sin. Human 'wisdom' perceives it as related to the inadequacy of the sinner on the one hand, and the overpowering stature of the One sinned against on the other. Since the sinner is so lacking in worth, once he has sinned, he is perceived as automatically and irreversibly pursued by the evil that his sin has evoked. Rehabilitation is not conceived possible, because of the unbridgeable chasm between puny man and the great Lawgiver and Creator. Therefore, the decree in Samuel I- 2,31-33, envisioning the irreversible punishment that the house of Eli would become victim of. The next point of view, espoused by 'prophecy', incorporates an understanding of the human personality based on revelation, and appreciates that each individual is to be judged on his own merits without setting in motion a chain reaction of punishments involving untold future generations. Thus 'prophecy' sees the death of the sinner himself as the fitting punishment for his inadequacies. Similarly, Solomon says (Kohelet 3,8) "there is one that is alone, without a second one, he has neither son nor brother." It is to this statement that 'prophecy' referred, when it said that the sinner alone would die, neither his son or brother will have to bear the burden of the sin of the sinner. Compare Ezekiel 18,4. The father/son relationship between G'd and His people is stronger than the father/son relationship between biological fathers and their sons, because G'd is our common Father. "You are sons to the Lord your G'd." (Deut 14,1) G'd can restrict punishment to each individual nefesh, personality, not as human wisdom would assume, that all punishment would ipso facto involve also subsequent generations of the sinner. (Chapter 99 will deal in greater detail with the obligations of the subsequent generations to embrace Sinaitic laws.) This then is the answer of 'prophecy', inasmuch as it represents the highest spiritual and intellectual level man is able to attain on his own. However, considering that the study of Torah broadens man's horizon, the additional insight gained by study of Torah produces the answer "let him bring a sacrifice and atone," to our original question. All the Rishonim agree that this recipe for obtaining forgiveness will alert man to the nature and severity of the sin, since when he sees what happens to the animal, he will say to himself "here but for the grace of G'd, go I. "He will thus acquire a deeper reverence for G'd and His commandments. We observe how Cain, when G'd told him "the voice of your brother's blood cries out to Me," and the punishment decreed, (Genesis 4,11-13) became aware of the vastness of sin, until he himself admitted "my sin is too great to bear." Due to the severe nature of the punishment, the true nature of the sin is sometimes revealed to the sinner. Just as the drunkard who enters a bar and gets drunk, does not realise what is wrong with him until he is asked to pay for what he has consumed, so the sinner. Solomon, in Proverbs 23,31, puts it this way: "when he sets his eyes on the cup," i.e. when he drinks only what he can afford, instead of falling victim to the allure of the wine's colour," only then can he walk upright." The reason that the animal sacrifice does not normally atone for intentional sins, is twofold. 1) Not to advertise that people who enjoy good reputations are capable of forgetting their duties to such an extent that they sin deliberately. 2) When a superior being, one that possesses the gift of speech, sins, it can hardly expect that an inarticulate animal or worse, some lifeless object, could serve as compensation, atonement for his sin. Only the sinner himself can properly be sacrificed on the altar through repentance, fasting, confession, suffering and the performance of good deeds, as expressed by Isaiah 58. In that chapter, Isaiah describes the nature of a meaningful fast day. Michah,6,7, offers scathing criticism of those who are content to offer up their firstborn in atonement for their sins, when nothing less than their own lives would really be capable of atoning for them. Only the sinner's complete transformation can achieve atonement. Our sages also said concerning the house of Eli, that not sacrifices but only Torah and good deeds could bring about their rehabilitation. (Rosh Hashanah 18) When the fourth example of the Yalkut quoted earlier has G'd saying "let the sinner repent," that refers to the sinner who has sinned knowingly. Since G'd, in His goodness desires the rehabilitation of the sinner, He shows them the way. The precise nature of teshuvah, repentance is discussed further in chapter 100. The type of sacrifice involving atonement is not too difficult to understand then, whereas a second category including peace offerings, vows, gifts etc. is much more difficult to understand. In fact, they are so difficult to comprehend, that Maimonides in chapter 32 third part of his Moreh, writes that the purpose of these sacrifices is sublimation. We are to dedicate them to G'd rather than to a lesser deity, as had been commonplace among the pagans. According to Maimonides, none of these sacrifices has intrinsic value. Maimonides' attitude on these matters has been severely criticised by many scholars including Nachmanides, as is well known. All the arguments offered by those scholars were not new to Maimonides, of course. Nonetheless we find his commentary inadequate. The same applies to the arguments of Yehudah Halevi in the Kuzari. (I have omitted the author's detailed rebuttal of Maimonides' arguments as well as his rebuttal of Yehudah Halevi's arguments. Ed.) We prefer to think that animal sacrifices, even when not for the purpose of atonement, help man to perfect himself through appreciation of the the why, where, how and what he is instructed to offer. In other words, there is a symbolism in the legislation pertaining to each category of sacrifice. Also the nation as a whole is strengthened by the offerings of the communally paid for sacrifices prescribed in the Torah. Just as the nefesh chayah, "soul" of man is distinct from his "physical life force," so is the food required for the former distinct from the food required by the latter. The former derives its sustenance from matters spiritual, as shown by Moses who went without food or drink for forty days at a time while on Mount Sinai on three separate occasions. Every se-udat mitzvah, a meal occasioned by a mitzvah celebration, contains elements designed to fortify our "soul," feeding the spiritual part of us from the sanctified portions of such a meal. The partaking of food primarily designed for our bodily needs, also strengthens the spiritual part of us if the circumstances and intent causing such food to be consumed are related to the performance of G'ds will. If we eat-for instance- in order to be better able to serve G'd, then our "soul" automatically derives sustenance from such eating. (see Proverbs 23,1-3. Compare also chapter thirty two.) The presence of G'd is assured not because we feed the shechinah, but because through our proper intent and care when offering sacrifices (i.e. feeding our national "soul") we become fit for the shechinah to continue to reside near us. This is the rey-ach nicho-ach lashem, the sweet smelling odour to G'd, that results whenever "My will" is done. (see Sifrey on Parshat Pinchas.) Since the Torah does not state the reasons explicitly, the first of the princes (Numbers 7) was especially complimented on having perceived some of the functions of the sacrifices on his own. (compare Midrash Rabbah Numbers 17 "Rabbi Pinchas ben Yair said etc.")

25. _.57.1.7

    In section 12, the Midrash states that Moses was afraid at the time that the holy spirit would depart from him and be transferred to the princes. G'd said to Moses "take it from them," i.e. accept it from them (Numbers 7,5) G'd said to Moses: "If I had told them to bring it, I would have told you to tell them. But, since the idea originated with them, I am telling you to accept these offerings, since the princes divined My will." Our rabbis wish to teach us from all this that it behooves us to try and emulate the princes. This is also what prompts Rashi in the name of Rabbi Moshe Hadarshan to explain the significance of each part of these offerings.

26. _.57.1.8

    Since the construction of the tabernacle is viewed by our sages as a microcosm incorporating all the creative endeavours employed in creation, the offerings of the princes fittingly represent and testify to the Creator and His hashgachah, supervision of our personal fates, ever since the days of creation. The collective total of these offerings,- and this was possible only if all the princes offered identical offerings-, represented the twelve horoscopes, six opposite the other six. (6 covered wagons and 6 covered wagons, chapter seven verse 3) The silver bowl in its globular shape represented the earth, the whitish colour of silver suggesting the moon. The twelve oxen, which with the wagons would transport the tabernacle, would ensure the continuity of the Divine Presence here on earth, just as the signs of the zodiac are the instruments of ongoing existence of our universe. The fact that although the sacrifice of Nachshon ben Aminadav was the first one of the princes, his is the only one described as "and this was his offering," indicates how closely connected all the twelve offerings were, though each prince brought his own offering independent of any outside instructions. The mizrak kessef, silver bowl, although not much more than half the weight of the silver dish ka-arat kessef, represents man, the relatively puny creature, who was "thrown into the universe" once he had been equipped with his soul, according to the idiom of our sages. (Sanhedrin 38) The word kessef in this connection means the "constant striving" needed by man to achieve his goal here on earth. (as in Genesis 31.30 et al.) The seventy shekel of its weight symbolises man's average lifespan. This number also equals the numerical value of the letter ay in, which is the organ man does most of his striving and desiring with. It is worth the least of the silver and gold vessels offered, reminding us of the relatively inconsequential value of all earthly possessions coveted by our eyes. "Both full of fine flour etc," both the earth whose purpose is to be filled with the glory of the Creator, and man of whom it is written "I will fill him with Divine spirit," are the solet, fine flour referred to in this offering. (Exodus 35,31, "I will fill him with the spirit of the Lord") "Each spoon ten shekel worth of gold, filled with incense," refers to the nachat ruach, Divine spirit come to rest, bestowed upon this earth, namely the soul descended through the ten layers of purely spiritual worlds. (the ten sefirot, as described in the Midrash on Shir Hashirim) "One young bullock." The number 1 symbolises the unique force within the body of man called intellect, which is the most respected of human attributes, just as the bull is the most honoured of all the animals that are suitable as sacrifices on the altar. Ben bakar from the root "to criticise," discern, capable of discernment. It is the task of man to distinguish between good and bad, truth and faslehood. Ayil echad, recalls the forces set in motion through action, through deeds, eyl means constructively powerful. Kevess echad, represents simply the life force, just as at life's beginning man is concerned only with the acquisition of survival techniques such as food and drink. Afterwards he concerns himself with more sophisticated tasks. Then the se-ir izzim, the he-goat begins to play a role. The yetzer hara symbolized by the he-goat, the force responsible for sin in man, even though an integral part of man himself, usually appears as a separate entity. U-lezevach hashlamim, bakar shenayim, for the peace offering two oxen, though bakar represents intellect, a unique phenomenon, the practical manifestation of intellect is observed both in theoretical and practical reason. Therefore, we need bakar shenayim, two of them. The five eylim and five atudim represent the five respective attributes of theoretical and practical reason, by means of which perception takes place. The latter five, the "senses" are quasi automatic functions that continue uninterruptedly unless disturbed by outside forces. Since all the above symbolise what is necessary in order to achieve man's ultimate purpose and perfection, the sacrifice is named that of Nachshon, whose entire purpose in life had been to achieve kirvat hashem, proximity to G'd who had created him and helped imbue him with striving.

27. _.57.1.9

    After these observations, we are entitled to view the sacrifices of the forefathers and kings of Israel in a similar light. All the sacrifices mentioned in the Torah,-other than those connected with atonement- express the desire of the donor to achieve a closeness with G'd. Creatures who have attained the level of articulate beings, are entitled to offer these animal sacrifices to G'd, and to perfect themselves by a variety of sacrificial rites so that their minds will be cleansed and their souls will be purified from slag. This is what our sages mean (Tossaphot Menachot 130 commencing with the word 'Michael') that the angel Michael, minister of the Interior at the celestial Court, presents the souls of the Just before the Almighty on the celestial altar. The consecration offering, which Aaron and his sons were commanded to bring, to enable them from then on to perform "holy service," combined the ingredients needed for atonement, namely the he-goat as well as the ram for the total offering. This was to express the priest's desire to achieve closeness with G'd. Add to that the commandment to the whole nation to bring offerings since "today the glory of G'd will appear," (Leviticus 9,4) and it is clear that when both considerations are present during the presentation of the sacrifices, the presence of the shechinah can be attained. Sometimes, due to faulty kavanot, thoughts or objectives, such a presence does not result. Only fools rush in without proper preparation. (Kohelet 4,17) Manoach, (Judges 13,15) invited the angel as if he were a human being to a meal on the one hand, and suggested that the nature of that meal be an offering. This combination of valid and invalid intent voids the value of the offering. The angel was quick to respond "if it is a meal, I cannot eat it, since angels do not eat in that sense of the word; if however, it is an offering, it should be addressed to G'd and to no one else." (compare Exodus 22,19, "he who sacrifices to elohim, another deity, even an agent of G'd, will be destroyed; only to the Lord exclusively.") It is interesting that in Parshat Ha-azinu, when quoting the sayings of our enemies. (Deut. 32,37-39) G'd responds to the erroneous impression of the gentiles that offerings are accepted by intermediaries, i.e. "elohim,” by saying "I, I am He." This means that there is no other elohim, agent with Me. The offerings must be addressed to "My holy name only."

28. _.57.1.10

    The Midrash Ne-elam in Parshat Bereshit, tells of a man who proclaimed that a son to be born should be "holy" to elokim. Thereupon Rabbi Chiya excommunicated him. When asked what wrong a man had done who sanctified his son to G'd, (similar to Hannah, mother of the prophet Samuel), his reply was that he had used the term a-d-o-na-y. Hannah's vow (Samuel I 1,11) is quoted there as the correct formula to use. The ignorance of Manoach, who was at that moment unaware that the messenger had been an angel of G'd, makes his behaviour appear even further removed from the traditional Jewish attitude to korban, sacrifice. He appears to have laboured under the delusion that Nebuchadnezzar laboured under. (Daniel 2,46.) The latter had prostrated himself in front of Daniel, and ordered a variety of of sacrifices to be offered to Daniel, treating him as the deputy of G'd. The angel's instructions to Manoach resulted in Manoach going about the sacrifice in the correct manner, as a result of which he became aware of the true identity of the messenger. Thus the proper attitude in offering sacrifices is seen to result in greater insights and greater proximity to the shechinah. A similar result occurred with Gideon. (Judges chapter 6) He too had been unaware of the true nature of who had addressed him. First, Gideon had thought that he had been talking to a prophet, i.e. a human being. When he sought reassurance that he was in fact being addressed by a Divine being, and asked for an opportunity to offer a sacrifice, the angel agreed to wait for his return, and then instructed him how to proceed with the offering. His realisation that he had been able to communicate with a Divine being, came as a result of his having offered a sacrifice in the correct manner, with the proper intent. If the accent in discussing korbanot, sacrifices, is on the free will type of offering, the reason is that though also the sin offering is acceptable, and contributes to our coming closer to G'd, it is preferable not to have to sin, than to have to atone for the sin through repentance and sacrifice. Even the objective of closeness to G'd, can be attained preferably without having to resort to sacrifice. The prophet Jeremiah (Jeremiah chapter 7) does not tire of stressing that G'd had never demanded sacrifices from the forefathers, nor even at the time of the Exodus. Rather, what G'd had demanded was obedience. There are numerous statements in the Bible along those lines. The important thing is that once used, the institution of sacrifice must not be abused, since this would be conterproductive, would thwart its objectives. The reason that non domesticated animals are not suitable for sacrifices, may be that all wildlife is ownerless, i.e. belongs directly to G'd, as opposed to domesticated animals to which man has established a claim of ownership. Presenting wildlife as an offering would not be giving to G'd of oneself, of one's own. However, G'd says (Psalm 50,9) that if it were a question of "My needs," "I would not even accept a domestic animal from your house, since I own all of them too. The reason that I accept korban is merely that I wish to acknowledge your wish to express gratitude or let you pay your vows to Me." (see verse 14 there) The first kind of offering, Todah, connected with the word viduy, confession, is usually motivated by some occurrence as described in verse 15, "a day of trouble"; "your vows," usually is preventative. You make vows in order to ward off untoward occurrences. Verses fourteen and fifteen are closely interrelated then.

29. _.57.1.11

    Of these two kinds of offerings, the freewill offering is more pleasing, as alluded to in the Midrash quoted at the opening of this chapter. Noach thanked G'd for having saved him. This is like when we recite the benediction hagomel, after having been bypassed by some danger. We are told that Noach had found favour in the eyes of G'd, but G'd had not found favour. Ezekiel 14,14, tells us that even if the generation that he describes would have a Noach amongst them, none would be saved. (Bereshit Rabbah 31) Noach's offering insured though that a repetition of the deluge would never recur, since he had found the key to atonement for all future generations by offering this thanksgiving offering. It was the people of Israel however, who were commanded to offer the daily offerings, (Numbers chapter 28 ) the objective being le-hakriv lee "to achieve closeness with Me,” something that goes beyond the mere attainment of atonement. It is this closeness that the prophet in our opening Midrash envisions. The proliferation of sacrifices in the days of Solomon was pleasing to G'd, since those sacrifices represented the desire to achieve close communion with G'd. The reason that the "days of Noach" are mentioned in the same breath, is to show that also that type of offering is acceptable. The reason that these daily communal offerings of the Jewish people are primarily referred to as olah, is that they are me-ulleh, the highest, most advanced form of offering that exists. If the prophet also mentions ki-yemey olam, a reference to the dawn of history, he may refer to the pleasing aspects of the sacrifice brought by Hevel, who was certainly not inspired by the need for atonement, sin not having been part of man's general lifestyle in those days. If G'd, on the other hand, rejected the offering of Kayin, this proves that the latter's motivation had been of a lower order. The priests, as the recipients of part of the offerimgs, are the intermediaries, conduits between man and his Creator. The killing of the animal in the sanctuary or at least on consecrated ground, is a natural pre-condition for achieving closeness with G'd. The various paragraphs seem to follow one another in a natural order. The Torah starts with the olah, representing what man, at his noblest, altruistic intention wishes to offer, i.e. himself. The Torah emphasises "from you an offering," not "an offering from you." This alludes to the underlying intention. Though the actual sacrifice consists of sheep or cattle, it will be considered as if you had offered yourself. There follow the various regulations connected with the olah offering. We are told which animals are suitable, plus the fact that a "gift offering" must accompany such an olah. This latter is to be of the finest grade of flour etc This too has nothing to do with sin. Next comes the "peace offering," the motivation for which is also unrelated to sin. Only after the list of the most pleasing kinds of offerings has been exhausted, does the Torah list the various sin offerings, whose purpose is the expiation of wrongdoing, though they expiate in the main for unintentional wrongdoing. Here the order commences with a sin committed by the High Priest, followed by the sacrifice appropriate for the error committed by the entire nation. This is to show that the same par, bull, that fulfils the function of expiating for the representative of the nation, also performs that function for ordinary citizens. This is followed by the he-goat which serves as sin offering from the Prince, the temporal authority, followed by the same he- goat serving a sin offering for sins by ordinary individuals. Next we have the regulations about the asham, a sin offering covering a different type of sin. The common denominator of all these sacrifices is the need for semichah, the placing of the sinner's hands and weight on the respective animal prior to its being slaughtered. In this way, the "greatness," i.e. the attributes of man are transferred to the animal. We find that once Moses had placed his hands on Joshua, (Deut. 34,9) the people listened to Joshua, authority had been transferred. Just as power, authority, can be transferred by this means, one's weaknesses and inadequacies can be transferred in a like manner. Aaron is commanded to place his hands on the scapegoat, and immediately afterwards the Torah tells us that the second he-goat carried all the guilts of the Jewish people. (Leviticus chapter 16) Obviously, this was not part of the act of sacrifice, since the he-goat, scapegoat, was not offered on the altar, but consigned to death in wild unfriendly country. The semichah declaration indicates that the donor fulfils the details of the instructions connected with the sacrificial rite, is free from blemish in this respect. We find that those who had overheard the blasphemer, (Leviticus 24,13-14) had to place their hands on him prior to his execution, thus transferring any guilt from them to him. They are stating symbolically "your blood is on your own head, not on ours." Since the sacrifice is to atone for unintentional sins, the donor must recite "I did not knowingly commit the sin for which this animal is to expiate." After the Torah has dealt with the purpose of each individual sacrifice, it turns its attention to what parts of the animal can serve as compensation for the priest who is charged with performing the sacrificial service.

30. _.57.1.12

    Again, the Torah starts with the olah, the sacrifice most acceptable to the Lord Of this sacrifice, only the skin and hair of the animal is designated for use by the priest. This is in return for his labour in connection with the service involved. (Levitcus 7,8) Details of the other sacrifices follow in their respective order. It is worth noting that the expression "as sweet smelling odour,” is reserved for the olah type of sacrifices. The other sacrifices are described as ve-chipper, they will atone. Beyond that they are not really desirable from G'ds point of view.

31. _.58.1.2

    "This is the Torah of the total offering."

32. _.58.1.3

    The Talmud, Berachot 16, quotes Rabbi Eleazar as interpreting the verse "so that I will bless You through my life; in Your name shall I lift up my hands" (Psalms 63,5) as meaning that the words "I will bless You," refer to recital of the keriyat shema, whereas the words "I will lift up my hands in Your name" refer to the daily prayers. Concerning anyone who does so regularly, the next verse continues "then my soul shall be satisfied as with fat and marrow;" not only that, but such persons will inherit two worlds, the present one and the world to come, since the verse concludes "my mouth will praise Your mighty acts with joyous lips."

33. _.58.1.4

    Reason is distinct from will in that it strives to imbue any action with purpose and make it failsafe. Aristotele, in chapter six of his book of ethics states that reason does not initiate any action that is not of benefit to its subject. Man's activities can be divided into four categories, a) Foolish actions; B) actions designed to gratify some urge, but devoid of moral purpose. C) Futile actions, actions that are not capable of achieving their purpose. D) Actions motivated by the desire to achieve meaningful constructive results. Maimonides in Moreh Nevuchim, expresses this somewhat differently. There are meaningless actions, (hevel, vain) and meaningful actions. The latter fall into two categories, depending on whether they are motivated by constructive or destructive considerations. The former originate with our reason, the latter with our will and its shortcomings. The actions originating with our reason employ will-power merely for execution of a purpose initiated by our intellect. Freedom of choice, or moral choice, was granted man so that he can use it in combination with his reason. On the other hand, man is to avoid actions that are initiated by will without benefit of reason. Whenever we fail to apply these criteria in planning our actions, we have reason to join the prophet Isaiah when he exclaims "I have toiled in vain, and wasted my strength; yet my judgment is with the Lord, my deeds with G'd." (Isaiah 49,4) The prophet describes his efforts as failures because he has not seen them crowned with success. He knows however, that sooner or later, G'd will cause his efforts to be crowned with success. All G'ds actions are based on reason; this is the meaning of Deut. 32,4, "the Rock, His work is perfect, for all His ways are justice." Historians may argue that even G'ds plans went awry when He commanded animal sacrifices as a means to sublimate existing idolatrous practices. History shows that in time, G'd needed the prophets to rebuke the people for the erroneous concepts they entertained about the meaning of the sacrifices. Eventually, the very sanctuary, the site of the sacrifices, had to be destroyed. According to Maimonides then, G'ds plans had misfired. Also, according to our own view that the sacrificial rites were designed to achieve a closeness with G'd, such a goal has evidently not been achieved. The answer to the problem lies in the fact that G'ds plans are long range and comprehensive on the one hand, and tactical, of limited duration on the other hand. The thought that G'ds long term objectives would fail to be realised is intolerable; on the other hand, short term objectives need not be realised. Even a short term objective need not be considered as having failed, when the lesson it was supposed to have taught is absorbed by a change of our lifestyle. If, say, sacrifices were meant to bring man closer to G'd through his having offered himself vicariously through the animal, then a lifestyle which includes three daily prayer sessions certainly can be said to be evidence that man has come closer to G'd, views Him as the source of all he strives for. Even while the temple had still been standing, sacrifice had been accompanied by prayer. Representatives of all the tribes were always present in Jerusalem to do this. Our sages in Chagigah 21, go so far as to say that had it not been for the ma-amadot, these Israelites who prayed when the sacrifices were being offered, heaven and earth would long since have ceased to exist. The prophet Hoseah exhorts us to employ "words" to achieve what the bulls had been meant to atone for. (Hoseah 14,3) We see therefore, that prayer is a very effective method of getting closer to G'd. Chapter two in Jeremiah makes it clear that the iniquities he talks of include those committed knowingly, purposely. All of these are covered by Hoseah's appeal "take words with you and do pennance." If prayer, coupled with proper remorse, of course, can atone for such sins, something which sacrifices never could, then prayer is a more powerful tool to achieve closeness with G'd. Prayer never ceased to be effective, whereas sacrifices, in order to achieve their purpose had to meet many pre-conditions. Not the least of these pre-conditions was the existence of a sanctuary at a site approved by G'd. In Psalms 51,17-20, David describes the mental state of man necessary in order that he may achieve what cannot be achieved in any other way today, due to the absence of sacrifices. When David says of G'd "for You do not wish a sacrifice," this is to be understood like "when you happen to encounter a bird's nest etc." (Deut 22,6), or "when you build a new house," (Deut 22,8) These situations are not bound to occur. The Torah addresses itself to circumstances that may or may not occur. David too means that if an occasion arises when sacrifice seems called for, but cannot be offered due to the absence of a temple, then G'd will not insist on a sacrifice if the sinner is humble and of contrite heart. Nonetheless, we pray urgently for His return to Zion and the restoration of sacrificial service.

34. _.58.1.5

    Because prayer is service of the heart, we have connected the chapter on prayer with the chapter on the olah, total offering. As an olah is an offering that "rises" towards G'd in its entirety, since the whole of the animal is being offered on the altar, so is prayer an offering of the heart which rises toward Heaven in its entirety. When our sages describe prayer without concentrating on its meaning, as being comparable to a body without soul, they mean that the warmth of feeling generated by genuine prayer, parallels the ongoing fire on the altar that burns the olah. In Vayikra Rabbah 7, Rabbi Pinchas notes that the Torah does not describe the fire on the altar as being "on" the altar. The Torah does not require that the "fire on the altar burn on it," rather it does say “aysh hamizbeach tukad bo," the fire on the altar shall burn within it, meaning that the entire altar should be permeated by it. (Leviticus 6,2) So our hearts are to be permeated by the outpouring of our prayers. The Talmud Berachot 32, tells us that we have to arrange the praise of the Lord before proceeding with voicing our requests from Him. Since the requests concern mostly our temporal needs, our sages (Shabbat 10) describe the supplicant as someone who temporarily abandons his concern with the values of the world to come, in favour of the mundane needs of this world he lives in at the time. If this is so, the opinion held by many, (including Maimonides chapter one hilchot tefillah ) which claims that prayer has been legislated by the Torah, is hard to understand. If the purpose of prayer would be exhausted by our asking for our needs, why should it matter to G'd whether we ask for them or not? We should be entitled to forego the opportunity to ask G'd for His kindness, assistance, etc. However, just as we have described the institution of sacrifice as designed to arouse certain emotions within us which will bring us closer to G'd, so prayer, by means of the trust we express when we ask Him for our needs, will bring us closer to Him. The conviction that He cares, that His Providence watches over us, all this helps to strengthen the existing ties between us and the Creator. The thanks we express for what He has done for us and for others, all help to cement our relationship with hashem. The early Chassidim, men of piety and devoutness, are described by the Talmud Berachot 32, as having prepared for prayer an hour ahead of time, and as having spent another hour winding down from the spiritual high achieved during prayer, before returning to the mundane tasks in their lives. Actually, they did exactly what our sages have since built into the formal liturgy that we follow nowadays. The hymns of praise, keriyat shema, are our introduction and preparation for prayer, i.e. the part during which we voice our requests. On the other hand, we are told that he who fails to enunciate the keriyat shema audibly, has failed in his purpose, since the praise of G'd and our assuming the yoke of Heaven are to be made known to our fellow men. On the other hand, he who raises his voice during the supplication part of the prayer service, is described as lacking in faith, as a prophet of the ido Baal. (Berachot 24) Channah already demonstrated that requests need not be aired audibly. If the High Priest Eli considered her as a drunken woman, this was not because she did not raise her voice in prayer, but because she had chosen a time of day he did not consider suitable for offering up prayer. (compare Samuel I chapter 1) He watched her closely to find out what she had to say to him, since most other women milling around the entrance of the tabernacle always spoke to him. Understanding Eli's error, she told him that her remarks were addressed to Him who does not need audible expression of her words in order to be able to hear and understand them. Since Channah came to the tabernacle after having dined, it was natural for Eli to have misconstrued her purpose, and to have judged same by outward appearances. In fact, one must not raise one's voice, so as not to create the impression that one considers G'd hard of hearing. When Ishmael was close to death, (Genesis 21,17) G'd considered his state of being "as he was then," not the loudness of his prayers. The mental anguish that he was suffering at that moment was the decisive element that led to his rescue. On the other hand, all those paragraphs in the liturgy that teach us knowledge and comprehension have to be recited aloud. "Hear O Israel!"- these words we have to hear with our own ears; they are directed both at ourselves and at our fellow Jews.

35. _.58.1.15

    Prayer requires a sense of remorse at the very outset, else it would be presumptious to expect a response to it. When Solomon dedicated the temple, he stipulated that those who would come to pray there due to a variety of communal problems, would first have to repent, before they could expect G'd to respond to their entreaties. (Kings I 8,33). It is clear that the cause of any trouble Israel would find itself in, would be their sins. Therefore, before their troubles could be removed, the cause would have to be eliminated. This involves confession, repentance and a resolution not to sin again. Contrary to popular belief that raising one's voice in fasting and prayer is designed to make Him listen, we are to pray and fast so that we will listen to Him. (see our commentary on Isaiah chapter 58 in chapter 63 Akeydah) Since the commandment of prayer embraces all aspects of our relationship with G'd, it is easily the most comprehensive of mitzvot. Sometimes, G'd may cause calamitous events to threaten our existence so as to prompt us to engage in prayer and thus fulfil that mitzvah .This will cause such prayer to be spontaneous, not merely a formula that is being recited day in day out. On such occasions entreaties are permitted even on the Sabbath, when supplication is normally prohibited. (Taanit 19) Normally, it is our very silence that makes our Sabbath observance praiseworthy. (silence= abstaining from formulating requests.)

36. _.58.1.16

    Shemot Rabbah 21 on Beshalach, states that human beings cannot judge their fellow men until they have listened to the arguments of either litigant. Not so the Almighty. Of Him it is said (Isaiah 65,24) "before they will call out, I shall respond; while they are still talking, I will already listen." This is also what G'd had said to Moses at the sea of reeds: "Why are you crying out to Me?" The purpose of prayer is not to inform G'd of our problems, but to prepare our hearts, to improve our ways before Him. Not sack and ashes cause our prayers to be heard, but repentance and good’ deeds. As the prophet Yoel proclaimed (Yoel 2,13) "tear out your hearts, not your clothes, and return to the Lord." Anyone who is not conscious of this requirement is as if he appeared before G'd offering counterfeit money. As David says in Psalms 145,18, "the Lord is close to all who call upon Him in truth." The substance of our daily prayers the amidah, the eighteen benedictions, is patterned after the Priestly blessings. There are three opening paragraphs, three closing paragraphs, and the "requests" in the middle. The priests, immediately after performing the service in the temple, recited the blessing. The temple service itself consisted of three elements, based on three kinds of service demanded from us and spelled out in the first paragraph of the keriyat shema. "Love the Lord your G'd with all your heart," i.e. service with our mental faculties, the heart being the seat of understanding. (Proverbs 14,33) "Wisdom resides in an understanding heart," or Exodus 31,6 " I have given an additional understanding in the heart of every wise person." The requirement to serve the Lord "with all your soul," refers to service with one's body. The Talmud Berachot 54, says that this may on occasion require our very life. The requirement to serve G'd "with all your might," refers to placing all our earthly possessions in the service of the Lord. When someone, be it an individual or a community, performs this service sincerely, he must convince himself first that the deity to whom he dedicates all his efforts is deserving of such service, and that no one else deserves such allegiance. Reflecting on this leads to proper concentration of one's heart. Again, without expenditure of funds for the upkeep of the temple and its furnishings, proper service is not feasible. Lastly, both the Levites and the Israelites, in addition to the Priests, perform physical tasks. In this manner, the community as a whole is represented in fulfilling the requirement stipulated in the first paragraph of the keriyat shema. Once all sectors of the nation have become involved in the "Service," those who have performed same should qualify for the triple blessing contained in the Priestly blessing described in Numbers 6, 24-27. The first blessing "may the Lord bless you and keep you,” refers to protection against errors of the mind and the heart. "May He bless you,” means "may He grant you additional insights.” The second blessing refers to material blessings; the third blessing discusses the result of total physical subservience to G'd, which results in the type of closeness to G'd that is the goal of all our strivings. This appears last, as it represents the attainment of our hishtalmut, our perfection. Whenever man offers prayer, he automatically engages in service with his possessions, since he takes time out from being gainfully occupied. He employs his body, by standing, bowing, prostrating himself etc. Lastly, he employs his mind by concentrating on the proper meaning of his devotion. For this reason our sages consider prayer as comparable to service in the holy Temple. He who prays properly, deserves to be rewarded with the promise contained in the last of the Priestly blessings, i.e. shalom, serenity, a feeling of closeness to the Creator.

37. _.58.1.17

    The eighteen benedictions parallel the Priests' blessings also formally, in that they commence with the word "bless" and end with the word "peace." Since the generosity of G'd is frequently apparent by His granting a double measure of blessings, the three blessings can actually be viewed as six. Our sages accordingly may have divided the eighteen benedictions into three groups of six. In the first group of three, we express our belief in the ability of G'd to answer our requests. Inasmuch as these three benedictions are service with the mind, as we have explained, they are followed by three requests all of which are for the benefit of the mind. "You grant man knowledge," is a request for spiritual assistance to our intellect. "Make us return to Your Torah," is a request to help us overcome our sinful urges. The third request "forgive us our Lord for we have sinned," requests assistance to our "ego" problems which are the root cause of committing sins. All three requests, at any rate, are concerned with the improvement of the state of our mind, and therefore correspond to the "may He bless you and keep you" section of the Priestly blessings. The next six benedictions, while dealing with physical needs, are divided into absolute needs, namely freedom of the body, health and food supply, followed by three requests which if not fulfilled will not jeopardise our survival, but will impede our progress towards our goal in life. Without national redemption, restoration of inspired leadership, and visible punishment of our detractors, our progress towards the golden age can hardly be expected. The benedictions asking that the righteous will be seen to receive their reward, is the other side of the coin of the more recently added nineteenth benediction concerning "the slanderers." When we reach the last six benedictions, we find all of the "may He lift His countenance to you and grant you peace" variety, that we have in the Priestly blessing. The reestablishment of the Kingdom of Heaven, the coming of the Messiah, response to our supplications are the first phase of the eventual granting of the "peace" for which we strive in all its ramifications. Rabbi Shimon, who warns in Avot 2,13, not to make prayer something that is performed by rote, i.e. keva, but rather to make all our prayers entreaties, wants us to utilise the recital of keriyat shema prior to the amidah to attain the mental state necessary to express our prayers meaningfully. In the absence of such mental state, the best we may receive is matnat chinam, an undeserved gift, but not the proper response to our prayers.

38. _.58.1.18

    The Talmud in Shabbat 12, cites an interesting detail about the manner in which Rabbi Eleazar prayed for other people. Sometimes he would say in Hebrew "may the Lord grant you peace," and other times he would say the same thing, but in Aramaic. The Talmud queries this practice quoting a saying that prayers should not be said in Aramaic since the angels do not understand Aramaic, and would therefore ignore such prayers. The answer given in the Talmud is that it is no problem, since in the case of a sick person, the shechinah is present at the patient's bedside. Scriptural proof for this is cited. When the Talmud Sotah 33, quotes Rabbi Yehudah in the name of Rav saying that a person should not pray in Aramaic, whereas we have the Mishnah saying that prayers may be recited in any language, the apparent contradiction is solved by making a distinction between a prayer offered in private and those offered publicly. The former, seeing they require an intermediary to reach their address, should not be said in Aramaic, the latter, since they do not require an intermediary, can be recited in any language. It is most unlikely that the Talmud means to tell us that of all the languages in the world, the angels understand all except Aramaic. From Daniel 5,25, and the discussion in the Talmud of the hand that wrote the message on the wall of Belshazzar's palace, it is clear that it was an angel who did the writing. (Sanhedrin 52) How then can we understand the saying that angels do not understand Aramaic? What Rabbi Yehudah in the name of Rav meant, was that we should not employ everyday language when praying. Such language is used thoughtlessly; it is used so mechanically that requests formulated in such terms are not accompanied by a meylitz yosher an advocate that advances our cause. The term "the angels of G'ds service," ( malachey hasharet) is merely a euphemism for "wings," giving our prayers "wings" so to speak. If we formulate our prayers in lashon hakodesh, the holy tongue, the concentration required will already be helpful in our attaining the proper spiritual level needed to accomplish what we set out to achieve when offering prayer. However, in the presence of a sick person whose bed is presided over by G'd Himself, no such preparation is necessary. G'ds kindness is prepared to forego the usual requirements. Similarly, when a congregation prays, the collective concentration enables us to achieve through assembly what may be achieved otherwise only through purposeful individual concentration. The Talmud reports on the same page that the High Priest enjoyed communication from the archangel Gabriel in Aramaic. If the angels did not "understand" Aramaic, such a statement would not make sense. If, however, as stated, the term Aramaic is used as describing everyday language, then the fact that when man wants something he should not employ such everyday terminology, but resort to the holy tongue, makes sense. The introduction of piyutim, liturgical poetry in our prayers served to enhance the concentration with which we would express these prayers. One of the more puzzling statements concerning kavanah, or lack thereof, is found in Yerushalmi Berachot 2,4. Rabbi Chiyah reports that he contemplated the relative rank of the "Resh Galuta," the highest ranking temporal representative of the Jewish community in Babylonia while engaged in prayer. The sage Samuel recalls having counted chicks during prayer. Rabbi Bun counted the bricks on the wall. Surely, if these statements are to be taken at face value, even if they describe accidental happenings, their being included in the Talmud would be counterproductive rather than constructive!? I believe these stories to be deliberate exaggerations. They are designed to illustrate thought associations in our mind. When one is deeply engrossed in something, it is extremely difficult to banish it from one's mind completely. The Rabbis' major occupation was Torah. Therefore, their major preoccupation was with matters connected with Torah. They found it difficult to exclude Torah thoughts from their minds even during prayer. Nevertheless, they wanted to conform to the halachic requirements to keep the times for prayer and the times for study completely separate. (Shabbat 6) It happened to Rabbi Chiyah once, that during prayer he compared the relative merit of the Exilarch and someone called Alkafta, just as one mentally compares the relative merits of Abraham Isaac and Jacob. Similarly, when the scholar Samuel recited the prayer attah chonen, which deals with three mental faculties, he found himself counting chicks since the mental faculties granted man enable him to raise himself from the ground, though like chicks, he must quickly return to earth. Rabbi Bunim, while contemplating the meaning of koneh hakol, "He who owns everything," thought of the innumerable layers of matter on which the universe is built, and the thought of a row of bricks intruded on his thinking. These thought associations are a natural product of the ideas generated by the wording in the prayers. These Rabbis were so unhappy about their lapse of concentration, that they castigated themselves for what were very minor digressions.

39. _.58.1.19

    When Solomon had his second vision, (Kings I, chapter 9) G'd refers to his prayers, not to the multitude of his offerings. This clearly indicates that the decisive element that prompted G'd to accept the prayers and grant the requests, was the mental attitude the prayers represented. Prayer complements the sacrificial service. It helps achieve closeness with G'd, which is the objective of sacrifice in the first place.

40. _.59.1.2

    "For He shall consecrate you seven days."

41. _.59.1.3

    The Talmud Eyruvin 40, quotes two interpretations on the verse "give a portion to seven and also to eight." (Kohelet 11,2) Rabbi Eleazar says "seven" refers to the seven days of creation, whereas "eight" refers to the eight days before circumcision. Rabbi Joshua says that the seven days are the seven days of Passover, the eight days are the eight days of Sukkot and Shemini Atzeret, whereas the words "and also" in the verse, refer to Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur.

42. _.59.1.4

    Before creation, the term "Time" was meaningless, since it can only assume meaning in relation to events prior and after creation. As long as there was only G'd, there had been no need to create "Time." Once the process of creation had begun, we find "evening" and "morning." These are pivotal points against which events can be measured, can be timed. The concepts of "before" and "after" came into existence once there had been a bereshit, a "beginning." The term zeman, season, refers to time as a general framework for events, the term eyt, "time" as a specific time frame for clearly defined happenings. The term "under the heavens," is applied to all that occurs in our cosmos, which is by definition a mobile one, in constant motion. The same does not hold true for the supernatural. In that abstract world, there is no motion, therefore neither progress nor regression. When the Mishnah in Avot 4,22, states that "one hour of repentance in our world is worth more than the whole of the future world," the meaning is twofold. A) Even a short time frame is extremely precious. B) When such time is spent constructively, it can double and triple its value, since it represents the entrance fee to a world of permanence. For this reason, Rabbi Meir advises people to minimise their earthly activities, and to maximise their Torah study, since "Time" was granted for the purpose of busying oneself with Torah study. "You shall be preoccupied with it by day and by night." (Joshua 1,8.) Should one ask how it is possible to attain worldly goods, seeing that they require much toil and time to amass, the answer is "be of humble spirit before all men." (Avot ibid.) Should one spurn Torah in favour of the acquisition of transient values, one's own end will be as finite as that of the commodities to acquire which one spent so much time and effort. The reverse is true if one concentrates on the acquisition of Torah values. To counteract any possible feeling of despair arising from the monumental nature of the task, Rabbi Tarfon adds: "it is not up to you to complete the task, yet you are not free to desist from it." Should someone not feel adequately rewarded for the effort, Rabbi Tarfon adds "your employer is faithful to pay you the reward for your work, but know that the reward of the righteous will come in the hereafter." This is based on the verse "which I command to you this day, to perform them." (Deut. 7,11) The Talmud Avodah Zarah 3, interprets the meaning as "to perform them today but not to receive the reward today." Since man is apt to lose sight of the swift passage of time, and the brevity of his stay on earth, the Torah commands us to count seven year cycles and fifty year cycles to remind us how quickly the time allotted to us passes, and to alert us to use such time wisely. "Man worries about the loss of his money, but fails to worry about the loss of his time. His money does not really help him, whereas his time is lost irretrievably." (Sefer Hachayim, 10,1) When the Torah legislates the counting of the cycles, (even of forty nine days ) it says "you shall count for yourself," meaning for your own benefit. The seven year cycles are symbolic of different stages of the average man's life cycle.

43. _.59.1.5

    The meaning of our opening aggadah is as follows. If you refrain from contact with your wife during the seven days of the menstrual cycle, tum-ah, you will merit the blessing of the eighth day, i.e. circumcision, which symbolises ascendancy over the spirit of impurity, attainment of purity. Since "seven days" represent the "creation cycle," the number seven always reminds man both of his duties and of his limitations on this planet.

44. _.59.1.7

    The seven days of consecration which Aaron and his sons spent in isolation, away from their respective families, prior to assuming their priestly functions, were to prepare them spiritually for their task. While they had to remain on the threshold, they were neither to enter the sanctuary nor to leave the holy courtyard. This clearly demonstrated that these seven days were preparatory to their sacred task, but that until the eighth day their preparations would not be complete. Symbolically, these seven days represented the entire life cycle. Just as life on this earth is viewed as an antechamber to the world to come, (Rabbi Yaakov Avot 4,21) so Aaron and sons were to view themselves as dedicating themselves for their lives' destiny. Wherever and whenever we encounter the number seven, it is to remind us that perfection is capable of being achieved at the end of a cycle of seven. Even when we observe a period of mourning, we do so for a seven day period. We have learned this from G'd Himself, who had observed seven days of mourning for mankind when He brought the deluge upon the earth. (Genesis 7,4. see commentary of Rabbi Zeyra in Moed Katan 3,5) He who fails to observe the seven days of preparation, is as if he were already mourning his own demise during the seven days that should have prepared him to attain his goal, his purpose.

45. _.59.1.8

    The lesson in all this, according to Rabbi Eleazar is that there is no "instant Judaism." Judaism cannot be absorbed instantaneously, though observance of mitzvot may commence suddenly. We develop into good Jews only step by step. Rabbi Joshua understands the number seven as referring to those holy days that are of seven day duration, and the eight as the holy day of a single day's duration. Just as the seven days of Passover were preceded by lengthy preparations, so the single day holy day atzeret commemorating the giving of the Torah, was preceded by preparations. Nothing was achieved instantly, without due preparation.

46. _.59.1.9

    Since the Torah seems specific about the sin that caused the death of Nadav and Avihu, two of Aaron's sons, it seems pertinent to ask why our sages ask so many questions about the true cause of their deaths. Rabbi Manni in Midrash Tanchuma cites four reasons, all of which are sins that carry the death penalty. A) They were drunk when they entered the sanctuary. B) They had failed to wash their hands and feet prior to entering. C) They did not wear all the priestly garments, i.e. the outer coat. D) They had not married, had not fulfilled the commandment to procreate. These reasons are very difficult to understand. In the first place, the injunction not to enter the sanctuary while under the influence of alcoholic drink, had not yet been issued. Washing of one's hands and feet prior to entering, is not even hinted at anywhere. The outer coat was a garment worn only by the High Priest, not by ordinary priests. The fact that they were both unmarried had been well known. If this indeed represented a disqualification to offering incense, why had Nadav and Avihu been designated to offer same in spite of such obvious disqualification?

47. _.59.1.10

    The four statements are therefore not to be understood as "sins," but rather as faults which made their sin possible. Outstanding individuals such as these two sons of Aaron, could not fall prey to a cardinal sin such as bringing "strange fire" into the sanctuary, unless there had previously been something wrong in their attitudes. Drunkenness disturbs the mind. Only when in a confused state of mind, could they have committed such a serious error. Not having washed their hands and feet is symbolic of not preparing one's body to perform a sacred task. Garments, especially outer garments, are meant as a shield against the temptation of the yetzer hara. Failing to wear such garments shows that one at least underestimates the power of temptation, while at the same time overestimating one's own character strength The purpose of all Torah study is execution of its teachings. Another way of expressing this, is "the producing of fruit." Having children is bearing fruit. Being able to bear fruit is a privilege. He who has something worthwhile to bequeath to posterity, leaves children behind who, perpetuate their parents, contribute to civilisation. He who studies Torah for ulterior motives, such as to achieve honour, a title etc has nothing to bequeath. These two sons of Aaron not having children, is not to be conceived as a cause for their being unfit. Rather, it is the result of their having been unfit. To sum up, one could accuse these two sons of three deficiencies. (1) intellectual; (2) emotional; (3) moral. It is also possible to view the fact that these sons did not marry as proof of a certain amount of arrogance. They did not marry because they did not consider anyone as good enough to become their respective wives. Again, the wearing of garments can be understood as representing acquired character traits. Not wearing outer garments would mean that they lacked certain character traits which are essential in a priest, without which he is not fit to represent the people before G'd.

48. _.60.1.1

    "These are the living things which you may eat"

49. _.60.1.2

    The verse in Song of songs 2,4, "He brought me into the house of wine and held the banner of love over me," is interpreted by Rabbi Meir to mean that Israel had said: "my evil urge is as strong within me as wine, which is so powerful that it overwhelms man and confuses him." Rabbi Yehudah objected to this interpretation, saying that one does not interpret Song of Songs in a manner which is uncomplimentary to Israel. The meaning is: Israel replied to the question "who has brought me to the house of wine? that "G'd brought me to the great wine cellar, i.e. Mount Sinai, and there He gave me the flags of Torah, mitzvot, good deeds etc., and I accepted them with love." (Midrash Chazit)

50. _.60.1.3

    In defining the relative merit of "good,” it can be said that the greatest "good" is that which confers the greatest number of benefits on the greatest number of people, without at the same time restricting the rights of the individual. Sunlight and warmth which embraces all people in equal measure, is a greater "good" than candlelight for instance. The latter provides light for only a limited number of people, the candle is not available for everyone, but has to be paid for by someone. Compared to the bounty of government, whose wealth and ability is very limited when measured against the wealth of the Almighty, only G'd has the ability to provide for everyone from an inexhaustible reservoir. "The Lord is good to All” (Psalms 145,9) This point is made by king Saul in Samuel I 22,7-8. He says that even if David had the best of intentions, he could not possibly grant everyone what they desire. Also, since the universe is constructed in a manner which makes each of its constituent parts indispensable to the proper functioning of the whole, the whole cannot merely be a multiplicity of components which each perform the identical function, and therefore are all of the same rank. To view the fact that some creatures appear more distinguished than others as proof of injustice, or to view the fact that parts of the body seem more precious than others, as proof of discrimination, is foolish. To arrive at the conclusion that these distinctions are the result of accident or lack of ability on the part of the Creator, is equally erroneous. "And His mercy extends to all His creatures," (Psalms 145,9) Each part in creation is equipped to perform its allotted task in the grand scheme of the Creator. In spite of all the foregoing, G'd has bestowed special loving care on His people Israel. The yovel year legislation etc prevents permanent loss of a family's inheritance, i.e. landed wealth. Jews must not be given menial tasks to perform. He who sells himself, is punishable; the Torah takes a dim view of such action. In short, Torah legislation is aimed at preserving the lofty status of the Jewish nation at the time when that nation accepted Torah as its national constitution. Vayikra Rabbah 13, mentions that the food and drink legislation also aims at the purification of man, just as Torah legislation as such, aims at purifying and refining man by limiting his indiscrimate indulgence in pleasurable activities meant only to gratify his body. Yalkut Shimoni Bereshit 31, points out that "he who wants to live, will die; he who is prepared to die, will live." Whatever man denies himself in this world, will ensure his life in the eternal world. The more he indulges himself in this life, however, the more likely is he to forfeit his share of eternal life. The aggadah in Baba Batra 74, portraying G'd as castrating the male leviathan, and killing the female, salting away its flesh for consumption by the righteous in the world to come, may express a similar idea. The separate creation of the males and females may symbolise the defusion of the physical and the spiritual. If the most powerful union of body and spirit in this universe, (Leviathan) would be allowed to roam completely unfettered, they could destroy the entire civilisation, G'd forbid. If human intelligence were to be used exclusively to advance his materialistic aspirations, the results could be disastrous. Alternately, if the body would be used exclusively to advance the interests of the spirit, this would also be contrary to G'ds plan for His universe. Therefore, G'd insured the survival of both as separate entities. As such, both are able to make their respective contributions to G'ds overall design for the world, without being able to completely upset such design. Pursuing the same subject matter, Pessachim 119, relates a strange story. In the world of the future, G'd will prepare a meal for the righteous. After having eaten and drunk, the cup is offered to Abraham to lead the other guests in reciting grace. Abraham declines the honour, saying that since he had sired Ishmael, he did not think he deserved this honour. Using similar reasoning, also Isaac declines, seeing he had fathered Esau. Jacob too declines, citing the fact that he had married two sisters while they were both alive. (something that would be forbidden once the Torah had been revealed) Moses declines the honour, saying that he had not been found fit to enter the holy land. Joshua declines, saying that he had not been found worthy to have a son. When the cup was offered to David, he accepted. He proclaimed "I shall raise the cup of salvation and call out in the name of the Lord." What we learn from here is that self control is valued so highly, that David was considered worthy to recite grace more than his illustrious ancestors including prophets. He alone of all those present, had possessed an active yetzer hara, sensual urges. Even though he might have sinned, compared to the many temptations he had been exposed to throughout his life, his sins were insignificant. All the others present must be viewed as tzaddikim gemurim, saintly by nature. (compare our commentary on chapter 41) Esther, who had been the only one among all the contestants for Ahasverus' favour, who had not availed herself of every means to enhance her physical charms, was rewarded by becoming queen. This was precisely because she did not make demands on life. External circumstances play an important part in shaping one's character. "The air of the land of Israel, makes wise." (Baba Balra 158 ) Exposure to certain climates advances one's ability to absorb knowledge. Inhabitants of parts of the globe subject to extremes of heat or cold, reflect this in their general behaviour. Since the land of Israel was considered as possessing a superior climate, being called eretz hatzvee, the choicest of countries, its climate can bestow benefits on its inhabitants. Rabbi Tanchum in Vayikra Rabba 13, says that a doctor who had two patients only one of whom he diagnosed as capable of making a recovery, imposed a rigorous diet on the patient he thought had a chance to recover. He did not place any restrictions on the other patient. Similarly, Israel and the gentiles. Israel, which has its after life at stake, must ensure that its food habits are such that that this after life is not jeopardised. The gentiles, who have not qualified for such after life, do not need to impose any restrictions on their food intake, therefore. On no account is the legislation of forbidden foods to be seen in the context of contributing to or detracting from physical well being, bodily health. Chapter fourteen in Deuteronomy begins by listing the otherness of the Jewish people. "You are children to the Lord your G'd; do not make incisions on your body when mourning the dead, neither make bald spots, because you are a holy nation...Do not eat anything which is an abomination." With this preamble, the Torah introduces the legislation about forbidden foods. If this legislation had hygiene, sanitary considerations, as its objective, it would reduce Torah to being a medical textbook, and a very abbreviated one at that. This thought is intolerable, if only for the fact that many of the health hazards in certain foods could be neutralized by the use of spices and other preservatives. Since we observe many nations who do eat foods that we consider abominations, enjoy good health, it is clear that the legislation is not aimed at our physical health, but rather at our mental health. Such foods as are listed as forbidden, might drive out the holy spirit that dwells within each Jew. David asks the Lord in Psalm 51,13, "do not take away Your holy spirit from me!" Since our sages suggest that the names of certain forbidden animals symbolise characteristics of different nations, and since many of these nations did not exist at the time the legislation was formulated, it is clear that they felt that consuming certain foods would eventually leave its mark on the character of such people. Examples are gamal for the Babylonians; arnevet for the Creeks; shafan for the Medes. The fact that these names seem repeated unaccountably in scripture, gave rise to these interpretations. Since G'd had said to Moses concerning achievements of our individual goals in life "it lies within your mouth and within your heart to accomplish," (Deut 30,11-14) it is no more than reasonable to include our food intake in that advice, i.e. "within your mouth."

51. _.60.1.6

    In our opening Midrash, Rabbi Meir takes the view that wine, -because it causes confusion of the mind-, is unwholesome. Rabbi Yehudah, on the other hand, holds that far from confusing the mind, wine confers blessings upon those who drink it; it improves the digestion, temperament etc. when consumed in moderation. The Bible is full of quotations attesting to the virtues of wine. As the wine cellar is open to all who wish to buy, so Sinai was open to all who wished to learn Torah, to help them control the urge to let the demands of the flesh dominate, a tendencey that has existed since the first sin in Eden. This is why the Talmud (Yevamot 103) claims that the Israelites who stood at Mount Sinai divested themselves of the impurities ingested by man in Eden, due to the serpent. For this reason too, our sages in Sanhedrin 90, say that all of Israel has a share in the world to come. If the Talmud in Sanhedrin 90, had meant that every Jew, whether religious or secular has eternal life, that would be unfair discrimination against the gentiles, and would make the life of the pious Jew unrewarding. The sinner could then look forward to the same destiny. Also, the second statement in that Mishnah, which lists a number of exclusions to the general rule, would contradict the first statement. Therefore, the correct understanding of the statement is that the term "Israelite" is not applied to someone who is merely of Jewish parentage, but to someone who lives up to the expectations of Judaism. It refers to Jews who live in accordance with the lessons learned at Sinai. Such a person is assured of eternal life. Therefore we understand the word "Israelite" as a righteous person, and conversely, "a righteous person" is an "Israelite." When the Mishnah goes on to adduce scriptural proof for its statement, the quotation "and your people who are all righteous will inherit the earth for all future times," makes perfect sense. We read in Tzefaniah 3,13, "the remnant of Israel will not commit iniquities." This seems to presuppose that it is possible to bear the name Israel, and yet commit all kinds of sins? When Tzefaniah talks about the "remnant" however, he refers to those who, though they share the Jewish tradition, are not necessarily aware of Torah. We see that Moses distinguishes between two sets of Jews. (Deut. 33,4) "Moses commanded us Torah, a hereditary tradition to the community of Jacob." The elite of the people are familiar with Torah and its details; the multitude treasures tradition handed down as such, but without deeper knowledge of same. Acquiring new habits is difficult, unless a satisfactory rationale is provided. Continuing a long established tradition does not make intellectual demands on those who practice them. The men of the great assembly may have been called such, because due to the cessation of activities by the prophets, it fell to their lot to make certain innovations to insure the continuance of Judaism as we know it. They established their claim to fame by three things. (Mishnah Avot 1) They advised moderation in the application of justice, searched for a concensus. 2) They tried to put Torah on a broad base, by enrolling many students in the academies; and once having done these two things, 3) they were able to construct "fences" around Torah, and have those "fences" respected by the people at large. If the interpretation of the Mishnah would be the standard one, i.e. that of "be circumspect before deciding legal matters," a later statement at the end of the chapter, that "justice is one of the pillars of the world," should have appeared before the statement in the name of Shimon Hatzaddik. The latter had been a member of the men of the great assembly, and was also the author of the opening statement of the first Mishnah. Having understood the function of the men of the great assembly, we can now understand the statement of the Talmud in Avodah Zarah 35, which interprets the verse "your friendship is dearer than wine" (Song of Songs 1,1) to mean that the Midrashic interpretations of Torah are dearer to Israel than the original text, even. The general order in which forbidden foods are listed, is such that the intake of animals that the Torah considers as only mildly damaging, is listed first, whereas those foods that the Torah considers as severely harmful to the development of the ideal Jewish personality, are listed later. The very fact that animals which are poisonous, or any plants that are poisonous are omitted in the list, clearly shows that the Torah's concern in this legislation is not our physical health.

52. _.61.1.2

    Parashat Ki Tazri'a

53. _.61.1.3

    Leviticus Rabbah 19, has Rabbi Shimon son of Yitzchak explain the verse (Song of Songs 5,11) "His sidelocks are black like a raven," as applying to the portions of the Torah, which although apparently dealing with ugly and distasteful matters, especially when read in public, such as the regulations pertaining to seminal flux, are nevertheless dear to the Almighty. As the prophet Maleachi 3,4, proclaims "the offerings of Yehudah and Jerusalem are pleasing to G'd as in former times, as ever." Proof of this is to be found in the fact that we have two separate portions dealing with the seminal flux of the male, and the seminal flux of the female. Had these matters appeared distasteful in the eyes of G'd, He could have merged these two portions into one. (compare Leviticus chapter 15)

54. _.61.1.4

    If nature is full of obstacles to man's development towards physical and spiritual perfection, G'd has gone out of His way to provide Israel with safeguards against the pitfalls encountered in nature. At the beginning of human history, G'd testifies that the heart of man is evil from youth. (Genesis 8,21) Our Rabbis comment "how wretched is the dough of which the baker says it is bad." (Bereshit Rabbah 34) Solomon describes the nature of evil as comparable to a woman who is a harlot. We have explained in the last chapter that none of this reflects on the Creator, His abilities, His knowledge etc., but that this condition is so because of the nature of the universe G'd has created. The reason that G'd revealed the fact that nature has inherent shortcomings, is to warn man not to take his existence for granted, but to be on guard against his yetzer hara, his evil urge. Refinement of man,- the objective of creation,- is only possible if man starts out unrefined. Once warned, he who fails to heed the warning becomes a wicked person. He will suffer death of the soul, which is worse than death of the body. Death of the body is after all a fate common to all living creatures regardless of their moral standing. Death of the soul, however, is the result of free choice. In Kohelet 7,26, Solomon views this yetzer hara (described as an evil woman spinning her snares) as worse than death. He evidently refers to the death of the soul, brought about through the machinations of this evil urge. The enticement is the fact that the evil urge always presents itself in the garb of a seductive, alluring partner. The successful activities of this yetzer hara are facilitated by five factors. 1) Since earth is a constituent part of man, it is natural that earthiness excercises a strong pull on man, so much so, that even people of the calibre of Moses, David and Solomon could not always resist this pull. 2) There is usually an imbalance between the various elements contained in the raw material man is made of. This imbalance frequently prompts man to follow the urgings of these urgings. 3) Lack of supervision and corrective measures during a man's youth, is apt to lead him astray and make him give way to desires inspired by these urgings that have gone unchecked. 4) External circumstances, i.e. depravity observed, being carried out successfully, apparently unpunished. 5) Acquiring the wrong set of moral and ethical values due to exposure to fraudulent philosophical teachings. The antidote to the above mentioned five impediments to proper conduct, may be seen in the five answers given by the students of Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakkai to the latter, in response to his famous challenge in Avot chapter 2. These five students were, Rabbi Eliezer ben Hyrkanus of the infallible memory; Rabbi Joshua ben Chanayah of whom it was said "happy the mother who bore him;" Rabbi Shimon ben Nataniel the truly G'd fearing person. Then there was Rabbi Yossi the priest, described as "the pious one," and Rabbi Eleazar ben Arach, described as the bubbling well. These five outstanding disciples of Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakkai, each gave their respective recipe of how to achieve one's spiritual goals in this life. The order in which their teacher Rabbi Yochanan lists the names of these students indicates the order of effectiveness of these various virtues in counteracting the activities of the yetzer hara. Rabbi Eliezer ben Hyrkanus not only possessed total recall, but he advocated ayin tovah, the benevolent eye, (obviously a virtue he practiced personally), a Divine quality. "He" bestows blessings on all His creatures, as we read in the Bible on numerous occasions. The opposite is "the evil eye," which can cause damage even to the most saintly persons. When G'd gave Moses the second set of tablets containing the ten commandments, He commanded Moses to make sure no one would be around to give an "evil eye," when the latter ascended the mountain. (Exodus 34,3) Such an instruction had not been issued the first time around. The essential damage caused by this evil eye is due to the character deficiency of the viewer who infects everything he sees with his own disease. Therefore, such people, especially when full of hatred, reinforce the damage that their look can cause. Rabbi Eliezer therefore concluded that the benevolent eye was the panacea for all that is wrong in the world, and suggested that a person pray to G'd to help him acquire this character trait of the ayin tovah, the positive attitude to all that he sees around him. Rabbi Joshua ben Chananyah, though not of the same high standard as Rabbi Eliezer, who was a saintly person, almost superhuman, nevertheless was made of the kind of raw material that is the envy of all mothers. He was possessed of balanced attributes, positive powers, that enable one to achieve one's perfection. His slogan "select," or "be" a good companion, friend, matches this characteristic. It ensures continuity and intensification of one's good traits. The third disciple, Rabbi Shimon ben Nataniel, though not naturally as well endowed as his colleagues, nevertheless had trained himself to become a G'd fearing individual, had acquired the tools to counter the yetzer hara successfully. His prescription for a successful path in life, matches his own experience, when he tells us that a person needs to consider the consequences of all his actions. Whenever one is in the grip of temptation by the yetzer hara, one should consider the ultimate and inevitable result of succumbing. His dictum is similar to the statement "consider the wages of sin, compared to the loss incurred by committing a transgression." The opposite, of course, is he who borrows without making repayment, since borrowing from G'd is essentially no different than borrowing from man. Rabbi Yossi, who is termed a chassid, devout, pious individual, concentrated on his relations with his fellow man, always acting in a manner that transcended the requirements of justice. Therefore, his recipe for a successful life is to attach oneself to good neighbours, to fellow human beings that cherish such ideals, and thereby reinforce one's own beliefs and standards. Rabbi Eleazar ben Arach supplies a fifth venue designed to confront the yetzer hara successfully. Instead of passively absorbing foreign ideas, he is a "bubbling well," he dynamically and actively espouses Torah viewpoints, nullifies evil influences. His specific recipe, namely to cultivate a good heart, leads to one's being sincere in one's conduct vis a vis G'd. Conversely, of course, an evil heart, insincerity, would spoil everything. In the opinion quoted in Avot at first, Rabbi Yochanan is reported as preferring a quality that comes with birth, i.e. the attribute of total recall possessed by Rabbi Eliezer ben Hyrkanus. Later, according to Abba Shaul, he changed his mind and concluded that a "good heart," i.e. an acquired trait, was the superior one. Man is made in such a way that his spirit can conquer his flesh. A combination of brain and good character is an unbeatable combination, and can overcome all difficulties. The five types of impurities discussed in our Parshah parallel to some extent the five impediments to human perfection discussed previously. 1) Menstrual flow, or flux, involuntary seminal discharge at regular intervals by the woman, is due to the nature of the raw material woman or man respectively are made of. 2) Various skin exzemas in their four categories. 3) Skin defects of the head, be they in normally hairy areas or normally bald areas. 4) Spots developing on one's clothing. 5) Spots developing in one's house. These impurities, tum-ot, appear in four gradations. A) Niddah and keree, a natural occurrence, not a disease, the result of the raw material man and woman respectively are made of. (Niddah, i.e. menstrual flow; keree, i.e. ejaculated male semen) B) Zav and Zavah, discharges by men and women respectively from the same source, but due to abnormalities in their respective systems, i.e. a disease. This is due to some imbalance in the physical composition of the body, usually temporarily. C) All kinds of Tzora-at, skin exzemas of the body, also due to errors of "nature." D) Tzora-at of the clothing or house,- completely unnatural, in fact, defying anything and everything we know about nature. Parallel to this, man's food intake can be viewed as comprising four patterns. 1) Food intake for the purpose of maintaining vital bodily functions. 2) Excessive food intake, which may result in a natural imbalance of the body's forces, akin to Zav and Zavah. 3) Intake of unwholesome food; this may cause skin diseases. 4) Intake as food of things which are not fit for human consumption in any state. Intake of such unnatural vegetable matter or animal tissue, may cause greater disturbances, far beyond the mere body of the person who has absorbed them, infecting his environment, i.e. clothing and home. It is natural for man to want luxuries once he has satisfied his vital requirements. Having tasted a variety of the latter, he is apt to begin experimenting with new kinds of physical gratifications, often harmful to him.

55. _.61.1.5

    Torah legislation, in imposing restrictions, is designed to combat the manner in which the yetzer hara would otherwise gradually succeed to make our mind the tool of our body instead of the other way around. The Torah therefore provides five remedies against the five fronts on which the yetzer hara attacks us. 1) Divine Providence that assists even those who rarely need it, being almost perfect. (such as Rabbi Eliezer ben Hyrkanus) 2) Parents and teachers for those on the level of a Rabbi Joshua ben Chananyah. (happy the woman who bore him) 3) Torah's injunctions and system of reward and punishment. The way of Rabbi Shimori ben Nataniel. (the G'd fearing person) 4) Telling us of the successful lives of those possessed of loving concern for G'ds creatures. (The way of Rabbi Yossi the pious one) 5) Illuminating our minds by its teachings, as illustrated by Rabbi Eleazar ben Arach. (the bubbling well) Proof that niddah of women and keree of the male are similar in nature, part of the general human condition as such, is found in the fact that the changeover from a state of impurity to a state of purity (based on Torah law) is immediate; there is no waiting period after the condition has passed. Zivah, an abnormal flow of blood from the same source, on the other hand, requires a seven day waiting period, suggesting that a severe impurity requires time for its subject to free himself from it completely. It is interesting that the Torah writes the laws of circumcision on the eighth day adjacent to the purification laws of niddah. The male too is purified through circumcision on the eight day. This is the purification from the impurities absorbed by the human species when the first pair of human beings ate from the tree of knowledge at the serpent's behest. If Israel had been purified by the revelation at Mount Sinai, as our sages tell us, (Yevamot 103) this suggests that the purification process had started already previously, and was only completed by that event. From the point of view of what they have in common, zav flux of the male, and zavah flux of the female, should have been written in the Torah side by side. However, the Torah wanted to point out the power of milah, circumcision, as a purifying factor. Rabbi Yochanan points out that impurity is not the result of death, but that death is the result of impurity. He means that a diseased body ( tum-ah ) causes all that it touches to become diseased, and whether death results depends on the intensity of the emanations from that diseased body. In ancient times, among the gentiles, women who menstruated were shunned and kept in quarantine for fear that they might contaminate. Rachel warned her father not to approach her too closely since she had been menstruating at the time. (Genesis 31,35) The lesson we learn from this legislation is that man's mental state has physical effects.

56. _.61.1.6

    In Leviticus 12,2, we read "A woman who is impregnated and gives birth to a male child etc." The male symbolises perfection, wholeness and spirituality, whereas the female symbolises imperfection. A woman who gives birth to a male, (to the spiritual) requires less purification than her counterpart who gives birth to the female (physical). During the first seven years, a child has no meaningful mental understanding of morality, therefore it is in a complete state of impurity. The following thirty three years are to be devoted to remedying this situation. At forty, when mature, atonement is made for previous immaturity. Those who give birth to the female, that which symbolises the physical, are impure till the onset of puberty (14 years) They need to devote the remainder of their lives (sixty six years) to remedying that state. They even have to atone for their imperfection at death, (80 years) since only then can they hope to achieve the innocence possessed when they entered the world. We have seen how the introduction of our Parshah, dealing with the need to purify oneself after certain abnormal body functions have occurred, is divided into two basic groups. 1) the avoidable; 2) the unavoidable. There are sub-categories under heading number one, introduced by the symbolism of the birth of a female child. The first sub-category is skin disease. It can be viewed as a derivative of giving birth to a female child. Such a disease is certainly an aberration of natural processes, an imbalace of body fluids resulting in four different possible blemishes. These reflect different degrees of such imbalances. Our sages tell us that tzora-at is due to four different kinds of sins, so that the four categories of skin disease listed represent each of those sins. Each respective discolouration reflects the abnormal quantity of one of the four basic elements man is made of. Arrogance is due to a disproportionate amount of air. The burn marks are due to a disproportionate amount of fire, heat. An example of arrogance is Na-aman the Syrian general (Kings II chapter 5) and his king ben Hadad, of whom many examples of haughty behaviour vis a vis king Achav are related. No doubt, "like master like servant." Na-man's own cure came only after he had humbled himself. Had Na-aman immediately acceeded to the advice of the prophet Elisha, we would have remained in doubt about both the cause of his affliction and the reason why he had been cured. As it is, the prophet Jeremiah makes it plain that the affliction was due to haughtiness, and that the cure was due to humility. We have here a perfect example of midah keneged midah, the principle of the crime fitting the punishment in reverse, i.e. rehabilitation being demonstrated by removal of the affliction caused by the sin. At that point, the instrument effecting the cure became of secondary importance. (he could now have been cured by immersion in other waters also) Tzora-at is also due to the evil tongue. This is symbolised as due to an imbalance in the water component of the four elements in man's composition. Flowing water is associated with a certain amount of sound, noise. It is also influenced by the moon's position. Since the moon is a passive force, it is symbolic of woman rather than man. (sun) Therefore, we find Miriam being struck with tzora-at for something she said, and not Aaron, who had only listened in silence. (Numbers chapter 12) Tzora-at is also due to spreading lies about someone. We will discuss this in greater detail in the next chapter. Tzoara-at can also be due to excessive greed, desire, due to an imbalance in the earth, i.e dust component in man's composition, the fourth of the raw materials he is made of. Creed for matter without specific objective, is apt to become insatiable, brings in its wake a lack of satisfaction even with the things we do have. Gechazi, the servant of the prophet Elisha, was of that category. Since he coveted what Na-aman possessed, he not only received Na-aman's money but also his tzora-at, the latter's former affliction. Our sages say that he who steals from the public purse, community property, will be struck with tzora-at. Anger can also be an indirect cause of tzora-at. Cain was given an ot, sign. According to one opinion, this sign was a form of tzora-at. When our sages say in Vayikra Rabbah 17, that there are ten causes that can result in a person being afflicted with tzora-at, these are merely derivatives of the four main causes corresponding to the four materials man is made of, and which therefore are subject to an imbalance of their proper ratios.

57. _.61.1.7

    The manner in which the Torah describes the priest examining the victim of tzora-at, suggests strongly that during the first two weeks the victim is being given an opportunity to mend his ways, and to have this reflected in his further temporary suspension from society and eventual rehabilitation. When the tzora-at remains static, temporarily, the period for repentance is extended. If the tzora-at retreats, it is a sign that it had only been an external blemish to start with, subject to purification and sin/atonement offering. If,- however, the probation period does not produce any improvement, it becomes absolute, and apparently not subject to further examination at a later date, and possible reversal. This would prove that the sin that had caused this tzora-at had taken over the personality of the afflicted person beyond hope for rehabilitation. The possible rehabilitation of the person afflicted with tzora-at is parallel to the influence by teachers and parents cited as remedy number two against the inroads of the yetzer hara as suggested by Rabbi Joshua ben Chananyah.

58. _.61.1.8

    Next, and third, we come to the blemishes on a person's head. These are due to a lack of faith and other shortcomings in a person's philosophical approach to life. When a person is deficient in these matters, which are after all, functions of his brain, the same midah keneged midah, punishment fitting the crime, will occur. There are two kinds of such blemishes that occur on the head. 1) Blemishes on areas normally covered by hair. 2) Blemishes on areas not subject to hair growth. The first is symbolic of covering up one's sins, i.e. someone who was not a believer having acted piously, devoutly, voicing only traditionally held beliefs. The other is the one who has the audacity to publicly proclaim his lack of belief etc., such as king Uzziah, who insisted on taking over the functions of a priest, though he belonged to the tribe of Yehudah. (Chronicles II, chapter 26.) His effrontery was punished by a blemish on the visible part of his forehead. The first category is too commonplace to require examples to be cited, as these people cover up their shortcomings being afraid of the reaction of the conservative society they live amongst. The four men outside the gates of Shomron, who had lost credibility due to their own testimony, is a further such example. (Kings II chapter 7.) Here too, the midah keneged midah, principle is seen in action, through the type of tzora-at they had been afflicted with. The sequence of the whole story, following the public scorn of the prophet displayed by the captain, suggests strongly that the four men in question had concurred with that captain's attitude. They repented, having seen what happened to their captain, and seeing the camp of Aram abandoned. Their main reason for wanting to be re-admitted to the city, was to await G'ds help which the prophet inside the city had already promised. This approach to that story provides the rationale for the otherwise apparent irrelevance in the verse about that day being a "day of good tidings." The third category of physical afflictions, nega-im, corresponds to the fifth venue, the one suggested by Rabbi Eleazar ben Arach, namely to let Torah illuminate our mind.

59. _.61.1.9

    The fourth category of afflictions, the spots and stains emerging on one's clothing, is due to a person's general poor character. The Bible often describes the wearing of or removing of garments, as symbolic of the acquisition of good habits or the removal of bad habits respectively. Both Maimonides and Aristotele say that to compensate for excessively bad habits, one must cultivate excessively good habits at least temporarily, so as to achieve a balanced personality, shevil hazahav, the golden path. If a tree has been bent too far in one direction, it must be pushed back beyond its original perpendicular position first, in order to straighten it out. Otherwise, it will never resume its original position. The waiting period that the Torah determines, decides whether only the blemish or the whole garment has to be destroyed or burned, respectively. If a recurrence of the nega, blemish, stain, does not occur, then the cure may be considered permanent. Washing the garment makes it fit for the owner to wear it again. This affliction symbolises what Rabbi Shimon ben Nataniel referred to when he said that the best path in life was to be a yerey chet, a G'd fearing person.

60. _.61.1.10

    The fifth and last category of blemishes is the one that afflicts one's house, one's dwelling. It is symbolic of bad habits acquired through association with evil people. The house is representative of one's wider social contacts, much more so than one's clothing. The priest's inspecting the house, suggests to the owner that he must keep away from his usual social environment, and rid himself of the negative character traits he has acquired through such associations. If the stains spread during the period of quarantine, this is a sign that the owner, has failed to take the lesson to heart, and the afflicted area must be replaced. If this still does not prevent re-appearance of the stains, the whole house must be destroyed, i.e. there is no hope to rehabilitate the owner. If, however, the stains have been contained after the whitewashing and removal of the diseased area, the house is declared fit, and the owner brings the prescribed atonement offerings. The very fact that the Talmud demands such stringent criteria, before the house afflicted with these kinds of stains becomes subject to total destruction, makes it practically impossible for these requirements to be fully met. This bears out the symbolic nature of this piece of legislation. (Sanhedrin 71.) The lesson it contains, is, of course, the one corresponding to the recipe for successful character improvement by Rabbi Yossi, the pious one, the Chassid, that one should endeavour to be and to have good neighbours. The Bible does not name a person as having been afflicted with bayit menuga, a house that had to be torn down due to stains. Nor for that matter, do we know of an instance of garments that had been afflicted with these nega-im We therefore do not equate these afflictions as being directly associated with the virtues or shortcomings of any of the students of Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakkai. There are contradictory opinions in the Talmud, whether in the course of history this legislation was ever implemented in practice.

61. _.61.1.11

    Our opening Midrash can therefore be understood thus. The portions that are dealing with these unpleasant blemishes are dear to G'd because of the fact that by heeding symptoms of imperfections in their respective characters, those afflicted can rehabilitate themselves. Others, noting what has happened are forewarned to reach their respective goals in life without becoming victims of the yetzer hara. The negative aspect of these portions is, of course, that inasmuch as these physical blemishes reflect defects of character and soul, man is revealed as morally inferior to the animals. But, since, as in the case of the verse quoted from Maleachi, the offerings brought by those afflicted with skin troubles when cured testifed to their moral rehabilitation, the whole subject matter is beloved by G'd. Leviticus 14,34, is not to be understood "as a result of when you come to the land of Canaan," but rather ,-as the Midrash Rabbah Leviticus 15, relates- the Jews who saw the houses with the stains were afraid of the nature of such a country. They were reassured by G'd that these phenomena were outgrowths of the former inhabitants' character defects who had been possessed of excessive greed for material possessions. In the case of the Jews, these stains would pinpoint hidden treasures for the benefit of the new owners. The meaning is similar to the verse in Exodus 15,26 "when you listen to My commandments, all the afflictions which I have visited upon Egypt, I will not afflict you with, I am the Lord your Healer." The proof that this is so, is in the separate treatment of Zav and Zavah. This draws our attention to the fact that each reflects different aberrations, and therefore requires individual methods of character rehabilitation. A male's state of seminal discharge is more serious than that of the female, since in the case of the female, a flux, though occurring at the wrong time of her menstrual cycle is a relatively minor departure from the norm. A male's flux reveals a more serious imbalance, and therefore requires more in the way of rehabilitation, such as immersion in mayim chayim, water from a well, not water stored in a pool. There is also a broader range of impurities which are communicated by a male afflicted with zav. All who contact him or what is his, become affected. The touch of an earthen vessel by a male zav communicates impurity to the entire earthen vessel, not merely to its external walls. Verse thirty one, at the conclusion of the whole legislation, clearly spells out that the objective is to stave off impurity which would endanger and jeopardise our national existence of holy soil.

62. _.62.1.2

    "This is the Torah of the Metzora."

63. _.62.1.3

    Vayikra Rabbah 16, describes a certain itinerant herbs and spices merchant, who used to frequent the district of Tzippori, offering the elixir of life. All the people in the district streamed to that merchant anxious to buy his wares. Rabbi Yannai, who sat in his palace teaching the plain meaning of scripture, heard about this, and invited the merchant to visit him and to sell him some of this life giving herb. The merchant said to Rabbi Yannai "you and the likes of you are not in need of my product." When Rabbai Yannai insisted, the merchant took out a book of Psalms and showed him the verse "who is the man that desires life and loves days that he may see good? keep your tongue from speaking evil and your lips from deceitful speech" (Psalms 34, 13-41) Rabbi Yannai said "also Solomon proclaims the same message in Proverbs 21,23." He continued "all my life I have read this verse and have wondered about its true meaning, until this spice merchant came and explained it to me."This too is why Moses exhorted the people when he said to the people of Israel "this is the Torah of the person who is afflicted with a skin exzema,( tzora-at), he who slanders etc."

64. _.62.1.4

    Since man's superiority over the beasts lies in his power of speech, it is fitting that whatever comes out of his mouth should reflect his superiority.

65. _.62.1.5

    The Torah states that man became a human being after G'd had imbued him with nishmat chayim, which Onkelos renders as "a talking spirit." Clearly, he refers to the internal spirit, the thought process leading to speech. Kohelet 1,16, "I spoke with my heart," reflects the same idea. Speech is a mechanical process, merely reflecting and relaying the thought process that has preceded it. Adam had already possessed the power to reason. What G'd had added was the means to communicate his thoughts. Scripture provides ample proof for this interpretation. When G'd said to Moses "who gave man a mouth, or who made him dumb, deaf, seeing or blind?" (Exodus 4,11), it is clear that the power to express thoughts is part of the definition of being a human being. A deaf/mute is not obligated to keep the commandments of the Torah since he is not able to communicate his thoughts or have thoughts communicated to him. He is an incomplete human being.

66. _.62.1.6

    From the above it is dear that when man abuses this power of speech, he denies his superiority over the beasts and calls into question the value of his whole existence. It is like a king who presented his servant with a fancy garment, only to have the servant drape it over his donkey. The sages of Israel are complimented when the Talmud Sukkah 28, states that they never indulged in idle talk. Maimonides divides speech into five categories. 1) Obligatory speech, i.e. teaching Torah. 2) Speech which must be avoided; false testimony, slander etc. 3) Disgraceful speech; i.e. what we call idle talk. 4) Desirable speech, i.e. words of mussar, moral instruction, sermons etc. 5) Permissible speech, i.e. speech needed in the pursuit of earning one's livelihood. In view of the above, we can understand Rabbi Shimon ben Gamliel who said that he found silence to be the essence of all wisdom, the best remedy for maintaining one's body's good health. (Avot 1,17) By moving in the company of sages, he learned that more even than the words of wisdom he learned, he learned to appreciate the importance of minimising talk. Silence is the seyag, the protective fence built around wisdom. It ensures that the latter remains untainted. Even a fool may be considered wise, as long as he keeps his mouth shut. We are taught in Pessachim 3, that one should employ few words when teaching one's students. The Mishnah in Avot tells us that "not the exposition is of crucial importance, but the execution, the deed." An alternate meaning of Rabbi Shimon ben Gamliel's statement might be this: "I have not found that sitting silently, without asking for clarification, contributes to the essence, namely the learning process. However, excessive talk is harmful."

67. _.62.1.7

    The Talmud in Nedarim 64, considers people who have been afflicted with tzora-at, the Biblical skin disease, as comparable to the dead. This is merely stating a "tit for tat" principle. If verbal barbs are likened to arrows and lethal rocks, then those guilty of throwing them deserve a punishment that makes them "dead" to society. If the word Torah occurs five times in the metzora legislation, it is a hint that those guilty of this sin have transgressed against all five books of the Torah, (compare Rabbi Joshua ben Levi in Vayikra Rabbah 16) We have instances of slander occurring in all five books of the Torah. In the book of Genesis, the serpent slanders G'd. Joseph slanders his brothers.

68. _.62.1.8

    In the book of Exodus, a Jew accuses Moses of wanting to kill him. Later on, G'd tells Moses that all those who had wanted to kill him had already died.

69. _.62.1.9

    The laws of slander are discussed in the book of Leviticus next to the verse "do not stand idly by the blood of your fellow man." (Leviticus 19,16)

70. _.62.1.10

    In the book of Numbers, we find Miriam and Aaron slandering Moses. The spies slander the land of Israel.

71. _.62.1.11

    In Deuteronomy, the early chapters are full of Moses recalling the frequent occasions when the Jewish people had indulged in slanderous talk of one kind or another. Also we have there the legislation about the motzi shem ra, a husband accusing his bride of pre-marital unchastity. The Talmud Shabbat 56, tells us that if David had not listened to lashon hara, evil gossip, his kingdom would not have been divided.

72. _.62.1.12

    Rabbi Yannai in the opening Midrash quoted, simply wanted to tell us that the lesson taught by the spice merchant had already been taught by Solomon in Proverbs.

73. _.62.1.13

    The sacrifices that the metzora has to offer upon being cured, consist of birds. Their incessant chirping comes to an end only when they die. This procedure is symbolic of the person who needs to atone for having abused the gift of speech. The reason that two birds have to be offered is because speech is basically welcome only for two purposes: a) to study and teach Torah, b) to earn one's livelihood. Also the commandment to use an earthen vessel has symbolic meaning. The letters (chet-resh-shin) are the same as in the word for "deaf/mute," i.e. "silent." The need for spring water contrasts with the silent, the deaf. The bubbling of the water is the opposite, conceptually speaking, of the inert clay vessel.

74. _.62.1.15

    The second bird, before being released, must be dipped in the blood of the bird that had been killed, to teach that the lesson how to employ speech has been learned. Unrestricted use of the power of speech is apt to kill, causes one to bloody oneself. The waiting period necessary after offering the sacrifice, before the victim may rejoin society, is to effect the moral and intellectual rehabilitation which follows physical rehabilitation. The latter was symbolised by the washing of the victim's clothing. The victim cannot appear before G'd at the entrance to the sanctuary until three more sacrifices, asham, chatat, and olah and the accompanying menachot have been offered. Sprinkling of the blood on the thumb and large toe, is symbolic of purifying the most mobile parts of the body. Hands symbolise action, feet symbolise motion. Both are usually involved in any sinful behaviour. The recipe presented by the spice merchant extends until the end of the quotation from Psalms 34, namely "keep away from evil, do good, seek peace and pursue it actively!" The latter advice is difficult to follow unless both hands and feet are involved. The reason that the Torah insists that blood be sprinkled on the right toe and right thumb, may be to remind us that until now the conduct of the metzora, had been foolish, like the people whom Solomon describes as having the seat of their intellect on their left side. (Kohelet 10,2) "The seat of a wise man's intellect is on his right side." Pouring oil on the toes, fingers, earlobe and head of the metzora, is symbolic of the imperative of our sages as expressesd in Kohelet 9,8, "at all times your clothing should be white, and oil should not be lacking on your head." A person's covering is symbolic of his good traits. After the atonement, donning clean garments and being anointed with oil on crucial parts of his body, demonstrates that from here on in, he is in possession of good character traits. The ear, i.e. the organ that receives the spoken word of the mouth that can cause tzora-at, must also undergo rehabilitation. The asham sacrifice removes the corrosive effect of the sin on the body; after that, when sin has been removed and atoned for,- as per chapter 14,18-19,- the olah sacrifice can bring the true purification, the positive finale of the atonement procedure.

75. _.63.1.2

    "Thus Aaron will enter the Sanctuary."

76. _.63.1.3

    Shimon the righteous said: "The world is founded on three things, Torah, service of the Lord, and loving kindness." (Avot chapter 1)

77. _.63.1.4

    Although as a rule the parable is used to help the reader or listener understand a difficult subject by means of illustrating concepts familiar to him, there are occasions when the parable is used in reverse. An example of the former usage is the verse "as a father chastises his son, so does the Lord chastise you." (Deut. 8,5.) On the other hand, the line "you will be like G'd, knowing good and evil," (Genesis 3,5) is an example of the use of the parable in reverse. Although we have no concept of the essence of G'd, we do understand the concepts of "good" and "evil;" ergo it helps to define G'd by saying that this knowledge is one of His attributes. Or, as the Talmud Berachot 10, says "just as G'd fills the universe, so does our soul fill our body." The subject "G'd" can be brought closer to our understanding, although the essence of G'd remains a mystery. Drawing conclusions from the known microcosm regarding the nature of G'd, the great unknown, is only possible with the aid of the Torah, G'ds revealed law. Since Greek philosophers have no such terms of reference they cannot draw any valid conclusions. The latter, observing three kinds of life in our world, i.e. plants, animals and humans, and noting that man comprehends all three kinds of life, concluded that man has three souls, one each to enable him to comprehend the various forms of life respectively. They did not realise that a single soul can govern all three aspects of life, (provision of food, motion and intelligent planning) Shimon the Just tells us that since man is heir to such a tripowered soul, one that governs vegetable, animal and human abilities, he must therefore assume a threefold moral obligation corresponding to his endowments. These obligations are the promotion of Torah, Avodah, i.e. service in matters relating to the man/G'd relationship and the performance of kind deeds, i.e. building social relationships with his fellow human beings. This is a suitable introduction to the whole tractate of Avot. When the Talmud says "the kingdom of earth is similar to the kingdom of Heaven," (Berachot 58) the meaning may well be that just as we find in the "upper" world both purely spiritual beings as well as bodies, (galaxies) although the essence of that world is spiritual, abstract, so we find in our "lower" world creatures possessed of spiritual capabilities, although by definition these creatures belong to an essentially physical world. Human beings have been equipped with a soul to aid them in performing their physical functions properly, just as the galaxies have been equipped with bodies to enable them to perform their spiritual functions properly. At the same time, just as there are completely disembodied spirits in the "upper" world, so there are completely lifeless bodies in our "lower" world, such as stones etc. Just as the planets in the galaxies have bodies to help them perform the tasks assigned to them by the Creator, so the animal kingdom has a kind of "soul" to help it perform the task assigned to it by the Creator in the scheme of things in our world. It is however, impossible to classify the soul of man as having been designed to serve his body, else one would have to believe that man's soul perishes at the same time his body dies, seeing it has no longer a function to perform. In that latter event, man would hardly possess an advantage over the animals. Rather, man is to be viewed as the counterpart to the angels, who appear in human form on occasion, i.e. equipped with a body, in order to perform a task that requires them to become visible to man. We refer to such apparitions as have been granted to Hagar, Lot, Gideon, Manoach and others. In all those instances, the bodies were corollaries to the angels' spirits. By the same token, man, or especially Jews, have been given a body to assist their souls to perform their tasks. The task of the Jewish people is to perform a mission on behalf of G'd, and the task of the High Priest is to do the same in an even more intensive and specific manner. The High Priest wears the special garments when he performs service in the holy Temple. These garments are worn only once, and were not passed on even to his successor. They had to be removed immediately upon termination of the respective service performed in the Temple. Angels appeared in one kind of human garb only once, since each angel was entrusted with only one mission at a time. A number of Midrashim elaborate on this parallel between the "upper" world and our own world down here. (Vayikra Rabbah 21) Once we accept this comparison, the statement that the Jewish people are to be a kingdom of priests illustrates the functions we are to perform even better. The function of the Jewish people is to act as messenger/priest for mankind. We are given a special equipment to help us perform this task, i.e. Torah etc. If we abuse this equipment for personal advancement instead of employing it to perform our tasks, we are guilty of treason both vis a vis G'd and vis a vis mankind. Our punishment in such an eventuality will reflect the severity of the crime.

78. _.63.1.5

    Shimon the Just mentioned only the pillars that ensure the survival of our soul. Had he referred to the needs of the body, he would have had to include food and other necessities for physical survival. On the Day of Atonement, culmination of ten days of preparation, the emphasis of this role of the Jew is even greater than at other times during the year, and we worship G'd in the manner of angels, abstaining from food and drink, just as spiritual beings. In fact, we desist from most physical functions that are not essential to our actual survival. Having thus approached a state of complete innocence, we are allowed to recite aloud, that which we dare no more than whisper during the rest of the year, namely the verse "blessed be the name of His glorious Majesty." Since this version is one that is plagiarised from the angels' liturgical repertoire, we would not dare do so without their consent. So far the Midrash. Since we note that the praise of G'd referred to is in indirect language, employing the pronoun "HIS," and since David in Psalms 145, and 72, has already employed similar terminology quite openly, one is tempted to ask why we cannot use said formula unabashedly all year round. The answer may be that all pronouns, or attributes, are merely a negative way of defining something. Since G'd is not understood by man, the nearest we can come to understanding Him, is the way He Himself explained it to Moses, i.e. "you will see My back." (Exodus 33,23) We arrive at a definition of G'd by a process of elimination. By comprehending what He is not, we form some idea of what He must be. The Talmud Berachot 31, states that Israel is more beloved than the angels, since the latter require three stages of elimination to arrive at G'ds name, whereas Israel needs only two such stages. The angels recite "holy, holy, holy," followed by the name of G'd, whereas Israel merely recites "Hear, O, Israel the Lord our G'd is One." The angels have to eliminate, i.e. separate themselves from three worlds, since they know both their own world, the one of abstract spiritual beings, as well as the two worlds which we know. Israel knows only two worlds, cannot distinguish what goes on in the world of the spirits. Therefore, it needs to separate itself only from the awareness of the two worlds containing matter before concentrating on praising the Lord. This gives the angels an advantage over the humans in that they can free themselves of even more encumbrance in order to come closer to the essence of G'd. When we commence the formula of the kedushah, the sanctification of G'd in our liturgy, we say "let us praise Your name O Lord just as they do in Heaven."..followed by the triple proclamation " holy, holy, holy," reflecting the havdalah, separation between the three worlds G'd has created, and the Creator Himself. Our own formula of praise is introduced by the words "Hear O Israel." The word "hear" describes a human function; humans employ physical ears to receive communications, since they can distinguish only the two worlds of the plants and the living bodies. But we do not praise the kinnuy, attribute, only the holy name itself. The angels, though they have a clearer comprehension, praise only "HIS" glorious Majesty, (not the actual NAME) In this respect we are more beloved than they are. In the words of the teachers of our Mishnah "chavivim yisrael, Israel is especially beloved. To sum up then: We address G'd directly in our formula of the keriyat shema, whereas the angels concern themselves only with some of G'ds attributes. Moreover, Israel recites the praises of G'd three times daily, whereas the angels do so only once a day. Many angels, individually get to do so only once in fifty years, (compare discussion in Chullin 91) We also have it on Talmudic authority that the angels are not permitted to recite their song of praise until after Israel has done so here on earth. Against this, we need to consider that the relatively infrequent occurrence of an event makes such an event more special, more distinguished. If it is true that the task of the angels is to promote G'ds work in the "lower" world, it makes sense that until Israel has praised the Lord, the angels are in no position to do so, having not yet completed their appointed task. In fact, it would be hypocritical for the angels to praise the Lord as long as Israel, G'ds standard bearer, has failed to do so. This is what the angel who wrestled with Jacob told him, when the Midrash quotes him as saying that he must now join in the Heavenly choir of praise to G'd. Only now, after he had found that Jacob did indeed possess integrity, had this angel accomplished his specific mission, and was able to re-join his colleagues. A second answer to our problem is that the verse "Blessed be Majesty, His kingdom forever and ever" is really talking about two separate aspects of Divine manifestations. The first half of the verse represents an acknowledgment of G'd as Creator and Supreme King, the second half talks about the manner in which He exercises His functions. Some people reach an understanding of the manner of G'ds guidance in the universe. Most people do not. Angels, however, when praising the Lord, automatically praise Him from both vantage points. Therefore, they use a formula which includes both aspects of the matter. On the Day of Atonement, when all of us reach a higher spiritual level than during the rest of the year, we can utter this formula with full voice, although the same thing would be presumptuous during the rest of the year. Pessachim 56, explains that since Moses had not used this formula of praising G'd, the sages were hesitant about arrogating such right to themselves. On the other hand, since Jacob was reputed to have used this formula according to the Midrash, they decided it should be used, but only sotto voce. The order of the service on the Day of Atonement, corresponds to the three principles laid down by Shimon the Just.

79. _.63.1.6

    Some problems in the text that need explaining. 1) Why does the Torah relate the service on the Day of Atonement to the two sons of Aaron that had died? (16,1) Why mention their death at this point? 2) Why does the High Priest bring one sin offering and one total offering, whereas for the people there are two sin offerings and one total offering? 3) What is the reason for the drawing of lots as to which he-goat will serve which purpose? 4) Why is the tabernacle when Aaron enters it to remove the spoon and pan for the incense in verse twenty three, described as "the tent of appointment" rather than as the "tabernacle," or "sanctuary," i.e. the usual designation? Why the requirement that he leave his garments there? 5) Why are not all the acts of the temple service of that day mentioned in this Parshah? If the answer is that the Torah at this point lists only the service performed in the white linen garments, why was there a need to constantly refer to the "changing of the garments?" 6) Why is the requirement of the "affliction" mentioned twice in this Parshah, and three more times in Parshat Emor? 7) How can the little extra time that one fasts before sunset on the day preceding the Day of Atonement be called "an affliction,” seeing one has just concluded eating a festive meal? 8) Why does verse 27, in chapter 23, start with the word ach, "however," a word which normally forms a bridge with the subject matter under discussion previously? The word is not usually employed to introduce new subject matter as in this instance. 9) Why is there a different penalty for transgressing the commandment of "afflicting oneself," and the transgression of the work prohibition? The Torah seems to describe different nuances of death at the hands of G'd? 10) The use of the word ish, a person, a man, would seem to have been more appropriate to describe the subject carrying out the work than the word nefesh, "soul," employed here!

80. _.63.1.7

    (1) The first message from G'd to Moses was to tell him, that although on occasion, death can be due to the concept of bi-krovay ekadesh, that death need not occur due to a mortal sin, there had been mortal sin in the case of the death of the sons of Aaron. The cause had been the sin as spelled out in the Torah at this point. The second communication by G'd to Moses, though related to him at a later stage, is coupled here with the former, in order to make the point that access to the holy of holies is restricted even to the High Priest, and that G'ds Presence does not appear in public, only wrapped in a cloud. (2) Even amongst the good people, the physical usually outweighs the spiritual. The High Priest who personifies the most favourable mix of the physical and the spiritual, is nonetheless mostly matter. His sin offering is described already in Leviticus 4,4, and consisted of a bull. Most of this bull was burned outside Jerusalem, only a small part being offered on the altar, (verse 12 there) The ram, symbolising man's spiritual part, which becomes olah, a total offering, i.e. fit for consumption by the altar in its entirety, is the other half of the High Priest's offering. Since the majority of the people are guilty of very fundamental errors, due to their yetzer hara, evil urge, the he-goat for the azzazel does not qualify for being offered on the altar itself. The fact that even the he-goat was presented in front of the tabernacle first, alive, is to show that even the kind of person represented by this he-goat will be granted forgiveness on the Day of Atonement. This is a tribute to the fact that a good part of their erroneous conduct had been due to the nature of the human condition, i.e. their being physical beings, something over which they had not had any control initially. The lots to be drawn symbolise the very fact that no choice existed prior to one's having being born into this world. (3) Use of the device of drawing lots to determine anything at all, appears to be an outright denial of G'ds Providence, since the result that emerges after the drawing of lots will be viewed as coincidence. The fact is however, that the cumulative effect of the lot falling again and again on the same person, lends it significance. If until the time of Shimon the Just, the lot "for the Lord" was always drawn by the he-goat placed on the right, that surely tells us something about the meaning of the word "right." (the time frame under discussion is about fifteen hundred years!) Indeed, once that pattern had been broken, due to the fact that the Jewish people could not produce a High Priest who was a tzaddik, and whose merits would counterbalance the sins of the masses, the lot would have become meaningless even if it had fallen on the he-goat that had been placed on the right. When Pharaoh had dreamed the same dream twice, that fact told Joseph something about whether the dream had any significance, or whether it was merely a matter of coincidence. The very repetition enabled Joseph to draw some conclusions. This is even more so, when the repetition occurs more than once. This is the reason the sailors "threw lots" (plural) and not just one "lot" before they were satisfied that the storm that threatened to sink their ship was really on account of Jonah. (Jonah 1,7) Since the lot fell on Jonah each time they repeated the procedure, they were certain that they were not condemning an innocent person on the basis of a "chance" lot. There is an element of chance concerning which person turns into a sinner, since natural endowments have a great deal to do with the likelihood of someone being able to overcome such strikes against him as he has been born with. Hence, if the he-goat for the azzazel becomes the scapegoat by means of the lottery, we might all breathe a sigh of relief and say "here but for the grace of G'd, go I." For that reason, the halachah, Jewish law, requires that the two he-goats must look so totally alike, that they are indistinguishable from one another. When the Tanna Ben Heh Heh says that reward is in accordance with the pain and effort incurred in securing an objective, (Avot 5,23), that he who has to overcome strong natural impediments rates a special reward, he does not mean that lack of this special effort totally forfeits one's chance of rehabilitation. The "scapegoat," though unfit to be presented on the altar, does accomplish this rehabilitation even for persons who have not made a special effort to surmount handicaps they were born with. (4) The procedure of offering incense, required a special skill, and therefore the full concentration of the High Priest during its performance. The reason for this could have been the need to counter the natural tendency to get "a glimpse" of the shechinah, Divine Presence. After all, the Torah did say "for in the cloud, I will become visible on the lid of the holy ark." (Leviticus 16,2) The Talmud tells of a High Priest, who was a member of the sect of the Sadducees, who when performing the rites of incense, put same on the pan prior to entering into the holy of holies, (contrary to hatachah ) and who boasted about having seen the shechinah. He died shortly after coming out of the sanctuary .The Pharisees saw in this a punishment for his disobedience. The Saducees felt that it was bad manners to enter the holy of holies without having everything ready, whereas the interpretation of the Pharisees of the verse "for through having made the cloud, My Presence over the lid can become revealed" was that they considered the exact composition of the correct quantities and ingredients of the incense as being vital. Placing of the incense on the pan, however, is to take place only "in front of G'd," as per verse 13. The sprinkling of the blood inside the holy of holies was to atone for errors concerning the laws applying to the temple itself, whereas the placing of the hands on the he-goat was to atone for other sins. The fact that the he-goat was used, also demonstrated that it was not a deity, (as some nations believed) This is the reason there had to be a special injunction "they shall no longer sacrifice to the he-goats." (Leviticus 17,7) There was no better date to proclaim the unity of G'd symbolically, and the futility of worshipping anyone or anything else, than the Day of Atonement. This symbolic statement helped to obtain forgiveness for other sins also. Whoever would observe that the scapegoat was thrown from the rock, would realise that it had not been an object of worship. Even Satan, the perennial accuser before the throne of G'd, would have to admit that the Jewish people were quite unequivocal in their service to the Lord. This is the meaning of a statement in Pirke de Rabbi Eliezer that we should present a bribe to Satan on that day. The sacrifice of the original Passover lamb in Egypt, was a similar statement of unequivocal commitment to G'd Therefore, the "great Sabbath," the Sabbath preceding the Passover holiday is conceptually related to the day of Atonement. For that reason Yom Kippur is also called Shabbaton The order of the confession, which according to the view of Rabbi Meir mentions the unintentionally committed sins first, and the intentionally committed ones last, was quoted in that order by Moses after the sin of the golden calf, when he remonstrated with G'd. Since Israel, at that time, had already done penitence, Moses made the point that due to the repentance, intentional sins had already been reduced to the status of unintentional sins. However, the normal process as found in the Bible on many occasions, is to first confess the intentional sins, including the ones that represent acts of rebellion against G'ds authority.

81. _.63.1.9

    (5) The changing of the priestly garments must be mentioned so that we will know that certain actions are not considered as falling within the definition of avodah; service. For instance, reading from the Torah in public on that occasion by the High Priest, is not avodah in the strict sense of the word. The purpose of the fast and the discomfort to be experienced, is to make the need for such a day redundant, as we read in Isaiah 58,3-14, G'd wishes that He could replace all fast days with days of joy instead. (Zachariah 8,18-19) The fasting by itself is no accomplishment. Also, fasting is not in order to attain our requests from G'd, but to cleanse us of our sins which we committed because of the enjoyment that indulging in such sins has afforded us. Compensating with discomfort for comfort obtained illegally previously, does not constitute any entitlement on our part. The word tzom, derived from the root tzamtzem, limiting oneself, can have three meanings when applied to man. This "restriction" can apply to all three parts of man, his physical functions, his emotional functions, and his intellectual functions. (6) The fact that this innuy, discomfort, affliction, is mentioned three times then, is to ensure that we understand that the Day of Atonement fulfils its function optimally only when we appreciate all the dimensions of the fast, (see comment in Parshat Emor) The fact that our sages in Yoma 81, explain the repetitions as relating to multiple discomfort such as washing, not wearing leather shoes, etc. in no way conflicts with our explanation, as the Talmudic commentary is halachah mi-Sinai, i.e. not based on any conceptual understanding of the legislation. (9) The Torah connects the prohibition of work with the fasting, to illustrate that no other activity is to interfere with our concentration on the purpose of the fast and what it stands for. That is also the reason for the word nefesh. The whole personality must be involved in the fasting process, not merely the body. The penalty for not involving the entire personality in the innuy, discomfort, is karet, since it revealed misunderstanding of the purpose of the fast. This penalty embraces the whole personality in all its three aspects, as discussed. When the Torah speaks of the work prohibition however, unconnected with the innuy aspect (as in chapter 23,31), the penalty is not spelled out. The reason for repeating the work prohibition at all, may be in order to stress the difference between mechanical offences, and those that involve one's personality. When coupled with Yom Kippur, Day of Atonement, and the specific demands of Yom Kippur, such offence invalidates the spirit of the day completely, and constitutes a grave error. This is the only holyday which demands a complete work-prohibition like the Sabbath, including all food preparation. (7) The innuy, discomfort, commences on the ninth of the month in the evening, though the effects may not be noticeable till the morning of the tenth of the month. In order for that discomfort to be felt on the tenth, it has to be commenced by abstention already on part of the ninth. (8) The word ach, in chapter twenty three, is employed to establish the connection with the avodah, sacrificial service legislation outlined in chapter seventeen of our Parshah.

82. _.63.1.13

    We have seen that the Torahpart of Shimon the Just's statement is contained in the section dealing with the "lots," the goats and the "fast" part of the day. The "avodah" part of his statement is dealt with in the legislation concerning the various sacrifices.

83. _.63.1.14

    Lastly, the "kind deeds" parts of his statement is contained in the very fact that forgiveness and atonement are possible, and are granted by G'd. He who is aware of the inherent weakness of man, has generously made provision for man's rehabilitation. It is not a Jewish characteristic to indulge in wholesale killing, even if great wrongs have been committed. The Torah has to exhort us not to have mercy in such cases as the ir hanidachat, the city whose majority have indulged in idol worship, whose inhabitants have to be executed. The Torah therefore emphasizes that administering the death penalty has as its objective to turn aside G'ds wrath against those who tolerate wrongdoing. This is proof that were it not for this consideration, we might not administer a death penalty at all. Kings who desire the adulation of their subjects, certainly indulge in generosity when sinned against. Even Haman had to keep secret the identity of the people he wished to murder, and not use the word "murder," but "destroy," meaning "neutralise," so as not to offend the sensibilities of the king. Another motivation for generosity is that forestalling the desire for revenge by his subjects, as well as fear to trigger hostile action by those to be killed. He who feels threatened, will try to act in self defense. Ahasverus, who had shown that he craved popularity by throwing lavish banquets, had no choice but to execute Bigtan and Teresh. He executed Haman when he had become aware of the latter's machinations. Heretofore he had put quite a different interpretation on what Haman had meant when the latter had asked permission le-abdam, to destroy them, (compare story in megillat Esther) Being generous and forgiving is therefore seen as a character trait that is conducive to self-preservation. It keeps civilisation going. The King of Kings certainly does not desire mass death of His subjects, but wishes to inspire teshuvah, repentance, through the retribution exacted from the few. G'd, who had first considered creating the universe by using the yardstick of justice, i.e. midat hadin, had reconsidered when He realised that the world would not be able to endure on that basis. This is because no man could be expected never to sin. (Bereshit Rabbah 12) This is why when the Torah relates the story of creation a second time in chapter 2,4, we find that G'd has acquired a new attribute in addition to elokim. He is now also called hashem, "the merciful One." These two attributes of G'd are reflected in the two holy days Rosh Hashanah, and Yom Kippur, i.e. New year's day and Day of Atonement. The former reflects the din, justice aspect of G'ds rule, the other the rachamim, mercy aspect. On the former day everyone is judged according to his "present" state. Even the beynonim, the people whose merits are balanced by their errors, debits, are treated according to the yardstick of justice, since G'd waits until the Day of Atonement to see which way the scales will tip at that time. However, repentance is accepted from all on Yom Kippur, meaning that G'd relaxes the rule of strict justice. This is what is called lifnim mishurat hadin. The hint in scripture confirming that this is so, is found in Psalms 47,6, Elokim arose at the sound of truah, but Hashem at the sound of the shofar. Since the term truah is found in the Torah in connection with Rosh Hashanah, whereas only the term shofar is found in connection with Yom kippur, the hint is reasonably clear. If, as we said before, Samael, i.e Satan, has no control over man on Yom Kippur, as long as man exploits the day properly, it follows that he who ignores the opportunity presented by that day will fall irretrievable victim to Samael. This is the "bribe" that G'd gave to Satan. The attribute of mercy, when ignored, causes utter destruction of the soul for all those who have ignored it. A hint of all this is found in the numerical value of the word "Satan." It adds up to 364, i.e. Satan has control on 364 days of the year, not on the 365th day, the Day of Atonement. (Yuma 19) The last sentence in the Yom Kippur service (16,34) is to remind us that the function of Yom Kippur is not affected by the existence or non existence of the holy Temple and the ability to offer the sacrifices. The need is for penitence brought on through innuy, discomfort. The day alone does not achieve atonement.

84. _.63.1.15

    Teshuvah cleanses the soul according to the degree of sin it rehabilitates. The soul is considered more precious than fine gold, and is therefore surrounded by five protective shields. The innermost of these shields even insulates the soul from contact with air. As we say in our daily prayers each morning, "my Lord, the soul is pure, You have created it etc." It is vital for the soul to remain in mint condition, since, being only on loan to the body, it could be recalled at any moment, and returning it to its owner in mint condition is mandatory. Errors committed in the manner in which the soul is protected, fall into four categories. A) The soul is not used for sinful purposes, but care is not taken to employ it always constructively. This exposes the soul to an alien atmosphere, on occasion. Such minor dereliction of man's duty is atoned for by the Day of Atonement's annual occurrence. B) The owner, i.e. host of the soul, does not transgress negative commandments, but omits the performance of positive commandments that are incumbent upon him. Although sins of omission are less serious than sins of commission as a rule, since such omission can frequently be made up for at a later date, and nothing has to be undone, they constitute dereliction of duty nonetheless. In such cases the occurrence of the Day of Atonement coupled with repentance achieves forgiveness. C) Satan feels already so much at home in the person who transgresses sins of omission, that the ground has been paved for sins of commission to take place. Atonement now becomes more complicated and requires both the date of Yom Kippur, repentance, and yissurim, bodily afflictions at G'ds discretion. D) Depravity has advanced so far that only destruction of the body, the vessel hosting the soul, can lead to rehabilitation of the soul itself. For such persons, "atonement" is not mentioned in the Torah, since it can occur only posthumously.

85. _.63.1.16

    The reason that sins committed between different human beings are not subject to atonement of Yom Kippur is, that any sin in which man's body is the major party, can only be atoned for by that same body making the appropriate restitution. When reconciling oneself with one's fellow man, it is the senior person, the scholar, who must make the first move, just as Abraham had done with his nephew Lot. (Genesis chapter 13)

86. _.63.1.17

    In spite of the absence of sacrifices then, we have G'ds assurance "this will be an eternal statute for you to atone for the children of Israel." (Leviticus 16,34)

87. _.64.1.2

    "What man soever there be of the house of Israel, that killeth"

88. _.64.1.3

    Rabbi Chaninah ben Dotha says that anyone whose fear of the Lord takes precedence over his wisdom, will enjoy enduring wisdom. Anyone, however, whose fear of the Lord does not take precedence over his wisdom, will find that his own wisdom will not endure. (Avot 3,11)

89. _.64.1.4

    When striving to achieve his potential, man must look beyond himself and attempt to act as if he had become a partner in what he is striving for. When king Saul listened to the people and allowed Agag to live, his error was that he was too aware of his own shortcomings and not sufficiently aware of the lofty position he occupied by reason of being king of Israel, G'ds holy nation, (compare Samuel I chapter 15) Concentrating on the Divine, which constitutes part of man's roots, is the antidote to dwelling on one's mortality. The latter is depressing, whereas the former is elevating. G'ds imperative "be holy, for I am holy," means "do not use the fact that you are in a mortal shell as an excuse not to strive for the ultimate you are capable of." This seems to conflict with the view expressed by Akavyah ben Mehallalel in Avot 3,1, who states "look at three things and you will not become a sinner. Your origin, i.e. a smelly drop of semen; your destiny, i.e. a place of dust and worms; the celestial tribunal before which you will have to give an account of your life to the Almighty." Surely, a person who is imbued with that outlook is apt to become rather permissive with himself, telling himself that nothing much can be expected of him seeing he is of such lowly origin and headed for such a miserable destiny. This also seems to be what Job argued when he justified his despair saying: "man, the product of woman, of short lifespan and excess of trouble, anger etc." (Job 14,1) Did not Samuel say to Rav Yehudah (Eyruvin 54 ) "smart one, eat and drink while you can, since the world we will depart from is like a feast." Even though the parable may tell us to seek the permissible pleasures of life while we are still here to enjoy them, it is certainly a public pronouncement totally different from that of Akavyah ben Mehallalel. In fact, since man's sins are rooted in any or all of three types of motivations, "jealousy, sensual desire, quest for honour and glory," the considerations Akavyah asks us to bear in mind, will act as brakes to any of the aforementioned causes of sin. How can a person be haughty, seek glory, when he considers his lowly origin?- How can a person be consumed with desire to gratify the urgings of his flesh, when he knows all too well that he will soon return to dust, and his own flesh will be food for the worms? How can one be greedy and jealous of someone else's possessions, when one knows full well that all these possessions will be left behind? How can one indulge the flesh when one knows one has to render an accounting of how one spent one's time down here? While Akavyah seems to make a good case, superficially, his arguments can be countered nonetheless. If one will turn into dust and worms, what judgment is there to be afraid of? If one's origin is low, so is everyone else's; how could this be a deterrent to sin then? Pride, i.e. being vainglorious, may reflect merely one's achievments, not one's origin! Why does Akavyah describe the fate of the corpse? It would have been simpler to say "we are all headed for death!" Is not the fact that one has to die a sufficient deterrent? In Kohelet 9,10, Solomon has already said "whatever you are able to do, do it with all your might; for there is neither action nor reasoning nor knowledge nor wisdom in she-ol, [the place] that you are going to." Since your body is finite, all that is connected with it comes to an end when your body dies. Akavyah, however, reminds us that we should consider the elevated part of man, not desecrate it or debase it. To this end, the considerations he suggests to keep in mind are very helpful. It is only the body that is lowly, just as it is only the body that turns into dust and worms; the soul, the Divine part of our roots will live on and have to give an accounting of itself. All phenomena in nature share three criteria. A) They are all observed in their present stage of development, evolution. B) They have all undergone some metamorphosis before they reached their present stage. C) They all appear in a certain format. Remembering these three facts, Rabbi Akavyah says will help one avoid sin. 1) Considering that one's raw material is only matter. 2) Considering that all matter is in a constantly changing state, not enduring as such. 3) Considering that one's format is "in the image of G'd." When considering all these factors combined, remembering the Divine part of our format helps to give us the proper perspective on life. Akavyah's warning then is not to let the yetzer hara mislead us into thinking that because our bodies are transient and our origin insignificant, we are not losing anything by enjoying the pleasures of life, but to remember that there is another part of us that transcends the body, and which we may place in jeopardy if we do not act properly. If the body is subject to metamorphosis, how much more so the soul. Death of the body as an end to existence is quite an illogical premise then. Death is merely a transition to another state, not a final disposition, extinction. It is this thought that is the rationale underlying all yirat chet, fear of sin, the knowledge that there is no escaping the consequences of one's actions. When the Mishnah in Ediyot 5,6-7, describes this same Akavyah as a person possessed both of great wisdom and fear of the Lord in the highest degree, it only shows that the author of the statement quoted in Avot, himself lived in accordance with his own philosophy. He is reported to have declined the highest office in order not to compromise what he believed to be the truth. He preferred to be called a fool, rather than appear wicked in the eyes of G'd by recanting publicly something which he believed privately. He who gives people cause to suspect him of wrongdoing, cannot be well liked in the eyes of the Lord. This is what Rabbi Chaninah ben Dotha had referred to in the opening quote from Tractate Avot. People of Akavyah's caliber require wisdom to help them distinguish true integrity. This is the reason that they are granted such wisdom. If, however, people want to employ their wisdom for ulterior personal motives, they are not really in need of such wisdom. Therefore, it will not endure, they will lose it. G'd does not endow people with the talent to deny their fear of G'd. In the words of the psalmist, Rabbi Chaninah's statement is "the beginning of wisdom is fear of the Lord, ensuring good intelligence for those who practice its dictates." (Psalms 111,10.) Those who act in accordance with that wisdom will find that their intellect stands them in good stead. When that psalm continues "his fame will endure forever," this is parallel to the statement in Avot "those whose deeds are more numerous than their theoretical wisdom will enjoy enduring wisdom." Anyone whose fear of the Lord is his priority number one, will try and do more than his wisdom dictates. He will do both what his own wisdom dictates and what his mentors have taught him to do. Those people who invert the process are described by the Rabbis as being like builders who have provided doors, but lack the house to put them in. What good are doors when you do not have a house?

90. _.64.1.5

    Some problems in the text of the Parshah. 1) The section dealing with the location of the sacrifices, keeps referring to ish, a man. Why? 2) Similarly, when discussing the prohibition of blood, the transgressor is constantly referred to as nefesh, soul, personality. Also at the end of the paragraph about incestuous relationships the use of the word nefesh, describing those who transgress keeps cropping up. One would have expected the reverse. Errors concerning sacrifice after all are errors of the mind and spirit, whereas indulging in forbidden sexual relationships, is very much a matter of the body! 3) Since blood is essential for the altar, why is the description of the fact that "the life of the flesh is in the blood," a sufficient rationale for forbidding us the consumption of blood? After all, we offer the meat of the olah offering on the altar, and this does not result in a general prohibition of meat consumption? 4) The repetition of the prohibition of blood in connection with venison, seems altogether superfluous. Why would we think that such blood is permitted for consumption? 5) How do we reconcile such statements as "its life is in its blood" versus "its blood is in its life, soul," and " blood is equivalent to life, soul?" 6) Why does the blood of fowl and free roaming animals need to be covered?

91. _.64.1.6

    In order to prevent the chance of someone offering a sacrifice to other deities, the Torah demands that the locale for all sacrifices that are either voluntary or mandatory be the central house of worship, the holy Temple or tabernacle prior to the permanent Temple. Also, such sacrifice must be performed by the priest, who will sprinkle the blood and burn the fat on the altar provided for that purpose. This is an "eternal statute for all your generations." (Leviticus 17,7) Even the slaughtering of the sacrificial animal outside the precincts of the Temple compound is an offence carrying the karet, penalty, (premature death at the hands of G'd) The burning of any of the remains of the animals in a place not designated for that purpose is eaually prohibited, (ibid verse 19) (1) So much for the spiritual aspect of the matter. (2) Then the Torah addresses itself to the physical aspects of the sacrifices, namely the eating of the blood of the animals that had been offered as sacrifices. Since blood represents the personality of the creature, its consumption would superimpose the animalistic personality on the person who consumes it. The result would be that that man who is always a blend of spiritual and material forces would become predominantly materialistic. His spiritual forces would lose the chance of gaining the ascendancy within him. The result would be the destruction of his personality, i.e. karet extinction. As long as Israel had been in the desert, all blood of animals to be eaten, had to be poured out on the altar as if to dedicate the animal's personality to G'd. Man must dedicate himself, -in this case his sacrifice, seeing it is his alter ego-, to the Lord. "Love the Lord your G'd with all your soul, personality." Many heroes of the Bible describe their endeavours in those terms. When David prepares for battle against Goliath, he voluntarily risks his life for the sanctification of G'ds name. Jonathan tells his father about David that "he has put his soul, his personality in his hand" in order to kill the Philistine. (Samuel I, 19,4) Yiftach expressed himself in similar terms before going into battle against the Bney Ammon. (Judges 11,30) When a person takes risks like the ones described, for a cause other than the glorification of the name of G'd, such as for the sake of personal glory and honour, he is merely making himself guilty of suicidal conduct. David refused to drink the water that had been obtained for him by three brave soldiers at the risk of their lives. (Samuel 11,23,14-17) (3) Instead, David tried to obtain atonement for the men who had mistakenly risked their nefesh, soul, life for such mundane matters, by making a drink offering to G'd of these waters. David would have considered drinking this water as not much less sinful than drinking blood. Since nefesh belongs to G'd, a Jew must not consume it. Since nefesh resides in the blood, blood must not be eaten. (5) On the one hand, blood as the carrier of nefesh, is like a vessel containing vital fluid. If the container leaks, the fluid will be lost. On the other hand, it is the fluid which enables everything to feed upon it. The body is diffused with it, nourished and sustained by it. They are inextricably interwoven, and the description by the Torah once as if blood is the primary agent, and on the other occasion as if nefesh is the prime factor, is quite apt. (4) This function of blood is also the reason that blood of animals that are not suitable for sacrifice is prohibited. Absorption of the animalistic life essence of the animal by man's body, would result in man himself becoming more animalistic, predominantly so. When G'd said to Cain "the voice of your brother's blood cries out to Me," (Genesis 4,10) He refers to the fact that the nefesh is in that blood. (6) In the case of the birds and free roaming animals, their blood being thinner, the contribution it makes to the essence of their being is somewhat smaller. Therefore, when the Torah states "for the life of the flesh is in the blood,” this is a one sided description. In that instance, the Torah does not describe the blood as being simultaneously the vessel of the animal's personality. Nevertheless, such blood is also forbidden, seeing that the blood as an agent of the life sustaining soul, carries this sustenance to all parts of the body. Without it, the animal would die.

92. _.64.1.7

    (1) Man is apt to sin for either of two reasons. Either he is overcome by physical temptation, or he subscribes to a faulty philosophy. In the latter event, his sin will be performed with dedication, since the sinner has become convinced that what he is doing is actually the will of the deity he worships. Warnings against this kind of sin must therefore be expressed in much stronger language than warnings against sins which are merely the result of weakness of the flesh, often only temporary. When warning against sins of the flesh, the Torah uses the term nefesh. When warning against aberrations due to intellectual misconceptions, the Torah uses the term ish, describing man's intellectual essence. The chapter dealing with immorality, incest etc. is introduced by a warning not to follow the lifestyle of the Egyptians, nor to adopt the lifestyle of the Canaanites. The former were more sophisticated, known for their intellect. Their physical corruption was rooted in a corrupt philosophy. The Canaanites, however were renowned for their physical prowess; their philosophy was only an outgrowth of their physical perversions. To counteract the former, the Torah says "observe My social laws, My philosophy, and keep My statutes." (in that order) Concerning the latter, the Torah says "keep My statutes and observe My social laws." (in that order) The purpose of the legislation is contained in the latter half of verse five, "that man shall perform them and live by them," meaning that we shall remain "human" only by observing Torah laws. The fact that the Torah stresses these practices as determining whether a person will retain the tzelem, the Divine image, which entitles him to the description Adam, human being in the true sense of the word, tells us that it is not the fundamental error of philosophy that requires the most urgent treatment. The errors stemming from physical urges require treatment on a priority basis. It is easier to disabuse the mind of ish of faulty reasoning, than to disabuse the nefesh, the physical essence of its urges. The repetition at the end of chapter eighteen, "for I am the Lord your G'd," is to impress upon us that we must observe this legislation not only out of fear of punishment, but because we appreciate the wisdom of the Creator revealed in this legislation. It is only in the next Parshah that the Torah addresses itself to many of the philosophic aberrations that we must avoid also.

93. _.65.1.2

    Midrash Tanchuma at the beginning of Parshat Kedoshim, states "you shall be holy because I am holy." G'd said to Israel: "before I created the universe, the angels used to praise Me, using your name. They said "blessed be the Lord G'd of Israel from time immemorial until the end of time." When Adam had been created, the angels said before the Almighty: "Lord of the universe, is this the one whose name we use when we praise You?" G'd replied:"no. This one is a thief, since it is recorded that he ate from the tree." (Genesis 3) When Noach appeared, the angels asked G'd again whether he was the one whose name they used when they praised G'd, and G'd replied that Noach was a drunkard, as it is stated in Genesis 9,21, "he drank of the wine and became drunk." When Abraham arose, the angels said to G'd that surely this must be the one. G'd said that he was a gentile since he had sired Ishmael. When Isaac appeared, the angels again felt sure that he must be the one whose name they recited when praising G'd; again G'd told them "this one loves the one who hates Me." (Genesis 25) When Jacob appeared, the angels said "this is he." G'd said to them "yes." It is written in Genesis 35,10, "your name shall not be Jacob anymore, your name shall be Israel" All the Jewish people will bear his name. At that hour, G'd sanctified Israel with His name, as it is written in Isaiah 49,3, "Israel, through you I become glorified. The holy One said to Israel "since you bore My holy name even before the universe had been created, attain holiness like Myself!" This is the meaning of the verse "be holy for I am holy."

94. _.65.1.3

    People partaking of the pleasures in this world can be divided into three categories. 1) One partakes of the forbidden pleasures. 2) One partakes of those pleasures that are not forbidden. 3) One partakes of only those pleasures which are at the same time vital for survival and promote good health of the body. The person who indulges in all physical and material pleasures regardless of G'ds ordinances, is so enslaved to his evil urge that Solomon says of him "whatever it is in your power to do, do it; for there is no work, device nor knowledge nor wisdom in the grave whither you go. (Kohelet 9,10) Of the second category of person, the one who indulges in everything that the Torah does not specifically forbid, regardless of his need for these pleasures, Solomon observes in Kohelet 9,7, "go and eat your bread in joy." The third category is the type of person who does not indulge unless his vital needs are involved. He does not wish to partake of anything which might deprive another person who is in need of it of such pleasure. The fact that someone does not steal or rob, or otherwise break the law, does not make such a person holy, saintly. The Talmud in Yevamot 20, advises that if someone strives for holiness, he should abstain from the permitted pleasures. Most of our sages have not been portrayed as saintly, although doubtless all of them were righteous and pious. Only a handful qualified for the appellation "saintly." Rabbi Yehudah hanassi, who never touched the flesh of the lower part of his body, is an example of a saintly person. (Shabbat 118) Even a Rabbi Yossi, who never indulged in small talk, does not seem to rate the description "holy." (Sukkah 28,) Only those who apply to themselves the criteria we have listed for category number three above, can qualify for that distinctive appellation.

95. _.65.1.4

    Keeping the above in mind, one can understand the following discussion in the Talmud Taanit, 11. Samuel said that anyone who sits and observes a fast is called a sinner, since the Torah says "he will atone for the sin his soul has committed." What sin did he commit? He denied himself the pleasure of drinking wine. Is it not a logical conclusion that if someone is called a sinner merely because he denied himself the pleasure of drinking wine, that he would certainly be called a sinner if he denied himself all other worldly pleasures?! Rabbi Eleazar said that such a person is called holy, since the Torah says "holy he shall be," referring to the Nazirite in Numbers 6,5. However, the Torah does say "from the sin he has committed against his soul?" The answer given is that he had dirtied his soul. And what about Samuel, does it not say "the Nazirite, the abstainer from wine will be holy?" Answer: this does not mean that he is holy, but that he should strive to become holy. In this paragraph of the Talmud, Samuel discusses the third type of person, the one who denies himself unnecessary pleasures. Samuel points out that this kind of thing can be exaggerated when it includes legitimate pleasures that contribute to our vitality and well being. Avoiding unnecessary pleasures is avoiding contamination of one's soul. Denying oneself necessities, however, is sinful. Rabbi Eleazar, on the other hand, was discussing people of the second category. When those people abstain from permissible pleasures, they are on the way to achieve holiness. There is therefore, no conflict between the views of Samuel and Rabbi Eleazar.

96. _.65.1.5

    When Rabbi Yehudah hanassi was able to declare on his deathbed that none of his ten fingers had made frivolous use of the pleasures of the world, one must remember that he was an extremely wealthy man, and could have indulged himself very easily. Many of the great sages possessed many of the attributes that would have enabled them to enjoy many of the permissible pleasures. Their conduct therefore, becomes even more praiseworthy. There are two anecdotes described in the Talmud (Tamid 32), that illustrate the Jewish attitude to the mundane. We read of an encounter between Alexander the Great and Jewish scholars. When Alexander asked the Jewish sages for their definition of "wise men," the sages replied that these are people who can foresee the result of their actions. To the enquiry who is a true hero, they responded by citing the person who can control his urges, his impulses. To the enquiry who is truly wealthy, they said that it is the person who counts his blessings. To the enquiry what one must do to ensure that one stays alive, they answered that "one must kill oneself." To the question what one must do to incur death, they said that one only needs to indulge oneself. To the enquiry what one must do to ensure one' popularity, they answered that one must display disdain for authority wielded arbitrarily. Alexander replied that his way was superior to theirs, namely that one should be a benevolent ruler, concerned with the welfare of one's subjects. We find another authoritative statement in Avot 4,1, where Ben Zoma says that the truly wise is someone who is willing to learn from anybody; that the truly brave is someone who suppresses his passions; that the truly wealthy is he who enjoys what he owns, and that the truly honoured is the one who accords honour to human beings. These quotes from our sages provide clear guidelines for the attainment of a successful and wholesome lifestyle. In the same way as the Rabbis legislated and appointed supervisors in such areas as true weights and measures, to preclude the public being defrauded, and in the same way as they instituted similar measures in other areas of public life, they also gave us guidelines to help us attain progress in our spiritual life, helping to make Israel a nation and the land of Israel a country fit for the Divine Presence to feel at home in.

97. _.65.1.6

    It is worthwhile to examine Ben Zoma's statement in detail, especially the scriptural proof he cites for each of his dictums. Concerning the attainment of wisdom, Ben Zoma quotes Psalms 119,99, "I have learned from all those who teach me." This sounds quite inappropriate. Surely, not everyone is qualified to teach merely because he wants to! Even if we understand the word melamdai in the sense of "who are more learned than I," the word used should have been melumdai. The truth of the matter is, however, that true wisdom is reserved for the Almighty by definition. He alone possesses knowledge that embraces every subject matter. He alone understands the interrelation between all phenomena. Human wisdom is only a state of comparative ignorance, by comparison. The wisest human being is he who is somewhat less ignorant than his peers. Realising this, a wise man demonstrates that he is aware of his monumental ignorance by being prepared to increase his knowledge, drawing on any source of information that helps to reduce his ignorance. True scholars,-while not too proud to learn from anyone-, are able to integrate information secured from unlikely sources into the existing fabric of information they already command. In this way, any new piece of information enlarges and widens their existing knowledge, sometimes adding a completely new dimension. The same piece of information which is hardly meaningful when in the hands of an ignoramus, may be of immense value to the scholar. Of such men Solomon says "the wise will hear and add additional instruction." (Proverbs 1,5) The meaning of our verse in Psalms 119,99, then is "I have obtained more comprehensive knowledge through all those who have instructed me."

98. _.65.1.7

    When looking at the proof quoted for the statement that the true hero is he who controls his passions, Ben Zoma quotes "better the long patience than a hero, and someone who is in control of his spirit, than the conqueror of a city." (Proverbs 16,32) We must approach this with a similar yardstick. Aristotele defines bravery in his book of ethics, as a person who is prepared to be a martyr and brave death for the sake of what he believes to be ethically good and noble. In fact, if we examine David's heroism, such as when he volunteered to do battle with Goliath, he fits the bill exactly. His motivation, as has been stated, was that someone who blasphemes the Lord G'd of Israel must not be allowed to get away with it. Pinchas, who killed Zimri, (Numbers 25,8) displayed similar emotions. Aristotele's definition appears quite appropriate then. Also Isaiah 63,5, seems to bear out this definition. Ben Zoma's quotation does not seem to prove much, stating only that conquests alone do not constitute bravery. Even a weak king can conquer cities, when he has armies at his command. What Ben Zoma wishes to tell us, however, is that to describe someone as brave merely because he conquers, is foolish. If a king cannot control his own passions, how can he expect to control his soldiers? Only after he has learned to be in charge of himself, can he be trusted to be in charge of others. Concerning David and Pinchas, it is true that had they not done what they did, they would not have been known for the heroes that they undoubtedly were. It is the normal reaction of a person who observes violence being perpetrated on an innocent human being, to rationalise that his own life is more precious than that of his fellow human being. Therefore, he refrains from a rescue operation that would put his own life at grave risk. This is especially so, when the prospect of success of the rescue operation is only marginal. In order to do what one has at first glance perceived as one's moral duty, one needs to conquer the voices that tell one not to risk one's life and become a dead hero. Both David and Pinchas became heroes when they had successfully conquered those voices. They conquered the urge that had prompted their peers to refrain from becoming involved. Engaging in dangerous action was not something impetuous then, but on the contrary, it resulted from deliberation, having one's passions under control. Had the undertaking been unsuccessful, the potential hero risked derision rather than admiration, even though he might have given his life for the cause. Relying on one's strength, as mentioned in Isaiah 63,5, is not the antithesis of our concept of bravery, provided such reliance is not the result of bravado, showmanship and quest for personal glory. The hero feels that his life is not worth living, if the only way he can live it is by permitting great evils to go unchecked, and thus allow the name of G'd to continue to be desecrated. Ben Zoma's definition of true heroism then includes two important elements: A) Preparedness for martyrdom in order to achieve an ideal, or wipe out an evil; B) an awareness that the risks involved are undertaken deliberately, not impulsively. The hero faces up to unpopularity or even scorn that his action may arouse.

99. _.65.1.8

    To turn now to the definition of wealth in Ben Zoma's statement. "He who enjoys his portion." As proof, we are reminded of the verse "you who eat from the toil of your hands are happy and well off." (Psalms 128,2) "Happy" refers to this life, "well off" to the hereafter. Those who pursue money endlessly, who are considered wealthy by the general public, are not wealthy at all, in fact. An important element in the definition of wealth is menuchah, a state of rest, serenity, contentment. Only when serenity and peace of mind have replaced the constant urge to amass more riches, can one be said to have become wealthy. This is quite independent of the quantity of possessions amassed, or their monetary value. A treasure is something that one has, not something that does not give one satisfaction. If it were true that in order to achieve man's perfect state, large amounts of material wealth were necessary, the complaint against the Creator for having sent us into this world without anything, would be quite justified. Since HE did not see fit to bring us into the world accompanied by large amounts of money or its equivalent, it appears that HE thought that as long as one has a healthy body, a sound mind, and is capable of absorbing instruction so that one can learn a useful trade or profession, this is adequate. The example of most of our Tannaim, teachers of the Mishnah, who worked for a living and still found the time to study Torah and perfect their personalities, is ample proof that in that manner one can assure oneself of a happy existence in this world, and amass meritorious deeds that ensure one success in the world to come. However, he who despises the work of his hands and keeps chasing financial fortunes, will lose his chance of success in the world to come in the process, since he will not make time for Torah study and the performance of meritorious deeds.

100. _.65.1.9

     Concerning Ben Zoma's definition of who is an honoured and respected person, Ben Zoma agrees with the prevailing philosophies, adding from his own wisdom. According to Aristotele, ethics section one chapter two, honour is not a true possession, but remains forever outside the person himself. If it were a true possession, it would have to be at one's disposal constantly and irrevocably. This is clearly not the case, since control of one's honour resides with one's peers, one's superiors or one's inferiors. It cannot therefore, be an attribute that is desirable for its own sake. Honour is desired in order to impress the beholder with the stature of the person being accorded that honour. Being beloved is superior to being accorded honour. Being accorded honour, merely gives the impression that one is beloved, substitutes the image for the substance. It is clearly desirable therefore, to be beloved, in order for the "honour" to become something of substance rather than remain a phantom. What better way to achieve that substance then but to accord honour to others, thereby gaining friendship and goodwill from those whom one honours. Since true virtues, at any rate, are desirable for the good the owner can accomplish through them, honour is not a virtue unless it is used to achieve that goal of doing good. Ben Zoma teaches that by honouring others, one's own honour becomes a vicarious virtue. We find the Almighty described as the "King of glory" in Psalms 24,9. This term is used because HE accords honour to His creatures, not because they honour Him. Rabbi Shimon points out in Numbers Rabbah 14, that it is to those who respect Him that G'd accords honour. Similarly, kings of flesh and blood accord honour to deserving subjects. Ahasverus wanted to know what honour to accord to Mordechai (Esther 6,6). This kind of honour is described by the Midrash as being like jewels that deserve to be set in a golden mounting. However, if someone were to mount a stone or piece of wood in a golden setting fit for jewels, he would surely cause himself to be ridiculed. Therefore, Solomon says in Proverbs 26,8, "as a pebble in a heap of stones, so is he who accords honour to a fool." If someone takes note of a pebble amongst a heap of precious stones, he is acting foolishly. We learn therefore, that the degree of honour accorded a person must be commensurate with the person's worth. Only in this manner can the objective of according someone honour be realised. Indiscriminate honour heaped on all one's fellow men is counterproductive, and will merely alert the citizenry to the foolishness of its ruler. Thus the end of the quotation Ben Zoma cited, "those who fail to honour Me, will become objects of derision." Such people demean themselves by withholding honour from Him who is deserving of it. They will end up being of no consequence themselves. All these examples show that the way to saintliness lies in observance of all these virtues. If, instead of equating a wise man with a person who feels superior to everyone around him, we equate him with personifying humility; if instead of equating bravery with the conquests of countries and nations, we equate it with self control; if instead of "rich" meaning that one is in control of vast amounts of material wealth , we equate it with "serene and content," then such persons are well on the way to saintliness which is the objective of the third category of people discussed at the outset. Holiness is not achieved merely by abstaining from everything forbidden, only by the judicious rejection of even those pleasures which are inherently permissible but are not permitted when used simply to afford one an opportunity to indulge one's senses. When viewed in this manner, the string of negative commandments following the instruction to become holy, may at first glance be in conflict with the view we have advanced. Leviticus 19,3-4,5-10,11-20, all deal with prohibitons. It is remarkable that our sages said that the reason the chapter dealing with immorality, (Leviticus 18) is followed by the command to be holy, is because wherever we find immorality held in check, holiness is close by. On the surface, this appears to mean that whosoever does not indulge in immoral acts, is already holy. This is, of course, quite preposterous.

← Previous · Next → — showing 701–800 of 1,212

Akeydat Yitzchak by Eliyahu Munk. Via Sefaria (sefaria.org), Sefaria-Export. Version source: http://www.urimpublications.com Licence: CC-BY. Source.