Posts
Adar 11, 5773 · February 21, 2013
Purim
Print this Page
Based on the teachings of the Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem M. Schneerson
How To Nullify a Decree
The holiday of Purim celebrates the miraculous deliverance of the Jewish people from a threat of annihilation: the evil plan fomented by Haman and signed by King Achashveirosh, to "annihilate, kill and destroy all the Jews,"1 Heaven forbid.
Both Mordechai, the leader of the Jewish people at that time, and his relative, Queen Esther, played a central role in nullifying the dastardly decree. The manner in which they did so is most instructive.
At that time, Mordechai was part of Achashveirosh's court, serving as a close advisor to the king.2 Moreover, he had recently saved the king's life.3 Esther was, of course, Achashveirosh's wife, a woman the king found "gracious and charming."4 Given that the two were so well connected, it might seem that the first thing to be done to save the Jews would be to use these connections to try and annul the decree.
Yet, as soon as the decree became known, Mordechai "garbed himself in sackcloth and ashes and went out to the midst of the city [of Shushan],"5 calling on all Jews to repent.6 Only after doing so did he instruct Esther to "go to the king, to supplicate him and beseech him regarding her people."7
Esther conducted herself in a similar fashion. Before seeking an audience with the king, she conveyed the following message to Mordechai:8 "Go and assemble all the Jews. fast on my behalf. Do not eat or drink for three days." Moreover, she said: "I too. shall fast in like manner."
Now, Esther desperately needed to be found appealing to the king, especially so since her visit would be unauthorized,9 and thus fraught with personal danger.10 She had not been called into the king's presence for 30 days.11
So why did she decide to fast for three days - an act that would cause her to appear much less physically appealing?
The answer is that both Mordechai and Esther realized that the decree regarding the Jews was the result of improper Jewish behavior.12 Since it is abundantly clear that one cannot nullify an end result (the decree) without first nullifying the cause (the erroneous Jewish conduct), their first act was to call Jews to repentance and fasting.
Once the spiritual cause of the decree had been ameliorated through repentance, and because G-d desires that one act through natural means,13 the two only then went to Achashveirosh in an attempt to abolish the decree.
Because the appeal to Achashveirosh was thus merely the natural vessel for the true salvation which came from above, it is understandable that Mordechai and Esther were not overly concerned by physical appearance or human diplomatic skill.
The lesson is obvious: There are those who think that during times of distress, G-d forbid, natural remedies should be the first course of action.
The story of Purim teaches us that natural means are only a secondary step; the first step must be to strengthen our bond with G-d by studying His Torah and performing His mitzvos. Then, and only then, should we turn to natural means to extricate ourselves from our difficulties.
When we act in this manner, we can be secure in the knowledge that whatever natural garment we employ will act to convey the supernatural miracle which is ultimately responsible for getting us out of trouble.
Just as this is so regarding Israel as a whole, so too is it in regard to individual Jews. Every Jew must know14 that he is bound up with G-d, who totally transcends nature. While G-d's blessing must be clothed in the natural vessel of human action ("all that you do"),15 human activity is, after all, no more than a garment. The main emphasis must not be on the garment,16 but on stimulating G-d's abundant blessings through the study of Torah and the performance of mitzvos.
Based on Likkutei Sichos, Vol. VI, pp. 191-193
FOOTNOTES
1. Esther 3:13.
2. See Esther 2:19; Megillah 13a.
3. Esther ibid., verse 21ff.
4. Ibid., 2:17.
5. Ibid., 4:3.
6. Targum Sheini ibid., verse 1.
7. Esther ibid., verse 8.
8. Ibid., verse 17.
9. Ibid., verse 16.
10. Ibid., verse 11.
11. Ibid.
12. See Rambam , Hilchos Taanios 1:2-3.
13. See Devarim 15:18.
14. See Derech Mitzvosecha p. 107ff.; Maamar titled VeYadaata HaYom 5657 , et al.
15. Devarim ibid.
16. See Likkutei Sichos, Vol. VII, p. 184 and places cited there.
Sunday, February 24, 2013
Body or Soul?
Chapter 3, Mishna 4a
Body or Soul? Part I
"Rabbi Shimon said: Three people who ate at the same table and did not speak words of Torah are as if they had eaten from sacrifices to dead [idols], as the verse states, 'For all [such] tables are full of vomit and filth without room' (Isaiah 28:8). But three who ate at the same table and did speak words of Torah are as if they had eaten from the L-rd's table,
as it states, 'And he [the angel] said to me, 'This [altar] is the table that is before the L-rd'' (Ezekiel 41:22)."
This mishna resembles the previous. In Mishna 3 we learned that two people spending time in each other's company must share words of Torah. We were taught the importance of using even small amounts of time productively, as well as of seeing human interaction as a means of increasing religious awareness rather than idling time. Here the advice is similar, yet of course there is one notable addition to our scenario (at least notable to us Jews): food. Here we have three people sharing a meal together, and they too are told to do so with words of Torah. And as we shall see, this mishna's advice, far from being redundant, offers us a far greater insight into Judaism's understanding of life.
As we know, Judaism is not a religion which relates only to matters of ritual and spirit. It is a practical religion, regulating and guiding all areas of human behavior, both the spiritual and the physical. And it offers fulfillment on all levels. No aspect of our lives should be entirely devoid of religious sentiment. Everything G-d created within us is holy, and if used properly can become a vehicle for recognizing G-d's Presence and sanctifying mankind.
But what does this mean? What relationship say does human lust have with spirituality? And this is a question which has plagued theologians throughout the ages. How do we reconcile our undeniable physical lusts with our equally unquestionable spiritual yearnings? Are they contradictory and mutually exclusive? Are we basically animals who just conceal our "real" natures behind a thin veneer of propriety and civilized behavior? Or are we truly souls, yearning for G-d yet shackled by bodies we share in common with the animal kingdom? Either way, not a very comfortable arrangement.
And likewise, how do we reconcile our dual natures? Must we crush and deny our physical drives in order to truly become people of spirit? Or must we deaden our souls and consciences in order to truly enjoy ourselves in this world? Or is the proper path some kind of delicate balancing act? But again, is that balance basically just a compromise -- sacrificing a little of our spirituality -- as well as a lot of our fun -- in order to live ordinary, well-mannered lives? What should we -- and what does the Torah -- consider the ideal?
(An issue we will not discuss this week is the fact that this dilemma became far more pronounced after the primordial Sin of man. Before Adam and Eve ate of the Tree of Knowledge, the drive for evil was an external force, embodied in the Biblical Serpent. Man himself was far more pure and complete; his physical was in complete harmony with his soul.)
I believe it is a valid observation that Gentiles appear to have even greater difficulty with this issue than Jews. When Bilam (Balaam), the wicked prophet of the nations (see Numbers 22-24), saw prophetically G-d waiting to see which drop of semen would produce a righteous person, he simply could not take it: "Would a G-d who is pure and holy and whose servants are pure and holy look at such things?!" (Talmud Niddah 31a). This coming from a person who according to the Talmud regularly engaged in bestiality (Sanhedrin 105b). (For Bilam's "righteous indignation" G-d blinded him in one eye, continues the Talmud.)
What Bilam could not relate to is how religion and holiness could have any relationship to physical, lustful activity. (Why such "lustful activity" results in man's highest act of creation too was surely beyond him.) In his world, spirituality and even prophecy are matters of the mind and the soul. Bilam's body was his to debase any way he felt like.
A further observation regarding this is that two of the great world religions appear to have dramatically divergent approaches to this issue. Now I'll state my standard disclaimer at this point. I have no pretenses of expertise in comparative religions. What follows I'm sure is a vast oversimplification. Yet I believe it sheds some light on man's difficulty in grappling with the issue of physical versus spiritual and the vastly divergent approaches different races and cultures have taken.
Christianity seems to view man's physical side as basically evil. Priests take vows of poverty. The truly holy are celibate. If you truly want G-d, you will live in a monastery, removed from mundane living and reality. Man was conceived in sin. Only by distancing himself the utmost from his original conception does he have any hope of attaining salvation. (We know only all too well today with all the cases of child abuse surfacing how badly such an approach often backfires.)
Islam, on the other hand, appears to take precisely the opposite approach. The physical to them almost assumes sacred proportions. Their image of the world to come is a heavenly harem, 70 beautiful virgins for every man. (I don't know what they offer women. ;-) The ideal state of man is cheapened to the fleeting pleasures of the flesh. A very sad and tragic distortion of man's inborn need for spirituality indeed. (It was probably a wonderful marketing tool when Islam was invented (if you have the luxury of inventing a religion, that is) -- far more attractive than flying from cloud to cloud playing the harp.)
And taken to the illogical extreme of Muslim fundamentalism, why not blow yourself up for your "holy" cause? After a little pain, you'll go straight to G-d's court in Heaven -- no doubt to a far better life than you lead today. (Boy are *they* in for a surprise!) ;-) I sometimes just wish that the victims of terrorism be allowed to be present when the perpetrators of such madness are put on trial in Heaven -- when they are brought to the awful realization of the utter fallacy of their lives. And even better, I wish one of those holy "martyrs" would be able to come back and tell his fellows who's really right.)
But in a small way Islam *is* onto something. They have some sense that there is holiness to the physical world and even to physical pleasure. If G-d created it, it cannot simply be evil -- to be conquered and suppressed. Judaism does not believe evil is an entity which exists outside of G-d. Man's body -- with all its lusts and drives -- was not the creation of Satan; it is the handiwork of G-d Himself. It must therefore be purposeful -- and "good" -- in the eyes of G-d, and capable of being uplifted in His service.
(By the way, the above might explain why the Muslims have had more of a presence in the Land of Israel during the course of the Exile. It too is a "Holy Land": a land whose physical side assumes sacred dimensions. The Land itself is holy. G-d watches over it, and crops which grow in it possess a degree of sanctity. Only a people which recognizes the hidden but intrinsic sanctity to the physical is able to develop a relationship -- even a transient one -- with such a Land.)
Well, I still have to do the impossible task of coming up with the Jewish view on all of this -- and further, what in the world has this got to do with our mishna? I think I'll have to take another week for this one! Till then! :-)
Body or Soul? Part I
"Rabbi Shimon said: Three people who ate at the same table and did not speak words of Torah are as if they had eaten from sacrifices to dead [idols], as the verse states, 'For all [such] tables are full of vomit and filth without room' (Isaiah 28:8). But three who ate at the same table and did speak words of Torah are as if they had eaten from the L-rd's table,
as it states, 'And he [the angel] said to me, 'This [altar] is the table that is before the L-rd'' (Ezekiel 41:22)."
This mishna resembles the previous. In Mishna 3 we learned that two people spending time in each other's company must share words of Torah. We were taught the importance of using even small amounts of time productively, as well as of seeing human interaction as a means of increasing religious awareness rather than idling time. Here the advice is similar, yet of course there is one notable addition to our scenario (at least notable to us Jews): food. Here we have three people sharing a meal together, and they too are told to do so with words of Torah. And as we shall see, this mishna's advice, far from being redundant, offers us a far greater insight into Judaism's understanding of life.
As we know, Judaism is not a religion which relates only to matters of ritual and spirit. It is a practical religion, regulating and guiding all areas of human behavior, both the spiritual and the physical. And it offers fulfillment on all levels. No aspect of our lives should be entirely devoid of religious sentiment. Everything G-d created within us is holy, and if used properly can become a vehicle for recognizing G-d's Presence and sanctifying mankind.
But what does this mean? What relationship say does human lust have with spirituality? And this is a question which has plagued theologians throughout the ages. How do we reconcile our undeniable physical lusts with our equally unquestionable spiritual yearnings? Are they contradictory and mutually exclusive? Are we basically animals who just conceal our "real" natures behind a thin veneer of propriety and civilized behavior? Or are we truly souls, yearning for G-d yet shackled by bodies we share in common with the animal kingdom? Either way, not a very comfortable arrangement.
And likewise, how do we reconcile our dual natures? Must we crush and deny our physical drives in order to truly become people of spirit? Or must we deaden our souls and consciences in order to truly enjoy ourselves in this world? Or is the proper path some kind of delicate balancing act? But again, is that balance basically just a compromise -- sacrificing a little of our spirituality -- as well as a lot of our fun -- in order to live ordinary, well-mannered lives? What should we -- and what does the Torah -- consider the ideal?
(An issue we will not discuss this week is the fact that this dilemma became far more pronounced after the primordial Sin of man. Before Adam and Eve ate of the Tree of Knowledge, the drive for evil was an external force, embodied in the Biblical Serpent. Man himself was far more pure and complete; his physical was in complete harmony with his soul.)
I believe it is a valid observation that Gentiles appear to have even greater difficulty with this issue than Jews. When Bilam (Balaam), the wicked prophet of the nations (see Numbers 22-24), saw prophetically G-d waiting to see which drop of semen would produce a righteous person, he simply could not take it: "Would a G-d who is pure and holy and whose servants are pure and holy look at such things?!" (Talmud Niddah 31a). This coming from a person who according to the Talmud regularly engaged in bestiality (Sanhedrin 105b). (For Bilam's "righteous indignation" G-d blinded him in one eye, continues the Talmud.)
What Bilam could not relate to is how religion and holiness could have any relationship to physical, lustful activity. (Why such "lustful activity" results in man's highest act of creation too was surely beyond him.) In his world, spirituality and even prophecy are matters of the mind and the soul. Bilam's body was his to debase any way he felt like.
A further observation regarding this is that two of the great world religions appear to have dramatically divergent approaches to this issue. Now I'll state my standard disclaimer at this point. I have no pretenses of expertise in comparative religions. What follows I'm sure is a vast oversimplification. Yet I believe it sheds some light on man's difficulty in grappling with the issue of physical versus spiritual and the vastly divergent approaches different races and cultures have taken.
Christianity seems to view man's physical side as basically evil. Priests take vows of poverty. The truly holy are celibate. If you truly want G-d, you will live in a monastery, removed from mundane living and reality. Man was conceived in sin. Only by distancing himself the utmost from his original conception does he have any hope of attaining salvation. (We know only all too well today with all the cases of child abuse surfacing how badly such an approach often backfires.)
Islam, on the other hand, appears to take precisely the opposite approach. The physical to them almost assumes sacred proportions. Their image of the world to come is a heavenly harem, 70 beautiful virgins for every man. (I don't know what they offer women. ;-) The ideal state of man is cheapened to the fleeting pleasures of the flesh. A very sad and tragic distortion of man's inborn need for spirituality indeed. (It was probably a wonderful marketing tool when Islam was invented (if you have the luxury of inventing a religion, that is) -- far more attractive than flying from cloud to cloud playing the harp.)
And taken to the illogical extreme of Muslim fundamentalism, why not blow yourself up for your "holy" cause? After a little pain, you'll go straight to G-d's court in Heaven -- no doubt to a far better life than you lead today. (Boy are *they* in for a surprise!) ;-) I sometimes just wish that the victims of terrorism be allowed to be present when the perpetrators of such madness are put on trial in Heaven -- when they are brought to the awful realization of the utter fallacy of their lives. And even better, I wish one of those holy "martyrs" would be able to come back and tell his fellows who's really right.)
But in a small way Islam *is* onto something. They have some sense that there is holiness to the physical world and even to physical pleasure. If G-d created it, it cannot simply be evil -- to be conquered and suppressed. Judaism does not believe evil is an entity which exists outside of G-d. Man's body -- with all its lusts and drives -- was not the creation of Satan; it is the handiwork of G-d Himself. It must therefore be purposeful -- and "good" -- in the eyes of G-d, and capable of being uplifted in His service.
(By the way, the above might explain why the Muslims have had more of a presence in the Land of Israel during the course of the Exile. It too is a "Holy Land": a land whose physical side assumes sacred dimensions. The Land itself is holy. G-d watches over it, and crops which grow in it possess a degree of sanctity. Only a people which recognizes the hidden but intrinsic sanctity to the physical is able to develop a relationship -- even a transient one -- with such a Land.)
Well, I still have to do the impossible task of coming up with the Jewish view on all of this -- and further, what in the world has this got to do with our mishna? I think I'll have to take another week for this one! Till then! :-)
Tuesday, February 19, 2013
Reishis Goyim Amalek 5680 [1920].
Learning & Values » Texts & Writings » Chassidic Texts » Reishit Goyim Amalek
http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/97823/jewish/Reishit-Goyim-Amalek.htm
http://www.chabad.org/therebbe/livingtorah/player_cdo/aid/363468/jewish/The-Previous-Rebbes-Arrival-to-America.htm
Publisher's Foreword
Share
PrintE-mailNext »
Chapter 1 In honor of the approach of Beis Nissan, we are happy to share with our readers a freshly-edited English translation of Reishis Goyim Amalek 5680 [1920].
This maamar is of particular interest because it was the first discourse delivered by the Previous Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Yosef Yitzchak Schneersohn, of blessed memory, after succeeding to the mantle of leadership on Beis Nissan, 5780 (1920). It is based on the last discourse delivered by his father, the Rebbe Rashab, who passed away on that date.
The original translation of this maamar was first published in 5747 [1987] in response to a call of the Rebbe that it be widely studied in order to ameliorate certain untoward events that clouded the chassidic horizon at that time. And since (in the words of the Rebbe Rayatz) “the words of tzaddikim are eternally true,” we may safely assume that its widespread study today will likewise help to sweeten whatever situations require sweetening today.
To Farbreng with
the Rebbe Rashab in Rostov
This maamar was first heard in the midst of the bitter civil war that shook the cities of Russia in the aftermath of the 1917 Revolution and the First World War. The dangers were so fierce that the Rebbe Rashab had planned to leave Rostov with his family before the approaching Bolsheviks overran it. This plan never eventuated, and in view of the grim situation he even forbade his chassidim to visit him to quench their thirst for Chassidus or to be received for private audience at yechidus.
The chassidim, however, continued to long for their well-loved and well-remembered visits to the home of the Rebbe Rashab. Despite his emergency orders, therefore, a large group of chassidim arrived there on Purim in order to participate in an uplifting farbrengen. Thus it was that the whole spiritual drama described below took place — in the very same building in Rostov that was redeemed from its gentile occupants this year after its seventy years in exile. This house was the home of the Rebbe Rashab from 1915 to 1920, and of the Rebbe Rayatz from 1915 until he was forced to flee from Rostov in 1924. To this day it resounds with many rich and epic moments in Lubavitch history, and it is scheduled to soon house a vigorous new branch of the same Tomchei Temimim Yeshivah which flourished in Rostov until 1924.
The farbrengen to be held with the visiting chassidim was originally intended to be brief. They were to disperse promptly because of the law which unequivocally prohibited all gatherings. Half an hour after it began, however, the Rebbe Rashab said LeChaim! to all those present. From that moment, as one of those present records,1 “we saw a transformation overtake him, as if there was now a new spirit within him.... He called to one of the chassidim and asked him to bring mashke.”
His wife, the Rebbitzin Sterna Sarah, and his son, who was later to succeed him as the Rebbe Rayatz, were fearful for his life.
The Rebbe Rashab was reassuring: “Yosef Yitzchak, don‘t be afraid. We shall remain intact. And I don‘t mean intact in secret chambers; I mean intact as we overtly move outward and extend ourselves.” [In the Yiddish original, mir veln zain gantz mit unzer gantzer yetziah vehispashtus.]
The chassid who recorded these words added his own note to his readers: “You can understand for yourselves what these words were hinting at.” [I.e., an assumed allusion to the Rebbe Rashab‘s own impending passing.]
A Maamar
to Silence Bolsheviks
While the chassidim were seated there around the Rebbe Rashab‘s table, news arrived that Bolsheviks with search-warrants were systematically ransacking their homes. Fear froze their hearts, but the Rebbe Rashab continued as before to rouse them on as they sang. As the same chassid continues: “His conduct appeared wondrously different to anything we had previously seen; we saw overt miracles from him that night.”
Sure enough, while the Rebbe Rashab was in the midst of farbrengen, the search squad knocked at the door. They were told that a search was now out of the question because the Rebbe was now occupied. Their second visit struck terror upon the chassidim, some of whom by this stage were not completely sober. To make things worse, as one would have thought, a mound of incriminating evidence was piled high on the table — the money that these poor chassidim had all contributed and collected for the upkeep of the Tomchei Temimim Yeshivah.
This was the history-making Yeshivah which the Rebbe Rashab himself had founded in Lubavitch in 1897. When he had fled with his family from Lubavitch in White Russia with the approach of the German forces at the height of World War I, it had followed him southeast here, to Rostov on the River Don. Tomchei Temimim was the crucible in which true chassidim were forged. It encapsulated the future of the Chabad-Lubavitch tradition. It was thus the apple of his eye — and the main target of the Yevsektsia.
The Bolsheviks were now inside the room. The money was on the table, and the time had come for the Rebbe Rashab to deliver a maamar.
The eye-witness continues his report: “Before he began he directed that nothing should be removed from the table, and then added: ’As I stand in the present situation, I have no fear of them whatever.‘
“They now took up positions facing him at the table. He turned aside a little and said: ’Nu, let‘s start speaking words of Chassidus, and then they will be altogether nullified.‘
“With that he immediately embarked on the maamar with these words: Reishis goyim Amalek, veachariso adei oved — ’Amalek is the first among nations, and in the end he shall be destroyed.‘ Its theme is that the kelipos do not have any true and intrinsic existence; they are non-entities.
“After standing and looking at him for a long time, the Bolsheviks left without a word. We stayed there till about four a.m.”
The First Maamar
of the Rebbe Rayatz
Two weeks later, on Motzaei Shabbos, the eve of the second of Nissan, the Rebbe Rashab departed this world physically.
In the dynasties of most other chassidic trends, the succession is customarily overt and immediate. In the case of most of our Rebbeim, and so too in this case, the mantle of leadership was accepted in gradual stages and only after some time worn overtly. (In fact, the Rebbe has referred in writing to Beis Nissan as the day on which the Rebbe Rayatz assumed the responsibilities of Rebbe.)
In Lubavitch tradition, the delivery of a maamar by the new incumbent is commonly perceived as indicating the acceptance of the Nesius. Thus, in more recent years, chassidim who were privileged to be present at “770” on the first yahrzeit of the Rebbe Rayatz on Yud Shvat, 5711 [1951], testify that the air was electrified with anticipation: Was the Rebbe going to deliver what was to prove to be the first maamar of one-and-a-half thousand?
Keeping this tradition in mind, the following first-person description of the prelude to the first maamar of the Rebbe Rayatz — i.e., the maamar which appears hereunder — is of acute interest. The description is borrowed from Ashkavta DeRebbe,2 an account of the period of the Rebbe Rashab‘s passing written by one of his close disciples, the eminent Rabbi Moshe DovBer Rivkin, later rosh yeshivah of Yeshivas Torah VaDaas in New York.
“It was after Minchah on Shabbos Kodesh [Parshas] Tzav, the last day of the shivah. The chassidim were all waiting for Maariv in the dining room adjoining the study of the Rebbe [Rashab], whose soul is in Eden, and the Rebbe [Rayatz] Shlita was in the study alone. One of his attendants called for me, and as soon as I entered he said with a broken heart: ’My father, after all, ordered me to speak words of Chassidus [i.e., to deliver maamarim] to Anash. But who am I, and how can I bring myself to stand in front of the members of the chassidic fraternity and deliver maamarim?‘
“In his humility he wanted to continue, but I interrupted him by saying that I would rather not hear further words in this vein.
“He continued: ’Nevertheless, since my father gave me an order, I would like to deliver a maamar of Chassidus for you. In that way I will have discharged my obligation to fulfill my father‘s holy instruction.‘
“I of course agreed. He did not want to be seated; instead, we walked about in the study, and he recited for me the last maamar which the Rebbe [Rashab] of blessed memory delivered publicly — the above-mentioned maamar that begins, Reishis Goyim Amalek. The wording was identical to that of the original maamar, except that he interspersed many glosses of his own. When it came to an end and I was about to leave, he detained me for a moment and asked me not to reveal to anyone what had transpired.
“ ’Why not?‘ I asked. ’In fact, I would very much like to let people know,‘ and so on.
“He earnestly repeated his request and I remained silent. When I left the study, however, I shared my information ’as a secret‘ only with the elderly chassid, Rabbi Shmuel Gourary. Since he had not been ordered to keep it a secret, he promptly passed in on. Within a few minutes, by word of mouth, the news had spread throughout the whole of the chassidic brotherhood, to whom it served as a measure of consolation.”
A Tzaddik's Merest Vessels
Retain their Sanctity
Rabbi Rivkin further relates that the Rebbe Rayatz lent him a transcript (a ksav) of the maamar for a few days, but he was afraid to copy it without explicit permission from the Rebbe. At any rate, he did take the liberty of copying the following few lines (from sec. 4 below). The first sentence of this passage is repeated verbatim from the parent maamar of the Rebbe Rashab, and its continuation is part of a long parenthetical addition by the Rebbe Rayatz: “Anything which G-d ordained to serve as a proper receptor for the irradiation of His light enjoys an essential and absolute existence. (One might add that this is the meaning of teachings such as,3 ’Holiness cannot be displaced,‘ and4 ’Ritual objects retain their sanctity.‘ Thus, the place in which a tzaddik studied Torah and engaged in the service of G-d retains its sanctity even after he has risen out of corporeal life and begun true life, for the luminescence of his Divine service remains there. We may therefore say that the place in which he studied and engaged in Torah, and all the vessels he utilized in the course of his spiritual service, retain their sanctity as part of his personal share in the spiritual rectification and elevation of the world...).”
In this passage, the Rebbe once observed,5 we see “something truly wondrous” — that a tzaddik‘s holiness fully retains its ongoing power not only with regard to his manuscripts and learned books and the like, but even with regard to his everyday objects, such as his table and chair. Moreover, the Rebbe points out, the context makes it clear that the Rebbe Rayatz is likening this relationship to the relationship between the “vessels” and the “lights” of the realm of Atzilus.
Furthermore, the Rebbe continues, this ongoing holiness continues powerfully while the table remains an ordinary everyday table. So powerfully, indeed, does it continue, that (as the passage interpolated by the Rebbe Rayatz goes on to describe) “once, in about the year 5645 or 5646 [1885-6], I saw my revered father [the Rebbe Rashab] enter the study of his father — my grandfather [the Rebbe Maharash]..., where he stood against the table, opposite his father‘s chair.”
“In other words,” the Rebbe concludes, “he entered that room exactly as he had been accustomed to entering it for yechidus. And the term yechidus signifies that the yechidah (the soul‘s innermost core) of the individual coming for yechidus fuses with the yechidah of the individual to whom he comes for yechidus....”
Firstly: Though the Rebbe himself had described Reishis Goyim Amalek as being “evidently the closing maamar [of the Rebbe Rashab],” he did not consider it right that this preface should describe it — without further qualification — as “the closing maamar,” because there is one more maamar, the one beginning Hineh Anochi, which the Rebbe Rashab delivered after this one.
The solution to this seeming anomaly is to be found in Rabbi Rivkin‘s account of the unique circumstances in which the maamar beginning Hineh Anochi was delivered: “On Shabbos Kodesh Parshas [Ki] Sisa, a maamar was delivered [by the Rebbe Rashab] on the words, Hineh Anochi Kores Bris.... The only ones present were his son [the Rebbe Rayatz] and three others, including myself, the writer of these lines. Hence, Reishis Goyim Amalek is the last maamar that the Rebbe Rashab delivered publicly. It is also the first maamar that the Rebbe Rayatz delivered when he first became Rebbe.”
The Rebbe goes on to say that “this may frequently be seen in the two manners in which material is added in the maamarim of the Tzemach Tzedek: (a) the interpolations are indicated by parentheses, sometimes introduced by [an initial letter or whatever] to show that what follows is an appended gloss; (b) the interpolations are incorporated in the body of the text, sometimes entailing changes in it, so that together they become one maamar — as in this case.”
Keeping in mind that Reishis Goyim Amalek was explicitly intended to nullify the Amalek of that era, viz., the Bolsheviks, it may perhaps be assumed that the delivery of these parallel maamarim in Adar 5730 [1970] was likewise intended to nullify the painful decree which at exactly this time the Rebbe began to publicly campaign against — the issue which is popularly known as “Who is a Jew?”
Some years later, on the eve of Rosh Chodesh Nissan, 5747 [1987],6 the Rebbe urged that Reishis Goyim Amalek be widely studied. At the same time he made what appears to have been an allusion to the insistent appeal which was being heard in the Federal Court at exactly that time contesting the ownership of the historic library of the Rebbe Rayatz. (Ultimately, the court decided that it was not to be inherited by any private family member; it was the lawful property of Agudas Chassidei Chabad, with the Rebbe at its head ex officio).
An End to Darkness
To conclude with the thought with which the Rebbe closes one of the maamarim of 5730 [1970]:7 Battling against the kelipah of Amalek by means of the Divine spark within one‘s soul and by means of one‘s conscious faculties brings about8 “G-d‘s battle against Amalek from generation to generation,” a phrase which the Targum relates to the generation of Mashiach. It brings about the time at which9 “[G-d] has set a limit to darkness” — with the imminent coming of Mashiach.
In the meantime, as we said above, the original translation of this maamar was first published in 5747 [1987] in response to a call of the Rebbe that it be widely studied in order to ameliorate certain untoward events that clouded the chassidic horizon at that time. And since (in the words of the Rebbe Rayatz) “the words of tzaddikim are eternally true,” we may safely assume that its widespread study today will likewise help to sweeten whatever situations require sweetening today. This will surely bring us closer to the days in which there will be10 “neither envy nor competition” — the days in which “the occupation of the whole world will be solely to know G-d.”
http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/97823/jewish/Reishit-Goyim-Amalek.htm
http://www.chabad.org/therebbe/livingtorah/player_cdo/aid/363468/jewish/The-Previous-Rebbes-Arrival-to-America.htm
Publisher's Foreword
Share
PrintE-mailNext »
Chapter 1 In honor of the approach of Beis Nissan, we are happy to share with our readers a freshly-edited English translation of Reishis Goyim Amalek 5680 [1920].
This maamar is of particular interest because it was the first discourse delivered by the Previous Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Yosef Yitzchak Schneersohn, of blessed memory, after succeeding to the mantle of leadership on Beis Nissan, 5780 (1920). It is based on the last discourse delivered by his father, the Rebbe Rashab, who passed away on that date.
The original translation of this maamar was first published in 5747 [1987] in response to a call of the Rebbe that it be widely studied in order to ameliorate certain untoward events that clouded the chassidic horizon at that time. And since (in the words of the Rebbe Rayatz) “the words of tzaddikim are eternally true,” we may safely assume that its widespread study today will likewise help to sweeten whatever situations require sweetening today.
To Farbreng with
the Rebbe Rashab in Rostov
This maamar was first heard in the midst of the bitter civil war that shook the cities of Russia in the aftermath of the 1917 Revolution and the First World War. The dangers were so fierce that the Rebbe Rashab had planned to leave Rostov with his family before the approaching Bolsheviks overran it. This plan never eventuated, and in view of the grim situation he even forbade his chassidim to visit him to quench their thirst for Chassidus or to be received for private audience at yechidus.
The chassidim, however, continued to long for their well-loved and well-remembered visits to the home of the Rebbe Rashab. Despite his emergency orders, therefore, a large group of chassidim arrived there on Purim in order to participate in an uplifting farbrengen. Thus it was that the whole spiritual drama described below took place — in the very same building in Rostov that was redeemed from its gentile occupants this year after its seventy years in exile. This house was the home of the Rebbe Rashab from 1915 to 1920, and of the Rebbe Rayatz from 1915 until he was forced to flee from Rostov in 1924. To this day it resounds with many rich and epic moments in Lubavitch history, and it is scheduled to soon house a vigorous new branch of the same Tomchei Temimim Yeshivah which flourished in Rostov until 1924.
The farbrengen to be held with the visiting chassidim was originally intended to be brief. They were to disperse promptly because of the law which unequivocally prohibited all gatherings. Half an hour after it began, however, the Rebbe Rashab said LeChaim! to all those present. From that moment, as one of those present records,1 “we saw a transformation overtake him, as if there was now a new spirit within him.... He called to one of the chassidim and asked him to bring mashke.”
His wife, the Rebbitzin Sterna Sarah, and his son, who was later to succeed him as the Rebbe Rayatz, were fearful for his life.
The Rebbe Rashab was reassuring: “Yosef Yitzchak, don‘t be afraid. We shall remain intact. And I don‘t mean intact in secret chambers; I mean intact as we overtly move outward and extend ourselves.” [In the Yiddish original, mir veln zain gantz mit unzer gantzer yetziah vehispashtus.]
The chassid who recorded these words added his own note to his readers: “You can understand for yourselves what these words were hinting at.” [I.e., an assumed allusion to the Rebbe Rashab‘s own impending passing.]
A Maamar
to Silence Bolsheviks
While the chassidim were seated there around the Rebbe Rashab‘s table, news arrived that Bolsheviks with search-warrants were systematically ransacking their homes. Fear froze their hearts, but the Rebbe Rashab continued as before to rouse them on as they sang. As the same chassid continues: “His conduct appeared wondrously different to anything we had previously seen; we saw overt miracles from him that night.”
Sure enough, while the Rebbe Rashab was in the midst of farbrengen, the search squad knocked at the door. They were told that a search was now out of the question because the Rebbe was now occupied. Their second visit struck terror upon the chassidim, some of whom by this stage were not completely sober. To make things worse, as one would have thought, a mound of incriminating evidence was piled high on the table — the money that these poor chassidim had all contributed and collected for the upkeep of the Tomchei Temimim Yeshivah.
This was the history-making Yeshivah which the Rebbe Rashab himself had founded in Lubavitch in 1897. When he had fled with his family from Lubavitch in White Russia with the approach of the German forces at the height of World War I, it had followed him southeast here, to Rostov on the River Don. Tomchei Temimim was the crucible in which true chassidim were forged. It encapsulated the future of the Chabad-Lubavitch tradition. It was thus the apple of his eye — and the main target of the Yevsektsia.
The Bolsheviks were now inside the room. The money was on the table, and the time had come for the Rebbe Rashab to deliver a maamar.
The eye-witness continues his report: “Before he began he directed that nothing should be removed from the table, and then added: ’As I stand in the present situation, I have no fear of them whatever.‘
“They now took up positions facing him at the table. He turned aside a little and said: ’Nu, let‘s start speaking words of Chassidus, and then they will be altogether nullified.‘
“With that he immediately embarked on the maamar with these words: Reishis goyim Amalek, veachariso adei oved — ’Amalek is the first among nations, and in the end he shall be destroyed.‘ Its theme is that the kelipos do not have any true and intrinsic existence; they are non-entities.
“After standing and looking at him for a long time, the Bolsheviks left without a word. We stayed there till about four a.m.”
The First Maamar
of the Rebbe Rayatz
Two weeks later, on Motzaei Shabbos, the eve of the second of Nissan, the Rebbe Rashab departed this world physically.
In the dynasties of most other chassidic trends, the succession is customarily overt and immediate. In the case of most of our Rebbeim, and so too in this case, the mantle of leadership was accepted in gradual stages and only after some time worn overtly. (In fact, the Rebbe has referred in writing to Beis Nissan as the day on which the Rebbe Rayatz assumed the responsibilities of Rebbe.)
In Lubavitch tradition, the delivery of a maamar by the new incumbent is commonly perceived as indicating the acceptance of the Nesius. Thus, in more recent years, chassidim who were privileged to be present at “770” on the first yahrzeit of the Rebbe Rayatz on Yud Shvat, 5711 [1951], testify that the air was electrified with anticipation: Was the Rebbe going to deliver what was to prove to be the first maamar of one-and-a-half thousand?
Keeping this tradition in mind, the following first-person description of the prelude to the first maamar of the Rebbe Rayatz — i.e., the maamar which appears hereunder — is of acute interest. The description is borrowed from Ashkavta DeRebbe,2 an account of the period of the Rebbe Rashab‘s passing written by one of his close disciples, the eminent Rabbi Moshe DovBer Rivkin, later rosh yeshivah of Yeshivas Torah VaDaas in New York.
“It was after Minchah on Shabbos Kodesh [Parshas] Tzav, the last day of the shivah. The chassidim were all waiting for Maariv in the dining room adjoining the study of the Rebbe [Rashab], whose soul is in Eden, and the Rebbe [Rayatz] Shlita was in the study alone. One of his attendants called for me, and as soon as I entered he said with a broken heart: ’My father, after all, ordered me to speak words of Chassidus [i.e., to deliver maamarim] to Anash. But who am I, and how can I bring myself to stand in front of the members of the chassidic fraternity and deliver maamarim?‘
“In his humility he wanted to continue, but I interrupted him by saying that I would rather not hear further words in this vein.
“He continued: ’Nevertheless, since my father gave me an order, I would like to deliver a maamar of Chassidus for you. In that way I will have discharged my obligation to fulfill my father‘s holy instruction.‘
“I of course agreed. He did not want to be seated; instead, we walked about in the study, and he recited for me the last maamar which the Rebbe [Rashab] of blessed memory delivered publicly — the above-mentioned maamar that begins, Reishis Goyim Amalek. The wording was identical to that of the original maamar, except that he interspersed many glosses of his own. When it came to an end and I was about to leave, he detained me for a moment and asked me not to reveal to anyone what had transpired.
“ ’Why not?‘ I asked. ’In fact, I would very much like to let people know,‘ and so on.
“He earnestly repeated his request and I remained silent. When I left the study, however, I shared my information ’as a secret‘ only with the elderly chassid, Rabbi Shmuel Gourary. Since he had not been ordered to keep it a secret, he promptly passed in on. Within a few minutes, by word of mouth, the news had spread throughout the whole of the chassidic brotherhood, to whom it served as a measure of consolation.”
A Tzaddik's Merest Vessels
Retain their Sanctity
Rabbi Rivkin further relates that the Rebbe Rayatz lent him a transcript (a ksav) of the maamar for a few days, but he was afraid to copy it without explicit permission from the Rebbe. At any rate, he did take the liberty of copying the following few lines (from sec. 4 below). The first sentence of this passage is repeated verbatim from the parent maamar of the Rebbe Rashab, and its continuation is part of a long parenthetical addition by the Rebbe Rayatz: “Anything which G-d ordained to serve as a proper receptor for the irradiation of His light enjoys an essential and absolute existence. (One might add that this is the meaning of teachings such as,3 ’Holiness cannot be displaced,‘ and4 ’Ritual objects retain their sanctity.‘ Thus, the place in which a tzaddik studied Torah and engaged in the service of G-d retains its sanctity even after he has risen out of corporeal life and begun true life, for the luminescence of his Divine service remains there. We may therefore say that the place in which he studied and engaged in Torah, and all the vessels he utilized in the course of his spiritual service, retain their sanctity as part of his personal share in the spiritual rectification and elevation of the world...).”
In this passage, the Rebbe once observed,5 we see “something truly wondrous” — that a tzaddik‘s holiness fully retains its ongoing power not only with regard to his manuscripts and learned books and the like, but even with regard to his everyday objects, such as his table and chair. Moreover, the Rebbe points out, the context makes it clear that the Rebbe Rayatz is likening this relationship to the relationship between the “vessels” and the “lights” of the realm of Atzilus.
Furthermore, the Rebbe continues, this ongoing holiness continues powerfully while the table remains an ordinary everyday table. So powerfully, indeed, does it continue, that (as the passage interpolated by the Rebbe Rayatz goes on to describe) “once, in about the year 5645 or 5646 [1885-6], I saw my revered father [the Rebbe Rashab] enter the study of his father — my grandfather [the Rebbe Maharash]..., where he stood against the table, opposite his father‘s chair.”
“In other words,” the Rebbe concludes, “he entered that room exactly as he had been accustomed to entering it for yechidus. And the term yechidus signifies that the yechidah (the soul‘s innermost core) of the individual coming for yechidus fuses with the yechidah of the individual to whom he comes for yechidus....”
Firstly: Though the Rebbe himself had described Reishis Goyim Amalek as being “evidently the closing maamar [of the Rebbe Rashab],” he did not consider it right that this preface should describe it — without further qualification — as “the closing maamar,” because there is one more maamar, the one beginning Hineh Anochi, which the Rebbe Rashab delivered after this one.
The solution to this seeming anomaly is to be found in Rabbi Rivkin‘s account of the unique circumstances in which the maamar beginning Hineh Anochi was delivered: “On Shabbos Kodesh Parshas [Ki] Sisa, a maamar was delivered [by the Rebbe Rashab] on the words, Hineh Anochi Kores Bris.... The only ones present were his son [the Rebbe Rayatz] and three others, including myself, the writer of these lines. Hence, Reishis Goyim Amalek is the last maamar that the Rebbe Rashab delivered publicly. It is also the first maamar that the Rebbe Rayatz delivered when he first became Rebbe.”
The Rebbe goes on to say that “this may frequently be seen in the two manners in which material is added in the maamarim of the Tzemach Tzedek: (a) the interpolations are indicated by parentheses, sometimes introduced by [an initial letter or whatever] to show that what follows is an appended gloss; (b) the interpolations are incorporated in the body of the text, sometimes entailing changes in it, so that together they become one maamar — as in this case.”
Keeping in mind that Reishis Goyim Amalek was explicitly intended to nullify the Amalek of that era, viz., the Bolsheviks, it may perhaps be assumed that the delivery of these parallel maamarim in Adar 5730 [1970] was likewise intended to nullify the painful decree which at exactly this time the Rebbe began to publicly campaign against — the issue which is popularly known as “Who is a Jew?”
Some years later, on the eve of Rosh Chodesh Nissan, 5747 [1987],6 the Rebbe urged that Reishis Goyim Amalek be widely studied. At the same time he made what appears to have been an allusion to the insistent appeal which was being heard in the Federal Court at exactly that time contesting the ownership of the historic library of the Rebbe Rayatz. (Ultimately, the court decided that it was not to be inherited by any private family member; it was the lawful property of Agudas Chassidei Chabad, with the Rebbe at its head ex officio).
An End to Darkness
To conclude with the thought with which the Rebbe closes one of the maamarim of 5730 [1970]:7 Battling against the kelipah of Amalek by means of the Divine spark within one‘s soul and by means of one‘s conscious faculties brings about8 “G-d‘s battle against Amalek from generation to generation,” a phrase which the Targum relates to the generation of Mashiach. It brings about the time at which9 “[G-d] has set a limit to darkness” — with the imminent coming of Mashiach.
In the meantime, as we said above, the original translation of this maamar was first published in 5747 [1987] in response to a call of the Rebbe that it be widely studied in order to ameliorate certain untoward events that clouded the chassidic horizon at that time. And since (in the words of the Rebbe Rayatz) “the words of tzaddikim are eternally true,” we may safely assume that its widespread study today will likewise help to sweeten whatever situations require sweetening today. This will surely bring us closer to the days in which there will be10 “neither envy nor competition” — the days in which “the occupation of the whole world will be solely to know G-d.”
Lechah Dodi
http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/531526/jewish/Chapter-1.htm
Jewish Practice » Lifecycle Events » Marriage » The Wedding » Readings & Tools » Tools » Lecha Dodi (Chassidic Discourses) » Lechah Dodi, 5689
Chapter 1
From the writings & talks of Rabbi Yosef Yitzchak of Lubavitch
Share
PrintE-mail Discuss (0)Next »
Chapter 2 Lechah Dodi, 5689
לכה דודי תרפ״טּ
לכה דודי לקראת כלה פני נקבלה
“Come, my Beloved to meet the Bride; let us welcome the Shabbos” Behold the Shabbos is called both bride and queen as in the expression “the Shabbos queen.” [The above metaphors are related to a wedding. In that context] the groom is called a king, as mentioned in Pirkei d’R. Eliezer 1 “a groom is like a king,” and the bride is called a queen.
[The concept also finds its parallel in the spiritual realms] as the Torah 2 declares “Let us make man in our image after our likeness.” Man below [on the earthly plane] reflects the form and image of the Higher Man, i.e., the heavenly Sefiros. [In that realm, the quality of] Ze’er Anpin of Atzilus known by its initials as Z”A [which corresponds to G-d’s “emotional powers”] is called “the King” as explained concerning [the quotation from the Zohar 3]: “The image of each and every soul stood before the holy King” i.e. Z”A of Atzilus. The Sefirah of Malchus Royalty is called the queen.
The Zohar 4 comments “a king without a queen is neither a king, nor is he great.” The essential factor is the union of Z”un Z”A and Nukvah [the Kabbalistic term for Malchus. This is emphasized] by the Torah’s statement 5 “Male and female He created them. And G-d blessed them…” [There, too, the blessing came to them, not to one alone.]
[To return to the concept of Shabbos.] The Shabbos must be received with joy, for it is the source of all blessings, both heavenly and earthly. [The Zohar states 6] “all the days are blessed from the Shabbos.” The same applies to a bride; she must also be greeted [with joy] for she is the source of all the blessings of above.
The above expression לכה דודי לקראת כלה פני שבת נקבלה is used in the Kabbalas Shabbos prayers. Its source is the Talmud’s 7 [description of how the sages would prepare to greet the Shabbos]. R. Chaninah robed himself in nice clothing, 8 stood at sunset on Shabbos eve, and exclaimed, ‘Come and let us go forth to welcome the Shabbos queen.’ R. Yannai donned his robes (Shabbos clothing) on Shabbos eve and exclaimed, ‘Come, O bride, Come, O bride.’ (Because of his great love for the Shabbos, he would refer to it as his bride. 9) The Zohar 10 [also emphasizes the relationship between a bride and Shabbos. It] declares “On Shabbos, one must add on from the mundane to the holy in all matters: in one’s eating, drinking, clothing, and reclining. One must prepare a pleasant sleeping chamber with embroidered covers and pillows from [the best of] all that is found in his house, just as one would prepare a marriage chamber for a bride. For behold, Shabbos is a queen and a bride.” Just as the Shabbos is the source of all blessings, similarly, the rejoicing of the groom and bride and the greeting of them is the source of blessing.
[The above can be explained in terms of a quotation from Isaiah 11 :] “For upon all the glory shall there be a canopy.” [The word all implies at least] two aspects of honor the honor of the groom and the honor of the bride. G-d is [often referred to as] the groom and the Jewish people as His bride: as our sages 12 commented, “on the day of His wedding the day of the giving of the Torah.” Honor refers to an encompassing light [a revelation above our conscious powers]. The honor of the groom refers to G-d’s great love for the Jewish people, as it is written: 13 “I have loved you, said the L-rd.” The honor of the bride refers to the great love of the Jewish people for G-d, as it is written: 14 “My soul longs, indeed it faints [for the courts of the L-rd].” The marriage canopy represents a more general encompassment of the groom and bride.
[These spiritual qualities are mirrored in the marriage ceremony on the physical plane.] Many people come to greet the groom proceeding afterwards, together with the groom, to greet the bride. Then, the groom covers the bride with a veil and they go to the marriage canopy.
[Why is it necessary for the groom to cover the bride’s face?] In order for a Mekabel (receiver) to ascend and approach the level of the Mashpiah 15 (giver) it is first necessary for the Mashpiah to establish a connection, by connecting his external qualities with those of the receiver. Through this bond the receiver can elevate himself and approach the level of the Mashpiah, enabling him to receive the inner qualities of the Mashpiah.
Synopsis
This chapter explains that a groom and a bride can be compared to the heavenly Sefiros Z”A and Malchus. Greeting the bride is compared with receiving the Shabbos, which contains the blessings for all the days of the week. The honor of the groom refers to the love G-d shows to the Jewish people. The honor of the bride refers to the love of the Jewish people for G-d. The marriage canopy represents calling forth the Essence [of G-d]. Before [going to] the marriage canopy the groom covers the bride with a veil thus establishing an external bond between the Mashpiah and the receiver. [However, this external bond is intended to bring about] a deeper bond.
Next »
Chapter 2 FOOTNOTES
1. [End of Chapter 16]
2. [Bereishis 1:26]
3. [Note Part III, 104b; Part I, 90b, 227b, 233b]
4. [Part III, 5a]
5. [Ibid. 1:27-28]
6. [Part II, 63b; 88a]
7. Shabbos 119a
8. Rashi
9. Ibid.
10. Part III, 272b
11. [4:5]
12. [Taanis 26b]
13. [Malachi 1:2]
14. [Tehillim 84:3]
15. [The words Mashpiah and Mekabel (giver and receiver) are used to describe many types of relationships. The root of the word Mashpiah is the word shefa, meaning flow or emanation. A Mashpiah is the source of flow, a bestower of energy, a giver of love, knowledge, blessing etc.]
Jewish Practice » Lifecycle Events » Marriage » The Wedding » Readings & Tools » Tools » Lecha Dodi (Chassidic Discourses) » Lechah Dodi, 5689
Chapter 1
From the writings & talks of Rabbi Yosef Yitzchak of Lubavitch
Share
PrintE-mail Discuss (0)Next »
Chapter 2 Lechah Dodi, 5689
לכה דודי תרפ״טּ
לכה דודי לקראת כלה פני נקבלה
“Come, my Beloved to meet the Bride; let us welcome the Shabbos” Behold the Shabbos is called both bride and queen as in the expression “the Shabbos queen.” [The above metaphors are related to a wedding. In that context] the groom is called a king, as mentioned in Pirkei d’R. Eliezer 1 “a groom is like a king,” and the bride is called a queen.
[The concept also finds its parallel in the spiritual realms] as the Torah 2 declares “Let us make man in our image after our likeness.” Man below [on the earthly plane] reflects the form and image of the Higher Man, i.e., the heavenly Sefiros. [In that realm, the quality of] Ze’er Anpin of Atzilus known by its initials as Z”A [which corresponds to G-d’s “emotional powers”] is called “the King” as explained concerning [the quotation from the Zohar 3]: “The image of each and every soul stood before the holy King” i.e. Z”A of Atzilus. The Sefirah of Malchus Royalty is called the queen.
The Zohar 4 comments “a king without a queen is neither a king, nor is he great.” The essential factor is the union of Z”un Z”A and Nukvah [the Kabbalistic term for Malchus. This is emphasized] by the Torah’s statement 5 “Male and female He created them. And G-d blessed them…” [There, too, the blessing came to them, not to one alone.]
[To return to the concept of Shabbos.] The Shabbos must be received with joy, for it is the source of all blessings, both heavenly and earthly. [The Zohar states 6] “all the days are blessed from the Shabbos.” The same applies to a bride; she must also be greeted [with joy] for she is the source of all the blessings of above.
The above expression לכה דודי לקראת כלה פני שבת נקבלה is used in the Kabbalas Shabbos prayers. Its source is the Talmud’s 7 [description of how the sages would prepare to greet the Shabbos]. R. Chaninah robed himself in nice clothing, 8 stood at sunset on Shabbos eve, and exclaimed, ‘Come and let us go forth to welcome the Shabbos queen.’ R. Yannai donned his robes (Shabbos clothing) on Shabbos eve and exclaimed, ‘Come, O bride, Come, O bride.’ (Because of his great love for the Shabbos, he would refer to it as his bride. 9) The Zohar 10 [also emphasizes the relationship between a bride and Shabbos. It] declares “On Shabbos, one must add on from the mundane to the holy in all matters: in one’s eating, drinking, clothing, and reclining. One must prepare a pleasant sleeping chamber with embroidered covers and pillows from [the best of] all that is found in his house, just as one would prepare a marriage chamber for a bride. For behold, Shabbos is a queen and a bride.” Just as the Shabbos is the source of all blessings, similarly, the rejoicing of the groom and bride and the greeting of them is the source of blessing.
[The above can be explained in terms of a quotation from Isaiah 11 :] “For upon all the glory shall there be a canopy.” [The word all implies at least] two aspects of honor the honor of the groom and the honor of the bride. G-d is [often referred to as] the groom and the Jewish people as His bride: as our sages 12 commented, “on the day of His wedding the day of the giving of the Torah.” Honor refers to an encompassing light [a revelation above our conscious powers]. The honor of the groom refers to G-d’s great love for the Jewish people, as it is written: 13 “I have loved you, said the L-rd.” The honor of the bride refers to the great love of the Jewish people for G-d, as it is written: 14 “My soul longs, indeed it faints [for the courts of the L-rd].” The marriage canopy represents a more general encompassment of the groom and bride.
[These spiritual qualities are mirrored in the marriage ceremony on the physical plane.] Many people come to greet the groom proceeding afterwards, together with the groom, to greet the bride. Then, the groom covers the bride with a veil and they go to the marriage canopy.
[Why is it necessary for the groom to cover the bride’s face?] In order for a Mekabel (receiver) to ascend and approach the level of the Mashpiah 15 (giver) it is first necessary for the Mashpiah to establish a connection, by connecting his external qualities with those of the receiver. Through this bond the receiver can elevate himself and approach the level of the Mashpiah, enabling him to receive the inner qualities of the Mashpiah.
Synopsis
This chapter explains that a groom and a bride can be compared to the heavenly Sefiros Z”A and Malchus. Greeting the bride is compared with receiving the Shabbos, which contains the blessings for all the days of the week. The honor of the groom refers to the love G-d shows to the Jewish people. The honor of the bride refers to the love of the Jewish people for G-d. The marriage canopy represents calling forth the Essence [of G-d]. Before [going to] the marriage canopy the groom covers the bride with a veil thus establishing an external bond between the Mashpiah and the receiver. [However, this external bond is intended to bring about] a deeper bond.
Next »
Chapter 2 FOOTNOTES
1. [End of Chapter 16]
2. [Bereishis 1:26]
3. [Note Part III, 104b; Part I, 90b, 227b, 233b]
4. [Part III, 5a]
5. [Ibid. 1:27-28]
6. [Part II, 63b; 88a]
7. Shabbos 119a
8. Rashi
9. Ibid.
10. Part III, 272b
11. [4:5]
12. [Taanis 26b]
13. [Malachi 1:2]
14. [Tehillim 84:3]
15. [The words Mashpiah and Mekabel (giver and receiver) are used to describe many types of relationships. The root of the word Mashpiah is the word shefa, meaning flow or emanation. A Mashpiah is the source of flow, a bestower of energy, a giver of love, knowledge, blessing etc.]
First Dispute Between Two Schools of Torah Thought (1st century CE)The difference of opinion between the School of Shammai and the School of Hillel regarding the kindling of Chanukah lamps
First Dispute Between Two Schools of Torah Thought (1st century CE)
http://www.chabad.org/search/keyword_cdo/kid/7547/jewish/Shammai-Hillel-Houses-of.htm
The schools of Shammai and Hillel for the very first time disagreed regarding a case of Jewish law. This occurred around the turn of the 1st century. In the ensuing generations, the schools argued regarding many different laws, until the law was established according to the teachings of the "House of Hillel" -- with the exception of a few instances. According to tradition, following the arrival of the Moshiach the law will follow the rulings of the House of Shammai.
All throughout, the members of the two schools maintained friendly relations with each other.
Learning & Values » Texts & Writings » Contemporary Works » I Will Write It In Their Hearts
The difference of opinion between the School of Shammai and the School of Hillel regarding the kindling of Chanukah lamps
From correspondence of the Lubavitcher Rebbe; translated by Eli Touger
Share
PrintE-mail Discuss (1)« Previous
Release Time Education Programs in Public Schools; Next »
A Rabbi’s privilege and responsibility The following letter was written to Rabbi Chayim Dovber Ginsburg, an active Rabbi in Vancouver, B.C.
[Beginning of Shvat, 5703]
In the margins of your last letter, you cited the statements of the tractate Sofrim (2:5) that the custom is to continue to add Chanukah lights [each night]. Two reasons are given for this:
a) one should always advance higher in holy matters and not regress,
b) this parallels the days which have already passed.
In the tractate of Shabbos (21b), by contrast, these two rationales are cited by Amoraim as differing views. The Nachalas Yaakov, in his commentary to the tractate of Sofrim (which is printed in the Talmud), notes this and states — without adding an explanation: “Here the Gemara [i.e., in Sofrim] accepts both rationales given in the Talmud [i.e., in Shabbos].”
It is possible to explain that since we are not able to decide in favor of either of the opinions mentioned, neither contradicts the other, and there is no practical difference between them; they are both equal and both should be considered. We have found more inclusive statements in the Talmud, even in places where the matter involves [a difference in] practice, as it is said (Berachos 59a,b et al.) “Therefore we will recite [the blessing] according to both views.”1 See also the interpretation of the Rashbam (Bava Basra 75a) regarding the statement: “I will make them according to both opinions.”
Since this subject has been mentioned, I would like to add something which applies to the rationales mentioned, [i.e., that the pattern parallels] the days which are coming or those which have already passed, or that one should continue and increase, or continue and decrease. [The difference between these opinions depends on the conception of whether] the Chanukah miracle grew greater each day or became less each day.
In the year the miracle took place, [the Jews] did not know for how many days the oil would last. Indeed, the commentaries have asked questions with regard to the opinions which explain that on the first day, they divided the oil into eight portions. Moreover, that thesis can be questioned based on the statements of Zevachim 88a which states that a sacred utensil consecrates its contents only when it is full. If its measure is lacking, it does not consecrate its contents.2
Similarly, a question can be raised based on Menachos 88b which states that when a lamp [of the Menorah] is extinguished [in the middle of the night], it is obvious [that it should be filled to capacity].3
Thus it is obvious that according to the perception of the observers, the greatness of the miracle increased every day. It was not until the following year, as our Sages (Shabbos, loc. cit.) state, that [the commemoration of the miracle] was established as the Chanukah festival. And at that time, it was already revealed that at the outset, on the first day, the oil that was found in the cruse had the potential to burn for eight days. On the second day, it had the potential to burn for seven days, and so on.
[On this basis, we can understand] the rationale of the School of Shammai which maintains that one should light as many lamps as the days which are coming. For by virtue of the miracle, the measure necessary for the lamps to shine for all the eight coming days was included in the quantity of oil. And from day to day, [the potential for] the miracle decreased.
The School of Hillel, in contrast, maintains that [the capacity for] a miracle present in the days which come is only a potential, and has not yet been expressed in actual fact. Therefore it is not appropriate to be stringent and require everyone to acknowledge a miracle [that is only on the level of potential]. For people at large [are affected] only by what they can actually see. To cite a parallel: Yoma 21a states: “The miracles that transpired outside [in the Beis HaMikdash] are mentioned; the miracles that transpired inside are not mentioned.”
Accordingly, [the School of Hillel] rules that [the number of lamps depends] on the days which have passed, how the miracle was actually expressed. This is particularly appropriate with regard to lighting [the Chanukah] lamps, for they were instituted to publicize the miracle to the public at large. From this perspective, the miracle grows greater from day to day.
The above explanation also illustrates that, [as is generally its pattern throughout the Talmud,] the School of Shammai is taking a more stringent position,4 while the School of Hillel is ruling leniently.
Using intellectual adroitness to expand the above, it can be explained that a difference of opinion between the School of Shammai and the School of Hillel based on similar principles can be found in another source: In Uktzin (3:5), the Mishnah states: “When are fish susceptible to contract ritual impurity?5 The School of Shammai states: ‘Once they are caught.’” {At that time, in potential, it is as if they have already died. For they have already been separated from their source of life, and it is only a matter of time [until they die].} The School of Hillel, in contrast, maintains that [the fish do not become susceptible to ritual impurity] until they actually die.
To conclude: [These concepts can be applied within the context] of our ethical development and Divine service. Shabbos 31a states that the School of Shammai rules more stringently and the School of Hillel more leniently. Therefore when there is a person whose yetzer hara has contaminated his sanctuary,6 but who desires to [return and] find shelter under the wings of the Shechinah, according to the School of Shammai, the first and most fundamental step in Divine service is for him to “turn away from evil,”7 “And you shall obliterate evil from your midst.”8 And when a person begins his Divine service, the evil possesses its innate strength and much effort and light is necessary [to unseat it]. This effort is demanded from [each] person. Every day, however, the evil becomes less and the amount of light necessary on the first day is no longer required.
To cite an example of this: the bulls offered on the holiday of Sukkos. They were offered for the sake of the gentile nations of the world so that they will not cause the world to become desolate (Yalkut Shimoni, the conclusion of Parshas Pinchas), but instead will be transformed into positive [influences]. From day to day, the evil in them decreases and therefore, a lesser number of sacrifices are necessary.
{On this basis, it is understood that there is no contradiction between the rationale that the number of bulls offered on Sukkos continually decreases because they are being offered for the sake of the gentile nations (see Rashi, the conclusion of Parshas Pinchas, and the Chidushei Aggados [of the Maharsha on the passage] in Shabbos [21b], and our Sages’ statements in Sukkah 55b that the bulls are intended to atone for the nations.}
The School of Hillel, in contrast, maintains that a person’s first step must be to enter under the wings of the Shechinah even though evil still exists within him in its innate strength. He must begin his Divine service through “doing good,”9 performing service in matters of actual holiness. And then, “one mitzvah will lead to another,”10 as he advances higher in holy matters. Little by little, he will increase his strength as he continues to grow until he will acknowledge and give praise to His great name.11 Through this, he will wipe out the descendants of Amalek and then G-d’s Name will be great and complete (see Tosafos, entry ViOnim, Berachos 3a).
We would be happy to hear of your positive activities in the mission of Machne Israel and Merkos L’Inyonei Chinuch. Certainly, you will write us of these from time to time; thanking you in advance, [and closing]
With the blessing “Immediately to teshuvah, immediately to Redemption,”
Rabbi Menachem Schneerson
Chairman of the Executive Committee
« Previous
Release Time Education Programs in Public Schools; Next »
A Rabbi’s privilege and responsibility FOOTNOTES
1. [That passage relates that two Sages mention opinions with regard to the version of a blessing, and the final decision is to incorporate both versions into the text of the blessing.]
2. [Thus if the lamps of the Menorah had not been filled with oil, the oil would not have been consecrated and would have been unfit for use for the mitzvah.]
3. [And thus certainly whenever one begins kindling the Menorah, its lamps should be filled to capacity.]
4. [For they are requiring a person to commemorate in practice something which existed only in potential.]
5. [I.e., when they are shifted from the category of living entities which cannot contract ritual impurity to that of foods which can.]
6. [The wording parallels the wording used by Shabbos 21a to describe the Greeks’ defilement of the Beis HaMikdash.]
7. [Cf. Tehillim 34:15.]
8. [Cf. Devarim 13:6, et al.]
9. [See above Letters No. 44 and 49.]
10. [Avos 4:2.]
11. [Cf. the VeAl HaNissim prayer recited on Chanukah (Siddur Tehillat HaShem, p.59).]
http://www.chabad.org/search/keyword_cdo/kid/7547/jewish/Shammai-Hillel-Houses-of.htm
The schools of Shammai and Hillel for the very first time disagreed regarding a case of Jewish law. This occurred around the turn of the 1st century. In the ensuing generations, the schools argued regarding many different laws, until the law was established according to the teachings of the "House of Hillel" -- with the exception of a few instances. According to tradition, following the arrival of the Moshiach the law will follow the rulings of the House of Shammai.
All throughout, the members of the two schools maintained friendly relations with each other.
Learning & Values » Texts & Writings » Contemporary Works » I Will Write It In Their Hearts
The difference of opinion between the School of Shammai and the School of Hillel regarding the kindling of Chanukah lamps
From correspondence of the Lubavitcher Rebbe; translated by Eli Touger
Share
PrintE-mail Discuss (1)« Previous
Release Time Education Programs in Public Schools; Next »
A Rabbi’s privilege and responsibility The following letter was written to Rabbi Chayim Dovber Ginsburg, an active Rabbi in Vancouver, B.C.
[Beginning of Shvat, 5703]
In the margins of your last letter, you cited the statements of the tractate Sofrim (2:5) that the custom is to continue to add Chanukah lights [each night]. Two reasons are given for this:
a) one should always advance higher in holy matters and not regress,
b) this parallels the days which have already passed.
In the tractate of Shabbos (21b), by contrast, these two rationales are cited by Amoraim as differing views. The Nachalas Yaakov, in his commentary to the tractate of Sofrim (which is printed in the Talmud), notes this and states — without adding an explanation: “Here the Gemara [i.e., in Sofrim] accepts both rationales given in the Talmud [i.e., in Shabbos].”
It is possible to explain that since we are not able to decide in favor of either of the opinions mentioned, neither contradicts the other, and there is no practical difference between them; they are both equal and both should be considered. We have found more inclusive statements in the Talmud, even in places where the matter involves [a difference in] practice, as it is said (Berachos 59a,b et al.) “Therefore we will recite [the blessing] according to both views.”1 See also the interpretation of the Rashbam (Bava Basra 75a) regarding the statement: “I will make them according to both opinions.”
Since this subject has been mentioned, I would like to add something which applies to the rationales mentioned, [i.e., that the pattern parallels] the days which are coming or those which have already passed, or that one should continue and increase, or continue and decrease. [The difference between these opinions depends on the conception of whether] the Chanukah miracle grew greater each day or became less each day.
In the year the miracle took place, [the Jews] did not know for how many days the oil would last. Indeed, the commentaries have asked questions with regard to the opinions which explain that on the first day, they divided the oil into eight portions. Moreover, that thesis can be questioned based on the statements of Zevachim 88a which states that a sacred utensil consecrates its contents only when it is full. If its measure is lacking, it does not consecrate its contents.2
Similarly, a question can be raised based on Menachos 88b which states that when a lamp [of the Menorah] is extinguished [in the middle of the night], it is obvious [that it should be filled to capacity].3
Thus it is obvious that according to the perception of the observers, the greatness of the miracle increased every day. It was not until the following year, as our Sages (Shabbos, loc. cit.) state, that [the commemoration of the miracle] was established as the Chanukah festival. And at that time, it was already revealed that at the outset, on the first day, the oil that was found in the cruse had the potential to burn for eight days. On the second day, it had the potential to burn for seven days, and so on.
[On this basis, we can understand] the rationale of the School of Shammai which maintains that one should light as many lamps as the days which are coming. For by virtue of the miracle, the measure necessary for the lamps to shine for all the eight coming days was included in the quantity of oil. And from day to day, [the potential for] the miracle decreased.
The School of Hillel, in contrast, maintains that [the capacity for] a miracle present in the days which come is only a potential, and has not yet been expressed in actual fact. Therefore it is not appropriate to be stringent and require everyone to acknowledge a miracle [that is only on the level of potential]. For people at large [are affected] only by what they can actually see. To cite a parallel: Yoma 21a states: “The miracles that transpired outside [in the Beis HaMikdash] are mentioned; the miracles that transpired inside are not mentioned.”
Accordingly, [the School of Hillel] rules that [the number of lamps depends] on the days which have passed, how the miracle was actually expressed. This is particularly appropriate with regard to lighting [the Chanukah] lamps, for they were instituted to publicize the miracle to the public at large. From this perspective, the miracle grows greater from day to day.
The above explanation also illustrates that, [as is generally its pattern throughout the Talmud,] the School of Shammai is taking a more stringent position,4 while the School of Hillel is ruling leniently.
Using intellectual adroitness to expand the above, it can be explained that a difference of opinion between the School of Shammai and the School of Hillel based on similar principles can be found in another source: In Uktzin (3:5), the Mishnah states: “When are fish susceptible to contract ritual impurity?5 The School of Shammai states: ‘Once they are caught.’” {At that time, in potential, it is as if they have already died. For they have already been separated from their source of life, and it is only a matter of time [until they die].} The School of Hillel, in contrast, maintains that [the fish do not become susceptible to ritual impurity] until they actually die.
To conclude: [These concepts can be applied within the context] of our ethical development and Divine service. Shabbos 31a states that the School of Shammai rules more stringently and the School of Hillel more leniently. Therefore when there is a person whose yetzer hara has contaminated his sanctuary,6 but who desires to [return and] find shelter under the wings of the Shechinah, according to the School of Shammai, the first and most fundamental step in Divine service is for him to “turn away from evil,”7 “And you shall obliterate evil from your midst.”8 And when a person begins his Divine service, the evil possesses its innate strength and much effort and light is necessary [to unseat it]. This effort is demanded from [each] person. Every day, however, the evil becomes less and the amount of light necessary on the first day is no longer required.
To cite an example of this: the bulls offered on the holiday of Sukkos. They were offered for the sake of the gentile nations of the world so that they will not cause the world to become desolate (Yalkut Shimoni, the conclusion of Parshas Pinchas), but instead will be transformed into positive [influences]. From day to day, the evil in them decreases and therefore, a lesser number of sacrifices are necessary.
{On this basis, it is understood that there is no contradiction between the rationale that the number of bulls offered on Sukkos continually decreases because they are being offered for the sake of the gentile nations (see Rashi, the conclusion of Parshas Pinchas, and the Chidushei Aggados [of the Maharsha on the passage] in Shabbos [21b], and our Sages’ statements in Sukkah 55b that the bulls are intended to atone for the nations.}
The School of Hillel, in contrast, maintains that a person’s first step must be to enter under the wings of the Shechinah even though evil still exists within him in its innate strength. He must begin his Divine service through “doing good,”9 performing service in matters of actual holiness. And then, “one mitzvah will lead to another,”10 as he advances higher in holy matters. Little by little, he will increase his strength as he continues to grow until he will acknowledge and give praise to His great name.11 Through this, he will wipe out the descendants of Amalek and then G-d’s Name will be great and complete (see Tosafos, entry ViOnim, Berachos 3a).
We would be happy to hear of your positive activities in the mission of Machne Israel and Merkos L’Inyonei Chinuch. Certainly, you will write us of these from time to time; thanking you in advance, [and closing]
With the blessing “Immediately to teshuvah, immediately to Redemption,”
Rabbi Menachem Schneerson
Chairman of the Executive Committee
« Previous
Release Time Education Programs in Public Schools; Next »
A Rabbi’s privilege and responsibility FOOTNOTES
1. [That passage relates that two Sages mention opinions with regard to the version of a blessing, and the final decision is to incorporate both versions into the text of the blessing.]
2. [Thus if the lamps of the Menorah had not been filled with oil, the oil would not have been consecrated and would have been unfit for use for the mitzvah.]
3. [And thus certainly whenever one begins kindling the Menorah, its lamps should be filled to capacity.]
4. [For they are requiring a person to commemorate in practice something which existed only in potential.]
5. [I.e., when they are shifted from the category of living entities which cannot contract ritual impurity to that of foods which can.]
6. [The wording parallels the wording used by Shabbos 21a to describe the Greeks’ defilement of the Beis HaMikdash.]
7. [Cf. Tehillim 34:15.]
8. [Cf. Devarim 13:6, et al.]
9. [See above Letters No. 44 and 49.]
10. [Avos 4:2.]
11. [Cf. the VeAl HaNissim prayer recited on Chanukah (Siddur Tehillat HaShem, p.59).]
Tuesday, February 12, 2013
A Joyous Divorce
Tales from the PastFrom the Midrash
Chassidic Stories
Fables & Parables
Sages & Mystics
Illustrated Inspiration & Entertainment » Tales from the Past » From the Midrash
A Joyous Divorce
Midrash Rabbah, Shir HaShirim 1
Share
PrintE-mail Discuss (13) A woman was married for many years to her husband, but had not had children. Her husband decided to divorce her, so he went to Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai, of blessed memory.
Rabbi Shimon told him that just as they had celebrated with joy their mutual bond when they got married, so should the severance of their mutual bond be celebrated in joy.
The husband therefore prepared a great feast, at the height of which he called his wife and asked her in his joy to choose whatever she desired of his possessions to be hers, and said that he would not refuse her anything.
What did she do? She served him so much wine that he got drunk and fell asleep on his bed. She then told her servant to take him on his bed into her bedroom in her father’s house.
The following morning, when he awoke and found himself in his wife’s home, he asked her why he was brought there—wasn’t it clear that he intended to divorce her? She replied, “Didn’t you tell me that I could take whatever I wanted? I desire not gold, nor silver, nor precious gems, nor pearls. All I want is you. You yourself are the sole object of my desire.”
When the husband heard this, he became once again enamored of his wife, and took her back as before. And in this merit the Holy One, blessed be He, granted them children.
Midrash Rabbah, Shir HaShirim 1
Excerpted from The Mystery of Marriage by Rabbi Yitzchak Ginsburgh
Chassidic Stories
Fables & Parables
Sages & Mystics
Illustrated Inspiration & Entertainment » Tales from the Past » From the Midrash
A Joyous Divorce
Midrash Rabbah, Shir HaShirim 1
Share
PrintE-mail Discuss (13) A woman was married for many years to her husband, but had not had children. Her husband decided to divorce her, so he went to Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai, of blessed memory.
Rabbi Shimon told him that just as they had celebrated with joy their mutual bond when they got married, so should the severance of their mutual bond be celebrated in joy.
The husband therefore prepared a great feast, at the height of which he called his wife and asked her in his joy to choose whatever she desired of his possessions to be hers, and said that he would not refuse her anything.
What did she do? She served him so much wine that he got drunk and fell asleep on his bed. She then told her servant to take him on his bed into her bedroom in her father’s house.
The following morning, when he awoke and found himself in his wife’s home, he asked her why he was brought there—wasn’t it clear that he intended to divorce her? She replied, “Didn’t you tell me that I could take whatever I wanted? I desire not gold, nor silver, nor precious gems, nor pearls. All I want is you. You yourself are the sole object of my desire.”
When the husband heard this, he became once again enamored of his wife, and took her back as before. And in this merit the Holy One, blessed be He, granted them children.
Midrash Rabbah, Shir HaShirim 1
Excerpted from The Mystery of Marriage by Rabbi Yitzchak Ginsburgh
The Snake in the Wall
Inspiration & Entertainment » Tales from the Past » From the Midrash
The Snake in the Wall
Talmud, Shabbat 156b
Share
PrintE-mail Discuss (6) Rabbi Akiva had a daughter. But astrologers said to him, “On the day she enters the bridal chamber, a snake will bite her and she will die.”
On the night of her marriage, she removed a brooch and stuck it into the wall. When she pulled it out the following morning, a poisonous snake came trailing after it; the pin had penetrated into the eye of the serpent.
“Was there anything special that you did yesterday?” her father asked her.
“A poor man came to our door in the evening,” she replied. “Everybody was busy at the banquet, and there was none to attend to him. So I took the portion of food which was given to me, and gave it to him.”
Thereupon Rabbi Akiva went out and declared: “Charity delivers from death.1 And not just from an unnatural death, but from death itself.”
FOOTNOTES
1. Proverbs 10:2.
The Snake in the Wall
Talmud, Shabbat 156b
Share
PrintE-mail Discuss (6) Rabbi Akiva had a daughter. But astrologers said to him, “On the day she enters the bridal chamber, a snake will bite her and she will die.”
On the night of her marriage, she removed a brooch and stuck it into the wall. When she pulled it out the following morning, a poisonous snake came trailing after it; the pin had penetrated into the eye of the serpent.
“Was there anything special that you did yesterday?” her father asked her.
“A poor man came to our door in the evening,” she replied. “Everybody was busy at the banquet, and there was none to attend to him. So I took the portion of food which was given to me, and gave it to him.”
Thereupon Rabbi Akiva went out and declared: “Charity delivers from death.1 And not just from an unnatural death, but from death itself.”
FOOTNOTES
1. Proverbs 10:2.
The Fox in the Vineyard
Inspiration & Entertainment » Tales from the Past » From the Midrash
The Fox in the Vineyard
From the Midrash
Share
PrintE-mail Discuss (3)A sly fox passed a lovely vineyard. A tall, thick fence surrounded the vineyard on all sides. As the fox circled around the fence, he found a small hole in the fence, barely large enough for him to push his head through. The fox could see what luscious grapes grew in the vineyard, and his mouth began to water. But the hole was too small for him. So what did the sly fox do? He fasted for three days until he became so thin that he managed to slip through the hole.
Inside the vineyard the fox began to eat to his heart's content. He grew bigger and fatter than ever before. Then he wanted to get out of the vineyard. But alas! The hole was too small again. So what did he do? He fasted for three days again, and then just about managed to slip through the hole and out again.
Turning his head towards the vineyard, the poor fox said: "Vineyard, O’ vineyard! How lovely you look, and how lovely are your fruits and vines. But what good are you to me? just as I came to you, so I leave you..."
And so, our Sages say, it is also with this world. It is a beautiful world, but--in the words of King Solomon, the wisest of all men--just as man comes into this world empty-handed, so he leaves it. Only the Torah he studied, the mitzvot he performed, and the good deeds he practiced are the real fruits which he can take with him.
From the Midrash
Excerpted from The Complete Story of Tishrei, published and copyright by Kehot Publication Society, Brooklyn NY
The Fox in the Vineyard
From the Midrash
Share
PrintE-mail Discuss (3)A sly fox passed a lovely vineyard. A tall, thick fence surrounded the vineyard on all sides. As the fox circled around the fence, he found a small hole in the fence, barely large enough for him to push his head through. The fox could see what luscious grapes grew in the vineyard, and his mouth began to water. But the hole was too small for him. So what did the sly fox do? He fasted for three days until he became so thin that he managed to slip through the hole.
Inside the vineyard the fox began to eat to his heart's content. He grew bigger and fatter than ever before. Then he wanted to get out of the vineyard. But alas! The hole was too small again. So what did he do? He fasted for three days again, and then just about managed to slip through the hole and out again.
Turning his head towards the vineyard, the poor fox said: "Vineyard, O’ vineyard! How lovely you look, and how lovely are your fruits and vines. But what good are you to me? just as I came to you, so I leave you..."
And so, our Sages say, it is also with this world. It is a beautiful world, but--in the words of King Solomon, the wisest of all men--just as man comes into this world empty-handed, so he leaves it. Only the Torah he studied, the mitzvot he performed, and the good deeds he practiced are the real fruits which he can take with him.
From the Midrash
Excerpted from The Complete Story of Tishrei, published and copyright by Kehot Publication Society, Brooklyn NY
Six Hundred Dinars Minus Six
Inspiration & Entertainment » Tales from the Past » From the Midrash
Six Hundred Dinars Minus Six
From the Midrash
Share
PrintE-mail Discuss (5) Rabbi Shimon Bar Yochai (who lived in the 2nd century CE in the Holy Land) was possibly the holiest man that ever lived. Besides authoring the 'Zohar', being a master of the oral Torah and a miracle worker, he was one of the few Jews in history who spent every instant of his time learning Torah; no casual conversations, coffee breaks and certainly no vacations--only Torah.
So everyone was surprised when, the day after Rosh Hashanah (Jewish New Year's Day) he showed up at the door of his nephews' home and began to lecture them about the importance of giving charity to the poor.
Although they didn't really have money to spare and totally didn't understand the urgency of what he was saying, they listened attentively; when Rabbi Shimon spoke everyone listened.
"Give with an open hand," Rabbi Shimon adjured. "Don't worry about tomorrow, G-d will provide. And most important: write it all down. Every penny you give, write it down and carry the list with you at all times. I want to see a big sum at the end of the year."
Rabbi Shimon made them promise and he left.
Almost a year later they had another strange visit--from a posse of Roman soldiers with an order for their arrest. Someone accused them of selling silk without paying the tax to the government. They began weeping and protesting their innocence but to no avail.
Trembling with fear, they were led off to prison where they were given a choice: either pay an outrageous fine of six hundred dinar or produce an even more outrageously priced silk garment for the king, both of which were utterly beyond their means.
When Rabbi Shimon heard what had happened he immediately rushed to the prison and got special permission to visit his relatives.
"Where is the account of the charity you gave?" He asked. "How much did you give?"
"Here," they replied as one of them pulled the small parchment from his pocket.
Rabbi Shimon took the account and noticed that they had given almost six hundred dinar; they were just six dinar short. "Do you have any money with you?" he asked.
They produced six dinar that they had sewn into their garments in case they needed it. Rabbi Shimon took the money, bribed one of the officials, the charges were dropped and they were released.
Rabbi Shimon explained to them what had happened. "This past Rosh Hashanah I dozed off and dreamt that the government would demand of you six hundred dinars. That is why I told you to give charity, to negate the decree."
"Then why didn't you tell us about that?" they complained. "We would have given the money immediately and spared ourselves a lot of anguish."
"But then," replied Rabbi Shimon. "You wouldn't have done the mitzvah for its own sake."
(From Midrash Rabbah, Vayikrah 34:12)
Six Hundred Dinars Minus Six
From the Midrash
Share
PrintE-mail Discuss (5) Rabbi Shimon Bar Yochai (who lived in the 2nd century CE in the Holy Land) was possibly the holiest man that ever lived. Besides authoring the 'Zohar', being a master of the oral Torah and a miracle worker, he was one of the few Jews in history who spent every instant of his time learning Torah; no casual conversations, coffee breaks and certainly no vacations--only Torah.
So everyone was surprised when, the day after Rosh Hashanah (Jewish New Year's Day) he showed up at the door of his nephews' home and began to lecture them about the importance of giving charity to the poor.
Although they didn't really have money to spare and totally didn't understand the urgency of what he was saying, they listened attentively; when Rabbi Shimon spoke everyone listened.
"Give with an open hand," Rabbi Shimon adjured. "Don't worry about tomorrow, G-d will provide. And most important: write it all down. Every penny you give, write it down and carry the list with you at all times. I want to see a big sum at the end of the year."
Rabbi Shimon made them promise and he left.
Almost a year later they had another strange visit--from a posse of Roman soldiers with an order for their arrest. Someone accused them of selling silk without paying the tax to the government. They began weeping and protesting their innocence but to no avail.
Trembling with fear, they were led off to prison where they were given a choice: either pay an outrageous fine of six hundred dinar or produce an even more outrageously priced silk garment for the king, both of which were utterly beyond their means.
When Rabbi Shimon heard what had happened he immediately rushed to the prison and got special permission to visit his relatives.
"Where is the account of the charity you gave?" He asked. "How much did you give?"
"Here," they replied as one of them pulled the small parchment from his pocket.
Rabbi Shimon took the account and noticed that they had given almost six hundred dinar; they were just six dinar short. "Do you have any money with you?" he asked.
They produced six dinar that they had sewn into their garments in case they needed it. Rabbi Shimon took the money, bribed one of the officials, the charges were dropped and they were released.
Rabbi Shimon explained to them what had happened. "This past Rosh Hashanah I dozed off and dreamt that the government would demand of you six hundred dinars. That is why I told you to give charity, to negate the decree."
"Then why didn't you tell us about that?" they complained. "We would have given the money immediately and spared ourselves a lot of anguish."
"But then," replied Rabbi Shimon. "You wouldn't have done the mitzvah for its own sake."
(From Midrash Rabbah, Vayikrah 34:12)
The Fox and the Fishes
Inspiration & Entertainment » Tales from the Past » From the Midrash
The Fox and the Fishes
Talmud, Berachot 61b
Share
PrintE-mail Discuss (7)Once, the wicked government [of Rome] decreed that the Jewish people were forbidden to study Torah. Pappus ben Judah saw Rabbi Akiva convening gatherings in public and studying Torah [with them]. Said he to him: "Akiva, are you not afraid of the government?"
Said [Rabbi Akiva] to him: "I'll give you a parable.
"A fox was walking along a river and saw fish rushing to and fro. Said he to them: 'Why are you fleeing?'
"Said they to him: 'The nets that the humans spread for us.'
"Said he to them: 'Why don't you come out onto the dry land? We'll live together, as my ancestors lived with your ancestors.'
"Said they to him: 'Are you the one of whom it is said that you are the wisest of animals? You're not wise, but foolish! If, in our environment of life, we have cause for fear, how much more so in the environment of our death!'
"The same applies to us: if, now, when we sit and study the Torah, of which it is said (Deuteronomy 30:20), For it is your life and the lengthening of your days, such is our situation, how much more so if we neglect it....
The Fox and the Fishes
Talmud, Berachot 61b
Share
PrintE-mail Discuss (7)Once, the wicked government [of Rome] decreed that the Jewish people were forbidden to study Torah. Pappus ben Judah saw Rabbi Akiva convening gatherings in public and studying Torah [with them]. Said he to him: "Akiva, are you not afraid of the government?"
Said [Rabbi Akiva] to him: "I'll give you a parable.
"A fox was walking along a river and saw fish rushing to and fro. Said he to them: 'Why are you fleeing?'
"Said they to him: 'The nets that the humans spread for us.'
"Said he to them: 'Why don't you come out onto the dry land? We'll live together, as my ancestors lived with your ancestors.'
"Said they to him: 'Are you the one of whom it is said that you are the wisest of animals? You're not wise, but foolish! If, in our environment of life, we have cause for fear, how much more so in the environment of our death!'
"The same applies to us: if, now, when we sit and study the Torah, of which it is said (Deuteronomy 30:20), For it is your life and the lengthening of your days, such is our situation, how much more so if we neglect it....
The Caving Walls of the Study Hall
Inspiration & Entertainment » Tales from the Past » From the Midrash
The Caving Walls of the Study Hall
Talmud, Bava Metzia 59a-b
Share
PrintE-mail Discuss (17) [An oven] that was cut into parts and sand was placed between the parts, Rabbi Eliezer maintained that it is pure (i.e., not susceptible to ritual impurity). The other sages said that it is susceptible to ritual impurity....
On that day, Rabbi Eliezer brought them all sorts of proofs, but they were rejected. Said he to them: "If the law is as I say, may the carob tree prove it." The carob tree was uprooted from its place a distance of 100 cubits. Others say, 400 cubits. Said they to him: "One cannot prove anything from a carob tree."
Said [Rabbi Eliezer] to them: "If the law is as I say, may the aqueduct prove it." The water in the aqueduct began to flow backwards. Saidthey to him: "One cannot prove anything from an aqueduct."
Said he to them: "If the law is as I say, then may the walls of the house of study prove it." The walls of the house of study began to cave in. Rabbi Joshua rebuked them, "If Torah scholars are debating a point of Jewish law, what are your qualifications to intervene?" The walls did not fall, in deference to Rabbi Joshua, nor did they straighten up, in deference to Rabbi Eliezer. They still stand there at a slant.
Said he to them: "If the law is as I say, may it be proven from heaven!" There then issued a heavenly voice which proclaimed: "What do you want of Rabbi Eliezer -- the law is as he says..."
Rabbi Joshua stood on his feet and said: "'The Torah is not in heaven!'1" ... We take no notice of heavenly voices, since You, G-d, have already, at Sinai, written in the Torah to "follow the majority."2
Rabbi Nathan subsequently met Elijah the Prophet and asked him: "What did G-d do at that moment?" [Elijah] replied: "He smiled and said: 'My children have triumphed over Me, My children have triumphed over Me.'"
FOOTNOTES
1. Deuteronomy 30:12.
2. Exodus 23:2.
Talmud, Bava Metzia 59a-b
The Tree
Inspiration & Entertainment » Tales from the Past » From the Midrash
The Tree
Talmud, Taanit 5b
Share
PrintE-mail Discuss (25) A man was travelling through the desert, hungry, thirsty and tired, when he came upon a tree bearing luscious fruit and affording plenty of shade, underneath which ran a spring of water. He ate of the fruit, drank of the water and rested beneath the shade.
When he was about to leave, he turned to the tree and said: “Tree, O tree, with what should I bless you?
“Should I bless you that your fruit be sweet? Your fruit is already sweet.
“Should I bless you that your shade be plentiful? Your shade is plentiful. That a spring of water should run beneath you? A spring of water runs beneath you.
“There is one thing with which I can bless you: May it be G‑d’s will that all the trees planted from your seeds should be like you . . .”
Talmud, Taanit 5b
Image: detail from an illustration by Chassidic artist Michoel Muchnik.
The Tree
Talmud, Taanit 5b
Share
PrintE-mail Discuss (25) A man was travelling through the desert, hungry, thirsty and tired, when he came upon a tree bearing luscious fruit and affording plenty of shade, underneath which ran a spring of water. He ate of the fruit, drank of the water and rested beneath the shade.
When he was about to leave, he turned to the tree and said: “Tree, O tree, with what should I bless you?
“Should I bless you that your fruit be sweet? Your fruit is already sweet.
“Should I bless you that your shade be plentiful? Your shade is plentiful. That a spring of water should run beneath you? A spring of water runs beneath you.
“There is one thing with which I can bless you: May it be G‑d’s will that all the trees planted from your seeds should be like you . . .”
Talmud, Taanit 5b
Image: detail from an illustration by Chassidic artist Michoel Muchnik.
The Boat From the teachings of Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai
Inspiration & Entertainment » Tales from the Past » From the Midrash
The Boat
From the teachings of Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai
Share
PrintE-mail Discuss (11) A group of people were travelling in a boat. One of them took a drill and began to drill a hole beneath himself.
His companions said to him: "Why are you doing this?" Replied the man: "What concern is it of yours? Am I not drilling under my own place?"
Said they to him: "But you will flood the boat for us all!" (Quoted in Midrash Rabbah, Vayikra 4:6).
From the teachings of Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai
Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai, also know by the acronym "Rashbi," lived in the Holy Land in the 2nd century C.E. A disciple of Rabbi Akiva, Rashbi played a key role in the transmission of Torah, both as an important Talmudic sage and as author of the Zohar, the most fundamental work of Kabbalah. He was buried in Meron, Israel, west of Safed.
More articles by Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai
RSS
The Boat
From the teachings of Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai
Share
PrintE-mail Discuss (11) A group of people were travelling in a boat. One of them took a drill and began to drill a hole beneath himself.
His companions said to him: "Why are you doing this?" Replied the man: "What concern is it of yours? Am I not drilling under my own place?"
Said they to him: "But you will flood the boat for us all!" (Quoted in Midrash Rabbah, Vayikra 4:6).
From the teachings of Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai
Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai, also know by the acronym "Rashbi," lived in the Holy Land in the 2nd century C.E. A disciple of Rabbi Akiva, Rashbi played a key role in the transmission of Torah, both as an important Talmudic sage and as author of the Zohar, the most fundamental work of Kabbalah. He was buried in Meron, Israel, west of Safed.
More articles by Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai
RSS
The Child and the Slave
http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/364584/jewish/The-Child-and-the-Slave.htm
Inspiration & Entertainment » Tales from the Past » From the Midrash
The Child and the Slave
Talmud, Bava Batra 10a
Share
PrintE-mail Discuss (4) Turnusrufus asked Rabbi Akiva: "If your G-d loves the poor, why doesn't He feed them?"
Said Rabbi Akiva to him: "So that we should be saved from purgatory (in the merit of the charity we give)."
Said he to him: "On the contrary: for this you deserve to be punished.
"I'll give you an analogy. This is analogous to a king who got angry at his slave and locked him away in a dungeon, and commanded
"If your G-d loves the poor, why doesn't He feed them?" that he not be given to eat or to drink; and a person came along and gave him to eat and to drink. When the king hears of this, is he not angry at that person? And you are called slaves, as it is written (Leviticus 25:55) 'The Children of Israel are My slaves.'"
Said Rabbi Akiva to him: "I'll give you an analogy.
"This is analogous to a king who got angry at his child and locked him away in a dungeon, and commanded that he not be given to eat or to drink; and a person came along and gave him to eat and to drink. When the king hears of this, does he not reward that person?
"And we are G-d's children, as it is written (Deuteronomy 14:1) 'You are children of the L-rd your G-d.'"
Inspiration & Entertainment » Tales from the Past » From the Midrash
The Child and the Slave
Talmud, Bava Batra 10a
Share
PrintE-mail Discuss (4) Turnusrufus asked Rabbi Akiva: "If your G-d loves the poor, why doesn't He feed them?"
Said Rabbi Akiva to him: "So that we should be saved from purgatory (in the merit of the charity we give)."
Said he to him: "On the contrary: for this you deserve to be punished.
"I'll give you an analogy. This is analogous to a king who got angry at his slave and locked him away in a dungeon, and commanded
"If your G-d loves the poor, why doesn't He feed them?" that he not be given to eat or to drink; and a person came along and gave him to eat and to drink. When the king hears of this, is he not angry at that person? And you are called slaves, as it is written (Leviticus 25:55) 'The Children of Israel are My slaves.'"
Said Rabbi Akiva to him: "I'll give you an analogy.
"This is analogous to a king who got angry at his child and locked him away in a dungeon, and commanded that he not be given to eat or to drink; and a person came along and gave him to eat and to drink. When the king hears of this, does he not reward that person?
"And we are G-d's children, as it is written (Deuteronomy 14:1) 'You are children of the L-rd your G-d.'"
Inspiration & Entertainment » Tales from the Past » From the Midrash
The Child and the Slave
Talmud, Bava Batra 10a
Share
PrintE-mail Discuss (4) Turnusrufus asked Rabbi Akiva: "If your G-d loves the poor, why doesn't He feed them?"
Said Rabbi Akiva to him: "So that we should be saved from purgatory (in the merit of the charity we give)."
Said he to him: "On the contrary: for this you deserve to be punished.
"I'll give you an analogy. This is analogous to a king who got angry at his slave and locked him away in a dungeon, and commanded
"If your G-d loves the poor, why doesn't He feed them?" that he not be given to eat or to drink; and a person came along and gave him to eat and to drink. When the king hears of this, is he not angry at that person? And you are called slaves, as it is written (Leviticus 25:55) 'The Children of Israel are My slaves.'"
Said Rabbi Akiva to him: "I'll give you an analogy.
"This is analogous to a king who got angry at his child and locked him away in a dungeon, and commanded that he not be given to eat or to drink; and a person came along and gave him to eat and to drink. When the king hears of this, does he not reward that person?
"And we are G-d's children, as it is written (Deuteronomy 14:1) 'You are children of the L-rd your G-d.'"
Inspiration & Entertainment » Tales from the Past » From the Midrash
The Child and the Slave
Talmud, Bava Batra 10a
Share
PrintE-mail Discuss (4) Turnusrufus asked Rabbi Akiva: "If your G-d loves the poor, why doesn't He feed them?"
Said Rabbi Akiva to him: "So that we should be saved from purgatory (in the merit of the charity we give)."
Said he to him: "On the contrary: for this you deserve to be punished.
"I'll give you an analogy. This is analogous to a king who got angry at his slave and locked him away in a dungeon, and commanded
"If your G-d loves the poor, why doesn't He feed them?" that he not be given to eat or to drink; and a person came along and gave him to eat and to drink. When the king hears of this, is he not angry at that person? And you are called slaves, as it is written (Leviticus 25:55) 'The Children of Israel are My slaves.'"
Said Rabbi Akiva to him: "I'll give you an analogy.
"This is analogous to a king who got angry at his child and locked him away in a dungeon, and commanded that he not be given to eat or to drink; and a person came along and gave him to eat and to drink. When the king hears of this, does he not reward that person?
"And we are G-d's children, as it is written (Deuteronomy 14:1) 'You are children of the L-rd your G-d.'"
Does Chasidism Shun the World?
vThe Rebbe » Wisdom » Correspondence » Kabbalah and the Mystical
Does Chasidism Shun the World?
By Rabbi Menachem M. Schneerson, The Lubavitcher Rebbe
Share
PrintE-mail Discuss (0)5724
Mr.
Toronto 19, Ont., Canada
Greeting and Blessing:
This is to acknowledge receipt of your letter.
It is surprising to me to note in your letter that it is your impression as though Chassidim do not participate in the outside world, etc. As a matter of fact, the reverse is true, for there is hardly any sphere or area in the world at large which Chassidim exclude from their interest. This attitude is the direct result of the emphasis in Chassidut on the true concept of Monotheism. The Chassidic concept of the Oneness of G-d goes much further than the generally accepted view that there is only One Deity and no more, but that there is only One G-d and nothing else1 . For, inasmuch as G-ds word (whereby he brought the world into existence) constantly and without interruption creates and vitalizes the whole Universe and every particular of it, and without this creative force, which is the true essence of every existing thing, nothing could exist, it follows that there is no true reality other than G-d, and there is actually nothing but G-dliness. Chassidus emphasizes that it is one of the central aspects of mans purpose in life to establish this truth and to spread it to the utmost extent of his influence. This is not merely an idea, but a way of life which is expressed in the daily life, and which permeates the whole inner being of the Chossid.
A corollary of this viewpoint is another fundamental principle in the teachings of Chassidut, namely that Divine Providence extends to each and every particular in the Creation, not only to each individual of the human race, but each particular in the realm of the animal world, the vegetable and even the mineral, as is well known to everyone who studies Chasidut2 .
Thus it is fundamental for the Chassidic philosophy and way of life not to exclude any part of the world from its sphere of interest.
As for your writing that you have not come across any names of Chassidim who participate in certain movements, such as civil rights, etc., this is also surprising, inasmuch as many have taken an active part in this and other constructive movements. Many more, however, among those who participate in such constructive movements do so while avoiding publicity and headlines in the press.
With blessing,
Does Chasidism Shun the World?
By Rabbi Menachem M. Schneerson, The Lubavitcher Rebbe
Share
PrintE-mail Discuss (0)5724
Mr.
Toronto 19, Ont., Canada
Greeting and Blessing:
This is to acknowledge receipt of your letter.
It is surprising to me to note in your letter that it is your impression as though Chassidim do not participate in the outside world, etc. As a matter of fact, the reverse is true, for there is hardly any sphere or area in the world at large which Chassidim exclude from their interest. This attitude is the direct result of the emphasis in Chassidut on the true concept of Monotheism. The Chassidic concept of the Oneness of G-d goes much further than the generally accepted view that there is only One Deity and no more, but that there is only One G-d and nothing else1 . For, inasmuch as G-ds word (whereby he brought the world into existence) constantly and without interruption creates and vitalizes the whole Universe and every particular of it, and without this creative force, which is the true essence of every existing thing, nothing could exist, it follows that there is no true reality other than G-d, and there is actually nothing but G-dliness. Chassidus emphasizes that it is one of the central aspects of mans purpose in life to establish this truth and to spread it to the utmost extent of his influence. This is not merely an idea, but a way of life which is expressed in the daily life, and which permeates the whole inner being of the Chossid.
A corollary of this viewpoint is another fundamental principle in the teachings of Chassidut, namely that Divine Providence extends to each and every particular in the Creation, not only to each individual of the human race, but each particular in the realm of the animal world, the vegetable and even the mineral, as is well known to everyone who studies Chasidut2 .
Thus it is fundamental for the Chassidic philosophy and way of life not to exclude any part of the world from its sphere of interest.
As for your writing that you have not come across any names of Chassidim who participate in certain movements, such as civil rights, etc., this is also surprising, inasmuch as many have taken an active part in this and other constructive movements. Many more, however, among those who participate in such constructive movements do so while avoiding publicity and headlines in the press.
With blessing,
Unfettered Feeling
The Rebbe » Wisdom » Correspondence » G-d and Us
Unfettered Feeling
Correspondence by Rabbi Menachem M. Schneerson, The Lubavitcher Rebbe
Share
Tishrei 5732
[September 1971]
Brooklyn, N.Y.
Greeting and Blessing:
A question:
As we know and see, there are situations in which Jews, regardless of their best intentions, regardless even of their self-sacrifice, are truly unable to fulfill the will of G‑d, due to circumstances beyond their control. As the parable goes, self-sacrifice can enable one to jump off a roof down to the ground, but it cannot enable one to jump from the ground up onto the roof . . .
But G‑d is the master of the entire world. Since G‑d Himself has commanded and spelled out how every Jew should behave in his daily life, how is it possible that there should be a situation in which a Jew is unable to carry out the will of G‑d, in every detail?
The answer:
There are two components to a mitzvah: the deed, and the kavanah and feeling that accompany it. It is true that “the deed is the primary thing,” but the kavanah and feeling are also of great importance.
When it happens that there is a situation in which it is impossible for a Jew to actually carry out the will of G‑d despite his self-sacrifice, this stimulates in him a deep spiritual pain that pervades him to the very core of his soul, bringing him to a deeper connection with G‑d, and with Torah and mitzvot and his Jewishness, the likes of which he could never have attained without this painful experience.
The fact that he did not actually do the mitzvah has no adverse effect on his relationship with G‑d, since he was prevented from doing it by forces beyond his control. On the other hand, the feeling element of the mitzvah achieves a height otherwise unobtainable, and the experience imparts to his spiritual life a depth and perfection that only this situation can generate.
Freely translated excerpt from a letter by the Rebbe.
Correspondence by Rabbi Menachem M. Schneerson, The Lubavitcher
Unfettered Feeling
Correspondence by Rabbi Menachem M. Schneerson, The Lubavitcher Rebbe
Share
Tishrei 5732
[September 1971]
Brooklyn, N.Y.
Greeting and Blessing:
A question:
As we know and see, there are situations in which Jews, regardless of their best intentions, regardless even of their self-sacrifice, are truly unable to fulfill the will of G‑d, due to circumstances beyond their control. As the parable goes, self-sacrifice can enable one to jump off a roof down to the ground, but it cannot enable one to jump from the ground up onto the roof . . .
But G‑d is the master of the entire world. Since G‑d Himself has commanded and spelled out how every Jew should behave in his daily life, how is it possible that there should be a situation in which a Jew is unable to carry out the will of G‑d, in every detail?
The answer:
There are two components to a mitzvah: the deed, and the kavanah and feeling that accompany it. It is true that “the deed is the primary thing,” but the kavanah and feeling are also of great importance.
When it happens that there is a situation in which it is impossible for a Jew to actually carry out the will of G‑d despite his self-sacrifice, this stimulates in him a deep spiritual pain that pervades him to the very core of his soul, bringing him to a deeper connection with G‑d, and with Torah and mitzvot and his Jewishness, the likes of which he could never have attained without this painful experience.
The fact that he did not actually do the mitzvah has no adverse effect on his relationship with G‑d, since he was prevented from doing it by forces beyond his control. On the other hand, the feeling element of the mitzvah achieves a height otherwise unobtainable, and the experience imparts to his spiritual life a depth and perfection that only this situation can generate.
Freely translated excerpt from a letter by the Rebbe.
Correspondence by Rabbi Menachem M. Schneerson, The Lubavitcher
Clinging to the Sages
Daily Quote
http://www.chabad.org/multimedia/media_cdo/aid/139989/jewish/Day-8-of-339.htm
http://www.chabad.org/dailystudy/seferHamitzvos.asp?tDate=2/12/2013
Rabbi Chanina the son of Dosa would say: One whose fear of sin takes precedence to his wisdom, his wisdom endures. But one whose wisdom takes precedence to his fear of sin, his wisdom does not endure
Clinging to the Sages Clinging to the Sages
"And cleave to Him"—Deuteronomy 11:22.
We are instructed to mingle with the sages and interact with them whenever possible: join in their meals, do business with them, etc. This way we will learn from their ways and come to adopt their true beliefs.
The verse tells us to "cleave" to G‑d—but is it possible to cleave to G‑d who is likened to a consuming fire? Rather this means that we must cleave to Torah scholars.
Unabridged English Text of this Mitzvah »
« Close
The 6th mitzvah is that we are commanded to be close to the wise and to associate with them. We should constantly be close to them and to be with them in all possible ways of friendship, such as eating, drinking and doing business, in order to thereby succeed in emulating their actions and knowing from their words the true way of looking at things.
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement (exalted be He),1 "And cling to Him." This commandment is repeated,2 "To Him you shall cling," and is explained in the words of the Sifri: "Cleave to the Sages and their students."
Our Sages also derived from the verse, "To Him you shall cling," that one must marry the daughter of a talmid chacham, marry one's daughter to a talmid chacham, give benefits to talmidei chachamim and to do business with them. Our Sages say3 "Is it possible for a person to cling to the Divine Presence, when the verse says,4 'G‑d your Lord is [like] a consuming fire'?! Rather, whoever marries the daughter of a talmid chacham [is considered to have cleaved to the Divine Presence]."
FOOTNOTES
1. Deut. 11:22.
2. Deut. 10:20.
3. Ketubot 111b.
4. Deut. 4:22.
Positive Commandment 206 (Digest)
"And cleave to Him"—Deuteronomy 11:22.
We are instructed to mingle with the sages and interact with them whenever possible: join in their meals, do business with them, etc. This way we will learn from their ways and come to adopt their true beliefs.
The verse tells us to "cleave" to G‑d—but is it possible to cleave to G‑d who is likened to a consuming fire? Rather this means that we must cleave to Torah scholars.
Daily Quote
"I will make your progeny like the dust of the earth" (G-d's blessing to Abraham, Genesis 13:17). Just as the dust of the earth is from one end of the world to the other, so, too, will your children be scattered from one end of the world to the other. Just as dust is treaded upon by all, so, too, your children are destined to be treaded upon by the nations. Just as the dust of the earth is made fertile only with water, so, too, the people of Israel are blessed only in the merit of the Torah which is analogous to water. Just as dust erodes all metal utensils while it itself lasts forever, so is it with Israel: all idolatrous nations disintegrate, while they persist.
–Midrash Rabbah
Negative Commandment 64 (Digest)
Testing G‑d
"Do not test the L-rd, your G‑d"—Deuteronomy 6:16.
Once a prophet has been established as a true prophet – either through accurately forecasting the future on several occasions, or through the testimony of another established prophet – it is forbidden to further test or doubt his words.
Unabridged English Text of this Mitzvah »
« Close
The 64th prohibition is that we are forbidden from testing His promises and warnings (exalted be He), that He has promised or warned us through His prophets. This would be done by doubting his words once we know that the one who has spoken to us is truly a prophet.1
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement,2 "Do not test G‑d your Lord as you tested Him in Massah."
Rabbi Berel Bell is a well-known educator, author and lecturer. He and his family reside in Montreal, Canada.
From "Sefer Hamitzvot in English," published by Sichos in English.
Emulating G‑d
"And walk in His ways"—Deuteronomy 28:9.
We are commanded to emulate G‑d's ways. As the Midrash explains, "Just as G‑d is merciful, you should be merciful; just as G‑d is gracious, you should be gracious; G‑d is righteous, you too should be righteous; G‑d is pious, you too should be pious."
Unabridged English Text of this Mitzvah »
« Close
The 8th mitzvah is that we are commanded to emulate G‑d, blessed be He, to the best of our ability.
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement (exalted be He),1 "And you shall walk in His paths."
This commandment is repeated in the verse,2 "To walk in all his ways." This is explained in the words of the Sifri3: "Just as G‑d is called merciful, so too, you must be merciful. Just as G‑d is called kind, so too, you must be kind. Just as G‑d is called righteous, so too, you must be righteous. Just as G‑d is called pious, so too, you must be pious."
This commandment is also repeated in the verse,4 "Walk after G‑d your Lord." This too is explained5 as emulating the good deeds and fine attributes which are used to allegorically describe G‑d (exalted be He), Who is immeasurably exalted over everything.
FOOTNOTES
1. Deut. 28:9.
2. Deut. 11:22.
3. Parshat Eikev.
4. Deut. 13:5.
5. Sotah 14a: "Just as G‑d clothes the naked, ... so too, you must clothe the naked. Just as G‑d visits the sick, ... so too, you must visit the sick. Just as G‑d comforts mourners, ... so too, you must comfort mourners."
Loving Our Fellow
"Love your fellow as yourself"—Leviticus 19:18.
We are commanded to love and care for our fellow Jew as we love and care for ourselves. We should treasure our fellow and his possessions as we treasure our own. Whatever I wish for myself, I wish also for my fellow; and whatever I dislike for myself, I should also not want to befall him.
Unabridged English Text of this Mitzvah »
« Close
The 206th mitzvah is that we are commanded to love each other as we love ourselves. I should have mercy for and love my brother as faithfully as I love and have mercy for myself. This applies to his financial and physical state, and whatever he has or desires. What I want for myself I should want for him, and whatever I don't want for myself or my friends, I shouldn't want for him.
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement,1 "You must love your neighbor as [you love] yourself."
FOOTNOTES
1. Lev.19:18.
http://www.chabad.org/multimedia/media_cdo/aid/139989/jewish/Day-8-of-339.htm
http://www.chabad.org/dailystudy/seferHamitzvos.asp?tDate=2/12/2013
Rabbi Chanina the son of Dosa would say: One whose fear of sin takes precedence to his wisdom, his wisdom endures. But one whose wisdom takes precedence to his fear of sin, his wisdom does not endure
Clinging to the Sages Clinging to the Sages
"And cleave to Him"—Deuteronomy 11:22.
We are instructed to mingle with the sages and interact with them whenever possible: join in their meals, do business with them, etc. This way we will learn from their ways and come to adopt their true beliefs.
The verse tells us to "cleave" to G‑d—but is it possible to cleave to G‑d who is likened to a consuming fire? Rather this means that we must cleave to Torah scholars.
Unabridged English Text of this Mitzvah »
« Close
The 6th mitzvah is that we are commanded to be close to the wise and to associate with them. We should constantly be close to them and to be with them in all possible ways of friendship, such as eating, drinking and doing business, in order to thereby succeed in emulating their actions and knowing from their words the true way of looking at things.
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement (exalted be He),1 "And cling to Him." This commandment is repeated,2 "To Him you shall cling," and is explained in the words of the Sifri: "Cleave to the Sages and their students."
Our Sages also derived from the verse, "To Him you shall cling," that one must marry the daughter of a talmid chacham, marry one's daughter to a talmid chacham, give benefits to talmidei chachamim and to do business with them. Our Sages say3 "Is it possible for a person to cling to the Divine Presence, when the verse says,4 'G‑d your Lord is [like] a consuming fire'?! Rather, whoever marries the daughter of a talmid chacham [is considered to have cleaved to the Divine Presence]."
FOOTNOTES
1. Deut. 11:22.
2. Deut. 10:20.
3. Ketubot 111b.
4. Deut. 4:22.
Positive Commandment 206 (Digest)
"And cleave to Him"—Deuteronomy 11:22.
We are instructed to mingle with the sages and interact with them whenever possible: join in their meals, do business with them, etc. This way we will learn from their ways and come to adopt their true beliefs.
The verse tells us to "cleave" to G‑d—but is it possible to cleave to G‑d who is likened to a consuming fire? Rather this means that we must cleave to Torah scholars.
Daily Quote
"I will make your progeny like the dust of the earth" (G-d's blessing to Abraham, Genesis 13:17). Just as the dust of the earth is from one end of the world to the other, so, too, will your children be scattered from one end of the world to the other. Just as dust is treaded upon by all, so, too, your children are destined to be treaded upon by the nations. Just as the dust of the earth is made fertile only with water, so, too, the people of Israel are blessed only in the merit of the Torah which is analogous to water. Just as dust erodes all metal utensils while it itself lasts forever, so is it with Israel: all idolatrous nations disintegrate, while they persist.
–Midrash Rabbah
Negative Commandment 64 (Digest)
Testing G‑d
"Do not test the L-rd, your G‑d"—Deuteronomy 6:16.
Once a prophet has been established as a true prophet – either through accurately forecasting the future on several occasions, or through the testimony of another established prophet – it is forbidden to further test or doubt his words.
Unabridged English Text of this Mitzvah »
« Close
The 64th prohibition is that we are forbidden from testing His promises and warnings (exalted be He), that He has promised or warned us through His prophets. This would be done by doubting his words once we know that the one who has spoken to us is truly a prophet.1
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement,2 "Do not test G‑d your Lord as you tested Him in Massah."
Rabbi Berel Bell is a well-known educator, author and lecturer. He and his family reside in Montreal, Canada.
From "Sefer Hamitzvot in English," published by Sichos in English.
Emulating G‑d
"And walk in His ways"—Deuteronomy 28:9.
We are commanded to emulate G‑d's ways. As the Midrash explains, "Just as G‑d is merciful, you should be merciful; just as G‑d is gracious, you should be gracious; G‑d is righteous, you too should be righteous; G‑d is pious, you too should be pious."
Unabridged English Text of this Mitzvah »
« Close
The 8th mitzvah is that we are commanded to emulate G‑d, blessed be He, to the best of our ability.
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement (exalted be He),1 "And you shall walk in His paths."
This commandment is repeated in the verse,2 "To walk in all his ways." This is explained in the words of the Sifri3: "Just as G‑d is called merciful, so too, you must be merciful. Just as G‑d is called kind, so too, you must be kind. Just as G‑d is called righteous, so too, you must be righteous. Just as G‑d is called pious, so too, you must be pious."
This commandment is also repeated in the verse,4 "Walk after G‑d your Lord." This too is explained5 as emulating the good deeds and fine attributes which are used to allegorically describe G‑d (exalted be He), Who is immeasurably exalted over everything.
FOOTNOTES
1. Deut. 28:9.
2. Deut. 11:22.
3. Parshat Eikev.
4. Deut. 13:5.
5. Sotah 14a: "Just as G‑d clothes the naked, ... so too, you must clothe the naked. Just as G‑d visits the sick, ... so too, you must visit the sick. Just as G‑d comforts mourners, ... so too, you must comfort mourners."
Loving Our Fellow
"Love your fellow as yourself"—Leviticus 19:18.
We are commanded to love and care for our fellow Jew as we love and care for ourselves. We should treasure our fellow and his possessions as we treasure our own. Whatever I wish for myself, I wish also for my fellow; and whatever I dislike for myself, I should also not want to befall him.
Unabridged English Text of this Mitzvah »
« Close
The 206th mitzvah is that we are commanded to love each other as we love ourselves. I should have mercy for and love my brother as faithfully as I love and have mercy for myself. This applies to his financial and physical state, and whatever he has or desires. What I want for myself I should want for him, and whatever I don't want for myself or my friends, I shouldn't want for him.
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement,1 "You must love your neighbor as [you love] yourself."
FOOTNOTES
1. Lev.19:18.
The Sitra Achra
Adar 2, 5773 · February 12, 2013
Today's Tanya Lesson
Likutei Amarim, end of Chapter 29
Listen Online
MP3 Download
והטעם: לפי שבאמת אין שום ממשות כלל בסטרא אחרא, שלכן נמשלה לחשך שאין בו שום ממשות כלל, וממילא נדחה מפני האור
The reason that humbling the spirit of the sitra achra is effective in crushing it is that in truth there is no substance whatever in the sitra achra. That is why it is compared to darkness, which has no substance whatsoever, and is automatically banished by the presence of light.
וכך הסטרא אחרא, אף שיש בה חיות הרבה, להחיות כל בעלי חיים הטמאים, ונפשות אומות העולם, וגם נפש הבהמית שבישראל, כנ״ל, מכל מקום הרי כל חיותה אינה מצד עצמה, חס ושלום, אלא מצד הקדושה, כנ״ל, ולכן היא בטלה לגמרי מפני הקדושה, כביטול החשך מפני האור הגשמי, רק שלגבי קדושת נפש האלקית שבאדם, נתן לה הקב״ה רשות ויכולת להגביה עצמה כנגדה, כדי שהאדם יתעורר להתגבר עליה להשפילה על ידי שפלות ונמיכת רוחו, ונבזה בעיניו נמאס
Similarly with the sitra achra. Indeed, it possesses abundant vitality with which to animate all the impure animals and the souls of the nations of the world, and also the animal soul of the Jew, as has been explained. 1 Yet this vitality is not its own, G‑d forbid, but stems from the realm of holiness, for the realm of holiness is the source of all life, including even the life-force of the sitra achra, as has been explained above. 2 Therefore it is completely nullified in the presence of holiness, as darkness is nullified in the presence of physical light. Its power lies only in the fact that in regard to the holiness of man’s divine soul, G‑d has given it (— the sitra achra) permission and ability to raise itself against it (— the divine soul), in order that man should be roused to overpower it and to humble it by means of the humility and submission of his spirit, and by being abhorrent and despised in his own eyes — for through this he humbles the sitra achra and abhors it.
ובאתערותא דלתתא: אתערותא דלעילא, לקיים מה שכתוב: משם אורידך, נאם ה׳
The arousal of man below to crush the sitra achra causes an arousal above, to fulfill what is written: 3 “From there will I bring you down, says G‑d” to the sitra achra, which seeks to rise against G‑dliness and to obscure it.
דהיינו שמסירה מממשלתה ויכלתה, ומסלק ממנה הכח ורשות שנתן לה להגביה עצמה נגד אור קדושת נפש האלקית
This means that He deprives it of its dominion and power, and withdraws from it the strength and authority which had been given it to rise up against the light of the holiness of the divine soul.
ואזי ממילא בטילה ונדחית, כביטול החשך מפני אור הגשמי
Thereupon it automatically becomes nullified and is banished, just as darkness is nullified before physical light.
וכמו שמצינו דבר זה מפורש בתורה גבי מרגלים, שמתחלה אמרו: כי חזק הוא ממנו, אל תקרי ממנו כו׳, שלא האמינו ביכולת ה׳, ואחר כך חזרו ואמרו: הננו ועלינו וגו׳
Indeed, we find this explicitly stated in the Torah in connection with the Spies sent by Moses to scout out the Holy Land. At the outset they declared: 4 “For he (the enemy) is stronger than we,” and, interpreting the word ממנו , the Sages say: 5
“Read not ’than we,‘ but ’than He,‘” meaning that they had no faith in G‑d’s ability to lead them into the Holy Land. But afterwards they reversed themselves and announced: 6 “We will readily go up [to conquer the Land].”
ומאין חזרה ובאה אליהם האמונה ביכולת ה׳, הרי לא הראה להם משה רבנו עליו השלום שום אות ומופת על זה בנתיים, רק שאמר להם איך שקצף ה׳ עליהם ונשבע שלא להביאם אל האר׳
Whence did their faith in G‑d’s ability return to them? Our teacher Moses, peace unto him, had not shown them in the interim any sign or miracle concerning this, which would restore their faith. He had merely told them that G‑d was angry with them and had sworn not to allow them to enter the Land. 7
ומה הועיל זה להם אם לא היו מאמינים ביכולת ה׳, חס ושלום, לכבוש ל״א מלכים, ומפני זה לא רצו כלל ליכנס לאר׳
What value did this Divine anger and oath have to them, if in any case they did not believe in G‑d’s ability to subdue the thirty-one kings8 who reigned in the Land at that time, for which reason they had had no desire whatever to enter the Land?
אלא ודאי מפני שישראל עצמן הם מאמינים בני מאמינים, רק שהסטרא אחרא המלובשת בגופם הגביה עצמה על אור קדושת נפשם האלקית, בגסות רוחה וגבהותה בחוצפה בלי טעם ודעת
Surely, then, the explanation is as follows: Israelites themselves are9 “believers, [being] the descendants of believers.” Even while they stated, “The enemy is stronger than He,” their divine soul still believed in G‑d. They professed a lack of faith in His ability only because the sitra achra clothed in their body in the person of their animal soul had risen against the light of the holiness of the divine soul, with its characteristic impudent arrogance and haughtiness, without sense or reason.
ולכן מיד שקצף ה׳ עליהם והרעים בקול רעש ורוגז: עד מתי לעדה הרעה הזאת וגו׳ במדבר הזה יפלו פגריכם וגו׳ אני ה׳ דברתי אם לא זאת אעשה לכל העדה הרעה הזאת וגו׳, וכששמעו דברים קשים אלו, נכנע ונשבר לבם בקרבם, כדכתיב: ויתאבלו העם מאד, וממילא נפלה הסטרא אחרא מממשלתה וגבהותה וגסות רוחה
Therefore as soon as G‑d became angry with them, and thundered angrily: 10 “How long shall I bear with this evil congregation…,Your carcasses shall fall in this wilderness…I, G‑d, have spoken: I will surely do it unto all this evil congregation...,” — their heart was humbled and broken within them when they heard these stern words, as it is written, 11 “And the people mourned greatly.” Consequently, the sitra achra toppled from its dominion, from its haughtiness and arrogance.
וישראל עצמן הם מאמינים
But the Israelites themselves i.e., as far as their divine soul was concerned had believed in G‑d all along.
Therefore, as soon as they were released from the dominion of the sitra achra, they proclaimed, “We will readily go up...” There was no need of a miracle to convince them of G‑d’s ability. All that was necessary was to divest the sitra achra of its arrogance, and this was accomplished by G‑d’s “raging” at them.
Similarly with every Jew: When the light of his soul does not penetrate his heart, it is merely due to the arrogance of the sitra achra, which will vanish as soon as he rages at it.
ומזה יכול ללמוד כל אדם שנופלים לו במחשבתו ספיקות על אמונה כי הם דברי רוח הסטרא אחרא לבדה, המגביה עצמה על נפשו, אבל ישראל עצמן הם מאמינים כו׳
Every person in whose mind there occur doubts concerning faith in G‑d can deduce from this episode of the Spies that these doubts are nothing but the empty words of the sitra achra which raises itself against his divine soul. But Israelites themselves are believers...
וגם הסטרא אחרא עצמה אין לה ספיקות כלל באמונה, רק שניתן לה רשות לבלבל האדם בדברי שקר ומרמה להרבות שכרו
Furthermore, the sitra achra itself entertains no doubts at all concerning faith. As explained in ch. 22, the kelipah in its spiritual state (i.e., when not clothed in the human body) does not deny G‑d’s sovereignty. It has merely been granted permission to confuse man with false and deceitful words, in order that he may be more richly rewarded for mastering it.
כפיתויי הזונה לבן המלך בשקר ומרמה ברשות המלך, כמו שכתוב בזהר הקדוש
In this it is similar to the harlot who attempts to seduce the king’s son through falsehood and deceit, with the king’s approval, as in the parable narrated in the holy Zohar.12
The parable: A king hires a harlot to seduce his son, so that the prince will reveal his wisdom in resisting her wiles. The harlot herself, knowing the king’s intention, does not want the prince to submit to temptation. Similarly with the sitra achra: it is merely fulfilling its G‑d-given task in attempting to lure man away from G‑d, but actually desires that man resist it, thereby earning a greater reward.
However, this is true only of the spiritual kelipah which is the source of the animal soul. The animal soul and evil impulse as clothed within man, on the other hand, are truly evil, and their unequivocal aim is to entice man to do evil.
In the context of the parable, this may be described as follows: The harlot originally commissioned by the king subcontracts a second harlot, and the second a third, and so on. As the actual executor of the mission becomes successively further removed from the king, the original intention is lost, and finally the prince is approached by a harlot who has her own intentions in mind, not those of the king, as she attempts to seduce the prince.
In any event, we see that any doubts one may have concerning faith in G‑d, are merely the empty words of the sitra achra. The soul within every Jew, however, believes in G‑d with a perfect faith.
FOOTNOTES
1. Chs. 6, 7.
2. Chs. 6, 22.
3. Ovadiah 1:4.
4. Bamidbar 13:31.
5. Sotah 35a; Menachot 53b.
6. Bamidbar 14:40.
7. Ibid., v. 39.
8. Enumerated in Yehoshua 12.
9. Bamidbar Rabbah 7:5.
10. Bamidbar 14:27, 29, 35.
11. Ibid., v. 39.
12. II, 163a. See above, end of ch. 9
Today's Tanya Lesson
Likutei Amarim, end of Chapter 29
Listen Online
MP3 Download
והטעם: לפי שבאמת אין שום ממשות כלל בסטרא אחרא, שלכן נמשלה לחשך שאין בו שום ממשות כלל, וממילא נדחה מפני האור
The reason that humbling the spirit of the sitra achra is effective in crushing it is that in truth there is no substance whatever in the sitra achra. That is why it is compared to darkness, which has no substance whatsoever, and is automatically banished by the presence of light.
וכך הסטרא אחרא, אף שיש בה חיות הרבה, להחיות כל בעלי חיים הטמאים, ונפשות אומות העולם, וגם נפש הבהמית שבישראל, כנ״ל, מכל מקום הרי כל חיותה אינה מצד עצמה, חס ושלום, אלא מצד הקדושה, כנ״ל, ולכן היא בטלה לגמרי מפני הקדושה, כביטול החשך מפני האור הגשמי, רק שלגבי קדושת נפש האלקית שבאדם, נתן לה הקב״ה רשות ויכולת להגביה עצמה כנגדה, כדי שהאדם יתעורר להתגבר עליה להשפילה על ידי שפלות ונמיכת רוחו, ונבזה בעיניו נמאס
Similarly with the sitra achra. Indeed, it possesses abundant vitality with which to animate all the impure animals and the souls of the nations of the world, and also the animal soul of the Jew, as has been explained. 1 Yet this vitality is not its own, G‑d forbid, but stems from the realm of holiness, for the realm of holiness is the source of all life, including even the life-force of the sitra achra, as has been explained above. 2 Therefore it is completely nullified in the presence of holiness, as darkness is nullified in the presence of physical light. Its power lies only in the fact that in regard to the holiness of man’s divine soul, G‑d has given it (— the sitra achra) permission and ability to raise itself against it (— the divine soul), in order that man should be roused to overpower it and to humble it by means of the humility and submission of his spirit, and by being abhorrent and despised in his own eyes — for through this he humbles the sitra achra and abhors it.
ובאתערותא דלתתא: אתערותא דלעילא, לקיים מה שכתוב: משם אורידך, נאם ה׳
The arousal of man below to crush the sitra achra causes an arousal above, to fulfill what is written: 3 “From there will I bring you down, says G‑d” to the sitra achra, which seeks to rise against G‑dliness and to obscure it.
דהיינו שמסירה מממשלתה ויכלתה, ומסלק ממנה הכח ורשות שנתן לה להגביה עצמה נגד אור קדושת נפש האלקית
This means that He deprives it of its dominion and power, and withdraws from it the strength and authority which had been given it to rise up against the light of the holiness of the divine soul.
ואזי ממילא בטילה ונדחית, כביטול החשך מפני אור הגשמי
Thereupon it automatically becomes nullified and is banished, just as darkness is nullified before physical light.
וכמו שמצינו דבר זה מפורש בתורה גבי מרגלים, שמתחלה אמרו: כי חזק הוא ממנו, אל תקרי ממנו כו׳, שלא האמינו ביכולת ה׳, ואחר כך חזרו ואמרו: הננו ועלינו וגו׳
Indeed, we find this explicitly stated in the Torah in connection with the Spies sent by Moses to scout out the Holy Land. At the outset they declared: 4 “For he (the enemy) is stronger than we,” and, interpreting the word ממנו , the Sages say: 5
“Read not ’than we,‘ but ’than He,‘” meaning that they had no faith in G‑d’s ability to lead them into the Holy Land. But afterwards they reversed themselves and announced: 6 “We will readily go up [to conquer the Land].”
ומאין חזרה ובאה אליהם האמונה ביכולת ה׳, הרי לא הראה להם משה רבנו עליו השלום שום אות ומופת על זה בנתיים, רק שאמר להם איך שקצף ה׳ עליהם ונשבע שלא להביאם אל האר׳
Whence did their faith in G‑d’s ability return to them? Our teacher Moses, peace unto him, had not shown them in the interim any sign or miracle concerning this, which would restore their faith. He had merely told them that G‑d was angry with them and had sworn not to allow them to enter the Land. 7
ומה הועיל זה להם אם לא היו מאמינים ביכולת ה׳, חס ושלום, לכבוש ל״א מלכים, ומפני זה לא רצו כלל ליכנס לאר׳
What value did this Divine anger and oath have to them, if in any case they did not believe in G‑d’s ability to subdue the thirty-one kings8 who reigned in the Land at that time, for which reason they had had no desire whatever to enter the Land?
אלא ודאי מפני שישראל עצמן הם מאמינים בני מאמינים, רק שהסטרא אחרא המלובשת בגופם הגביה עצמה על אור קדושת נפשם האלקית, בגסות רוחה וגבהותה בחוצפה בלי טעם ודעת
Surely, then, the explanation is as follows: Israelites themselves are9 “believers, [being] the descendants of believers.” Even while they stated, “The enemy is stronger than He,” their divine soul still believed in G‑d. They professed a lack of faith in His ability only because the sitra achra clothed in their body in the person of their animal soul had risen against the light of the holiness of the divine soul, with its characteristic impudent arrogance and haughtiness, without sense or reason.
ולכן מיד שקצף ה׳ עליהם והרעים בקול רעש ורוגז: עד מתי לעדה הרעה הזאת וגו׳ במדבר הזה יפלו פגריכם וגו׳ אני ה׳ דברתי אם לא זאת אעשה לכל העדה הרעה הזאת וגו׳, וכששמעו דברים קשים אלו, נכנע ונשבר לבם בקרבם, כדכתיב: ויתאבלו העם מאד, וממילא נפלה הסטרא אחרא מממשלתה וגבהותה וגסות רוחה
Therefore as soon as G‑d became angry with them, and thundered angrily: 10 “How long shall I bear with this evil congregation…,Your carcasses shall fall in this wilderness…I, G‑d, have spoken: I will surely do it unto all this evil congregation...,” — their heart was humbled and broken within them when they heard these stern words, as it is written, 11 “And the people mourned greatly.” Consequently, the sitra achra toppled from its dominion, from its haughtiness and arrogance.
וישראל עצמן הם מאמינים
But the Israelites themselves i.e., as far as their divine soul was concerned had believed in G‑d all along.
Therefore, as soon as they were released from the dominion of the sitra achra, they proclaimed, “We will readily go up...” There was no need of a miracle to convince them of G‑d’s ability. All that was necessary was to divest the sitra achra of its arrogance, and this was accomplished by G‑d’s “raging” at them.
Similarly with every Jew: When the light of his soul does not penetrate his heart, it is merely due to the arrogance of the sitra achra, which will vanish as soon as he rages at it.
ומזה יכול ללמוד כל אדם שנופלים לו במחשבתו ספיקות על אמונה כי הם דברי רוח הסטרא אחרא לבדה, המגביה עצמה על נפשו, אבל ישראל עצמן הם מאמינים כו׳
Every person in whose mind there occur doubts concerning faith in G‑d can deduce from this episode of the Spies that these doubts are nothing but the empty words of the sitra achra which raises itself against his divine soul. But Israelites themselves are believers...
וגם הסטרא אחרא עצמה אין לה ספיקות כלל באמונה, רק שניתן לה רשות לבלבל האדם בדברי שקר ומרמה להרבות שכרו
Furthermore, the sitra achra itself entertains no doubts at all concerning faith. As explained in ch. 22, the kelipah in its spiritual state (i.e., when not clothed in the human body) does not deny G‑d’s sovereignty. It has merely been granted permission to confuse man with false and deceitful words, in order that he may be more richly rewarded for mastering it.
כפיתויי הזונה לבן המלך בשקר ומרמה ברשות המלך, כמו שכתוב בזהר הקדוש
In this it is similar to the harlot who attempts to seduce the king’s son through falsehood and deceit, with the king’s approval, as in the parable narrated in the holy Zohar.12
The parable: A king hires a harlot to seduce his son, so that the prince will reveal his wisdom in resisting her wiles. The harlot herself, knowing the king’s intention, does not want the prince to submit to temptation. Similarly with the sitra achra: it is merely fulfilling its G‑d-given task in attempting to lure man away from G‑d, but actually desires that man resist it, thereby earning a greater reward.
However, this is true only of the spiritual kelipah which is the source of the animal soul. The animal soul and evil impulse as clothed within man, on the other hand, are truly evil, and their unequivocal aim is to entice man to do evil.
In the context of the parable, this may be described as follows: The harlot originally commissioned by the king subcontracts a second harlot, and the second a third, and so on. As the actual executor of the mission becomes successively further removed from the king, the original intention is lost, and finally the prince is approached by a harlot who has her own intentions in mind, not those of the king, as she attempts to seduce the prince.
In any event, we see that any doubts one may have concerning faith in G‑d, are merely the empty words of the sitra achra. The soul within every Jew, however, believes in G‑d with a perfect faith.
FOOTNOTES
1. Chs. 6, 7.
2. Chs. 6, 22.
3. Ovadiah 1:4.
4. Bamidbar 13:31.
5. Sotah 35a; Menachot 53b.
6. Bamidbar 14:40.
7. Ibid., v. 39.
8. Enumerated in Yehoshua 12.
9. Bamidbar Rabbah 7:5.
10. Bamidbar 14:27, 29, 35.
11. Ibid., v. 39.
12. II, 163a. See above, end of ch. 9
Saturday, February 9, 2013
"A PEOPLE DISPERSED"
Parshas Mishpatim
The Four Parashiot: Mis'mach Ge'ulah l'G'ulah
VIII
"A PEOPLE DISPERSED"
No one knew how to speak Lashon haRa as well as Haman. (BT Megillah 13b). Keep in mind that Lashon haRa is defined as true but degrading statements (slander is know by a different ignonomous title: Motzi Shem Ra). What did Haman say about the B'nei Yisra'el? He claimed that we are a "dispersed and disconnected people". This is, both from a perspective of Hazal's history and what we can approximate from Biblical narrative, an accurate description of the B'nei Yisra'el during this time.
There are many indications - in the Megillah, in Sefer Ezra and in Rabbinic literature - of the lack of unity and mutual concern to be found among the Judean exiles in Persia during the reign of Ahashverosh (and his predecessors). They had assimilated to the point where Jewish concerns, specifically of the welfare of the nascent and beleagured community "back home" who had returned and rebuilt the Beit haMikdash, were apparently not at the forefront of the Jewish community's conscience. Besides their assimiliation into Persi an culture (to the point where they were willing participants in Ahashverosh's idolatrous orgy - see R. Shim'on b. Yohai's comments in BT Megillah 12a) and the high rate of intermarriage prevalent in that community (see Ezra 9), the fact that it took the queen's order to assemble the Jews together in Shushan may be an indication of how "dispersed and disconnected" they really were.
What is the antidote for this lack of mutual and communal concern? Note Esther's response to Mordechai: "Assemble all of the Jews together..." (4:16). Esther understood that the first step needed in order to effect national salvation (or, in other words, to create the necessary conditions for national redemption) is to ensure that there is a nation to save. We can not be an Am Nosha (redeemed nation - Devarim 33:29) if we are not a nation to begin with.
PARASHAT SHEKALIM
And so, we begin the process of nation-building by publicly reading the Parashah of Shekalim: And Hashem spoke to Moses, saying, When you take the census of the people of Yisra'el according to their number, then shall they give every man a ransom for his soul to Hashem, when you count them; that there should be no plague among them, when you count them. This they shall give, every one who passes among those who are counted, half a shekel according to the shekel of the sanctuary; a shekel is twenty gerahs; a half shekel shall be the offering of Hashem. Every one who passes among those who are counted, from twenty years old and above, shall give an offering to Hashem. The rich shall not give more, and the poor shall not give less than half a shekel, when they give an offering to Hashem, to make an atonement for your souls. And you shall take the atonement money of the people of Yisra'el, and shall appoint it for the service of the Tent of Meeting; that it may be a memorial to the people of Yisra'el before Hash em, to make an atonement for your souls.
The first lesson we are taught in this Parashah is not the obligation to donate to the building of the Mishkan - we've already learned about that (Sh'mot 25:2). Rather, we learn that everyone must participate in this donation - and that everyone has an equal amount of responsibility towards this project. In other words, no individual can exempt himself from his responsibility towards the community - and no one should think that his part is either more or less significant than his fellow's. It is often this sense of exaggerated self -importance on the one hand and (its equally dangerous opposite number) self -negation on the other which causes individuals to lose a sense of perspective regarding their role and responsibility within the body politic.
Note that the Torah obligates each person to give the same amount: The rich shall not give more, and the poor shall not give less. Besides this common standard, the Torah teaches us another valuable lesson regarding the role of the individual within the community: This they shall give, every one who passes among those who are counted, half a shekel according to the shekel of the sanctuary;
The Torah clearly prescribes the gift of half of a shekel; why doesn't the Torah just obligate a full shekel; or, that particular amount is inherently significant, obligate a gift of 10 gera of silver. Why phrase it as half a shekel (thus leading to the Halakhic obligation to change money in order to give an actual half-shekel piece)?
The answer which suggests itself is that the Torah is teaching us about the power of the individual - and his limitations. Everyone is needed for the public welfare to be secure - but no individual, no matter how rich, intelligent or powerful, is capable of succeeding on his own. Any nation-building enterprise demands, first and foremost, a partnership. When each individual recognizes his own strengths, not negating his own value (the poor shall not give less) nor overestimate his indispensability (The rich shall not give more), he can also understand that he needs his fellow as much as his fellow needs him (half a shekel).
PARASHAT ZAKHOR
On the Shabbat immediately before Purim, we take out a second Sefer Torah and read Parashat Zakhor: Remember what Amalek did to you by the way, when you came forth out of Egypt; How he met you by the way, and struck at your rear, all who were feeble behind you, when you were faint and weary; and he did not fear God. Therefore it shall be, when Hashem your God has given you rest from all your enemies around, in the land which Hashem your God gives you for an inheritance to possess, that you shall blot out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven; you shall not forget it.
What is the connection between this Parashah and Purim? Keep in mind that if we are only concerned with having this section read once a year, we have already done so in the late summer - and the related Parashah (Sh'mot 17:8-16) was read a month ago. Although Haman's Amalek-association (genealogical, ideological or both) is strongly alluded to in the Megillah, this still doesn't explain this extra reading at this time; after all, we don't take out a second Sefer Torah on the Shabbat of Hol haMo'ed Pesach in order to read about the prohibitions of allowing an Egyptian convert into the community for two generations - or how we must treat Egyptians in general - even though these laws are clearly associated with the events celebrated on Pesach.
A careful look at the nature of Amalek's attack reveals an intricate connection to the Purim story beyond the ancestry of Haman. How did Amalek attack us? How he met you by the way, and struck at your rear, all who were feeble behind you...In other words, the infirm, old and weak who were walking at the back of the Israelite camp were the targets of these tribal warriors (see Ibn Ezra ad loc.) The question must be asked: Why were these people walking at the back of the camp? Why weren't they placed safely in the middle, with strong, young and healthy men on the outskirts of this nomadic community?
The only conclusion which may be drawn is that the community itself did not demonstrate sufficient and appropriate concern for the weak and less capable within the group. To wit, Amalek was only able to successfully attack us when our own sense of common and mutual concern was lax. (See the comment of the Mekhilta on the verse And Amalek came and fought Yisra'el at Refidim - that Refidim implies that the B'nei Yisra'el acted deficiently in their own observace of Torah).
The sequence of Shekalim-Zakhor is one which seems to produce a dialectic tension. Shekalim teaches the equal responsibility of each person - no more, no less - towards the communal enterprise. From Parashat Zakhor, conversely, we learn that those who are stronger have a greater share of the responsibility towards their weaker fellows. Which is it? Do we have equal responsibilities or not?
This tension is immediately ameliorated when we consider which attitude each Parashah is coming to correct. At its foundation, a community must recognize the equal worth of each member and no one's worth should either be negated nor should it be overemphasized to the point of feeling like a "whole shekel". Once that sense of common obligation and equal responsibility is internalized, we do a "reality check" and note that some people, due to circumstances of birth and other Divine blessings, are more gifted than others at different things. There are brilliant theoreticians, military strategists, composers of beautiful music, and so on. Some of them, due to their engagement and involvement with their own art, are not as strong as others in other disciplines. As a result, each person needs to channel his talents towards the good of the community; strength, wisdom, wealth etc. do not breed rights; rather, they are cause for responsibility.
Both of these lessons are brought to the fore within the context of the Purim story. As noted above, Esther directed Mordechai to "assemble all of the people together", implying the commonality expressed by Parashat Shekalim. Within the celebration of Purim, however, we see an emphasis on our responsibilities towards those less fortunate: that they should make them days of feasting and gladness, days for sending gifts of food to one another and presents to the poor. (Esther 9:22).
Note the words of Rambam in codifying the Purim budget in MT Hilkhot Megillah 2:17: It is preferable for a person to spend more on his gifts to the poor than on his feast and sending portions to his friends. For there is no greater or more glorious happiness than to gladden the hearts of the poor, orphan, widow and stranger. One who gladdens the heart of these destitute people is similar to the Shekhinah, as it says: To bring life to the spirit of the lowly and to restore the heart of the downtrodden.
In sum, the two lessons which we need to learn in order to build a nation (which can then become a "nation which is redeemed") are the [limited] value of each member and the responsibility of each member towards each other, particularly those less "privileged". These lessons bring us to the first level of redemption - the redemption of Purim, a redemption born of Jewish unity.
PARASHAT PARAH
Once we have forged the unity necessary to create and maintain a healthy nation, there is yet one significant step we must take to be worthy of Ge'ulah. Any group which has achieved cohesion must also have a goal towards which that cooperative spirit is focused. If communal concern and mutual respect become ends in and of themselves, there is little reason to think that they will endure. It is the engine of common purpose and direction which ultimately drives the community (and, writ large, the nation).
What is our goal? Towards what do we aim our national resources? The answer is provided in the introductory chapter to the Stand at Sinai: but you shall be for Me a kingdom of Kohanim and a holy nation... (Sh'mot 19:6)
Our national charter is not just to be a unified people, an ethical beacon whose communal and national behavior exemplify sensitivity to others and respect for each member of the K'lal. We are called to be much more than that - we are charged to be a holy nation, a nation which strives to infuse its national life - and the personal lives of its members - with sanctity. We aim to bring God's Name into this world and to bring this world to a greater realization of His Presence.
After we have achieved the lonGodesired unity on Purim, balancing the demands of Shekalim and Zakhor, we then move this unified nation towards the national agenda of purity and holiness.
The selection known as Parashat Parah details the laws of the red heifer, used to purify anyone who has come into contact with the dead and has, as a result, become Tamei (ritually impure). His Tum'ah prevents him from entering the Mikdash/Mishkan and from partaking in any of the sancta. This ritual is, as Rashi (BT Megillah 29a) points out, Taharatan shel Yisra'el - the purification of the B'nei Yisra'el.
After we have gelled as a nation, we must move, together, towards the purity which allows us to reenter the Mikdash - so that we can continue on our national mission of bringing this world to God - and revealing God to this world.
XII
PARASHAT HACHODESH
Which brings us to the last of the four Parashiot, the one which, as we noted in last week's issue, seems the most problematic.
The opening line of this Parashah, haChodesh haZeh Lakhem, is itself somewhat difficult to understand. Although it has been Halakhically rendered as a command (either the command to declare the New Moon or to maintain a calendar with the month of Aviv at its head - see Rashi and Ramban ad loc.), the wording seems to be lacking a verb. We would expect it to read: haChodesh haZeh Yihyeh Lakhem.
S'forno notes that this opening line is, indeed, not phrased as a command; rather, it is a declarative statement: This month is yours. Here is his comment: From here on the months shall be yours, to do with them as you wish. During the days of the slavery your days were not your own, rather they were committed to other people's work and contingent upon their will. Therefore It is the first one for you of the months of the year - because now you began your life of free -will.
Our liberation, giving us the opportunity to create the conditions necessary for redemption, can only come when, as a united nation, we have become purified and moved our national agenda towards our mission of becoming a holy nation. As soon as we achieve that lofty goal, the time is ours - to act as we choose. If we choose wisely, the celebration of the past Exodus can become the promised future redemption.
XIII
THE ARBA PARASHIOT AND THE FOUR CUPS
We can now appreciate the analogy presented by R. Levi in the selection from the Yerushalmi cited above: Just as we don't drink between the third and fourth cup (but we may between the others), similarly, we don't skip a Shabbat between Parah and haChodesh.
Since the goal of the entire sequence of these Parashiot is to engender the necessary environment for turning Pesach from past into present - ensuring a brighter future - the analogy of the four cups, which are a vehicle for celebrating that freedom are, indeed, an apt analogy.
The Four Parashiot: Mis'mach Ge'ulah l'G'ulah
VIII
"A PEOPLE DISPERSED"
No one knew how to speak Lashon haRa as well as Haman. (BT Megillah 13b). Keep in mind that Lashon haRa is defined as true but degrading statements (slander is know by a different ignonomous title: Motzi Shem Ra). What did Haman say about the B'nei Yisra'el? He claimed that we are a "dispersed and disconnected people". This is, both from a perspective of Hazal's history and what we can approximate from Biblical narrative, an accurate description of the B'nei Yisra'el during this time.
There are many indications - in the Megillah, in Sefer Ezra and in Rabbinic literature - of the lack of unity and mutual concern to be found among the Judean exiles in Persia during the reign of Ahashverosh (and his predecessors). They had assimilated to the point where Jewish concerns, specifically of the welfare of the nascent and beleagured community "back home" who had returned and rebuilt the Beit haMikdash, were apparently not at the forefront of the Jewish community's conscience. Besides their assimiliation into Persi an culture (to the point where they were willing participants in Ahashverosh's idolatrous orgy - see R. Shim'on b. Yohai's comments in BT Megillah 12a) and the high rate of intermarriage prevalent in that community (see Ezra 9), the fact that it took the queen's order to assemble the Jews together in Shushan may be an indication of how "dispersed and disconnected" they really were.
What is the antidote for this lack of mutual and communal concern? Note Esther's response to Mordechai: "Assemble all of the Jews together..." (4:16). Esther understood that the first step needed in order to effect national salvation (or, in other words, to create the necessary conditions for national redemption) is to ensure that there is a nation to save. We can not be an Am Nosha (redeemed nation - Devarim 33:29) if we are not a nation to begin with.
PARASHAT SHEKALIM
And so, we begin the process of nation-building by publicly reading the Parashah of Shekalim: And Hashem spoke to Moses, saying, When you take the census of the people of Yisra'el according to their number, then shall they give every man a ransom for his soul to Hashem, when you count them; that there should be no plague among them, when you count them. This they shall give, every one who passes among those who are counted, half a shekel according to the shekel of the sanctuary; a shekel is twenty gerahs; a half shekel shall be the offering of Hashem. Every one who passes among those who are counted, from twenty years old and above, shall give an offering to Hashem. The rich shall not give more, and the poor shall not give less than half a shekel, when they give an offering to Hashem, to make an atonement for your souls. And you shall take the atonement money of the people of Yisra'el, and shall appoint it for the service of the Tent of Meeting; that it may be a memorial to the people of Yisra'el before Hash em, to make an atonement for your souls.
The first lesson we are taught in this Parashah is not the obligation to donate to the building of the Mishkan - we've already learned about that (Sh'mot 25:2). Rather, we learn that everyone must participate in this donation - and that everyone has an equal amount of responsibility towards this project. In other words, no individual can exempt himself from his responsibility towards the community - and no one should think that his part is either more or less significant than his fellow's. It is often this sense of exaggerated self -importance on the one hand and (its equally dangerous opposite number) self -negation on the other which causes individuals to lose a sense of perspective regarding their role and responsibility within the body politic.
Note that the Torah obligates each person to give the same amount: The rich shall not give more, and the poor shall not give less. Besides this common standard, the Torah teaches us another valuable lesson regarding the role of the individual within the community: This they shall give, every one who passes among those who are counted, half a shekel according to the shekel of the sanctuary;
The Torah clearly prescribes the gift of half of a shekel; why doesn't the Torah just obligate a full shekel; or, that particular amount is inherently significant, obligate a gift of 10 gera of silver. Why phrase it as half a shekel (thus leading to the Halakhic obligation to change money in order to give an actual half-shekel piece)?
The answer which suggests itself is that the Torah is teaching us about the power of the individual - and his limitations. Everyone is needed for the public welfare to be secure - but no individual, no matter how rich, intelligent or powerful, is capable of succeeding on his own. Any nation-building enterprise demands, first and foremost, a partnership. When each individual recognizes his own strengths, not negating his own value (the poor shall not give less) nor overestimate his indispensability (The rich shall not give more), he can also understand that he needs his fellow as much as his fellow needs him (half a shekel).
PARASHAT ZAKHOR
On the Shabbat immediately before Purim, we take out a second Sefer Torah and read Parashat Zakhor: Remember what Amalek did to you by the way, when you came forth out of Egypt; How he met you by the way, and struck at your rear, all who were feeble behind you, when you were faint and weary; and he did not fear God. Therefore it shall be, when Hashem your God has given you rest from all your enemies around, in the land which Hashem your God gives you for an inheritance to possess, that you shall blot out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven; you shall not forget it.
What is the connection between this Parashah and Purim? Keep in mind that if we are only concerned with having this section read once a year, we have already done so in the late summer - and the related Parashah (Sh'mot 17:8-16) was read a month ago. Although Haman's Amalek-association (genealogical, ideological or both) is strongly alluded to in the Megillah, this still doesn't explain this extra reading at this time; after all, we don't take out a second Sefer Torah on the Shabbat of Hol haMo'ed Pesach in order to read about the prohibitions of allowing an Egyptian convert into the community for two generations - or how we must treat Egyptians in general - even though these laws are clearly associated with the events celebrated on Pesach.
A careful look at the nature of Amalek's attack reveals an intricate connection to the Purim story beyond the ancestry of Haman. How did Amalek attack us? How he met you by the way, and struck at your rear, all who were feeble behind you...In other words, the infirm, old and weak who were walking at the back of the Israelite camp were the targets of these tribal warriors (see Ibn Ezra ad loc.) The question must be asked: Why were these people walking at the back of the camp? Why weren't they placed safely in the middle, with strong, young and healthy men on the outskirts of this nomadic community?
The only conclusion which may be drawn is that the community itself did not demonstrate sufficient and appropriate concern for the weak and less capable within the group. To wit, Amalek was only able to successfully attack us when our own sense of common and mutual concern was lax. (See the comment of the Mekhilta on the verse And Amalek came and fought Yisra'el at Refidim - that Refidim implies that the B'nei Yisra'el acted deficiently in their own observace of Torah).
The sequence of Shekalim-Zakhor is one which seems to produce a dialectic tension. Shekalim teaches the equal responsibility of each person - no more, no less - towards the communal enterprise. From Parashat Zakhor, conversely, we learn that those who are stronger have a greater share of the responsibility towards their weaker fellows. Which is it? Do we have equal responsibilities or not?
This tension is immediately ameliorated when we consider which attitude each Parashah is coming to correct. At its foundation, a community must recognize the equal worth of each member and no one's worth should either be negated nor should it be overemphasized to the point of feeling like a "whole shekel". Once that sense of common obligation and equal responsibility is internalized, we do a "reality check" and note that some people, due to circumstances of birth and other Divine blessings, are more gifted than others at different things. There are brilliant theoreticians, military strategists, composers of beautiful music, and so on. Some of them, due to their engagement and involvement with their own art, are not as strong as others in other disciplines. As a result, each person needs to channel his talents towards the good of the community; strength, wisdom, wealth etc. do not breed rights; rather, they are cause for responsibility.
Both of these lessons are brought to the fore within the context of the Purim story. As noted above, Esther directed Mordechai to "assemble all of the people together", implying the commonality expressed by Parashat Shekalim. Within the celebration of Purim, however, we see an emphasis on our responsibilities towards those less fortunate: that they should make them days of feasting and gladness, days for sending gifts of food to one another and presents to the poor. (Esther 9:22).
Note the words of Rambam in codifying the Purim budget in MT Hilkhot Megillah 2:17: It is preferable for a person to spend more on his gifts to the poor than on his feast and sending portions to his friends. For there is no greater or more glorious happiness than to gladden the hearts of the poor, orphan, widow and stranger. One who gladdens the heart of these destitute people is similar to the Shekhinah, as it says: To bring life to the spirit of the lowly and to restore the heart of the downtrodden.
In sum, the two lessons which we need to learn in order to build a nation (which can then become a "nation which is redeemed") are the [limited] value of each member and the responsibility of each member towards each other, particularly those less "privileged". These lessons bring us to the first level of redemption - the redemption of Purim, a redemption born of Jewish unity.
PARASHAT PARAH
Once we have forged the unity necessary to create and maintain a healthy nation, there is yet one significant step we must take to be worthy of Ge'ulah. Any group which has achieved cohesion must also have a goal towards which that cooperative spirit is focused. If communal concern and mutual respect become ends in and of themselves, there is little reason to think that they will endure. It is the engine of common purpose and direction which ultimately drives the community (and, writ large, the nation).
What is our goal? Towards what do we aim our national resources? The answer is provided in the introductory chapter to the Stand at Sinai: but you shall be for Me a kingdom of Kohanim and a holy nation... (Sh'mot 19:6)
Our national charter is not just to be a unified people, an ethical beacon whose communal and national behavior exemplify sensitivity to others and respect for each member of the K'lal. We are called to be much more than that - we are charged to be a holy nation, a nation which strives to infuse its national life - and the personal lives of its members - with sanctity. We aim to bring God's Name into this world and to bring this world to a greater realization of His Presence.
After we have achieved the lonGodesired unity on Purim, balancing the demands of Shekalim and Zakhor, we then move this unified nation towards the national agenda of purity and holiness.
The selection known as Parashat Parah details the laws of the red heifer, used to purify anyone who has come into contact with the dead and has, as a result, become Tamei (ritually impure). His Tum'ah prevents him from entering the Mikdash/Mishkan and from partaking in any of the sancta. This ritual is, as Rashi (BT Megillah 29a) points out, Taharatan shel Yisra'el - the purification of the B'nei Yisra'el.
After we have gelled as a nation, we must move, together, towards the purity which allows us to reenter the Mikdash - so that we can continue on our national mission of bringing this world to God - and revealing God to this world.
XII
PARASHAT HACHODESH
Which brings us to the last of the four Parashiot, the one which, as we noted in last week's issue, seems the most problematic.
The opening line of this Parashah, haChodesh haZeh Lakhem, is itself somewhat difficult to understand. Although it has been Halakhically rendered as a command (either the command to declare the New Moon or to maintain a calendar with the month of Aviv at its head - see Rashi and Ramban ad loc.), the wording seems to be lacking a verb. We would expect it to read: haChodesh haZeh Yihyeh Lakhem.
S'forno notes that this opening line is, indeed, not phrased as a command; rather, it is a declarative statement: This month is yours. Here is his comment: From here on the months shall be yours, to do with them as you wish. During the days of the slavery your days were not your own, rather they were committed to other people's work and contingent upon their will. Therefore It is the first one for you of the months of the year - because now you began your life of free -will.
Our liberation, giving us the opportunity to create the conditions necessary for redemption, can only come when, as a united nation, we have become purified and moved our national agenda towards our mission of becoming a holy nation. As soon as we achieve that lofty goal, the time is ours - to act as we choose. If we choose wisely, the celebration of the past Exodus can become the promised future redemption.
XIII
THE ARBA PARASHIOT AND THE FOUR CUPS
We can now appreciate the analogy presented by R. Levi in the selection from the Yerushalmi cited above: Just as we don't drink between the third and fourth cup (but we may between the others), similarly, we don't skip a Shabbat between Parah and haChodesh.
Since the goal of the entire sequence of these Parashiot is to engender the necessary environment for turning Pesach from past into present - ensuring a brighter future - the analogy of the four cups, which are a vehicle for celebrating that freedom are, indeed, an apt analogy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)