meta: {"file": "/data/tomer/Sefaria-Export/txt/Halakhah/Shulchan Shel Arba/English/Shulhan Shel Arba, translated by Jonathan Brumberg-Kraus, 2010.txt"}
text: Shulchan Shel Arba
  שלחן של ארבע
  Shulhan Shel Arba, translated by Jonathan Brumberg-Kraus, 2010
  
  
  Shulchan Shel Arba
  
  Introduction
  
  Son of Man who’s made from four, Do taste my bread, calm your belly’s roar.
  Hark and hear, speak I secret lore. Hold it well, a peg in your tent’s floor.
  But only a wise pilgrim the depths can endure; No witless fool, who’ll stray from shore.
  Then like at dawn, the sun’s shining core Emerge your Light! From the book, this Table of Four.
  “This is the table which is before the Lord,1<i class="footnote">Ez 41:22.</i> who spreads the heavens like a canopy for a tent 2<i class="footnote">Is 40:22.</i> sets earth over water 3<i class="footnote">Ps 135:6</i> and feeds the creatures of His home in three divisions: “the bottom, middle, and topmost decks.”4<i class="footnote">An allusion to Noah’s ark in Gen 6:16.</i> In the highest realm are the ministering angels nearest to Him: the <i>cherubim, </i>the<i> seraphim, </i>the <i>ofanim</i>, and the <i>arielim</i>. They are attendants in His palace; in legions they feast on the light of His presence, from the flowing light of His own radiance. The middle realm is the “vest of the heavens,”5<i class="footnote">Chavel (457): the realm of the planets.</i> an assembly of fire and water –rains constraining and constrained – by day and night God restrains them. The eyes of their minds see [<i>tzofim</i>] their Master’s delight as their food, far sweeter to them than choice honey [<i>tzufim</i>]. They hunger for the Cause of their existence;6<i class="footnote">Wonderful but untranslatable wordplay: <i>sibat sivuvam sibatam nekhsafim</i>.</i> the pillars supporting their realm are suspended by the arm of His wisdom, and quake at His rebuke.7<i class="footnote">Allusion to Job 26:11.</i> But the lowest dwelling, a circle radiating from its midpoint, has measurable dimensions. Our food is not their food. Their food is conceived in their mind, when they see the face of their Maker. Our food is meager bread, water, and tears,8<i class="footnote">Cf. Is 30:20, Ps. 80:6.</i> gotten by hard work and toil.
  For so the King ordered how we are to live because of the first sin on the day the smooth talker deceived our first father.9<i class="footnote">I.e., the serpent.</i> On the day Adam was ensnared by his enemy, it was decreed for him that he would earn his bread only by the sweat of his brow,10<i class="footnote">Gen 3:19.</i> and that man be humbled and brought low.11<i class="footnote">Is. 2:9.</i> He traded pleasure [‘<i>oneg</i>] for plague [<i>nega’</i>], got hard work instead of rest. His wisdom spoiled and his stature was diminished. It caused him weakness instead of strength; instead of wheat, thorns came forth. Instead of eternal life, death; instead of light, the shadow of death. With all this the Lord raised the power of the upper beings, and worsened the power of the lower beings. For the upper beings were fed without toiling, while the lower ones had to make do with pain and suffering. He gave the upper beings on high eternal life for all their generations, but to the lower ones short lives, days flying swifter than a runner.12<i class="footnote">Job 9:25.</i> This is the striking parable that our rabbis brought in Bereshit Rabba on the verse: “the earth was unformed and void[<i>tohu ve-bohu</i>].”13<i class="footnote">Gen 1:1.</i>
  It is like a king who acquired two slaves, both with one and the same contract and price. He decreed that one would eat from the king’s stock for free, and that the other would have to work for his food. So the latter sat wondering and confused [<i>toheh ve-boheh</i>].14<i class="footnote">A pun on the Hebrew <i>tohu ve-bohu</i> – “unformed and void” – in Gen. 1:1.</i> He said, ‘Both of us were acquired by one and the same price and contract, yet that one is fed from the treasury. But I, if I don’t work, I don’t eat. I am astonished! Likewise the earth sat wondering and confused.15<i class="footnote">Ber. R. 2:2.</i>
  The word <i>timyon</i> means treasury, and the two servants are the heavens and the earth. And when it is said, “maker [<i>koneh</i>] of the heaven and earth,”16<i class="footnote">Gen 14:22, playing on the double meaning of <i>koneh </i>as both “who makes” and “who acquires.”</i> it means they were acquired with one and the same contract and price, that is to say by one bill of sale and one lump payment; the parable refers to a single substance. This interpretation presumes that both were created from a single substance. And in a similar vein there is another interpretation: “The upper and lower beings were created in a single instant. The upper beings feed on the radiance of the Shekhinah, while the lower beings – if they don’t toil, they don’t eat.”17<i class="footnote">Ber. R. 2:2</i> And if so, this is why the composer of the second interpretation said “the radiance of the Shekhinah” instead of <i>timyon</i>, which is where the king stores his goods. Another interpretation says, “The upper beings live, the lower ones die; thus there was wondering and confusion.”18<i class="footnote">Ibid.</i> While considering the quality of its own existence, man looked at the lives of the upper beings. Those lives are sweet-they last forever. He looked at all the seas that stand before the Lord, and the earth, considering the quality of the Lord’s creation, and complained about how bad his own portion was. With all of this, man really wondered and was confused. And so this is the inheritance of the human race–that we cannot be freed from the prison of man’s first crime. Our existence is meagerbecause we haven’t been purified of this crime. So we shall wait for the angel of the covenant comes to refine and purify us, —the lord whom we seek, the messiah of the Holy of Holies. As all the children of Adam—children of the man who sinned, we are stained, our souls are sick –our nation is no better than all the rest of the nations; like us, like them – under the same sentence of Eve.
  However, we are distinguished by our regimen of pleasures [<i>dat sha’ashu’im</i>] from the nations who err, rebel, and sin. For we found our Rock in the desert in the land of souls, and there He set for us a table against the nations, and thus David, said, ‘Set before me a table against my enemies’ [Ps 23:5). There the Lord gave us an abundance of charity and good things. There He gave us a marvelous portion of the bread in our law, bread from heaven through no toil. There He showed us through great love something like the world to come—where the divisions of His marvelously formed angels are fed without toil, hewn from flames and awesome fires; and the planting of the Lord of Hosts. Our holy race is lovely because our heart was tested in the desert. We rose up like sweet-smelling incense to thank the Lord and said a blessing over the table. As it is written regarding the manna: “In the morning you shall have your fill of bread and you shall know that I the Lord am your God.”19<i class="footnote">Ex. 16:12.</i> Even while we were in the land of our enemies bearing our punishment,the manna soothed our dry and shriveled gullets,20<i class="footnote">Nu. 11:6.</i> while the flowering vines of our enemies spread heavy on the ground. Even without temple or altar, no medicine-making; the Torah of the Lord with us will save us from breaking. Marked as we are by our circumcision, fringes, and shaving–– the food on our table will help us recognize and remind ourselves to respect His greatness. Let us bless over the table of Him whose food we have eaten.21<i class="footnote">An allusion to the wording of the grace after meals.</i> It is not so with the wicked, whose sins have earned them aninextinguishable fire;22<i class="footnote">Ps. 14:4.</i> their table lies before them like mire. Rising early in the morning they devour food and they do not call to the Lord; their hearts and eyes they raise to what delights them, but toward the One above not even the slightest look. Such is the sentence of the nations, that they are a vile and foolish nation filled with folk devoid of sense. Unlike those other nations is Jacob, for he will bless the sacrifice and then eat it.23<i class="footnote">Jer 10:16; I Sam 9:13.</i> All his fruit shall also be set aside for jubilation before the Lord;24<i class="footnote">Lev 19:24.</i> he will withdraw his right hand until the blessing is drawn back into the ‘palace that is before Me.’25<i class="footnote">I Kg 6:17 [<i>heykhal lifnay</i>], usually translated as ‘the front part of the House’ (i.e., the Temple). Bahya reads <i>lifnay</i> as “before Me,” in order to allude to the mystical idea that saying a blessing returns the vital energy in what is eaten back to its source in the heavenly realm.</i> This is among the ways of wisdom to keep the heart of man straight upon the path of the Lord’sbright lights, to prevent one straying from the service of his God; so that the temptationsof pleasure would not draw our purpose away from being drawn to Him, nor our sinfulinstincts seduce us from serving our Creator,26<i class="footnote">An untranslatable wordplay here on <i>yetzer </i>and <i>yotzer</i>.</i> from waiting for Him at the doors of His gates.27<i class="footnote">Prov. 8:34.</i>
  Typically, when people recline at the table and enjoy themselves eating and drinking, isn’ttemptation exactly what tricks their instinct by its crafty power to make their nature too proud and make their heart haughty? Because when they eat they’ll be sated, and when sated they’ll be wicked. They’ll throw off any discipline; their tastes will grip their sense, and will pull them by “the cords of falsehood.”28<i class="footnote">Is 5:18.</i> They won’t distinguish between the sacred and the profane, nor between the cheap and the priceless; they’ll drink and forget what the point was. And thus the prophet, the son of Beeri, when at the Israelites he was piqued and shrieked, “When they were sated, their hearts grew haughty and they forgot me.”29<i class="footnote">Hos. 13:6.</i> And in the Torah it is written, “[When] your herds and flocks have multiplied, and your silver and gold have increased, and everything you own has prospered, your heart will grow haughty and you will forget the Lord your God.”30<i class="footnote">Dt. 8:13-14.</i>
  It is well known that the majority of the children of Adam have sleeping hearts and theyslumber; they eat with the blood and they spill blood themselves.31<i class="footnote">This whole paragraph, which in Hebrew is all rhymed prose, is a remarkable pastiche of Biblical allusions; nearly every phrase has a Biblical source. See Chavel, who lists as sources Is 11:7; Hos 4:18; Prov 23:30; Ez 48:20; Prov 16:28; Nah 2:5; and Ps 37:4. There are others, including Prov 15:17 (see next note).</i> Like an ox eats straw they eat their bread, and their souls are wasted and devastated, drunk from the wine of lust and not of the wine of intellect; their drink turns on them.32<i class="footnote">Hos 4:18.</i> In their quest for more intense stimulation of their senses, their souls are far from the way of truth. There are some, witless and ignorant, or capricious, who enjoy without blessing or neglect blessings. There are some fools who spit the good of the world into their vessels; if they drink from their bowl, they will forget the point of their eating at their tables, and the light of their calm will flash away like lightning. But unique is the one who fears and delights in the Lord even over a dinner of vegetables.33<i class="footnote">An allusion to Prov 15:17: “Better a meal of vegetables where there is love, than a fattened bull where there is hate;” and <i>Midrash Mishlei</i> 15:1 (on it), which R. Bahya quotes and discusses at length in his commentary on the Torah (<i>Be’ur</i>, 2:376-7). The midrash’s point is to teach <i>derekh eretz</i> – “good manners.” Even a poor host, who invokes the blessings of God, can make his “meal of vegetables” more palatable to his guest, than a rich host who says the wrong thing, though serving his guest a sumptuous meal. It is worth quoting the whole midrash:“BETTER A MEAL OF VEGETABLES WHERE THERE IS LOVE, THAN A FATTENED BULL WHERE THERE IS HATE.” (Prov. 15:17) R. Levi said, “About whom did Solomon say this verse? About two men who met him after he had lost his kingdom and was wandering from door to door looking for a job. Two men met him, who recognized him. One of them came up, prostrated himself before him, and said to him, “My lord the king, if it pleases you, take a meal with me today.” Immediately he went with him. He had him go up to the best seat, slaughtered a bull, had many delicacies brought to him, and began to recite to him all the things having to do with his kingdom. He said to him, “Remember how you did such and such a thing on such and such a day when you were king.” But as soon as he reminded him of the days of his kingdom, he began to cry and moan. And so it was for the whole meal until he got up and left having cried himself out. The next day, his host’s companion met him. He began to prostrate himself before him, and said to him, “My lord the king, if it pleases you, take a meal with me today.” He said to him, “Perhaps you seek to do for me as your friend did yesterday?” He said, “My lord, the king, I am a poor man, but if it pleases you, take a meal with me today of the little bit of vegetables I have.” At that very moment he went to his house. The man washed his hands and feet, brought him a little bit of vegetables, and began to console him. He said to him, “My Lord the king, the Holy One Blessed Be He surely swore to your father that the monarchy will never cease from your line, as it is said, “The Lord swore to David a firm oath the He will not renounce, ‘One of your own issue I will set upon your throne’” (Ps. 132:11). It’s just the way of the Holy One Blessed Be He to rebuke and then repent from rebuking, as it said, “For whom the Lord loves, He rebukes, as a father the son he favors.” (Prov. 3:12). But He will restore your kingdom to you. R. Hiyya said…when Solomon got his kingdom back, he wrote in his wisdom, “’BETTER A MEAL OF VEGETABLES WHERE THERE IS LOVE’ which I ate at the poor man’s home, ‘THAN A FATTENED BULL WHERE THERE IS HATE’ which the rich man who reminded me of my sorrow fed me.”</i>
  And because I saw that this was how things were, as someone bereft of knowledge a sad and worthless worm, a trampled doormat,34<i class="footnote">Jer. 10:14.</i> my heart compelled me to write about this in brief in a book, and to include in it some sacred words so that it could be at your table, by your right hand, for you to read in it all that is required at your meal. And if at the time you are eating, your faith is reassured by this book of mine, and according to its words, you will be sure attain the level of the pious ones who are perfect in their qualities, who wage “the wars for the Lord” and stand up against all their desires.35<i class="footnote">“Wars for the Lord:” the whole phrase is <i>Ha-lohmot milhamot Ha-Shem</i> – idiomatically, “those who wage holy wars.” However, R. Bahya has chosen this expression for its multiple connotations. Though this is a technical medieval Hebrew expression for “holy war,” R. Bahya also plays on the pun between <i>lehem</i> – “bread” or food in general, and the Hebrew noun for war – <i>milhamah</i> – and the verb “to wage war” – <i>l.</i><i>a.h.am</i>. That these “holy wars” are directed internally against one’s animal desires is strikingly similarity to the idea in Islam of “the greater <i>jihad.</i>” See for example Ghazz¯al¯i, “An Exposition of the Merit of Hunger and a Condemnation of Satiety,” the seventh chapter in <i>On Disciplining the Soul = Kit¯ab Riy¯adat Al-Nafs, &amp; On Breaking the Two Desires = Kit¯ab Kasr Al-Shahwatayn: Books XXII and XXIII of The Revival of the Religious Sciences = Ihy¯a’ ‘ul¯um Al-D¯in</i> (Cambridge, UK: The Islamic Texts Society, 1995).</i> And because it’s through my lips that the topics of the table and its requirements are expressed; the title “The Table of Four” is how I think my book should be addressed – and this is for several reasons:
  The first reason is because the food on a table is the cause of the sustenance of the body, which is composed of four elements. If one were missing or were more dominant than its fellows, a person would sicken immediately and be unable to eat or drink, or serve the Lord. The heart would be terrified and the mind afraid at the overturning of the equilibrium of the organs, which are the vessel of the soul. The soul cannot act without its vessel. If so, the table then is the foundation of the four elements, and they keep the body standing just as the four poles in the four rings used to hold up the table [in the Tabernacle], which is why Scripture said, “By these [the poles] the table shall be carried.”36<i class="footnote">Ex. 25:28.</i>
  The second is because we have been commanded to make ourselves holy over the table with four different scriptural mentions of “holiness,” 37<i class="footnote">In verse 11:44 of Leviticus: “For I am the Lord your God. You shall make yourselves holy and you shall be holy, for I am holy.”</i> as our rabbis interpreted:38<i class="footnote">B.Ber 53b.</i> “’You shall make yourselves holy’ – this refers to the hand-washing before a meal; ‘You shall be holy’ – this refers to the hand-washing after the meal; ‘For holy’ – this refers to the fragrant oil;39<i class="footnote">According to Chavel, quoting Rashi’s comment to this midrash: “It was customary to bring fragrant oil at the end of the meal to pour on one’s hands after the hand-washing after the meal removed the dirt from them.”</i> and ‘I am the Lord’ – this refers to blessing.” And of these four “holinesses,” two are for the purification of the body, and two for the purification of the soul. Our souls take pleasure in the scent [of the oil] and rejoice, and expand – making our souls then capable of blessing the Holy One Blessed Be He.
  The third is because I have divided this book into four “gates,” corresponding to the four blessings in the grace after meals – three from the Torah, one from the words of the scribes.
  And the fourth is because the perfect table “which is before the Lord” is the upper level where the soul is nourished. There are four upper levels which, like the four animals of “the chariot” among the upper beings, correspond to the four winds of the world, and to the four elements in the beings below in the lower world. These levels are the intellectual banquet which is called “the life of the world to come.” And our rabbis before us called it “the table of three legs,” as it is said in the Talmud, Massekhet Ta’anit.40<i class="footnote">B. Ta’anit 25a: “In the future the righteous will eat at a table of gold which has three legs.”</i> And why didn’t they call it “the table of four legs”? It was their way of referring to the three patriarchs, and that’s why they said “of three legs;” and they were concealing the fourth. LikewiseEzekiel concealed the <i>place</i> of the eagle, as it is written, “Each of the four had the face of an eagle;” he did not specify what its position was.41<i class="footnote">Ez. 1:10. In his prophetic vision of the four heavenly creatures, the prophet specifies that each had four faces: a human face, a face of a lion on the right, the face of an ox on the left, and the face of an eagle. But unlike the other faces, Ezekiel does not state specifically <i>where</i> on the creatures’ bodies the eagle’s face was.</i> And from his example our sages z”l learned to conceal an implied fourth when they just said, “The patriarchs are indeed the chariot”42<i class="footnote">Ber. R. 47:8.</i> and “one refers to the patriarchs only as three.”43<i class="footnote">B. Berakhot 16b.</i> But it is well known that no chariot has less than four wheels. For this reason one saint used to say while reciting the Amidah, “the God of David and Builder of Jerusalem,” to mention in his prayer the whole chariot in all its completeness.44<i class="footnote">In other words, he added the Messiah, the descendent of King David and rebuilder of Jerusalem, who has yet to come and complete the four.</i> And therefore I call this book “Table of Four” for that level where our souls are attached: where they are nourished and take pleasure to the degree appropriate to their level. This is the perfect table for the righteous one.Completing the chariot makes it a table of four, for there the souls of the patriarchs are hidden away. And accordingly, having achieved this status, the place where the vessels [of their souls, i.e., their bodies] are buried is called Kiryat Arba’ (“The City of Four”), that is, Hebron.45<i class="footnote">R. Bahya is probably also suggesting that the name of the patriarchs’ burial place not only alludes to the number four as a symbol of perfection and completion, but also to the re-union of the soul with her source implied in the word “Hebron.” Hebron sounds like the root of the Hebrew word for “to unite” or “to attach” that R. Bahya just used to refer to the place “where the soul is attached,” “<i>sham hithabrut ha-nefesh</i>.”</i> So when a person is eating and drinking at his table to sate his soul to sustain his body with its four elements, his mind should ramble about upward onto the pure “table which is before the Lord,” that is, the four levels which hover over the refined soul who merits each and every one according to her level. There is no doubt that by this, all of his bodily activities are accounted to a person as if they were intellectual ones, that he himself be counted among the elite, and his soul “be bound up in the bundle of life”46<i class="footnote">I Sam 25:29: <i>tzurah be-tzror ha-hayyim</i>, an expression which has come to mean “eternal life” as in the prayer for the dead <i>El Male Rahamim</i>.</i>even while he is still alive; fit for the whole world to be created for his sake. As our rabbis z”l taught in a midrash: “’For this applies to all mankind,’47<i class="footnote">Eccl. 12:13.</i> that is, all the world in its entirety was created only in conjunction with this man.”48<i class="footnote">B. Shabbat 30b.</i>
  These then are the four gates into which this book is divided:
  The First Gate:
  An explanation of the blessings that a person is obliged to bless over the table, and the other obligations of the table.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  The Second Gate:
  An explanation of the nature of eating: What it is and how a person through it should prepare himself for the proper purpose in life required of him.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  The Third Gate:
  An explanation of the ethics and etiquette with which a person is required to behave at the table.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  The Fourth Gate:
  An explanation of the meal prepared for the righteous in the future to come.
  
  
  
  
  
  Gate 1
  
  <i>An explanation of the blessings that a person is obliged to bless over the table, and the other obligations of the table</i>
  There are eight table blessings, and they are: <i>netilat yada’im </i>[over hand-washing]<i>, ha-motzi </i>[over bread], the four blessings of <i>birkat ha-mazon </i>[grace after meals], and twoblessings over the wine (before and after the meal). The reason for these eight has to do with the table being considered equal to the altar of the Temple. Just as the altar atones, so does the table. Look – when you put bread on the table to feed the poor, it is like a sacrifice on the altar. Just as the incense on the altar (which atoned more than all the sacrifices upon the altar of bronze) was made of eight kinds of spices – four in the anointing oil- myrrh, cinnamon, aromatic cane, and cassia; and the four in the incense itself which are specified in Scripture: stacte, onycha, galbanum, and frankincense–1<i class="footnote">Ex 30:34, following the <i>Jewish Study Bible</i>’s translation.</i> we are commanded to say eight different kinds of blessings over the table corresponding to them. Most people do not take this into consideration or pay attention to this matter. Butit is necessary for person to make himself holy at his table during his meal with these eight blessings that correspond to the eight kinds of spices specified in the Torah, which used to be in the Temple, in order to fulfill the commandments in their essence, and to direct one’s mind in the blessings to their basic foundations.
  The first blessing is <i>al netilat yada’im</i> -“over the washing of the hands”. Our rabbis z”l specifically fixed the form of this blessing with the word “<i>netilah</i>,” which literally means “raising high,” as the Targum translates “then a spirit lifted me up [<i>va-tise’ni</i>]”2<i class="footnote">Ez 3:12.</i> – “raised me up” [<i>va-nitaltni</i>]. These two verbs are also used synonymously when it is written “He raised them and lifted them up [<i>va-yitlem va-yinas’em</i>] all the days of old.”3<i class="footnote">Is 63:9.</i>It is necessary to raise up one’s hands when saying this blessing. Moreover this would include the point of raising hands in prayer, to concentrate one’s mind on them (i.e., the ten fingers of one’s hands) to be made holy by them from the ten <i>sefirot</i>. It is like someone who raises their hands upward to concentrate on opening the source above, pulling and drawing down the divine energy flow. This is what Scripture means when it says, “I reach up for your commandments which I love.”4<i class="footnote">Ps 119:48.</i> This verse teaches you that in some of the commandments there is an imprint or picture above, which a person needs, in order to follow them below, so you should raise your hands toward them above. Even here over the table when you are eating, you ought to lift up your hands and raise them above.5<i class="footnote">Or “ought to perform the ritual of <i>al netilat yada’im </i>raising his hands upward …;” the Hebrew can mean either, or most likely, both.</i> You should concentrate on the ten <i>sefirot</i> when you lift (or wash) before you eat, and likewise after you eat with the <i>mayim aharonim</i> [i.e., the washing after the meal]. Scripture talksabout this when it says, “Lift your hands toward the sanctuary and bless the Lord.”6<i class="footnote">Ps 134:2</i>Similarly with the ten things that are necessary for a cup of blessing, according to the custom of those in the past.7<i class="footnote">R. Bahya is referring to b. Berakhot 51a:Rabbi Zeira said in the name of Rabbi Abahu – others say it is taught in a beraita: “Ten things were said to have been required for of a cup of blessing: (1) washing and (2) rinsing it before use, (3) undiluted, (4) a full cup (5) closing it [<i>itur</i>] (6) covering with a cloth [<i>ituf</i>], (7) lifting it up with two hands and putting it in the right, and (8) elevating it at least a handbreadth from the ground, (9) looking at it; and some say, (10) sending it as a gift to household members.” Rabbi Yohanan said, “we know of only four: Washing, rinsing, undiluted, and full.”Though R. Yohanan’s view became the accepted practice, R. Bahya is suggesting that there nevertheless was an ancient custom that did associate the rituals concerned with blessing a cup of wine with the ten <i>sefirot. </i>That is why Rabbi Zeira et al. specified <i>ten, </i>according to R. Bahya’s interpretation of his rationale. So Chavel in his notes explains R. Bahya’s reference to “the custom of those in the past.” See below, where R. Bahya discusses in more detail the ten things connected with the cup of blessing. See also the <i>Zohar</i> 2:157b.</i> All this is to hint that the purpose of concentrating on our eating at the table is only for our body to be sustained and be able to serve theCreator so that our soul will merit to stand among “the ten,” and that the brilliant light be her food and hover protectively over her. And know the truth, that the structure of the body with ten fingers on the hands that can be raised above, and ten toes below, with our body in the middle – was designed this way, to get us to visualize the connection between heaven and earth. Just so, our body links our upper and lower ten digits.8<i class="footnote">In other words, the connection between our 10 toes and fingers with our body in the middle is analogous to the connection between our 10 fingers lifted up in <i>netilat yada’im</i>down here on earth and the 10 sefirot in the upper world. This is the “imprint” of the cosmos in the human body to which R. Bahya just referred. Perhaps R. Bahya’s particular wording here to introduce this analogy, “Know the truth [<i>ha-emet</i>],” is an allusion to Ps. 85:11: “Truth [<i>emet</i>] will spring up from the ground.”</i> 
  And understand for this reason the Torah describes the sanctification of the priests’ hands and feet, as Scripture says, “They shall wash their hands and feet, that they may not die.”9<i class="footnote">Ex 30:21.</i> This washing Targum Onkelos (may his memory be a blessing) translates with a word that connotes holiness, even though in the other places where “they shall wash” is written, it is translated “they shall remove the dirt from” [<i>va-yes’hun</i>], but here he translated it “they shall sanctify” [<i>va-yikadshun</i>]. This is to explain that the priest used to sanctify his hand and his feet. With his right hand for his right foot and his left hand for his left foot, he would concentrate on “the ten” and make himself holy through their holiness, and draw upon the blessing from their blessedness, and with this thought in mind the priest would sanctify his hands and feet in the basin when he approached the altar. Thus the table is called an altar. For this reason they [the rabbis] were very severe with the punishment for someone who makes light of hand washing; he is to be “uprooted from the world.”10<i class="footnote">B.Sotah 4b.</i> The severity of this punishment is because hand-washing hints at the thing upon which the whole world depends. So whoever makes light of “lifting” the hands (for washing) causes a washing that destroys the world. As it has been said, “wash before or be fed pig meat; wash after or a life might be lost.”11<i class="footnote">B.Hullin 106a. Chavel explains this somewhat elliptical saying in his notes by bringing two stories. First, there was a Jewish shopkeeper who would sell kosher meat that he would cook and feed to a Jew, but when a gentile came into the store, he’d feed him <i>trayf</i>. But if a Jew came to eat and didn’t wash his hands, thinking he was a gentile, the storekeeper would feed him pig meat. As for the danger of not washing afterwards, Chavel retells the story of the man who entrusted his wife with purse of money, and then went out to the market without washing his hands after the meal. A wicked man came along who saw the husband give his wife the purse. He came to the woman and said to her, “Give me the purse that your husband gave you.” She replied to him, “Give me a sign” (i.e., that proved he know her husband and that he sent him). He told that he knew her husband just ate lentils (since he had seen them on her husband’s unwashed hands). So she gave him the purse. When her husband came home, she told him what happened, and he killed her!</i> And this also was said about <i>netilat yada’im</i>: “whoever makes light of hand-washing will end up poor.”12<i class="footnote">B.Shabbat 62b.</i> Wealth is accumulated by the work of one’s <i>hands</i>, and so it is written, “in all that you extend your <i>hand</i> to,”13<i class="footnote">Dt 15:10: “The Lord your God will bless you in all you do, and in all that you extend your hand to.”</i> and blessings are linked to “the ten.” This is hinted at in “you shall surely set aside a tenth,”14<i class="footnote">Deut. 14:22.</i> that is, “from ten [<i>‘eser</i>] so that you will become rich [<i>tit-‘asher</i>].15<i class="footnote">B.Ta’anit 9a, which interprets the Biblical Hebrew emphatic infinitive absolute construction: <i>‘iser te-‘aser</i> (“you shall surely set aside a tenth”) as <i>‘eser te’asher</i> (“ten will make you rich”), punning on the similar spelling and sound of <i>‘eser,</i> “ten” and ‘<i>osher</i>, “wealth.”</i> They proved that <i>‘osher</i> –“wealth” – which is a <i>shibboleth </i>[“an ear of wheat” spelled with a <i>shin</i>] is from the <i>ma’aser</i> [“tithe” spelled with a <i>sin</i>] which is a <i>sibboleth</i> [that is, the letter <i>shin</i>in <i>ma’aser</i> is pronounced like the letter <i>samekh </i>in “<i>sibboleth</i>,” to hint that blessing and wealth is linked to “the ten” (the ten sefirot).16<i class="footnote">The point of the midrash is that <i>‘eser</i> (ten) and <i>‘osher</i> (wealth) are more or less equivalent, even though one is pronounced with an /s/, the other with a /sh/ sound. Of course this an allusion to the story in Judges 12 where the Gileadites used the word <i>shibboleth </i>as a password to distinguish their people from the Ephraimites, who could only pronounce it “<i>sibboleth.</i>” Though R. Bahya on the one hand seems to stress the <i>interchangeability</i> of <i>shibboleth</i> and <i>sibboleth</i> to make his point, I would not put it past him to be also hinting that knowing the equivalence of <i>‘eser</i>, <i>‘osher, </i>and the mystical secret of the connection between the ten<i> sefirot</i> and acquiring blessing is itself a sort of “shibboleth,” as it were. Having the wisdom to make these connections distinguishes the Torah scholars from those who don’t know or appreciate the secrets of the Torah and their benefits.</i> Proof of this is in the <i>birkat kohanim</i> (the priestly) when they raise and extend their hands.17<i class="footnote">I.e., to draw down the blessings from the ten <i>sefirot</i> through their ten fingers. R. Bahya in effect implicitly associates the lifting of the ten fingers when to draw down blessing when one washes before eating at the table, to the blessings drawn down by the hereditary priests.</i> It should become clear from this that the more a commandment requires this sort of thinking directed above, the greater the punishment for making light of it. This is like the issue of saying “<i>Amen</i>.” As great as one’s reward is for answering “Amen,” double is the punishment for making light of it. This is what our rabbis z”l taught in a midrash: “Everyone who is careful to answer “Amen” in this world deserves to answer “Amen” in the world to come.” David (peace be upon him) said, ‘Blessed is the Lord forever, Amen and Amen;’18<i class="footnote">Ps 89:53.</i> ‘Amen’ in this world, and ‘Amen’ in the world to come. For everyone who answers ‘Amen’ deserves two worlds: this world and the world to come.19<i class="footnote">M. Tanhuma 96:7.</i> And in the Temple, when The Name of God was spoken aloud as it is spelled, they did not answer “Amen.” But in the precincts of the Temple where it was not permitted to say it as it is spelled, they would say aloud “Amen” instead of The Name, because the word “<i>Amen</i>” hints at the letters of The Name.20<i class="footnote">B. Berakhot 63a. The numerical equivalents for the names of God ADoNaY (65) and YHWH (26) when added together equal AMeN (91).</i> Therefore, greater is the one who says “Amen” than the one making the blessing using a circumlocution for the actual name of God.21<i class="footnote">I.e., like saying “Adonai” instead of pronouncing YHWH.</i> And everyone who makes light of saying “Amen,” their punishment is double in the circles of hell, that is, the circle called “a land whose light is darkness,”22<i class="footnote">Job 10:22.</i> which is lower She’ol. The prophet who spoke about those that make light of answering “Amen” referred to this when he said “They have forsaken Me, the Fount of living waters, and hewed them out cisterns, broken cisterns which cannot even hold water.”23<i class="footnote">Jer 2:13.</i> But whoever answers “Amen” with its letters opens “the Fount” and draws out the flow of blessing. And accordingly the verse refers to those who make light of it when it says “hewed them out cisterns, broken cisterns.” That is to say, they are punished with a double punishment, the one worse than the other.24<i class="footnote">R. Bahya is picking up on the repetition of the word “cisterns” (<i>be’erot</i>) to hook his midrash.</i> Thus you learn that the greater the reward is for doing something, the greater the punishment for not doing it. Now right after washing and drying his hands, he ought to eat, and so they said, “Right after washing his hands, <i>ha-motzi’.</i>25<i class="footnote">B.Berakhot 52b, which actually says, “right after washing hands, the meal.”</i>
  Washing the hands, even though it is not explicitly commanded in the Torah, was given by our rabbis z”l the authority from a verse in the Torah, as it is written, “If one with a discharge, <i>without having rinsed his hands in water</i>, touches another person.”26<i class="footnote">Lev. 15:11. In other words, this verse assumes <i>that there was a requirement</i> for the one with a discharge to wash his hands, but he didn’t do it.</i> Rabbi Elazar ben Arakh said from here our rabbis z”l gave the command to wash hands the authority of the Torah. Washing hands, whether it’s before eating unconsecrated food or the <i>terumah</i> offering, is done up to where the wrist joint is connected to the palm of the hand.27<i class="footnote">B. Hullin 106a-b, as understood by R. Bahya’s teacher, R. Shlomo ben Adret (according to Chavel). Chavel says he’s also following the R”IF (R. Yitzhak al-Fasi).</i> Whatever applies to ritual immersion also applies to washing hands.28<i class="footnote">Ibid., 106b.</i> A person washing their hands in the morning can set the condition that it covers the whole day.29<i class="footnote">Ibid., 106b-107a.</i> Some have explained that this applies specifically to an exigent situation,30<i class="footnote">E.g., Rabbenu Hananael, cited in R. Shlomo ben Adret in <i>Torat Ha-Bayit</i> 6.4 near the end.</i>while others say even when it is not an exigent situation.31<i class="footnote">E.g., Maimonides and R. Shlomo ben Adret himself, ibid.</i> One who washes his hands should not eat until he has wiped them dry, because anyone who eats without drying, it is as if he eats unclean bread, as it is said, “So shall the people of Israel eat their unclean bread.”32<i class="footnote">Ez. 4:13; b.Sotah 4b.</i> The word <i>lahmam</i> -“their bread”- is an acronym for <i>lihot mayim</i> – “wet with water.”33<i class="footnote">I.e., “hands wet with water.” <i>Ozar Geonim</i> on b.Sotah 4b.</i> Someone washing must raise their hands up, so that the water will not run back down below his wrists, and make his hands unclean all over again.34<i class="footnote">B. Sotah 4b. Chavel says that this also means that one should only raise one’s hands after he’s dried them, so that the water above his wrists doesn’t drip back down afterwards and make his hands unclean again.</i>
  There is a distinction between washing before (<i>mayim rishonim) </i>and washing after (<i>mayim ahronim)</i> a meal in many particulars. <i>Mayim rishonim</i> require a person’s effort, either another person to pour it over his hands, or he himself to pour it with one hand over the other. That is not the case with <i>mayim ahronim</i>, for which a person’s effort is not required to make it flow. <i>Mayim rishonim</i> require raising the hands in a way so as not to bring them back down and make them unclean. That is not the case with <i>mayim ahronim</i>, for which it is required to lower one’s hands downward to remove the dirt. <i>Mayim rishonim</i> require wiping dry, because the wiping dry is crucial to the point of the hand washing; <i>mayim ahronim</i> do not require wiping dry. 35<i class="footnote">The point of the <i>mayim rishonim</i> is to purify one’s hands in order to eat with pure hands. If one doesn’t dry them, they can become unclean again (see the previous note), defeating the purpose of <i>netilat yada’im</i> before the meal. The point of the <i>mayim ahronim</i>however is merely to get the dirt off one’s hands after finishing eating, so it doesn’t really matter if they become ritually unclean once the meal is over.</i> <i>Mayim rishonim</i> require that there be nothing on one’s hands separating them from the water, such as wax, pitch, flour, or feces on one’s fingernails. For <i>mayim ahronim,</i> it doesn’t matter whatsoever if there is or isn’t something separating one’s hands from the water. With <i>mayim rishonim</i>, the hands can be washed either with a vessel or over the ground. In other words, we need not worry if the water falls onto the vessel or onto the ground. With <i>mayim ahronim,</i> one only washes with a vessel, since the water has to fall into the vessel and not onto the ground. With <i>mayim rishonim</i>, if one has rubbed his hands together, he has to do <i>netilat yada’im</i> all over again; with <i>mayim ahronim</i> it is not necessary.36<i class="footnote">Chavel: if one rubs his hands under the water, the water may have missed a spot, leaving it unclean.</i> With <i>mayim rishonim</i>, one recites the blessing “<i>al netilat yada’im</i>.” With <i>mayim ahronim, </i>there is no blessing, except for someone saying <i>birkat ha-mazon</i>, who says the blessing “<i>al rehitzat yada’im</i>” (“concerning the <i>washing</i> of the hands”).37<i class="footnote">As opposed to “<i>al netilat yada’im</i>” – literally, “taking <i>up</i> the hands [to wash them].”</i> <i>Mayim rishonim</i> require pauses; it shouldn’t be poured all at once. Rather, taking up his hands, one washes and pauses, and then takes up and washes and pauses again.38<i class="footnote">Halakhah, Chavel notes, following <i>Orah Hayim</i> 122:2, actually requires three distinct pourings of the <i>mayim rishonim</i>, pausing between each: the first pouring to remove dirt or anything else separating the surface of one’s hands from the water, and then a second pouring to wash off the dirty water; but the water for both of these pourings remains impure. Only after one pours yet a third time does the water purify the water that was on one’s hands.</i> But the <i>mayim ahronim</i> one may pour all at once. <i>Mayim rishonim</i> specifically requires water, and not other kinds of liquids. But for <i>mayim ahronim,</i> even other liquids are acceptable, such as wine and milk, since they are only used to remove the dirt. <i>Mayim rishonim</i> require a vessel (from which to pour it), as it is written about the priests’ washstand: “from it;”39<i class="footnote">Ex 30:19: “Let Aaron and his sons wash their hands and feet [in water drawn] <i>from it</i>.” (JSB). Chavel points out that the commentators explain “from it” (<i>mi-meno</i>) to specify that they were to wash in water poured from it, not <i>in it</i>, and that the Torah’s rules about the Temple priests’ washing apply to <i>netilat yada’im</i> as well.</i> one should not remove or rub off the water in a river; for <i>mayim ahronim</i>, it is permitted. <i>Mayim rishonim</i> go as far as the <i>perek</i> (“the joint”) which is where the hand ends, where the hand and the arm bones are joined. <i>Mayim ahronim</i> are required only up to the edge of the hand where the fingers end. And there are some who say that this is the extent that is required for <i>mayim rishonim</i> – the place where the fingers end. And that the extent for <i>mayim ahronim</i> is up to the middle section of the fingers, since <i>mayim ahronim</i> are only to remove the dirt, and from that point and higher the cooked food is unlikely to get on them. A specific quantity is required for <i>mayim rishonim</i>, namely a quarter of a <i>log</i>,40<i class="footnote">About the size of 1½ eggs.</i> but <i>mayim ahronim</i> do not require a specific quantity. One can extend the effect of <i>mayim rishonim</i> by setting a condition, but one cannot extend the effect of <i>mayim ahronim</i> with a condition.41<i class="footnote">In other words, one can say, “The washing I’m doing now before this meal applies to all the meals I’m going to eat today,” that is, “I’m as ritually clean as a priest to eat this and all my subsequent meals today.” However, since the washing after is to remove actual, visible food from one’s hands, obviously simply stating the condition that “my first hand-washing after a meal will remove any food I get on my hands at subsequent meals during the day” is not going to remove the food stuck to one’s hands after later meals. It seems that R. Bahya and the source he quotes virtually verbatim for all these differences between <i>mayim rishonim</i> and <i>mayim ahronim</i> (R. Abraham ibn Daud, <i>Kol Bo 23: Din Netilat Yadayim</i>) recognize a distinction between what some today might call “ritual” vs. “actual” washing, but what I would prefer to call “theurgic” vs. “pragmatic” washing. After all, they are both rituals. But the former seems explicitly intended to change one’s subjective, spiritual status (“now I’m as pure as priest”); the latter primarily merely one’s observable physical status (no more food scraps on the hands). The ruling that one can verbally condition the “validity” of the <i>mayim rishonim </i>as opposed to the <i>ahronim</i> supports my view that R. Bahya appreciates the difference between rituals whose primary intent is to affect one’s subjective status, vs. those which primarily affect one physically. However, R. Bahya would not say that the former type of ritual was somehow more “spiritual” or important than the latter. On the contrary, one of the main points of <i>Shulhan Shel Arba</i> is to show that even those rituals that primarily affect one physically are designed implicitly to reinforce one’s awareness that eating meals is a way to worship God.</i> A mnemonic for all of these differences between <i>mayim rishonim</i> and <i>mayim ahronim</i> is <i>KoHe”N He”N Sha’A”H MiKaPeRe”T</i> (“For the precious priest, the hour atones”): K – <i>Ko’ah adam</i> (“by human power”); H – <i>Hag’ba’ah</i> (“raising up”); N- <i>Niguv</i> (“wiping dry”); H-<i>Hatzitzah</i> (“nothing separating”); N- <i>Netilah bayn klay beyn ‘al gabay karka’</i> (“washing into a vessel or onto the ground”); Sh – <i>Shifshuf</i> (“rubbing”); ‘A – <i>‘Al netilat yada’im</i> (the blessing <i>‘al netilat yada’im</i>); H – <i>Hefsek</i> (“pausing between pours”); M – <i>Mayim</i> (“water, and nothing else”); K – <i>Klay</i> (“poured from a vessel”); P- <i>Perek</i> (“up to the joint”); R – <i>Revi’it log</i> (“a quarter of a <i>log</i>”); and T- <i>Tenai</i> (“setting a condition”).
  What goes for this blessing, <i>al netilat yada’im,</i> that it is worded with both the explicit second person singular pronoun “You” and the “hidden” pronoun implicit in the third person singular past tense verb form,42<i class="footnote">The original Hebrew is much more elliptical: “<i>be-lashon nigleh ve-nistar</i>.” These are technical grammatical terms. See note 46.</i> is the rule for the rest of the blessings that are fixed according to this formula. This is the secret of blessings, that “the World” is what “sanctified us by His commandments,” and we bless it with the phrase <i>melekh ha-‘olam</i> – “King of the World,” and thus you will find it in the Song at the Sea, “<i>Adonai yimlokh le-‘olam va’ed</i>” – “YHWH will be King for <i>‘olam</i> forever.”43<i class="footnote">Ex 15:18, ordinarily translated “The Lord will reign forever and ever” (JSB).</i> And this has been evoked by the expression “YHWH will be King,” the word “world” and the word “forever.” This is a reference to the three names for God in “The Thirteen Attributes,” which is similarly evoked by the expression “<i>Barukh YHWH ha-mevorakh le-‘olam va’ed</i>” – “Blessed be the Lord to Whom blessing is due as ‘World’ forever,”44<i class="footnote">That is, the usual communal liturgical response to the call to worship: “<i>Barekhu et YHWH ha-mevorakh.</i>” Clearly, R. Bahya is interpreting it midrashically, not in its ordinary sense.</i> and likewise in the prayer “<i>Aleynu le-shabe’ah</i>” by the expression, “Before the Kings of Kings, the Holy One Blessed be He, Who spread out the heavens and established the earth.”45<i class="footnote">Here too, the title <i>melekh </i>(King) is associated with “the World,” that is, “the heavens…and earth” which He spread out and established.</i> It is precisely in this manner that the phrasing of blessings was fixed and ordered. But for the experts on the literal meaning of the text, it seems grammatically inconsistent, since it would be better to say, “us whom <i>You</i> sanctified and by <i>Your</i> commandments <i>You</i> commanded.”46<i class="footnote"><i>Asher kidashtanu bi-mitzvotekha vetzvi</i>ta<i>nu </i>as opposed to<i> asher kidshanu bi-mitzvotav ve-tzivavanu</i>.</i> However, there are pretty good reasons for it to be phrased exactly as it is with its literal meaning, in order to fix in the heart that the Holy One Blessed be He is both revealed and hidden:47<i class="footnote"><i>Nigleh ve-nistar</i>, which are also the grammatical terms R. Bahya uses at the beginning of this paragraph. See note 41.</i>revealed in regard to His ways and actions; hidden in regard to His essence and His very Selfhood. Therefore you will find that when Moses Our Teacher (peace be upon him) asked about knowing Him (may He be Blessed) in regard to his ways, he said to Him, “Pray let me know Your ways.”48<i class="footnote">Ex 33:13.</i> He replied, “I will make all My goodness pass before you.”49<i class="footnote">Ibid., 33:19.</i> But when he asked to know Him in regard to his very Selfhood, and said to Him, “Oh let me behold Your Presence,”50<i class="footnote">Ibid., 33:18.</i> He replied, “You cannot see My face.”51<i class="footnote">Ibid., 33:20.</i> He explained to him these two ways: that He is revealed, and that it is possible to conceive of Him in regard to His ways and actions; and that He is hidden in regard to His Selfhood, and there is no power or device to conceive of Him in this way. And therefore, here when we say “<i>Barukh Atah</i>” – “Blessed are You” – with a present participle [and the pronoun “You”], we should focus on how He (May He be Blessed) is revealed through His actions. And when we continue speaking using the third person singular (<i>be-nistar</i>), saying “<i>asher kidshanu bi-mitzvotav ve-tzivanu</i>” – “who sanctified us by His commandments and commanded us” – we should focus on how He (May He be Blessed) is hidden and invisible to our power of conception. An analogy to this is that the sun, which is one of His servants,52<i class="footnote">R. Bahya’s Hebrew wordplay here “<i>she-ha-shemesh she-hu ehad mi-shamsav</i>” is lost in translation.</i>and of which human beings can conceive through its actions, such as how it works in the lower world with its heat on the speaking species, animals, and plants, and through its light and heat. And thus it is written, “nothing escapes (<i>nistar</i>) his heat.”53<i class="footnote">Ps. 19:7 (JSB); “his” refers to the sun.</i> But if trying to conceive the sun itself, one looks into the light itself, the light of his own eyes will be extinguished, and understand this! So in order to hint at Him being revealed and hidden, Scripture has said, “And your faithful ones shall bless You,”54<i class="footnote">Ps. 145:10.</i> that is to say, “in this way they shall bless You:” revealed and hidden, and this what is meant by “They shall talk of the majesty of Your kingship [<i>kevod malkhutkha</i>],”55<i class="footnote">Ibid., 145:11.</i> using the present tense, to teach about Him being revealed.56<i class="footnote">Actually, in the Hebrew the verb is in the imperfect tense.</i> And it said, “to make His mighty acts known among men,”57<i class="footnote">Ibid., 145:12.</i> to teach about Him being hidden.
  And you knew that there are many other particulars in the laws of <i>netilah</i>, such as water that has dripped from an animal drinking, and water which is salted, and with water that a baker rinses his hands in, and two that have taken from a fourth, and with one of one’s hands rinsing, the other taken up to wash which they call in the Talmud, Massakhet Gittin “clean hands,” and if one is permitted to accept water from a gentile or from a menstruating woman, since there are those who have written that water is not accepted from a foreigner, and so on in many other things like this. And it is the rule with the laws of “<i>ha-motzi’</i>”, and likewise the rest of the blessings we are going to discuss, and other blessings of the table, for which there are many other particulars that I have omitted and not written about, for if I had decided to write about these particulars, the book would have been too long. For it is my intention to speak only briefly about generally known rules. Those in the know will know the particulars that go with them.
  A second blessing “<i>Ha-motzi’ lehem min ha-aretz</i>” is from the words of the scribes, which they derived <i>a fortiori</i>: “If one who has satisfied his hunger says a blessing, how much the more so ought one when he is hungry say a blessing.”58<i class="footnote">B. Berakhot 35a.</i> The explanation is that when one has satisfied his hunger and has already enjoyed the holy things of Heaven, which until he has said a blessing are prohibited to him as if they were <i>hekdesh</i>, how much the more so when he is hungry and about to enjoy the holy things of Heaven ought he say a blessing <i>before</i> eating them, so as not to be penalized with having to make a sacrilege offering (<i>korban me’ilah</i>).59<i class="footnote">That is, the offering required for someone who has “stolen” the sacred food set aside for the priests.</i> You would think that one should say “<i>min ha-adamah</i>” – “from the ground” in this blessing, but it gets the expression from Scripture: “<i>le-hotzi’ lehem min ha-‘aretz</i>.”60<i class="footnote">Ps. 104:14: “to get food out of the earth.” Though ‘<i>adamah</i> and ‘<i>eretz</i> can both mean “earth,” <i>‘adamah</i> is the term more commonly used when speaking about harvesting food grown in a field.</i> And if you take issue with the precise meaning of the expression “<i>lehem</i>” – “bread,” you will find that it means food in general, as in “he [King Belshazzar] gave a great <i>banquet</i> [<i>lehem</i>],61<i class="footnote">Daniel 5:1 (<i>JSB</i>) translating the Aramaic “<i>’avad lehem rav</i>.”</i> since the bread itself is not what comes forth from the earth, but rather the produce from which they make bread. And so you will find with the manna: “I will rain down bread [<i>lehem</i>] for you from the sky.”62<i class="footnote">Ex. 16:4.</i> It is well known that bread did not come down from the sky, but the manna out of which they made bread,” as it is said, “they would make it into cakes.”63<i class="footnote">Nu. 11:8.</i>
  The one who breaks the bread when he breaks it should grasp the loaf in his two hands with ten fingers because of his love for the blessing [over the bread]. And thus you will find ten words in the blessing “<i>ha-motzi.</i>” And likewise the verse [from which it is derived]: “You grow grass for cattle, herbage for man to work to bring forth bread from the earth.”64<i class="footnote">Ps 104:14 in Hebrew is ten words: <i>Matzmi’ah hatzir le-behemah va-esev le-avodat ha-adam le-hotzi’ lehem min ha-aretz</i>.</i> And we find ten <i>mitzvo</i>t that were given regarding produce: (1) “You shall not plow [with and ox and ass together];” (2) “You shall not muzzle [an ox while it is threshing];” 65<i class="footnote">Dt. 22:10; Dt 25:4.</i> (3) <i>terumah</i> for the priest; (4) the first tithe for the Levite; (5) the tithe of the tithe that the Levite gives to the priest; (6) the second tithe; (7) the tithe for the poor; (8) gleaning; (9) “the forgotten sheaf;” and (10) leaving the corners of the field for the poor.
  And know that the participle “<i>ha-motzi’</i>” implies both past and future action. For example, “who brings you forth [<i>ha-motzi’</i>] from the land of Egypt”66<i class="footnote">Lev. 22:23.</i> has a future sense. It alludes to the same time about which our rabbis z”l taught this midrash: “In the future the land of Israel <i>will bring forth</i> [<i>totzi’</i>] cakes and fine woolen clothes, as it is said, ‘Let a slice of grain appear in the land.’67<i class="footnote">Ps 72:16, <i>pisat bar</i> is usually translated “abundant grain,” but the midrash here from b.Ketuboth 111b interprets <i>pisah</i> hyper-literally as a “<i>slice</i> of grain,” i.e., a piece of a ready-made baked good from the land.</i> And we allude in the blessing “<i>ha-motzi’</i>” to the future time when our food will appear without effort and toil, and the land will bring forth actual bread like the bread which we eat and over which we say the blessing. For thus the world would have behaved in the time of Adam had the land not been cursed because of his sin, as it said, “Cursed is the land because of you.”68<i class="footnote">Gen 3:17.</i> And in the future when the sin has been atoned for, the world will return to the way it’s supposed to be.
  And when one is breaking the bread, he finishes the blessing and then breaks it. This is out of respect for a king. And accordingly it is necessary to put pleasing the Holy One Blessed Be He first before pleasing a king of flesh and blood or pleasing oneself, as it is said, “Fear the Lord, my son, and the king.”69<i class="footnote">Prov. 24:22, i.e., in that order. Granted, here the addressee “my son” comes before the king, which seems to contradict R. Bahya’s sequence. However, he may be implying that one best looks out for one’s own interest by showing public deference to the king of flesh blood.</i> And whoever breaks the bread before he blesses or before he finishes the blessing – he is called a glutton. About him it is said, “the greedy man [<i>botze’a’</i>] reviled [<i>barekh</i>] and scorned the Lord,”70<i class="footnote">Ps. 10:3. R. Bahya is playing on the double meanings of the words <i>botze’a’</i> – which means both “break bread” and “be greedy,” and <i>barekh</i>, which means both “bless” and “curse” in Biblical Hebrew.</i> that is to say, he breaks and afterwards then says the blessing, and so “has scorned the Lord.”
  The head of the house breaks the bread in order to show that he’s being generous with all he has.71<i class="footnote">According to b. Berakhot 46a.</i> And the guest leads the blessing after the meal in order to bless the head of the house. The one who breaks the bread is the first to extend his hand into the common serving plate. And if he wants to show respect for his teacher or someone greater than him in wisdom, it’s his choice. And when he breaks a piece from the loaf, he should break a piece from the side of the loaf that is baked the best, for this is amongst the choicest of mitzvot to evoke the name of heaven over it, as it is said about the grain offering [<i>minhah</i>] of the priest: “offer it as a meal offering of the best baked pieces,”72<i class="footnote">Lev 6:14. Modern commentators are uncertain about the meaning of the Hebrew word <i>tofini</i>, which I have translated here as “best baked,” based on R. Bahya’s interpretation. See the following note.</i> for which the Tractate <i>Zevahim </i>said, “the word <i>tofini</i> would be the nicest baked part.”73<i class="footnote">B.Menahot 50b. I suspect the Talmud is treating the word <i>tofini </i>as if it were derived from both <i>yafeh – </i>“nice” or “pretty,” and <i>‘afah –“</i>baked,” a good example of the “creative philology” typical of midrash.</i>
  If one has said the blessing “ha-<i>motzi’</i>” and has a conversation in the interim before he eats, he says the blessing over again. But if the conversation is just something that has to do with the table, like “take it and say the blessing,” or “pass the salt or relish,” or even “mix some mush for my ox,” he does not have to repeat the blessing, since a person is required to give food to his livestock first, and after that eat, as it is said, “I will provide grass in your fields for your livestock” and <i>then</i> “you shall eat your fill.”74<i class="footnote">Dt. 11:15.</i> Thus it is something that has to do with the table and does not count as a break. It is like some one butchering a hundred chickens. If he talks between one butchering and another to say, “pass me some others,” it has to do with the butchering, and does not count as a break.
  The person breaking the bread is not allowed to taste it until those responding “<i>Amen</i>” finished saying, or at least until most of them have responded.75<i class="footnote">Tur and Orah Hayim 167:16, based on the discussion in b. Berakhot 47a.</i> That being said, they should not stretch out their “Amen” either; whoever takes too long to say “<i>Amen</i>” is in error.76<i class="footnote">B. Berakhot 47a.</i> And the diners are not allowed to taste the bread until the person making the blessing has tasted it.77<i class="footnote">Ibid.</i> If one has eaten and forgotten to say “<i>ha-motzi’,</i>” he goes back and says the blessing, as long as he has not finished his meal. But if he has finished his meal, he does not say the blessing because what’s over is over.78<i class="footnote">Ibid., 51a, and Tur and Orah Hayim 167:8.</i>
  A third blessing is “<i>boray peri ha-gafen</i>” – “Who created the fruit of the vine.” One cannot say that blessing the bread exempts one from saying it, because wine “attaches” a blessing to itself.79<i class="footnote">An expression used by the Tosafot on b.Berakhot 44a.</i> It would seem preferable for us to say “<i>boray peri ha-etz</i>” – “Who created the fruit of the tree” – but because of the high status of wine, they specified the name of the tree, that is, “the grapevine” [<i>ha-gafen</i>]. For had they not wanted to specify the name “the grapevine” because of wine’s importance, they could have fixed the blessing to say “<i>boray peri ha-anavim</i>” – “Who created the fruit of the grapes” because grapes themselves are the fruit of the grapevine, and wine is the fruit which comes from grapes, just as oil is the fruit that comes from olives. Accordingly, they fixed the blessing “<i>boray peri ha-gafen</i>” even though truthfully, grapes are the fruit of the vine, still, the drink which is pressed from the grapes is the fruit of the grapes themselves, and this is because it is considered more important than grapes, just as oil is considered more important than olives. And the Tosafists z”l went back and forth on this topic a lot, and they proved that wine is not called “fruit”, as it is taught in <i>Massekhet Bikkurim</i>:80<i class="footnote">Chavel says this tradition appears in b.Hullin 102b, not in the Mishnah Bikkurim.</i> “’from the first of every fruit of the earth:’ the fruit which you bring as first fruit offerings, and you do not bring drinks as first fruit offerings; therefore wine is not a fruit.” However, they brought these matters up again at the end, and said that wine is called “fruit” by <i>gezerah shavah,81<i class="footnote">Verbal analogy, one of the classic forms of Talmudic hermeneutics<i>.</i></i> </i>since in another context, the word “fruit,” namely “fruit of<i> orlah</i>”82<i class="footnote"><i>Orlah</i> is the term for fruit that grows from a tree in the first three years after it was planted; it is forbidden to eat or profit from it (Lev.19:23).</i> refers to wine, in <i>Massekhet Orlah</i>:83<i class="footnote">Likewise Chavel found the source not here, but elsewhere in the Talmud.</i> “They absorb the forty because of <i>orlah</i> only for what comes out of grapes and olives, namely, wine and oil.” And hear from this that just as in regard to orlah wine is called “fruit,” so in regard to blessings it is called “fruit.” The drinks that come from them are like them. And so from this one ought to say the blessing over wine with the expression “<i>boray peri ha-gafen,</i>” and thus to specify the name “<i>gafen</i>” by saying “<i>peri ha-gafen</i>.” And so our sages z”l explained it for us when they said in Massekhet Berakhot, “From where do we get that you only say a song over wine, as it is said, ‘But the vine replied, ‘Have I stopped yielding my new wine which gladdens God and men?’’84<i class="footnote">Judges 9:13.</i> If it gladdens men, how does it gladden God? From here you get that you only say a song over wine.85<i class="footnote">In other words, since God does not actually drink wine, this tradition says that songs inevitably accompany wine-drinking, and must be what gladdens God.</i> And thus an objection was raised among the Tosafists: “But surely it is over several things that we say Hallel, like when they came from battle, as it is said about Jehoshaphat in the Book of Chronicles,86<i class="footnote">2 Chronicles 20:21.</i> or on the Fourteenth of Nisan, when they slaughtered the paschal lamb!” They answered and explained thus, “From where do we get that a song is said over nothing that has to do with the sacrificial altar, such as the flinging of blood, the burning of incense, the water libation, and the rest of the activities of the altar – except for the wine libation, as it is said, ‘But the vine replied to them, ‘Have I stopped yielding my new wine [<i>tiroshi</i>]?’’87<i class="footnote">Judges 9:13.</i> And they said in the Aggadah: “Nine hundred twenty-six kinds of grapes were created in the world, the numerical equivalent of the letters of the word <i>tiroshi</i> – “my new wine,” but all of them were stricken when Adam sinned, and only one remained for us.”88<i class="footnote">Chavel says he could not find the source for this midrash.</i> The status of the grapevine is further enhanced in the way the prophets would always compare the community of Israel to a grapevine, and this is what Scripture meant when it said, “You plucked up a grapevine from Egypt.”89<i class="footnote">Ps. 80:9.</i> And there are still other weightier reasons, but it is not necessary to go into them at length here. Know that the point of human wine-drinking ought to be only in service of food for health reasons alone, so that the food and drink will be mixed internally in a moderate manner, and that one direct the way he conducts his drinking to overcome his hunger and thirst.
  If wine comes to them in the middle of a meal, each person says the blessing for himself, since the throat may not be empty (when it comes), but after the meal, one person says the blessing for all.90<i class="footnote">B.Berakhot 43a; <i>Tur </i>and<i> Orah Hayim</i> 174:8.</i> The explanation: The throat may not be empty because all the diners are involved in eating, and some may not hear the blessing, or be paying attention or listening. That is how Rashi z”l explained it. So by this logic, if they all were to stop eating and listen, one person could say the blessing for himself. And there is someone who explained that even if they were listening and each one says the blessing for himself – because they are not able to reply “Amen,” since anyone who was chewing something in their mouth might swallow something down the wrong pipe.91<i class="footnote">Tur.</i> And this is the view of the Jerusalem Talmud, where their version says, “’The throat may not be empty.’ Rabbi Muna said, ‘If someone sneezes during a meal, it is forbidden to say to him ‘<i>asuta,”</i>92<i class="footnote">The Aramaic equivalent to our “Gesundheit.”</i>since that might endanger his life.”93<i class="footnote">Y.Berakhot 6:6. That is, dangerous for the one saying “<i>asuta,</i>” since he might choke while eating and talking at the same time.</i>
  If the wine is changed, one must say a blessing, because even though he has already said “<i>boray peri ha-gafen</i>” when he was about to drink in the beginning, he is required to say a blessing for this change of wine, and this is the blessing “<i>ha-tov ve-ha-metiv.</i>”94<i class="footnote">B.Berakhot 59b; <i>Tur </i>and<i> Orah Hayim</i> 175:1.</i> So why did they say this for a change a wine, and not for a change of loaf or other things? For many reasons: (1) The crucial component for rejoicing at a meal is none other than wine. The way of kings is to change their wine, but not their loaf, and the people Israel are “the sons of kings.”95<i class="footnote">B. Shabbat 67a.</i> (2) Every table onto which they bring wine after wine is an expression of the multiplication of joy, but a person should not multiply his joy too much in this world, as it is said, “Our mouths shall be filled with laughter, our tongues with songs of joy. They shall say among the nations, ‘The Lord has done great things for them!’”96<i class="footnote">Ps 126:2: <i>Az yimalay s’hok pinu ulshonenu rinah az yomru ba-goyim. Higdil Adonai la’asot im eleh</i>,” from<i> Shir Ha-ma’a lot </i>that we recite on holidays and Shabbat before <i>birkat ha-mazon</i>.</i>Our rabbis taught in a midrash,97<i class="footnote">B.Berakhot 31a.</i> “When ‘will our mouths be filled with laughter’? When the nations (i.e., the Gentiles) say, ‘The Lord has done great things for them.’ Another verse completes this thought, “They will rejoice with trembling.”98<i class="footnote">Ps. 2:11</i> They said, “In a place of rejoicing there will be trembling.” The explanation is that even in a place where there is rejoicing and joy from doing a <i>mitzvah</i>, there it is necessary that there be some trembling, too, to remember how the world is subject to the evil inclination and is shaken by it, so that it should not be shaken by our joy. Therefore it is a custom in a few Jewish communities at life cycle celebrations and meals celebrating a mitzvah to break there a vessel of glass or “flagons of grapes”99<i class="footnote"><i>Assisay ‘anavim</i>, from Hos. 3:1– variously translated as “cups of the grapes” (JSB); “flagons of grapes (KJB); or even “cakes of raisins.” (RSV).</i> to sadden those rejoicing, so that the <i>simhah</i> be mixed a little bit with trembling. And there is no greater <i>simhah</i> than Israel’s rejoicing at receiving the Torah [<i>Simhat Ha-Torah</i>] on Mt. Sinai, in the presence of the Holy One, about which it is written “like the Mahanayim dance,”100<i class="footnote">Song of Songs 7:1. <i>Mahana’im</i> (lit., “two camps”) is the dual form of the word for “camp” – <i>mahaneh</i>. When Israel “married God” as it were at Mt. Sinai, the dancing at that “wedding,” that is the joy they expressed then, was like no other joy experienced on earth. Even the angels came down from heaven to celebrate and dance with them! This is an allusion to a midrash that applies this verse to Ex. 19:17 (M. Tanhuma Titzaveh 11), which R. Bahya brings in his Commentary on the Torah to Ex. 19:17: “Moses led the people out of the camp [<i>mahaneh</i>] toward God.” He says thereOur rabbis taught in a midrash, “600,000 ministering angels descended there corresponding to the 600,000 Israelites. And about them Jacob hinted, “He named that place Mahana’im.” (Gen 32:3), for there were two camps, one next to the other. And it is about this that King Solomon (peace be upon him) was talking when he said “like the Mahanai’m dance.” (S.S. 7:1). It was because the Israelites have been enslaved to four empires, and each one of them says that the Israelites should turn from their own faith and believe in them, which is why the verse in Song of Songs (7:1) repeats the imperative “turn” four times. And we today are subject to the fourth empire, who says, “Turn and let us seek out from among you” [<i>nehezeh bakh</i>], that is, “Let us make some of you political authorities, and give you all kinds of ruling power,” with the expression “<i>nehezeh bakh</i>” [literally, “let us gaze upon you”] having the same connotation a similar phrase has in Ex. 18:21: “You shall seek out from among all the people – <i>tehezeh mikol ha-‘am</i> – [all the capable men … to set them over the people as chiefs of thousands, hundreds, etc.”]. And our rabbis also taught this midrash (Song of Songs Rabbah 7:1): “’The Shulammite’ –is <i>ha-ummah she-shalom ha-olamim dar be-tokhah</i>– the people within whom the peace of the world resides [i.e., the Israelites], and she replies, ‘What would you ‘seek out’ [for leaders] from the Shulammite? [<i>Mah tehezah ba-Shulamit?</i>], that is, “What ruling power, status, and glory could <i>you</i> give to the Shulammite that you could ever find comparable to the state of joy the Israelites experienced at Mt. Sinai. This is “like the Mahanai’m dance:” two camps that would go out one before the other. And they compared the pleasure of the experience they achieved at the revelation there to a dance. To the same point our rabbis z”l taught, “In the future the Holy One Blessed be He will arrange a dance for the righteous in the Garden of Eden, so that I will never be able to turn to your [Gentile] faith, because I remember this dance – that is, like the one at Mt. Sinai. (Chavel, 2:173).And yet, even at this peak of joy, there was the breaking of the tablets, like the breaking of the glass now to temper the pure joy at weddings.</i> yet you know that even there, the tablets of the covenant were broken. And if you would think hard and lift up your eyes to “ever since God created human beings on the earth,”101<i class="footnote">Dt. 4:32.</i> you will find in the Holy One Blessed Be He His boundless joy: “May the Glory of the Lord endure forever; may the Lord rejoice in his works!”102<i class="footnote">Ps. 104:31.</i>But His joy has a limit with respect to the human race, “because he too is flesh.”103<i class="footnote">Gen 6:3. That is, humans are mortal.</i> That is what is written about Him when it says: “And the Lord regretted that he had made man on the earth, and His heart was saddened.”104<i class="footnote">Ibid. 6:6.</i> Even in the Mishkan, which was a microcosm of the world, on the eight day of the priests’ assigned service, which was the day of the New Moon for the month of Nisan, on that very day there was nothing like it in its degree of joy, its intensity multiplied tenfold, to what our sages z”l referred when they said, “On that very day they got ten crowns”105<i class="footnote">Sifra Shemini.</i> – you already knew what happened, and to what end that joy came. On that very day Nadab and Abihu died, like whom, after Moses and Aaron, there were none among the Israelites to compare. And this is what Scripture meant when it said, “Then Moses and Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, and seventy elders of Israel ascended.”106<i class="footnote">Ex 24:9. I.e., in <i>that order</i> was their “ascendence,” their status, relative to one another.</i> And see also what Ecclesiastes says about the joy of this world: “Of revelry I said, ‘It is mad!’ Of joy (<i>simhah</i>), ‘What good is that?’”107<i class="footnote">Eccl 2:2.</i> And the explanation of this statement is that because joy and sorrow are brothers attached to one another like day is attached to night, just as a person is sure in the day that night will come after it, and as sure at night that the day will come after it, so is he sure that joy will come after sorrow, and likewise sorrow after joy. And so he said, “The heart may ache even in laughter, and joy may end in grief,”108<i class="footnote">Prov 14:13.</i> to explain about sorrow after joy, and he said, “From all grief there is some gain,”109<i class="footnote">Prov 14:23. “Grief” (<i>‘etzev</i>) here and “sorrow” <i>(‘itzavon</i>) in 14:13 come from the same Hebrew root.</i> to explain about joy after sorrow. From this you learn that the joy of this world can never be complete, but rather any good in it and contentment with it is “futile and pursuit of the wind,”110<i class="footnote">Eccl 1:14.</i> all glory in it is to be mocked,111<i class="footnote">An allusion to Ps 4:3.</i> its “glorious beauty is but wilted flowers.112<i class="footnote">Is 28:1, referring specifically to the fleeting pleasures of the table: “Ah the proud crowns of the drunkards of Ephraim, whose <i>glorious beauty is but wilted flowers</i> on the heads of men bloated with rich food, who are overcome by wine!”</i> For right at the moment when a person’s hopes are highest in the midst of joy, it stops, flickers out, and goes away. For this reason they ruled that the blessing over a change in wine should be “<i>ha-tov ve-ha-metiv”</i> (“Who is good and Who does good”), the same blessing they added to the grace after meals to remember the martyrs of Beitar when they were permitted to bury them.113<i class="footnote">B. Berakhot 48b. The battle at Beitar was the Bar Kochba revolt’s unsuccessful “last stand” against the Romans in 135 CE.</i> The explanation: <i>Ha-tov</i> – “Who is good” – because He didn’t let the bodies putrefy; <i>ha-metiv</i> – “Who did good” – by letting the bodies be buried.114<i class="footnote">Ibid.</i> And all this is to make human beings feel sadness, being fashioned from clay, composed of natural elements which are dead bodies, sunken in the desires of our senses – so that we’re brought back from a surfeit of joy to the middle way.
  And another reason why they ruled that <i>Ha-tov ve-ha-metiv</i> should be the blessing for a change of wine, is that wine is a drink that comes from grapes that are in a vineyard, and our sages z”l already said “Seven years our enemies manured their vineyards with the blood of the martyrs of Beitar.”115<i class="footnote">B. Gittin 57a.</i> So for that reason they ruled that <i>Ha-tov ve-ha-metiv</i>should be the blessing for a change of wine. And you need to know that it is the way of Torah for a person to be required to restrain his eating and drinking, and that he thus guard his mouth. This is why the Torah specifies which foods are permitted and prohibited, and afterwards connects to them the admonition: “You shall be holy,”116<i class="footnote">Lev 19:2.</i> that is to say, be ascetic and restrain yourselves from even those foods that are pure and permitted, for if one don’t restrain himself from permitted food that is too pleasing to him, he’ll become one of those who “glut themselves on meat and guzzle wine.”117<i class="footnote">Prov 23:20.</i> From this he profanes himself and his good qualities, and if a <i>talmid hakham</i> –a “disciple of the sages” – profanes his Torah. And already our rabbis taught us how a person should conduct himself when he’s drinking: he should sip the wine and let it linger in his throat, and by this be satisfied. And they brought proof from the altar where they used to close up the pits, which were holes under the hollow part of the altar from where the libations would flow down into the empty part, so that the wine would linger in the altar, which is what they were talking about in the chapter “<i>Lulav</i> and Willow”:118<i class="footnote">B.Sukkah 49b.</i> “Resh Lakish said, ‘At the time when they poured the wine libation on Sukkot on top of the altar, they would cork the pits, as it is said, “to be poured in the sacred precinct as an offering of fermented drink to the Lord;”119<i class="footnote">Nu 28:7. That is, wine, according to traditional interpretation, and so the JSB. However, archaeological evidence has convinced some recent scholars that “fermented drink” (“<i>shekhar</i>”) means “beer.”</i>’Fermented drink’ (<i>shekhar</i>) because it connotes “joy,” “satisfaction,” and “intoxication.” Raba replied, ‘Hear from this that wine satisfies a person; in his throat it satisfies him’ – meaning that if he lets it linger in his throat, he will be satisfied, for so they used to let the wine linger in the altar. And they said in tractate Yoma:120<i class="footnote">B. Yoma 71a.</i> “Whoever gives a drink of wine to a <i>talmid hakham</i>, it is as if they are making libation sacrifices on the altar, as it is said, ‘O men (<i>‘ishim</i>), I call you,’” and thus “<i>ishim”</i> is interpreted midrashically to connote both “wine flagon” as in the word “‘<i>ashishah,”</i> and “sacrifice,” as in the expression “<i>isheh la-Shem</i>” – “fire offering to the Lord.”121<i class="footnote">Ex 29:41: “like its libation offering (<i>ki</i>–<i>niskah</i>) you shall make it (<i>lah</i>), as a fragrant odor, a fire offering to the Lord.” However, by creative philology, it could be read “like a libation offering of Ha-Shem” – <i>ke-nesekh Ha’ –</i> you shall make it <i>Lah, </i>i.e., <i>La-Shem</i>, to the Lord.”</i>
  Things which come during the meal for the meal such as fish, salt, etc., even though one eats them without a piece of bread, like what comes as the main course of the meal, do not require any blessing, because the bread (and the blessing said for it) exempts them.122<i class="footnote">B. Berakhot 41a, and so the Tur, and Orah Hayim 177.</i>Things that come during the meal that are not for the meal, such as figs and grapes that do not come as part of the main course, do require a blessing before eating them, but not one after them.123<i class="footnote">Ibid.</i> But if one comes to season the bread with figs or grapes, then it is part of the main course, and they require no blessing, neither before nor after them, because the bread exempts them. But if they come as dessert after the meal proper is over, they require a blessing before, even if one eats them with bread, but not after them, because <i>birkat ha-mazon</i> exempts them.
  And in tractate Yoma, in the chapter “The Appointee,”124<i class="footnote">B. Yoma 30a.</i> they said: “It is halakhah at a meal, that a person who leaves the dining room to urinate washes one of his hands and re-enters. But if he spoke with his companion [while he was out],125<i class="footnote">That is, he didn’t just relieve himself and come right back, but socialized for a bit while he was out.</i> he washes both hands and returns, he does not wash outside, but rather inside, returns to and sits down at his place at the table, and turns his face back towards his fellow guests.126<i class="footnote">I.e., to confirm through eye contact that his fellow guests saw that he properly rewashed before rejoining them at the table. Indeed, that’s precisely the intent of the sequence of most of these particular actions prescribed for a guest returning to the table after urinating, according to Chavel, p. 473.</i> Rav Hisda said, ‘They meant this only for someone returning to drink, but in if he’s returning to eat, he washes outside and re-enters. It is known that he has a delicate sensitivity about such things.127<i class="footnote">Because you can assume that everyone washes their hands after peeing before eating (with their hands) without having to see it, while you can’t assume this for drinking, since as long as it’s from a cup, some might not care how clean their hands are.</i>
  If one was reclining and eating at the table, and the time for <i>minhah</i> came, if there isn’t enough time to wait before it’s too late, he interrupts his meal and prays. But if there is enough time to wait, he finishes his meal and then prays.128<i class="footnote">B. Shabbat 9b, and so the Tur and Orah Hayim 232.</i> And likewise if during the festival of Sukkot he forgot to wave the <i>lulav</i>, and he is standing over his table, if there is enough time in the day to wait, he finishes his meal, and then waves it, but if there is not enough time in the day to wait, he interrupts his meal and waves the <i>lulav</i>.129<i class="footnote">B. Sukkot 38a, because one must wave the <i>lulav</i> during the day time.</i>
  If one has finished eating, he still should prolong his time at the table. And so our rabbis z”l said: “Whoever prolongs his time at the table, his days and years are prolonged for him.”130<i class="footnote">B. Berakhot 54b.</i> And the reason behind this statement is that the table in the house is like the altar in the Temple. Just as an altar atones, so also a table atones, when one feeds the poor on it. So by prolonging one’s time at the table, it is more likely that a poor person will come and he’ll give him a piece of food so he’ll be provided for.131<i class="footnote">Rashi’s commentary on B. Berakhot 54b.</i> And his prolongation of his time at the table with this intention leads to the <i>tzedakah</i> about which it is written, “by way of <i>tzedakah</i> comes life;”132<i class="footnote">Prov 12:28: <i>Be-oreh tzedakah hayyim</i> – “the road of righteousness leads to life” (JSB).</i>thus his days and years are prolonged for him. And they said in tractate Berakhot: “’A wooden altar three cubits high and two cubits long, with edging; and its length and its walls were of wood. And he said to me, This is the table before the Lord.’133<i class="footnote">Ez 41:22.</i> This verse opens with an ‘altar’ and ends with a ‘table,’ which means none other than that just as an altar atones, so a table atones.”134<i class="footnote">B. Berakhot 55a.</i> Indeed, we have heard with our own ears, and many have told us,135<i class="footnote">An allusion to Ps 44:2.</i> that among the leading sages of Provence, and the people who owned and ran inns, that they practiced an especially honorable custom, which was prevalent among them from the earliest days. Their tables, upon which they feed the poor, when it was their time to go to the cemetery, were made into the coffins and slabs with which they were buried. And all this is to arouse and fix in their hearts, that humankind, though they reach the tip of the clouds136<i class="footnote">A paraphrase of Job 20:6.</i> and their wealth grows as high as the wealth of King Solomon, will take none of it with them, nothing from all they toiled for under the sun, 137<i class="footnote">Eccl 1:3.</i> except the good they do and the <i>tzedakah</i> they compassionately bestow upon the poor, just as it said, “Your righteousness [<i>tzidkekha</i>] will march before you.”138<i class="footnote">Is 58:8.</i>
  And thus one needs to say words of Torah over the table, because even though one has said all the blessings he is required to say, and will eventually conclude with <i>birkat ha-mazon</i>, saying <i>birkat ha-mazon</i> will not exempt him from his requirement unless he speaks words of Torah. And so our rabbis said: “Every table over which they ate and said words of Torah, it is as if they ate from the table of God [<i>Makom</i>], as it is said, ‘He said to me, This is the table before the Lord,’”139<i class="footnote">M. Avot 3:3, quoting Ez 41:22.</i> that is to say, <i>when</i> they spoke over it words of Torah, <i>then</i> “<i>this table</i> is before the Lord.”140<i class="footnote">Ez. 41:22.</i> “And every table over which they ate and did not say over it words of Torah, it is as if they ate from the sacrifices of the dead. As it is said, ‘For all tables were full of vomit, no place [<i>bli Makom</i>] without excrement,”141<i class="footnote">M. Avot 3:3, quoting Is 28:8.</i> that is to say, the words of <i>Makom</i>, i.e., God, are not mentioned there.142<i class="footnote">R. Bahya, following M. Avot’s midrashic interpretation, also creatively attributes the use of the later rabbinic term for God – <i>Ha-Makom </i>– “The Place” to Isaiah’s Biblical Hebrew “<i>bli makom,</i>” i.e., “without God.”</i> And all this is to instruct you that humankind [<i>adam</i>] was not created for eating and drink, but rather to engage in Torah. For this is what Scripture meant when it said, “for man [<i>adam</i>] was born for toil [‘<i>amal</i>].”143<i class="footnote">Job 5:7.</i> Our sages interpreted this in a midrash:144<i class="footnote">B. Sanhedrin 99b.</i> “’For man was born for toil’ – I don’t know if this is toil by mouth, or if it’s toiling in the Torah. When Scripture says, “The appetite of a toiler [<i>‘amel</i>] toils [<i>‘amlah</i>] for him, because his mouth craves it,”145<i class="footnote">Prov 16:26.</i> toil by the mouth is being spoken about. But this is exactly how I fulfill “For man was born for toil” when it refers to toiling in Torah, so I say it means “for toiling in Torah he was born.”146<i class="footnote">In other words, R. Bahya has it both ways, since you use your mouth to “toil in Torah,” that is, by speaking words of Torah.</i> And so they said in another midrash: Just as in the Creation, He created domestic and wild animals, birds, reptiles and swarming things, and after that created Adam, as it is said, “And God created Adam in his image,”147<i class="footnote">Gen 1:27.</i> so it was written in the Torah “This you shall eat” and “this you shall not eat,”148<i class="footnote">Lev 11:9,4.</i> and after that Adam was born. This is why Scripture connects this parashah (“Shemini”) with the next one that begins “When a woman at childbirth bears a male,”149<i class="footnote">Lev 12:2.</i> to say it is for toil in Torah he was born. And thus right after that it is written, “On the eighth day the flesh of his foreskin shall be circumcised,”150<i class="footnote">Ibid. 12:3.</i> teaching that even before he was formed the Torah and commandments encircled him, and afterwards he was born. This is what it meant when it said, “When a woman at childbirth bears a male”151<i class="footnote">Lev 12:2.</i> – that The Holy One Blessed be He imposed commandments before him and after him, and he is in the middle.152<i class="footnote">In other words, even the syntax of the vv. 12:2-3 in Leviticus “sandwiches” the birth of a man between two commandments, one directed to his mother giving birth to him, the second, after he’s born, that he himself be circumcised. In other words, the man’s birth is literally surrounded by Torah and commandments. Circumscribed (and circumcised) by the Torah from his birth – of course that “proves” that’s what he was born for!</i>This is what it meant when it said, “For man was born for toil”153<i class="footnote">Job 5:7.</i>– that for toil in Torah he was born.
  You already knew from “The Wisdom of Formation”154<i class="footnote">I.e., <i>Sefer Yetzirah</i>, 4:7.</i> that a human being has seven apertures: two ears, two nostrils, two eyes, and the seventh is the mouth. And the “sevenths” are what the Holy One Blessed be He has “chosen.” He created the heavens, and <i>chose</i> the seventh one, which is “<i>aravot</i>” (“deserts”),155<i class="footnote">According to B. Hagigah 12b, “Resh Lakish said: There are seven heavens. <i>Vilon, Raki’a, Shekhakim, Z’vul, Ma’on, Makchon,</i> and <i>Aravot.</i>”</i> as it is said, “Cast up a highway for Him who rides through the deserts [<i>aravot</i>].”156<i class="footnote">Ps 68:5.</i> He created seven days of the week, and chose the seventh day, which is Shabbat, as it said, “the days were formed, and for Him there was one among them.”157<i class="footnote">Ps 139:16.</i> He created seven climates, and chose the seventh one, which is the land of Israel, as it is said, “For the Lord has chosen Zion.”158<i class="footnote">Ps 132:13.</i>And meditate well on this verse: “The Canaanites were then in the land.”159<i class="footnote">Gen 12:6.</i> The secret meaning of the verse is “and a girdle she gives to the merchant [<i>la-kana’ani</i> –‘to the Canaanite’]”160<i class="footnote">Prov 31:24. “Canaanite” can be a generic term for “merchant” in Biblical Hebrew, just as “gypsy” can generically refer to any wanderer in English, though this is not how R. Bahya reads “<i>kana’ani</i>” here.</i> – a girdle is put on the middle of a body.161<i class="footnote">In other words, the Cana’anites were originally given the “girdle” – the land, that like a girdle, is in the “center” of all the other lands; its <i>centrality</i> is proof that God prefers it over other lands. Chavel suggests that R. Bahya alludes to a mystical interpretation found also in his contemporary R. Menahem Recanati’s comment on Gen 12:6. Recanati says that “The Canaanites were then in the land” hints that even before God handed the land of the Canaanites over to the Israelites, it was his “chosen” land. For Prov 31:24 says to the <i>Canaanites</i> was given the “girdle” – the <i>center </i>of all the lands. This was when God assigned to each nation a piece of the earth, and an angel above to rule over it. However, no nation below falls from power until its ruling angel above falls – hence “the Canaanites were then in the land.” Eventually this does occur, and so the Israelites get the “girdle” that had originally been assigned to the Canaanites and their ruling angel.</i> He created seven apertures in the head, and chose the seventh one, which is the mouth. And it is well known that he did not choose it because it eats and drinks, but rather because of the Torah and the <i>mitzvah</i> to bless His Name and declare His praise, just as the heavens and their hosts declare His glory, as it said, “The heavens declare the glory of God, the sky proclaims His handiwork.”162<i class="footnote">Ps 19:2.</i> And thus it is written, “This people I formed for Myself, that they might declare My praise.”163<i class="footnote">Is 43:21.</i> It is obvious that all that the Holy One Blessed be He created in the world, He created only for His glory, and so the prophet proclaimed: “Everyone who is called by My Name, I created for My glory,”164<i class="footnote">Is 43:7.</i> and it is written, “The Lord made everything for a purpose – <i>le-ma’anehu,</i>” to praise Him, like in the expression, “And Miriam chanted – <i>ve-ta’an</i> – for them.”165<i class="footnote">Ex 15:21, i.e., led the women in a song of praise after God saved them at the Red Sea. R. Bahya interprets <i>le-ma’anehu</i> and <i>va-ta’an</i> midrashically as if they came from the same verb.</i> So if everything was created to praise Him, it goes without saying that the mouth, which is the particular instrument for praising Him, was created for none other than this.
  If someone is about to say <i>birkat ha-mazon</i>, he is required to wash his hands first, and then say the blessing “<i>al rehitzat yada’im;</i>” this washing is an obligation. And so they said, “<i>Mayim rishonim</i> is a <i>mitzvah</i>, <i>mayim ahronim</i> an obligation (<i>hovah</i>), washing during the meal optional.”166<i class="footnote">B. Hullin 105a. An obligation – <i>hovah</i> – is a stronger requirement than a <i>mitzvah.</i></i> And when they said “during the meal,” they meant it is optional between one cooked dish and another. But between a cooked dish and cheese, it is an obligation.167<i class="footnote">Ibid., 105b.</i>
  Rav Hisda said, “if someone has eaten meat, he is forbidden to eat cheese, but if he ate cheese first, he is permitted to eat meat,168<i class="footnote">Ibid., 105a.</i> and Rav Hisda’s view is the accepted view.169<i class="footnote">So the Tur and <i>Shulhan Arukh Yoreh Deah</i> 89.</i> But surely he said, “He is forbidden to eat cheese until another meal.” Indeed, for a whole day is a more stringent practice, and thus it was when Mar Ukba’s practice was to wait only until the next meal. For Mar Ukba said, “I am in this matter like ‘<i>Hametz</i> the son of Wine,’ for if my father would eat meat he was fastidious and wouldn’t eat cheese till the same time the next day. But while I won’t eat it at the same meal, I’ll eat it at the next meal.170<i class="footnote">B. Hullin 105a.</i> And the custom of Mar Ukba’s father to wait for a whole day is extra stringent, so accordingly we follow Mar Ukba’s practice, even though he said, “I am in this matter like <i>Hametz</i> the son of Wine.” And so it is our practice to wait just until the next meal. Hence, it is not sufficient just to wipe one’s mouth or to wash one’s hands, since meat is not digested after the first meal for at least six hours, and meat caught in between the teeth is still meat, as it is said, “The <i>meat </i>was still between their teeth.”171<i class="footnote">Nu 11:33, a reference to the quail meat God over-fed the Israelites in response to their complaining in the desert.</i> But if one eats cheese, he is permitted to eat meat without any delay at all. He only has to wipe his mouth whether it’s day or night, and wash his hands if it’s at night, but not if it’s during the day, nor does it make a difference whether it’s game or meat from a domesticated animal.172<i class="footnote">An so also the Tur and Shulhan Arukh Y.D. 89:1.</i> Poultry and cheese are eaten “like an epicurean,”173<i class="footnote">B. Hullin 104b, which Rashi explains to mean “without any qualms,” as libertines eat.</i> which I found in the explanation of the Arukh to mean without wiping one’s mouth or washing their hands whether in the day or in the night.174<i class="footnote"><i>Sefer Ha-Arukh</i>, the Dictionary of R. Natan ben Yehiel of Rome (11th century).</i> The reason given was that <i>mayim ahronim</i> are an obligation, because a person eats salt after his meal, which contains Sodomite salt that blinds the eyes, even one grain in a <i>kor</i> of regular salt,175<i class="footnote">Sodomite salt – salt from the Dead Sea. Potent stuff. Even in a mixture of one grain to a <i>kor </i>(about 530 liters) of regular salt would blind you ! It was customary to eat a little salt for “dessert,” presumably to “kill” anything potentially harmful in the food one has just eaten. See Rabbi Levi Cooper, “World of Our Sages: Salty Hands,” &lt;http: www.pardes.org.il="" online_learning="" weekly-talmud="" 2009-02-12.php=""&gt;.</i> though no blessing is required, except for someone who is saying a blessing over washing dirty hands. For just as a polluted priest was unfit for the Temple service, someone whose hands are polluted is unfit to say a blessing. What does it mean to be “polluted”? Anything that is not fit to be brought near the altar, such as an animal or birds, but whatever is fit does not require washing, since it isn’t something that’s polluted. However, there are some among the great teachers who are of the opinion that anything can be polluted.
  Right after washing the hands comes the blessing, in other words, whoever has washed their hands for <i>mayim ahronim</i> ought to say <i>birkat ha-mazon</i> immediately.176<i class="footnote">B. Berakhot 42a.</i> And so you will also find in the Jerusalem Talmud: “Rabbi Zeira said in the name of Rabbi Abba, ‘There are three pairs of things that need to be done in immediate succession: the 18 Benedictions prayer has to follow the blessing for redemption without a break, kosher slaughter has to follow the laying on of hands without a break, and the blessing has to follow hand-washing without a break. The 18 Benedictions prayer has to follow the blessing for redemption without a break, as it is said, “The Lord is my Rock and my Redeemer,’ to which immediately is connected, ‘May the Lord answer you in time of trouble.’177<i class="footnote">Ps 19:15 (last verse) and Ps 20:2 (first verse after the ascription).</i> Kosher slaughter has to follow the laying on of hands without a break, as it is said, ‘He shall lay his hand…He shall slaughter.’178<i class="footnote">Lev 1:4, 5.</i> The blessing has to follow <i>netilat yada’im</i> without a break, as it is said, ‘Lift your hands toward the sanctuary and bless the Lord.’179<i class="footnote">Ps 134:2.</i> Rabbi Yosi the son of Rabbi Abin said, ‘Everyone who connects <i>ge’ulah</i> to <i>tefilah</i> without a break, Satan cannot accuse for the whole day; and everyone who connects the blessing to <i>netilat yada’im</i> without a break, Satan cannot accuse him during that meal. And likewise, everyone who lays his hand and slaughters without a break, there will be nothing invalid about that sacrifice.” So says the Jerusalem Talmud.180<i class="footnote">Y. Berakhot 1:1.</i>
  One has to be careful when he is about to say <i>birkat ha-mazon</i> not to leave the table without any bread on it, as they said in tractate Sanhedrin:181<i class="footnote">B. Sanhedrin 92a.</i> “Whoever does not leave bread on his table, about him Scripture says, ‘With no remnant for him to eat, his goodness will not take hold.”182<i class="footnote">Job 20:21.</i> The reason for this practice is so that the blessing about which this was said will take hold; for if nothing is left, in what can the blessing take hold, because no blessing takes hold upon nothing, but only upon something? And the table in the sanctuary, which never was without bread, attests to this. And that bread was eaten by the priests who ministered to the sanctuary, and only a little of it was enough to feed many of them, and so our rabbis said, “Every priest who approached it was made doubly happy,”183<i class="footnote">B. Yoma 39a. R. Bahya seems to allude to double portion of manna in the manna miracle as well as to the two loaves offered to the priests in Lev. 23:17.</i> and through this very bread on the table blessing descended and was dispersed in the food of the world, from the showbread, by way of “something from something” and not something from nothing. For even the prophets who were “capable of serving in the royal palace”184<i class="footnote">Dan 1:4.</i> were not capable of producing something from nothing, but rather only something from something. Let me call for myself reliable witnesses:185<i class="footnote">An allusion to Is 8:2.</i>Elijah and Elisha, the former through “flour in a jar,”186<i class="footnote">I Kg 17:12: “<i>kad ha-kemah</i>,” which R. Bahya used as the title for his famous encyclopedic collection of sermons.</i> the latter “a jug of oil” – all was “something from something,” for no one has the power to make something from nothing but the Holy One Blessed be He, Shaper of creation which He created from nothing, and with all due to respect for Him, we find that even He only did it in the six days of the creation of the world. From then on till now, everything is “something from something.” And thus it is written, “which God created and made.”187<i class="footnote">Gen 2:3.</i> The explanation: “which God created” – something from nothing; “and made” – from then on, something from something, not something from nothing. So accordingly, it is necessary that a person about to recite <i>birkat ha-mazon</i>, leave a piece of bread on the table, for even a little of it is enough for the blessing to take hold in, and its power will be distributed through an increase of the small amount, just like the hidden miracles that are done for us every day, without us knowing or being aware of them. Just as our rabbis said: “188<i class="footnote">B. Nidah 31a.</i>No miracle-worker is aware of his own miracle.” And you should know that the cause behind the blessing that drops down in the food of the world and in the showbread is explained in the verse: “It [the frankincense] shall be a reminder-offering with the bread.”189<i class="footnote">Lev 24:7. R. Bahya seems to allude to the miracle of the manna here in the language he uses about the showbread drawing miracles and blessings down to the earth, and of the priests being “doubly happy” See note 183 above . And later he explicitly associates the covering of bread on the table with cloths above and below with the miracle of the manna.</i> As you already knew that they used to place frankincense on top of the bread, which is what is written just before, “With each row you shall place pure frankincense,”190<i class="footnote">Ibid.</i> the showbread and the frankincense used to counteract one another, just like the <i>etrog</i> and the <i>lulav,</i>191<i class="footnote">B. Menahot 27a.</i><i> </i>and the blue dye and white cloth (when blue dye could still be found). For the Most High has no share in the showbread, while the ordinary mortal has no share in the frankincense, which they would burn upon the fire. Therefore Scripture said, “It shall be a <i>reminder</i>-offering with the bread,” because by burning the frankincense which is on top of the bread, it becomes a reminder to the power above for blessing to drop down on it and from it into the food for the world. And understand this, that it is for this reason that there were twelve <i>hallot</i> arranged on top of the table. And from there the blessing came, which corresponded to the twelve angels192<i class="footnote"><i>Pirkei de Rabbi Eliezer</i> 4.</i> surrounding the throne of glory, which are called “four camps of the Shekhinah,” from which the world is blessed to the four winds, and they serve three to each wind, the meaning behind the four banners that were in the desert. Also corresponding to them below were the twelve lions on Solomon’s throne, and they are like these twelve <i>hallot</i> and the twenty-four tenth-measures,193<i class="footnote">Lev 24:5. Each loaf – <i>hallah</i> – was made of two tenth-measures – <i>‘esronim</i> – of choice flour, i.e., 24 = 2 x <i>12</i>.</i> and arouse your mind to this!
  One also has to careful when about to say <i>birkat ha-mazon</i> to remove the knife from the table. The reason for this practice is because the table is called an “altar,” and just as on an altar we have been warned not to brandish something made of iron over it, as it is said, “do not build it [an altar] of hewn stones, etc.”194<i class="footnote">Ex 20:22.</i> The rule of Torah is that if one makes it into an altar of hewn stones with a tool of silver or flint, it is permitted. For the point of the prohibition is not against it being <i>hewn</i>, but rather because it is hewn with something made of <i>iron</i>, i.e., a sword, and Torah kept it far from the tabernacle, when it is written: “gold, silver, and copper,”195<i class="footnote">Ex 25:3.</i> but does not mention iron there. And likewise with the sanctuary it is written, “No hammers or axe or any iron tool was heard in the House when it was being built.”196<i class="footnote">I Kings 6:7.</i> The reason is because that is the power of Esau with what he was blessed from his father’s mouth; this is what is meant by “By the sword you shall live,”197<i class="footnote">Gen 27:40.</i> and it is written, “but Esau I hated.”198<i class="footnote">Mal 1:3.</i> Therefore it is kept far from the sanctuary. And likewise at the table we have been warned to remove the sword from it, because the sword is something destructive199<i class="footnote">The pun <i>ha-herev hu ha-mahriv</i> is lost in the translation.</i> and the source of destruction, the opposite of peace, and it does not belong in a place of blessing, i.e., peace. For indeed the altar and the table prolongs a person’s days, while a sword shortens them, and it makes no sense to brandish something that shortens over something that prolongs life.200<i class="footnote">Mekhilta Yitro (end).</i>
  One also has to take care to spread a cloth over the bread on the table when saying the blessing, for thus it was the custom of the old-timers to cover the bread when they would recite <i>birkat ha-mazon</i>, so that the bread won’t be embarrassed (that we’re reciting this blessing for the food over wine and not bread), and likewise when they would recite the Shabbat <i>Kiddush </i>on wine and not bread. And so they said for the daytime <i>Kiddush</i>: “One spreads a cloth and recites the <i>Kiddush</i>,”201<i class="footnote">B. Pesah 100a.</i> that is to say, one spreads a cloth over the bread, and then one recites the <i>Kiddush</i> over the wine. There is also in this an allusion and symbol of the descent of the manna, which when the manna first came down, it would come down on the surface of the wilderness, which is what this meant: “in the morning there was a fall of dew,”202<i class="footnote">Ex 16:13.</i> and afterwards, the manna fell on it [the dew], which is what is meant by “over the surface of the wilderness lay a fine and flaky substance, as fine as frost on the ground.”203<i class="footnote">Ex 16:14.</i> And it is written “when the fall of dew lifted” and not “when the fall of manna lifted,” so that “when the fall of dew lifted” teaches you that <i>another</i> layer of dew came down upon it [the manna].204<i class="footnote">Ibid. In other words, R. Bahya interprets the miracle of the manna to include two separate dewfalls, in between which the manna was sandwiched.</i> And so our rabbis z”l said, “Dew above and dew below and the manna in the middle, as if it were packed in a box.”205<i class="footnote">Mekhilta Va-Yisa 3, which R. Bahya also brings in his Torah Commentary on to Ex 16:13. In other words, it was even more miraculous than other miracles, because the manna didn’t just fall, but rather God wrapped it in dew as he were a parent lovingly sending a “care package” to the Israelites.</i> Therefore here at the table one spreads cloth and recites the <i>Kiddush</i> – a cloth above, a cloth below, and the bread in the middle. For this is a symbolic re-enactment of the descent of the manna.206<i class="footnote">Likewise the Tosafot to b. Pesahim 100b explain this practice.</i>
  Birkat ha-mazon consists of three blessings from the Torah, and one blessing from the words of the scribes. The oldest at the table leads the blessing, even if he came after the meal.207<i class="footnote">So the Tur and Shulhan Arukh Orah Hayim 201.</i> A mnemonic acronym for the three blessings from the Torah comes from the verses “You shall make a table of acacia wood… and make around it a molding of gold – <i>ZaHa”B</i>:”208<i class="footnote">Ex 25:23,24.</i> the blessing <i>ha-Zan</i> (“who feeds”), the blessing <i>Ha-aretz</i> (“for the land”) and the blessing <i>Boneh Yerushalayim</i> (“who builds Jerusalem”) – the initials of which are <i>ZH”B,</i> and <i>zahav</i> is numerically equivalent to <i>DaVi”D,</i>209<i class="footnote">I.e., both = 14.</i> and thus the table hints at <i>malkhut</i> – “kingdom.”210<i class="footnote">According to b. Yoma 72, “there were three rims in the sanctuary, one on the altar, one on the ark, and on the table…David earned the rim on the table, and he took it.” In other words, King David and his kingdom are associated with “the table.”</i> The symbol of kingdom is the house of David son of Jesse, which includes the both the kingdom of the house of David below, and the kingdom above, which is the power of the frankincense: <i>Dovid melekh Yisrael hay ve-kayam</i>(“Long live David King of Israel!”) – this is what is meant by “We have no portion in David, No share in Jesse’s son! Every man to his tent (<i>le</i>–<i>ohalav</i>), O Israel!”211<i class="footnote">2 Sam 20:1.</i> not “<i>le-ohalav</i> – to his tent” but rather “le’lohav– to his God.”212<i class="footnote">In other words, the Torah is using “his tent” (<i>ohalav)</i> as a euphemism for “his God” (<i>elohav</i>), because it is quoting a wicked person, Sheba the son of Bichri, and it would have been disrespectful to God to quote Sheba’s call to rebellion that invoked God. I think what R. Bahya has in mind in all this is that “house of David,” “<i>malkhut</i>,” and “<i>elohim</i>” are all symbolic synonyms for the tenth <i>sefirah</i> – <i>Malkhut</i>, or <i>Shekhinah.</i></i> For you already knew that the table in the sanctuary corresponds to <i>midat ha-din</i> – God’s attribute of justice – which is the reason why it is located on the north, that is the left side,213<i class="footnote">That is, if one is standing facing the east.</i> the side of <i>Gevurah</i> – “Might.” And on the table were two cloths, one made of crimson, the other blue.214<i class="footnote">Nu 4:7-8.</i> The crimson one corresponds to <i>midat ha-din</i> above, and the blue one corresponds to <i>midat ha-din</i> below, which is comprised of all the other attributes. And here the showbread was on the table itself, without anything in between, as it is said, “And the regular bread shall rest upon it [the table],”215<i class="footnote">Nu 4:7.</i> and over the bread was spread the blue cloth. And on this cloth were put all the utensils for the table, and over the utensils was spread the crimson cloth; was the highest on top of everything else. The crimson cloth would be on top, and the blue cloth below, that’s just how the upper <i>midat din</i> emanates down into the lower one, and the point of this whole arrangement is that from the table in the sanctuary comes sustenance for the whole world.216<i class="footnote">Zohar 153b: “This table stands inside the <i>Mishkan</i>, and from it goes out food for the whole world.”</i> Corresponding to it is the <i>midat din</i> above that sustains the upper beings, the host on high, even as it does the lower beings, for it is the attribute “that supplies provisions for her household and, the daily fare of her maids.”217<i class="footnote">Prv 31:15.</i> From this you will understand the reason why the height of the table with all of the things arrayed on was ten handbreadths. For even so, the table in the sanctuary with what was on top of it should instruct you about <i>midat ha-din</i>, and understand this! For you need to be awakened to what our sages z”l said about this: “Ten tables King Solomon (peace be upon him) made, as it is explained in Scripture, and likewise ten lampstands, and ten washbasins.218<i class="footnote">2 Chr 4:6-8. Clearly, R. Bahya is alluding to the ten<i> sefirot</i>, for whose array the arrangement of cloths, utensils, and shewbread on the table in the sanctuary is a microcosm.</i>
  <i>Birkat ha-mazon</i> is from the Torah, as it is said, “When you have eaten your fill, you shall bless the Lord your God.”219<i class="footnote">Deut 8:10. The complete verse is “When you have eaten your fill, you shall bless the Lord your God for the good land which he has given you.”</i> And they taught in a <i>baraita</i>:220<i class="footnote">B. Berakhot 48b.</i> “you shall bless” – this is the blessing “<i>ha-zan;</i>” “the Lord your God” – this is <i>birkat ha-zimmun</i> (“the blessing of invitation”); “for the land” – this is the blessing “<i>ha-aretz</i>” (“for the land”); “good” [<i>ha-tovah</i>]– this is the blessing “<i>boneh Yerushalayim.</i>” And therefore it says “the good hill country [<i>ha-har ha-tov</i>] and the Lebanon.”221<i class="footnote">Deut 3:25.</i> I have only a blessing after the meal; from where do I get before it? Scripture says “”which He has given you” – from the moment He has given it to you, you are obligated to bless Him. Our rabbis z”l taught in a midrash: Moses instituted the blessing “<i>ha-zan</i>” for Israel when the manna fell down for them; Joshua instituted the blessing “<i>ha-aretz</i>” when he led them into to the land, and David and Solomon instituted “<i>boneh Yerushalayim</i>.”222<i class="footnote">B. Berakhot 48b.</i> And you will also find in the story of the manna a hint at the blessing “<i>ha-zan</i>” in the manna itself, as it is said, “In the morning you shall have your fill of bread,223<i class="footnote">Ex 16:12.</i> and you shall know that I the Lord am you God” – this knowing will occur when remind yourselves of it when you say a blessing over eating the manna. The fourth blessing, “<i>ha-tov ve-ha-metiv</i>,” was instituted at Yavneh. Our rabbis z”l needed to make reference in the blessing “<i>ha-aretz</i>” the Torah, and also refer in it to the covenant (<i>brit</i>), and for them to mention <i>brit</i> before Torah,224<i class="footnote">In B. Berakhot 48b-49a it says that Torah was given through three covenants, while the covenant of circumcision was given through thirteen covenants. R. Bahya explains the point of this allusion in what follows.</i> so it would be said like this: “<i>brit</i> and Torah, life and food, for your <i>brit </i>which you sealed [upon us] and your Torah which you taught us.”225<i class="footnote">A quotation from a version of <i>birkat ha-mazon </i>used by R. Bahya and his contemporaries, but slightly different from the version we use now.</i> And the reason that they needed to mention both in the blessing “<i>ha-aretz</i>” was to instruct us that it was because of the Torah that we merited the inheritance of the Land.226<i class="footnote">And so the Tur, and Rashi’s commentary on b. Berakhot 48b.</i> And this is the reason for the setting up of the stones upon which “the whole Torah” is written, and this is what is meant by “to [<i>le-ma’an</i>] enter the land.”227<i class="footnote">Dt 27:3. <i>Le-ma’an</i> means literally “for the sake of” R. Bahya alludes to stones Moses instructed the Israelites to set up in Dt 27:2-3: “As soon as you have crossed the Jordan into the land that the Lord your God is giving you, you shall set up large stones. Coat them with plaster and inscribe upon them all the words of this Torah when you cross over in order, to enter the land that the Lord you God is giving you.”</i> <i>Le-ma’an</i> – “for the sake of” <i>this Torah</i> “you will enter the Land.” And in my opinion, in “to [<i>le-ma’an</i>] enter the land,” “<i>le-ma’an</i>” means “so that you are able to enter,” that is to say, “Insofar as I am commanding you to write on them the whole Torah, so you will have the power to enter the land, because the power of the Torah will cut out [<i>yakhritu</i>] 228<i class="footnote">R. Bahya’s word choice here is rich in relevant connotations. “Cut out” – <i>yakhrit </i>– is from the root of the same verb “<i>karat</i>” used in the Biblical expression “to cut a covenant”- <i>likrot brit</i> – that is, to make a covenant, and also used for the punishment of someone who violates the covenant, e.g., as in Ex 12:15: “Whoever eats leavened bread from the first day to the seventh day [of Passover], that person shall be cut off [<i>nikhreta</i>] from Israel.”</i>the enemies of the land, so that you will inherit it.
  And the reason for mentioning <i>brit</i> before the Torah is because the Torah was given through three covenants, while <i>brit milah</i> – circumcision was given through thirteen covenants, and they are mentioned in the account of Abraham’s circumcision, and for the sake of all sixteen of these covenants, we are rescued from <i>midat ha-din</i>, the sword [<i>herev</i>]of the Holy One Blessed be He, which has sixteen mouths that say “smite the enemies!” Moses referred to this in his promise for the future, “When I whet My flashing sword [<i>harbi</i>] and My hand lays hold of justice.”229<i class="footnote">Dt 32:41. In other words, here God’s sword is associated with His hand that exercises justice – His left hand, <i>midat ha-din</i>.</i> He connected the <i>yod</i> ending <i>harbi</i>(“my sword”) with the initial <i>vav</i> of <i>ve-tohez</i> (“lays hold of”) in order to hint at “the sword of sixteen.” Understand this verse: “Be in fear of the sword [<i>herev</i>], for fury is iniquity worthy of the sword [<i>herev</i>]; know there is a judgment [<i>she</i>–<i>din</i>].230<i class="footnote">Job 19:29.</i> This means “be in fear of the sword from above,” for iniquity cause the “fury” and “sword” below, and so to this end you should know that there is justice and the world is not random, and with this sword the wicked are judged, and that righteous not only need not be afraid of it, but indeed it is put into their hands. That is what is written “with paeans to God in their throat and two-edged swords [<i>herev pipiyot</i>] in their hand”231<i class="footnote">Ps 149:6.</i> – read in it “sixteen mouths – <i>piyot.</i>” So understand this! For this is a deep matter linked to some of the letters on the Lord’s great Name itself, but it’s my intention to limit what I say about it.
  The blessing <i>ha-tov ve-ha-metiv</i> needs two more mentions of <i>melekh</i> besides its own in its opening line. And thus they said in the Jerusalem Talmud: 232<i class="footnote">Not in our versions of the Jerusalem Talmud, but in Tosafot to b.Berakhot 46b, d.h. “<i>ha-tov ve-ha-metiv</i>” Chavel).</i> “three mentions of <i>melekh</i>, three mentions of being <i>metiv</i>, and three mentions of recompense (<i>gemulot</i>). The three “<i>melekh</i>”’s(1) “<i>melekh ha-olam</i>,” (2) “<i>ha-el avinu malkenu</i>,” and (3) “<i>ha-melekh ha-tov</i>.” The three “<i>metiv</i>”’s: (1) ha-melekh ha-tov, (2) “<i>ve-ha-metiv,</i>” and (3) “<i>hu he-tiv.</i>” The three <i>gemulot</i>: (1) “<i>hu gomalnu</i>,” (2) <i>hu gamlenu,</i> and (3) <i>hu yigmalenu</i>.
  <i>Birkat ha-mazon</i> is recited with at least three adults, as it is said, “Exalt the Lord with me.233<i class="footnote">Ps 34:4: <i>Gadlu la-Shem iti</i>. <i>Gadlu</i> is a plural imperative, so it includes at least two; <i>iti</i> – “with me” adds one more, making it at least three.</i> With three, one says in the <i>zimmun</i> “<i>nivarekh she-akhalnu mishelo”</i> – “Let us bless Him from whose food we have eaten” without mentioning God’s name. And with ten one does mention God’s name: <i>nivarekh eloheynu</i>– “Let us bless our God.”234<i class="footnote">B. Berakhot 49b, and so the Tur and Orah Hayim 192.</i> And one does not say “<i>Barekhu eloheynu</i>” – “Bless our God,” in other words, one should not exclude himself from the group. Thus I conclude that “<i>nivarekh”</i> is preferable, but if someone has said “<i>barekhu,</i>” one doesn’t hold it against him.235<i class="footnote">B. Berakhot 50a. In other words, it is acceptable to say “<i>barekhu</i>.”</i> Regardless if the number of diners is eleven or 110,000, one says, “<i>nivarekh  eloheynu she-akhalnu mishelo,” </i>because ten is the number that includes everything and there is nothing after it, unless it is doubled [?]. If one leading a <i>zimmun</i> of three says, “<i>nivarekh she-akhalnu mishelo”</i> – “Let us bless Him from whose food we have eaten,” the other two reply as if he were beginning with “<i>Barukh she-akhalnu mishelo uv-tuvo hayinu” –</i>“Blessed be the One from whose food we ate and by whose goodness we live.” If one leading a <i>zimmun</i> of ten says, “<i>nivarekh eloheynu she-akhalnu mishelo”</i> – “Let us bless our God from whose food we have eaten,” the rest reply with “<i>Barukh eloheynu she-akhalnu mishelo uv-tuvo hayinu” –</i>“Blessed be our God from whose food we ate and by whose goodness we live.” Those outside of the table answer “Amen,” which is like the matter discussed in tractate Yoma:236<i class="footnote">B. Yoma 37a.</i> “For the name of the Lord I proclaim; Give glory to our God!”237<i class="footnote">Dt 32:3.</i> When “I proclaim the name ‘Lord,’ You give glory to ‘Eloheynu,’ namely, you should answer “Amen.”
  A minor who knows Whom they are blessing is included in the <i>zimmun</i>, but if not, he is not included. However he does count to complete the <i>minyan</i> of ten, according to what they said, R. Joshua ben Levi said that even though a child who is being rocked in a cradle is not counted in the <i>zimmun</i>, they consider him an addition to complete the minimum of ten. And Rashi z”l explained, “not for a minyan of ten in general, only for a<i> zimmun</i>. Otherwise, how could we maintain that he’s not considered an addition to make ten for the <i>amidah</i> or for the <i>zimmun</i> until he’s grown two pubic hairs? From what they said in the Jerusalem Talmud: a minor – at what point do we consider him an addition to make ten? R. Abin says R. Huna and R. Judah disagree with one another, both in the name of Shmuel. The one says when he knows the form of the blessing, the other, when he knows Whom he is blessing. R. Yosi b. R. Halafta said, ‘How many times have you eaten with my father Halafta, and with R. Abina b. Kisi, and they didn’t make a <i>zimmun</i> for me until I grew two pubic hairs?!’ And this is how Rabbenu Tam reasoned, and thus it is the practice of the whole world.238<i class="footnote">Tosafot to b. Berakhot 48a, d.h., “<i>ve-layt hilkhata she-mevi’ shitat Rabbenu Tam</i>.”</i>
  If nine who have eaten something made of grain, and one just greens, they include him for the purpose of saying “<i>nivarekh</i>.” And precisely just for the sake of inclusion, but in order for him to enable the majority to fulfill their obligation, we need him to eat at least an “olive’s measure” of something made of grain.239<i class="footnote">B. Berakhot 48a, and so the Tur and O.H. 197.</i> And with three, it goes without saying that in order for him to enable the others to fulfill their obligation, even to be added in, we need him to eat at least an “olive’s measure” of something made of grain. And thus it is our custom that when a person enters to be included, that he takes at least an olive’s measure of something made from grain and eats it.
  And you need to know that because the sages z”l said, “a <i>bat kol</i> went out and said that a cup of blessing is equal to forty pieces of gold, it is clear from this that each blessing of the hundred blessing equals ten pieces of gold.”240<i class="footnote">B. Hullin 87a. Since there are four blessings in <i>birkat ha-mazon</i> said over the cup of blessing – you do the math. This is also an allusion to the tradition that one said say at least a hundred blessings per day.</i> And there’s support for this in the verse: “one ladle (<i>kaf</i>) of ten [shekels] of gold filled with incense,”241<i class="footnote">Nu 7:14.</i> that is to say, every “one from <i>Ka”F,</i>242<i class="footnote">Ka”F is numerically equivalent to 100.</i><i> </i>which are the one hundred blessings equal to “ten gold [pieces].” And you will also find in another place, “<i>esreh zahav mishkalam”</i> – “ten gold shekels in weight”243<i class="footnote">Gen 24:22, the value of the gold armbands Eliezer gave Rebekah as a present after she gave his camels water at the well.</i> to which armbands Scripture follows with the phrase “Then I bowed low in homage to the Lord and blessed the Lord.”244<i class="footnote">Gen 24:48, immediately preceded in 24:27 with “And I put the ring on her nose, and the bands on her arms,” i.e., the ten shekel gold bands, which are equal to one blessing.</i> The reason why every blessing is equal to ten shekels of gold is to hint that it is possible to include the 10 sefirot in each and every blessing. And the reason for 100 blessings every day is their correspondence to the 10 sefirot, ten blessings for each and every sefirah. And this what is written, “And now, O Israel, what (<i>mah</i>) does the Lord your God demand of you.”245<i class="footnote">Dt 10:12.</i> And our sages z”l said, “Don’t read <i>mah</i> – “what,” but rather <i>me’ah</i> –“a hundred,”246<i class="footnote">B. Menahot 43b.</i> that is to say, “A hundred the Lord your God demands of you.” And there are 99 letters in this verse; adding the letter aleph makes it 100.247<i class="footnote">That is, adding an aleph to the word <i>mah</i>, making it <i>me’ah</i>, give the verse 100 letters. In his commentary to the Torah R. Bahya brings this interpretation as the <i>sod – </i>“the mystical interpretation” of Dt. 10:12.</i> And we found in King David (peace upon him), who said, “The utterance of the man set on high [<i>‘al</i>],”248<i class="footnote">2 Sam 23:1. The Hebrew word <i>‘al</i> is numerically equivalent to 100.</i> because one hundred men of Israel a day used to die in that generation, and deeply moved by this, David instituted [<i>tiken</i>]100 blessings.249<i class="footnote">Midrash Tanhuma Korah 12. <i>Tiken</i> – “instituted” of course also has the connotation of <i>tikkun</i> – “repair,” as in the sense of a cosmic repair through blessings of a world diminished by the loss of 100 lives.</i> He didn’t institute them per se, but rather re-established them, since they had been forgotten, and David came along and re-established them.250<i class="footnote">Ibid. According to this midrash, Moses originally established the blessings, and afterwards, whne they had been forgotten, David came along and re-established them, and after David’s era they were forgotten again until the sages of the Talmud re-established them (Chavel).</i> And thus is written, “So [<i>ki khen</i>] shall the man who fears the Lord be blessed [<i>yivorakh</i>].”251<i class="footnote">Ps 128:4.</i> The word <i>yivorakh</i> – “shall be blessed” is spelled without a <i>vav</i>, which means that by the numerical equivalent of <i>K”I Khe”N</i> – 100 – will the person who fears the Lord both bless and be blessed.252<i class="footnote">Lacking the <i>vav</i>, the Hebrew word can be read either actively as <i>yivarekh</i> – “he will bless,” or passively as <i>yivorakh</i> – “he will be blessed.”</i> Therefore a person needs to recite 100 blessings and fulfill them each day. And on Shabbat, when it is not possible because the <i>Amidah</i> for Shabbat contains only seven blessings, as it is written, “I praise You seven times on <i>the</i>day,”253<i class="footnote">Ps 119:164.</i> the day which is well-known and special, namely, Shabbat, our sages z”l already said, “one completes them with aromatic herbs and fancy fruits.”254<i class="footnote">B. Menahot 43b, i.e., one enjoys lots of extra snacks and aromas that require blessings to make up for the shortage of blessings.</i> 
  And now I shall explain to you the three meals of Shabbat. Our rabbis said:255<i class="footnote">B. Shabbat 119b.</i> A person is required to eat three meals on Shabbat, as it is said, “Eat it today, for today is a Sabbath of the Lord, you will not find it today on the plain.”256<i class="footnote">Ex 16:25, referring to the manna. There are three mentions of “today,” each corresponding to one of the three meals on Shabbat.</i> And about the reward for this mitzvah they said:257<i class="footnote">B Shabbat 118a.</i> Whoever fulfills the mitzvah of three meals on Shabbat is rescued from three tribulations: from the birth pangs of the Messiah, from the judgment of Gehenna, and from the wars of Gog and Magog, and for each of these three the Scripture mentions “day.” For the birth pangs of the Messiah – “before the coming of the <i>day</i> of the Lord.”258<i class="footnote">Mal 3:23: “Lo, I will send the prophet Elijah to you before the coming of the awesome, fearful day of the Lord.”</i> From the judgment of Gehenna – “For lo! That <i>day </i>is at hand, burning like an oven” and it is written, “and the <i>day</i> that is coming shall burn them.” 259<i class="footnote">Mal 3:19: “For lo! That <i>day</i> is at hand, burning like an oven. All the arrogant and doers of evil shall be straw, and the day that is coming – said the Lord of Hosts – shall burn them to ashes and leave of them neither stalk nor boughs.”</i> And from the wars of Gog and Magog: “Lo, a day of the Lord is coming.”260<i class="footnote">Zech 14:1, referring to the apocalyptic wars at the end of time.</i> The reason for the three meals of Shabbat corresponds to the three higher states that the soul will have in the eternal and true life that is called “the life of the world to come” (<i>hayye ha-olam ha-ba</i>) and “bundle of life” (<i>tzror ha-hayim</i>).
  The first meal is the aspect of “<i>shamor</i>”261<i class="footnote">From the commandment in the 10 commandments to observe Shabbat in Dt 5:12.</i> – “Observe!” which is <i>Malkhut</i>, and “the Bride,” which is why Shabbat is called a “bride.” And this why it says, “Come bride, Come and let us go out to greet the Sabbath bride and queen,” and this is “Eat it today”262<i class="footnote">Ex 16:25.</i> – [<i>ikhlu-hu</i>] the “day” for whom we make the Shabbat evening <i>Kiddush</i> over wine.263<i class="footnote">Midrashic creative philology reads <i>ikhlu-hu</i> “eat it” as something like “I shall make her a bride” – playing upon the similarities between <i>kalah</i> – “bride “and akhal – “eat.”</i>
  The second meal is the aspect of “<i>zakhor</i>” – “Remember!”264<i class="footnote">From the commandment in the 10 commandments to remember the Shabbat in Ex 20:8.</i> which is <i>Rahamim</i> – Compassion, for whom we make the <i>Kiddush</i> of the Day, which is called <i>Kiddusha Raba</i> – “the Great Kiddush”265<i class="footnote">B. Pesahim 106a.</i> because at night – <i>shamor!</i>, and in the day <i>zakhor!</i> which is Compassion, and the meaning of “for today is the Sabbath of the Lord.”266<i class="footnote">Ex 16:25.</i>
  The third meal is the upper source, which is called <i>Ayin </i>– “Nothing” -from what is written, “And Wisdom you will find comes <i>me-ayin</i> –“from Nothing.”267<i class="footnote">Job 28:12, which JSB translates “And wisdom, from where [<i>me-ayin</i>] can it be found?” R. Bahya creatively “misreads” the verse to reveal its kabbalistic meaning.</i> And this is the meaning of <i>you will not find it today</i> on the plain.”268<i class="footnote">Ex 16:25.</i>
  And from now on meditate on this and open the eyes of your heart to the high levels which someone who fulfills the three meals achieves, and the deep reward reserved in the future for him when he has this lofty focus in mind, and indeed he deserves to be rescued from the three tribulations, and understand this!
  And it is up to you to know that the three Shabbat meals have alloted times: the first on Shabbat eve, the second at <i>shahrit</i> in the morning, and the third at <i>minhah</i> in the afternoon. One does not make the third meal at shahrit right after the meal and birkat ha-mazon, by spreading a tablecloth and starting a new meal so that it seems that the meals divide Shabbat in half, without any acknowledgment here in the third meal of the upper miracle. But rather, the time of the third meal is at the hour of minhah, as they taught in the chapter “All the holy writings:”269<i class="footnote">B. Shabbat 117b.</i> “If a fire breaks out on Shabbat Eve, one rescues the food for three meals; if during <i>shahrit</i>, one rescues the food for two meals; if at minhah, one rescues the food for one meal.” And they also taught in Pesahim: “If the 14thof Nisan occurs on Shabbat, one burns all the <i>hametz</i> before Shabbat, but leaves enough food for two meals.<i> </i>270<i class="footnote">B. Pesahim 13a: “all,” that is, regardless whether it is ordinary food or food reserved for the priests, except for what is needed for Shabbat, according to Rashi on this passage. But one leaves enough only for two meals on Shabbat, since on the day before Pesah, one is forbidden to eat anything from minhah on, until the <i>seder </i>meal itself.</i> All of this is proof that the time for the third meal is at <i>minhah</i>, since this time would already have arrived within the time of the prohibition from the Torah against eating <i>hametz</i> from six hours on until the <i>seder.</i> And they said in the Tosefta, “Anyone who wants to fulfill the obligation of three meals when the 14th of Nisan occurs on Shabbat, eats ‘rich matzah,’ which is made with oil and honey. For they did not say ‘Whoever eats <i>matzah</i> on the eve of Pesah…,’271<i class="footnote">Tosafot on b. Pesahim 99b, citing the Jerusalem Talmud. The whole quotation is, “Whoever eats the bread of affliction<i> </i>on the eve of Pesah is like a man who has sex with his betrothed at his in-laws’ house.”</i> but rather ‘<i>the bread of affliction,</i>’ which would permit ‘rich <i>matzah</i>,’ since the obligation to eat <i>only</i> the ‘bread of affliction’ does not go into effect until the evening.”272<i class="footnote">This may be a manuscript error, since this ruling is not in the Tosefta, but in the Tosafot to B.Pesahim 99b (Chavel).</i>
  One needs to base all three of these meals over wine, and to break two loaves of bread, whether it is for Shabbat or for the other holidays. Some say that it is possible to serve fruit and not bread at the third meal, and bring for proof what is said in tractate Sukkah: “We say, ‘If one made up for a meal in the sukkah that he missed with kinds of desserts, he has fulfilled his obligation.”273<i class="footnote">B. Sukkah 27a. One is required to eat fourteen meals in the sukkah, two on each of the seven days of Sukkot. But according to this opinion, you can “make up” a missed meal just by adding dessert to another meal in the sukkah, rather than having another whole meal.</i> But this is not our view, for we hold that fruit does not need to be eaten in a sukkah, and if he made up his missed meal with fruits, he has not fulfilled his obligation, but rather, bread is certainly required at the third meal as it is for the first two.274<i class="footnote">Hence R. Bahya rejects the argument that this saying from b. Sukkot proves one doesn’t need to eat bread at the third Shabbat meal. R. Bahya does not accept the view that dessert can count as a “make-up” meal, because if the dessert is just fruit, which the halakhah permits one to eat as a snack outside the sukkah, it is not sufficient to meet one’s obligation to eat 14 <i>meals</i> in the <i>sukkah.</i> Only an additional course that includes something that halakhah requires being eaten in the sukkah, like bread or other grain products can count as a meal “make-up.” The analogy between the sukkah meal and the third Shabbat meal proves the opposite of what those who brought it contended. Thus R. Bahya infers that for something to count as a meal <i>per se</i>, whether in the sukkah or the third Shabbat meal, it must include bread.</i>
  And when I explained to you the requirement for three meals on Shabbat and informed you of its reward, I revealed it to you only partially, leaving some of it secret. Now I shall explain to you further the topic of <i>panim hadashot</i> –“a new face.” 275<i class="footnote"><i>Hadashot panim</i> – a “new face,” a term taken from the marriage custom of the <i>Sheva’ Berakhot</i>, when friends of the bride and groom host them for seven meals on the seven days following their wedding. At these meals they recite a special <i>birkat ha-mazon</i>containing the traditional Seven Wedding Blessings – the <i>Sheva Berakhot.</i> But they only recite this special <i>birkat ha-mazon</i> with the seven blessings on the second through seventh days following the wedding if there are at least 10 adults, and at least one “new face” – <i>panim hadashot</i> – a person who wasn’t there on the previous day. This custom and the words for the <i>sheva Berakhot</i> are introduced in b. Ketubah 7b-8a.</i> This refers to the virtue particularly associated with Malkhut, about which Scripture remarked when it said, “Let us make human being in Our image and according to Our likeness,”276<i class="footnote">Gen 1:26.</i> and when it is the great Shabbat, for indeed when Shabbat comes, a “new face” comes. And for this reason you will find in the discussion of the <i>Sheva Berakhot, </i>which is connected to a “new face,” as we maintain in the Gemara, “On the first day [after the wedding] one says all seven blessings. From then on, if there is a new face (<i>panim hadashot</i>), one recites them, but if not one doesn’t.”277<i class="footnote">B. Ketubot 8a.</i> And Shabbat itself is like a new face.278<i class="footnote">In other words, even if there is not a new guest, if it is Shabbat, one can still recite the <i>Sheva Berakhot</i> in <i>birkat ha-mazon</i>. So Tosafot to b. Ketubot 7b. By analogy, this principle was also applied to other holidays which occur uring the week of <i>Sheva Berakhot</i>.</i> But all the words of our rabbis z”l are built upon the wisdom of kabbalah, and it is the great foundation upon which all of their words depend. Happy is the one who meditates upon them and looks at their shining mirror. And at this point I do not need to expand upon the explanation of the topic of marriage in the lower formation of the world involving male and female, because of what I hinted at in my discussion of <i>zakhor ve-shamor</i> “remember and observe.” From this little hint you should be able to understand much more.
  Now that I have explained to you the topic of <i>Kiddush</i>, I will explain the topic of <i>Havdalah</i>, so that nothing will be missing from your table whether it is an ordinary day or Shabbat, for indeed Havdalah is a way of honoring Shabbat, to remember the day of Shabbat both when it comes and goes, as our rabbis z”l taught in a midrash, “’Remember the Sabbath day’279<i class="footnote">Ex 20:8.</i> – remember it both at its entrance and its departure.”280<i class="footnote">Maimonides, <i>Sefer Ha-Mitzvot, M”A </i>155, and in <i>Hilkhot Shabbat</i> 29a.</i> And know that Havdalah with its four blessings is hinted at in the first parshah of Genesis: the first blessing – <i>borei pri ha-gafen</i> – “who creates the fruit of the vine” – is hinted at in the first verse in the word <i>ha-aretz</i> – “the land”281<i class="footnote">Gen 1:1.</i> – which is the garden and the vine in the garden, and this is the wine preserved in its grapes from the six days of creation.282<i class="footnote">B. Berakhot 34b. The wine that will be served at the messianic banquet at the end of time comes has been preserved in the grapes of the first vine God created in the six days of creation.</i>The second blessing: “<i>atzei besamim</i>”– “spices from a tree”283<i class="footnote">Technically, one needs to specify in the blessing the type of spice: <i>atzei besamim</i> – “spices from a tree,” such as cinnamon or nutmeg; <i>esvei besamim, </i>“spices from grasses,” such as mint or tarragon. However, taking into account that not everybody knows how to tell the difference between types of spices, the more inclusive formulation <i>minei besamim</i>– “different kinds of spices” was instituted, to avoid having people say the wrong blessing (Chavel).</i> is hinted in the expression, “a wind [<i>ru’ah</i>] from God sweeping over the water,”284<i class="footnote">Gen 1:1.</i> because smell – <i>re’ah</i> – is sensed by means of the wind – <i>ru’ah</i>. The third blessing: <i>bore’ me’orei ha-esh</i> – “who creates the lights of fire,” is what is written in “<i>Yehi ‘or</i>” – “Let there be light!”285<i class="footnote">Gen 1:3: “’<i>Or</i>” and “<i>me’orei</i>” are from the same Hebrew root that means “light.”</i> The fourth blessing – <i>Ha-mavdil</i> – “Who separates” is what is written in “and God separated [<i>va-yavdel</i>] the light.”286<i class="footnote">Gen 1:4.</i> And just as we found the act of separation – Havdalah – in the Holy One Blessed be He at the beginning of His rule with the creation of the world and its renewal, so we found in Him the sanctification – <i>kiddush</i>287<i class="footnote">Its root, <i>kadosh</i>, in its adjectival and verbal forms means literally to “be set apart” or “to set apart.”</i> – of the day of Shabbat on which work is forbidden, which is written: “God blessed the seventh day and declared it holy [<i>va-yikadesh</i> ‘<i>oto</i>].”288<i class="footnote">Gen 2:3. What follows is more or less a quotation from Genesis Rabbah Parshah 11, with some omissions.</i> He “blessed” it providing an extra portion of the manna for it and “declared it holy” by prohibiting the gathering of manna on it. 
   Another interpretation: He blessed it with light. When the sun set on the evening of Shabbat, the Holy One Blessed be He sought to hide the light and gave honor to Shabbat, as it is written, “and God blessed it, etc.”289<i class="footnote">Gen 2:3.</i>With what did He bless it? With light. Everything began to praise the Holy One Blessed be He, as it is written, “Everything under the heavens, He made it sing.”290<i class="footnote">Job 37:3: Literally, “He lets it loose [<i>yishrehu</i>] beneath the entire heavens; His lightning [<i>oro</i>] to the ends of the earth.” The midrash treats <i>yishrehu a</i>s if it were from the word “<i>shirah</i>” – “song.”</i> Why? “His light [spread] to the ends of the earth.”291<i class="footnote">Genesis Rabbah 11:2.</i>
  Rabbi Ishmael the son of Rabbi Yosi asked those who lived in Babylonia, by what did they earn the right to call their living there “life.”292<i class="footnote">I.e., a successful life, since a life of sorrow cannot really be called “life.”</i> They replied, “by right of the Torah.” And for those in the land of Israel, by right of the tithes. And those outside of the Land, by what right? Because they honor the Sabbaths and the holidays. Rabbi Yohanan in the name of Rabbi Yosi b. Halafta said, “Abraham our father, about whom is not written that he observed the Sabbath, inherited the world within measurable limits, as it is said, ‘Up, walk about the land through its length and breadth.’293<i class="footnote">Gen 13:17.</i> But Jacob, about whom it <i>is</i>written that he observed Shabbat, as it is said, ‘and he encamped in the city,’ he entered at morning twilight, and fixed boundaries while it was still day,294<i class="footnote">Gen 33:18. In other words, according to the midrash, Jacob made an <i>eruv</i> that allowed him to carry things in the city on Shabbat.</i> inherited the world without measurable limits, as it is said, ‘You shall spread out to the west and to the east, etc.’295<i class="footnote">Gen 28:14.</i> Another interpretation: “God blessed the seventh day and declared it holy,”296<i class="footnote">Gen 2:3.</i>He blessed it by exempting it from being postponed. R. Samuel b. Nahmani said, ‘A festival is postponed; Shabbat is not postponed.297<i class="footnote">That is, unlike other holidays, which occasionally may be postponed a day, such as the first day of Rosh Hashanah so that it won’t fall on a Sunday, Wednesday, or Friday, which would create problems later on in the calendar. Shabbat always falls on the seventh day of the week (Chavel).</i> Another interpretation: He blessed it with a partner. 
  They taught that R. Simon bar Yohai says, Shabbat came before the Holy One Blessed be He and said, “Master of the Universe, everything has a partner, but I don’t have a partner. I am astonished.” The Holy One Blessed be He replied, “The assembly of the people of Israel shall be your partner.” And when they stood at Mt. Sinai, He said to them, “Remember what I said to Shabbat. The assembly of Israel shall be your partner. So I am saying, “Remember Shabbat and make it holy.”298<i class="footnote">Ex 20:8: “make it holy” – <i>likadshehu</i> also has the connotation of marriage, as in the expression <i>kiddushin.</i> So in effect God is saying, “Remember Shabbat, that you’re married to him!”</i>
  Also it says there:299<i class="footnote">In Genesis Rabbah 16:8.</i> “And He placed him [Adam] in the Garden of Eden,”300<i class="footnote">Gen 2:15.</i> the Holy One Blessed be He gave Adam the commandments of Shabbat, since it is written in this verse <i>va-yanhehu</i> – “placed him” and in another verse “<i>va-yanah</i> – and He rested on the seventh day.301<i class="footnote">Gen 2:15: <i>va-yanhehu</i> – literally, “caused him to rest;” Ex 20:11. In other words, the similar diction suggests, by midrashic logic, that Gen 2:15 is in fact an allusion to the rules for Shabbat in Ex 20:8-11 – part of the 10 Commandments.</i> “To work it”302<i class="footnote">Gen 2:15.</i> alludes to “six days shall you work”303<i class="footnote">Ex 20:9.</i> and “to tend it” – <i>li-shomrah</i> – alludes to “Observe – <i>shamor</i> [the Sabbath day].”304<i class="footnote">Dt 5:12, i.e., Deuteronomy’s Shabbat commandment in its version of the 10 commandments.</i> So ends the quotation from Genesis Rabba. And you will find in the chapter “<i>Arvei Pesahim</i>” of the Talmud305<i class="footnote">B. Pesahim 105b.</i> that it said, “One can interrupt for <i>Kiddush</i>, but one does not interrupt for <i>Havdalah</i>. The explanation: If a person interrupts his meal on the eve of Shabbat and says <i>birkat ha-mazon</i> for a regular day, and afterwards says the Kiddush for Shabbat, this is “making an interruption.” But if he were eating on Shabbat and sundown came, he does not interrupt his meal, but rather, completes it. And even though he says birkat ha-mazon for Shabbat when it has become an ordinary day, it doesn’t matter, and then afterwards he makes Havdalah, which is what is meant by “one does not interrupt for Havdalah.” And the reason why is because it is proper for a person to interrupt his meal to honor the King when He enters in order to welcome Him, but on Shabbat one does not interrupt his meal for Havdalah, but rather keeps eating like a person who wants the King to stay and to delay Him from leaving his home. For were he to interrupt the meal, it would seem like he was trying to get rid of the King. And this is like what our rabbis z”l taught in a midrash in Mekhilta: “Remember and Keep!” “Remember” Shabbat at its entrance, so as to welcome it before sunset so that everything is prepared for it. “And Keep!” Keep it as it leaves, like a person watching over the king or his dear friend who is with him, and he doesn’t want him to go; he does what he can the whole time to delay him.306<i class="footnote">Mekhilta of R. Simon Bar Yohai, Yitro 20:8.</i>
  Whoever is given the cup of blessing for <i>birkat ha-mazon</i> to say the blessing should not refuse, and thus they said, “Three things shorten a person’s life: if he’s given a Torah scroll and doesn’t read from it, a cup of blessing to say <i>birkat ha-mazon</i> and he doesn’t say it, and someone who arrogates authority to himself. And while <i>birkat ha-mazon</i> is from the Torah, it is an accepted view that the blessing does not require a cup, but to perform the mitzvah in the best way possible, one ought to say the blessing over a cup.307<i class="footnote">Tur O.H. 182.</i>
  Following the way of the old-timers and strict interpreters of the halakhah, one should be careful about doing the ten things308<i class="footnote">See B. Berakhot 51a. R. Bahya says ten, but then lists eleven. Chavel says that the last is not really part of the ten, and notes that R. Bahya in <i>Kad Ha-Kemah</i> lists the ten things mentioned here in a different order. R. Bahya more or less paraphrase this discussion of the ten things required for the cup of blessing from b. Berakhot 51a-b, though he adds some kabbalistic interpretations, such as the tradition from the <i>Book of Bahir,</i> that are not from the original Talmud passage.</i> required for the cup of blessing. And they are: (1) “rinsing”; (2) “washing away”; (3) “undiluted” wine; (4) that the cup be full; (5) “crowning;” (6) wrapping; (7) holding the cup in two hands; (8) grasping it with the right hand; (9) raising it a hands’ breadth; (10) setting one’s eyes upon it; and (11) passing it on to members of one’s household. The interpretation: <i>“</i>rinsing” inside the cup, “washing away” the outside.309<i class="footnote">The Hebrew words <i>hadahah</i> –“rinsing” and <i>shetifah</i> “washing away” are in this context virtually synonymous, thus the need to make the distinction.</i> “Undiluted” – <i>hay</i>: the wine should be pure and undiluted until the blessing “<i>ha-aretz</i>” in <i>birkat ha-mazon</i>; at that point water is put in it. There are some who interpreted “undiluted” – <i>hay</i> – to mean that it came out of a vessel right next to the meal, as in the expression <i>mayim hayyim</i>, that is water drawn from a nearby spring. And there are those who interpreted <i>hay</i> – as “live,” referring to cup that is whole, unbroken, because vessels that are broken are called “dead.” One does not say the blessing of the cup of <i>birkat ha-mazon</i> until water is put in it, because we need the mitzvah to use only the finest, which would be mixed wine, since pure “undiluted” wine is harmful, and the point of the blessing is to be thankful for something that is not harmful. And thus they said, “the cup of blessing is not blessed until he puts water in it, especially the blessing of <i>birkat ha-mazon</i>. However one can say the blessing <i>Boray pri ha-gafen</i> over it, for making Kiddush is analogous to the wine libation, as it written, “a libation offering to the Lord of an intoxicating drink to be poured,”310<i class="footnote">Nu 28:7.</i> – we need wine that intoxicates,311<i class="footnote">B. Sukkah 49b.</i> and like this they said, “something like this required to say a blessing over it, or to say the Great Hallel.”312<i class="footnote">B. Pesahim 107a.</i>And you already knew that wine hints at <i>midat din</i>, whose number is seventy, for in the realm above seventy ruling angels are nourished by the <i>sefirah</i> of Gevurah, and all of them are drawn from Compassion in the form of Jacob, the third in the heavenly chariot, out of whom came seventy souls.313<i class="footnote">A mystical interpretation of Ex 1:5. <i>Din</i> and <i>Gevurah</i> are more or less synonymous terms for the Divine aspect of Judgment. <i>Rahamim</i> – “Compassion” and “Jacob” are other names for the sefirah <i>Tiferet</i> – “Beauty” which is connected directly to the sefirah Gevurah.</i> For this reason they put a ban on the nazirite, to separate himself from wine and anything that came from the “grapevine of wine,”314<i class="footnote">Nu 6:2-4: “If anyone, man or woman, explicitly utters a nazirite’s vow to set himself apart for the Lord, he shall abstain from wine and any other intoxicant; he shall not drink vinegar of wine or of any other intoxicant, neither shall he drink anything in which grapes have been steeped, nor eat grapes fresh or dried. Throughout his term as a nazirite, he may not eat anything that is obtained from the grapevine of wine, even seeds or skin.”</i> because he is attached to Compassion, as it said, “if anyone explicitly utters a nazirite’s vow.”315<i class="footnote">Ibid. 6:2.</i> Therefore our sages z”l required that the cup for <i>birkat ha-mazon</i>, which is from the Torah, should not have the blessing said over it until water is put into it, because the intention of the blessing is basically for Compassion. And “full”: R. Yohanan said, “Whoever blesses over a full cup of blessing is given a boundless inheritance, as it is said, ‘full of the Lord’s blessing, take possession west and south.’316<i class="footnote">Dt. 33:23.</i> R. Yosi bar Haninah says he earns and inherits two worlds: this world and the world to come, as it is said, “take possession west and south.”317<i class="footnote">Dt. 33:23.</i> R. Yohanan used to prove “boundless inheritance” from the expression: <i>yam ve-darush yerashah</i>, and R. Yosi concurred with him on this, adding, “from what is written, ‘let him take possession [<i>yerashah</i>] west and south;’ it did not say “<i>rash</i>” – “take possession” because the world to come was created by the letter Yod, and this world was created by the letter Hay.318<i class="footnote">Hence, the letters Yod and Hay have been “added” to the word “<i>rash</i>,” to hint at this.</i> This is what the Book of Bahir was talking about when it said, “It should have said <i>RaSh</i> but instead it is written YeRaShaH – everything is given to you. And provided that you keep His ways, this is an inward, hidden matter, for “west [lit., “sea”] and south” – <i>yam ve-darom</i> – are intended to hint at Peace and the Covenant, which are the sefirot <i>Hokhmah</i> – ‘Wisdom’ and <i>Binah</i> – ‘Understanding.’” So understand this! “Crowning:” the cup is “crowned” by the disciples of the person saying the blessing. R. Hisda crowns it with other cups. Wrapping: R. Pappa said he wraps himself in his robe, 319<i class="footnote">The verb for wrapping <i>‘ataf</i> may connote wrapping oneself in a <i>tallit</i>, since it is the root of the verb in the expression <i>le-hitatef ba-tzizit</i> “to wrap oneself in the fringed garment – i.e., a tallit.</i>sits, and then says the blessing. R. Ashi put a scarf on his head and take up the cup with two hands, as is it is said, “Lift up your hands in holiness and bless the Lord.”320<i class="footnote">Ps 134:2.</i> And then he would grasp it in his right hand without any support from his other hand at all. And he would raise it a handbreadth from the ground, as Scripture said, “I will lift up the cup of salvation, etc.”321<i class="footnote">Ps. 116:13.</i> And he would set his eyes upon it, so his attention won’t be distracted from it. And he hands it over to his wife, for thus his wife may be blessed. So you see these are the ten things which were said about the cup of blessing. But R. Yohanan said, “We have only four, and they are: undiluted, full, rinsing, and washing. And here’s a acronym for them: <i>HaMiShaH </i>–“five”: <i>Het – Hai</i> – “undiluted;” <i>Mem – male’</i> – “full;” <i>Shin – Shetifah</i> – “rinsing;” and <i>Hay – hadahah</i> – “washing.” Or if you’d prefer it, say <i>SiMHa”H</i> – “joy”, because it is written, “wine gladdens [yiSMaH] the human heart.”322<i class="footnote">Ps 104:15. The letters of <i>hamishah</i> can be rearranged to spell <i>simhah.</i></i>
  <i>Birkat ha-mazon</i> should be said only when one is sitting, and if one was eating and walking or standing, he sits in his place and says the blessing. But if he forgot and did not say <i>birkat ha-mazon</i>, and started to walk and after that remembered that he did not say the blessing, he should not say the blessing where he remembered, but rather should return to the place where he ate and say the blessing, for we say: Bet Shamai said to Bet Hillel, “Do you really mean to say if one forgot a purse at the top of the Temple Mount, is he not to go up and get it? So if he will go up for his own sake and come back, surely he should do so all the more for the honor of Heaven!
  One should not engage in conversation after the cup of blessing, and one should not say the blessing over a “cup of tribulations.” What is a “cup of tribulations”? A second cup. The reason for this is that pairs are bad luck. As they taught in a baraita, “Whoever drinks double – that is, a pair of cups – should not say the blessing, because of the verse “Be proper to meet your God, O Israel.”323<i class="footnote">Am 4:12: “Prepare to meet your God, O Israel!” (<i>JSB</i>), but this midrashic use of the verse picks up on the connotation of <i>nakhon</i> – being proper or correct – from the root of the imperative verb <i>hikon</i> “prepare.”</i> And the reason for prohibiting pairs is because of witchcraft and beings composed of two who rule over anyone who eats and drinking something in pairs. And another reason to distance oneself from “twos” is that that are separated from the power of One, for pairs come from the power of “twos.” So in order to fix one’s heart on unity and distance oneself from dualistic faith, like what is alluded to in Scripture, “Do not mix with <i>shonim,</i>”324<i class="footnote">Pr 24:21: “Do not mix with dissenters” (<i>JSB</i>). However, R. Bahya is clearly playing on the connection between “<i>shonim</i>” – literally, “those who differ” and <i>shnayim </i>– “two. In other words, he reads the verse as, “Do not mix with dualists.” The Talmudic prohibitions on pairs probably had something to do with their Babylonian cultural context, i.e., the dualistic Zoroastrianism of the Sassanid Persian empire.</i> those who believe in twos or more. Therefore they prohibited pairs even for things eaten and drunk, for it is appropriate for natural matters to be a sign and symbol of appropriate practices and beliefs,325<i class="footnote">Literally, “appropriate matters.” But some mss. of R. Bahya’s text read “intellectual and spiritual matters,” making his point clearer.</i> in that you already knew that true beliefs thus require actions. And you see that in the story of Creation, it was not said, “that it was good” on the second day.326<i class="footnote">That expression <i>ki tov</i>, which appears after the descriptions of what was created on the other five days in Genesis 1, is conspicuously absent at the end of the account of day two.</i> For we follow what they said in Genesis Rabbah, that on it dissent and Gehennah were created, and without a doubt, with things like these created on it, it is a dangerous day, on which it is prohibited to begin any work, as our rabbis z”l said, “One does not begin things on the second day, because whoever adds something to one, there’s no good in him [or it], and thus it was called <i>yom sheni</i> – “day two,” which is from the expression <i>shinui</i> – “change.” For in One there is no change, which is what is written: “For I am the Lord, I have not changed.”327<i class="footnote">Mal 3:6.</i> But the second day was the beginning of change, and from then on, change in what was created is desirable, and on the rest of the days after it we have found basis for an accusation against all of them, e.g., on the third day God said, “Let the earth bring forth <i>fruit</i> trees,” but it actually brought forth only “trees bearing fruit.”328<i class="footnote">Gen 1:11,12. R. Bahya picks up on the slightly different phrasing: “fruit tree bearing fruit” (1:11) vs. “tree bearing, to imply that the earth did not do exactly as God commanded.</i> Similarly on the fourth day the moon made an accusation saying, “It isn’t fair for two kings to use one crown.”329<i class="footnote">B. Hullin 60b. This is the midrash told there:And God made the two great lights? but later it says: “the great light and the small light”! The moon said before the Holy One: Master of the world, is it possible for two kings to use one crown? God said to her: Go and diminish yourself! She said before God: Because I asked a good question, I should diminish myself? God said: Go and rule both in day and in night. She said: What advantage is that? A candle in the daylight is useless. God said: Go and let Israel count their days and years by you. She said: They use the daylight [of the sun] to count seasonal cycles as well…Seeing that she was not appeased, the Holy One said: Bring a (sacrificial) atonement for me that I diminished the moon! This is what R. Shimon ben Lakish said: What is different about the ram of the new moon that it is offered “for God” (And one ram of the flock for a sin offering for God…Numbers 28:14). Said the Holy One: This ram shall be an atonement for me that I diminished the moon.</i> And likewise on the fifth day, God killed the male Leviathan,330<i class="footnote">Though in his commentary to the Torah on Gen 1:4, R. Bahya uses the version of this midrash found in b. Bava Batra 74b: God castrated the male Leviathan and killed the female Leviathan. For had they mated with one another, they would have destroyed the world.</i> which can be interpreted as He hid the heavenly light. And likewise on the sixth day, Adam sinned and changed the will of Ha-Shem, and about this it is said, “altering his face, you sent him out.”331<i class="footnote">Job 14:20, which R. Bahya interprets as “you (Adam)– changed <i>God’s</i> face, and so ‘made” Him (God) send you out of the Garden of Eden.”</i> See how the second day is the cause behind all of this, because all of these things come from its power and follow it. To the extent it said “Prepare to meet your God, O Israel,”332<i class="footnote">Am 4:12.</i> who is one, and it added “O Israel,” who is the one singular nation of the one God, as it is said, “And who is like Your people, one nation on earth,”333<i class="footnote">I Chr 17:21.</i> you should prepare and direct yourself to meet the One. So you should not eat or drink things in pairs, so that you will not think dualistic things in your heart.
  So you see that there are seven blessings a person is required to say over the table, and they are <i>netilat yada’im</i>, <i>ha-motzi’</i>, <i>bore pri ha-gafen</i>, and <i>birkat ha-mazon</i>, (which counts as four blessings). And these are found and practiced all the time, and if you count <i>mayim ahronim</i>, you have eight blessings. And if one drank a fourth of wine from the cup of <i>birkat ha-mazon</i>, he says over it the blessing <i>Al ha-gefen ve-al pri ha-gafen </i>“For the vine and the fruit of the vine;” and with this blessing we have nine. And if there is about be a change of wine, one says the blessing <i>Ha-tov veha-metiv</i>; now we have ten. And if different kinds of fruit are about to be served, whose blessings are not equivalent,334<i class="footnote">I.e., if saying one doesn’t exempt one from saying the blessing for another kind of fruit that requires its own blessing.</i> one says the blessing over the one kind of fruit, and then repeats it over another kind of fruit;335<i class="footnote">As is the practice in Tu Bishvat seders, a later early modern development in Jewish table rituals. I describe this briefly in “The Original Tu B’Shvat Seder: Pri Etz Hadar” in the blog <i>The Jew and the Carrot.</i></i> and now we have twelve, though it doesn’t matter which of these two you do first.336<i class="footnote">In other words, this rule applies to a situation only where one fruit does not have precedence over another, but rather simply each requires a blessing of its own.</i> But if the blessings are equivalent, even though one of them is from one of the Seven Species, one goes with the preferred and more desirable kind first.337<i class="footnote">According to Maimonides, as brought in O.H. 211:2, if one kind is more desirable than another, regardless whether their blessings are equivalent or not, regardless whether they are from the Seven Species or not, one blesses the more desirable kind first (Chavel).</i> And whoever sets the priority of fruits on the basis of the verse, follows the same sequence of priority for blessing:338<i class="footnote">B. Berakhot 41a.</i> “a land of wheat and barley, etc.”339<i class="footnote">Dt 8:8: “a land of wheat and barley, of vines and fig trees and pomegranates, a land of olive trees and date honey,” the classic source for “the Seven Species” for which the land of Israel is renown and praiseworthy.</i> Wheat and barley refer to bread, which if it comes as part of dessert, one says the blessing <i>She-ha-kol</i> over it, and does not precede it with <i>Boray pri ha-etz</i>. If one is served dates and pomegranates, one says a blessing over the dates first, and then one over the pomegranates, because dates are two words from “the Land,” while pomegranates are five words from “the Land.”340<i class="footnote">In other words, even though pomegranates precede date honey in the list of fruits in Dt. 8:8, the word “land” – referring to the Land of Israel- is mentioned twice, once at the beginning of Dt 8:8, the second time interrupting the list. Since the second “land” interrupted the topic, whatever after it is closest to it, is more important than something further from the first mention of land, i.e, pomegranates. (Chavel). And since the point of the verse is the connection of the fruits to <i>the Land,</i> because “date honey” is syntactically closer in this regard to the word “land” than “pomegranate,” which is five words distant from the first “the land,” dates take precedence over pomegranates. Hence one says the blessing over dates first.</i>
  It is forbidden for a person to enjoy something from this world without saying a blessing.341<i class="footnote">B. Berakhot 35a.</i> And the reason behind this saying is because everyone who says a blessing over something, which he has enjoyed bears witness to the Divine providence that has caused food to come into being for the lower beings in order that they live, and thanks to them, produce and fruit are increased and blessed. And whoever enjoys something and does not say a blessing steals this Divine providence from it, and hands over the direction of the lower beings to the stars and planets. This is what is meant by: “Everyone who enjoys something from this world without saying a blessing, it is as if he robs from the Holy One Blessed be He and from the assembly of Israel, as it is said, ‘He robs his father and mother and says…,”342<i class="footnote">Prv 28:24: “He who robs his father or his mother and says, ‘That is no offense,’ is the companion of a man who destroys.”</i> that is to say, he robs the Holy One Blessed be He of His providence, and the assembly of Israel of their fruit. For because of this crime, the fruits are diminished for Israel because of him, for the whole world is judged according to the majority,343<i class="footnote">B. Kiddushin 40b.</i> and each and every individual is judged according to the majority, and therefore one has to view oneself as if the whole depended on him. So you see in this way blessings are not because the One Above needs them, but rather the ordinary individual needs them, for while the Exalted One is the source of blessing, and all the blessings flow down from Him, everything in existence which blesses Him their blessings are not worthy of Him, because He who exists first brings into existence all else that exists, and their existence is nothing but <i>His</i> existence, and His existence is sufficient in and of itself without needing anything else. And if they would bless Him “always, every day and every night they would take no rest,”344<i class="footnote">Is 62:6.</i> He wouldn’t get any greater; what could they give Him, or what could He take from their hand? There is not benefit or increase except on our side.
  However, you could be roused and open the eyes of your heart to the way of the wisdom of Kabbalah, that blessings are not just the private individual’s need alone, that something in them meets a “need” of the One Above, as Scripture says, “And you shall eat and be full, and you shall bless the LORD your God.” This verse permits the heart to understand the secret of blessings, and you will not find in the whole Torah anywhere that the Holy One Blessed be He commands us to bless His name unless it is with “Amen.” And because of this David said, “I will bless Your name”345<i class="footnote">Ps 145:1.</i>and likewise he said, “Thank Him, and bless His name,”346<i class="footnote">Ps 100:4.</i> and many other sayings like this. Accordingly you need to comprehend that blessings aren’t for the private individual’s needs at all, and that they are not only an expression of thanks, but they are an expression of addition and increase, as in the connotation of “He will bless your bread and water.”347<i class="footnote">Ex 23:25.</i> And understand this statement of the sages z”l, when that said at the end of the chapter “The one who receives” on the topic of the creditor:348<i class="footnote">B. Bava Metzia 114a:Scripture says (Dt 24:13) “that he may sleep in his cloth and bless you<i>,” </i>thus excluding <i>hekdesh</i>, which needs no blessing. Does it not? But it is written, <i>“</i>And you shall eat and be full, and you shall bless the Lord your God.” (Dt 8:10) But Scripture says, “And it shall be accounted to you as righteousness [i.e., charity].” (Dt 24:13) Hence it [the law of returning] holds good only for him [the creditor] for whom the act of righteousness is necessary, thus excluding <i>hekdesh</i> [as a creditor], which does not require righteousness.</i> “that he may sleep in his cloth and <i>bless</i> you,”349<i class="footnote">Dt 24:13. If you’ve taken a pledge of clothing from a poor person for a loan, you must not keep it overnight, but rather, “when the sun goes down, you shall restore to him the pledge that he may sleep in his cloak and bless you; it will be an act of righteousness – <i>tzedakah</i> – before the Lord your God.”</i>someone who needs a blessing, namely, a private individual, but if it is <i>hekdesh</i>, it doesn’t need a blessing<i>,350<i class="footnote">That is, if the person pledges something that is <i>hekdesh</i> – property consecrated for use in the Temple for which no blessing is required, hence it must be an exception to Dt. 24:13, which specifies a blessing.</i></i> “it would be an act of righteousness,” to the One to whom all acts of righteousness already belong. The sages z”l explained this with the interpretation that <i>hekdesh</i> requires a blessing, but does not require <i>tzedakah</i>. And they made this even clearer in tractate Berakhot, “R. Ishmael said to him, ‘Bless me, my son,’”351<i class="footnote">B. Berakhot 7a.</i> and in tractate Shabbat, “The Holy One Blessed be He said to Moses, ‘You could have helped Me,’”352<i class="footnote">B. Shabbat 89a.</i> – this deals with the matter of blessings.353<i class="footnote">In each of the these examples, someone like “the man who has everything” asks for something from someone clearly his inferior, with a lot less of his own to give.</i> And they also said that the Holy One Blessed be He desires the prayer of the righteous who are much smaller in number than the rest of the large nations, even though they are not “a numerous people, the glory of a king.”354<i class="footnote">Pr 14:28.</i> But rather, certainly the expression “you shall bless” is an expression of addition and increase, and it connotes a <i>brekhah</i> – a “pool” gushing from its source, and thus we mention in our prayer <i>titromam</i> and <i>titbarakh</i> – “you shall be exalted and be blessed,”355<i class="footnote">In the blessing<i> Yotzer Or</i> in <i>Shahrit</i>.</i> and in the language of the Kaddish – <i>yitbarakh va-yishtabah, va-yitpa’ar, va-yitromam, vayitnasay.</i> And it also has the connotation of <i>berekhah</i> – “kneeling” and bowing down, to He to whom every knee (<i>berekh</i>) must bend. And so you will find in the Book of Bahir, “What is the meaning of <i>berakhah</i>? It is the “tongue” of the “knee” – <i>berekh, </i>as it said, ‘and to You every knee must bend and every tongue give homage’356<i class="footnote">Is 45:23.</i>– the One to whom every knee bows down.”357<i class="footnote"><i>Sefer Ha-Bahir, Ot</i> 9.</i> Behold, this is among the mysteries of the Torah, and the whole issue of <i>kavvanah</i> – “intention”- in prayer follows it, but it is not right to explain and expand upon this further in writing.
  And know from what our sages z”l said: “It is forbidden to enjoy something from this world without a blessing, they were speaking about all pleasures in general, whether from something one tastes, from something one smells, or from something one sees and hears – for all four of these senses they fixed a blessing. The sense of taste: from what is written, “set aside [<i>kidesh</i> – lit., “make holy”] for jubilation [<i>hilulim</i>] before the Lord,”358<i class="footnote">Lev 19:24.</i> it comes to teach you that every edible thing is forbidden to you as if it were <i>hekdesh</i> – “holy” food set aside to the priests and Temple – until one sings praises [<i>yi-hallel</i>], that is, says a blessing to the Holy One Blessed be He before and after over the same food, and this is why <i>hilulim</i> is plural, not the singular form <i>hilul.</i> For the sense of smell one has to say a blessing as well, and there is support for this in the verse, “See, the smell of my son is like the smell of the fields that the Lord has <i>blessed</i>.”359<i class="footnote">Gen 27:27.</i> From here we get that the sense of smell is blessed. And it is also written, “’Let every soul praise [<i>tehallel</i>] the Lord!’360<i class="footnote">Ps 150:6.</i> Which thing is it that gives joy to the soul but not to the body? You must say that this is smell!”361<i class="footnote">B. Berakhot 43b.</i> For the sense of sight there are many blessings such as one sees the sun at the summer solstice should say this blessing: “Blessed is He who makes Creation,”362<i class="footnote">Current practice is to recite this <i>Birkat Ha-Hamah –</i> “the Blessing of the Sun” – every 28 years at <i>tekufat Nisan</i> –the beginning of spring, rather than <i>tekufat Tammuz</i> – the beginning of summer, to which R. Bahya refers here. See b. Berachot 59b: “He who sees the sun at its turning point should say, ‘Blessed is He who makes the works of Creation.’ And when is this? Abaya said: every 28th year.”</i> and similarly the blessing for moon in each month.363<i class="footnote">B. Sanhedrin 42a.</i> And they said in the chapter <i>Ha-Ro-eh</i> – “He who sees”: 364<i class="footnote">B. Berakhot 59b. R. Bahya’s quotation differs slightly from its source in the Talmud.</i> “He who sees the sun at its turning point,the moon in its purity, the planets in their courses, and the signs of the zodiac in their season, should say: ‘Blessed is He who makes the work of creation.’” And this is what you will find in the story of the making of Creation: “They shall serve as signs for the set times – the days and the years,” because the lights, besides giving light, also are signs by which the future is hinted at, what our rabbis z”l meant by saying:365<i class="footnote">B. Sukkah 29a.</i> “When the lights are in eclipse, it is a bad sign for “the nations of the world.”366<i class="footnote">“The lights” – the moon and the stars; “the nations of the world” – a euphemism for <i>Israel</i>!</i> And they are also a sign for Israel when to recite the <i>Shma</i> in the morning, because the mitzvah is to recite it at <i>sun</i>rise,367<i class="footnote">B. Berakhot 9b.</i> and when to recite the <i>Shma</i> in the evening, because the mitzvah is to recite it “when the stars come out.”368<i class="footnote">B. Berakhot 2a.</i> And this is the meaning of what is written in: “Lift high your eyes and see Who created these,”369<i class="footnote">Is 40:26.</i> because through looking at this, a person is roused to see that the are creations, and to praise his Creator for them by either a blessing or some other expression of praise. And in the chapter <i>Ha-Ro-eh, </i>it also says, “Whoever goes out in the days of Nisan and sees the trees sprouting, he should say, ‘Blessed is He who has not left His world lacking in anything and has created in it goodly creatures and goodly trees for the enjoyment of humanity.”370<i class="footnote">B. Berakhot 43b.</i> And likewise whoever sees their friend after not seeing them for twelve months, one says, “Blessed is He Who revives the dead,”371<i class="footnote">Ibid., 58b.</i> and after thirty days he says a <i>Shehekheyanu</i> blessing, 372<i class="footnote">Ibid.</i> and likewise whoever sees a rainbow says, “Blessed is He Who remembers the covenant,373<i class="footnote">Ibid., 59a.</i> and so with all the rest of the things for which they fixed a blessing for seeing them. And so that’s what the chapter <i>Ha-Ro-eh</i> talks about.374<i class="footnote">Ibid., 54a.</i> For the sense of hearing they also fixed blessings. For good news, one recites the blessing <i>Ha-Tov ve-Ha-Metiv</i>; for bad news, “<i>Barukh dayan ha-emet</i>”- “Blessed is the true Judge.”375<i class="footnote">Ibid.</i> However, they did not fix a blessing for when someone hears a sound [<i>kol</i>] of a lyre or pipe so sweet that it make their soul happy and it enjoys it, as it is written, “for your voice <i>[kol</i>] is sweet.”376<i class="footnote">S.S. 2:14.</i> The reason why is because sound isn’t actually a thing. Now if you would say the same is true of smell, there is actually something in fruits that give off their smell. And if you would say that there is something in the instrument or singer that produces the sound, the smell that comes from fruits is not like the sound that comes from a person’s body or a musical instrument. For the smell of a fruit or a spice is from their body and essence, but the sound of a human being or musical instrument is not from their body and essence, but rather the result of air blowing through it. Nor did they fix a blessing for the sense of touch, because it is included in the sense of taste. And this is the reason why the Torah mentions these <i>four</i> senses explicitly. When it is written, “that cannot see or hear or eat or smell,”377<i class="footnote">Dt 4:28: “There you will serve man-made gods of wood and stone, <i>that cannot see or hear or eat or smell</i>,” is the whole verse. The original context, where this refers to the idolatry that the Israelites will eventually fall into, is certainly thought-provoking in light of R. Bahya’s discussion here of the significance of the senses.</i> it does not mention the sense of touch, because it is included in “that cannot eat,” which is the sense of taste. And you must understand that it is among the wonders of the formation of the human body that these five senses in it are implanted in the five organs that are the tools and gateways of the intellectual soul, which derives its nobility from the Holy Spirit in it, and human being’s high rank and greatness is their result, because they are the basis for his activity in doing <i>mitzvot</i>, and likewise for committing sins, for by means of them he will be rewarded, and by means of them he will be punished, according to how he chooses to use them. Therefore Scripture faults <i>avodah zarah</i> for its lack of these senses in order to instruct us about their importance. Because idols are lacking in their ability to sense and are generally incomplete, they have no power to save. And if so, how could those who worship these other gods in times of distress call out, “Rise up and save us!?”378<i class="footnote">R. Bahya is referring back to Dt. 4:28 in its original context. See note above.</i>
  And of these five senses, two are physical, three are spiritual. We have found them in the Holy One Blessed be He: “And the Lord saw;” “and the Lord heard;” and “the Lord smelled;”379<i class="footnote">Gen 5:5, Nu 11:1; Gen 8:21, respectively.</i>but not so the other two. We were given five senses to correspond to the five books of the Torah, and to the five references to “light” in the first chapter of Genesis,380<i class="footnote">Gen 1:3 (2x), 4 (2x), 5.</i> and the five names of the soul.381<i class="footnote">According to Bereshit Rabbah 14:11, they are <i>nefesh</i>, <i>ruah, neshamah, yehidah</i>(“unity”), and <i>hayah </i>(“animal”).</i> Indeed they are the body’s perfection because they are the palace of the soul, and the soul reveals its actions through them. And the natural scientists said that it was from the wisdom of the design of nature that human beings were created with five fingers on each hand to serve the five senses. Each and every finger has its own sense to serve. The biggest (the thumb) is for wiping the mouth, the index finger for the nostrils, the middle finger for the sense of touch to feel all the parts of the body because it is the longest of all (and can reach everywhere), the ring finger to wipe the eye, and the pinky, which is the smallest of all, to clean the ear. So it is from the wisdom of nature that each and every finger goes to its proper sense organ instinctively and unconsciously. About the order of the fingers our sages z”l said:382<i class="footnote">B. Ketubot 5b.</i>”This pinky [is for…], this ring finger [is for…], this middle finger [is for…], this pointer [is for…], this thumb [is for…].” And they already explained at the beginning of tractate Ketubot that each of these five fingers had their own mitzvah: This pinky for measuring the <i>hoshen</i> – the High Priest’s breastplate; this ring finger for the priest’s meal-offering, this index finger [<i>amah</i> –‘the cubit measure’] for building and tools; this index finger [<i>ha-‘etzba’</i>] for sprinkling (the blood of the sin offering)– “he shall sprinkle it with his finger [<i>be-‘etzba’o</i>],”383<i class="footnote">Lev 16:14.</i>and this ‘biggest’ which is the widest of all of them, namely, the thumb of Aaron’s hand for purifying someone stricken with skin rot.384<i class="footnote">These explanations of the purpose of each finger are not the ones the Gemara brings, but are brought by Rashi in his commentary to this passage in b. Ketubot (Chavel).</i> So you find yourself learning that the five fingers on the human body meet the needs of both the individual and of God. And you will find among the wonders of human being’s design that the ability to feel is extended throughout the whole body, and the sense of smell is extended outside the body, and that the sense of hearing is extended even further than smell to the extent that humans need it more, and that the sense of sight is extended even further than hearing because humans need it more. So behold how great a matter this is to all who look into it, for it instructs us about the perfection of human beings with their five senses, for “these are the work of God!”385<i class="footnote">An allusion to Ex 32:16, referring there to the tablets of the covenant, and hence hinting at R. Bahya’s previous association of the five senses with the five books of the <i>Torah</i>.</i> 
  
  Gate 2
  
  <i>An explanation of the nature of eating: What it is and how a person through it should prepare himself for the proper purpose in life required of him</i>
  A person has a great obligation to reflect deeply upon the nature of eating and to reflect deeply into its appropriate end. Namely, that the nature of eating is the annihilation (<i>kilayon</i>) of the thing that is eaten and made into waste. Accordingly eating is called “<i>akhilah,”</i> from the expression <i>kilayah</i> – “annihilation” – of what is being consumed in the stomach.1<i class="footnote">R. Bahya midrashically associates the words <i>akhilah</i> and <i>kilayah </i>through “creative philology.”</i> And the three special organs that are the “kings” and heads of the rest of the body’s organs each take their share first. They are the brain, heart, and liver, and their essence is circulated and distributed to the rest of the organs, which serve and are subordinate to them, just as servants are fed from the table of the king, and are blessed through his blessing. Now see that they are three kings, and that they are singular; they were not created in pairs like the other organs. For the work coming from two workers is heavier than the work coming from one worker. Therefore, the Sage has said, “It is not good to have multiple leaders,”2<i class="footnote">That is, Aristotle, as quoted in R. Bahya ibn Pakuda’s <i>Duties of the Heart, </i>Chapter 7 (Chavel, 491).</i> and for that reason was the Cause of everything one, namely the Creator, May He be Blessed.
  And thus the utensil, the knife, with which food is cut into pieces is called a <i>ma’akhelet</i> because it annihilates and destroys, as in the expression, “you shall consume (<i>ve-‘akhalta</i>) all the peoples.”3<i class="footnote">Dt. 7:16: “You shall destroy all the peoples” (NJSB). <i>Ma’akhelet</i> is the term for the knife with which Abraham prepares to slaughter Isaac in Gen 22:10.</i> And the verse which uses <i>va-yokhlu</i> (“they ate”) to refer to what the ministering angels were doing teaches this,4<i class="footnote">Gen 18:8, in the story of the angels visiting Abraham at Mamre.</i> as our sages z”l taught in a midrash about the three calves that Abraham brought to them. “One after another each one went up and disappeared (<i>kalah</i>) off the table, and Abraham when he realized this, brought some more meat almost continually time after time, like a person who kept increasing the number of whole burnt offerings he sacrificed on the altar.”5<i class="footnote">Gen. R. 48:16.</i> And likewise about Adam it is written, “She also gave some to her husband, and he ate (<i>va-yokhal</i>).”6<i class="footnote">Gen 3:6</i>The word <i>va-yokhal</i> (“and he ate”) proclaims his sin both by his deed and by his thought. By his deed: that is that he caused the tree to lose its fruit, and ate it despite his being warned not to: “for as soon as you eat of it, you will die.”7<i class="footnote">Gen 2:17.</i> His thought: that is that he destroyed, cut off, and made like the branch of the tree was a thing in and of itself, and if so, everything suffers destruction and annihilation, in both physical and intellectual things.8<i class="footnote">R. Bahya alludes here to the kabbalistic idea that the sin of Adam also involved “the cutting of the shoots,” the intellectual error of mistaking the part for the whole of creation. This had profound cosmic implications, since by eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge, Adam not only physically separated the fruit from the tree, he intellectually “separated” it from its heavenly image above, its source of power and energy. This <i>intellectual separation</i> cuts the divine “pipeline” connecting the lower and upper worlds, effectively blocking the empowering flow of divine energy between the two worlds. It is precisely this state of affairs, the consequence of Adam’s sin, that the table blessings R. Bahya discusses in the First Gate is intended to repair.</i> And so when you are found saying the word <i>va-yokhal</i>, it includes the destruction (<i>hashhatah</i>) of both something below and the destruction of something above, as it is written, “your people have gone bad (<i>shihet</i>),”9<i class="footnote">Ex 32:7. This is from the story of the Golden Calf. God is speaking to Moses, and instead of referring to the Israelites as “My people” as He usually does, God calls them “<i>your</i> – i.e., Moses’ – people,” much as parents often pass the buck to one another when their children have misbehaved (as does Moses, too, replying to God in Ex 32:11). I think R. Bahya’s point is that there is both a lower and upper “people “(“your [Moses’] people” vs. “My [God’s] people” that have “gone bad.”</i> and likewise Jeroboam was called a <i>mashhit</i> – “destroyer” – because he destroyed and cut short the shoots.10<i class="footnote">See note 8 above. R. Bahya alludes to the midrash in b. Berakhot 35b: “‘He is a companion to vandals (<i>ish mashhit</i>) (Prov. 28:24).’ This refers to Jeroboam the son of Nebat who ruined (<i>she-hishhit</i>) Israel for their Father in Heaven,” by building two golden calves and ordering the Israelites to worship them (I Kings 12:28-32).</i>
  And already you know that the soul is sustained in the body and its activities are manifest only if the body eats. And from this understand the matter of the sacrifices, which are the hidden things of the Torah, about which it is written: ‘to My [offering by] fire, my pleasing odor’ [Nu 28:2]. The power of the higher soul increases and is added to by the fire offerings in the eating of the sacrifices, and so our rabbis said;11<i class="footnote"><i>Song of Songs Zuta</i>, though in R. Bahya’s own paraphrased version [as per Chavel’s note].</i> ‘My sacrifice, My bread, to My [offering by] fire.’ It could say just ‘My bread,’ but Scripture adds, ‘to My [offering by] fire;’ to My fire you give it. This is because of the connection of the soul to its attributes. The powers of the soul are connected to the powers of the body. And understand the verse that ‘the favorite of the Strong One’ [Ps. 103:1, i.e., David] mentions: “My soul bless YHWH, all that is inside me [bless] His holy name.’ The invisible unites with the invisible, the visible with the visible. And understand this, that the powers of the soul are not visible and are actualized only through the body. If so, the body is a great necessity for the public revelation of the high degree of the soul and its perfection.
  And it is necessary that you know that human eating is nothing but an illusion, that it is not a true thing or a real activity, that it is something deceptive, something that keeps changing as it goes through the internal organs in a sequence of causes and effects. But ideas refined through wisdom, and by the attachment of one’s thought to the light of the intellect to the Upper Wisdom is itself “real and lasting eating,” as in the way that our Sages of blessed memory interpreted the verse: “‘And they envisioned God, and they ate and drank.’12<i class="footnote">Ex 24:11.</i> R. Yohanan says, ‘real eating,’ [<i>akhilah vada’it</i>], as it is said, ‘In the light of the face of the King – life!’13<i class="footnote">Prov.16:15.</i> And it is necessary for you to think hard about this verse, why it was necessary to say, ‘they envisioned,’ and why wasn’t it written as it was just before, ‘they saw?14<i class="footnote">Ex. 24:10.</i> But rather because it specified ‘they saw’ so you would not understand [what happened next] as actual seeing with the sense of your eye, it follows that it was necessary to say ‘they envisioned’ immediately afterward to teach you that this wasn’t this prior kind of ‘seeing’ [<i>re’iyah</i>], but rather seeing by means of prophecy, and that is why it said, ‘And they <i>envisioned</i> [<i>va-yehezu</i>] God, and they ate and drank,’ from the term for prophetic “vision” [<i>mahzeh</i>]. And the explanation of the Scripture ‘And they envisioned God, and they ate and drank,’ is that the leaders merited to see with the prophecy of ‘a glass that does not reflect,’ without a barrier, while the rest of Israel had a barrier, and Moses really “saw” directly.15<i class="footnote">That is, the leaders’ prophetic vision was better than the Israelites’, but not as direct as Moses.’</i> “And they ate and drank,” that is to say that their eating and drinking by this vision was indeed “real eating.” And it is also possible to interpret “And they ate and drank” as that they saw by prophecy the very attribute from which they “ate and drank,” that is, from the very same attribute from which the manna came to them, which is the principle behind all their material support, about which matter it is written, “She rises while it is still night,”16<i class="footnote">Prov. 31:15.</i> and it is written “Here I am causing it to rain down.”17<i class="footnote">Ex 16:4.</i> And you already knew that this was material support that occurred at night, for this is to what ‘She rises while is still night’ is referring. And thus the manna used to come down during the third watch of the night, when the Israelites were sleeping in their beds in the desert. And on the next day they would get up early in the morning and find their sustenance ready for them. This is the meaning of what is written: “So they gathered it every morning.”18<i class="footnote">Ex 16:21.</i> And thus you will find in First Temple that the rains used to fall on Wednesday and Shabbat nights, and on the next day they would get up early in the morning to do their work, without wasting any time. And so you also find with King Hezekiah, who said, “Master of the World, I myself don’t have the power in me to pursue enemies, or to sing a victory song, but I sleep on my bed, and you do it.” And the Holy One Blessed be He replied to him, “You sleep in your bed while I do it,” as it is said, “That night, an angel of the Lord struck down 185,000 in the Assyrian camp.”19<i class="footnote">2 Kings 19:35. This story about Hezekiah is a midrash from Lam. R. 30.</i> It was about him (or this) David spoke when he said, “In vain do you rise up early and stay up late…He provides as much for His loved ones while they sleep.”20<i class="footnote">Ps 127:2.</i> The meaning of the Scripture is that what the other peoples achieve through hard work, by getting up early and staying up late to eat the bread for which they toil,21<i class="footnote">An allusion to Ps 127:2. R. Bahya hints here that food “served” to Israelites without any toil, that is, good things God prepares for them while they are asleep, is angelic food. As R. Bahya put in his preface, “Our food is not their food. Their [the angelic beings’] food is conceived in their mind, when they see the face of their Maker. Our food is meager bread, water, and tears, gotten by hard work and toil.” It is like the food Adam ate before the Fall.</i>God provides to His loved ones while they sleep! This is the thing the Holy One provides to the one He loves, at the hour when he’s asleep, with no need to bother about it at all. And from now on any reference to “they ate and drank” means nothing other than a reference to “real eating,” or to eating the manna that was the offspring of the Upper Light – which is “real eating.”
  Therefore the reverent person ought to have his intention connected to the higher things, and have his eating be to sustain his body alone and not to be drawn to physical pleasures, for being drawn to physical pleasures is the cause for the loss of both body and soul, and the cause for forgetting the point, for out of eating and drinking he will become full of himself [lit., lift up his heart] and stumble into great pitfalls and sins, and do things which should not be done. See how Joseph’s brothers sold him only in the middle of eating and drinking, as it is said, “They sat down to a meal, and looking up…”22<i class="footnote">Gen 37:28. While eating the brothers looked up and saw the Ishmaelites to who they sold Joseph. R. Bahya expands upon this more fully in his commentary to the Torah on this verse.</i> And for this reason the Torah said not to eat on Yom Kippur, which is the day of judgment for criminal cases involving people, because one’s eating might cause his soul to sin. And they even said in civil cases dealing with monetary compensation: “<i>akhal ve-shatah al yorah”</i> – “Don’t instruct right after eating and drinking!”23<i class="footnote">A rhyming proverb in the Hebrew. <i>Yorah</i>, which means to instruct or teach, is the same verb used in the Biblical passage from Lev. 10:11 that R. Bahya cites. It is from the same Hebrew root as the word <i>Torah.</i> R. Bahya subtly makes another point here besides the obvious one that people are inclined to make bad judgments right after they’ve eaten and drunk. Namely, with this wordplay and the analogy to the Biblical priests, he’s reiterating his general contention that engaging in <i>torah</i> is a sacramental <i>priest-like</i>activity, even when done by non-priests – i.e., rabbinical torah scholars, or even ordinary Jews fasting on Yom Kippur.</i> Why is this so? From what is written, “Drink no wine or other intoxicant, you or your sons,”24<i class="footnote">Lev 10:9, addressed to Aaron and his sons, that is, the priests.</i> and connected to it, “to instruct [<i>le-horot</i>] the Israelites.”25<i class="footnote">Ibid., 10:11.</i> When they were commanded to instruct [<i>le-horot</i>], they were warned to avoid wine, because wine confuses the mind, and it does not distinguish between the holy and the profane, which is why it is written “to distinguish.”26<i class="footnote">Ibid., 10:10.</i> All this is proof that eating and drinking causes human beings to move themselves away off the track of Torah and worship, and to cast aside all the statutes of Ha-Shem, may He be Blessed. All this is caused when one has eaten and is satisfied, and therefore the Torah commanded, “And you shall eat and be satisfied, and you shall bless” (Deut 8:10). That is to say, after you will have eaten and have been satisfied, and you are close to throwing off the yoke of the commandments, “You shall bless YHWH your God” at the very moment you need to bless Him, so that you will take upon yourself the yoke of His rule and bless His name. And this in my opinion is the meaning of the Scripture, “In all your ways, know Him;”27<i class="footnote">Prov 3:6.</i><i> </i>it means even at the time of eating when you are close to forgetting Him and to severing your reason from your mind, at that very moment, “know Him” and cleave to Him. And if you do this, “He will straighten your paths,”28<i class="footnote">Prov 3:6.</i> He will straighten your ways on the paths of life, namely, the soul’s successful attainment of the world to come. If so, then a person ought to eat only for the sustenance of his body alone, and it is forbidden for him to pursue any sort of pleasure unless it is to make his body healthy and make the eyes of his intellect clear-sighted. In order for his body to be healthy and strong, he should pursue what pleases [his intellect] and his Creator, for his organs are combined and possess the capacity exactly in the measure that enables him to bear the yoke of the Torah and its commandments, which is the point of the verse written about the tribe of Issachar, “he bent his shoulder to bear the burden” (Gen 49:15), which is the same language used to refer to the giving of the Torah, “He [God] bent the sky and came down” (2 Sam 22:10). And anyone whose intention is this, is an angel of the Lord of Hosts, but whoever does not direct their intention to this end, is “likened to the beasts that perish.” (Ps 49:13,21). “You can see for yourself”29<i class="footnote">1 Sam 24:12: <i>Re-eh gam re-eh </i>– “you can see for yourself” (JSB).</i> Joseph the righteous, who was noted for his quality of reverence [<i>yir’ah</i>], from what is written, “I am a God-fearing man”30<i class="footnote">Gen 42:18.</i> and “Am I a substitute for God?”31<i class="footnote">Ibid. 50:19.</i> hinted at this point when he said, “take something for the hunger of your houses and be off.”32<i class="footnote">Ibid. 42:33.</i> He comes to instruct and to teach people to know that they should only eat to break their hunger, not to fill their belly and be drawn by the taste, which is base and to be scorned, because that is a disgrace to us, utter waste, and a thing which has no point to it. And do not say that this because it was a time of famine, because when Joseph was “a prince and commander of peoples,”33<i class="footnote">Is 55:4.</i>and the treasuries of the king were under his control, he had the power to supply bread and food to his father and brothers, as in the other the years of plenty. However, instead he made it known to us that this is the way of Torah and fear of Ha-Shem (may He be blessed!), that a person should only eat, satisfy himself, and fill his belly to satisfy his soul.
  And know indeed that what kind of person one is, is determined at the table, for there his qualities are revealed and made known. And thus our rabbis z”l said, “By three things a person is known: through his purse, through his cup, and through his anger.”34<i class="footnote">B. Erubin 68b. The clever wordplay of <i>be-kiso, be-koso, be-ka’aso</i> of the saying is lost in the translation.</i> For being drawn to wine and other pleasures – surely these are “the drippings of the honeycomb”35<i class="footnote">Psalm 19:11, that is, the flowing “honey, the drippings of the honeycomb” than which the “fear of the Lord” and “judgments of the Lord” (19:10) “<i>are sweeter.</i>”</i> – is one drawn to the drug of death, and by his grasping this path he will die an everlasting death. But whoever wants to live ought to keep far from this path; “he will eat and live forever.”36<i class="footnote">Gen 3:22, an allusion to the immortality that would have come from eating from the Tree of Life. In other words, unlike the way Adam and Eve chose, there is another way one can and should eat to gain eternal life.</i> And thus our rabbis z”l said in tractate Gittin of the Talmud, “A meal for your own enjoyment – pull your hand away from it,”37<i class="footnote">B.Gittin 70a.</i> and similarly said, “‘You shall be holy,’ that is, ‘you shall be abstemious (<i>perushim</i>),'”38<i class="footnote">Sifra on Lev. 19:2.</i> and “Make yourself holy through what is appropriate for you.”39<i class="footnote">B. Yebamot 20a: “Make yourself holy through what is permitted to you.”</i> And the author of Ecclesiastes said, “I said to myself, ‘Come, I will treat you to merriment. Taste mirth!’ That too, I found was futile.”40<i class="footnote">Eccl. 2:1.</i> And after that, he said, “I ventured to tempt [<i>limshokh</i>] my flesh with wine.”41<i class="footnote">Ibid. 2:3. <i>Limshokh</i> here is from the root of the same verb R. Bahya used above to refer to being drawn to wine, i.e., “being drawn [<i>he-hamshekh</i>] to wine and other pleasures…is one drawn [<i>nemshakh</i>] to the drug of death.” Thus, R. Bahya is using Eccl. 2:3 as a sort of prooftext for his point about wine.</i> And in tractate Sanhedrin of the Talmud:42<i class="footnote">B.Sanhedrin 70a.</i> “Thirteen woes are said about wine, and they are specified in Parshat Noah. It is written, ‘Noah, the tiller of the soil, was the first to plant a vineyard,’43<i class="footnote">Gen 9:20.</i> which means from the moment he began to plant, he made his holiness profane. That is the point of the expression <i>va-yahel</i> – “he began”- which includes both the connotations of “beginning” (<i>tehilah</i>) and “profanation” (<i>hillul</i>). And because of wine, one third of the world was cursed.44<i class="footnote">That is, the descendents of Ham were condemned to serve the descendents of his brothers Shem and Japhet, because when Noah, after drinking his wine, fell asleep in a drunken stupor, Ham “saw his nakedness.” Normally this is a Biblical euphemism for having sexual relations, hence the severity of the curse. The curse was actually directed at Ham’s son Canaan, most likely to justify morally the Israelites’ subsequent subjugation of the Canaanites and their land. However, the whole account is ambiguous and full of apparent non-sequiturs, prompting a quite a fruitful growth of midrashic attempts to explain the story. One unfortunate stream of interpretation, that Ham’s curse not only involved eternal servitude but also the blackening of his skin color, was later adopted in Christian and Muslim traditions, and used to justify the enslavement of Black Africans well into the 19th century – the so-called “Curse of Ham.”</i> And they also taught in a midrash, “Don’t eye the wine, as it reddens…,”45<i class="footnote">Prov. 23:31.</i> that is, it yearns for blood.46<i class="footnote">B. Sanhedrin 70a.</i> And likewise Bathsheba warned King Solomon not to tempt his flesh with wine,47<i class="footnote">B. Sanhedrin 70b.</i>when she said to him, “Wine is not for kings, O Lemuel; not for kings to drink, nor any beer for princes.”48<i class="footnote">Prov. 31:4. The midrash above identifies “Lemuel’s mother” (Prov. 31:1) with Bathsheba, the mother of King Solomon.</i> And so he said, “I ventured to tempt my flesh with wine,”49<i class="footnote">Eccl. 2:3.</i> and “for who eats, and who feels the pleasures of the senses but me?”50<i class="footnote">Ibid., 2:25.</i> and then remarks after that, “That too is futile.”51<i class="footnote">Ibid., 2:26.</i> For it is well known that someone in whose heart reverence for HaShem and fear of Him is strong, will reject and separate himself from the pleasures of the world, and will scorn them to the utmost, for he knows and is familiar with their consequences, while others who are lesser or worthless will fill their bellies with what delights them, and their vessels will return empty; they’re empty because they lack sense “They neither know nor understand; they walk about in darkness.”52<i class="footnote">Ps. 82:5.</i> About this, Solomon said, “When you sit down to dine with a ruler, consider well who is before you.”53<i class="footnote">Prov. 23:1.</i> He said, “If the wrath of the ruler rises up against you”54<i class="footnote">Eccl. 10:4.</i> and you go out to eat “the king’s food or the wine he drank”55<i class="footnote">Dan. 1:8.</i> in the house of the king who rules the land, understand well and look at those who were before you who chose this way- “what they saw in that matter and what had befallen them.”56<i class="footnote">Esth. 9:26.</i> Doesn’t the high status and greatness of most of them end up in humiliation and submission, “wholly swept away by terrors”?57<i class="footnote">Ps. 73:19.</i> Just what is written right afterwards in Proverbs, “Thrust a knife in your gullet!”58<i class="footnote">Prov. 23:2.</i>And our rabbis z”l said, “Do not yearn for the tables of kings, for your table is greater than their table, your crown greater than their crown.”59<i class="footnote">M. Avot 6:5.</i> Therefore, a person should not seek excessive gains and pursue them, for if he does, his days will be painful and he will never be satisfied, because there is no end to these gains, and whoever pursues things that have no end – is he not sick, blinded by his stupidity? For “every fool is embroiled.”60<i class="footnote">Prov. 20:3.</i> It goes without saying that he has no share in the Torah, because if he were rich and used to eating and drinking with silver dishes, he would be liable to think little of them and become unsatisfied until he had utensils of “turquoise, sapphire, and diamond,”61<i class="footnote">Ex 28:18.</i> and as soon as he obtained one of them, he’d want two or three, and this would go on without out end. And therefore a person with good qualities must not in his heart crave for excessive gains, and should be satisfied with a little.
  See how the Torah attests that Jacob our father (Peace be upon him) had the quality of contentment, and did not seek excessive gains, but rather only what was necessary, who, when it was said, “If God gives me bread to eat and clothing to wear,”62<i class="footnote">Gen 28:20.</i> asked for what was necessary, what the Holy One Blessed be He provides for all His creatures, as it is said, “You give it openhandedly, etc.”63<i class="footnote">Ps. 148:16.</i> And our rabbis z”l taught in a midrash: “‘Bread to eat and clothing to wear:’ in all his days, this righteous man [Jacob] never grieved over his eating, but rather over ‘the inward and the outward.'”64<i class="footnote"><i>Penimi ve-hitzon</i> is an expression that refers to one’s personal integrity. The person who is inward is genuine; “their outside is like their inside.” What you see is what you get. One who is “outward” is a hypocrite; their outward behavior does not match their true inner feelings. The contrast between <i>penimi</i> and <i>hitzon</i> (“inward” vs. “outward”) has become a distinctive concept in modern Hasidic ethics. In any case, the point of the midrash is that Jacob worried much more about his personal integrity than what he was going to eat.</i> And know that the righteous person ought to direct his mind when he is eating only to the fact that the bodily meal by which he will sustain his body for the moment is so that his soul with it may show its powers and realize them in action, and by this prepare the eternal meal by which it will sustained forever. And look at the holy status prevalent among the elite of the people of Israel, who used to eat and look with the heart itself. This is what the Scripture means when it says, “They envisioned God and they ate and drank,”65<i class="footnote">Ex 24:11.</i>that the organs of the body which are the vessel of the soul would receive power and strength in the banquet, and the soul would be roused with its powers in them and strengthen them in this thought, and make it possible for holy spirit to descend upon it [the body] at the time of eating, when he is lifted up in this thought, and his body is clothed in the thought of his soul, and the two of them as one good enough for the Divine Presence [Shekhinah] to descend among them. This was the intent of Moses and the elders of Israel during Jethro’s banquet, and this is what the Scripture means when it says, “Aaron came and all the elders of Israel [to partake of the meal before God with Moses’ father-in-law],”66<i class="footnote">Ex 18:12.</i> and likewise Isaac our father in the tasty foods for which he asked,67<i class="footnote">Gen 27:4.</i>and in all the rest of the places that we find banquets for righteous people – that was the end to which they were intended.
  And it follows from the rule that a human being needs to direct his mind when eating (and this is of great benefit to the fulfillment of his intent), that he turn to “fine foods,” for by their fineness the intellect is refined and the heart made clear-sighted, as our sages said, “wine and fragrances made me clear-sighted,”68<i class="footnote">B. Yoma 76b.</i> and it is necessary to direct one’s mind to them only to make the eyes of the intellect clear-sighted, as I mentioned above. And one should beware of coarse foods, for the power of the intellect is clouded by them and its lucidity and refinement ruined. And already among our ancestors, so I have heard, that whoever did not eat beef because of its coarseness, but whose eating consisted mostly of small, delicate fowl, would raise them in their homes and feed them meals of ingredients known to them and which they themselves prepared for them, in order to refine their brains and make their organs right, which are the vessel of the soul, in order for the soul to be lifted up and develop the aptitude to receive the Torah and to understand the Holy One (may his name be blessed), for the intellect is sharpened and refined according to the fineness of the food and its purity. And this is a tried and tested thing among cosmopolitan people, and some village people, for cosmopolitan people whose foods are delicacies and whose drinks are fine and refined – are they not intelligent in every area, and quick to understand science with ease and without much effort, much more so than village people who eat barley and onions, and the rest of the coarse foods. Indeed the coarseness of their intellect follows the coarseness of their food. And the choicest of enjoyments, the pleasures of food were created only for the sake of the Torah, and for this reason they said in the Chapters of the Fathers: “If there is no choice flour, there is no Torah, and if no Torah, no choice flour,”69<i class="footnote">M. Avot 3:17.</i> that is to say, there would be no pleasures of food.
  And it is necessary that you consider well that human beings’ food should have been only plants from the earth, such as grain produce and fruit, not animals. For animals have a soul of that gives them independent movement, which is similar in some of its activities to the soul of intellectual beings, and this is kinship which motivates us to keep away from what is harmful. Accordingly, a soul that can move itself ought not to be a food for the human soul. Therefore, Adam was originally commanded that his food and sustenance be grain produce and fruits, the point of what was written: “Behold I have given to you every grass and seed-producing plant…”70<i class="footnote">Gen 1:29.</i> But at the time when all flesh went bad, and all animals deserved annihilation and would not have been saved were it not for the merit of Noah, it was permitted to eat them [the meat of animals], just as the greens and grasses had been before. At <i>that</i> time the souls that could move themselves were permitted to wait upon the intellectual soul, who waited upon the Creator. And if so, this is not to demean the soul that can move itself, but rather a mark of respect, status, and merit, and accordingly our sages taught, it is forbidden for an <i>am-ha-aretz</i> to eat meat, as it is written, ‘This is the Torah of the beast and fowl.’71<i class="footnote">Lev. 11:46.</i> All who engage in Torah are permitted to eat the meat of beasts and fowl, and all who do not engage in Torah are forbidden to eat beast and fowl. The explanation of this among the enlightened is – when we set aside a soul for a soul, this is nothing other than the soul that can move itself that we annihilate for the sake of intellectual soul. But because one is an <i>am ha-aretz</i> and has no intellectual soul, you have it that he is forbidden to eat meat, since [in him] we have nothing to set aside and annihilate the soul that can move itself, since he is someone who has no intellectual soul, and understand this.
  And thus it is necessary that when one eats, he turn his thought [<i>mahshevato</i>] and that it ramble about [<i>meshotetet</i>] the Holy One Blessed Be He over each and every bite – according to the matter of “They envisioned God and they ate and drank.”72<i class="footnote">Ex 24:11.</i> This is like the way our sages interpreted “Let all that breathe [<i>kol ha</i>–<i>neshamah</i>] praise the Lord,” over each and every breath [<i>kol neshimah ve-neshimah</i>] give praise to Him. You could learn this from the generation in the desert, for when they ate the manna, their intention would ramble about the Shekhinah, and they would meditate about her in humility, why wisdom required that the quantity of their meal be an <i>omer</i>, which is one tenth of an <i>ephah</i>, that is to say, one tithe of an ephah, the reason for the commandment to tithe – for see, when a person would measure out nine measures and separate the tenth, it would get wise people to meditate about the meaning of “the tenth,” which is the attribute73<i class="footnote">Heb., <i>midah</i>, which means both “measure” and “attribute,” as in an attribute of God.</i> which gives food to Her house and supplies meals for every creature above and below. And for this reason, [our sages] said, “nine [adults] and a minor can be combined with them,”74<i class="footnote">B. Ber 47b.</i> that is, combined to make a minyan of ten for <i>birkat ha-mazon</i> (grace after meals) in which one can include the words, “Let us bless <i>our God</i>,” the lord in charge of satisfying the every creature with meals, whose face every Israelite would come to see and to whom they would give thanks for the support with which He supports His world. 
  Therefore, they used to come to Him three times a year for the pilgrimage festivals: Passover, Shavuot, and Sukkot – on the holiday of Passover because it is the month of Aviv, the time for the barley harvest; on the holiday of Shavuot because it is the time for the wheat harvest, and on the holiday of Sukkot because it is the time of gathering when all the fruits were gathered into the home. And this is why it is written, “[three time a year all your males shall see] the face of the <i>lord YHWH, the God of Israel</i>,”75<i class="footnote">Ex 34:23.</i> and it is written, “none shall see My face,”76<i class="footnote">Ex 23:15.</i> that is to say, without a sacrifice, because they would need to bring in any case the <i>olah</i> and <i>shlemim</i> offerings, and through this the world would be blessed with its meals and sustenance from the flow of blessing from the source to the well, and from the well to the garden, and from the garden to the four rivers of the garden of Eden of the lower world, whose inhabitants are blessed from there throughout the four corners of the world. So you find yourself learning that <i>when a person stands over his table and eats with this thought in mind,</i> see! This eating is indeed physical and a natural activity, but see! It also revolves into a higher, intellectual form of worship, and this is the reason why it is written, ‘In all your ways know Him,’77<i class="footnote">Prov 3:6.</i> as I discussed above. And if so, you see how one’s eating is thought to be a perfect act of worship like one of the forms of divine service [i.e., the sacrifices], and the like quintessential commandment of all the commandments. And this is the point of having the right intention at a meal at the table – that the body be nourished by it and take its bodily portion from the bodily eating, and the soul by this act of thought is filled, fed, and satisfied as if from the choicest parts of “real eating” of the ways of Ha-Shem and His pleasantness, and regarding this it is said, ‘Your table is laid out with rich food.’78<i class="footnote">Job 36:16.</i> 
  
  Gate 3
  
  <i>An Explanation of the ethics and etiquette with which a person is required to behave at the table</i>
  It is well known that ethics [<i>ha-musar</i>] are connected to the Torah, for so it is written: “He who follows ethics [<i>musar</i>] shows the way to life,” and they said explicitly, “If there is no <i>derekh eretz</i> [etiquette], there is no Torah.”1<i class="footnote">M.Avot 3:17.</i> And it is from ethics and etiquette that we advised that no person should recline at the table until he knows who his fellow guests are and with whom he’ll be reclining. And so we learned from the laws of <i>Derekh Eretz</i>: “A person should always know with whom he stands, with whom he reclines, and with whom he puts his seal on his documents.”2<i class="footnote">Derekh Eretz Zuta 10.</i>
  It is proper etiquette for a person to honor his companion by letting him wash his hands first with the washing before the meal, but not with the washing after the meal, because for the washing after the meal, his own hands are dirty. For we have learned, “One does not show honor with dirty hands, or out in the streets, or on bridges, nor at an entrance small enough for a <i>mezuzah</i>,”3<i class="footnote">That is, a doorway, not a wide gate.</i>because as long as one’s hands are dirty, it is not polite to delay washing one’s own hands to honor any other person, but whoever washes his hands first merits being in a state of purity. A person should not sit at meal above someone who is older than him in years, for this would transgress the rule of ethics; indeed, one should assume because someone is older than him that he is perhaps greater in merits than him (and it goes without saying, greater than him in wisdom) – for he wouldn’t want to transgress the law of Torah nor throw off the yoke of reverence for the disciples of the sages. 
  A person ought to be modest in his eating and drinking, not be short-tempered at the table,4<i class="footnote">Derekh Eretz Rabba 6.</i> not eat or drink standing, nor eat before the fourth hour of the day.5<i class="footnote">Derekh Eretz Rabba 7, around 10:00 AM (van Loopik, 115).</i> When two are eating, each one waits for the other to take from the plate, but with three, one does not wait. A person should not grab in his hand a serving larger in size than an egg, because that is being a glutton.6<i class="footnote">Derekh Eretz Rabba 6.</i> One should not wipe the plate with his fingers, not eat from a head of garlic or onion but from its leaves.7<i class="footnote">Ibid.</i> And one should not bite from a piece of food and then give it to his companion, because not all creatures feel the same way [about how hygienic this would be].8<i class="footnote">Ibid., 9.</i> One should not bite off piece of bread with one’s teeth and then return it to the table. Once it happened that there was someone who picked up a piece of bread and let it hang from his teeth. R. Akiba said to him, “Not so, my son. You might as well put your heel on it and rip it off.”9<i class="footnote">Ibid., 7.</i> A person should not drink his cup in one gulp, and if he does so, he is a glutton. Two sips are polite; three sips, vulgar.10<i class="footnote">Ibid., 6.</i> One should not drink from one’s cup and then give it to his companion because of the health risk. Once it happened to R. Akiba when he was a guest at someone’s house that his host gave him a cup from which he had sipped. R. Akiba said to him, “Drink it yourself.” Ben Azzai said to him (the host), “How long will you keep giving R. Akiba cups that have been sipped from!?”11<i class="footnote">Ibid., 9.</i> A person should not put the plate on top of the bread. Once it happened to R. Akiba when he was a guest at someone’s house that his host took a piece of food and put the plate on it. R. Akiba grabbed it and ate it. He said to his host, “How could I imagine that you would be hurt by lukewarm water when you’re not even hurt by boiling water?”12<i class="footnote">Ibid. The story “proves” that it is wrong to cover food with the plate. Following Chavel’s explanation, I think Rabbi Akiba reproaches his host for ungraciously not offering him the piece of food and trying to hide it under the plate. R. Akiba explains his own bold gesture -grabbing the food and eating – euphemistically. In other words, with someone as rude as you who doesn’t know better than to put a plate on a piece of food, only something as rude as what I did (“boiling water”), not a gentle or subtle hint (“lukewarm water”), could get it across to you just how wrong and rude you were to put the plate on top of the food.</i>
  Five are the things they said about bread: (1) Don’t put raw meat on bread; (2) don’t put the cup on top of the bread; (3) don’t put the plate on top of the bread; (4) don’t throw the bread; and (5) don’t sit on the food – so it is taught in the laws of <i>Derekh Eretz</i>.13<i class="footnote">Ibid.</i>Rejoice over your table when the hungry come and enjoy from your table, for that will lengthen your days in this world and earn you life in the world to come. And so also from <i>Derekh Eretz</i> we learn: “Let no guest say, ‘Give me and I shall eat,’ until they speak to him, though it is not necessary to say explicitly that he should eat when on the table in front of him is whatever he needs and is able to eat. For thus it is written in the Torah: “But when food was set before him, he said, ‘I will not eat until I have said what I have to say.'”14<i class="footnote">Gen 24:33.</i> Who said anything to Eliezer about eating that he should reply, “I will not eat,” unless he was responding to the fact that the food was prepared, set before him, and up to him to eat? There was no one putting himself between him and his food for him to say to him “I will” or “I will not eat.”
  One does not look directly at the face of someone eating at the table, nor at the plate, nor at the portion set before him, so as not to embarrass anyone. The table server does not eat in the presence of the diners, but they give him some of each dish out of kindness, so that his heart won’t be ashamed. A host who has eaten before his guest – he’s a disgrace! When two are sitting at the table, the older gets to reach for the food first, then the younger. And whoever extends their hand before someone older than them – he’s a glutton! One leaves a “corner” of food uneaten in a kettle but not in a pot.15<i class="footnote">Derekh Eretz Rabba, 6. Corner in the Hebrew is “<i>pe’ah</i>.” Just as farmers are commanded to leave the corners (<i>pe’ot</i>) of their fields un-harvested for the poor to glean (in Lev. 19:9), so one should not scrape clean food served a cooking pot, but rather should leave leftovers for the servers to eat. On the other hand, it is okay not to leave leftovers from food served in a different kind of cooking pot. Chavel suggests that the difference between the “kettle” (lit., “something made in an <i>‘ilpas</i> – one type of cooking pot”) and the “pot” (lit., something made in a <i>kedrah</i> – another type of cooking pot) is their size, and that one is only required to leave a “corner” of leftovers for the server from the bigger stew pot (<i>ilpas</i>), not the smaller cooking pot (<i>kedrah)</i>. In other words, <i>unlike</i> the saying “That’s like the pot calling the kettle black,” what I’ve translated here as “kettle” and “pot” are significantly different types of cooking utensils.</i> It happened to Rabbi Yehoshua when he was a guest at a widow’s home, that she brought him a stew pot, and he did not leave a “corner.” She brought him a second one, and he did not leave a “corner. The third time she ruined the dish with salt. He withdrew his hand and ate only bread. She said to him, “Why did you take so much bread when you took so little of the pounded beans?” Hence, Rabbi Yehoshua said, “Nobody has ever gotten the best of me except a woman who was a widow, a little boy, and a little girl.” For it happened to Rabbi Yehoshua when he was walking on a path through a field, that he found a girl who was sitting in the field. She said to him, “Why are you walking in the field?” He said, “I’m walking on a path.” She said, “If this is a path, it’s only because robbers like you have trampled it into one.” And again, it happened to Rabbi Yehoshua when he was walking on a path through a field, that he found a little boy sitting where the path split in two. He said to the boy, “My son, which path will take me into the city?” He said to him, “There are two paths in front of you: the one long and short; the other short and long.” Rabbi Yehoshua took the short and long path. When he got to the wall of the city, he saw gardens and orchards surrounding the city. R. Yehoshua turned back and saw the little boy sitting where he had been before. He said to him, “My son, didn’t I ask you which path would take me into the city?” He replied, “You’re the old sage; aren’t you wise enough to figure it out?” At that, Rabbi Yehoshua went to kiss him on his head and said, “Happy are you, O Israel, for all of you are wise, from your oldest to your youngest!16<i class="footnote">All these stories about Rabbi Yehoshua are taken almost verbatim from Derekh Eretz Rabba 6.</i>”
  The host enters first into the house, then the guest after him. And when the guest leaves, the guest leaves first, then the host after him.17<i class="footnote">Derekh Eretz Rabba 4.</i> One must beware of saying <i>birkat ha-mazon</i> if one’s father, or teacher, or someone greater in wisdom than he is at the table, unless he gets permission from them. And if there is a <i>kohen</i> among them, one should defer to the <i>kohen, </i>for thus it is written, “And you shall make him holy,”18<i class="footnote">Lev. 21:8</i> and the sages interpreted this in a midrash to mean, “you shall make him holy in everything that involves holiness, such as letting him open first, say a blessing first, take the nicest portion first, since a person is required to bestow honors upon the seed of Aaron.19<i class="footnote">B.Gittin 59b.</i> And if there’s a <i>kohen</i> who’s a <i>talmid hakham </i>(i.e., a Torah scholar)20<i class="footnote">Lit., “disciple of a sage,” i.e., someone learned in rabbinic Torah.</i> and an ordinary Jew who’s a <i>talmid hakham</i>, and the <i>kohen</i> wishes to bestow an honor on him, he may. For it is said about a <i>kohen</i>, “You shall make him holy [<i>ve-kidashto</i>]” but it is also said about ordinary Israelites “Set bounds about the mountain and make it holy [<i>ve-kidashto</i>],” and in the entire Torah there are only these two occurrences of “<i>ve-kidashto</i>:” one at the beginning of the verse, the other at the end of the verse.21<i class="footnote">Lev. 21:8 and Ex. 19:23. In Ex. 19:23, Moses says to the Lord, “The people cannot come up to Mount Sinai, for you warned us saying, “set bounds about the mountain and make it holy [<i>ve-kidashto</i>].” However, R. Bahya takes the “it” in the pronominal suffix of <i>ve-kidashto</i> to refer to “the people [<i>ha-‘am</i>],” i.e., the Israelites, not the mountain. Grammatically both are masculine singular.</i> This comes to teach about the <i>kohen</i>, that his greatness comes when he begins things, like opening first, or saying a blessing first. But the <i>talmid hakham</i>, his greatness comes at the end, which we derive from what is written, “to the holy ones [<i>la-kedoshim</i>] who are in the land,”22<i class="footnote">Ps. 16:3.</i> which the sages interpret in a midrash to mean the holy ones are not called “holy ones” until they have been given their “land.”23<i class="footnote">Midrash Tehillim on Ps. 16:3.</i> as it is said, “they become holy ones [<i>la-kedoshim</i>]- those who are in the land.”24<i class="footnote">The midrash seems to read <i>la-kedoshim</i> (“to the holy ones) as if it were in the Hebrew grammatical construction “<i>hayu le-:”</i> “they became holy ones.”</i> But about them during their lifetime it is written, “He should not trust that he is among His holy ones.”25<i class="footnote">Job 15:15, as R. Bahya creatively reads the verse, which the JSB translates “He puts no trust in His Holy ones.”</i> 
  So it is with the <i>talmid hakham</i> in this world; his glory is at the end, as they say about the Torah scroll – “the talmid hakham rolls up the torah scroll in the end.”26<i class="footnote">An allusion to the honor of rolling and tying the Torah scroll back up after it is read publically in the synagogue service – the honor of being the “<i>golel</i>.” According Chavel, R. Bahya takes “the greatest among them rolls up the <i>sefer torah</i>” in b.Megillah 32a to refer to the <i>talmid hakham, </i>the Torah scholar. I believe R. Bahya is also implying that the reward the torah scholars – <i>talmidei hakhamim</i> – will receive at the “end of this world” is in the world to come, and will be much greater than the perks that the <i>kohanim </i>receive for their hereditary status <i>only</i> in this world.This expresses the same belief in the spiritual superiority of the <i>talmidei hakhamim</i> over non-torah scholars <i>(‘ammei-ha-‘aretz</i>) about which R. Bahya speaks at length in the previous Second Gate. Moreover, this reflects the general tendency of rabbinic Judaism to supplant the priests with rabbinic Torah scholars as the ideal Jewish religious authorities and role models. However, R. Bahya and his fellow kabbalists accentuate the priest-like, “sacramental” powers of the Torah scholars – those adept in both rabbinic and <i>kabbalistic</i>Torah – by comparing them to the <i>kohanim</i> in the Temple, using priestly language especially to describe their divine service <i>(‘avodah ‘elohit</i>) at the table, the “little Temple” (<i>mikdash me’at</i>).</i> An ordinary Jew who is a <i>talmid hakham</i> ought to confer honor on the <i>kohen</i> by letting him go first, provided that the <i>kohen</i> is a <i>talmid hakham</i>. But if the ordinary Jew were a <i>talmid hakham</i> and the <i>kohen</i> an ‘<i>am ha-‘aretz,27<i class="footnote">A Jew who is not learned in rabbinic torah.</i> </i>the <i>talmid hakham</i> says the blessing first, for thus they said in the Talmud in the tractate Horayot on the order of statuses: “An illegitimate child [<i>mamzer</i>] who is a <i>talmid hakham</i> has precedence over the High Priest if he is an <i>‘am ha-‘aretz</i>.”28<i class="footnote">B. Horayot 13a.</i> If someone who is not a <i>talmid hakham</i>, – driven by his pride and need to dominate – wants to say a blessing over the table instead of a <i>talmid hakham</i>, the <i>talmid hakham</i> may not give him permission to do so. And thus they said in the section in the Talmud about “fellow townsmen”: “Any <i>talmid hakham</i> before whom an <i>‘am ha-‘aretz</i>, even if he is the High Priest, says a blessing, deserves to die,” as it is said, ‘All those who hate me [<i>mis’anai</i>], love death.’29<i class="footnote">Prov. 8:36. Wisdom (<i>Hokhmah</i>) personified is the “me” speaking.</i> Don’t read this as <i>mis’anai</i> (those who hate me), but as <i>masniy-ai</i> (those who cause people to hate me).” 30<i class="footnote">B. Megillah 28a.</i> They said in the laws of Derekh Eretz: “Don’t eat the bread of an <i>‘am-ha-‘aretz</i> priest [<i>kohen</i>] lest he feed you the holy things dedicated to Heaven.”31<i class="footnote">Derekh Eretz Zuta 1.</i> 
  Whoever enters into a meal should not take his portion and give it to the table server, lest it cause something to happen during the meal to spoil it. Rather he should take it and set it aside, and afterwards give it to him.32<i class="footnote">Derekh Eretz Rabba 9.</i> Those entering a host’s home are not allowed to pick up anything set before them to give it to the host’s son, to his servant, nor anyone representing him – unless they have gotten permission from the host.33<i class="footnote">Ibid.</i> It once happened to someone when three guests entered into his home during a period of drought, that he placed before them three eggs. The host’s son came and stood in front of them. One of the guests took his share and gave it to him, and likewise the second guest, and then the third. When the host saw the three eggs in his son’s hands, he lifted him up bodily and smashed him onto the floor, and he died. Then his mother, when she saw her son dead, went up to the roof and plunged to her death. When his father saw this, he too went up to the roof and plunged to his death.34<i class="footnote">Ibid.</i>
  If the host himself wants to serve his guests, he may, even if the host is a <i>talmid hakham</i>. The reason is from this:35<i class="footnote">Rabbi Yitzchok Etshalom, on his <i>Rambam</i> website, explains clearly the Gemara that R. Bahya cites in this way:The essential question, as presented in the Gemara (BT Kiddushin 32a-b), is whether the honor due the sage is his own (like the father’s), or if it is the *K’vod haTorah* (Honor of the Torah), which he embodies. The Gemara posits that even though the father (and, presumably, the mother), may be *Mochel* [that is, “waive”] the honor due him, the teacher may not. A challenge is brought from the fact that God Himself was “*Mochel*” His Honor, by “walking” in front of the camp of Bnei Yisrael in the desert (inappropriate for one due honor) – and God is seen here as the model for the teacher. The Gemara defeats this challenge by distinguishing – it is God’s world and it is God’s honor – if He wishes to be *Mochel* – that is “up to Him”. But the scholar isn’t just representing his own self; it is God’s Torah which is the source of his honor. The Gemara refutes this distinction by pointing to an alternate reading of the first verse of Psalms, which indicates that after learning Torah, the Torah becomes the “property” of the student/scholar. That is the final result of the *sugya* (section) in the Gemara.  consulted 3/11/10.</i> If a teacher has waived the honor due him, his waiver of honor is waived, as it is said, “The Lord went before them by day.”36<i class="footnote">That is, God Himself waived His own honor by walking in front of the Israelites. It would have been more appropriate for the honored person to be proceeded by someone lesser in rank (like when King Ahashverous honors Mordechai by having Haman lead him around the city on horseback).</i> That contradicts this! Or does it? It is the Holy One Blessed be He’s world, and if He wants to waive His honor, it is up to Him.37<i class="footnote">Here the Gemara goes on to object that if the teacher’s honor depends his knowledge of Torah, and Torah comes from God, that it is not the teacher’s honor that he’s waiving, but God’s. However, the Gemara then goes on to refute this objection with the proof text from Psalm 1:2, where R. Bahya resumes his paraphrase of the sugya, having omitted the objection itself.</i> And it goes on to say that it is the teacher’s torah (and honor) once he has learned it, as it is said, “he studies his torah day and night.”38<i class="footnote">Ps. 1:2, taking the “his” of “his torah” (<i>be-torato</i>) to refer to the subject of the verb “studies” (<i>ye-he-geh</i>), that is, the <i>man</i> who studies, not God.</i> And they also said, if a <i>nasi</i> (political authority) has waived his honor, his waiver of honor is waived.39<i class="footnote">B. Kiddushin 32b.</i> It happened to Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua when they were reclining in the banquet hall of the son of Rabban Gamaliel the Elder, that Rabban Gamaliel was serving them something to drink. He gave a cup to Rabbi Eliezer, who refused it, and to Rabbi Yehoshua, who accepted it. Rabbi Eliezer said to him, “What is this, Rabbi Yehoshua? We are sitting, but Rabban Gamaliel the son of Rabbi is standing and serving us something to drink!” He replied, “We have precedent for the greater acting as a table server. Abraham was the greatest of his generation, and it is written about him, “And he stood over them under the tree and they ate.”40<i class="footnote">Gen 18:8.</i> Lest you object that they appeared him as heavenly angels, on the contrary, they appeared to him as Arabs. So as for us, why shouldn’t Rabban Gamaliel the son of Rabbi stand and wait upon us?” Rabbi Zadok said to them, “How long are you going to overlook the honor of God and occupy yourself with the honor of mortals? The Holy One Blessed be He causes the winds to blow and raises up rulers, makes the dew fall and makes plants grow from the earth; He sets a table before each and every one. So as for us, why shouldn’t Rabban Gamaliel the son of Rabbi stand and wait upon us?41<i class="footnote">In other words, R. Zadok says, we hardly need the precedent of Abraham, a mortal, to wait on his inferiors, when this is what God Himself does for everyone all the time! For anyone familiar with the New Testament, this whole discussion about the appropriateness of a high status host waiting upon his guests at the table calls to mind a scene in the Last Supper in Luke’s Gospel:A dispute also arose among them [the disciples] as to which of them was to be regarded as the greatest. But he [Jesus] said to them, “The kings of the Gentiles lord it over them; and those in authority over them are called benefactors. But not so with you; rather, the greatest among you must become like the youngest, and the leader like one who serves. <i>For who is greater, the one who is at the table or the one who serves? Is it not the one at the table? But I am among you as one who serves.</i>” (Lk 22:24-27)Yet despite their similarities, the most striking difference between the Jewish and Christian stories is <i>who gets to make the interpretation</i> that the host’s lowering himself to the status of a table server is okay. In the Christian story, Jesus defends his own behavior, while in the Jewish story, the <i>guests</i> defend their host’s right to lower his status to wait on them. Moreover, they justify his behavior with examples from others who willingly lowered their high status to wait on their guests: Abraham to wait upon his mysterious visitors, and God to “wait upon” the whole world! In the Last Supper, Jesus justifies his behavior by his <i>own</i> example. Jesus warrants his practices by his own charisma; the rabbis warrant theirs on the precedents of others, that is, on past traditions and rational argument.</i>
  
  Gate 4
  
  <i>An Explanation of the Meals Prepared for the Righteous in the Time to Come</i>
  Some of the meals prepared in the world to come are bodily and intellectual – for both the body and soul. And there are some intellectual meals for souls who stand alone without the body, and they enjoy forever those very worlds where each and every one resides according to their level. The bodily meals have been reserved for them from the beginning, the refined and pure foods created from the supernal light through a chain of causes. And they are: Leviathan among the fishes, Bar-Yokhnai among the birds, which were created on the fifth day, and Leviathan is called what it is because it is ordered for the righteous, and likewise the Behemoth of the thousand mountains,1<i class="footnote">Ps 50:10.</i> which was created on the sixth day with the creation of the human being, but before him. And the quality of these foods is very profound; they can penetrate into the intellect and purify the heart, like the manna which the generation in the desert merited, which was “like wafers in honey”,2<i class="footnote">Ex. 16:31.</i> and was an offspring of the upper light, about which it is written, “Sweet is the light, and good to the eyes, to see the sun.”3<i class="footnote">Eccl. 11:7.</i> And it is possible that their quality will be greater than those who ate the manna, for insofar as perception at the end of days will be greater and more elevated than all the times before, so will the hearts be wide enough to include knowledge of Ha-Shem (May He Blessed) in its completeness, like “waters covering to the sea,”4<i class="footnote">Is. 11.9.</i> and this will be in the time of the Messiah greater and greater than the generation of the desert who went out of Egypt, habituated to hard labor, raising their hands out of mud, and their “palms just passed from the kettle.”5<i class="footnote">Ps. 81:7.</i> For this time will be the perfect and elevated time, following the will of the One Who dwells in the bush, what is not so in this world, because it does not follow what His will was. And that is why they fixed the wording of the Kaddish to say, ‘<i>be-alma dibra khe-r’utay</i>‘ [‘in the world He created according to His will’], so consequently we pray for the time of the King Messiah which in the future the Holy One Blessed be He will create according to His will. And the compelling proof of this is that this world which we stand in now, in its conduct indeed does not follow His will, because here – when Adam sinned because of the serpent, it was against His will, because it was indeed His will that Adam live forever, that he never die. And thus the intention of creation was originally that no creature ever cross the line of serving its Creator, and because the design of the Holy One Blessed Be He was not fulfilled, but instead, the design of the Adversary, nevertheless, this world itself necessarily will return to the end which was the desire of its Creator at its beginning. And because we pray for this very time, the formulation of the Kaddish was fixed in the Aramaic language, so that the ministering angels won’t recognize or understand it, for if they did understand, they would be jealous of our status at that time, and they would pray for the delay of the redemption. Therefore we seek mercy for the name YAH as it written regarding it, “By the hand on the throne of YAH,”6<i class="footnote">Ex 17:16. Both <i>kise</i> and <i>Yah</i> are spelled defectively, that is without an aleph and hay respectively, according to R. Bahya’s midrashic reading of Ex 17:16 and the Kaddish. See Mahzor Vitry.</i> that His name will be “made greater and sanctified”, that is, the “name Yah will be great and blessed” [<i>yehay shmay (= shem yah) rabah mevorakh</i>], namely, that both His name and His throne will be complete, in that world which He created according to His will, all of it will return to like it was at its beginning. And I have compelling proofs for this that there is no need for me to go into at length, for it is my intention in this Gate only to give an explanation of the bodily and intellectual meals prepared for the righteous in their body and soul, and for the intellectual meals which are for the soul alone without the body. And no one with understanding ought to be astonished if the righteous will have actual physical meals, that they will delight in both in body and soul. For see, in the Garden of Eden which had in its land a tree of life which could bring about eternal life for those who ate from it – whether good or bad, and there was water and grasses in it, which without a doubt, some of them were life-giving, others deadly, some of them healthful, others which would make you sick. And thus it is written in the Torah, “There He made for them a fixed rule, and there He put them to the test.”7<i class="footnote">Ex 15:25, which R. Bahya understands to apply to the Garden of Eden as well, not just to the grumbling Israelites’ experience in the desert.</i>And the view of our rabbis z”l was that the wood was bitter, and the Holy One Blessed Be He sweetened the bitter with something bitter, a miracle within a miracle, and so our sages z”l taught in a midrash:8<i class="footnote">Mekhilta Be-Shalah Vayisa’ 1.</i> “‘The Lord showed him [Moses] a piece of wood.’9<i class="footnote">Ex 15:25.</i> Rabbi Elazar says it was <i>hardofaney,</i>10<i class="footnote">A kind of ivy with berries poisonous to animals.</i> R. Nathan says it was olive wood,11<i class="footnote">According to the Mekhilta, ibid., there is no wood more bitter than olive wood.</i> and there are others who say it was the roots of a fig tree.” In any case, it was bitter. And so you find it written about Elisha, “The water is bad and the land causes bereavement,”12<i class="footnote">2 Kings 2:19.</i> and it is written, “Bring me a new dish, and put salt in it,”13<i class="footnote">Ibid. 2:20.</i> and that “healed” the water.14<i class="footnote">Ibid., 2:22.</i>Rabbi Simon ben Gamaliel says how much more wonderful are His ways than the ways of flesh and blood! He puts a harmful thing inside a harmful thing to make a miracle inside of a miracle.15<i class="footnote">Mekhilta, ibid.</i> Moreover, we are able to teach even more <i>midrash</i> about this, for you know Torah has seventy faces, because when it said in the verse, “There He put them to the test,”16<i class="footnote">Ex 15:25.</i> that is to say, there Moses tested this plant, and it was out of the science the Holy One Blessed be He taught him that he knew the power of this plant, about its nature or its virtue, which was to sweeten the bitter. And so it uses the expression: <i>va-yorehuHa-Shem (</i>i.e., “the Lord instructed him”<i>), </i>instead of <i>va-yar’ehu</i> (“He showed him”),17<i class="footnote">Ex 15:25. Actually, va-<i>yorehu</i> is just a defective spelling of <i>va-yarehu, </i>and so its literal meaning is the same: “He showed him,” but R. Bahya exploits the spelling anomaly for the sake of midrash.</i>because he had to have Him teach him about this; the Holy One Blessed be He taught him the science of the plants He created – about their nature to revive and to kill, to heal and to sicken, to sweeten and to embitter. And this is the connotation of the expression <i>hok u-mishpat</i> (“statute and law”):18<i class="footnote">Here R. Bahya is drawing upon the classic Jewish medieval philosophical distinction between laws whose rationale are not immediately accessible to reason – “<i>hukim</i>” (e.g., the rules of <i>kashrut)</i> and those which any rational being would derive through reason – “<i>mishpatim</i>” (e.g., “Thou shalt not kill”). The Torah consists of both types of laws, but the <i>hukim</i> are known to us only because <i>God revealed</i> them. R. Bahya suggests here that the “laws of nature” (e.g., the nature of plants in this case) are analogous to laws governing human behavior – <i>mitzvot. </i>In other words, eh believe we can discern some qualities of the natural world through natural science, but other qualities are made known to us only through supernatural revelation.</i> <i>hok</i> is its virtue whose reason is not known, and about <i>mishpat</i>, our rabbis z”l said, “And the Lord instructed him [about] the tree” – that is, its nature, that it is by law to be so in its nature. And it is connected immediately to “If you will heed the Lord your God diligently, doing what is upright in His sight, giving ear to his commandments and keeping all His <i>hukim</i> [“statutes”], then I will not bring upon you any of the diseases that I brought upon the Egyptians, for I the Lord am your healer.”19<i class="footnote">Ex 15:26.</i>Scripture has warned us not to entrust the core of our well-being to the power of plants, but rather to keeping the commandments, for they are the core. And with keeping the commandments He will keep them healthy, and prevent them from getting sick. And it was necessary to say this, because it is possible that mortals, erring and stumbling through their knowledge of the powers of these plants, will entrust the core of their well-being to them, and despair of seeking mercy from the Master of Mercy (may He be blessed) “in whose hand is every living soul.”20<i class="footnote">Job 12:10.</i> And this is the reason why King Hezekiah hid the Book of Cures, so that human beings would not stumble over them, and the sages z”l thanked him for this.21<i class="footnote">B. Pesahim 56a.</i>
  And now that I have explained all of this to you, you ought to meditate on the idea that if in this world you will find that things are so according to nature and their inherent virtues, how much the more so will it be the case at the end of time when nature will be made anew and be changed for the better to meet the needs of everything that has been created based on its status! And it goes without saying for the status of the people of Israel and the righteous among them, that the Holy One Blessed be He will make anew the kinds of pleasures and meals, just as He will make them a new creation, in whom the flow of intelligence and the capacity for prophecy has been strengthened. And if the heart of man who thinks he’s so smart objects to this idea, and says the words of the sages z”l are based on the pillars of science and the splendor of the intellect, and that all of them are in accordance with reason, and that they did not speak or say a word except by means of allegory, and the meal of the Leviathan is not physical but only an allegory for intellectual capacity and “the bundle of eternal life,” we will say to him in reply: we are compelled by necessity to believe that the words about a physical meal words refer literally to a physical meal, and not just an intellectual experience. For see what they said in the Perek Ha-Sefinah (“The Ship”):22<i class="footnote">B. Baba Batra 75a.</i> R. Yohanan said, The Holy One, blessed be He, will in time to come make a banquet for the righteous from the flesh of Leviathan; for it is said: “Companions will make a banquet of it [<i>yikhru ‘alav habarim</i>].”23<i class="footnote">Job 40:30: literally, “Shall traders traffic in him?” (<i>JSB</i>).</i> <i>Kerah</i> must mean a banquet; for it is said: “And he prepared [<i>va-yikhreh</i>] for them a great banquet [<i>kerah</i>] and they ate and drank.”24<i class="footnote">2 Kg 6:23.</i> “Companions” [<i>habarim</i>] must mean scholars for it is said: “the companions hearken for your voice; cause me to hear it.”25<i class="footnote">Song of Songs 8:13.</i> The rest [of Leviathan] will be distributed and sold out in the markets of Jerusalem; for it is said: “They will part him among the <i>Kena’anim</i>.”26<i class="footnote">Job 40:30. R. Bahya omits the Talmud’s explanation of <i>kena’anim</i>: “<i>Kena’anim </i>must mean merchants, for it is said: “a trader [<i>kena’an</i>] with balances of deceit in his hand; he loves to oppress.’ (Hos 12:8) And if you wish, you may infer it from the following: ‘Whose merchants are princes, whose traffickers [<i>kena’anim</i>] are the honorable of the earth.'(Is 23:8)” b. Baba Batra 75a.</i>
  And you already knew that the words of our rabbis follow the Torah’s means of expression, and so in the Torah there are permitted and prohibited foods: this you shall eat; this you shall not eat, and it is written, “from their flesh you shall not eat.”27<i class="footnote">Lev 11:8.</i> You wouldn’t say that this is an allegory – God forbid! – but it’s the actual literal meaning. And so they went on to say The Holy One, blessed be He, will in time to come make a <i>sukkah</i> for the righteous from the skin of Leviathan; for it is said: “Can you fill <i>sukkot</i> with his skin?”28<i class="footnote">Job 40:31. <i>Sukkot</i> here is spelled with a <i>sin</i>, not a <i>samekh</i> as in <i>sukkah</i> meaning “tent,” and means “darts.” Thus, the meaning of the verse in context is “Can you fill his skin with darts?”</i> If a man is worthy, a <i>sukkah</i> is made for him; if he is not worthy, a shadow [<i>tzel</i>] is made for him, for it is said: “And his head with a fish covering [<i>bi-tziltzel</i>].”29<i class="footnote">Job 30:41. R. Bahya following the Talmud takes the two parts of this verse in Job as contrasting: the first part hints at the reward of the worthy, the second part to the punishment of the unworthy – “shade.” After this he skips a few lines of Talmud that expand on this theme of the worthy and unworthy’s “rewards.”</i> The rest [of Leviathan] will be spread by the Holy One, blessed be He, upon the walls of Jerusalem, and its splendor will shine from one end of the world to the other; as it is said: “And nations shall walk by Your light.”30<i class="footnote">Is 60:3, in b. Baba Batra 75a.</i>
  Out of all this it will be explained explicitly that the words are meant literally: about the actual flesh of Leviathan, about his actual skin.31<i class="footnote">In his insistence on the literal meaning of the Talmudic description of the banquets in the world to come, R. Bahya follows the position of his teacher, R. Solomon ben Adret (Chavel). However, there’s a certain irony here that R. Bahya uses rather non-literal midrashic interpretations of scriptural verses to support his contention that the statements about the food and setting of the banquets in the world to come are indeed to be taken quite literally.</i> The actual flesh of Leviathan will be the food of the righteous who “bothered themselves” with the Torah and <i>mitzvot, </i>and his actual skin to make their dwelling place glow in order to proclaim their high status among the nations, how they served the Holy One Blessed be He and took hold of His Torah and His qualities, to what is written here refers: “And you shall come to see the difference between the righteous and the wicked, between him who has served God and him who has not served Him.”32<i class="footnote">Mal 3:18.</i> And likewise it is written, Behold <i>my servants</i> shall eat, and <i>you</i> shall hunger; <i>My servants</i> shall drink, and <i>you</i> shall thirst… <i>My servants</i> shall cry out in gladness and <i>you</i> shall cry out in anguish, howling in heartbreak.33<i class="footnote">Is 65:13-14.</i>
  And in connection to this you will also find it plainly stated in Perek Helek34<i class="footnote">B. Sanhedrin 100a, a well-known passage from the Talmud describing the world to come.</i> that in time to come the human height [<i>komot</i>] will return to two hundred cubits, and they also taught this in a midrash likewise in Perek Sefinah:35<i class="footnote">B. Baba Batra 75a.</i> “I will lead you <i>komamiyut</i>,”36<i class="footnote">Lev 26:13, literally, “I will make you walk erect” (<i>JSB</i>), but the midrash plays on the similarity between <i>komamiyut</i> “erect” and <i>komot –</i> “height.”</i> R. Meir says: [it means] two hundred cubits – twice the height of Adam. R. Judah says: A hundred cubits; corresponding to the [height of the] temple and its walls. For it is said: ‘carved after the fashion of the Temple.37<i class="footnote">Ps 144:22.</i> But insofar as it said,38<i class="footnote">B. Baba Batra, ibid.</i> The Holy One, Blessed be He, will in time to come bring precious stones and pearls…and will cut out from them [openings] ten by twenty cubits, and will set them up in the gates of Jerusalem, as it is said, “and your gates of stones of carbuncle,”39<i class="footnote">Is 54:12.</i> it seems from this that the height will be no more than twenty cubits. So therefore it must be said that the gates of the houses are not being spoken about, for how could they enter them at that height?! But rather, it’s certainly the gates of the windows that are being spoken about. And you already knew that parashat “<i>Im Behukotai</i>” is a promise of what will happen in the future, for what it says there never existed in the two Temples, neither in the First nor the Second Temple. For what is destined in the Torah through its promises is not <i>al shlemut,</i> but will happen in time to come after the ancient sin has been atoned for, which has never occurred at any time, and this is what our sages z”l taught in a midrash:40<i class="footnote">B. M.K. 16b.</i> When David went out to war he killed eight hundred at one time, but was sorry for the two hundred [he would have killed], to fulfill what has been said, “How could one have routed a thousand?”41<i class="footnote">Dt 32:32, from the future promises enumerated in Deuteronomy.</i> A voice from heaven went out and said, “Were it not for the matter of Uriah the Hittite.”42<i class="footnote">1 Kings 15:5, and see the story in 2 Samuel chapters 11-12. King David fell in love with Uriah’s wife Bathsheba, and so sent Uriah off to the front lines of battle to be killed so that he could marry her.</i>
  And you ought to understand now that is known, that because of Adam’s sin his height was diminished, as our rabbis z”l taught in a midrash:43<i class="footnote">B. Sanhedrin 38b.</i> “But when he sinned, the Holy One Blessed be He, set His eyes upon him and diminished him and reduced him to one thousand cubits,44<i class="footnote">From his original height which originally stretched from one end of the earth to the other, according to this midrash!</i> for it is written, ‘You hedge me before and behind; You lay your hand upon me.’45<i class="footnote">Ps 129:5.</i> You need not wonder that when the sin has been atoned for and the decree has been cancelled that his height will return to its original measure, for indeed the height was diminished only because of the sin, which caused the climate to go bad, but at this time the whole work of creation will be changed for the better, and return to its perfection and virtue, just as it was in the time of Adam before the sin, and then the heights will get bigger and return to their original measure, and all of Israel will be elated and enjoy the kingdom of Shaddai, and there will be a flow of perception and pleasure into the body and soul, a huge “King’s share” of blessing.46<i class="footnote">Literally, “great as the hand of the King (may He be blessed)” [could give].</i> And now that I have explained all this to you, no rationalist ought to doubt from now on that the physical meal prepared for the righteous, because these things had been created back then with this intention – that from them would come in the future the reward for the righteous – that they will delight in these meals <i>with their bodies</i>. And already our sages z”l said that Moses Our Teacher (peace be upon him) will be with them serving these meals. You will find a hint of this matter in the Torah in the blessings of Jacob (peace be upon him) when he said, “Until Shiloh will come,”47<i class="footnote">Gen 49:10.</i> that is to say, until <i>Moses</i> will come. For he wanted to hint at the coming of the “nearer” redeemer by whom Israel would be redeemed from Egypt; and the last, more distant redeemer is included in this who will come at the future redemption And this is also: “Until Shiloh will come.”48<i class="footnote">Ibid.</i> The expression will serve to refer to the <i>two</i> redemptions: the first, which is nearer in time, and the last, which is more distant. And thus they said in a midrash about Moses our Teacher (may he rest in peace): “<i>shihula kardona</i> – the skinner for preparing a meal, who was pulled out,” – the explanation of “<i>shihula,</i>” is Moses, which is from the Aramaic [<i>shihaltay</i>] for the Hebrew, “I drew him out” (Ex: 2:10).49<i class="footnote">The etymology which the Torah has Pharoah’s daughter give for Moses’ name: “<i>Moshe</i> because I drew him out [<i>mashiti-hu</i>] of the water.” However, the Aramaic for <i>mashiti-hu, shihaltay, </i>is related to the word <i>shilulah, </i>which sounds like “Shiloh;” hence Shiloh refers to <i>Moses, </i>according to the midrash.</i> And a “skinner” (for preparing a meal) is a type of butcher or cook. So here the goal of the intention of these bodily meals is to be a device to refine the body and matter and to sharpen the mind so that it will attain knowledge of the Creator (May He be blessed) and meditate upon the purely intelligible beings, and then the souls by this looking of their bodies will become fit for the intellectual banquet from which the ministering angels themselves who are near the Shekhinah eat – for then the soul will perceive the brilliant light which it is impossible to perceive as long as it is stuck in matter.
  And this was the subject of what Moses asked when he said, “Please, let me behold Your Presence!”50<i class="footnote">Ex 33:18.</i> Here it should be asked, was Moses asking for something possible or impossible? If for something possible, why did God refuse him and say, “You cannot see my face”?51<i class="footnote">Ibid., 33:20.</i> And if for something impossible, why did he ask? And the answer to this strictly speaking, is that Moses sought to perceive something while he was still in a material body what he would perceive only after he had been separated from matter. And the reason that it occurred to him to ask was because he saw that he had already stood on Mt. Sinai for forty days, and the power of his flesh had attenuated and the earthy matter in him weakened with the increase of light over him, by which the beams of light shone from his face. So he asked while he was still made of matter as if he were not, that he not be hindered from perceiving what he would perceive after the separation (of his soul from his flesh). And the Holy One Blessed be He replied to him, “For man may not see me and live,”52<i class="footnote">Ibid.</i> that is to say, no matter what, because you are still a man, it is impossible for you to perceive while you’re still material what you will perceive only afterwards. And so they said in the Midrash,53<i class="footnote">Sifra, beginning of Vayikra 2.</i> “‘For man may not see me and live:’54<i class="footnote">Ibid.</i> while alive they do not see, but upon their death the do see.” And this is after the separation of the soul from its material form. And it is possible to specify further that “upon their death” means when they are about to die, as in the topic they discussed in Midrash Deuteronomy Rabbah Parashat Ekev,55<i class="footnote">Though it doesn’t appear in the printed editions of Deuteronomy Rabbah (Chavel).</i> “How abundant is the good that You have in store for those who fear You.56<i class="footnote">Ps 31:20.</i> ‘It happened that when R. Abbahu was about to die, he saw the gift of his reward, what the Holy One Blessed be He was going to give him in the time to come, and all the good prepared for the righteous themselves in the time to come. So when he saw all these consolations which had been prepared, he exclaimed, “All these are for Abbahu!” and immediately he desired to die, and began reciting: “How abundant is the good that You have in store for those who fear You.”57<i class="footnote">Ibid.</i>
  And it is necessary that you know that just as Israel merited at the crossing of the Red Sea two marvelous and profound statuses, and they merited them in the body and the soul – the first, that they crossed the sea feeling this in their bodies the great miracle that was made for them with the sea splitting into twelve different divisions, and the twelve tribes, crossed through these cuts tribe by tribe during its own cut; the second, that their soul was elevated and they prophesied there and a serving maiden of Israel saw there what Ezekiel ben Buzi never saw, so in the future Israel will merit two statuses in their body and soul. Bodily meals of fine and pure foods which I mentioned, and an intellectual meal for the soul alone of the holy spirit, for so all Israel will ascend to the level of prophecy, as it is said, ‘It shall come to pass afterwards that I will pour out my spirit on all flesh and your sons and your daughters will prophesy,”58<i class="footnote">Joel 3:1.</i> and the weakest among them like David and the house of David, like gods, like an angel of the Lord before them. This will be at the time of the redemption after the wars have ceased and Israel is back on its own land. Therefore, one should not think these meals are not bodily affairs in the literal sense. In addition you will find that our rabbis z”l explained it [literally]: “In the future the Holy One Blessed be He will make a great banquet for the righteous in the future to come from the flesh of Leviathan. Any whoever did not eat prohibited <i>trayf</i> foods will deserve to eat at it.”59<i class="footnote">Lev. R. 13:3.</i> 
  And our rabbis also taught in a midrash: “Leviathan is a pure fish” [i.e., a kosher fish with fins and scales] as it is said, “The layers of his flesh stick together,”60<i class="footnote">Job 41:15.</i>and it is written, “his underparts are jagged shards”61<i class="footnote">Job 41:22.</i> – these are the scales fixed to him.62<i class="footnote">In other words, R. Bahya takes these particulars of the Book of Job’s lengthy description of Leviathan as references to its fins and scales.</i> And the intellectual meal for both the body and soul will occur at the time of the resurrection of the dead. And now I will explain to you in what follows about the world of souls, which will come to human beings after their separation from the world, and the matter of the world to come, which is <i>after</i> the resurrection and the matter of the joy that the soul has in all these worlds together. Know that the intellectual meal for the body and soul at the time of the resurrection of the dead, because the routine for the body will be cancelled completely, and another routine – marvelous and new – will replace it, and moral rot –<i>zohama’</i> – will cease from the world,63<i class="footnote">According to b. Shabbat 146a: When the serpent came upon Eve, he infected her with <i>zohama’</i> (“filth” or “moral lasciviousness”). Israel, who stood at Mt. Sinai – their filth ceased. The nations of the world, who did not stand at Mt. Sinai – their filth has not ceased. Thus, R. Bahya must be referring to the cessation of <i>the whole world’s</i> moral rot that will occur in the world to come after the resurrection of the dead (Chavel).</i> and the Accuser will be swallowed up, “there is no adversary [<i>satan</i>] and no mischance,”64<i class="footnote">1 Kg 5:18.</i> “the Lord will make something new on earth,”65<i class="footnote">Jer 31:21.</i> and the souls will be made anew like the eagle is renewed;66<i class="footnote">An allusion to Ps 103:5: “He satisfies you with good things in the prime of life so that your youth is renewed like the eagle’s.”</i> all of them shall be new, “the work of the Artist’s hand,”67<i class="footnote">SS 7:2.</i> so much the more so than with vessels of glass.68<i class="footnote">B. Sanhedrin 91a: “Just as vessels of glass, which are the work of the breath of flesh and blood, are broken and it is possible to repair them, how much the more so with flesh and blood, who were through the breath of the Holy One Blessed be He.”</i> Then the “children of the resurrection of the dead” whose body and their soul have been renewed shall take delight in the intellectual meal in the world to come, which is after the resurrection, in which there is no bodily meal at all, and it is regarding this meal that our rabbis z”l said,69<i class="footnote">B. Berakhot 17a.</i> “Rav was accustomed to say, ‘In the world to come, there is no eating and no drinking, no envy, no hatred, and no rivalry, but rather the righteous will sit with crowns on their heads and enjoy the splendor of the Shekhinah.'” And this statement should teach they will exist there in that world in a body and a soul, which is why he said “no eating and drinking.” For if they did not have there a body and soul, there would be no need for Rav to say “no eating and drinking for souls,” but rather they will certainly be there in body and soul, and <i>despite that</i> there will be no eating and drinking. For their bodily powers will be suspended from them, as they were suspended from Moses and Elijah70<i class="footnote">Ex 34:28: “And [Moses] was there with the Lord forty days and forty nights; he ate no bread and drank no water;” 1 Kg 19:8: “And with the strength from that meal [Elijah] walked forty days and forty nights.”</i> (peace be upon them). And if you would say that the “vessels” of their bodies and soul serve no purpose, they do serve a purpose, because they receive the reward and enjoyment together, just as they toiled in the Torah body and soul together. For the Holy One Blessed be He does not rob any created being of its reward, and He wants the body to receive its reward and He will not hold back on His judgment. For even though the soul is the most important, the body is nevertheless not superfluous; for it too is of great importance, for it is the tool through which the soul reveals its activities, and it has no power to realize them in action without it. That being so, the body should be destined with the gift of its reward together with the soul. And what “and their crowns on their heads” meant was a reference to the brilliant light that hovers over them, as it is written, “On that day the Lord of Hosts shall become a crown of beauty and a diadem for the remnant…”71<i class="footnote">Is 28:5.</i> which our rabbis z”l interpreted in a midrash: It will be like someone who puts scraps on himself, though they are indeed “children of the resurrection of the dead.” 72<i class="footnote">I.e., these crowns of light will be so commonplace among those rewarded with them that they’d think nothing of it.</i> And more could be said about “and their crowns on their heads” – in the image of the crowns that were given to them at Mt. Sinai. This the finery which they merited at their receiving of the Torah, as it is said, “And the Israelites were stripped of the finery from Mt. Horeb.”73<i class="footnote">Ex 33:6. That is, the finery must have already been given to them at Mt. Horeb (Sinai), if now, after the sin of the Golden Calf, it was stripped from them.</i> Our rabbis taught in a midrash:74<i class="footnote">Exodus Rabbah 45:1.</i> “The armor of God’s Ineffable Name girded them. But when they sinned, they were taken from them, and Moses earned them back, and this is what Scripture meant by ‘from Mt. Horeb. And Moses would take the tent.’75<i class="footnote">Ex 33:5-6. “And Moses took the tent” immediately follows “from Horeb,” and <i>thisjuxtaposition</i> implies that Moses took back what the Israel got “from Horeb” but lost after that because of the sin of the calf (Chavel).</i> That is to say, he took all these marks of status and kinds of lights back for them – that is, ‘the tent –<i>ha-ohel</i>,’ which is like the expression: ‘<i>be-halo nero</i>– when His lamp shone [over my head].'”76<i class="footnote">Job 29:3. By “creative philology” the midrash associates the similarly sounding words <i>ha-ohel</i> – “the tent” and <i>be-halo</i> – “when it shone.”</i> And just as their measure of delight is like Adam’s measure of delight in the Garden of Delights before the sin, so the crowns on their heads are in the image of the crowns on at Mt. Sinai before the sin. 
  And know that because the body is the “robe” of the soul, for as King Solomon (peace be upon him) spoke about the topic of the resurrection of the dead when he said: “I had taken off my robe; How shall I wear it again?”77<i class="footnote">SS 5:3.</i> he revealed to us explicitly that the soul will be clothed in the same robe. But he said, “How shall I wear it again?” – it is impossible for this to occur in nature, but rather only by a complete, marvelous, profound miracle shall I go back and wear it again after it has been stripped off. And he said this out of astonishment, not out of doubt – God forbid! “I had bathed my feet”78<i class="footnote">Ibid.</i> – that is to say, after I have bathed my feet, how is it possible for me to step back in the same muck!? It is better for me to stay on this level than to go back there.79<i class="footnote">I.e., to stay in the world of souls – as only a soul, rather than return to the body, in the world of the resurrection (Chavel).</i> All this comes from astonishment, but “inasmuch the king’s command is authoritative,”80<i class="footnote">Eccl 8:4.</i> because he promised us this in the Torah that the soul will return to the body at the resurrection of the dead, in order to receive its reward or punishment, according to the judgment coming to it. The explanation of this topic about the matter of the resurrection of the dead I shall complete for you in this Gate. Dig after it, pursue it, and get it!
  And know and understand that it was about this intellectual meal of the resurrection of the dead that rabbis z”l interpreted in a midrash in <i>Tractate Pesahim</i>:81<i class="footnote">B. Pesahim 119b.</i> “‘And Abraham made a great feast on the day of the weaning [<i>ha</i>–<i>higamel</i>], etc.’82<i class="footnote">Gen 21:8.</i> The Holy One, blessed be He, will in time to come make a banquet for the righteous on the day when He will reward [<i>yigamel</i><i> hesed</i>] the seed of Isaac, and the cup of blessing will be given to Abraham to bless and he says to them, “I won’t say the blessing because Ishmael came from me.” The cup of blessing is given to Isaac to bless, and he says, “I won’t say the blessing because Esau came out of me.” The cup of blessing is given to Jacob to bless and he says to them, “I won’t say the blessing because I married two sisters while they were both alive.” The cup of blessing is given to Moses to bless, and he says, “I won’t say the blessing, because I didn’t merit entering the land of Israel.” The cup of blessing is given to Joshua to bless and he said to them, “I won’t say the blessing, because I never merited having a son. The cup of blessing was giving to David to bless, and he says to them, “I will say the blessing, and it is right for me to bless the King (may He be blessed), as it is said, “<i>I</i> raise the cup of deliverance and invoke the name of the Lord.”83<i class="footnote">Ps 116:13.</i>
  And the meal is for the world to come after the resurrection of the dead, and “the cup of blessing” – this is an allegory, for it was already explained that the world to come has in it no eating and drinking, and it comes to teach us about King David (peace be upon him), that he is the first of all the righteous to praise the Holy One Blessed be He. And they said in <i>Tractate Yoma</i>:84<i class="footnote">B. Yoma 76a.</i> “The cup of David in the world to come will be two hundred twenty-one <i>logs</i>, as it is said, ‘You have anointed my head with oil, my cup runs over [<i>revayah</i>].’85<i class="footnote">Ps 23:5.</i> <i>ReVaYa”H</i> by gematria is numerically equivalent to two hundred twenty-one.” All this is an allegory for the matter of the virtues and praises with which he will praise him, and he will be first of all of them in the status of kingship. And already our rabbis z”l explained to us that he is the first of all the righteous in the Garden of Eden, which is the world of souls, which we get from what they said that the Holy One Blessed be He said to Jereboam: “Repent, and then I, you, and the son of Jesse will walk with the righteous in the Garden of Eden.” He replied, “And who shall be at the head?” He said, ‘The son of Jesse.” He said, “Then I do not want to.”86<i class="footnote">B. Sanhedrin 102a.</i> You find yourself learning that just as he [David] is the first among all of the righteous in the Garden of Eden, so, he explained, here in the world to come after the resurrection of the dead, that he is the head of all of them and the first to bless and praise.
  And know indeed that the status of the souls in the world of souls comes right as one dies, while the world to come is after the resurrection. And it is the hope of all hopes, it cannot be compared or likened to anything in this world, nor pictured in the mind, because its image cannot be comprehended in the heart of “anyone artistically skillful,”87<i class="footnote">“<i>Kol hakham lev,</i>” any “artistic genius.” R. Bahya uses an expression from Ex 31:3-5 that describes the great architect and builders of the mishkan, Bezalel and his assistants: “I have filled him [Bezalel] with a divine spirit of skill [<i>hakhmah</i>]…to make designs…and work in every kind of craft. Moreover I have assigned to him Oholiab…and I have granted skill [<i>hakhmah</i>] to all who are skillful [<i>kol hakham lev</i>]…”</i>surpassing their ability to picture its essence and quality – what it is like and how the souls take delight in it. The reason for this is because of our being sunken in the world of thick and coarse bodies, which is totally thickness and coarseness, while the upper world is totally elevation, refinement, and purity. Indeed, the two are opposites; it’s impossible to think of what we are diametrically opposed to. Just as for fish, because they exist in the element of water, and need it to exist and live, it would be impossible for them to turn to the element of fire because it is its opposite, so these two worlds are opposites, and “every man is proved dull, without knowledge”88<i class="footnote">Jer 10:14.</i> of the quality of the world to come while in this world, and even the wisest of the wise are fools about this. And you already knew that our rabbis z”l said that even the prophets didn’t prophesy about it due the fact that it was hidden for the most part, which is what they said in Sanhedrin:89<i class="footnote">B. Sanhedrin 99a.</i> “All the prophets prophesied all the good things with regard to the days of Messiah; but as for the world to come ‘No eye has seen, O God, but You.'” However, we know in general through what we can infer through reason and from the Torah “which makes wise the simple”90<i class="footnote">Ps 19:8.</i> that just as the body enjoys and takes delight [<i>mitaden</i>] in a pleasant aromatic meal according to the body’s standards of pleasure, so the soul will enjoy and take delight in this upper world. However, its way of taking delight there is not measured like bodily things, which have measures and dimensions, but the upper beings have no measure and dimension, because their status is great, beyond conception, and their way of taking delight deeper than any measure. And even though the power of the body is weak and unable to picture in the heart the existence of the upper beings and their delight that is without measure, the power of the upper beings and their perfection is not diminished by lesser beings, composed of matter, who are unable to conceive of them, just as the human wisdom and virtue is not diminished by a fool or beast who cannot imagine or conceive of it. 
  This is the topic of what “the sages of the truth” said here:91<i class="footnote">B. Sukkah 46b. The expression “sages of the truth” is an epithet for the Talmudic sages who received the Oral Torah, which is the truth, to explain the Written Torah. Rabbenu Bahya frequently employs this expression in his books (Chavel, p. 508).</i> Come and see how the way of the Holy One Blessed be He is not the way of flesh and blood. For flesh and blood, an empty vessel can contain something, a full one cannot. But it is not so for the Holy One Blessed be He. The full vessel can contain, the empty one cannot, as it is said, “If only they would surely hear.”92<i class="footnote">Ex 15:26.</i> The explanation of this is that insofar as bodily things have measure and dimension, when they are empty they can filled, but when one fills it, they cannot contain any more since they are already filled to their capacity, and nothing with a capacity can contain something more than its capacity. But among the upper things, full contains, since it has no measured capacity.
  And the world of souls, this is what is called ‘Garden of Eden’ (<i>gan aden</i>) among the sages, and they called it this by way of an allegory, using the example of how the body takes delight (<i>mitaden</i>) in a garden, and so it is written about the Garden of Eden in the land, ‘He set him in the Garden of Eden to work it and keep it,’ (Gen 2:5) – this heavenly Garden of Eden is the world of souls comparable but in contrast to it, and it is call ‘Garden of Eden’ too, and it is the reward for doing the <i>mitzvot</i> in which the soul takes delight, using the image of the body taking delight in a garden. And to the extent that the Torah does not specify explicitly anywhere the matter of the Garden of Eden being destined for the soul as a reward for the mitzvot, but does specify the bodily things destined for Israel when they return most certainly to their land, when they will have “all their rains in their season”93<i class="footnote">Lev 26:4.</i> and with the abundance of blessing and happiness – this matter is because the Torah was given to the masses of <i>all</i> of Israel, and the masses would not be able to understand the destined intellectual things. So even if the Torah would come to tell about this in brief, they would not find in it any way in to understand it, they wouldn’t be up to it, and it would be for them like a dream without an interpretation. And if the story of this went on at length in Scripture, wouldn’t more doubts be raised, the more was written about it? So for this reason, the Torah did not want to go down this road, neither in brief nor at length, because the masses wouldn’t believe in any of it, until they would see a sign or confirmation of it with their own eyes, and therefore the wisdom of the Torah comes in a story about physical rewards destined to come, to go on at length about them since they are preparation for the soul’s recompense, which is her “Garden of Eden,” and since they are a sign and confirmation for what they wouldn’t understand. And for this reason the Torah did not mention it explicitly in the story of the Garden of Eden, and by concealing it lest doubts multiply and confusion in understanding them ensue, but did mention openly what is the sign and confirmation of it. So this reason is correct and sufficient to all who understand and discern that the Torah was given to the masses. However, the “engaged intellectual” [<i>maskil nilvav</i>94<i class="footnote">This expression from R. Bahya ibn Pakuda’s <i>Duties of the Heart -(Hovot ha-Levavot), Sha’ar Yihud </i>Chapter 1,<i> </i>plays on the connection to “heart”, and refers to someone philosophically trained but also “with a heart” – that is, emotionally engaged, not intellectually distant. He says the “<i>maskil nilvav </i>will strive to strip the shells of the words and their materiality from the subject.” In other words, it is out of emotionally longing to connect to God, that he will use philosophy to strip away the linguistic and material obstacles to that connection.</i>] who delves deeply into it, will find everything in the Torah, “as milk under pressure produces butter”95<i class="footnote">Prov 30:33.</i> – whoever is found engaged in the Torah, the milk he suckles from the breast of his mother will produce the “butter” of Torah.96<i class="footnote">Chavel thinks R. Bahya has in mind this midrash on Prov 30:33 in b. Berakhot 63b: “‘As milk under pressure produces butter’ – In whom do find the butter of Torah? In him who spits up the milk he suckled from his mother for it.”</i> And so you who are an engaged intellectual – “Turn it and turn it because everything is in it!”97<i class="footnote">M. Avot 5 (end). I think R. Bahya means by this analogy that the baby “churns” his mother’s milk in his mouth and turns it into butter, and similarly the engaged intellectual “churns” Torah by “turning it and turning it” and so turns it into “the butter of Torah.” Similarly, medieval Christian monastic educators described the active process of reading as “rumination.”</i> You will find in the matter of Enoch that “And Enoch walked with God”98<i class="footnote">Gen 5:24: <i>va-yithalakh Hanokh et ha-elohim</i>.</i> And this “walking with God” is as the Targum translated it into Aramaic, “And Enoch walked in fear of the Lord.”99<i class="footnote">Targum Onkelos Gen 5:24: <i>Ve-halikh hanokh be-dahalta’ d’YHVH</i>.</i> Enoch was a “righteous man who rules in the fear of God,”100<i class="footnote">2 Samuel 23:3.</i>as it is said, “for God took him,”101<i class="footnote">Gen 5:24.</i> – it is known that the “taking” was because of his virtue and goodness, because he was a righteous man. And if so, from here we get the explanation of the matter of “the Garden of Eden” for the soul of the righteous. And you will also find in the Torah in parashat “<i>Im be-hukotai</i>” that it is promise for the future, the world to come, for it is written there, “I will look with favor on you,102<i class="footnote">Lev 26:9.</i>” and this means that “My goodwill [<i>ratzon</i>]will be attached to you,” and the “goodwill” of Ha-Shem (may He be blessed) is the life of the world to come. This is what is referred to in what is written: “<i>hayyim birtzono</i>” – “When He is pleased, there is life,”103<i class="footnote">Ps 30:6.</i> and thus it is also written there, “I shall walk about – <i>hithalakhti</i> – in your midst.”104<i class="footnote">Lev 26:12</i> And what is destined here is not to be understood in the category of things destined for the body, but rather from things destined for the soul in the world to come, which is what is referred to when it is written: “moving about – <i>mithalekh</i> – in the breezy part of the day.”105<i class="footnote">Gen 3:8: “They [Adam and Eve] heard the sound of the Lord God moving about [<i>mithalekh</i>] in the garden at the breezy time of the day.”</i> And our sages interpreted this in a midrash:106<i class="footnote"><i>Sifra Be-Hukkotai</i> Chapter 3.</i>”‘<i>Va-hithalakhti be-tokhekham</i> -I will walk about in their midst.’ In time to come the Holy One Blessed be He will stroll around with the righteous in the Garden of Eden.” And similarly they said, “In time to come the Holy One Blessed be He will arrange a “greenbelt”107<i class="footnote"><i>Mahol- </i>untilled land surrounding a vineyard (Jastrow). However, <i>mahol </i>has the additional connotation of a chorus of singers and dancers, so R. Bahya may also be alluding to the “Mahanayyim dance” he mentioned in the First Gate. In any case, the main point of this image is that it is circular, with God in the center. The “choreography” of the souls of the “Garden of Eden”, is that they will be arranged in a circle with God in the center, as R. Bahya goes on to explain.</i> for the righteous in the Garden of Eden, and His Presence will be among them.”108<i class="footnote">B. Ta’anit 3a.</i> The achievement of this joy for the souls is compared to an endless eternal “greenbelt,” because the circle goes around a point, and the point is in the center, which is why the Talmud says “His Presence will be among them –<i>beynahem</i>.” And similarly the Torah specified “in your midst – <i>be-tokhekham,</i>“109<i class="footnote">Lev 26:12.</i> because Israel is compared to circle, and He himself to the center point. And after it said, “I will walk about in your midst,” it said, “I will be your God,” 110<i class="footnote">Ibid.</i> and our sages z”l interpreted this in a midrash,111<i class="footnote">B. Taanit 31a.</i> “And each and every one of them will point to Him with their finger, as it is said, ‘Behold! This is our God!”112<i class="footnote">Is 25:9.</i> The word “this” is an allegory for nearing complete intellectual conception, like someone who has knowledge of something that exists and recognizes it clearly, and understands it as distinct from other things. And you should not understand “this” literally, like what you would mean if you were standing in front of a person and pointing them out, but rather, it is like what is meant when the Torah said, “For <i>this</i> man Moses…”113<i class="footnote">Ex 32:1: “When the people saw that Moses was so long in coming down from the mountain, the people gathered against Aaron and said to him, ‘Come make us a god who shall go before us, for this man Moses, who brought us from the land of Egypt – we do not know what happened to him”</i>who was not standing among them, but about whom they had specific knowledge. From here114<i class="footnote">From the expression “I shall walk about in your midst” in Lev 26:12.</i> it should be clear to the enlightened that the world of souls is the “Garden of Eden” for the soul, but Scripture mixes it in the general list of things destined for the body, and depended on the intellect of the enlightened to discern it from them, that it would not be hidden from him as it would be from the masses.
  You will find also in the words of Moses at the end of the Torah a promise well-known to be about the world to come, which is what is written, “O happy Israel! Who is like you, A people delivered by the Lord.”115<i class="footnote">Dt 33:29.</i> Because it specified above the destined physical rewards, when it said, “Thus Israel will dwell in safety, untroubled will be Jacob’s abode, in a land of grain and wine, under heavens dripping dew,”116<i class="footnote">Ibid., 33:28.</i> so it connected it immediately to “O Happy Israel!” to say “don’t think that the only recompense and reward you’ll have for doing the mitzvoth will be in this world.” That’s why it said, “O Happy [<i>ashrekha</i>] Israel,” as our sages taught in a midrash, “‘You shall be happy [<i>ashrekha</i>] and you shall prosper,’117<i class="footnote">Ps 128:2.</i> ‘You shall be happy’ – in this world, and ‘You shall prosper’ – in the world to come.”118<i class="footnote">M. Avot 4:1.</i> And afterwards it said, “Who is like you?”119<i class="footnote">Dt 33:29.</i> that is to say, who among all the nations is like you will be “delivered by the Lord” – which means the salvation [<i>t’shua’at</i>] of the soul in the world of souls, which is why it said, “delivered [<i>nosha’</i>] by the Lord.”120<i class="footnote">Ibid.</i> It’s like the similar expression of the prophet: “Israel has been delivered [<i>nosha’</i>] by the Lord, with salvation [<i>t’shuat</i>] everlasting.”121<i class="footnote">Is 45:17: literally “salvation of the worlds” – <i>t’shuat olamim </i>– the plural of which R. Bahya without a doubt understands as an allusion to salvation in both worlds – this world and the world to come.</i> And it said, “your protecting shield”122<i class="footnote">Dt 33:29.</i> because after it specified the reward of the soul and its salvation in the world of souls, it gave a sign for this and said that Ha-Shem (may He be blessed) is their shield, their protection and their “sword triumphant” [<i>herev ge’utam</i>], 123<i class="footnote">Ibid., literally, “the sword of your pride.”</i>that is, something they could be proud [<i>le-hitga’ot</i>] about, hence “your protecting shield.”124<i class="footnote">Ibid.</i> And this would even include what <i>midat ha-din</i> above is called – <i>magen</i> – “shield”, because one usually holds a shield in the left hand, and He keeps us safe with it so that by protecting us, we need not be afraid of the enemy overpowering it, and so David said, “You have granted me the shield of Your protection – <i>magen yish’ekha</i>“125<i class="footnote">2 Sam 22:36, or “shield of Your salvation.”</i> – the shield which protects You. And he explained further, “For YHWH God is sun and shield,”126<i class="footnote">Ps 84:12.</i> that is, “the Great Name” [of YHWH], the quality of Jacob, which is called “sun.”127<i class="footnote">E.g., in Joseph’s dream, Gen 37:9, where the sun clearly stands for Jacob. I think R. Bahya means that “sun” is expression for God’s other main attribute, His “right hand” – <i>midat ha-rahamim</i>. Thus, when David referred to “Lord God” as “sun <i>and</i> shield” in Ps 84:12, from a kabbalistic perspective, it’s a reference to God having both <i>midat ha-din</i> and <i>midat ha-rahamim</i>, the attribute of severity and the attribute of compassion. I.e., YHWH (“Lord”) = “sun” = “Jacob” = <i>midat ha-rahamim, </i>while Elohim (“God”) = “shield” = <i>midat ha-din</i>.</i> And so our rabbis z”l taught in a midrash, “Jacob said, ‘Who revealed to him [Joseph] that my name [<i>sh’my</i>] was ‘sun’?”128<i class="footnote">Bereshit Rabba 84:10. Or as R. Bahya interprets it, <i>sh’my</i>= <i>shem Y’</i>, “the great name of YHWH.”</i> And he called the heavenly <i>midat ha-din</i> “shield,” and this what is meant by “For YHWH God is sun and shield;”129<i class="footnote">Ps 84:12.</i> this is why it is specified “Your protecting shield, your sword of pride”130<i class="footnote">Dt 33:29.</i> because of Israel having this eternal success and ultimate victory over all their enemies. So all this is a sign that they are attached to and will be delivered by Ha-Shem in the world of souls. If so, then the account of the things destined for the soul in the Torah are only there by analogy and as a sign, so set your heart to the words of Moses, how he wanted on the day of his death to “seal” his words in the upper world – understand this!
  And now that I have explained the topic of the world of souls, which is called “Garden of Eden” among our rabbis z”l, and I have revealed to you the reason why the Torah did not mention it explicitly except to the “engaged intellectual” (<i>la</i>–<i>maskil ha-nilvav</i>), I will now expand upon for you my explanation of the matter of the pleasure that will be experienced in the measure it was originally experienced by Adam in the Garden of Eden before the sin, in that you already knew that the nature of the pleasure there was very great and deep, and that the greater part of it was the soul’s pleasure, the lesser the pleasure of the body, which had quiet, ease, and peace of mind unlike any you can imagine, and because he was all intellectual -body and soul in complete agreement to conceive of his Creator, and even the power of the Tree of Life to cause eternal life was at first not kept from him, but after the sin, when he ate from the Tree of Knowledge – it was only after this eating that he was made to follow his desires and strive for the needs of the body more than the needs of the soul, acting “all as we act now here today.”131<i class="footnote">Dt 12:8</i> And therefore he had to have his days limited and for death to hold sway over him. But before the sin, he could take pleasure in the Garden of Eden and delight himself as he wished, and this it what meant by, “And He placed him in the Garden of Eden to till it and tend it,”132<i class="footnote">Gen 2:15.</i> that He placed him in the Garden of Eden so that he would work the soil of the Garden, and sow in it every kind of produce, and plant all kinds of fruit trees, and his sustenance came from the trees of the Garden, and his drink from the rivers of Eden. And his clothes were “the clouds of glory,” until the ministering angels got jealous of his status, and things changed for the reasons you know.133<i class="footnote">According to the story in Pirke de Rabbi Eliezer 13, it was the angel’s jealousy of Adam that led them to tempt Adam and Eve through the serpent.</i> It is to this status and to this measure of joy that the dead who are resurrected will in time to come return, to take delight in together in both body and soul, and the greater part of the pleasure will be the soul’s, the lesser part the body’s, as it was with Adam before the sin. Therefore, it will be necessary for any one among those raised from the dead to live a long or eternal life, for thus the world will return to its perfection as its Creator (may He be exalted) originally intended.
  And if you think and “your heart carries you away”134<i class="footnote">Job 15:12.</i> to say, what need is there for the resurrection of the dead since the souls are already on the level of the heavenly hosts, assembled in awesome view of Ha-Shem the King of the hosts,135<i class="footnote">There’s a untranslatable play of words here on <i>tzeva’ot</i> (armies – as in “the heavenly hosts”) and <i>tzov’ot be-mar’ot</i> (“assembled in view of”), an allusion to the <i>mar’ot tzov’ot</i>(“the mirrors of the assembled women”) at the Tent of Meeting in Ex 38:8.</i> those of the completely righteous who served Him lovingly with sincere hearts in this world? Is it proper for the Holy One Blessed be He to perform this miracle upon them, to make them live again after they died? Wouldn’t it be better to remain in their honored and pure place in the upper palace in heaven than to return to their body to dwell in a “house of clay,”136<i class="footnote">An allusion to Job 4:19.</i> even if these dwellings were precious, “trimmed to give shape to a palace,”137<i class="footnote">Ps 144;12.</i> brilliant with precious stones, as I mentioned above?
  Now I shall enlighten and illuminate for you the answer to this question. It is because when a person is taken up from this world to the world of souls, which is right as he dies, this is called <i>k’vod Ha-Shem</i> – “the Glory of theLord,”138<i class="footnote">As is described in Is 58:8, when “Your Vindicator shall march before, and the <i>k’vod Ha-Shem</i> – the Glory (or Presence) of the Lord – shall gather you up.” (Chavel).</i> and from there, the world of souls, the soul is elevated to take delight in <i>tzrur ha-hayyim</i> – “the bundle of life”139<i class="footnote">From the expression in 1 Sam 25:28: “the soul … will be bound up in the bundle of life” (<i>nefesh …tzrurah be-tzror ha-hayyim</i>), which is used in the prayer for the dead <i>El Male’ Rahamim</i> to describe where the souls of the departed go.</i> – which is called “<i>netzah</i>” – “forever” – like it is used in the verse “You will make known to me the path of life. In Your presence is perfect joy, delights are forever [<i>netzah</i>] in Your right hand.”140<i class="footnote">Ps 16:11.</i> And if it is fit to stay there forever, it stays there without a break, for this is what our rabbis z”l said,141<i class="footnote">B. Erubin 54a.</i> “Every place where the words <i>netzah, selah</i>, and <i>va-ed</i> are used [in Scripture] it means without interruption forever.” And when the soul is not fit to stay there, but ought to receive what it deserves in the world of bodies measure for measure, you see it has to return to this world for the resurrection of the dead, to get its due with the body in the world of bodies. And this is why it is written, “Many of those that sleep in the dust of the earth will awake.”142<i class="footnote">Dan 12:2.</i> It didn’t say “all of those that sleep,” but “many of those” – and they, the ones who are not fit to prolong their days in the “bundle of life” return in the resurrection of the dead and there receive their due, and concentrate on comprehending Him (may He be blessed), and are refined in the elevation of their comprehension and knowledge, until they are fit to return there, and after returning there they are elevated to the invisible world, which is what is written: “He [God] will lead us beyond death.”143<i class="footnote">Ps 48:15.</i>
  And you need to understand the statement our rabbis z”l made: “The righteous who in time to come will live again do not return to their ‘dust,’ but rather will keep on lasting, as it is said, ‘And those who remain in Zion, and are left in Jerusalem…shall be called holy.’144<i class="footnote">Is 4:3.</i> Just as the Holy lasts forever, so the righteous in time to come will live and last forever, as they explained in a midrash in the Talmud, Tractate Sanhedrin.145<i class="footnote">B. Sanhedrin 92a: “Raba said: Whence is resurrection derived from the Torah? … Rabina said, [it is derived] from this verse, ‘And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.’ (Dan 12:2.)</i> And in another place they taught in a midrash: “The dead whom the Holy One Blessed be He will in time to come bring back to life do not return to ‘their dust,” but rather will last forever, and delight themselves in seven <i>huppot </i>– wedding canopies.146<i class="footnote">B. Baba Batra 75a.</i> And this is the explanation of the matter and the secret of the statement, for the decree of Scripture: “For dust you are, and to dust you shall return,”147<i class="footnote">Gen 3:19.</i> is only from the perspective of the original sin, but when sin is taken away and “He will destroy death forever,”148<i class="footnote">Is 25:8.</i> and the day “will return to its normal state [<i>le-eitano</i>] in the morning,”149<i class="footnote">An allusion to the miraculous parting of the Red Sea in Ex. 14:27, playing on the verbal similarity between <i>yom</i> – “day” and <i>yam</i> – “sea.” I.e., Ex 14:27: “the sea [<i>yam</i>] returned to its normal state in the morning.”</i> that is, the strength of the world,150<i class="footnote">Because according to Mekhilta Be-Shalah on Ex 14:27<i>, eyn eitano ela’ tokfo, </i>wherever it says <i>eitano,</i> it means “its strength” – <i>tokfo</i>.</i> and no one will be able to lead into sin any work of the hands of the Lord (may He be blessed), for the Accuser will be gone in the blink of an eye – therefore they do not return to the dust forever. For when sin is taken away and cancelled, so the decree is cancelled, and so they do not return to ‘their dust.” But even though they never return to their dust, you shouldn’t understand this to mean that their bodies keep existing as real flesh and blood, with muscles and bones, as we are now. But rather, they will have earned the capacity to take on some sort of transformation, but it won’t ever be returning back to their dust. Thus, it is necessary for anyone with a clear mind to understand, and not to deceive himself with the “king’s food” of his desires and “wine he drank,”151<i class="footnote">An allusion to Dan 1:5.</i> nor be seduced by the sort of things fools and those stuck in the “slimy depths”152<i class="footnote">Ps 69:2.</i> of their ignorance are seduced by.
  And you ought to know that at the intellectual meal which is for the soul alone, prepared for the righteous in the world of souls or in the life of the world to come, the righteous are not all equal in this, but there is a hierarchy of status, one above the other. And thus they interpreted “<i>sove’a’ semahot</i>“153<i class="footnote">An expression in Ps 16:11: “You will teach me the path of life. In your presence is perfect joy – <i>sove’a’ semahot</i>.”</i> – “perfect joy” in a midrash in Sifre:154<i class="footnote">Sifre Devarim 10.</i> “The faces of the righteous in time to come will be like the sun, the moon, the horizon, the stars, lightning, flowers, and the <i>menorot</i> of the Temple<i>.</i>” And likewise they said in <i>Seder Eliahu Zuta</i>,155<i class="footnote">Chavel says he couldn’t find this tradition in Seder Eliahu Zuta, but it is in b. Baba Batra 75a.</i> “The righteous have seven huppot in the Garden of Eden, as it is said, ‘The Lord will create over the whole shrine and meeting place of Mt. Zion cloud by day, and smoke with a glow of flaming fire by night, etc.”156<i class="footnote">Is 4:5: “The Lord will create over the whole shrine and meeting place of Mt. Zion cloud by day, and smoke with a glow of flaming fire by night. Indeed, over each ‘glory’ (<i>kavod</i>) will hang a <i>huppah</i>.” Cf Is 4:1: “In that day seven women shall take hold of one man…” You can see where the midrash gets the idea of seven wedding <i>huppot</i> in the future to come. So Rashi explains in a comment to b. Baba Batra 75a: “Indeed over each glory (or honor ) will hang a huppah: (1) “the cloud by day,” (2) “smoke”, (3) “glow”, (4) “fire”, (5) “flaming”, (6) “over each glory”, and (7) “huppah.” But “over each glory” doesn’t seem to belong to this count, but rather the “sukkah which will serve for shade by day” which follows immediately in the next verse (Is 4:6), making seven.</i> It was this that was referred to when the Holy One Blessed be He promised Abraham Our Father in the “Covenant between the pieces” when He said to him, “Count the stars,” and “So shall your offspring be,”157<i class="footnote">Gen 15:5.</i> that is to say, just as the stars are arranged by levels, each star’s light greater than its neighbor, with some below it and some above, so in time to come your offspring will be arranged in levels, based on their light of Torah and wisdom, each one greater than the other, each one above the other. And thus in the light of the world to come, the level of the righteous will be one above the other, some of them worthy of the “glass that does not reflect”158<i class="footnote">That is, the least obstructed view of God. See the Second Gate (pp. 492-3).</i>, others “the glass which does reflect,” some that go up inside, that is, have permission to, and others who do not go up inside. And all of this they described in a midrash in Tractate Sukkah,159<i class="footnote">B.Sukkah 45b.</i> “The row [of righteous men immediately] before the Holy One, blessed be He, consists of eighteen thousand, for it is said, ‘It shall be eighteen thousand round about,'”160<i class="footnote">Ez 48:35.</i> which Rashi explained as “eighteen thousand of the righteous surrounding the <i>Shekhinah</i>.”161<i class="footnote">Rashi’s comment to B.Sukkah 45b.</i> And the explanation of his explanation is that they do so at each of the four winds of the world, and if so, each wind has four thousand five hundred righteous people, and this is what “eighteen thousand round about”162<i class="footnote">Ez 48:35.</i> refers to. 
  And this is why they taught this midrash in the first chapter of Tractate Avodah Zarah: “He [God] floats about through eighteen thousand worlds that He created,”163<i class="footnote">B. Avodah Zarah 3b, an account of God’s activities in the world to come.</i> that is, He walks around among the righteous, because each righteous person has his own world. And understand this, for there is no need to lengthen or expand this explanation further. And there are also the great righteous ones above all the rest, who are able to look at “the reflecting mirror” and enter without needing permission, and about them Rabbi Shimon Bar Yohai said,164<i class="footnote">B. Sukkah 45b.</i> “I have seen the <i>benei-aliyah</i> [“the elite”] and they are few in number, because the righteous who enter into this small realm are the thirty-six in every generation, as it is said, “Happy are those who wait for Him!”165<i class="footnote">Is 30:18. The 36 are the “<i>Lamed-Vavniks</i>” of legend, the 36 <i>zaddikim</i> hidden in each generation, by virtue of whose actions the world deserves to exist.</i> And as we said there,166<i class="footnote">B. Sukkah 45b.</i> “Who wait for Him [<i>lo</i>]” – <i>lo </i>[<i>lamed vav</i>] in Gematria is thirty-six, but they are called “<i>benei aliyah</i>,” because they are among the few who can enter without permission.
  And now I shall make known to you the subject of the upper light, which I mentioned above, and that’s how I will end this Gate. Know that the upper light I mentioned above is called “day” [<i>yom</i>] in the story of creation, and about it the prophet said, “there shall be one day – only the Lord knows when – of neither day nor night, and there will be light at evening time.”167<i class="footnote">Zech 14:7 (JSB).</i> The explanation of this verse: “There will be [<i>ve-hayah</i>] one day”. The word <i>Ve-HaYa”H</i> consists of the same letters of God’s proper name, and so it is written “YHVH is my light and my help, whom shall I fear? YHVH, etc.”168<i class="footnote">Ps 27:1. This is YHVH is “<i>light</i>.”</i> “One day of light – only the Lord knows” – He alone knows where it is. As they taught in a midrash, “He hid it for Himself, He made it separate for Himself.”169<i class="footnote">Ber. R. 3:7.</i> “Neither day nor night” – that is to say, a time will come when this day shall serve for the righteous, and time won’t consist of day and night like it works now with light and darkness, but rather, “there will be light at evening time” – a great light. And “evening” [<i>‘erev</i>] is the secret of “the sixth <i>aleph,</i>” which is the evening of Shabbat, as in “<i>yom ha-shishi</i>” – “the sixth day.” And this is the light that Moses our Rabbi (peace upon him) earned in “the cleft of the rock,”170<i class="footnote">Ex 33:22.</i>”the reflecting mirror”171<i class="footnote">B. Yebamot 49b.</i> out of which he was able to prophesy, and thus earned the “radiation from the skin of his face”172<i class="footnote">Ex 34:29.</i> that was as bright as “the face of the sun.”173<i class="footnote">B. Baba Batra 75a.</i> And in an interpretation they said, “a variety of the upper light is the globe of the sun,”174<i class="footnote">Ber. R. 17:7 (as translated by Jastrow).</i> because the light of this level is the level of Moses’ prophecy, and the globe of the sun, which is a variety of this, is the “radiation from the skin of his face.” And this is what is written, “rays [<i>karnayyim</i>] given off from every side, and therein His glory is enveloped,”175<i class="footnote">Hab 3:4.</i> that is, the “radiation from the skin of his face.” This came directly from the hand of the Holy One Blessed be He to Moses, and this radiation is the fruit of what was his in this world, distinct from the eternal radiance that would be his in the world to come, and that is the level of the upper light. If so, then the word “<i>karnayyim</i>” – “rays” -includes both the fruit and the eternal radiance.176<i class="footnote"><i>Karnayyim</i> is the dual form of <i>keren</i>, which can mean either “ray”, or more ordinarily, “horn.” From this ambiguity comes the misinterpretation of Ex 34:29 that led artists such as Michelangelo to represent Moses with horns coming out of his forehead. R. Bahya is playing upon the dual form of <i>keren, karnayyim, </i>which is the normal plural form for body parts, like horns, which come in pairs.</i> And all this was because of the tablets – <i>luhot</i> – that he was holding. And so this is hinted at in the word “<i>LU’a”H</i>,” which is an acronym of the words in Habakkuk 3:4: <i>karnayyim mi-yado Lo Ve-sham Hevyon ‘uzo.</i> And they said in a midrash, 177<i class="footnote">M. Tanhuma Ki Tisa 37.</i> “‘[They saw] the rays of the skin of his face,’178<i class="footnote">Ex 34:30.</i> all the majesty that Moses got was but temporary fruit, a gift he earned, but the eternal radiance would be his in the world to come, as it is said, ‘ray<i>s</i> [<i>karnayyim</i>] from His hand to him.'”179<i class="footnote">Hab 3:4, reading <i>mi-yado</i> midrashically as “from His [God’s] hand,” i.e., two kinds of “rays” one in this world, one in the world to come, from God’s hand to Moses.</i> And they went on in another midrash,180<i class="footnote">M. Tanhuma Ki Tisa 37.</i> “‘I will put you in a cleft of a rock’ – from ‘the cleft of the rock’ Moses earned the radiation from the skin of his face, and thus it says, ‘rays from His hand to him, there from a secret place [<i>hevyon</i>] His glory.'”181<i class="footnote">Hab 3:4.</i>
  So this book is now finished, built upon precious sayings. With these words the enlightened182<i class="footnote">Lit., <i>ha-maskil be-hakhmah</i>, one “enlightened with wisdom, i.e., the wisdom of Kabbalah (Chavel).</i> will discern when they’re eating, may they make themselves holy and their minds burnished fully. With these words engaged, may they be at their table; raise their table’s renown so that “all shall say ‘Glory!'”183<i class="footnote">An allusion to Ps 29:9: <i>kulo ‘omer kavod</i>.</i> Let their hearts be made pure, to withstand any test. “By these raise up the table,”184<i class="footnote">Ex 28:28</i> so that “before the Lord”185<i class="footnote">Ez 41:22</i> is its label. This table is greater than the table of kings, “he shall be permitted to join those attending,”186<i class="footnote">An allusion to the reward of the faithful promised in Zech 3:7: “Thus said the Lord of Hosts: If you walk in My paths and keep My charge, you will in turn rule in My house and guard My courts, and <i>I will permit you to move about among these attendants</i>.”</i>and to be lifted in honor to gaze on187<i class="footnote">Or “envision,” because the Hebrew is <i>ye-hazeh</i>, as in <i>hazon “</i>vision,” like the verb in Ex 24:11, with connotation of prophetic vision.</i> the face of “David among the lilies grazing,” to earn “the three-legged table” 188<i class="footnote">An allusion to what is referred to in B. Ta’anit 25a: “The righteous will in time to come eat at a golden table with three legs.” See R. Bahya’s Preface, where he explains this idea in his discussion of the fourth reason he gives for calling his book <i>Shulhan Shel Arba</i>. There’s an untranslatable wordplay here with the Hebrew word <i>r</i><i>o‘e’</i> (“grazing” or “shepherd”) and the Aramaic word ker’a’ (“leg”): “David among the lilies grazing (<i>r</i><i>o‘e’)</i>” to earn the table of three legs (ker’a’).”</i> of gold ablazing. They will earn the physical and intellectual meals, and be counted among the <i>benei aliyah</i>. Blessed is the Lord who has refined His servants to perfect us, whose love for us even preceded us; may He bring us to see wonders from His Torah, the foundation of His Temple, the place of the ark and the tablets, the menorah and table and the altars. May our betrayals and sins be atoned for and forgiven, may prosperity be ours – from God’s hand gladly given.189<i class="footnote">An allusion to Is 54:10.</i> Among the saints may He raise and lift us, “west and south”190<i class="footnote">An allusion to Dt 33:23.</i> may He gift us. From the abundance of His love may He redeem our soul191<i class="footnote">An allusion to Ps 22:21.</i> from Sheol when He takes it, by His counsel may He guide us192<i class="footnote">An allusion to Ps 73:24.</i> to the “delights ever in His right hand.”193<i class="footnote">An allusion to Ps 16:11.</i> May he encompass us with favor, 194<i class="footnote">An allusion to Ps 5:13.</i> in the “bundle of life” may He hide us,195<i class="footnote">As opposed to <i>She’ol</i> – “hell” – as in Job 14:13: “O that You would hide me in Sheol.”</i> in the path of life may He guide us, and grant us what is written, “For God is our God forever; He will guide us even beyond death.”196<i class="footnote">Ps. 48:15.</i> 